Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Sitka Seaplane Base Construction, 39591-39604 [2024-10145]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
math, or other disciplines related to
NOAA’s mission, excellent health, and
normal color vision with uncorrected
visual acuity no worse than 20/400 in
each eye (correctable to 20/20).
The revision includes updates that
reflect the current status of the NOAA
Corps. This includes amending the
essay questions and updating the
instructions to reflect a new direct-toaviation recruitment model. NOAA
Form 56–80A is a required summary of
Aviation experience for those applying
to become NOAA Aviators. Members of
the public who wish to apply to the
Direct-to-Aviation NOAA Corps
program are required to complete NF
56–80A.
II. Method of Collection
Applicants must utilize the online Erecruit electronic application to
complete and digitally submit the forms,
including the Direct-to-Aviation
Summary for NOAA Corps. An inperson interview is also required.
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Comments that you submit in
response to this notice are a matter of
public record. We will include or
summarize each comment in our request
to OMB to approve this ICR. Before
including your address, phone number,
email address, or other personal
identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you may ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Sheleen Dumas,
Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of
the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs,
Commerce Department.
[FR Doc. 2024–10169 Filed 5–8–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0648–0047.
Form Number(s): NOAA 56–42,
NOAA 56–42A, and NOAA Form 56–
80A.
Type of Review: Regular submission.
Revision and extension of an existing
information collection.
Affected Public: Individuals.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
300.
Estimated Time per Response: Written
applications, 2 hours; interviews, 5
hours; references, 15 minutes; and
Direct to Aviation Summary form, 10
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 2,425.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $21,750.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
Obtain or Retain Benefits.
Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. chapter 17,
subchapter 1, sections 853 and 854.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
IV. Request for Comments
We are soliciting public comments to
permit the Department/Bureau to: (a)
Evaluate whether the proposed
information collection is necessary for
the proper functions of the Department,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the
accuracy of our estimate of the time and
cost burden for this proposed collection,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c)
Evaluate ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) Minimize the
reporting burden on those who are to
respond, including the use of automated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XD743]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Sitka Seaplane
Base Construction
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of two
incidental harassment authorizations.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued two consecutive
incidental harassment authorizations
(IHAs) to City and Borough of Sitka
(CBS) to incidentally harass marine
mammals during construction activities
associated with the CBS’ Sitka Seaplane
Base project, in Sitka, Alaska.
DATES: The authorizations are effective
from July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025
and July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026.
ADDRESSES: 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-city-andborough-sitkas-seaplane-baseconstruction-activities. In case of
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39591
problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jenna Harlacher, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of
marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and
(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce
(as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon
request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
proposed or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a notice of a proposed IHA
is provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings
shall be granted if NMFS finds that the
taking will have a negligible impact on
the species or stock(s) 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 the 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 the 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 September 1, 2023, NMFS
received a request from CBS for two
IHAs to take marine mammals
incidental to the Sitka seaplane base
construction project in Sitka, Alaska,
over the course of 2 years. Following
NMFS’ review of the application and a
revised version, CBS submitted a final
version on November 15, 2023. The
application was deemed adequate and
complete on December 1, 2023. The
notice of proposed IHAs published for
public comment on January 11, 2024 (89
FR 1884). For both IHAs, CBS’s request
is for take of seven species of marine
mammals by Level B harassment and,
for a subset of three of these species,
Level A harassment. Neither CBS nor
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
39592
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
NMFS expect serious injury or mortality
to result from this activity and,
therefore, IHAs are appropriate.
Description of Activity
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
CBS plans to replace the existing
seaplane base in the Sitka Channel in
Sitka, Alaska. The purpose of this
project is to construct a new seaplane
base, which would address existing
capacity, safety, and condition
deficiencies for critical seaplane
operations, and for all seaplanes to
transit the Sitka Chanel more safely. The
planned location of the new seaplane
base in the Sitka Channel is located on
the northern shore of Japonski Island in
the Sitka Sound. Over the course of 2
years spanning July 2024–June 2025 and
July 2025–June 2026, CBS would use a
variety of methods, including vibratory
and impact pile driving, and down-thehole (DTH) drilling to install and
remove piles.
Phase I would involve the installation
and removal of temporary piles, and the
installation of permanent piles. During
Phase I, 10 16-inch (in, 0.4 meter (m))
and 16 24-in (0.6 m) permanent steel
piles would be installed. The
installation and removal of 12
temporary 16-in (0.4 m) steel pipe piles
would be completed to support
permanent pile installation. Vibratory
hammers, impact hammers, and DTH
drilling would be used for the
installation and removal of the piles
(table 1). The installation and removal
of temporary piles would be conducted
using impact and vibratory hammers.
All permanent piles would be initially
installed with a vibratory hammer. After
vibratory driving, piles would be
socketed into the bedrock with DTH
drilling equipment. Finally, piles would
be driven the final few inches of
embedment with an impact hammer.
Phase II similarly would involve the
installation and removal of temporary
piles, and the installation of permanent
piles. During Phase II six 24-in (0.6 m)
steel piles would be installed. The
installation and removal of six
temporary 16-in (0.4 m) steel pipe piles
would be completed to support the
permanent pile installation. As in Phase
I, vibratory hammers, impact hammers,
and DTH drilling would be used for the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
installation and removal of the piles
(table 2). The installation and removal
of temporary piles would be conducted
using impact and vibratory hammers.
All permanent piles would be initially
installed with a vibratory hammer. After
vibratory driving, piles would be
socketed into the bedrock with DTH
drilling equipment. Finally, piles would
be driven the final few inches of
embedment with an impact hammer.
A further detailed description of the
planned construction project is
provided in the Federal Register notice
for the proposed IHAs (89 FR 1884,
January 11, 2024). Since that time, no
changes have been made to the planned
activities. Therefore, a detailed
description is not provided here. Please
refer to that Federal Register notice for
the description of the specified activity.
Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
measures are described in detail later in
this document (please see Mitigation
and Monitoring and Reporting).
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue
two consecutive IHAs to CBS was
published in the Federal Register on
January 11, 2024 (89 FR 1884). That
notice described, in detail, CBS’
activity, the marine mammal species
that may be affected by the activity, and
the anticipated effects on marine
mammals. During that 30-day public
comment period, no comments were
received.
Changes From the Proposed IHAs for
Final IHAs
Changes were made between
publication of the notice of proposed
IHAs and this notice of final IHAs.
Changes have been made to correct
typographical errors and inconsistences
in the high frequency shutdown zones
in both the Phase I and Phase II IHAs
to reflect the correct shutdown zones
included in the proposed Federal
Register notice.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application
summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution
and habitat preferences, and behavior
and life history of the potentially
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
affected species. NMFS fully considered
all of this information, and we refer the
reader to these descriptions, instead of
reprinting the information. 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-assessments)
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 1 lists all species or stocks for
which take is expected and authorized
for this activity 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. 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
serious injury or 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 or stocks 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. Alaska Marine Mammal
SARs. All values presented in table 1
are the most recent available final SAR
at the time of publication of NMFS’
proposed IHAs and are available online
at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/marine-mammal-protection/
marine-mammal-stock-assessments.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
39593
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
TABLE 1—SPECIES LIKELY IMPACTED BY THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES
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
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
Family Balaenopteridae
(rorquals):
Humpback Whale ...............
Minke Whale .......................
Family Eschrichtiidae:
Gray Whale .........................
Megaptera novaeangliae ..........
Hawai1i ......................................
-,-,N
Balaenoptera acutorostrata ......
Mexico-North Pacific .................
Alaska .......................................
T,D,Y
-,-,N
Eschrichtius robustus ................
Eastern North Pacific ................
-,-,N
11,278 (0.56, 7,265,
2020).
N/A (N/A, N/A, 2006) ......
N/A (N/A, N/A, 2018) ......
26,960 (0.05, 25,849,
2016).
127
27
UND
................
0.6
0
801
131
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale .........................
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise ..................
Orca orcinus .............................
Phocoena phocoena .................
Northern Resident .....................
Alaska Resident ........................
Gulf of Alaska/Aleutian Islands/
Bering Sea Transient.
West Coast Transient ...............
-,-,N
-,-,N
-,-,N
302 (N/A, 302, 2018) ......
1,920 (N/A, 1,920, 2019)
587 (N/A, 587, 2012) ......
2.2
19
5.9
0.2
1.3
0.8
-,-,N
349 (N/A, 349, 2018) ......
3.5
0.4
Northern Southeast Alaska .......
-,-,N
1,619 (0.26, 1,250, 2019)
13
5.6
318
254
2,592
112
356
77
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared seals
and sea lions):
Steller sea lion ....................
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal .........................
Eumetopias jubatus ..................
Phoca vituline richardii ..............
Western Stock ..........................
E,D,Y
Eastern Stock ...........................
-,-,N
Sitka/Chatham ..........................
-,-,N
52,932 (N/A, 52,932,
2019).
43,201 (N/A, 43,201,
2017).
13,289 (N/A, 11,883,
2015).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
1 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 SARs online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
3 These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range.
As indicated above, all 7 species (with
12 managed stocks) in table 1
temporally and spatially co-occur with
the activity to the degree that take is
reasonably likely to occur. All species
that could potentially occur in the
action area are included in table 8 of the
IHA application. While northern fur
seal, Pacific white-sided dolphin, Dall’s
porpoise, North Pacific right whale,
sperm whale, fin whale, and Cuvier’s
beaked whale have been documented in
or near Sitka Sound and Sitka Channel,
the temporal and/or spatial occurrence
of these species is such that take is not
expected to occur, and they are not
discussed further beyond the
explanation provided here. These
species are all considered to be rare (no
sightings in recent years) or very rare
(no local knowledge of sightings within
the project vicinity) within Sitka Sound
or near the action area. The take of these
species has not been requested nor is
authorized and these species are not
considered further in this document.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
Additionally, the Northern Sea Otter
may be found in Sitka Sound. However,
the Northern Sea Otter are managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
are not considered further in this
document.
A detailed description of the species
likely to be affected by CBS’
construction project, were provided in
the Federal Register notice for the
proposed IHAs (89 FR 1884, January 11,
2024). 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 the Federal Register
notice for these descriptions. Please also
refer to the NMFS website (https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for
generalized species descriptions.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory
modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to
anthropogenic sound can have
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
deleterious effects. To appropriately
assess the potential effects of exposure
to sound, it is necessary to understand
the frequency ranges marine mammals
are able to hear. Not all marine mammal
species have equal hearing capabilities
(e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok
and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings,
2008). To reflect this, Southall et al.
(2007, 2019) recommended that marine
mammals be divided into hearing
groups based on directly measured
(behavioral or auditory evoked potential
techniques) or estimated hearing ranges
(behavioral response data, anatomical
modeling, etc.). Note that no direct
measurements of hearing ability have
been successfully completed for
mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency
cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018)
described generalized hearing ranges for
these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen
based on the approximately 65 decibel
(dB) threshold from the normalized
composite audiograms, with the
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
39594
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower
bound was deemed to be biologically
implausible and the lower bound from
Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine
mammal hearing groups and their
associated hearing ranges are provided
in table 2.
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS
[NMFS, 2018]
Hearing group
Generalized hearing range *
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ........................................................................................................
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) .............................
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) .....................................................................................................
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) .................................................................................
7 Hz to 35 kilohertz (kHz).
150 Hz to 160 kHz.
275 Hz to 160 kHz.
50 Hz to 86 kHz.
60 Hz to 39 kHz.
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’
hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram,
with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing
group was modified from Southall et al.
(2007) on the basis of data indicating
that phocid species have consistently
demonstrated an extended frequency
range of hearing compared to otariids,
especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemila¨ et al., 2006; Kastelein et al.,
2009; Reichmuth et al., 2013).
For more detail concerning these
groups and associated frequency ranges,
please see NMFS (2018) for a review of
available information.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Potential Effects of Specified Activities
on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from
CBS’ pile driving activities have the
potential to result in behavioral
harassment of marine mammals in the
vicinity of the project area. The notice
of the proposed IHAs (89 FR 1884,
January 11, 2024) included a discussion
of the effects of anthropogenic noise on
marine mammals and the potential
effects of under noise from CBS’ pile
driving activities on marine mammals
and their habitat. Please refer to the
notice of the proposed IHAs (89 FR
1884, January 11, 2024) for that
information and analysis, which is not
repeated here.
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes
authorized through the IHAs, which
will inform NMFS’ consideration of
‘‘small numbers,’’ and the negligible
impact determinations.
Harassment is the only type of take
expected to result from these activities.
Except with respect to certain activities
not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the
MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act
of pursuit, torment, or annoyance,
which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption
of behavioral patterns, including, but
not limited to, migration, breathing,
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering
(Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would primarily be
by Level B harassment, as vibratory or
impact pile driving and DTH drilling
has the potential to result in disruption
of behavioral patterns for individual
marine mammals. There is also some
potential for auditory injury (Level A
harassment) to result, primarily for
harbor porpoise, harbor seals and Steller
sea lions. Harbor porpoise have larger
predicted auditory injury zones and due
to their small size, they could enter the
Level A harassment zone and remain
undetected for sufficient duration to
incur auditory injury. While Steller sea
lion do not have large Level A
harassment zones, they are frequently
sighted in the project area and therefor
have some potential for auditory injury.
Additionally harbor seals have larger
Level A harassment zones and are
common in the action area, and
therefore have potential for auditory
injury. Auditory injury is unlikely to
occur for all other species, based on the
unlikelihood of the species in the action
area and the smaller Level A harassment
zones. The mitigation and monitoring
measures are expected to minimize the
severity of the taking to the extent
practicable.
As described previously, no serious
injury or mortality is anticipated or
authorized for this activity. Below we
describe how the take numbers are
estimated.
For acoustic impacts, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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) the number of days of activities.
We note that while these factors can
contribute to a basic calculation to
provide an initial prediction of potential
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 take estimates.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends the use of
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 or exposure
context (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle, duration of the exposure,
signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the
source), the environment (e.g.,
bathymetry, other noises in the area,
predators in the area), and the receiving
animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography, life stage,
depth) and can be difficult to predict
(e.g., Southall et al., 2007, 2021; Ellison
et al., 2012). Based on what the
available science indicates and the
practical need to use a threshold based
on a metric that is both predictable and
measurable for most activities, NMFS
typically uses a generalized acoustic
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
39595
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
threshold based on received level to
estimate the onset of behavioral
harassment. NMFS generally predicts
that marine mammals are likely to be
behaviorally harassed in a manner
considered to be Level B harassment
when exposed to underwater
anthropogenic noise above root-meansquared pressure received levels (RMS
SPL) of 120 dB (referenced to 1
micropascal (re 1 mPa)) for continuous
(e.g., vibratory pile driving, drilling) and
above RMS SPL 160 dB re 1 mPa for nonexplosive impulsive (e.g., seismic
airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific
sonar) sources. Generally speaking,
Level B harassment take estimates based
on these behavioral harassment
thresholds are expected to include any
likely takes by temporary threshold shift
(TTS) as, in most cases, the likelihood
of TTS occurs at distances from the
source less than those at which
behavioral harassment is likely. TTS of
a sufficient degree can manifest as
behavioral harassment, as reduced
hearing sensitivity and the potential
reduced opportunities to detect
important signals (conspecific
communication, predators, prey) may
result in changes in behavior patterns
that would not otherwise occur.
CBS’s planned activity includes the
use of continuous (vibratory hammer
and DTH drilling) and impulsive (DTH
drilling and impact pile driving)
sources, and therefore the RMS SPL
thresholds of 120 and 160 dB re 1 mPa
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 from two different
types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). CBS’s planned activity
includes the use of impulsive (impact
pile driving and DTH drilling) and nonimpulsive (vibratory hammer and DTH
drilling) sources.
These thresholds are provided in the
table below. The references, analysis,
and methodology used in the
development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS’ 2018 Technical
Guidance, which may be accessed at:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/marine-mammal-protection/
marine-mammal-acoustic-technicalguidance.
TABLE 3—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT
PTS onset acoustic thresholds *
(received level)
Hearing group
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.
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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and
environmental parameters of the activity
that are used in estimating the area
ensonified above the acoustic
thresholds, including source levels and
transmission loss coefficient.
The sound field in the project area is
the existing background noise plus
additional construction noise from the
project. Marine mammals are expected
to be affected via sound generated by
the primary components of the project
(i.e., impact pile driving, vibratory pile
driving and removal, and DTH).
In order to calculate distances to the
Level A harassment and Level B
harassment thresholds for the methods
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
and piles being used in this project,
NMFS used acoustic monitoring data
from other locations to develop source
levels for the various pile types, sizes
and methods (table 4). This analysis
uses practical spreading loss, a standard
assumption regarding sound
propagation for similar environments, to
estimate transmission of sound through
water. For this analysis, the
transmission loss factor of 15 (4.5 dB
per doubling of distance) is used. A
weighting adjustment factor of 2.5 or 2,
a standard default value for vibratory
pile driving and removal or impact
driving and DTH respectively, were
used to calculate Level A harassment
areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NMFS recommends treating DTH
systems as both impulsive and
continuous, non-impulsive sound
source types simultaneously. Thus,
impulsive thresholds are used to
evaluate Level A harassment, and
continuous thresholds are used to
evaluate Level B harassment. With
regards to DTH mono-hammers, NMFS
recommends proxy levels for Level A
harassment based on available data
regarding DTH systems of similar sized
piles and holes (Denes et al., 2019; Guan
and Miner, 2020; Reyff and Heyvaert,
2019; Reyff, 2020; Heyvaert and Reyff,
2021).
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
39596
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
TABLE 4—ESTIMATES UNDERWATER PROXY SOURCE LEVEL FOR PILE INSTALLATION AND REMOVAL
Method and pile type
Sound source at 10 meters
Vibratory Hammer
dB rms
16 in ........................................
24 in ........................................
161
161
DTH Drill
dB rms
16 in ........................................
24 in ........................................
Impact Hammer
dB peak
146
159
dB rms
16 in ........................................
24 in ........................................
NAVFAC 2015.
NAVFAC 2015.
dB SEL
167
167
172
184
dB SEL
185
190
Level B Harassment Zones
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:
TL = transmission loss in dB
B = transmission loss coefficient; for practical
spreading equals 15
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from
the driven pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the
initial measurement.
The recommended TL coefficient for
most nearshore environments is the
practical spreading value of 15. This
value results in an expected propagation
environment that would lie between
Source
Heyvaert and Reyff 2021, Guan and Miner 2020.
Heyvaert and Reyff 2021.
dB peak
175
177
200
203
Caltrans 2020.
Caltrans 2015.
spherical and cylindrical spreading loss
conditions, which is the most
appropriate assumption for CBS’s
planned underwater activities. The
Level B harassment zones and
approximate amount of area ensonified
for the underwater activities are shown
in table 5.
Level A Harassment Zones
The ensonified area associated with
Level A harassment is more technically
challenging to predict due to the need
to account for a duration component.
Therefore, NMFS developed an optional
User Spreadsheet tool to accompany the
Technical Guidance that can be used to
relatively simply predict an isopleth
distance for use in conjunction with
marine mammal density or occurrence
to help predict potential takes. We note
that because of some of the assumptions
included in the methods underlying this
optional tool, we anticipate that the
resulting isopleth estimates are typically
going to be overestimates of some
degree, which may result in an
overestimate of potential take by Level
A harassment. However, this optional
tool offers the best way to estimate
isopleth distances when more
sophisticated modeling methods are not
available or practical. For stationary
sources such as pile installation or
removal, the optional User Spreadsheet
tool predicts the distance at which, if a
marine mammal remained at that
distance for the duration of the activity,
it would be expected to incur PTS. The
isopleths generated by the User
Spreadsheet used the same TL
coefficient as the Level B harassment
zone calculations (i.e., the practical
spreading value of 15). Inputs used in
the User Spreadsheet (e.g., number of
piles per day, duration and/or strikes
per pile) are presented in tables 1 and
2. The maximum RMS SPL, sound
exposure level (SEL), and resulting
isopleths are reported in tables 4 and 5.
TABLE 5—LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS FOR PILE DRIVING ACTIVITIES
Level A isopleth (m)
Activity
I
LF
I
MF
I
HF
Phocids
I
Otariids
Level B
isopleth
(m)
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Vibratory Pile Removal/Installation
Phase I:
16- in temp install .................................................
16-in temp removal ...............................................
16-in perm install ..................................................
24-in perm install ..................................................
Phase II:
16- in temp install .................................................
16-in temp removal ...............................................
24-in perm install ..................................................
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
5,411.7
5,411.7
5,411.7
5,411.7
6.8
6.8
6.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
10.1
10.1
10.1
4.2
4.2
4.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
5,411.7
5,411.7
5,411.7
70.3
677.6
31.6
304.4
2.3
22.2
1 8,500
22.2
1 8,500
DTH Pile Installation
Phase I:
16-in perm install ..................................................
24-in perm install ..................................................
Phase II:
24-in perm install ..................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
59
568.9
I
Frm 00018
568.9
2.1
20.2
I
Fmt 4703
20.2
Sfmt 4703
I
677.6
I
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
304.4
09MYN1
I
1 8,500
39597
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
TABLE 5—LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS FOR PILE DRIVING ACTIVITIES—Continued
Level A isopleth (m)
Activity
LF
I
MF
I
HF
I
Phocids
I
Otariids
Level B
isopleth
(m)
Impact Pile Installation
Phase I:
16-in
16-in
24-in
Phase II:
16-in
24-in
temp install ..................................................
perm install ..................................................
perm install ..................................................
231
231
313
8.2
8.2
11.1
275
275
373
123
123
168
9
9
12.2
464.2
464.2
1,000
temp install ..................................................
perm install ..................................................
231
313
8.2
11.1
275
373
123
168
9
12.2
464.2
1,000
1 The calculated Level B harassment zone is 13,594 m. However, the farthest distance that sound will transmit from the source is 8,500 m before transmission is stopped by landmasses.
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide information
about the occurrence of marine
mammals, including density or other
relevant information which will inform
the take calculations.
Daily occurrence probability of each
marine mammal species in the action
area is based on consultation with
previous monitoring reports, local
researchers and marine professionals.
Occurrence probability estimates are
based on conservative density
approximations for each species and
factor in historic data of occurrence,
seasonality, and group size in Sitka
Sound and Sitka Channel. A summary
of species occurrence is shown in table
6. To accurately describe species
occurrence near the action area, marine
mammals were described as either
common (species sighted consistently
during all monitoring efforts in the
project vicinity, assume one to two
groups per day), frequent (species
sighted with some consistency during
most monitoring efforts in the project
vicinity, assume one group per week), or
infrequent (species sighted occasionally
during a few monitoring efforts in the
project vicinity, assume one group per
2 weeks).
TABLE 6—ESTIMATED OCCURRENCE OF GROUP SIGHTINGS OF MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES
Average group
size
Species
Frequency
Humpback whale ....................................................
Minke whale 1 ..........................................................
Gray whale ..............................................................
Killer whale ..............................................................
Harbor porpoise ......................................................
Harbor seal 2 ...........................................................
Steller sea lion 2 ......................................................
Frequent .................................................................
Infrequent ...............................................................
Infrequent ...............................................................
Frequent .................................................................
Infrequent ...............................................................
Common .................................................................
Common .................................................................
3.4
3.5
3.5
6.6
5.0
2.1
2.0
Expected occurrence
1 group/week.
1 group/2 weeks.
1 group/2 weeks.
1 group/week.
1 group/2 weeks.
1–2 groups/day.
1–2 groups/day.
1 Minke whale considered rare in Sitka Channel, but to be conservative they are treated as infrequent for take estimation as there is a small
likelihood they could be in the area during the activity.
2 Likelihood of one group/day in the Level A harassment zone and likelihood of two groups/day in the level B harassment zone.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Take Estimation
Here we describe how the information
provided above is synthesized to
produce a quantitative estimate of the
take that is reasonably likely to occur
and authorized.
For the total underwater take
estimate, the daily occurrence
probability for a species was multiplied
by the estimated group size and by the
number of days of each type of pile
driving activity. Group size is based on
the best available published research for
these species and their presence in the
action area.
Estimated take = Group size × Groups
per day × Days of pile driving
activity
Take by Level A harassment is
anticipated for Steller sea lions and
harbor seals. Although Steller sea lion
Level A harassment zones are small, as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
previously discussed they are known to
spend extended periods of time within
the breakwaters in Sitka sound and in
the project area. Harbor seals are also
common in the project area and
although their Level A harassment
zones are farther from the project area,
CBS has requested a maximum
shutdown zone of 125 m for harbor seals
and therefor there is likelihood for take
by Level A harassment of harbor seals.
Take by Level A harassment is also
requested for harbor porpoise. We
require a maximum shutdown zone for
high frequency species of 300 m in this
case and therefor there is likelihood for
some take by Level A harassment. Even
though they are not as common within
the breakwaters, their Level A
harassment zone extends beyond the
breakwaters and they are elusive in
nature. The take by Level A harassment
for both pinniped species are based on
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a lower daily occurrence rate based on
the frequency of sightings within the
smaller Level A harassment zone of the
breakwaters (table 6).
Additionally, for species that are large
and/or infrequent (gray whale, minke
whale, humpback whale, and harbor
porpoise) in Sitka Sound and are
unlikely to be within the breakwaters
where the action will take place, take by
Level B harassment is only anticipated
to occur incidental to vibratory and
DTH methods, given the larger Level B
harassment zones which will extend
beyond the breakwaters. Anticipated
take by Level A harassment for harbor
seal and harbor porpoise would likely
occur only incidental to impact pile
driving and DTH drilling, and
anticipated take of Steller sea lion by
Level A harassment would likely occur
only incidental to DTH drilling, due to
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
39598
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
the larger Level A harassment zones for
these activities. See table 5.
TABLE 7—TAKE OF MARINE MAMMALS BY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT AND PERCENT OF STOCK TO BE TAKEN
Phase 1
Species
Stock
Level A
Humpback whale 1 .............................
Gray Whale ........................................
Minke Whale ......................................
Killer whale ........................................
Harbor porpoise .................................
Harbor seal ........................................
Steller sea lion ...................................
Hawai1i ...............................................
Mexico-North Pacific 2 .......................
Eastern North Pacific ........................
Alaska ...............................................
West Coast Transients .....................
Gulf, Aleutian, Bering Transient ........
Northern Resident .............................
Alaska Resident ................................
Northern Southeast Alaska ...............
Sitka/Chatham Alaska .......................
Eastern US ........................................
Western US .......................................
Level B
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*5
48
16
0
11
0
6
6
3
6
3
18
8
130
121
3
Phase 2
Percent of
stock
Level A
0.1
0
0
NA
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.3
0.3
0
Percent of
stock
Level B
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*5
13
6
0
4*
0
*4
*4
1
2
1
6
*5
38
35
*2
0
0
0
NA
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.1
0
1 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. Humpback whale probability by stock based on Southeast Alaska estimates from NMFS 2021 (98 percent Hawaii distinct population segment (DPS); 2 percent Mexico DPS).
2 ESA listed Mexico humpback whales take calculation resulted in less than 0.5 takes, therefore no takes are anticipated or authorized.
* Where calculated take was less than the average group size, the take was rounded up to a group size as that is likely what would be encountered.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
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 the activity, and
other means of effecting the least
practicable impact on the species or
stock and its habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds,
and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the species or stock
for taking for certain subsistence uses.
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 the 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, NMFS considers 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, as well as
subsistence uses. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
(probability implemented as planned);
and
(2) The practicability of the measures
for applicant implementation, which
may consider such things as cost, and
impact on operations.
Mitigation Measures
For each IHA, CBS must follow
mitigation measures as specified below:
• Ensure that construction
supervisors and crews, the monitoring
team, and relevant CBS staff are trained
prior to the start of all pile driving and
DTH drilling activity, 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;
• Employ Protected Species
Observers (PSOs) and establish
monitoring locations as described in the
application and the IHA. The Holder
must monitor the project area to the
maximum extent possible based on the
required number of PSOs, required
monitoring locations, and
environmental conditions. For all pile
driving and removal at least one PSO
must be used. The PSO will be stationed
as close to the activity as possible;
• The placement of the PSOs during
all pile driving and removal and DTH
drilling activities will ensure that the
entire shutdown zone is visible during
pile installation;
• Monitoring must take place from 30
minutes prior to initiation of pile
driving or DTH drilling activity (i.e.,
pre-clearance monitoring) through 30
minutes post-completion of pile driving
or DTH drilling activity;
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Pre-start clearance monitoring must
be conducted during periods of
visibility sufficient for the lead PSO to
determine that the shutdown zones
indicated in table 10 are clear of marine
mammals. Pile driving and DTH drilling
may commence following 30 minutes of
observation when the determination is
made that the shutdown zones are clear
of marine mammals;
• CBS must use soft start techniques
when impact pile driving. Soft start
requires contractors to provide an initial
set of three strikes at reduced energy,
followed by a 30-second waiting period,
then two subsequent reduced-energy
strike sets. A soft start must 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; and
• If a marine mammal is observed
entering or within the shutdown zones
indicated in table 10, pile driving and
DTH drilling must be delayed or halted.
If pile driving 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 (table 11) or
15 minutes have passed without redetection of the animal.
As planned by the applicant, in water
activities will take place only between
civil dawn and civil dusk when PSOs
can effectively monitor for the presence
of marine mammals; during conditions
with a Beaufort sea state of four or less.
Pile driving and DTH drilling may
continue for up to 30 minutes after
sunset during evening civil twilight, as
necessary to secure a pile for safety
prior to demobilization during this time.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
39599
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
The length of the post-activity
monitoring period may be reduced if
darkness precludes visibility of the
shutdown and monitoring zones.
Shutdown Zones
CBS will establish shutdown zones
for all pile driving and DTH drilling
activities. 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). Shutdown
zones would be based upon the Level A
harassment isopleth for each pile size/
type and driving method where
applicable, as shown in table 10.
For in-water heavy machinery
activities other than pile driving, if a
marine mammal comes within 10 m,
work will stop and vessels will reduce
speed to the minimum level required to
maintain steerage and safe working
conditions. A 10 m shutdown zone
serves to protect marine mammals from
physical interactions with project
vessels during pile driving and other
CBS would also establish shutdown
zones for all marine mammals for which
take has not been authorized or for
which incidental take has been
authorized but the authorized number of
takes has been met. These zones are
equivalent to the Level B harassment
zones for each activity. If a marine
mammal species not covered under this
IHA enters the shutdown zone, all inwater activities will cease until the
animal leaves the zone or has not been
observed for at least 15 minutes, and
NMFS will be notified about species
and precautions taken. Pile driving will
proceed if the non-IHA species is
observed to leave the Level B
harassment zone or if 15 minutes have
passed since the last observation.
If shutdown and/or clearance
procedures would result in an imminent
safety concern, as determined by CBS or
its designated officials, the in-water
activity will be allowed to continue
until the safety concern has been
addressed, and the animal will be
continuously monitored.
construction activities, such as barge
positioning or drilling. If an activity 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 indicated in table 10 or
15 minutes have passed without redetection of the animal. Construction
activities must be halted upon
observation of 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.
All marine mammals will be
monitored in the Level B harassment
zones and throughout the area as far as
visual monitoring can take place. If a
marine mammal enters the Level B
harassment zone, construction activities
including in-water work will continue
and the animal’s presence within the
estimated harassment zone will be
documented.
TABLE 8—SHUTDOWN AND MONITORING ZONES
Level A isopleth (m)
Activity
I
LF
I
MF
I
HF 2
Phocids 1
I
Otariids
Level B
isopleth
(m)
Vibratory Pile Removal/Installation
Phase I:
16- in temp install .................................................
16-in temp removal ...............................................
16-in perm install ..................................................
24-in perm install ..................................................
Phase II:
16- in temp install .................................................
16-in temp removal ...............................................
24-in perm install ..................................................
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
20
20
20
20
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5,415
5,415
5,415
5,415
10
10
10
10
10
10
20
20
20
10
10
10
10
10
10
5,415
5,415
5,415
75
300
35
125
10
30
8,500
8,500
30
8,500
DTH Pile Installation
Phase I:
16-in perm install ..................................................
24-in perm install ..................................................
Phase II:
24-in perm install ..................................................
60
570
570
I
10
30
I
30
I
300
I
125
I
Impact Pile Installation
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Phase I:
16-in
16-in
24-in
Phase II:
16-in
24-in
temp install ..................................................
perm install ..................................................
perm install ..................................................
235
235
315
10
10
20
275
275
300
125
125
125
10
10
20
465
465
1,000
temp install ..................................................
perm install ..................................................
235
315
10
20
275
300
125
125
10
20
465
1,000
1 Maximum
2 Maximum
shutdown for phocids is reduced to 125 m as they are a common species within the breakwaters of Sitka Sound.
shutdown for high frequency species is reduced to 300 m, given the difficulty observing harbor porpoise at greater distances.
Protected Species Observers
The placement of PSOs during all
construction activities (described in the
Monitoring and Reporting section)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
would ensure that the entire shutdown
zone is visible. Should environmental
conditions deteriorate such that the
entire shutdown zone would not be
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
visible (e.g., fog, heavy rain), pile
driving would be delayed until the PSO
is confident marine mammals within
the shutdown zone could be detected.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
39600
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
PSOs would monitor the full
shutdown zones and the remaining
Level A harassment and the Level B
harassment zones to the extent
practicable. Monitoring zones provide
utility for observing by establishing
monitoring protocols for areas adjacent
to the shutdown zones. Monitoring
zones enable observers to be aware of
and communicate the presence of
marine mammals in the project areas
outside the shutdown zones and thus
prepare for a potential cessation of
activity should the animal enter the
shutdown zone.
Pre-Activity Monitoring
Prior to the start of daily in-water
construction activity, or whenever a
break in pile driving or DTH drilling of
30 minutes or longer occurs, PSOs
would observe the shutdown and
monitoring zones for a period of 30
minutes. The shutdown zone would be
considered cleared when a marine
mammal has not been observed within
the zone for that 30-minute period. If a
marine mammal is observed within the
shutdown zones listed in table 10, pile
driving activity would be delayed or
halted. If work ceases for more than 30
minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of
the shutdown zones would commence.
A determination that the shutdown zone
is clear must be made during a period
of good visibility (i.e., the entire
shutdown zone and surrounding waters
must be visible to the naked eye).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Soft-Start Procedures
Soft-start procedures provide
additional protection to marine
mammals by providing warning and/or
giving marine mammals a chance to
leave the area prior to the hammer
operating at full capacity. For impact
pile driving, contractors would be
required to provide an initial set of three
strikes from the hammer at reduced
energy, followed by a 30-second waiting
period, then two subsequent reducedenergy strike sets. Soft-start would 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.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s measures NMFS has
determined that the 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
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 while conducting the activities.
Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the
most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the area in which
take is anticipated (e.g., presence,
abundance, distribution, density);
• Nature, scope, or context of likely
marine mammal exposure to potential
stressors/impacts (individual or
cumulative, acute or chronic), through
better understanding of: (1) action or
environment (e.g., source
characterization, propagation, ambient
noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life
history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the
activity; or (4) biological or behavioral
context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or
feeding areas);
• Individual marine mammal
responses (behavioral or physiological)
to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
cumulative), other stressors, or
cumulative impacts from multiple
stressors;
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) long-term
fitness and survival of individual
marine mammals; or (2) populations,
species, or stocks;
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
physical components of marine
mammal habitat); and
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
Visual Monitoring
Marine mammal monitoring must be
conducted in accordance with the
conditions in this section and the IHA.
Marine mammal monitoring during pile
driving activities would be conducted
by PSOs meeting NMFS’ following
requirements:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• PSOs must be independent of the
activity contractor (for example,
employed by a subcontractor) and have
no other assigned tasks during
monitoring periods;
• At least one PSO would have prior
experience performing the duties of a
PSO during construction activity
pursuant to a NMFS-issued incidental
take authorization;
• Other PSOs may substitute
education (degree in biological science
or related field) or training for
experience; and
• Where a team of three or more PSOs
is required, a lead observer or
monitoring coordinator would be
designated. The lead observer would be
required to have prior experience
working as a marine mammal observer
during construction.
PSOs should have the following
additional qualifications:
Æ Ability to conduct field
observations and collect data according
to assigned protocols;
Æ Experience or training in the field
identification of marine mammals,
including the identification of
behaviors;
Æ Sufficient training, orientation, or
experience with the construction
operation to provide for personal safety
during observations;
Æ 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
Æ 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.
• CBS must employ up to five PSOs
depending on the size of the monitoring
and shutdown zones. A minimum of
two PSOs (including the lead PSO) must
be assigned to the active pile driving
location to monitor the shutdown zones
and as much of the Level B harassment
zones as possible.
• CBS must establish monitoring
locations with the best views of
monitoring zones as described in the
IHA and Monitoring Plan posted on our
website.
• Up to four monitors will be used at
a time depending on the size of the
monitoring area. PSOs would be
deployed in strategic locations around
the area of potential effects at all times
during in-water pile driving and
removal. PSOs will be positioned at
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
locations that provide full views of the
monitoring zones and the Level A
harassment Shutdown Zones. All PSOs
would have access to high-quality
binoculars, range finders to monitor
distances, and a compass to record
bearing to animals as well as radios or
cells phones for maintaining contact
with work crews.
• Up to four PSOs will be stationed
at the following locations: the project
site, Sandy Beach Day use site,
O’Connell lightering float, and Whale
Park.
Monitoring would be conducted 30
minutes before, during, and 30 minutes
after all in water construction activities.
In addition, PSOs would record all
incidents of marine mammal
occurrence, regardless of distance from
activity, and would document any
behavioral reactions in concert with
distance from piles being driven or
removed. Pile driving activities include
the time to install or remove a single
pile or series of piles, as long as the time
elapsed between uses of the pile driving
equipment is no more than 30 minutes.
CBS shall conduct briefings between
construction supervisors and crews,
PSOs, CBS staff prior to the start of all
pile driving activities and when new
personnel join the work. These briefings
would explain responsibilities,
communication procedures, marine
mammal monitoring protocol, and
operational procedures.
Reporting
A draft marine mammal monitoring
report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of
pile driving and removal activities for
each IHA, or 60 days prior to a
requested date of issuance from any
future IHAs for projects at the same
location, whichever comes first. The
report will include an overall
description of work completed, a
narrative regarding marine mammal
sightings, and associated PSO data
sheets. Specifically, the report must
include:
• Dates and times (begin and end) of
all marine mammal monitoring;
• Construction activities occurring
during each daily observation period,
including the number and type of piles
driven or removed and by what method
(i.e., impact, vibratory, or DTH drilling)
and the total equipment duration for
vibratory removal for each pile or total
number of strikes for each pile (impact
driving);
• PSO locations during marine
mammal monitoring;
• Environmental conditions during
monitoring periods (at beginning and
end of PSO shift and whenever
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
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;
• Upon observation of a marine
mammal, the following information:
• Name of PSO who sighted the
animal(s) and PSO location and activity
at the time of sighting;
• Time of sighting;
• Identification of the animal(s) (e.g.,
genus/species, lowest possible
taxonomic level, or unidentifiable), PSO
confidence in identification, and the
composition of the group if there is a
mix of species;
• Distance and bearing of each marine
mammal observed relative to the pile
being driven for each sightings (if pile
driving was occurring at time of
sighting);
• Estimated number of animals (min/
max/best estimate);
• Estimated number of animals by
cohort (adults, juveniles, neonates,
group composition, sex class, etc.);
• Animal’s closest point of approach
and estimated time spent within the
harassment zone;
• Description of any marine mammal
behavioral observations (e.g., observed
behaviors such as feeding or traveling),
including an assessment of behavioral
responses thought to have resulted from
the activity (e.g., no response or changes
in behavioral state such as ceasing
feeding, changing direction, flushing, or
breaching);
• Number of marine mammals
detected within the harassment zones
and shutdown zones; by species; and
• Detailed information about any
implementation of any mitigation
triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a
description of specific actions that
ensured, and resulting changes in
behavior of the animal(s), if any.
If no comments are received from
NMFS within 30 days, the draft reports
will constitute the final reports. If
comments are received, a final report
addressing NMFS comments must be
submitted within 30 days after receipt of
comments.
Reporting Injured or Dead Marine
Mammals
In the event that personnel involved
in the construction activities discover
an injured or dead marine mammal, the
IHA-holder must immediately cease the
specified activities and report the
incident to the Office of Protected
Resources (OPR)
(PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov),
NMFS and to the Alaska Regional
Stranding Coordinator as soon as
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39601
feasible. If the death or injury was
clearly caused by the specified activity,
CBS must immediately cease the
specified activities until NMFS 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 the
IHA. The IHA-holder must not resume
their activities until notified by NMFS.
The report must include the following
information:
• Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the first discovery (and
updated location information if known
and applicable);
• Species identification (if known) or
description of the animal(s) involved;
• Condition of the animal(s)
(including carcass condition if the
animal is dead);
• Observed behaviors of the
animal(s), if alive;
• If available, photographs or video
footage of the animal(s); and
• 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’’
through harassment, NMFS considers
other factors, such as the likely nature
of any impacts or responses (e.g.,
intensity, duration), the context of any
impacts or responses (e.g., critical
reproductive time or location, foraging
impacts affecting energetics), as well as
effects on habitat, and the likely
effectiveness of the mitigation. We also
assess the number, intensity, and
context of estimated takes by evaluating
this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS’ implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338, September 29,
1989), the impacts from other past and
ongoing anthropogenic activities are
incorporated into this analysis via their
impacts on the baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the
species, population size and growth rate
where known, ongoing sources of
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
39602
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
human-caused mortality, or ambient
noise levels).
To avoid repetition, the discussion of
our analysis applies to all species listed
in table 3, given that the anticipated
effects of this activity on these different
marine mammal stocks are expected to
be similar. There is little information
about the nature or severity of the
impacts, or the size, status, or structure
of any of these species or stocks that
would lead to a different analysis for
this activity. In addition, because both
the number and nature of the estimated
takes anticipated to occur are identical
in Phase I and II, the analysis below
applies to both of the IHAs.
Pile driving and DTH drilling
activities associated with the project, as
outlined previously, have the potential
to disturb or displace marine mammals.
Specifically, the specified activities may
result in take, in the form of Level B
harassment and, for some species, Level
A harassment from underwater sounds
generated by pile driving and DTH
drilling. Potential takes could occur if
individuals are present in the ensonified
zone when these activities are
underway.
No serious injury or mortality would
be expected, even in the absence of
required mitigation measures, given the
nature of the activities. Further, no take
by Level A harassment is anticipated for
killer whales, humpback whales, gray
whales, or minke whales due to the
application of planned mitigation
measures, such as shutdown zones that
encompass the Level A harassment
zones for the species, the rarity of the
species near the action area, and the
small Level A harassment zones (for
killer whales only). The potential for
harassment would be minimized
through the construction method and
the implementation of the planned
mitigation measures (see Mitigation
section).
Take by Level A harassment is
authorized for three species (harbor
porpoise, Steller sea lion, and harbor
seal) as the Level A harassment
isopleths exceed the size of the
shutdown zones for specific
construction scenarios, the Level A
harassment zones are large, and/or the
species is frequent near the action area.
Therefore, there is the possibility that an
animal could enter a Level A
harassment zone and remain within that
zone for a duration long enough to incur
PTS. Level A harassment of these
species is therefore authorized. Any take
by Level A harassment is expected to
arise from, at most, a small degree of
PTS (i.e., minor degradation of hearing
capabilities within regions of hearing
that align most completely with the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
energy produced by impact pile driving
such as the low-frequency region below
2 kHz), not severe hearing impairment
or impairment within the ranges of
greatest hearing sensitivity. Animals
would need to be exposed to higher
levels and/or longer duration than are
expected to occur here in order to incur
any more than a small degree of PTS.
Further, the amount of take
authorized by Level A harassment is
very low for the marine mammal stocks
and species. If hearing impairment
occurs, it is most likely that the affected
animal would lose only a few decibels
in its hearing sensitivity. Due to the
small degree anticipated, any PTS
potential incurred would not be
expected to affect the reproductive
success or survival of any individuals,
much less result in adverse impacts on
the species or stock.
The Level A harassment zones
identified in table 7 are based upon an
animal exposed to pile driving or DTH
drilling of several piles per day (six
piles per day for vibratory removal and
installation, four piles per day of impact
driving, and two piles per day of DTH
drilling). Given the short duration to
impact drive or vibratory install or
remove, or use DTH drilling, each pile
and break between pile installations (to
reset equipment and move piles into
place), an animal would have to remain
within the area estimated to be
ensonified above the Level A
harassment threshold for multiple
hours. This is highly unlikely given
marine mammal movement patterns in
the area. If an animal was exposed to
accumulated sound energy, the resulting
PTS would likely be small (e.g., PTS
onset) at lower frequencies where pile
driving energy is concentrated, and
unlikely to result in impacts to
individual fitness, reproduction, or
survival.
Additionally, some subset of the
individuals that are behaviorally
harassed could also simultaneously
incur some small degree of TTS for a
short duration of time. However, since
the hearing sensitivity of individuals
that incur TTS is expected to recover
completely within minutes to hours, it
is unlikely that the brief hearing
impairment would affect the
individual’s long-term ability to forage
and communicate with conspecifics,
and would therefore not likely impact
reproduction or survival of any
individual marine mammal, let alone
adversely affect rates of recruitment or
survival of the species or stock.
The nature of the pile driving project
precludes the likelihood of serious
injury or mortality. For all species and
stocks, take would occur within a
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
limited, confined area (adjacent to the
project site) of the stock’s range. The
intensity and duration of take by Level
A and Level B harassment would be
minimized through use of mitigation
measures described herein. Further, the
amount of take authorized is extremely
small when compared to stock
abundance.
Behavioral responses of marine
mammals to pile driving, pile removals,
and DTH drilling in Sitka Channel and
the surrounding Sitka Sound are
expected to be mild, short term, and
temporary. Marine mammals within the
Level B harassment zones may not show
any visual cues they are disturbed by
activities or they could become alert,
avoid the area, leave the area, or display
other mild responses that are not
observable such as changes in
vocalization patterns. Given that pile
driving, pile removal, and DTH drilling
are temporary activities and effects
would cease when equipment is not
operating, any harassment occurring
would be temporary. Additionally,
many of the species present in the
region would only be present
temporarily based on seasonal patterns
or during transit between other habitats.
These species would be exposed to even
smaller periods of noise-generating
activity, further decreasing the impacts.
Nearly all inland waters of southeast
Alaska, including Sitka Sound, are
included in the southeast Alaska
humpback whale feeding Biologically
Important Area (BIA) (Wild et al., 2023),
though humpback whale distribution in
southeast Alaska varies by season and
waterway (Dahlheim et al., 2009).
Humpback whales could be present
within Sitka Sound year round,
however the action area is within the
breakwaters where humpback whales
are not commonly found and therefore,
the BIA is not expected to be affected.
Therefore, the planned project is not
expected to have significant adverse
effects on the foraging of humpback
whales.
Sitka Sound is also within a gray
whale migratory corridor BIA (Wild et
al., 2023). Construction is expected to
occur while the BIA is active during the
southbound migration (November to
January) and northbound migration
(March to May). The Sound is also a
Gray whale feeding BIA. Construction is
expected to overlap with the feeding
BIA (March to June). However, as noted
for humpback whales, project activities
will only overlap seasonally in the gray
whale migratory and feeding BIAs, and
the overall 2 year project (Phase I and
Phase II) is expected to occur over just
40 in-water workdays, further reducing
the temporal overlap with the BIAs.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
Additionally, the area of the feeding BIA
in which impacts of the planned project
may occur is small relative to both the
overall area of the BIA and the overall
area of suitable gray whale habitat
outside of this BIA. The area of Sitka
Sound affected by this project is also
small relative to the rest of the Sound,
such that it allows animals within the
migratory corridor to still utilize Sitka
Sound without necessarily being
disturbed by the construction.
Specifically, all Level A harassment
isopleths for gray whale are within the
breakwaters where gray whales are not
expected. Therefore, take of gray whales
using the feeding and migratory BIAs is
not expected to impact feeding or
migratory behavior and, therefore,
would not impact reproduction or
survivorship.
As noted previously, since January 1,
2019, elevated gray whale strandings
have occurred along the west coast of
North America from Mexico through
Alaska. The event has been declared an
unusual mortality event (UME), though
a cause has not yet been determined.
While six takes by Level B harassment
in phase I and four takes by Level B
harassment in phase II of gray whale are
authorized for each year this is an
extremely small portion of the stock (<1
percent), and CBS will be required to
implement a shutdown zone that
includes the entire Level A harassment
zone for low-frequency cetaceans such
as gray whales.
The same regions are also a part of the
Western DPS Steller sea lion ESA
critical habitat. While Steller sea lions
are common in the project area, there
are no essential physical and biological
habitat features, such as haulouts or
rookeries, within the project area. The
nearest haulout is approximately 25
kilometers away from the project area.
Therefore, the project is not expected to
have significant adverse effects on the
critical habitat of Western DPS Steller
sea lions. No areas of specific biological
importance (e.g., ESA critical habitat,
other BIAs, or other areas) for any other
species are known to co-occur with the
project area.
In addition, it is unlikely that minor
noise effects in a small, localized area of
habitat would have any effect on each
stock’s ability to recover. In
combination, we believe that these
factors, as well as the available body of
evidence from other similar activities,
demonstrate that the potential effects of
the specified activities would have only
minor, short-term effects on individuals.
The specified activities are not expected
to impact rates of recruitment or
survival and would therefore not result
in population-level impacts.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
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 any of the
species or stocks through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival:
• No serious injury or mortality is
anticipated or authorized;
• Level A harassment would be very
small amounts and of low degree;
• Level A harassment takes of only
harbor porpoise, Steller sea lions and
harbor seals;
• For all species, the Sitka Sound and
channel are a very small and peripheral
part of their range;
• Anticipated takes by Level B
harassment are relatively low for all
stocks. Level B harassment would be
primarily in the form of behavioral
disturbance, resulting in avoidance of
the project areas around where impact
or vibratory pile driving is occurring,
with some low-level TTS that may limit
the detection of acoustic cues for
relatively brief amounts of time in
relatively confined footprints of the
activities;
• Effects on species that serve as prey
for marine mammals from the activities
are expected to be short-term and,
therefore, any associated impacts on
marine mammal feeding are not
expected to result in significant or longterm consequences for individuals, or to
accrue to adverse impacts on their
populations;
• The ensonified areas are very small
relative to the overall habitat ranges of
all species and stocks, and would not
adversely affect ESA-designated critical
habitat for any species or any areas of
known biological importance;
• The lack of anticipated significant
or long-term negative effects to marine
mammal habitat; and
• CBS would implement mitigation
measures including soft-starts and
shutdown zones to minimize the
numbers of marine mammals exposed to
injurious levels of sound, and to ensure
that take by Level A harassment is, at
most, a small degree of PTS.
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, specific to each of the 2
consecutive years of planned activity,
would have a negligible impact on all
affected marine mammal species or
stocks.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39603
Small Numbers
As noted previously, only take of
small numbers of marine mammals may
be authorized under sections
101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
specified activities other than military
readiness activities. The MMPA does
not define small numbers and so, in
practice, where estimated numbers are
available, NMFS compares the number
of individuals taken to the most
appropriate estimation of abundance of
the relevant species or stock in our
determination of whether an
authorization is limited to small
numbers of marine mammals. 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.
The amount of take NMFS authorized,
for each of the 2 consecutive years of the
activity, is below one third of the
estimated stock abundance for all
species (in fact, take of individuals is
less than 2 percent of the abundance of
the affected stocks, see table 9). This is
likely a conservative estimate because
we assume all takes are of different
individual animals, which is likely not
the case. Some individuals may return
multiple times in a day, but PSOs would
count them as separate takes if they
cannot be individually identified.
There is no current or historical
estimate of the Alaska minke whale
stock, but there are known to be over
1,000 minke whales in the Gulf of
Alaska (Muto et al., 2018), so the 10
takes by Level B harassment over the 2
years of the project duration is small
relative to estimated survey abundance,
even if each take occurred to a new
individual. Additionally, the range of
the Alaska stock of minke whales is
extensive, stretching from the Canadian
Pacific coast to the Chukchi Sea, and
CBS’s project would only impact a small
portion of this range.
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, for
each of the two IHAs, small numbers of
marine mammals would 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’’
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
39604
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 2024 / Notices
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.
Sitka Channel and other nearby areas
are within the traditional territory of the
Sheet1ka´ K
Ò wa´an. Alaska natives have
traditionally harvested marine mammals
in Sitka, however today a majority of the
subsistence harvest is of species other
than marine mammals. Alaska
Department Fish and Game reported
that in 2013, around 11 percent of Sitka
households used subsistence-caught
marine mammals (ADF&G, 2023),
however this is the most recent data
available and there has not been a
survey since.
The project is not likely to adversely
impact the availability of any marine
mammal species or stocks that are
commonly used for subsistence
purposes or impact subsistence harvest
of marine mammals in the region
because:
• There is no recent recorded
subsistence harvest of marine mammals
in the area;
• Construction activities are
temporary and localized primarily
within Sitka Channel;
• Construction will not take place
during the herring spawning season
when subsistence species are more
active;
• Mitigation measures will be
implemented to minimize disturbance
of marine mammals in the action area;
and
• The project will not result in
significant changes to availability of
subsistence resources.
Based on the description of the
specified activity, the measures
described to minimize adverse effects
on the availability of marine mammals
for subsistence purposes, and the
mitigation and monitoring measures;
NMFS has determined that, specific to
each of the 2 consecutive years of
planned activity, there will not be an
unmitigable adverse impact on
subsistence uses from CBS’s activities.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 May 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
Endangered Species Act
There are two marine mammals
(western DPS Steller sea lion and
Mexico- North Pacific DPS humpback
whale) with the potential to occur in the
project area that are listed as
endangered or threatened under the
ESA. The NMFS Alaska Regional Office
issued a Biological Opinion under
section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of
two IHAs to CBS under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the NMFS
OPR. The Biological Opinion concluded
that this action is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
either DPS. In addition, the action
authorized no take of the Mexico- North
Pacific DPS humpback whale and is not
likely to adversely affect any critical
habitat.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
NOAA Administrative Order (NAO)
216–6A, NMFS must review our action
(i.e., the issuance of an IHA) with
respect to potential impacts on the
human environment.
This action is consistent with
categories of activities identified in
Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no
anticipated serious injury or mortality)
of the Companion Manual for NAO 216–
6A, which do not individually or
cumulatively have the potential for
significant impacts on the quality of the
human environment and for which we
have not identified any extraordinary
circumstances that would preclude this
categorical exclusion. Accordingly,
NMFS has determined that the issuance
of these IHAs qualifies to be
categorically excluded from further
NEPA review.
Authorization
NMFS has issued two consecutive
IHAs to CBS for conducting Seaplane
Base construction in Sitka, Alaska,
starting in July 2024 for Phase I and July
2025 for Phase II, provided the
previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements
are incorporated. The issued IHAs can
be found at: https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/
incidental-take-authorization-city-andborough-sitkas-seaplane-baseconstruction-activities.
Dated: May 6, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–10145 Filed 5–8–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Comment Request;
Applicant Operational and Financial
Survey
Corporation for National and
Community Service.
ACTION: Notice of information collection;
request for comment.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Corporation for National and
Community Service (operating as
AmeriCorps) is proposing to renew an
information collection.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted to the individual and office
listed in the ADDRESSES section by July
8, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the title of the information
collection activity, by any of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically through
www.regulations.gov (preferred method)
(2) By mail sent to: AmeriCorps,
Attention Alex Delaney, 250 E Street
SW, Washington, DC, 20525.
(3) By hand delivery or by courier to
the AmeriCorps mailroom at the mail
address given in paragraph (2) above,
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice may be made available to the
public through regulations.gov. For this
reason, please do not include in your
comments information of a confidential
nature, such as sensitive personal
information or proprietary information.
If you send an email comment, your
email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
internet. Please note that responses to
this public comment request containing
any routine notice about the
confidentiality of the communication
will be treated as public comment that
may be made available to the public,
notwithstanding the inclusion of the
routine notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex
Delaney, 202–528–2705, or by email at
ADelaney@americorps.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title of
Collection: Applicant Operational and
Financial Survey.
OMB Control Number: 3045–0102.
Type of Review: Renewal.
Respondents/Affected Public:
Businesses and Organizations.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 91 (Thursday, May 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39591-39604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-10145]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XD743]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Sitka Seaplane Base Construction
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of two incidental harassment authorizations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued two consecutive incidental harassment
authorizations (IHAs) to City and Borough of Sitka (CBS) to
incidentally harass marine mammals during construction activities
associated with the CBS' Sitka Seaplane Base project, in Sitka, Alaska.
DATES: The authorizations are effective from July 1, 2024 through June
30, 2025 and July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026.
ADDRESSES: 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-city-and-borough-sitkas-seaplane-base-construction-activities. In case of problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jenna Harlacher, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations
are proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed IHA is provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) 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 the 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 the 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 September 1, 2023, NMFS received a request from CBS for two IHAs
to take marine mammals incidental to the Sitka seaplane base
construction project in Sitka, Alaska, over the course of 2 years.
Following NMFS' review of the application and a revised version, CBS
submitted a final version on November 15, 2023. The application was
deemed adequate and complete on December 1, 2023. The notice of
proposed IHAs published for public comment on January 11, 2024 (89 FR
1884). For both IHAs, CBS's request is for take of seven species of
marine mammals by Level B harassment and, for a subset of three of
these species, Level A harassment. Neither CBS nor
[[Page 39592]]
NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to result from this activity
and, therefore, IHAs are appropriate.
Description of Activity
CBS plans to replace the existing seaplane base in the Sitka
Channel in Sitka, Alaska. The purpose of this project is to construct a
new seaplane base, which would address existing capacity, safety, and
condition deficiencies for critical seaplane operations, and for all
seaplanes to transit the Sitka Chanel more safely. The planned location
of the new seaplane base in the Sitka Channel is located on the
northern shore of Japonski Island in the Sitka Sound. Over the course
of 2 years spanning July 2024-June 2025 and July 2025-June 2026, CBS
would use a variety of methods, including vibratory and impact pile
driving, and down-the-hole (DTH) drilling to install and remove piles.
Phase I would involve the installation and removal of temporary
piles, and the installation of permanent piles. During Phase I, 10 16-
inch (in, 0.4 meter (m)) and 16 24-in (0.6 m) permanent steel piles
would be installed. The installation and removal of 12 temporary 16-in
(0.4 m) steel pipe piles would be completed to support permanent pile
installation. Vibratory hammers, impact hammers, and DTH drilling would
be used for the installation and removal of the piles (table 1). The
installation and removal of temporary piles would be conducted using
impact and vibratory hammers. All permanent piles would be initially
installed with a vibratory hammer. After vibratory driving, piles would
be socketed into the bedrock with DTH drilling equipment. Finally,
piles would be driven the final few inches of embedment with an impact
hammer.
Phase II similarly would involve the installation and removal of
temporary piles, and the installation of permanent piles. During Phase
II six 24-in (0.6 m) steel piles would be installed. The installation
and removal of six temporary 16-in (0.4 m) steel pipe piles would be
completed to support the permanent pile installation. As in Phase I,
vibratory hammers, impact hammers, and DTH drilling would be used for
the installation and removal of the piles (table 2). The installation
and removal of temporary piles would be conducted using impact and
vibratory hammers. All permanent piles would be initially installed
with a vibratory hammer. After vibratory driving, piles would be
socketed into the bedrock with DTH drilling equipment. Finally, piles
would be driven the final few inches of embedment with an impact
hammer.
A further detailed description of the planned construction project
is provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHAs (89 FR
1884, January 11, 2024). Since that time, no changes have been made to
the planned activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not
provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the
description of the specified activity. Mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures are described in detail later in this document
(please see Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting).
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue two consecutive IHAs to CBS was
published in the Federal Register on January 11, 2024 (89 FR 1884).
That notice described, in detail, CBS' activity, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated
effects on marine mammals. During that 30-day public comment period, no
comments were received.
Changes From the Proposed IHAs for Final IHAs
Changes were made between publication of the notice of proposed
IHAs and this notice of final IHAs. Changes have been made to correct
typographical errors and inconsistences in the high frequency shutdown
zones in both the Phase I and Phase II IHAs to reflect the correct
shutdown zones included in the proposed Federal Register notice.
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. NMFS
fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader to
these descriptions, instead of reprinting the information. 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-assessments) 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 1 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
authorized for this activity 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. 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
serious injury or 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 or
stocks 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. Alaska Marine Mammal SARs. All values presented in table 1
are the most recent available final SAR at the time of publication of
NMFS' proposed IHAs and are available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments.
[[Page 39593]]
Table 1--Species Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Humpback Whale.................. Megaptera novaeangliae. Hawai[revaps]i......... -,-,N 11,278 (0.56, 7,265, 127 27
2020).
Mexico-North Pacific... T,D,Y N/A (N/A, N/A, 2006).. UND 0.6
Minke Whale..................... Balaenoptera Alaska................. -,-,N N/A (N/A, N/A, 2018).. ......... 0
acutorostrata.
Family Eschrichtiidae:
Gray Whale...................... Eschrichtius robustus.. Eastern North Pacific.. -,-,N 26,960 (0.05, 25,849, 801 131
2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale.................... Orca orcinus........... Northern Resident...... -,-,N 302 (N/A, 302, 2018).. 2.2 0.2
Alaska Resident........ -,-,N 1,920 (N/A, 1,920, 19 1.3
2019).
Gulf of Alaska/Aleutian -,-,N 587 (N/A, 587, 2012).. 5.9 0.8
Islands/Bering Sea
Transient.
West Coast Transient... -,-,N 349 (N/A, 349, 2018).. 3.5 0.4
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise................. Phocoena phocoena...... Northern Southeast -,-,N 1,619 (0.26, 1,250, 13 5.6
Alaska. 2019).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
Steller sea lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Western Stock.......... E,D,Y 52,932 (N/A, 52,932, 318 254
2019).
Eastern Stock.......... -,-,N 43,201 (N/A, 43,201, 2,592 112
2017).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal..................... Phoca vituline Sitka/Chatham.......... -,-,N 13,289 (N/A, 11,883, 356 77
richardii. 2015).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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 SARs online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports CV is
coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g.,
commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range.
As indicated above, all 7 species (with 12 managed stocks) in table
1 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree
that take is reasonably likely to occur. All species that could
potentially occur in the action area are included in table 8 of the IHA
application. While northern fur seal, Pacific white-sided dolphin,
Dall's porpoise, North Pacific right whale, sperm whale, fin whale, and
Cuvier's beaked whale have been documented in or near Sitka Sound and
Sitka Channel, the temporal and/or spatial occurrence of these species
is such that take is not expected to occur, and they are not discussed
further beyond the explanation provided here. These species are all
considered to be rare (no sightings in recent years) or very rare (no
local knowledge of sightings within the project vicinity) within Sitka
Sound or near the action area. The take of these species has not been
requested nor is authorized and these species are not considered
further in this document. Additionally, the Northern Sea Otter may be
found in Sitka Sound. However, the Northern Sea Otter are managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are not considered further in
this document.
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by CBS'
construction project, were provided in the Federal Register notice for
the proposed IHAs (89 FR 1884, January 11, 2024). 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
the Federal Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer
to the NMFS website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for
generalized species descriptions.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Not all marine mammal species have equal
hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and
Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al.
(2007, 2019) recommended that marine mammals be divided into hearing
groups based on directly measured (behavioral or auditory evoked
potential techniques) or estimated hearing ranges (behavioral response
data, anatomical modeling, etc.). Note that no direct measurements of
hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e.,
low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with
the
[[Page 39594]]
exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower
bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound
from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing groups and
their associated hearing ranges are provided in table 2.
Table 2--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans 7 Hz to 35 kilohertz (kHz).
(baleen whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
(dolphins, toothed whales,
beaked whales, bottlenose
whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
(true porpoises, Kogia, river
dolphins, Cephalorhynchid,
Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L.
australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
(underwater) (true seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
(underwater) (sea lions and
fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth et al.,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from CBS' pile driving activities
have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals
in the vicinity of the project area. The notice of the proposed IHAs
(89 FR 1884, January 11, 2024) included a discussion of the effects of
anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential effects of
under noise from CBS' pile driving activities on marine mammals and
their habitat. Please refer to the notice of the proposed IHAs (89 FR
1884, January 11, 2024) for that information and analysis, which is not
repeated here.
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through the IHAs, which will inform NMFS' consideration of
``small numbers,'' and the negligible impact determinations.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would primarily be by Level B harassment, as
vibratory or impact pile driving and DTH drilling has the potential to
result in disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine
mammals. There is also some potential for auditory injury (Level A
harassment) to result, primarily for harbor porpoise, harbor seals and
Steller sea lions. Harbor porpoise have larger predicted auditory
injury zones and due to their small size, they could enter the Level A
harassment zone and remain undetected for sufficient duration to incur
auditory injury. While Steller sea lion do not have large Level A
harassment zones, they are frequently sighted in the project area and
therefor have some potential for auditory injury. Additionally harbor
seals have larger Level A harassment zones and are common in the action
area, and therefore have potential for auditory injury. Auditory injury
is unlikely to occur for all other species, based on the unlikelihood
of the species in the action area and the smaller Level A harassment
zones. The mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to minimize
the severity of the taking to the extent practicable.
As described previously, no serious injury or mortality is
anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the
take numbers are estimated.
For acoustic impacts, 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) the number of days of activities. We note
that while these factors can contribute to a basic calculation to
provide an initial prediction of potential 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 take estimates.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends the use of 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 or exposure context (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty
cycle, duration of the exposure, signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the
source), the environment (e.g., bathymetry, other noises in the area,
predators in the area), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography, life stage, depth) and can be difficult to
predict (e.g., Southall et al., 2007, 2021; Ellison et al., 2012).
Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to
use a threshold based on a metric that is both predictable and
measurable for most activities, NMFS typically uses a generalized
acoustic
[[Page 39595]]
threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of behavioral
harassment. NMFS generally predicts that marine mammals are likely to
be behaviorally harassed in a manner considered to be Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above root-
mean-squared pressure received levels (RMS SPL) of 120 dB (referenced
to 1 micropascal (re 1 [mu]Pa)) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile
driving, drilling) and above RMS SPL 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa for non-
explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g.,
scientific sonar) sources. Generally speaking, Level B harassment take
estimates based on these behavioral harassment thresholds are expected
to include any likely takes by temporary threshold shift (TTS) as, in
most cases, the likelihood of TTS occurs at distances from the source
less than those at which behavioral harassment is likely. TTS of a
sufficient degree can manifest as behavioral harassment, as reduced
hearing sensitivity and the potential reduced opportunities to detect
important signals (conspecific communication, predators, prey) may
result in changes in behavior patterns that would not otherwise occur.
CBS's planned activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory
hammer and DTH drilling) and impulsive (DTH drilling and impact pile
driving) sources, and therefore the RMS SPL thresholds of 120 and 160
dB re 1 [mu]Pa 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 from
two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). CBS's
planned activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile driving and
DTH drilling) and non-impulsive (vibratory hammer and DTH drilling)
sources.
These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
Table 3--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
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 are used in estimating the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, including source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
The sound field in the project area is the existing background
noise plus additional construction noise from the project. Marine
mammals are expected to be affected via sound generated by the primary
components of the project (i.e., impact pile driving, vibratory pile
driving and removal, and DTH).
In order to calculate distances to the Level A harassment and Level
B harassment thresholds for the methods and piles being used in this
project, NMFS used acoustic monitoring data from other locations to
develop source levels for the various pile types, sizes and methods
(table 4). This analysis uses practical spreading loss, a standard
assumption regarding sound propagation for similar environments, to
estimate transmission of sound through water. For this analysis, the
transmission loss factor of 15 (4.5 dB per doubling of distance) is
used. A weighting adjustment factor of 2.5 or 2, a standard default
value for vibratory pile driving and removal or impact driving and DTH
respectively, were used to calculate Level A harassment areas.
NMFS recommends treating DTH systems as both impulsive and
continuous, non-impulsive sound source types simultaneously. Thus,
impulsive thresholds are used to evaluate Level A harassment, and
continuous thresholds are used to evaluate Level B harassment. With
regards to DTH mono-hammers, NMFS recommends proxy levels for Level A
harassment based on available data regarding DTH systems of similar
sized piles and holes (Denes et al., 2019; Guan and Miner, 2020; Reyff
and Heyvaert, 2019; Reyff, 2020; Heyvaert and Reyff, 2021).
[[Page 39596]]
Table 4--Estimates Underwater Proxy Source Level for Pile Installation and Removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Method and pile type Sound source at 10 meters Source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Hammer dB rms
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 in.............................. 161 NAVFAC 2015.
24 in.............................. 161 NAVFAC 2015.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH Drill dB rms dB SEL dB peak
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 in.............................. 167 146 172 Heyvaert and Reyff 2021,
Guan and Miner 2020.
24 in.............................. 167 159 184 Heyvaert and Reyff 2021.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Hammer dB rms dB SEL dB peak
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 in.............................. 185 175 200 Caltrans 2020.
24 in.............................. 190 177 203 Caltrans 2015.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Harassment Zones
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:
TL = transmission loss in dB
B = transmission loss coefficient; for practical spreading equals 15
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven
pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial
measurement.
The recommended TL coefficient for most nearshore environments is
the practical spreading value of 15. This value results in an expected
propagation environment that would lie between spherical and
cylindrical spreading loss conditions, which is the most appropriate
assumption for CBS's planned underwater activities. The Level B
harassment zones and approximate amount of area ensonified for the
underwater activities are shown in table 5.
Level A Harassment Zones
The ensonified area associated with Level A harassment is more
technically challenging to predict due to the need to account for a
duration component. Therefore, NMFS developed an optional User
Spreadsheet tool to accompany the Technical Guidance that can be used
to relatively simply predict an isopleth distance for use in
conjunction with marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict
potential takes. We note that because of some of the assumptions
included in the methods underlying this optional tool, we anticipate
that the resulting isopleth estimates are typically going to be
overestimates of some degree, which may result in an overestimate of
potential take by Level A harassment. However, this optional tool
offers the best way to estimate isopleth distances when more
sophisticated modeling methods are not available or practical. For
stationary sources such as pile installation or removal, the optional
User Spreadsheet tool predicts the distance at which, if a marine
mammal remained at that distance for the duration of the activity, it
would be expected to incur PTS. The isopleths generated by the User
Spreadsheet used the same TL coefficient as the Level B harassment zone
calculations (i.e., the practical spreading value of 15). Inputs used
in the User Spreadsheet (e.g., number of piles per day, duration and/or
strikes per pile) are presented in tables 1 and 2. The maximum RMS SPL,
sound exposure level (SEL), and resulting isopleths are reported in
tables 4 and 5.
Table 5--Level A and Level B Harassment Isopleths for Pile Driving Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A isopleth (m)
Activity ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level B
LF MF HF Phocids Otariids isopleth (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Pile Removal/Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16- in temp install........ 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
16-in temp removal......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
16-in perm install......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
24-in perm install......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
Phase II:
16- in temp install........ 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
16-in temp removal......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
24-in perm install......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16-in perm install......... 59 2.1 70.3 31.6 2.3 \1\ 8,500
24-in perm install......... 568.9 20.2 677.6 304.4 22.2 \1\ 8,500
Phase II:
24-in perm install......... 568.9 20.2 677.6 304.4 22.2 \1\ 8,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 39597]]
Impact Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16-in temp install......... 231 8.2 275 123 9 464.2
16-in perm install......... 231 8.2 275 123 9 464.2
24-in perm install......... 313 11.1 373 168 12.2 1,000
Phase II:
16-in temp install......... 231 8.2 275 123 9 464.2
24-in perm install......... 313 11.1 373 168 12.2 1,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The calculated Level B harassment zone is 13,594 m. However, the farthest distance that sound will transmit
from the source is 8,500 m before transmission is stopped by landmasses.
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide information about the occurrence of
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information which
will inform the take calculations.
Daily occurrence probability of each marine mammal species in the
action area is based on consultation with previous monitoring reports,
local researchers and marine professionals. Occurrence probability
estimates are based on conservative density approximations for each
species and factor in historic data of occurrence, seasonality, and
group size in Sitka Sound and Sitka Channel. A summary of species
occurrence is shown in table 6. To accurately describe species
occurrence near the action area, marine mammals were described as
either common (species sighted consistently during all monitoring
efforts in the project vicinity, assume one to two groups per day),
frequent (species sighted with some consistency during most monitoring
efforts in the project vicinity, assume one group per week), or
infrequent (species sighted occasionally during a few monitoring
efforts in the project vicinity, assume one group per 2 weeks).
Table 6--Estimated Occurrence of Group Sightings of Marine Mammal Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average group
Species Frequency size Expected occurrence
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale...................... Frequent............... 3.4 1 group/week.
Minke whale \1\..................... Infrequent............. 3.5 1 group/2 weeks.
Gray whale.......................... Infrequent............. 3.5 1 group/2 weeks.
Killer whale........................ Frequent............... 6.6 1 group/week.
Harbor porpoise..................... Infrequent............. 5.0 1 group/2 weeks.
Harbor seal \2\..................... Common................. 2.1 1-2 groups/day.
Steller sea lion \2\................ Common................. 2.0 1-2 groups/day.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Minke whale considered rare in Sitka Channel, but to be conservative they are treated as infrequent for take
estimation as there is a small likelihood they could be in the area during the activity.
\2\ Likelihood of one group/day in the Level A harassment zone and likelihood of two groups/day in the level B
harassment zone.
Take Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is synthesized
to produce a quantitative estimate of the take that is reasonably
likely to occur and authorized.
For the total underwater take estimate, the daily occurrence
probability for a species was multiplied by the estimated group size
and by the number of days of each type of pile driving activity. Group
size is based on the best available published research for these
species and their presence in the action area.
Estimated take = Group size x Groups per day x Days of pile driving
activity
Take by Level A harassment is anticipated for Steller sea lions and
harbor seals. Although Steller sea lion Level A harassment zones are
small, as previously discussed they are known to spend extended periods
of time within the breakwaters in Sitka sound and in the project area.
Harbor seals are also common in the project area and although their
Level A harassment zones are farther from the project area, CBS has
requested a maximum shutdown zone of 125 m for harbor seals and
therefor there is likelihood for take by Level A harassment of harbor
seals. Take by Level A harassment is also requested for harbor
porpoise. We require a maximum shutdown zone for high frequency species
of 300 m in this case and therefor there is likelihood for some take by
Level A harassment. Even though they are not as common within the
breakwaters, their Level A harassment zone extends beyond the
breakwaters and they are elusive in nature. The take by Level A
harassment for both pinniped species are based on a lower daily
occurrence rate based on the frequency of sightings within the smaller
Level A harassment zone of the breakwaters (table 6).
Additionally, for species that are large and/or infrequent (gray
whale, minke whale, humpback whale, and harbor porpoise) in Sitka Sound
and are unlikely to be within the breakwaters where the action will
take place, take by Level B harassment is only anticipated to occur
incidental to vibratory and DTH methods, given the larger Level B
harassment zones which will extend beyond the breakwaters. Anticipated
take by Level A harassment for harbor seal and harbor porpoise would
likely occur only incidental to impact pile driving and DTH drilling,
and anticipated take of Steller sea lion by Level A harassment would
likely occur only incidental to DTH drilling, due to
[[Page 39598]]
the larger Level A harassment zones for these activities. See table 5.
Table 7--Take of Marine Mammals by Level A and Level B Harassment and Percent of Stock To Be Taken
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase 1 Phase 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Stock Percent of Percent of
Level A Level B stock Level A Level B stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale \1\......................... Hawai[revaps]i............... 0 11 0.1 0 4 * 0
Mexico-North Pacific \2\..... 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gray Whale................................. Eastern North Pacific........ 0 6 0 0 * 4 0
Minke Whale................................ Alaska....................... 0 6 NA 0 * 4 NA
Killer whale............................... West Coast Transients........ 0 3 0.9 0 1 0.3
Gulf, Aleutian, Bering 0 6 0.9 0 2 0.3
Transient.
Northern Resident............ 0 3 0.9 0 1 0.3
Alaska Resident.............. 0 18 0.9 0 6 0.3
Harbor porpoise............................ Northern Southeast Alaska.... * 5 8 0.9 * 5 * 5 0.7
Harbor seal................................ Sitka/Chatham Alaska......... 48 130 1.3 13 38 0.4
Steller sea lion........................... Eastern US................... 16 121 0.3 6 35 0.1
Western US................... 0 3 0 0 * 2 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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. Humpback whale probability by stock based on Southeast Alaska estimates from NMFS 2021 (98 percent Hawaii
distinct population segment (DPS); 2 percent Mexico DPS).
\2\ ESA listed Mexico humpback whales take calculation resulted in less than 0.5 takes, therefore no takes are anticipated or authorized.
* Where calculated take was less than the average group size, the take was rounded up to a group size as that is likely what would be encountered.
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 the
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses. 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 the 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, NMFS
considers 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, as
well as subsistence uses. This considers the nature of the potential
adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further
considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if
implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if
implemented as planned), the likelihood of effective implementation
(probability implemented as planned); and
(2) The practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, and impact on
operations.
Mitigation Measures
For each IHA, CBS must follow mitigation measures as specified
below:
Ensure that construction supervisors and crews, the
monitoring team, and relevant CBS staff are trained prior to the start
of all pile driving and DTH drilling activity, 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;
Employ Protected Species Observers (PSOs) and establish
monitoring locations as described in the application and the IHA. The
Holder must monitor the project area to the maximum extent possible
based on the required number of PSOs, required monitoring locations,
and environmental conditions. For all pile driving and removal at least
one PSO must be used. The PSO will be stationed as close to the
activity as possible;
The placement of the PSOs during all pile driving and
removal and DTH drilling activities will ensure that the entire
shutdown zone is visible during pile installation;
Monitoring must take place from 30 minutes prior to
initiation of pile driving or DTH drilling activity (i.e., pre-
clearance monitoring) through 30 minutes post-completion of pile
driving or DTH drilling activity;
Pre-start clearance monitoring must be conducted during
periods of visibility sufficient for the lead PSO to determine that the
shutdown zones indicated in table 10 are clear of marine mammals. Pile
driving and DTH drilling may commence following 30 minutes of
observation when the determination is made that the shutdown zones are
clear of marine mammals;
CBS must use soft start techniques when impact pile
driving. Soft start requires contractors to provide an initial set of
three strikes at reduced energy, followed by a 30-second waiting
period, then two subsequent reduced-energy strike sets. A soft start
must 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; and
If a marine mammal is observed entering or within the
shutdown zones indicated in table 10, pile driving and DTH drilling
must be delayed or halted. If pile driving 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 (table 11) or 15 minutes have passed
without re-detection of the animal.
As planned by the applicant, in water activities will take place
only between civil dawn and civil dusk when PSOs can effectively
monitor for the presence of marine mammals; during conditions with a
Beaufort sea state of four or less. Pile driving and DTH drilling may
continue for up to 30 minutes after sunset during evening civil
twilight, as necessary to secure a pile for safety prior to
demobilization during this time.
[[Page 39599]]
The length of the post-activity monitoring period may be reduced if
darkness precludes visibility of the shutdown and monitoring zones.
Shutdown Zones
CBS will establish shutdown zones for all pile driving and DTH
drilling activities. 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). Shutdown zones would be based upon the Level A
harassment isopleth for each pile size/type and driving method where
applicable, as shown in table 10.
For in-water heavy machinery activities other than pile driving, if
a marine mammal comes within 10 m, work will stop and vessels will
reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and
safe working conditions. A 10 m shutdown zone serves to protect marine
mammals from physical interactions with project vessels during pile
driving and other construction activities, such as barge positioning or
drilling. If an activity 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 indicated in table 10 or 15 minutes have passed without
re-detection of the animal. Construction activities must be halted upon
observation of 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.
All marine mammals will be monitored in the Level B harassment
zones and throughout the area as far as visual monitoring can take
place. If a marine mammal enters the Level B harassment zone,
construction activities including in-water work will continue and the
animal's presence within the estimated harassment zone will be
documented.
CBS would also establish shutdown zones for all marine mammals for
which take has not been authorized or for which incidental take has
been authorized but the authorized number of takes has been met. These
zones are equivalent to the Level B harassment zones for each activity.
If a marine mammal species not covered under this IHA enters the
shutdown zone, all in-water activities will cease until the animal
leaves the zone or has not been observed for at least 15 minutes, and
NMFS will be notified about species and precautions taken. Pile driving
will proceed if the non-IHA species is observed to leave the Level B
harassment zone or if 15 minutes have passed since the last
observation.
If shutdown and/or clearance procedures would result in an imminent
safety concern, as determined by CBS or its designated officials, the
in-water activity will be allowed to continue until the safety concern
has been addressed, and the animal will be continuously monitored.
Table 8--Shutdown and Monitoring Zones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A isopleth (m)
Activity ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level B
LF MF HF \2\ Phocids \1\ Otariids isopleth (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Pile Removal/Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16- in temp install........ 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
16-in temp removal......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
16-in perm install......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
24-in perm install......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
Phase II:
16- in temp install........ 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
16-in temp removal......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
24-in perm install......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16-in perm install......... 60 10 75 35 10 8,500
24-in perm install......... 570 30 300 125 30 8,500
Phase II:
24-in perm install......... 570 30 300 125 30 8,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16-in temp install......... 235 10 275 125 10 465
16-in perm install......... 235 10 275 125 10 465
24-in perm install......... 315 20 300 125 20 1,000
Phase II:
16-in temp install......... 235 10 275 125 10 465
24-in perm install......... 315 20 300 125 20 1,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Maximum shutdown for phocids is reduced to 125 m as they are a common species within the breakwaters of
Sitka Sound.
\2\ Maximum shutdown for high frequency species is reduced to 300 m, given the difficulty observing harbor
porpoise at greater distances.
Protected Species Observers
The placement of PSOs during all construction activities (described
in the Monitoring and Reporting section) would ensure that the entire
shutdown zone is visible. Should environmental conditions deteriorate
such that the entire shutdown zone would not be visible (e.g., fog,
heavy rain), pile driving would be delayed until the PSO is confident
marine mammals within the shutdown zone could be detected.
[[Page 39600]]
PSOs would monitor the full shutdown zones and the remaining Level
A harassment and the Level B harassment zones to the extent
practicable. Monitoring zones provide utility for observing by
establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown
zones. Monitoring zones enable observers to be aware of and communicate
the presence of marine mammals in the project areas outside the
shutdown zones and thus prepare for a potential cessation of activity
should the animal enter the shutdown zone.
Pre-Activity Monitoring
Prior to the start of daily in-water construction activity, or
whenever a break in pile driving or DTH drilling of 30 minutes or
longer occurs, PSOs would observe the shutdown and monitoring zones for
a period of 30 minutes. The shutdown zone would be considered cleared
when a marine mammal has not been observed within the zone for that 30-
minute period. If a marine mammal is observed within the shutdown zones
listed in table 10, pile driving activity would be delayed or halted.
If work ceases for more than 30 minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of
the shutdown zones would commence. A determination that the shutdown
zone is clear must be made during a period of good visibility (i.e.,
the entire shutdown zone and surrounding waters must be visible to the
naked eye).
Soft-Start Procedures
Soft-start procedures provide additional protection to marine
mammals by providing warning and/or giving marine mammals a chance to
leave the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity. For
impact pile driving, contractors would be required 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. Soft-start would 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.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's measures NMFS has
determined that the 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 while
conducting the activities. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the activity; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Visual Monitoring
Marine mammal monitoring must be conducted in accordance with the
conditions in this section and the IHA. Marine mammal monitoring during
pile driving activities would be conducted by PSOs meeting NMFS'
following requirements:
PSOs must be independent of the activity contractor (for
example, employed by a subcontractor) and have no other assigned tasks
during monitoring periods;
At least one PSO would have prior experience performing
the duties of a PSO during construction activity pursuant to a NMFS-
issued incidental take authorization;
Other PSOs may substitute education (degree in biological
science or related field) or training for experience; and
Where a team of three or more PSOs is required, a lead
observer or monitoring coordinator would be designated. The lead
observer would be required to have prior experience working as a marine
mammal observer during construction.
PSOs should have the following additional qualifications:
[cir] Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
[cir] Experience or training in the field identification of marine
mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
[cir] Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
[cir] 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
[cir] 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.
CBS must employ up to five PSOs depending on the size of
the monitoring and shutdown zones. A minimum of two PSOs (including the
lead PSO) must be assigned to the active pile driving location to
monitor the shutdown zones and as much of the Level B harassment zones
as possible.
CBS must establish monitoring locations with the best
views of monitoring zones as described in the IHA and Monitoring Plan
posted on our website.
Up to four monitors will be used at a time depending on
the size of the monitoring area. PSOs would be deployed in strategic
locations around the area of potential effects at all times during in-
water pile driving and removal. PSOs will be positioned at
[[Page 39601]]
locations that provide full views of the monitoring zones and the Level
A harassment Shutdown Zones. All PSOs would have access to high-quality
binoculars, range finders to monitor distances, and a compass to record
bearing to animals as well as radios or cells phones for maintaining
contact with work crews.
Up to four PSOs will be stationed at the following
locations: the project site, Sandy Beach Day use site, O'Connell
lightering float, and Whale Park.
Monitoring would be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30
minutes after all in water construction activities. In addition, PSOs
would record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of
distance from activity, and would document any behavioral reactions in
concert with distance from piles being driven or removed. Pile driving
activities include the time to install or remove a single pile or
series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile
driving equipment is no more than 30 minutes.
CBS shall conduct briefings between construction supervisors and
crews, PSOs, CBS staff prior to the start of all pile driving
activities and when new personnel join the work. These briefings would
explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal
monitoring protocol, and operational procedures.
Reporting
A draft marine mammal monitoring report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities for each IHA, or 60 days prior to a requested date of
issuance from any future IHAs for projects at the same location,
whichever comes first. The report will include an overall description
of work completed, a narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and
associated PSO data sheets. Specifically, the report must include:
Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal
monitoring;
Construction activities occurring during each daily
observation period, including the number and type of piles driven or
removed and by what method (i.e., impact, vibratory, or DTH drilling)
and the total equipment duration for vibratory removal for each pile or
total number of strikes for each pile (impact driving);
PSO locations during marine mammal monitoring;
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;
Upon observation of a marine mammal, the following
information:
Name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) and PSO location and
activity at the time of sighting;
Time of sighting;
Identification of the animal(s) (e.g., genus/species,
lowest possible taxonomic level, or unidentifiable), PSO confidence in
identification, and the composition of the group if there is a mix of
species;
Distance and bearing of each marine mammal observed
relative to the pile being driven for each sightings (if pile driving
was occurring at time of sighting);
Estimated number of animals (min/max/best estimate);
Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, juveniles,
neonates, group composition, sex class, etc.);
Animal's closest point of approach and estimated time
spent within the harassment zone;
Description of any marine mammal behavioral observations
(e.g., observed behaviors such as feeding or traveling), including an
assessment of behavioral responses thought to have resulted from the
activity (e.g., no response or changes in behavioral state such as
ceasing feeding, changing direction, flushing, or breaching);
Number of marine mammals detected within the harassment
zones and shutdown zones; by species; and
Detailed information about any implementation of any
mitigation triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a description of
specific actions that ensured, and resulting changes in behavior of the
animal(s), if any.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
reports will constitute the final reports. If comments are received, a
final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted within 30 days
after receipt of comments.
Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
In the event that personnel involved in the construction activities
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the IHA-holder must
immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to
the Office of Protected Resources (OPR)
([email protected]), NMFS and to the Alaska Regional
Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. If the death or injury was
clearly caused by the specified activity, CBS must immediately cease
the specified activities until NMFS 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 the IHA. The IHA-
holder must not resume their activities until notified by NMFS. The
report must include the following information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if
the animal is dead);
Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
If available, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s); and
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'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any impacts or responses (e.g., intensity, duration),
the context of any impacts or responses (e.g., critical reproductive
time or location, foraging impacts affecting energetics), as well as
effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We
also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by
evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent
with the 1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing regulations (54 FR 40338,
September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing
anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their
impacts on the baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of
the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing
sources of
[[Page 39602]]
human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analysis applies to all
species listed in table 3, given that the anticipated effects of this
activity on these different marine mammal stocks are expected to be
similar. There is little information about the nature or severity of
the impacts, or the size, status, or structure of any of these species
or stocks that would lead to a different analysis for this activity. In
addition, because both the number and nature of the estimated takes
anticipated to occur are identical in Phase I and II, the analysis
below applies to both of the IHAs.
Pile driving and DTH drilling activities associated with the
project, as outlined previously, have the potential to disturb or
displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may
result in take, in the form of Level B harassment and, for some
species, Level A harassment from underwater sounds generated by pile
driving and DTH drilling. Potential takes could occur if individuals
are present in the ensonified zone when these activities are underway.
No serious injury or mortality would be expected, even in the
absence of required mitigation measures, given the nature of the
activities. Further, no take by Level A harassment is anticipated for
killer whales, humpback whales, gray whales, or minke whales due to the
application of planned mitigation measures, such as shutdown zones that
encompass the Level A harassment zones for the species, the rarity of
the species near the action area, and the small Level A harassment
zones (for killer whales only). The potential for harassment would be
minimized through the construction method and the implementation of the
planned mitigation measures (see Mitigation section).
Take by Level A harassment is authorized for three species (harbor
porpoise, Steller sea lion, and harbor seal) as the Level A harassment
isopleths exceed the size of the shutdown zones for specific
construction scenarios, the Level A harassment zones are large, and/or
the species is frequent near the action area. Therefore, there is the
possibility that an animal could enter a Level A harassment zone and
remain within that zone for a duration long enough to incur PTS. Level
A harassment of these species is therefore authorized. Any take by
Level A harassment is expected to arise from, at most, a small degree
of PTS (i.e., minor degradation of hearing capabilities within regions
of hearing that align most completely with the energy produced by
impact pile driving such as the low-frequency region below 2 kHz), not
severe hearing impairment or impairment within the ranges of greatest
hearing sensitivity. Animals would need to be exposed to higher levels
and/or longer duration than are expected to occur here in order to
incur any more than a small degree of PTS.
Further, the amount of take authorized by Level A harassment is
very low for the marine mammal stocks and species. If hearing
impairment occurs, it is most likely that the affected animal would
lose only a few decibels in its hearing sensitivity. Due to the small
degree anticipated, any PTS potential incurred would not be expected to
affect the reproductive success or survival of any individuals, much
less result in adverse impacts on the species or stock.
The Level A harassment zones identified in table 7 are based upon
an animal exposed to pile driving or DTH drilling of several piles per
day (six piles per day for vibratory removal and installation, four
piles per day of impact driving, and two piles per day of DTH
drilling). Given the short duration to impact drive or vibratory
install or remove, or use DTH drilling, each pile and break between
pile installations (to reset equipment and move piles into place), an
animal would have to remain within the area estimated to be ensonified
above the Level A harassment threshold for multiple hours. This is
highly unlikely given marine mammal movement patterns in the area. If
an animal was exposed to accumulated sound energy, the resulting PTS
would likely be small (e.g., PTS onset) at lower frequencies where pile
driving energy is concentrated, and unlikely to result in impacts to
individual fitness, reproduction, or survival.
Additionally, some subset of the individuals that are behaviorally
harassed could also simultaneously incur some small degree of TTS for a
short duration of time. However, since the hearing sensitivity of
individuals that incur TTS is expected to recover completely within
minutes to hours, it is unlikely that the brief hearing impairment
would affect the individual's long-term ability to forage and
communicate with conspecifics, and would therefore not likely impact
reproduction or survival of any individual marine mammal, let alone
adversely affect rates of recruitment or survival of the species or
stock.
The nature of the pile driving project precludes the likelihood of
serious injury or mortality. For all species and stocks, take would
occur within a limited, confined area (adjacent to the project site) of
the stock's range. The intensity and duration of take by Level A and
Level B harassment would be minimized through use of mitigation
measures described herein. Further, the amount of take authorized is
extremely small when compared to stock abundance.
Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving, pile
removals, and DTH drilling in Sitka Channel and the surrounding Sitka
Sound are expected to be mild, short term, and temporary. Marine
mammals within the Level B harassment zones may not show any visual
cues they are disturbed by activities or they could become alert, avoid
the area, leave the area, or display other mild responses that are not
observable such as changes in vocalization patterns. Given that pile
driving, pile removal, and DTH drilling are temporary activities and
effects would cease when equipment is not operating, any harassment
occurring would be temporary. Additionally, many of the species present
in the region would only be present temporarily based on seasonal
patterns or during transit between other habitats. These species would
be exposed to even smaller periods of noise-generating activity,
further decreasing the impacts.
Nearly all inland waters of southeast Alaska, including Sitka
Sound, are included in the southeast Alaska humpback whale feeding
Biologically Important Area (BIA) (Wild et al., 2023), though humpback
whale distribution in southeast Alaska varies by season and waterway
(Dahlheim et al., 2009). Humpback whales could be present within Sitka
Sound year round, however the action area is within the breakwaters
where humpback whales are not commonly found and therefore, the BIA is
not expected to be affected. Therefore, the planned project is not
expected to have significant adverse effects on the foraging of
humpback whales.
Sitka Sound is also within a gray whale migratory corridor BIA
(Wild et al., 2023). Construction is expected to occur while the BIA is
active during the southbound migration (November to January) and
northbound migration (March to May). The Sound is also a Gray whale
feeding BIA. Construction is expected to overlap with the feeding BIA
(March to June). However, as noted for humpback whales, project
activities will only overlap seasonally in the gray whale migratory and
feeding BIAs, and the overall 2 year project (Phase I and Phase II) is
expected to occur over just 40 in-water workdays, further reducing the
temporal overlap with the BIAs.
[[Page 39603]]
Additionally, the area of the feeding BIA in which impacts of the
planned project may occur is small relative to both the overall area of
the BIA and the overall area of suitable gray whale habitat outside of
this BIA. The area of Sitka Sound affected by this project is also
small relative to the rest of the Sound, such that it allows animals
within the migratory corridor to still utilize Sitka Sound without
necessarily being disturbed by the construction. Specifically, all
Level A harassment isopleths for gray whale are within the breakwaters
where gray whales are not expected. Therefore, take of gray whales
using the feeding and migratory BIAs is not expected to impact feeding
or migratory behavior and, therefore, would not impact reproduction or
survivorship.
As noted previously, since January 1, 2019, elevated gray whale
strandings have occurred along the west coast of North America from
Mexico through Alaska. The event has been declared an unusual mortality
event (UME), though a cause has not yet been determined. While six
takes by Level B harassment in phase I and four takes by Level B
harassment in phase II of gray whale are authorized for each year this
is an extremely small portion of the stock (<1 percent), and CBS will
be required to implement a shutdown zone that includes the entire Level
A harassment zone for low-frequency cetaceans such as gray whales.
The same regions are also a part of the Western DPS Steller sea
lion ESA critical habitat. While Steller sea lions are common in the
project area, there are no essential physical and biological habitat
features, such as haulouts or rookeries, within the project area. The
nearest haulout is approximately 25 kilometers away from the project
area. Therefore, the project is not expected to have significant
adverse effects on the critical habitat of Western DPS Steller sea
lions. No areas of specific biological importance (e.g., ESA critical
habitat, other BIAs, or other areas) for any other species are known to
co-occur with the project area.
In addition, it is unlikely that minor noise effects in a small,
localized area of habitat would have any effect on each stock's ability
to recover. In combination, we believe that these factors, as well as
the available body of evidence from other similar activities,
demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified activities
would have only minor, short-term effects on individuals. The specified
activities are not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival
and would therefore not result in population-level impacts.
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 any of the species or stocks
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or
authorized;
Level A harassment would be very small amounts and of low
degree;
Level A harassment takes of only harbor porpoise, Steller
sea lions and harbor seals;
For all species, the Sitka Sound and channel are a very
small and peripheral part of their range;
Anticipated takes by Level B harassment are relatively low
for all stocks. Level B harassment would be primarily in the form of
behavioral disturbance, resulting in avoidance of the project areas
around where impact or vibratory pile driving is occurring, with some
low-level TTS that may limit the detection of acoustic cues for
relatively brief amounts of time in relatively confined footprints of
the activities;
Effects on species that serve as prey for marine mammals
from the activities are expected to be short-term and, therefore, any
associated impacts on marine mammal feeding are not expected to result
in significant or long-term consequences for individuals, or to accrue
to adverse impacts on their populations;
The ensonified areas are very small relative to the
overall habitat ranges of all species and stocks, and would not
adversely affect ESA-designated critical habitat for any species or any
areas of known biological importance;
The lack of anticipated significant or long-term negative
effects to marine mammal habitat; and
CBS would implement mitigation measures including soft-
starts and shutdown zones to minimize the numbers of marine mammals
exposed to injurious levels of sound, and to ensure that take by Level
A harassment is, at most, a small degree of PTS.
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, specific to
each of the 2 consecutive years of planned activity, would have a
negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted previously, only take of small numbers of marine mammals
may be authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to
small numbers of marine mammals. 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.
The amount of take NMFS authorized, for each of the 2 consecutive
years of the activity, is below one third of the estimated stock
abundance for all species (in fact, take of individuals is less than 2
percent of the abundance of the affected stocks, see table 9). This is
likely a conservative estimate because we assume all takes are of
different individual animals, which is likely not the case. Some
individuals may return multiple times in a day, but PSOs would count
them as separate takes if they cannot be individually identified.
There is no current or historical estimate of the Alaska minke
whale stock, but there are known to be over 1,000 minke whales in the
Gulf of Alaska (Muto et al., 2018), so the 10 takes by Level B
harassment over the 2 years of the project duration is small relative
to estimated survey abundance, even if each take occurred to a new
individual. Additionally, the range of the Alaska stock of minke whales
is extensive, stretching from the Canadian Pacific coast to the Chukchi
Sea, and CBS's project would only impact a small portion of this range.
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, for each of the two IHAs,
small numbers of marine mammals would 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''
[[Page 39604]]
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.
Sitka Channel and other nearby areas are within the traditional
territory of the Sheet[revaps]k[aacute] Kgw[aacute]an. Alaska natives
have traditionally harvested marine mammals in Sitka, however today a
majority of the subsistence harvest is of species other than marine
mammals. Alaska Department Fish and Game reported that in 2013, around
11 percent of Sitka households used subsistence-caught marine mammals
(ADF&G, 2023), however this is the most recent data available and there
has not been a survey since.
The project is not likely to adversely impact the availability of
any marine mammal species or stocks that are commonly used for
subsistence purposes or impact subsistence harvest of marine mammals in
the region because:
There is no recent recorded subsistence harvest of marine
mammals in the area;
Construction activities are temporary and localized
primarily within Sitka Channel;
Construction will not take place during the herring
spawning season when subsistence species are more active;
Mitigation measures will be implemented to minimize
disturbance of marine mammals in the action area; and
The project will not result in significant changes to
availability of subsistence resources.
Based on the description of the specified activity, the measures
described to minimize adverse effects on the availability of marine
mammals for subsistence purposes, and the mitigation and monitoring
measures; NMFS has determined that, specific to each of the 2
consecutive years of planned activity, there will not be an unmitigable
adverse impact on subsistence uses from CBS's activities.
Endangered Species Act
There are two marine mammals (western DPS Steller sea lion and
Mexico- North Pacific DPS humpback whale) with the potential to occur
in the project area that are listed as endangered or threatened under
the ESA. The NMFS Alaska Regional Office issued a Biological Opinion
under section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of two IHAs to CBS under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the NMFS OPR. The Biological
Opinion concluded that this action is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of either DPS. In addition, the action authorized
no take of the Mexico- North Pacific DPS humpback whale and is not
likely to adversely affect any critical habitat.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must review our action (i.e., the issuance of an IHA) with respect
to potential impacts on the human environment.
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or
mortality) of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A, which do not
individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts
on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not
identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this
categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the
issuance of these IHAs qualifies to be categorically excluded from
further NEPA review.
Authorization
NMFS has issued two consecutive IHAs to CBS for conducting Seaplane
Base construction in Sitka, Alaska, starting in July 2024 for Phase I
and July 2025 for Phase II, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.
The issued IHAs can be found at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-city-and-borough-sitkas-seaplane-base-construction-activities.
Dated: May 6, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-10145 Filed 5-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P