Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Weyerhaeuser Company for Their Log Export Dock Project on the Columbia River Near Longview, Washington, 64420-64432 [2024-17470]
Download as PDF
64420
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
adversely affect the stock through effects
on annual rates of recruitment or
survival. Additionally, only about 1.2
percent of this stock’s abundance is
proposed for take by Level B
harassment.
Based on the information and analysis
contained here and in the referenced
documents, NMFS has determined the
following: (1) the required mitigation
measures will affect the least practicable
adverse impact on marine mammal
species or stocks and their habitat; (2)
the proposed takes for authorization
would have a negligible impact on the
affected marine mammal species or
stocks; (3) the takes proposed for
authorization represent small numbers
of marine mammals relative to the
affected stock abundances; (4) Attentive
Energy’s activities will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on taking
for subsistence purposes as no relevant
subsistence uses of marine mammals are
implicated by this action; and (5)
appropriate monitoring and reporting
requirements are included. This
includes consideration of the estimated
abundance of 13 stock(s) decreasing or
increasing slightly, specific to each
stock.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal
agency insure that any action it
authorizes, funds, or carries out is not
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any endangered or
threatened species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
designated critical habitat. To ensure
ESA compliance for the issuance of
IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this
case with the NMFS Greater Atlantic
Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO),
whenever we propose to authorize take
for endangered or threatened species.
NMFS Office of Protected Resources
has proposed to authorize the incidental
take of four species of marine mammals
which are listed under the ESA (the
North Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm
whale) and has determined that these
activities fall within the scope of
activities analyzed in GARFO’s
programmatic consultation regarding
geophysical surveys along the U.S.
Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic
Renewable Energy Regions (completed
June 29, 2021; revised September 2021).
The proposed renewal IHA provides no
new information about the effects of the
action, nor does it change the extent of
effects of the action, or present any
other basis to require re-initiation of
consultation with NMFS GARFO;
therefore, the ESA consultation has been
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
satisfied for the initial IHA and remains
valid for the Renewal IHA.
Proposed Renewal IHA and Request for
Public Comment
As a result of these preliminary
determinations, NMFS proposes to issue
a renewal IHA to Attentive Energy for
conducting marine site characterization
surveys in coastal waters off of New
York and New Jersey in the New York
Bight, from the date of issuance through
June 19, 2025, provided the previously
described mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
A draft of the proposed and final initial
IHA can be found at https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/
incidental-take-authorization-attentiveenergy-llc-marine-site-characterizationsurveys-0. We request comment on our
analyses, the proposed renewal IHA,
and any other aspect of this notice.
Please include with your comments any
supporting data or literature citations to
help inform our final decision on the
request for MMPA authorization.
Dated: August 2, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–17454 Filed 8–6–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XE088]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Weyerhaeuser
Company for Their Log Export Dock
Project on the Columbia River Near
Longview, Washington
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to
Weyerhaeuser Company (Weyerhaeuser)
to incidentally harass marine mammals
during construction activities associated
with the Log Export Dock Project on the
Columbia River near Longview,
Washington.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
This authorization is effective
from September 1, 2025 through August
31, 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/national/
marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-constructionactivities. In case of problems accessing
these documents, please call the contact
listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rachel Wachtendonk, Office of
Protected Resources (OPR), NMFS, (301)
427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
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 monitoring and
reporting of the takings. The definitions
of all applicable MMPA statutory terms
cited above are included in the relevant
sections below.
Summary of Request
On October 29, 2023, NMFS received
a request from Weyerhaeuser for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to
pile driving and removal activities
associated with the Log Export Dock
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
Project on the Columbia River near
Longview, Washington. Following
NMFS’ review of the application,
Weyerhaeuser submitted a revised
version on March 14, 2024. The
application was deemed adequate and
complete on April 16, 2024.
Weyerhaeuser’s request is for take of
harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), California
sea lion (Zalophus californiaus), and
Steller sea lion (Eumatopius jubatus) by
Level B harassment and, for harbor
seals, by Level A harassment. Neither
Weyerhaeuser nor NMFS expect serious
injury or mortality to result from this
activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
Weyerhaeuser is planning the partial
demolition and replacement of the
existing Log Export dock on the
Columbia River, near Longview,
Washington. The project includes
impact and vibratory pile installation
and vibratory pile removal. Vibratory
and impact pile driving are expected to
start in September 2025 and take about
120 days of in-water work within the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS)-designated in-water work
window (September 1, 2025–January 3,
2026). All pile installation will occur
during the work window, which would
minimize potential exposure of
Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed
fish species from impact pile driving.
An additional 30 days of vibratory pile
removal may occur outside the window.
The demolition and replacement of
the 612-foot (ft), or 186.5-meter (m)
berth A of the Log Export Dock would
include the removal of 983 16-inch (in),
or 0.41-m, timber piles, 36 16-in (0.41m) steel pipe piles, 10 12-in (0.30-m)
steel H-piles, 7 12-in (0.30-m) steel pipe
piles, and 20 14- or 16-in (0.36- or 0.41m) steel fender piles. Existing piles
would be primarily removed by the
deadpull method, with piles being
removed with the vibratory hammer if
the deadpull is unsuccessful. Broken or
damaged piles would be cut at the
mudline. It is anticipated that 75
percent of the existing 983 timber piles
will be removed by the deadpull
method, with the remaining 246 being
removed with the vibratory hammer.
The new structure will be supported by
the installation of 325 30-in (0.76-m)
steel pipe piles. In addition, up to 26 24in (0.61 m) temporary steel pipe piles
may be installed and removed to
support permanent pile installation.
Temporary and permanent piles would
be initially installed with a vibratory
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
hammer, with permanent piles being
followed by an impact hammer to
embed them to their final depth. To
reduce underwater noise produced by
impact pile driving, an unconfined
bubble curtain will be used during
impact pile installation.
In order to maintain project
schedules, it is possible that multiple
pieces of equipment would operate at
the same time within the project area.
Piles may be driven on the same day or,
less commonly, at the same time, by two
impact hammers, one impact hammer
and one vibratory hammer, or two
vibratory hammers. The method of
installation, and whether concurrent
pile driving scenarios will be
implemented, will be determined by the
construction crew once the project has
begun. Therefore, the total take estimate
reflects the worst-case scenario (both
hammers installing 30-in steel pipe
piles) for the proposed project.
However, the most likely scenario is the
vibratory removal of a 16-in timber pile
at the same time as installing a 30-in
steel pipe piles by vibratory or impact
methods.
A detailed description of the planned
construction project is provided in the
Federal Register notice for the proposed
IHA (89 FR 48579, June 7, 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
specific activity.
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue
an IHA to Weyerhaeuser was published
in the Federal Register on June 7, 2024
(89 FR 48579). That notice described, in
detail, Weyerhaeuser’s activity, the
marine mammal species that may be
affected by the activity, and the
anticipated effects on marine mammals.
In that notice, we requested public
input on the request for authorization
described therein, our analyses, the
proposed authorization, and any other
aspect of the notice of proposed IHA,
and requested that interested persons
submit relevant information,
suggestions, and comments. During the
30-day public comment period, NMFS
did not receive any substantive
comments on the proposed IHA.
Changes From the Proposed IHA to
Final IHA
In table 5 of the proposed IHA
Federal Register notice (89 FR 48579,
June 7, 2024) the source levels for the
impact driving of the 30-in steel pipe
piles did not include the 5 decibel (dB)
reduction from the bubble curtain.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64421
These values have been corrected in
tables 4 and 5 of this notice. The 5 dB
reduction resulted in smaller Level A
and Level B isopleths, which have been
corrected in table 7 of this notice. The
estimated number of takes by Level B
harassment remains the same for all
species because the smaller Level B
isopleth still spans the width of the
river and the same number of marine
mammals are expected to be transiting
through the project area. The estimated
number of takes by Level A harassment
for harbor seals was reduced to 56 to
account for the smaller Level A isopleth
which no longer spans the full width of
the river. These values have been
corrected in table 8 of this notice.
Finally the smaller isopleths from the 5
dB reduction also decreased the
minimum shutdown zone and
harassment monitoring zone for impact
pile driving. The reduced shutdown and
monitoring zones have been corrected in
table 9 of this notice.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of Weyerhaeuser’s
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/marinemammal-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 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
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
64422
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
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. 2022 SARs. All values
presented in table 1 are the most recent
available at the time of publication
(including from the draft 2023 SARs)
and are available online at: https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments.
TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES 1 LIKELY IMPACTED BY THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES
Common name
Scientific name
Stock
I
ESA/
MMPA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 2
Stock abundance
(CV, Nmin, most recent
abundance survey) 3
I
PBR
Annual
M/SI 4
14,011 ......................................
>321
2,178 ........................................
93.2
UND ..........................................
10.6
Order Carnivora—Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared
seals and sea lions).
California Sea Lion ..
Zalophus californianus .............
U.S .....................
-, -, N
Steller Sea Lion .......
Eumetopias jubatus ..................
Eastern ...............
-, -, N
Family Phocidae (earless
seals):
Harbor Seal .............
Phoca vitulina ...........................
OR/WA Coastal ..
-, -, N
257,606 (N/A, 233,515,
2014).
36,308 (N/A, 36,308,
2022) 5.
UNK (UNK, UNK, 1999)
1 Information
on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy’s Committee on Taxonomy
(https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies; Committee on Taxonomy, 2022).
2 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.
3 NMFS marine mammal SARs online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region. CV
is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
4 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 mortality and serious injury (M/SI) often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A
CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
5 Nest is best estimate of counts, which have not been corrected for animals at sea during abundance surveys. Estimates provided are for the U.S. only.
As indicated above, all three species
(with three managed stocks) in table 2
temporally and spatially co-occur with
the activity to the degree that take is
reasonably likely to occur.
A detailed description of the species
likely to be affected by Weyerhaeuser’s
project, including brief introductions to
the species and relevant stocks as well
as available information regarding
population trends and threats, and
information regarding local occurrence,
were provided in the Federal Register
notice for the proposed IHA (89 (FR
48579, June 7, 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 that
Federal Register notice for these
descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS’
website (https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for
generalized species accounts.
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.). Subsequently, NMFS
(2018) described generalized hearing
ranges for these marine mammal hearing
groups. Generalized hearing ranges were
chosen based on the approximately 65decibel (dB) threshold from the
normalized composite audiograms, with
the exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower
bound was deemed to be biologically
implausible and the lower bound from
Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine
mammal hearing groups and their
associated hearing ranges are provided
in table 2.
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS
[NMFS, 2018]
Generalized hearing range in hertz
(Hz) and kilohertz (kHz) *
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Hearing group
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ................................................................................................
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) .....................
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia spp., river dolphins, Cephalorhynchids,
Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) .............................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
7 Hz to 35 kHz.
150 Hz to 160 kHz.
275 Hz to 160 kHz.
50 Hz to 86 kHz.
07AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
64423
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS—Continued
[NMFS, 2018]
Generalized hearing range in hertz
(Hz) and kilohertz (kHz) *
Hearing group
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) .........................................................................
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 the ∼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
(Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al.,
2009; Reichmuth et al., 2013). This
division between phocid and otariid
pinnipeds is now reflected in the
updated hearing groups proposed in
Southall et al. (2019).
For more detail concerning these
groups and associated frequency ranges,
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
Weyerhaeuser’s 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 IHA (FR 48579, June 7,
2024) included a discussion of the
effects of anthropogenic noise on marine
mammals and the potential effects of
underwater noise from Weyerhaeuser’s
pile driving activities on marine
mammals and their habitat. That
information and analysis is incorporated
by reference into this final IHA
determination and is not repeated here;
please refer to the notice of the
proposed IHA (FR 48579, June 7, 2024).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes
authorized through the IHA, which will
inform NMFS’ consideration of ‘‘small
numbers,’’ the negligible impact
determinations, and impacts on
subsistence uses.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
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 will primarily be by
Level B harassment, as use of the
acoustic source (i.e., pile driving) has
the potential to result in disruption of
behavioral patterns for individual
marine mammals. There is also some
potential for auditory injury (Level A
harassment) to result, primarily for
phocids because predicted auditory
injury zones are larger than for otariids.
Auditory injury is unlikely to occur for
otariids. The proposed 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. 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 is
authorized.
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 authorized take numbers.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends the use of
acoustic thresholds that identify the
received level of underwater sound
above which exposed marine mammals
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
would be reasonably expected to be
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level
B harassment) or to incur permeant
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
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
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
64424
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
result in changes in behavior patterns
that would not otherwise occur.
Weyerhaeuser’s activity includes the
use of continuous (vibratory pile
driving) and impulsive (impact pile
driving) sources, and therefore the RMS
SPL thresholds of 120 and 160 dB re
1mPa 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). Weyerhaeuser’s activity
includes the use of impulsive (impact
pile driving) and non-impulsive
(vibratory pile driving) 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 PTS
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.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
* 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 (ANSI) 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
proposed project. Pile driving generates
underwater noise that can potentially
result in disturbance to marine
mammals in the project area. The
maximum (underwater) area ensonified
is determined by the topography of the
Columbia River, including intersecting
land masses that will reduce the overall
area of potential impact. Additionally,
vessel traffic, including the other half of
the dock (berth B) remaining operational
during construction, in the project area
may contribute to elevated background
noise levels, which may mask sounds
produced by the project.
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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
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.
This formula neglects loss due to
scattering and absorption, which is
assumed to be zero here. The degree to
which underwater sound propagates
away from a sound source is dependent
on a variety of factors, most notably the
water bathymetry and presence or
absence of reflective or absorptive
conditions including in-water structures
and sediments. Spherical spreading
occurs in a perfectly unobstructed (freefield) environment not limited by depth
or water surface, resulting in a 6-dB
reduction in sound level for each
doubling of distance from the source (20
× log 10 [range]). Cylindrical spreading
occurs in an environment in which
sound propagation is bounded by the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
water surface and sea bottom, resulting
in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for
each doubling of distance from the
source (10 × log 10 [range]). A practical
spreading value of 15 is often used
under conditions, such as the project
site, where water increases with depth
as the receiver moves away from the
shoreline, resulting in an expected
propagation environment that would lie
between spherical and cylindrical
spreading loss conditions. Practical
spreading loss is assumed here.
The intensity of pile driving sounds is
greatly influenced by factors such as the
type of piles, hammers, and the physical
environment in which the activity takes
place. In order to calculate the distances
to the Level A harassment and the Level
B harassment sound thresholds for the
methods and piles being used in this
project, NMFS used acoustic monitoring
data from other locations to develop
proxy source levels for the various pile
types, sizes and methods (table 4).
Generally, we choose source levels from
similar pile types from locations (e.g.,
geology, bathymetry) similar to the
project.
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
64425
TABLE 4—PROXY SOUND SOURCE LEVELS FOR PILE SIZES AND DRIVING METHODS
Peak SPL
(re 1 μPa)
Pile type and size
RMS SPL
(re 1 μPa)
SEL
(re 1 μPa2-s )
Source
Vibratory pile installation and removal
16-in
12-in
12-in
16-in
24-in
30-in
timber pile ..............................................
steel pipe ...............................................
steel H-pile .............................................
steel pipe 1 .............................................
temporary steel pipe ..............................
steel pipe ...............................................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
162
158
152
161
161
163
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
Caltrans, 2020.
Laughlin, 2012.
Laughlin, 2019.
Navy, 2015.
Navy, 2015.
Anchor, QEA, 2021; Greenbush,
Denes et al., 2016, table 72.
2019;
Impact pile installation
30-in steel pipe 2 .............................................
210 (205)
190 (185)
177 (177)
Caltrans, 2020.
1 For
the purposes of this analysis, the underwater sound source level for removal of existing 16-in steel piles (i.e., 161 dB RMS per Navy,
2015) has been used for the removal of approximately 36 16-in steel pipe piles and 20 fender piles (14- or 16-in steel pipe piles).
2 Values in parentheses indicate the calculated proxy source value minus 5 dB of assumed attenuation from the unconfined bubble curtain.
For this project, two hammers,
including any combination of vibratory
and impact hammers, may operate
simultaneously. As noted earlier, the
estimated ensonified area reflects the
worst-case scenario (both hammers
installing 30-in steel pipe piles) for the
project. However, the most likely
scenario is the removal of a 16-in timber
pile at the same time as installing a 30in steel pipe pile. The calculated proxy
source levels for the different potential
concurrent pile driving scenarios are
shown in table 5.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Two Impact Hammers
For simultaneous impact driving of
two 30-in steel pipe piles (the most
conservative scenario), the number of
strikes per pile was doubled to estimate
total sound exposure during
simultaneous installation. While the
likelihood of impact pile driving strikes
completely overlapping in time is rare
due to the intermittent nature and short
duration of strikes, NMFS
conservatively estimates that up to 20
percent of strikes may overlap
completely in time. Therefore, to
calculate Level B isopleths for
simultaneous impact pile driving, dB
addition (if the difference between the
two sound source levels is between 0
and 1 dB, 3 dB are added to the higher
sound source level) was used to
calculate the combined sound source
level of 188 dB RMS that was used in
this analysis.
One Impact Hammer, One Vibratory
Hammer
To calculate Level B isopleths for one
impact and one vibratory hammer
operating simultaneously, sources were
treated as though they were nonoverlapping and the isopleth associated
with the individual source which
results in the largest Level B harassment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
isopleth was conservatively used for
both sources to account for periods of
overlapping activities.
Two Vibratory Hammers
To calculate Level B isopleths for two
simultaneous vibratory hammers, the
NMFS acoustic threshold calculator was
used with modified inputs to account
for accumulation, weighting, and source
overlap in space and time. Using the
rules of dB addition if the difference
between the two sound source levels is
between 0 and 1 dB, 3 dB are added to
the higher sound source level), the
combined sound source level for the
simultaneous vibratory installation of
two 30-in steel piles is 166 dB RMS.
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, like pile driving, 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. Inputs used in
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the optional User Spreadsheet tool, and
the resulting estimated isopleths, are
reported in table 6, below.
To calculate Level A isopleths for two
impact hammers operating
simultaneously, the NMFS User
Spreadsheet calculator was used with
modified inputs to account for the total
estimated number of strikes for all piles.
For simultaneous impact driving of two
30-in steel pipe piles (the most
conservative scenario), the number of
strikes per pile was doubled to estimate
total sound exposure during
simultaneous installation, and the
number of piles per day was reduced to
one. The source level for two
simultaneous impact hammers was not
adjusted because for identical sources
the accumulation of energy depends
only on the total number of strikes,
whether or not they overlap fully in
time. Therefore, the source level used
for two simultaneous impact hammers
was 172 dB single-strike sound
exposure level (SELss).
To calculate Level A isopleths of one
impact hammer and one vibratory
hammer operating simultaneously,
sources were treated as though they
were non-overlapping and the isopleth
associated with the individual source
which resulted in the largest Level A
isopleth was conservatively used for
both sources to account for periods of
overlapping activities.
To calculate Level A isopleths of two
vibratory hammers operating
simultaneously, the NMFS acoustic
threshold calculator was used with
modified inputs to account for
accumulation, weighting, and source
overlap in space and time. Using the
rules of dB addition (NMFS, 2024; if the
difference between the two sound
source levels is between 0 and 1 dB, 3
dB are added to the higher sound source
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
64426
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
level), the combined sound source level
for the simultaneous vibratory
installation of two 30-in steel piles is
166 dB RMS.
TABLE 5—CALCULATED PROXY SOUND SOURCE LEVELS FOR POTENTIAL CONCURRENT PILE DRIVING SCENARIOS
Scenario
Pile type and proxy
Two impact hammers ......
Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile (172 dB SEL, 185 dB RMS) AND impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile (172 dB SEL, 185 dB RMS).
Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile (172 dB SEL, 185 dB RMS) AND vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile (163 dB RMS).
Vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile (163 dB RMS) AND vibratory install
of 30-in steel pipe pile (163 dB RMS).
One impact hammer, one
vibratory hammer.
Two vibratory hammers ...
Calculated proxy sound source level
172
188
172
163
166
dB
dB
dB
dB
dB
SEL for Level A.
RMS for Level B
SEL for Level A.
RMS for Level B
RMS.
TABLE 6—NMFS USER SPREADSHEET INPUTS
Pile size and type
Spreadsheet tab used
Weighting
factor
adjustment
(kHz)
Duration to
drive a
single pile
(min)
Number of
piles per day
Number of
strikes per pile
Vibratory pile driving and removal
16-in timber pile ....................................................
12-in steel pipe .....................................................
12-in steel H-pile ...................................................
16-in steel pipe .....................................................
24-in temporary steel pipe ....................................
30-in steel pipe .....................................................
A.1. Vibratory pile driving.
A.1. Vibratory pile driving.
A.1. Vibratory pile driving.
A.1 Vibratory pile driving.
A.1 Vibratory pile driving.
A.1. Vibratory pile driving.
2.5
8
60
NA
2.5
8
60
NA
2.5
8
60
NA
2.5
8
60
NA
2.5
8
60
NA
2.5
8
60
NA
2
8
NA
1000
E.1. Impact pile driving
2
1
NA
8000
E.1. Impact pile driving
2
1
NA
8000
A.1. Vibratory pile driving.
2.5
1
480
NA
Impact pile driving
30-in steel pipe .....................................................
E.1. Impact pile driving
Concurrent pile driving 1
Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND impact
install of 30-in steel pipe pile.
Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile.
Vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile.
1 Number
of strikes is no longer per pile, it is the total number of strikes per day. The number of piles per day has been reduced to one.
TABLE 7—CALCULATED LEVELS A AND B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS
Level A harassment zone
(m/km2)
Pile size and type
Phocid
I
Otariid
Level B
harassment zone
(m/km2)
Vibratory pile driving and removal
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
16-in
12-in
12-in
16-in
24-in
30-in
timber pile .........................................................................................................
steel pipe ..........................................................................................................
steel H-pile ........................................................................................................
steel pipe ..........................................................................................................
temporary steel pipe.
steel pipe ..........................................................................................................
20/0.000693
11/0.000226
5/0.000055
17/0.000509
2/0.000012
1/0.000003
1/0.000003
2/0.000012
6,310/8.25
3,415/5.14
1,585/2.46
5,412/7.47
23/0.000906
2/0.000012
7,356a b/8.96
395/0.25181
29/0.001393
464/0.35
395/0.25181
29/0.001393
736/0.89
7,356a b/8.96
Impact pile driving
30-in steel pipe ..........................................................................................................
Concurrent pile driving
Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile .....
Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile ..
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
64427
TABLE 7—CALCULATED LEVELS A AND B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS—Continued
Level A harassment zone
(m/km2)
Pile size and type
Phocid
Vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe
pile ..........................................................................................................................
Otariid
36/2,153
3/0.000023
Level B
harassment zone
(m/km2)
11,660 b/10.52
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
a The Level B harassment thresholds for the vibratory installation of a single 30-in steel pile are equivalent to the potential simultaneous installation of up to two 30-inch steel piles using one impact hammer and one vibratory hammer operating concurrently. As noted previously, Levels A
and B harassment thresholds for simultaneous pile driving were analyzed based on interim guidance provided by NMFS (2024).
b The Level B harassment thresholds reported above were calculated using the practical spreading loss model, although the extent of actual
sound propagation will be limited to the areas identified in figure 6–3 of Weyerhaeuser’s application due to the shape and configuration of the
Columbia River in the vicinity.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take
Estimation
In this section, we provide
information about the occurrence of
marine mammals that will inform the
take calculations, and describe how the
information provided is synthesized to
produce a quantitative estimate of the
take that is reasonably likely to occur
and authorized. Daily occurrence data
cones from USACE compiled weekly
monitoring reports collected at the
Bonneville Dam (river mile (RM) 146)
from 2020 through 2021 (van der Leeuw
and Tidwell, 2022). As pinnipeds would
need to swim past the proposed project
site to reach the dam, the number of
animals observed at Bonneville Dam
may be slightly lower than what would
be observed at the project site. The take
calculations for this project are:
Incidental take estimate = (number of
days during work window × estimated
number of animals per day) + (number
of days outside work window ×
estimated number of animals per day).
work window from these data, because
the numbers at Bonneville Dam reflect
a strong seasonal presence in spring. A
conservative estimate of three California
sea lions per day during the in-water
work window and five California sea
lions per day outside the in-water work
window was used. Therefore, using the
equation given above, the estimated
number of takes by Level B harassment
for California sea lions would be 510.
The largest Level A harassment zone
for California sea lions extends 29 m
from the sound source (table 7) during
impact pile driving. All construction
work would be shut down prior to a
California sea lion entering the Level A
harassment zone specific to the in-water
activity underway at the time. In
consideration of the small Level A
harassment isopleth and proposed
shutdown requirements, no take by
Level A harassment is anticipated or
authorized for California sea lions.
California Sea Lion
The numbers of California sea lions
observed at Bonneville Dam have been
in decline in recent years and ranged
from 149 in 2016 to a total of 24 in 2021
(van der Leeuw and Tidwell, 2022).
During the spring period from January 1
to May 6, 2020, daily counts averaged
0.9 animals ± 3.3 standard deviation,
with a high of seven individuals
(Tidwell et al., 2020). During spring
2021, California sea lions were present
from late March through late May, but
in relatively low numbers, with most
days having five or fewer present (van
der Leeuw and Tidwell, 2022). It is
difficult to estimate the number of
California sea lions that could
potentially occur in the Level B
harassment zone during the fall in-water
Steller sea lions have been observed
in varying numbers at Bonneville Dam
throughout much of the year, with a
peak in April and May (Tidwell et al.,
2020; van der Leeuw and Tidwell,
2022). Reports from a 2-year period
observed daily counts of 12 to 20 Steller
sea lions during the fall survey period
(Tidwell et al., 2020, Tidwell and van
der Leeuw, 2021), and up to 27 Steller
sea lions per day in the spring (van der
Leeuw and Tidwell, 2022). A
conservative estimate of 20 Steller sea
lions per day during the in-water work
window and 27 Steller sea lions per day
outside the in-water work window was
used. Therefore, using the equation
given above, the estimated number of
takes by Level B harassment for Steller
sea lions would be 3,210.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
Steller Sea Lion
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The largest Level A harassment zone
for Steller sea lions extends 29 m from
the sound source (table 7) during impact
pile driving. All construction work
would be shut down prior to a Steller
sea lion entering the Level A harassment
zone specific to the in-water activity
underway at the time. In consideration
of the small Level A harassment
isopleth and proposed shutdown
requirements, no take by Level A
harassment is anticipated or authorized
for Steller sea lions.
Harbor Seal
Harbor seals are rarely observed at
Bonneville Dam, but have been recorded
in low numbers over the past 10 years.
A recent IHA issued for the Port of
Kalama Manufacturing and Marine
Export Facility (85 FR 76527), which is
located near the proposed project site,
used a conservative estimate based on
anecdotal information of harbor seals
residing near the mouths of the Cowlitz
and Kalama Rivers and estimated that
there could be up to 10 present on any
given day of pile driving (NMFS, 2017;
81 FR 15064, March 21, 2016).
Therefore, using the equation given
above, the calculated estimate of take by
Level B harassment for harbor seals
would be 1,500.
The largest Level A harassment zone
for harbor seals extends 395 m from the
sound source (table 7) during impact
pile driving. The Port of Kalama project
estimated that one harbor seal per day
could be present in the Level A
harassment zone for each day of impact
pile driving. Given that the largest Level
A isopleth extends approximately half
the width of the river (810 m), the
calculated estimated take by Level A
harassment for harbor seals would be 58
(1 seal on 48.5% of the 120 impact pile
driving days).
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
64428
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
TABLE 8—ESTIMATED TAKE BY LEVELS A AND B HARASSMENT
Stock
abundance
Common name
Stock
California sea lion ................................
Steller sea lion .....................................
Harbor seal ..........................................
U.S. Stock ...........................................
Eastern DPS .......................................
OR/WA coastal stock ..........................
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
(latter not applicable for this action).
NMFS regulations require applicants for
incidental take authorizations to include
information about the availability and
feasibility (economic and technological)
of equipment, methods, and manner of
conducting 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. This considers
the nature of the potential adverse
impact being mitigated (likelihood,
scope, range). It further considers the
Level A
harassment
257,606
36,308
24,732
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.
The mitigation measures described in
the following paragraphs will apply to
the Weyerhaeuser in-water construction
activities.
Shutdown and Monitoring Zones
Weyerhaeuser must establish
shutdown zones and Level B
harassment monitoring zones for all pile
driving 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 animal (or in anticipation of an
animal entering the defined area).
Shutdown zones are based on the largest
Level A harassment zone for each pile
size/type and driving method, and
behavioral monitoring zones are meant
to encompass Level B harassment zones
for each pile size/type and driving
method, as shown in table 9. A
minimum shutdown zone of 10 m will
be required for all in-water construction
activities to avoid physical interaction
with marine mammals. Shutdown zones
for each activity type are shown in table
9.
Level B
harassment
0
0
58
Total
authorized
take
510
3,210
1,500
510
3,210
1,558
Authorized
take as a
percentage
of stock
0.2
8.8
6.3
Prior to pile driving, Protected
Species Observers (PSOs) will survey
the shutdown zones and surrounding
areas for at least 30 minutes before pile
driving activities start. If marine
mammals are found within the
shutdown zone, pile driving will be
delayed until the animal has moved out
of the shutdown zone, either verified by
an observer or by waiting until 15
minutes has elapsed without a sighting.
If a marine mammal approaches or
enters the shutdown zone during pile
driving, the activity will be halted. Pile
driving may resume after the animal has
moved out of and is moving away from
the shutdown zone or after at least 15
minutes has passed since the last
observation of the animal.
All marine mammals will be
monitored in the Level B harassment to
the extent of visibility for the on-duty
PSOs. If a marine mammal for which
take is authorized enters the Level B
harassment zone, in-water activities will
continue and PSOs will document the
animal’s presence within the estimated
harassment zone.
If a species for which authorization
has not been granted, or for which the
authorized takes are met, is observed
approaching or within the Level B
harassment zone, pile driving activities
will be shut down immediately.
Activities will not resume until the
animal has been confirmed to have left
the area or 15 minutes has elapsed with
no sighting of the animal.
TABLE 9—SHUTDOWN AND LEVEL B MONITORING ZONES BY ACTIVITY
Minimum shutdown zone (m)
Method
Pile size and type
Phocid
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Vibratory ..................................
Impact .....................................
Concurrent pile driving ............
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
16-in timber pile removal ........................................................
12-in steel pipe pile removal ..................................................
12-in steel H-pile removal ......................................................
16-in steel pipe removal .........................................................
24-in steel pipe pile (temporary) installation and removal .....
30-in steel pipe pile installation ..............................................
30-in steel pipe pile installation ..............................................
Two impact hammers .............................................................
One impact hammer and one vibratory hammer ...................
Two vibratory hammers ..........................................................
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
Otariid
20
15
10
20
20
25
200
200
200
40
07AUN1
10
10
10
10
10
10
30
30
30
10
Harassment
monitoring
zone
(m)
6,310
3,415
1,585
5,412
5,412
7,356
464
736
7,356
11,660
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
PSOs
The placement of PSOs during all pile
driving and removal activities
(described in detail in the Monitoring
and Reporting section) will ensure that
the ensonified area of the Columbia
River is visible during pile installation.
Pre- and Post-Activity Monitoring
Monitoring must take place from 30
minutes prior to initiation of pile
driving activities (i.e., pre-clearance
monitoring) through 30 minutes postcompletion of pile driving. Prior to the
start of daily in-water construction
activity, or whenever a break in pile
driving of 30 minutes or longer occurs,
PSOs will observe the shutdown and
monitoring zones for a period of 30
minutes. The shutdown zone will be
considered cleared when a marine
mammal has not been observed within
the zone for a 30-minute period. If a
marine mammal is observed within the
shutdown zones, pile driving activity
will be delayed or halted. If work ceases
for more than 30 minutes, the preactivity monitoring of the shutdown
zones will 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).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Bubble Curtain
A bubble curtain must be employed
during all impact pile driving activities
to interrupt the acoustic pressure and
reduce impact on marine mammals. The
bubble curtain must distribute air
bubbles around 100 percent of the piling
circumference for the full depth of the
water column. The lowest bubble ring
must be in contact with the mudline for
the full circumference of the ring. The
weights attached to the bottom ring
must ensure 100 percent substrate
contact. No parts of the ring or other
objects may prevent full substrate
contact. Air flow to the bubblers must
be balanced around the circumference
of the pile. If simultaneous use of two
impact hammers occurs, both piles must
be mitigated with bubble curtains as
described above.
Soft Start
Soft-start procedures are believed to
provide additional protection to marine
mammals by providing warning and/or
giving marine mammals a chance to
leave the area prior to the impact
hammer operating at full capacity. For
impact driving, an initial set of three
strikes will be made by the hammer at
reduced energy, followed by a 30second waiting period, then two
subsequent three-strike sets before
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
initiating continuous driving. Soft start
will be implemented at the start of each
day’s impact pile driving and at any
time following cessation of impact pile
driving for a period of 30 minutes or
longer.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures, NMFS
has determined that the proposed
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;
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64429
• 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 section 5
of the IHA. Marine mammal monitoring
during pile driving and removal must be
conducted by NMFS-approved PSOs in
a manner consistent with the following:
• 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 must 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,
• Weyerhaeuser must submit PSO
Curriculum Vitae for approval by NMFS
prior to the onset of pile driving.
PSOs must have the following
additional qualifications:
• Ability to conduct field
observations and collect data according
to assigned protocols;
• Experience or training in the field
identification of marine mammals,
including the identification of
behaviors;
• Sufficient training, orientation, or
experience with the construction
operation to provide for personal safety
during observations;
• 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,
• 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.
Weyerhaeuser will employ up to four
PSOs. PSO locations will provide an
unobstructed view of all water within
the shutdown zone(s), and as much of
the Level A harassment and Level B
harassment zones as possible. PSOs will
be stationed along the shore of the
Columbia River.
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
64430
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
Weyerhaeuser will ensure that
construction supervisors and crews, the
monitoring team, and relevant
Weyerhaeuser staff are trained prior to
the start of activities subject to the
proposed IHA, so that responsibilities,
communication procedures, monitoring
protocols, and operational procedures
are clearly understood. New personnel
joining during the project will be
trained prior to commencing work.
Monitoring will occur for all pile
driving activities during the pile
installation work window (September 1,
2025 through January 31, 2026). For pile
removal activities outside the work
window, one PSO will be on site to
monitor the ensonified area once every
7 calendar days, whether or not
vibratory pile extraction occurs on that
day. Monitoring will be conducted 30
minutes before, during, and 30 minutes
after pile driving/removal activities. In
addition, observers shall record all
incidents of marine mammal
occurrence, regardless of distance from
activity, and shall document any
behavioral reactions in concert with
distance from piles being driven or
removed. Pile driving/removal 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.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Data Collection
PSOs will use approved data forms to
record the following information:
• Dates and times (beginning and
end) of all marine mammal monitoring.
• PSO locations during marine
mammal monitoring.
• Construction activities occurring
during each daily observation period,
including how many and what type of
piles were driven or removed and by
what method (i.e., vibratory or impact).
• Weather parameters and water
conditions.
• The number of marine mammals
observed, by species, relative to the pile
location and if pile driving or removal
was occurring at time of sighting.
• Distance and bearings of each
marine mammal observed to the pile
being driven or removed.
• Description of marine mammal
behavior patterns, including direction of
travel.
• Age and sex class, if possible, of all
marine mammals observed.
• Detailed information about
implementation of any mitigation
triggered (such as shutdowns and
delays), a description of specific actions
that ensued, and resulting behavior of
the animal if any.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
Reporting
A draft marine mammal monitoring
report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of
pile driving and removal activities. It
would 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., vibratory driving) and the total
equipment duration for cutting for each
pile.
• 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: (1)
name of PSO who sighted the animal(s)
and PSO location and activity at time of
sighting; (2) time of sighting; (3)
identification of the animal(s) (e.g.,
genus/species, lowest possible
taxonomic level, or unidentified), PSO
confidence in identification, and the
composition of the group if there is a
mix of species; (4) distance and bearing
of each marine mammal observed
relative to the pile being driven for each
sighting (if pile driving was occurring at
time of sighting); (5) estimated number
of animals (min/max/best estimate); (6)
estimated number of animals by cohort
(adults, juveniles, neonates, group
composition, etc.); (7) animal’s closest
point of approach and estimated time
spent within the harassment zone; and
(8) 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,
by species.
• Detailed information about any
implementation of any mitigation
triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a
description of specific actions that
ensued, and resulting changes in
behavior of the animal(s), if any.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
If no comments are received from
NMFS within 30 days, the draft final
report would constitute the final report.
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,
Weyerhaeuser shall report the incident
to the OPR, NMFS and to the west coast
regional stranding network as soon as
feasible. If the death or injury was
clearly caused by the specified activity,
Weyerhaeuser 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
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
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
human-caused mortality, or ambient
noise levels).
To avoid repetition, the discussion of
our analysis applies to California sea
lions, Steller sea lions, and harbor seals,
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.
Pile driving activities have the
potential to disturb or displace marine
mammals. Specifically, the project
activities may result in take, in the form
of Level A harassment and Level B
harassment from underwater sounds
generated from pile driving and
removal. Potential takes could occur if
individuals are present in the ensonified
zone when these activities are
underway.
The takes from Level B harassment
would be due to potential behavioral
disturbance, and TTS. Level A
harassment takes would be due to PTS.
No mortality or serious injury is
anticipated given the nature of the
activity, even in the absence of the
required mitigation. The potential for
harassment is minimized through the
construction method and the
implementation of the mitigation
measures (see Mitigation section).
Take would occur within a limited,
confined area (the Columbia River) of
the stocks’ ranges. Level A harassment
and Level B harassment would be
reduced to the level of least practicable
adverse impact through use of
mitigation measures described herein.
Further, the amount of take authorized
is extremely small when compared to
stock abundance, and the project is not
anticipated to impact any known
important habitat areas for any marine
mammal species.
Take by Level A harassment is
authorized to account for the potential
that an animal could enter and remain
within the area between a Level A
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
harassment zone and the shutdown
zone for a duration long enough to be
taken by Level A harassment. Any take
by Level A harassment is expected to
arise from, at most, a small degree of
PTS because 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. Additionally, and as
noted previously, some subset of the
individuals that are behaviorally
harassed could also simultaneously
incur some small degree of TTS for a
short duration of time. Because of the
small degree anticipated, though, any
PTS or TTS potentially incurred here
would not be expected to adversely
impact individual fitness, let alone
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
Behavioral responses of marine
mammals to pile driving at the project
site, if any, are expected to be mild and
temporary. Marine mammals within the
Level B harassment zone may not show
any visual cues they are disturbed by
activities or 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 the limited number of
piles to be installed or extracted per day
and that pile driving and removal would
occur across a maximum of 150 days
within the 12-month authorization
period, any harassment would be
temporary.
Any impacts on marine mammal prey
that would occur during Weyerhaeuser’s
activity would have, at most, short-term
effects on foraging of individual marine
mammals, and likely no effect on the
populations of marine mammals as a
whole. Indirect effects on marine
mammal prey during the construction
are expected to be minor, and these
effects are unlikely to cause substantial
effects on marine mammals at the
individual level, with no expected effect
on annual rates of recruitment or
survival.
In addition, it is unlikely that minor
noise effects in a small, localized area of
habitat would have any effect on the
stocks’ annual rates of recruitment or
survival. 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 will have only minor, shortterm effects on individuals. The
specified activities are not expected to
impact rates of recruitment or survival
and will therefore not result in
population-level impacts.
In summary and as described above,
the following factors primarily support
our determination that the impacts
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64431
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;
• The intensity of anticipated takes
by Level B harassment is relatively low
for all stocks and would not be of a
duration or intensity expected to result
in impacts on reproduction or survival;
• No important habitat areas have
been identified within the project area;
• For all species, the Columbia River
is a very small and peripheral part of
their range and anticipated habitat
impacts are minor; and,
• Weyerhaeuser will implement
mitigation measures, such as soft-starts
for impact pile driving and shut downs
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 from the proposed activity
will 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.
Table 8 demonstrates the number of
animals that could be exposed to
received noise levels that could cause
Level B harassment for the work. Our
analysis shows that less than 10 percent
of each affected stock could be taken by
harassment. The numbers of animals
authorized to be taken for these stocks
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
64432
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2024 / Notices
would be considered small relative to
the relevant stock’s abundances, even if
each estimated taking occurred to a new
individual—an extremely unlikely
scenario.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the activity (including the
mitigation and monitoring measures)
and the authorized take of marine
mammals, NMFS finds that 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
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of the affected marine mammal stocks or
species implicated by this action.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that
the total taking of affected species or
stocks would not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of
such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal
agency insure that any action it
authorizes, funds, or carries out is not
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any endangered or
threatened species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
designated critical habitat. To ensure
ESA compliance for the issuance of
IHAs, NMFS consults internally
whenever we propose to authorize take
for endangered or threatened species.
No incidental take of ESA-listed
species is authorized or expected to
result from this activity. Therefore,
NMFS has determined that formal
consultation under section 7 of the ESA
is not required for this action.
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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Aug 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
NMFS has determined that the issuance
of this IHA qualifies to be categorically
excluded from further NEPA review.
bryan.keller@noaa.gov; phone: 301–
427–7725.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authorization
The Convention and the Commission
ICCAT was established to provide an
effective program of international
cooperation in research and
conservation in recognition of the
unique problems related to the highly
migratory nature of tunas and tuna-like
species. The International Convention
for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas
(Convention), which established ICCAT,
entered into force in 1969. ICCAT
usually holds an Annual Meeting in
November of each year, and convenes
meetings of its working groups and
other subsidiary bodies between annual
meetings as needed. Under ATCA (see
16 U.S.C. 971a), the United States is
represented at ICCAT by not more than
three U.S. Commissioners. Additional
information about ICCAT is available at
www.iccat.int.
NMFS has issued an IHA to
Weyerhaeuser for the potential
harassment of small numbers of three
marine mammal species incidental to
the Log Export Dock Project on the
Columbia River near Longview,
Washington that includes the previously
explained mitigation, monitoring and
reporting requirements.
Dated: August 2, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–17470 Filed 8–6–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XE161]
Nominations for Advisory Committee
and Species Working Group Technical
Advisor Appointments to the U.S.
Section to the International
Commission for the Conservation of
Atlantic Tunas
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of request for
nominations.
AGENCY:
NMFS is soliciting
nominations (which may include selfnominations) to the Advisory
Committee to the U.S. Section to the
International Commission for the
Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT)
as established by the Atlantic Tunas
Convention Act (ATCA). NMFS is also
soliciting nominations for Technical
Advisors to the Advisory Committee’s
species working groups.
DATES: Nominations must be received
by September 13, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Nominations, including a
letter of interest and a resume or
curriculum vitae, should be sent via
email to Bryan Keller at bryan.keller@
noaa.gov. Include in the subject line
whether the nomination is for a position
as an Advisory Committee member or as
a Technical Advisor to one of the
Committee’s species working groups.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bryan Keller, Office of International
Affairs, Trade, and Commerce; email:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Advisory Committee to the U.S. Section
to ICCAT and its Species Working
Groups
ATCA (see 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.)
establishes an advisory committee
comprising: (1) Not less than 5 nor more
than 20 individuals appointed by the
U.S. Commissioners to ICCAT who shall
select such individuals from the various
groups concerned with the fisheries
covered by the ICCAT Convention; and
(2) the chairs (or their designees) of the
New England, Mid-Atlantic, South
Atlantic, Caribbean, and Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Councils. Each
member of the Advisory Committee
shall serve for a term of 2 years and be
eligible for reappointment. The
Committee meets at least twice a year
during which members receive
information and provide advice on
ICCAT-related matters. All members of
the Advisory Committee are appointed
in their individual professional capacity
and undergo a background screening.
Any individual appointed to the
Committee who is unable to attend all
or part of an Advisory Committee
meeting may not appoint another person
to attend such meetings as his or her
proxy. Nominees should be able to
fulfill the time and travel commitments
required to participate in the
Committee’s annual spring and fall
meetings, in addition to ad hoc meetings
as necessary throughout the year. The
annual spring and fall meetings are
normally 2 days long and are usually
held in Silver Spring, Maryland, or
Miami, Florida.
Members of the Advisory Committee
receive no compensation for their
services. The Secretary of Commerce
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 7, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64420-64432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-17470]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XE088]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Weyerhaeuser Company for Their Log
Export Dock Project on the Columbia River Near Longview, Washington
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
Weyerhaeuser Company (Weyerhaeuser) to incidentally harass marine
mammals during construction activities associated with the Log Export
Dock Project on the Columbia River near Longview, Washington.
DATES: This authorization is effective from September 1, 2025 through
August 31, 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/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call
the contact listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel Wachtendonk, Office of
Protected Resources (OPR), 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 monitoring and
reporting of the takings. The definitions of all applicable MMPA
statutory terms cited above are included in the relevant sections
below.
Summary of Request
On October 29, 2023, NMFS received a request from Weyerhaeuser for
an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving and removal
activities associated with the Log Export Dock
[[Page 64421]]
Project on the Columbia River near Longview, Washington. Following
NMFS' review of the application, Weyerhaeuser submitted a revised
version on March 14, 2024. The application was deemed adequate and
complete on April 16, 2024. Weyerhaeuser's request is for take of
harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), California sea lion (Zalophus
californiaus), and Steller sea lion (Eumatopius jubatus) by Level B
harassment and, for harbor seals, by Level A harassment. Neither
Weyerhaeuser nor NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to result from
this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
Weyerhaeuser is planning the partial demolition and replacement of
the existing Log Export dock on the Columbia River, near Longview,
Washington. The project includes impact and vibratory pile installation
and vibratory pile removal. Vibratory and impact pile driving are
expected to start in September 2025 and take about 120 days of in-water
work within the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS)-designated in-water work window (September
1, 2025-January 3, 2026). All pile installation will occur during the
work window, which would minimize potential exposure of Endangered
Species Act (ESA) listed fish species from impact pile driving. An
additional 30 days of vibratory pile removal may occur outside the
window.
The demolition and replacement of the 612-foot (ft), or 186.5-meter
(m) berth A of the Log Export Dock would include the removal of 983 16-
inch (in), or 0.41-m, timber piles, 36 16-in (0.41-m) steel pipe piles,
10 12-in (0.30-m) steel H-piles, 7 12-in (0.30-m) steel pipe piles, and
20 14- or 16-in (0.36- or 0.41-m) steel fender piles. Existing piles
would be primarily removed by the deadpull method, with piles being
removed with the vibratory hammer if the deadpull is unsuccessful.
Broken or damaged piles would be cut at the mudline. It is anticipated
that 75 percent of the existing 983 timber piles will be removed by the
deadpull method, with the remaining 246 being removed with the
vibratory hammer. The new structure will be supported by the
installation of 325 30-in (0.76-m) steel pipe piles. In addition, up to
26 24-in (0.61 m) temporary steel pipe piles may be installed and
removed to support permanent pile installation. Temporary and permanent
piles would be initially installed with a vibratory hammer, with
permanent piles being followed by an impact hammer to embed them to
their final depth. To reduce underwater noise produced by impact pile
driving, an unconfined bubble curtain will be used during impact pile
installation.
In order to maintain project schedules, it is possible that
multiple pieces of equipment would operate at the same time within the
project area. Piles may be driven on the same day or, less commonly, at
the same time, by two impact hammers, one impact hammer and one
vibratory hammer, or two vibratory hammers. The method of installation,
and whether concurrent pile driving scenarios will be implemented, will
be determined by the construction crew once the project has begun.
Therefore, the total take estimate reflects the worst-case scenario
(both hammers installing 30-in steel pipe piles) for the proposed
project. However, the most likely scenario is the vibratory removal of
a 16-in timber pile at the same time as installing a 30-in steel pipe
piles by vibratory or impact methods.
A detailed description of the planned construction project is
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (89 FR
48579, June 7, 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 specific activity.
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to Weyerhaeuser was
published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2024 (89 FR 48579). That
notice described, in detail, Weyerhaeuser's activity, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated
effects on marine mammals. In that notice, we requested public input on
the request for authorization described therein, our analyses, the
proposed authorization, and any other aspect of the notice of proposed
IHA, and requested that interested persons submit relevant information,
suggestions, and comments. During the 30-day public comment period,
NMFS did not receive any substantive comments on the proposed IHA.
Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA
In table 5 of the proposed IHA Federal Register notice (89 FR
48579, June 7, 2024) the source levels for the impact driving of the
30-in steel pipe piles did not include the 5 decibel (dB) reduction
from the bubble curtain. These values have been corrected in tables 4
and 5 of this notice. The 5 dB reduction resulted in smaller Level A
and Level B isopleths, which have been corrected in table 7 of this
notice. The estimated number of takes by Level B harassment remains the
same for all species because the smaller Level B isopleth still spans
the width of the river and the same number of marine mammals are
expected to be transiting through the project area. The estimated
number of takes by Level A harassment for harbor seals was reduced to
56 to account for the smaller Level A isopleth which no longer spans
the full width of the river. These values have been corrected in table
8 of this notice. Finally the smaller isopleths from the 5 dB reduction
also decreased the minimum shutdown zone and harassment monitoring zone
for impact pile driving. The reduced shutdown and monitoring zones have
been corrected in table 9 of this notice.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of Weyerhaeuser's 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 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
[[Page 64422]]
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. 2022 SARs. All values presented in table 1 are the most
recent available at the time of publication (including from the draft
2023 SARs) and are available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments.
Table 1--Marine Mammal Species \1\ Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA Stock abundance (CV,
status; Nmin, most recent Annual M/
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) abundance survey) PBR SI \4\
\2\ \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions).
California Sea Lion.......... Zalophus U.S.................... -, -, N 257,606 (N/A, 14,011............. >321
californianus. 233,515, 2014).
Steller Sea Lion............. Eumetopias jubatus.. Eastern................ -, -, N 36,308 (N/A, 36,308, 2,178.............. 93.2
2022) \5\.
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor Seal.................. Phoca vitulina...... OR/WA Coastal.......... -, -, N UNK (UNK, UNK, 1999) UND................ 10.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy's Committee on Taxonomy
(https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies; Committee on Taxonomy, 2022).
\2\ 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.
\3\ NMFS marine mammal SARs online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region.
CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\4\ 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 mortality and serious injury (M/SI) often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as
a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\5\ Nest is best estimate of counts, which have not been corrected for animals at sea during abundance surveys. Estimates provided are for the U.S.
only.
As indicated above, all three species (with three managed stocks)
in table 2 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur.
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by
Weyerhaeuser's project, including brief introductions to the species
and relevant stocks as well as available information regarding
population trends and threats, and information regarding local
occurrence, were provided in the Federal Register notice for the
proposed IHA (89 (FR 48579, June 7, 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
that Federal Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer
to NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for
generalized species accounts.
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.). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65-
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with
the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the
lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower
bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing
groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in table 2.
Table 2--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized hearing range
Hearing group in hertz (Hz) and kilohertz
(kHz) *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose
whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia spp., river dolphins,
Cephalorhynchids, Lagenorhynchus cruciger
& L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
seals).
[[Page 64423]]
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
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 the ~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). This division between phocid and otariid pinnipeds is now
reflected in the updated hearing groups proposed in Southall et al.
(2019).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, 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 Weyerhaeuser's 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 IHA (FR 48579, June 7, 2024) included a discussion of the
effects of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential
effects of underwater noise from Weyerhaeuser's pile driving activities
on marine mammals and their habitat. That information and analysis is
incorporated by reference into this final IHA determination and is not
repeated here; please refer to the notice of the proposed IHA (FR
48579, June 7, 2024).
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through the IHA, which will inform NMFS' consideration of
``small numbers,'' the negligible impact determinations, and impacts on
subsistence uses.
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 will primarily be by Level B harassment, as use of
the acoustic source (i.e., pile driving) has the potential to result in
disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals. There
is also some potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment) to
result, primarily for phocids because predicted auditory injury zones
are larger than for otariids. Auditory injury is unlikely to occur for
otariids. The proposed 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. 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 is
authorized.
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 authorized take numbers.
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 permeant 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 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
[[Page 64424]]
result in changes in behavior patterns that would not otherwise occur.
Weyerhaeuser's activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory
pile driving) and impulsive (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).
Weyerhaeuser's activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile
driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving) 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 PTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 [mu]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has
a reference value of 1[mu]Pa\2\s. In this table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National
Standards Institute (ANSI) 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 proposed project.
Pile driving generates underwater noise that can potentially result in
disturbance to marine mammals in the project area. The maximum
(underwater) area ensonified is determined by the topography of the
Columbia River, including intersecting land masses that will reduce the
overall area of potential impact. Additionally, vessel traffic,
including the other half of the dock (berth B) remaining operational
during construction, in the project area may contribute to elevated
background noise levels, which may mask sounds produced by the project.
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 x 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.
This formula neglects loss due to scattering and absorption, which
is assumed to be zero here. The degree to which underwater sound
propagates away from a sound source is dependent on a variety of
factors, most notably the water bathymetry and presence or absence of
reflective or absorptive conditions including in-water structures and
sediments. Spherical spreading occurs in a perfectly unobstructed
(free-field) environment not limited by depth or water surface,
resulting in a 6-dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of
distance from the source (20 x log 10 [range]). Cylindrical
spreading occurs in an environment in which sound propagation is
bounded by the water surface and sea bottom, resulting in a reduction
of 3 dB in sound level for each doubling of distance from the source
(10 x log 10 [range]). A practical spreading value of 15 is
often used under conditions, such as the project site, where water
increases with depth as the receiver moves away from the shoreline,
resulting in an expected propagation environment that would lie between
spherical and cylindrical spreading loss conditions. Practical
spreading loss is assumed here.
The intensity of pile driving sounds is greatly influenced by
factors such as the type of piles, hammers, and the physical
environment in which the activity takes place. In order to calculate
the distances to the Level A harassment and the Level B harassment
sound thresholds for the methods and piles being used in this project,
NMFS used acoustic monitoring data from other locations to develop
proxy source levels for the various pile types, sizes and methods
(table 4). Generally, we choose source levels from similar pile types
from locations (e.g., geology, bathymetry) similar to the project.
[[Page 64425]]
Table 4--Proxy Sound Source Levels for Pile Sizes and Driving Methods
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peak SPL (re 1 RMS SPL (re 1 SEL (re 1
Pile type and size [mu]Pa) [mu]Pa) [mu]Pa\2\-s ) Source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile installation and removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in timber pile..................... .............. 162 .............. Caltrans, 2020.
12-in steel pipe...................... .............. 158 .............. Laughlin, 2012.
12-in steel H-pile.................... .............. 152 .............. Laughlin, 2019.
16-in steel pipe \1\.................. .............. 161 .............. Navy, 2015.
24-in temporary steel pipe............ .............. 161 .............. Navy, 2015.
30-in steel pipe...................... .............. 163 .............. Anchor, QEA, 2021;
Greenbush, 2019; Denes
et al., 2016, table 72.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact pile installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-in steel pipe \2\.................. 210 (205) 190 (185) 177 (177) Caltrans, 2020.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the purposes of this analysis, the underwater sound source level for removal of existing 16-in steel
piles (i.e., 161 dB RMS per Navy, 2015) has been used for the removal of approximately 36 16-in steel pipe
piles and 20 fender piles (14- or 16-in steel pipe piles).
\2\ Values in parentheses indicate the calculated proxy source value minus 5 dB of assumed attenuation from the
unconfined bubble curtain.
For this project, two hammers, including any combination of
vibratory and impact hammers, may operate simultaneously. As noted
earlier, the estimated ensonified area reflects the worst-case scenario
(both hammers installing 30-in steel pipe piles) for the project.
However, the most likely scenario is the removal of a 16-in timber pile
at the same time as installing a 30-in steel pipe pile. The calculated
proxy source levels for the different potential concurrent pile driving
scenarios are shown in table 5.
Two Impact Hammers
For simultaneous impact driving of two 30-in steel pipe piles (the
most conservative scenario), the number of strikes per pile was doubled
to estimate total sound exposure during simultaneous installation.
While the likelihood of impact pile driving strikes completely
overlapping in time is rare due to the intermittent nature and short
duration of strikes, NMFS conservatively estimates that up to 20
percent of strikes may overlap completely in time. Therefore, to
calculate Level B isopleths for simultaneous impact pile driving, dB
addition (if the difference between the two sound source levels is
between 0 and 1 dB, 3 dB are added to the higher sound source level)
was used to calculate the combined sound source level of 188 dB RMS
that was used in this analysis.
One Impact Hammer, One Vibratory Hammer
To calculate Level B isopleths for one impact and one vibratory
hammer operating simultaneously, sources were treated as though they
were non-overlapping and the isopleth associated with the individual
source which results in the largest Level B harassment isopleth was
conservatively used for both sources to account for periods of
overlapping activities.
Two Vibratory Hammers
To calculate Level B isopleths for two simultaneous vibratory
hammers, the NMFS acoustic threshold calculator was used with modified
inputs to account for accumulation, weighting, and source overlap in
space and time. Using the rules of dB addition if the difference
between the two sound source levels is between 0 and 1 dB, 3 dB are
added to the higher sound source level), the combined sound source
level for the simultaneous vibratory installation of two 30-in steel
piles is 166 dB RMS.
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, like pile driving, 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. Inputs used in the optional User Spreadsheet tool, and the
resulting estimated isopleths, are reported in table 6, below.
To calculate Level A isopleths for two impact hammers operating
simultaneously, the NMFS User Spreadsheet calculator was used with
modified inputs to account for the total estimated number of strikes
for all piles. For simultaneous impact driving of two 30-in steel pipe
piles (the most conservative scenario), the number of strikes per pile
was doubled to estimate total sound exposure during simultaneous
installation, and the number of piles per day was reduced to one. The
source level for two simultaneous impact hammers was not adjusted
because for identical sources the accumulation of energy depends only
on the total number of strikes, whether or not they overlap fully in
time. Therefore, the source level used for two simultaneous impact
hammers was 172 dB single-strike sound exposure level
(SELss).
To calculate Level A isopleths of one impact hammer and one
vibratory hammer operating simultaneously, sources were treated as
though they were non-overlapping and the isopleth associated with the
individual source which resulted in the largest Level A isopleth was
conservatively used for both sources to account for periods of
overlapping activities.
To calculate Level A isopleths of two vibratory hammers operating
simultaneously, the NMFS acoustic threshold calculator was used with
modified inputs to account for accumulation, weighting, and source
overlap in space and time. Using the rules of dB addition (NMFS, 2024;
if the difference between the two sound source levels is between 0 and
1 dB, 3 dB are added to the higher sound source
[[Page 64426]]
level), the combined sound source level for the simultaneous vibratory
installation of two 30-in steel piles is 166 dB RMS.
Table 5--Calculated Proxy Sound Source Levels for Potential Concurrent Pile Driving Scenarios
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calculated proxy sound
Scenario Pile type and proxy source level
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two impact hammers...................... Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile 172 dB SEL for Level A.
(172 dB SEL, 185 dB RMS) AND impact 188 dB RMS for Level B
install of 30-in steel pipe pile (172 dB
SEL, 185 dB RMS).
One impact hammer, one vibratory hammer. Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile 172 dB SEL for Level A.
(172 dB SEL, 185 dB RMS) AND vibratory 163 dB RMS for Level B
install of 30-in steel pipe pile (163 dB
RMS).
Two vibratory hammers................... Vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile 166 dB RMS.
(163 dB RMS) AND vibratory install of 30-
in steel pipe pile (163 dB RMS).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--NMFS User Spreadsheet Inputs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighting
Spreadsheet tab factor Number of Duration to Number of
Pile size and type used adjustment piles per day drive a single strikes per
(kHz) pile (min) pile
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile driving and removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in timber pile............. A.1. Vibratory 2.5 8 60 NA
pile driving.
12-in steel pipe.............. A.1. Vibratory 2.5 8 60 NA
pile driving.
12-in steel H-pile............ A.1. Vibratory 2.5 8 60 NA
pile driving.
16-in steel pipe.............. A.1 Vibratory 2.5 8 60 NA
pile driving.
24-in temporary steel pipe.... A.1 Vibratory 2.5 8 60 NA
pile driving.
30-in steel pipe.............. A.1. Vibratory 2.5 8 60 NA
pile driving.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact pile driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-in steel pipe.............. E.1. Impact pile 2 8 NA 1000
driving.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concurrent pile driving \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact install of 30-in steel E.1. Impact pile 2 1 NA 8000
pipe pile AND impact install driving.
of 30-in steel pipe pile.
Impact install of 30-in steel E.1. Impact pile 2 1 NA 8000
pipe pile AND vibratory driving.
install of 30-in steel pipe
pile.
Vibratory install of 30-in A.1. Vibratory 2.5 1 480 NA
steel pipe pile AND vibratory pile driving.
install of 30-in steel pipe
pile.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Number of strikes is no longer per pile, it is the total number of strikes per day. The number of piles per
day has been reduced to one.
Table 7--Calculated Levels A and B Harassment Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment zone (m/km\2\) Level B
Pile size and type -------------------------------------- harassment zone
Phocid Otariid (m/km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile driving and removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in timber pile...................................... 20/0.000693 2/0.000012 6,310/8.25
12-in steel pipe....................................... 11/0.000226 1/0.000003 3,415/5.14
12-in steel H-pile..................................... 5/0.000055 1/0.000003 1,585/2.46
16-in steel pipe....................................... 17/0.000509 2/0.000012 5,412/7.47
24-in temporary steel pipe.............................
30-in steel pipe....................................... 23/0.000906 2/0.000012 7,356\a\ \b\/8.96
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact pile driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-in steel pipe....................................... 395/0.25181 29/0.001393 464/0.35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concurrent pile driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND impact 395/0.25181 29/0.001393 736/0.89
install of 30-in steel pipe pile......................
Impact install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND vibratory 7,356\a\ \b\/8.96
install of 30-in steel pipe pile......................
[[Page 64427]]
Vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile AND 36/2,153 3/0.000023 11,660 \b\/10.52
vibratory install of 30-in steel pipe pile............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The Level B harassment thresholds for the vibratory installation of a single 30-in steel pile are equivalent
to the potential simultaneous installation of up to two 30-inch steel piles using one impact hammer and one
vibratory hammer operating concurrently. As noted previously, Levels A and B harassment thresholds for
simultaneous pile driving were analyzed based on interim guidance provided by NMFS (2024).
\b\ The Level B harassment thresholds reported above were calculated using the practical spreading loss model,
although the extent of actual sound propagation will be limited to the areas identified in figure 6-3 of
Weyerhaeuser's application due to the shape and configuration of the Columbia River in the vicinity.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Estimation
In this section, we provide information about the occurrence of
marine mammals that will inform the take calculations, and describe how
the information provided is synthesized to produce a quantitative
estimate of the take that is reasonably likely to occur and authorized.
Daily occurrence data cones from USACE compiled weekly monitoring
reports collected at the Bonneville Dam (river mile (RM) 146) from 2020
through 2021 (van der Leeuw and Tidwell, 2022). As pinnipeds would need
to swim past the proposed project site to reach the dam, the number of
animals observed at Bonneville Dam may be slightly lower than what
would be observed at the project site. The take calculations for this
project are:
Incidental take estimate = (number of days during work window x
estimated number of animals per day) + (number of days outside work
window x estimated number of animals per day).
California Sea Lion
The numbers of California sea lions observed at Bonneville Dam have
been in decline in recent years and ranged from 149 in 2016 to a total
of 24 in 2021 (van der Leeuw and Tidwell, 2022). During the spring
period from January 1 to May 6, 2020, daily counts averaged 0.9 animals
3.3 standard deviation, with a high of seven individuals
(Tidwell et al., 2020). During spring 2021, California sea lions were
present from late March through late May, but in relatively low
numbers, with most days having five or fewer present (van der Leeuw and
Tidwell, 2022). It is difficult to estimate the number of California
sea lions that could potentially occur in the Level B harassment zone
during the fall in-water work window from these data, because the
numbers at Bonneville Dam reflect a strong seasonal presence in spring.
A conservative estimate of three California sea lions per day during
the in-water work window and five California sea lions per day outside
the in-water work window was used. Therefore, using the equation given
above, the estimated number of takes by Level B harassment for
California sea lions would be 510.
The largest Level A harassment zone for California sea lions
extends 29 m from the sound source (table 7) during impact pile
driving. All construction work would be shut down prior to a California
sea lion entering the Level A harassment zone specific to the in-water
activity underway at the time. In consideration of the small Level A
harassment isopleth and proposed shutdown requirements, no take by
Level A harassment is anticipated or authorized for California sea
lions.
Steller Sea Lion
Steller sea lions have been observed in varying numbers at
Bonneville Dam throughout much of the year, with a peak in April and
May (Tidwell et al., 2020; van der Leeuw and Tidwell, 2022). Reports
from a 2-year period observed daily counts of 12 to 20 Steller sea
lions during the fall survey period (Tidwell et al., 2020, Tidwell and
van der Leeuw, 2021), and up to 27 Steller sea lions per day in the
spring (van der Leeuw and Tidwell, 2022). A conservative estimate of 20
Steller sea lions per day during the in-water work window and 27
Steller sea lions per day outside the in-water work window was used.
Therefore, using the equation given above, the estimated number of
takes by Level B harassment for Steller sea lions would be 3,210.
The largest Level A harassment zone for Steller sea lions extends
29 m from the sound source (table 7) during impact pile driving. All
construction work would be shut down prior to a Steller sea lion
entering the Level A harassment zone specific to the in-water activity
underway at the time. In consideration of the small Level A harassment
isopleth and proposed shutdown requirements, no take by Level A
harassment is anticipated or authorized for Steller sea lions.
Harbor Seal
Harbor seals are rarely observed at Bonneville Dam, but have been
recorded in low numbers over the past 10 years. A recent IHA issued for
the Port of Kalama Manufacturing and Marine Export Facility (85 FR
76527), which is located near the proposed project site, used a
conservative estimate based on anecdotal information of harbor seals
residing near the mouths of the Cowlitz and Kalama Rivers and estimated
that there could be up to 10 present on any given day of pile driving
(NMFS, 2017; 81 FR 15064, March 21, 2016). Therefore, using the
equation given above, the calculated estimate of take by Level B
harassment for harbor seals would be 1,500.
The largest Level A harassment zone for harbor seals extends 395 m
from the sound source (table 7) during impact pile driving. The Port of
Kalama project estimated that one harbor seal per day could be present
in the Level A harassment zone for each day of impact pile driving.
Given that the largest Level A isopleth extends approximately half the
width of the river (810 m), the calculated estimated take by Level A
harassment for harbor seals would be 58 (1 seal on 48.5% of the 120
impact pile driving days).
[[Page 64428]]
Table 8--Estimated Take by Levels A and B Harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized
Stock Level A Level B Total take as a
Common name Stock abundance harassment harassment authorized percentage of
take stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion....................... U.S. Stock.................. 257,606 0 510 510 0.2
Steller sea lion.......................... Eastern DPS................. 36,308 0 3,210 3,210 8.8
Harbor seal............................... OR/WA coastal stock......... 24,732 58 1,500 1,558 6.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting 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.
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.
The mitigation measures described in the following paragraphs will
apply to the Weyerhaeuser in-water construction activities.
Shutdown and Monitoring Zones
Weyerhaeuser must establish shutdown zones and Level B harassment
monitoring zones for all pile driving 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 animal (or in
anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). Shutdown zones
are based on the largest Level A harassment zone for each pile size/
type and driving method, and behavioral monitoring zones are meant to
encompass Level B harassment zones for each pile size/type and driving
method, as shown in table 9. A minimum shutdown zone of 10 m will be
required for all in-water construction activities to avoid physical
interaction with marine mammals. Shutdown zones for each activity type
are shown in table 9.
Prior to pile driving, Protected Species Observers (PSOs) will
survey the shutdown zones and surrounding areas for at least 30 minutes
before pile driving activities start. If marine mammals are found
within the shutdown zone, pile driving will be delayed until the animal
has moved out of the shutdown zone, either verified by an observer or
by waiting until 15 minutes has elapsed without a sighting. If a marine
mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone during pile driving, the
activity will be halted. Pile driving may resume after the animal has
moved out of and is moving away from the shutdown zone or after at
least 15 minutes has passed since the last observation of the animal.
All marine mammals will be monitored in the Level B harassment to
the extent of visibility for the on-duty PSOs. If a marine mammal for
which take is authorized enters the Level B harassment zone, in-water
activities will continue and PSOs will document the animal's presence
within the estimated harassment zone.
If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or for
which the authorized takes are met, is observed approaching or within
the Level B harassment zone, pile driving activities will be shut down
immediately. Activities will not resume until the animal has been
confirmed to have left the area or 15 minutes has elapsed with no
sighting of the animal.
Table 9--Shutdown and Level B Monitoring Zones by Activity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum shutdown zone (m) Harassment
Method Pile size and type -------------------------------- monitoring
Phocid Otariid zone (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory.......................... 16-in timber pile removal.. 20 10 6,310
12-in steel pipe pile 15 10 3,415
removal.
12-in steel H-pile removal. 10 10 1,585
16-in steel pipe removal... 20 10 5,412
24-in steel pipe pile 20 10 5,412
(temporary) installation
and removal.
30-in steel pipe pile 25 10 7,356
installation.
Impact............................. 30-in steel pipe pile 200 30 464
installation.
Concurrent pile driving............ Two impact hammers......... 200 30 736
One impact hammer and one 200 30 7,356
vibratory hammer.
Two vibratory hammers...... 40 10 11,660
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 64429]]
PSOs
The placement of PSOs during all pile driving and removal
activities (described in detail in the Monitoring and Reporting
section) will ensure that the ensonified area of the Columbia River is
visible during pile installation.
Pre- and Post-Activity Monitoring
Monitoring must take place from 30 minutes prior to initiation of
pile driving activities (i.e., pre-clearance monitoring) through 30
minutes post-completion of pile driving. Prior to the start of daily
in-water construction activity, or whenever a break in pile driving of
30 minutes or longer occurs, PSOs will observe the shutdown and
monitoring zones for a period of 30 minutes. The shutdown zone will be
considered cleared when a marine mammal has not been observed within
the zone for a 30-minute period. If a marine mammal is observed within
the shutdown zones, pile driving activity will be delayed or halted. If
work ceases for more than 30 minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of
the shutdown zones will 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).
Bubble Curtain
A bubble curtain must be employed during all impact pile driving
activities to interrupt the acoustic pressure and reduce impact on
marine mammals. The bubble curtain must distribute air bubbles around
100 percent of the piling circumference for the full depth of the water
column. The lowest bubble ring must be in contact with the mudline for
the full circumference of the ring. The weights attached to the bottom
ring must ensure 100 percent substrate contact. No parts of the ring or
other objects may prevent full substrate contact. Air flow to the
bubblers must be balanced around the circumference of the pile. If
simultaneous use of two impact hammers occurs, both piles must be
mitigated with bubble curtains as described above.
Soft Start
Soft-start procedures are believed to provide additional protection
to marine mammals by providing warning and/or giving marine mammals a
chance to leave the area prior to the impact hammer operating at full
capacity. For impact driving, an initial set of three strikes will be
made by the hammer at reduced energy, followed by a 30-second waiting
period, then two subsequent three-strike sets before initiating
continuous driving. Soft start will be implemented at the start of each
day's impact pile driving and at any time following cessation of impact
pile driving for a period of 30 minutes or longer.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, NMFS
has determined that the proposed 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
section 5 of the IHA. Marine mammal monitoring during pile driving and
removal must be conducted by NMFS-approved PSOs in a manner consistent
with the following:
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 must 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,
Weyerhaeuser must submit PSO Curriculum Vitae for approval
by NMFS prior to the onset of pile driving.
PSOs must have the following additional qualifications:
Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
Experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
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,
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. Weyerhaeuser will employ up to four
PSOs. PSO locations will provide an unobstructed view of all water
within the shutdown zone(s), and as much of the Level A harassment and
Level B harassment zones as possible. PSOs will be stationed along the
shore of the Columbia River.
[[Page 64430]]
Weyerhaeuser will ensure that construction supervisors and crews,
the monitoring team, and relevant Weyerhaeuser staff are trained prior
to the start of activities subject to the proposed IHA, so that
responsibilities, communication procedures, monitoring protocols, and
operational procedures are clearly understood. New personnel joining
during the project will be trained prior to commencing work. Monitoring
will occur for all pile driving activities during the pile installation
work window (September 1, 2025 through January 31, 2026). For pile
removal activities outside the work window, one PSO will be on site to
monitor the ensonified area once every 7 calendar days, whether or not
vibratory pile extraction occurs on that day. Monitoring will be
conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30 minutes after pile driving/
removal activities. In addition, observers shall record all incidents
of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from activity, and
shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with distance from
piles being driven or removed. Pile driving/removal 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.
Data Collection
PSOs will use approved data forms to record the following
information:
Dates and times (beginning and end) of all marine mammal
monitoring.
PSO locations during marine mammal monitoring.
Construction activities occurring during each daily
observation period, including how many and what type of piles were
driven or removed and by what method (i.e., vibratory or impact).
Weather parameters and water conditions.
The number of marine mammals observed, by species,
relative to the pile location and if pile driving or removal was
occurring at time of sighting.
Distance and bearings of each marine mammal observed to
the pile being driven or removed.
Description of marine mammal behavior patterns, including
direction of travel.
Age and sex class, if possible, of all marine mammals
observed.
Detailed information about implementation of any
mitigation triggered (such as shutdowns and delays), a description of
specific actions that ensued, and resulting behavior of the animal if
any.
Reporting
A draft marine mammal monitoring report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities. It would 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., vibratory driving) and the total
equipment duration for cutting for each pile.
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: (1) name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) and PSO location
and activity at time of sighting; (2) time of sighting; (3)
identification of the animal(s) (e.g., genus/species, lowest possible
taxonomic level, or unidentified), PSO confidence in identification,
and the composition of the group if there is a mix of species; (4)
distance and bearing of each marine mammal observed relative to the
pile being driven for each sighting (if pile driving was occurring at
time of sighting); (5) estimated number of animals (min/max/best
estimate); (6) estimated number of animals by cohort (adults,
juveniles, neonates, group composition, etc.); (7) animal's closest
point of approach and estimated time spent within the harassment zone;
and (8) 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, by species.
Detailed information about any implementation of any
mitigation triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a description of
specific actions that ensued, and resulting changes in behavior of the
animal(s), if any.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
final report would constitute the final report. 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, Weyerhaeuser shall report
the incident to the OPR, NMFS and to the west coast regional stranding
network as soon as feasible. If the death or injury was clearly caused
by the specified activity, Weyerhaeuser 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
[[Page 64431]]
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 human-caused
mortality, or ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analysis applies to
California sea lions, Steller sea lions, and harbor seals, 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.
Pile driving activities have the potential to disturb or displace
marine mammals. Specifically, the project activities may result in
take, in the form of Level A harassment and Level B harassment from
underwater sounds generated from pile driving and removal. Potential
takes could occur if individuals are present in the ensonified zone
when these activities are underway.
The takes from Level B harassment would be due to potential
behavioral disturbance, and TTS. Level A harassment takes would be due
to PTS. No mortality or serious injury is anticipated given the nature
of the activity, even in the absence of the required mitigation. The
potential for harassment is minimized through the construction method
and the implementation of the mitigation measures (see Mitigation
section).
Take would occur within a limited, confined area (the Columbia
River) of the stocks' ranges. Level A harassment and Level B harassment
would be reduced to the level of least practicable adverse impact
through use of mitigation measures described herein. Further, the
amount of take authorized is extremely small when compared to stock
abundance, and the project is not anticipated to impact any known
important habitat areas for any marine mammal species.
Take by Level A harassment is authorized to account for the
potential that an animal could enter and remain within the area between
a Level A harassment zone and the shutdown zone for a duration long
enough to be taken by Level A harassment. Any take by Level A
harassment is expected to arise from, at most, a small degree of PTS
because 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. Additionally, and as noted previously, some
subset of the individuals that are behaviorally harassed could also
simultaneously incur some small degree of TTS for a short duration of
time. Because of the small degree anticipated, though, any PTS or TTS
potentially incurred here would not be expected to adversely impact
individual fitness, let alone annual rates of recruitment or survival.
Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving at the
project site, if any, are expected to be mild and temporary. Marine
mammals within the Level B harassment zone may not show any visual cues
they are disturbed by activities or 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 the limited number of
piles to be installed or extracted per day and that pile driving and
removal would occur across a maximum of 150 days within the 12-month
authorization period, any harassment would be temporary.
Any impacts on marine mammal prey that would occur during
Weyerhaeuser's activity would have, at most, short-term effects on
foraging of individual marine mammals, and likely no effect on the
populations of marine mammals as a whole. Indirect effects on marine
mammal prey during the construction are expected to be minor, and these
effects are unlikely to cause substantial effects on marine mammals at
the individual level, with no expected effect on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.
In addition, it is unlikely that minor noise effects in a small,
localized area of habitat would have any effect on the stocks' annual
rates of recruitment or survival. 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 will have only minor, short-term effects on individuals. The
specified activities are not expected to impact rates of recruitment or
survival and will 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;
The intensity of anticipated takes by Level B harassment
is relatively low for all stocks and would not be of a duration or
intensity expected to result in impacts on reproduction or survival;
No important habitat areas have been identified within the
project area;
For all species, the Columbia River is a very small and
peripheral part of their range and anticipated habitat impacts are
minor; and,
Weyerhaeuser will implement mitigation measures, such as
soft-starts for impact pile driving and shut downs 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 from the
proposed activity will 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.
Table 8 demonstrates the number of animals that could be exposed to
received noise levels that could cause Level B harassment for the work.
Our analysis shows that less than 10 percent of each affected stock
could be taken by harassment. The numbers of animals authorized to be
taken for these stocks
[[Page 64432]]
would be considered small relative to the relevant stock's abundances,
even if each estimated taking occurred to a new individual--an
extremely unlikely scenario.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the activity (including
the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the authorized take of
marine mammals, NMFS finds that 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
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for
endangered or threatened species.
No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that
formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this
action.
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 this IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from
further NEPA review.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to Weyerhaeuser for the potential harassment
of small numbers of three marine mammal species incidental to the Log
Export Dock Project on the Columbia River near Longview, Washington
that includes the previously explained mitigation, monitoring and
reporting requirements.
Dated: August 2, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-17470 Filed 8-6-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P