[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 250 (Tuesday, December 31, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72321-72333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-28213]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XR045]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Whittier Ferry Terminal Alaska
Class Ferry Modification Project
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to
incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only, marine mammals during
construction activities associated with the Whittier Ferry Terminal ACF
Modification project in Whittier, AK.
DATES: This Authorization is effective from February 1, 2020 to January
31, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leah Davis, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act. In case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to
allow, upon
[[Page 72322]]
request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers
of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity
(other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region
if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if
the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed incidental
take authorization may be provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of such species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.
The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above
are included in the relevant sections below.
Summary of Request
On June 6, 2019, NMFS received a request from Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) for an IHA to take
marine mammals incidental to the relocation of one dolphin at the
Whittier Ferry Terminal in Whittier, Alaska. The application was deemed
adequate and complete on September 27, 2019. ADOT&PF's request is for
take of a small number of five species of marine mammals by Level B
harassment. Neither ADOT&PF nor NMFS expects serious injury or
mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
Description of the Specified Activity
ADOT&PF is seeking an IHA for ferry terminal modifications at the
Whittier Ferry terminal in Whittier, AK. Whitter is located at the head
of Passage Canal, a deep-water fjord within Prince William Sound. The
project includes relocation of one dolphin to accommodate a new, Alaska
Class Ferry, the M/V Hubbard, as it is wider than the ferries currently
operating in Prince William Sound. The dolphin will be removed using a
vibratory hammer, and reinstalled using both vibratory and impact
hammers. Additionally, construction will include modifying the existing
catwalk and landing and modifying the bridge girder connection. Pile
removal and installation associated with the project are expected to
result in Level B harassment of humpback whale, killer whale, Dall's
porpoise, Steller sea lion, and harbor seal. The ensonified area is
expected to reach 12.0 km beyond the project site in Passage Canal. In-
water construction is expected to occur over six workdays during
February and March 2020, however the IHA will be effective from
February 2020 to January 2021.
A detailed description of the planned project is provided in the
Federal Register notification for the proposed IHA (84 FR 56427;
October 22, 2019). Since that time, no changes have been made to the
planned construction activities. Therefore, a detailed description is
not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notification
for the description of the specific activity.
Comments and Responses
A notification of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to ADOT&PF was
published in the Federal Register on October 22, 2019 (84 FR 56427).
That notification described, in detail, ADOT&PF's activity, the marine
mammal species that may be affected by the activity, and the
anticipated effects on marine mammals. During the 30-day public comment
period, NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal Commission; the
Commission's recommendations and our responses are provided here.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that NMFS update its various
templates for Federal Register notifications and draft authorizations
and conduct a more thorough review of the applications and Federal
Register notifications to ensure accuracy, completeness, and
consistency prior to submitting them to the Federal Register for public
comment.
Response: NMFS thanks the Commission for its recommendation. NMFS
makes every effort to keep templates up-to-date and read notifications
thoroughly prior to publication and will continue this effort to
publish the best possible product for public comment.
Comment 2: The Commission recommends that NMFS authorize at least
four Level A harassment takes of harbor seals based on impact driving
of four piles. While the shutdown zone includes the entire Level A
harassment zone for harbor seals, harbor seals could pop up into the
Level A harassment zone before activities can shut down. In that
instance, the Commission asserts that a sighting should be recorded as
a Level A harassment take, as a Protected Species Observer (PSO) cannot
determine the amount of time that the animal was within the Level A
harassment zone undetected, nor its location while it was underwater.
Response: During impact pile driving, the shutdown zone for harbor
seals (200m) encompasses the entire Level A harassment zone for harbor
seals (195m). While it is possible that a harbor seal may pop up in the
shutdown zone before a shutdown can be implemented, it is unlikely that
the animal would have been exposed to pile driving noise for a long
enough duration to cause Level A harassment, given the duration
component. Therefore, we have not authorized Level A harassment takes
of harbor seals.
Additionally, as noted in the mitigation and monitoring
requirements, PSOs are required to record and report all observed
instances of marine mammals, including the distance from pile driving
activity to the animal. Therefore, if a harbor seal is observed within
200m of the shutdown zone, it will be included in the monitoring report
along with the estimated distance from pile driving activity. However,
as noted above, it is not expected that the animal would have been
taken by Level A harassment, and it would not be considered an
unauthorized Level A harassment take.
Comment 3: The Commission recommended that NMFS increase the number
of Level B harassment takes of Steller sea lions from 15 takes to 30
takes based on five animals potentially occurring in the Level B
harassment zone on each of the six days of activities.
Response: As described in the Federal Register notification for the
proposed IHA (84 FR 56427; October 22, 2019), as many as ten sea lions
haul out year-round on a channel buoy within Shotgun Cove approximately
6 km (3.7 mi) northeast of the project location (M. Bender, Lazy Otter
Charters, pers. comm.; M. Kopec, Whittier Marine Charters, pers.
comm.). The Level B harassment zone does extend past Shotgun cove,
however, due to the features of the shoreline, the Level B harassment
zone is clipped on the Shotgun Cove side of Passage canal. It does not
include the area of Passage Canal directly outside of Shotgun Cove (see
application for more information), therefore animals do not have to
enter the Level B harassment zone to exit Shotgun Cove and travel
toward Prince William Sound. Given the limited prey
[[Page 72323]]
availability in the project area in February and March, as described in
the Federal Register notification for the proposed IHA (84 FR 56427),
NMFS believes that Level B harassment takes of Steller sea lion are not
likely to occur. However, 15 Level B harassment takes are being
authorized at the request of the applicant to ensure MMPA coverage,
should they occur.
Comment 4: The Commission recommends that NMFS require ADOT&PF to
implement shutdown zones of 375m for low-frequency cetaceans and 450m
for high-frequency cetaceans.
Response: During impact pile driving, the Level A harassment zone
for low-frequency cetaceans is 364.3m. During informal discussion with
the Commission on the Draft IHA, NMFS expected to include a shutdown
zone of 350m for low-frequency cetaceans, which NMFS believed to be
sufficient to prevent Level A harassment. Due to the duration component
associated with the Level A harassment zones, NMFS did not expect that
a low-frequency cetacean would remain in the Level A harassment zone
for a long enough period, without being detected and triggering a
shutdown, to be taken by Level A harassment, given a shutdown zone of
350m. However, in the final Authorization, NMFS is requiring a 550-
meter shutdown zone during impact pile driving. The shutdown zone is
much larger than the Level A harassment zone, however, NMFS previously
concluded informal Section 7 consultation with the Alaska Region with
the understanding that the shutdown zone would include the area within
the 550m isopleth. For vibratory pile driving, the shutdown zone for
low-frequency cetaceans will be 25m, while the Level A harassment zone
is 26m.
During impact pile driving, the Level A harassment zone for high-
frequency cetaceans is 433.9m. NMFS is requiring a 400m shutdown zone
for high-frequency cetaceans. As previously discussed for low-frequency
cetaceans, due to the duration component associated with the Level A
harassment zones, NMFS does not expect that a high-frequency cetacean
would remain in the Level A harassment zone for a long enough period,
without being detected and triggering a shutdown, to be taken by Level
A harassment.
Comment 5: The Commission recommends that NMFS ensure that ADOT&PF
keep a running tally of the total takes, which includes extrapolated
takes, for each species to comply with section 4(g) of the
authorization.
Response: NMFS agrees that ADOT&PF must ensure they do not exceed
authorized takes. We have included in the authorization that ADOT&PF
must include extrapolation of the estimated takes by Level B harassment
based on the number of observed exposures within the Level B harassment
zone and the percentage of the Level B harassment zone that was not
visible in the draft and final reports.
Comment 6: The Commission recommends that NMFS refrain from using
the proposed renewal process for ADOT&PF's authorization. The
Commission states that the renewal process should be used sparingly and
selectively, by limiting its use only to those proposed incidental
harassment authorizations that are expected to have the lowest levels
of impacts to marine mammals and that require the least complex
analyses.
The Commission states that if NMFS intends to use the renewal
process frequently or for authorizations that require a more complex
review or for which much new information has been generated (e.g.,
multiple or extensive monitoring reports), it recommends that NMFS
provide the Commission and other reviewers the full 30-day comment
opportunity set forth in section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA.
Response: We appreciate the Commission's input and direct the
reader to our recent response to a similar comment, which can be found
at 84 FR 52464 (October 2, 2019).
Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA
The sizes of the Level A harassment zones decreased between the
proposed IHA and the final IHA. In the proposed IHA, NMFS used the
average number of piles per day (1.5 piles) and a sound source level
based on SPL RMS (and assumed 100msec pulse duration for impact pile
driving) to estimate Level A harassment zones for pile driving
activities. In the Final IHA, NMFS used the maximum number of piles per
day (2 piles) and a sound source level based on a single-strike sound
exposure level (for impact pile driving only), as recommended by the
Commission. Additionally, shutdown zone sizes have been modified based
on informal correspondence with the Commission and NMFS's Alaska
Regional Office. After a shutdown, activities may not resume until
either the animal has been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone
or 15 minutes (pinnipeds)/30 minutes (cetaceans) have passed without
subsequent detections of the animal. The proposed authorization stated
that activities may resume after the animal has been visually confirmed
beyond the shutdown zone, or 15 minutes have passed without subsequent
detections for all species. See the Mitigation Measures section for
additional information. Also suggested by the Commission, the
monitoring zone associated with vibratory pile driving and removal was
decreased to reflect concerns that PSOs would not be able to view the
farthest extents of the proposed 12km monitoring zone. Finally, 60
Level B harassment takes of harbor seal are authorized, rather than the
15 Level B harassment takes of harbor seal originally proposed for
authorization, as a result of informal correspondence with the
Commission.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species.
Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be
found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's
website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 1 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in
Passage Canal and summarizes information related to the population or
stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA and potential
biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we follow
Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum
number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be
removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach
or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS's
SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and
annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and
other threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area.
NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that
comprise that stock. For some species, this geographic area may
[[Page 72324]]
extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are
assessed in NMFS's U.S. Alaska and U.S. Pacific SARs (e.g., Muto et
al., 2019). All values presented in Table 1 are the most recent
available at the time of publication and are available in the 2018 SARs
or 2019 draft SARs (Carretta et al., 2019 and Muto et al., 2019).
Table 1--Marine Mammals That Could Occur in the Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae:
Gray whale...................... Eschrichtius robustus.. Eastern North Pacific.. -, -, N 26,960 (0.05, 25,849, 801 139
2016).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Fin whale....................... Balaenoptera physalus.. Northeast Pacific...... E, D, Y see SAR (see SAR, see 5.1 0.6
SAR, 2013).
Humpback whale.................. Megaptera novaeangilae. Central North Pacific.. -, -, Y 10,103 (0.300, 7,891, 83 26
2006).
California/Oregon/ -, -, Y 2,900 (0.05, 2,784, 16.7 >=40.2
Washington. 2014).
Western North Pacific.. E, D, Y 1,107 (0.300, 865, 3 3.0
2006).
Minke whale..................... Balaenoptera Alaska................. -, -, N N/A (see SAR, N/A, see Undet 0
acutorostra. SAR).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale.................... Orcinus orca........... Eastern North Pacific, -, -, N 2,347c (N/A, 2,347, 24 1
Alaska Resident. 2012).
Gulf, Aleutian, Bering -, -, N 587c (N/A, 587, 2012). 5.87 1
Transient.
AT1 Transient.......... -, D, Y 7c (N/A, 7, 2017)..... 0.01 0
Pacific white-sided dolphin..... Lagenorhynchus North Pacific.......... -, -, N 26,880 (Unknown, Undet 0
obliquidens. Unknown, 1990).
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Dall's porpoise................. Phocoenoides dalli..... Alaska................. -, -, N 83,400 (0.097, N/A, Undet 38
1991).
Harbor porpoise................. Phocoena............... Gulf of Alaska......... -, -, Y 31,046 (0.214, N/A, Undet 72
1998).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California sea lion............. Zalophus californianus. U.S.................... -, -, N 257,606 (N.A, 233,515, 14,011 >=321
2014).
Steller sea lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Western U.S............ E, D, Y 53,624a (Unknown, 322 247
53,624, 2018).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Pacific harbor seal............. Phoca vitulina......... Prince William Sound... -, -, N 44,756 (see SAR, 1,253 413
41,776, 2015).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1--Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
2--NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
stock abundance. For certain stocks of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals (often pups) ashore multiplied by some
correction factor derived from knowledge of the species (or similar species) life history to arrive at a best abundance estimate; therefore, there is
no associated CV. In these cases, the minimum abundance may represent actual counts of all animals ashore.
3--These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated
with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
Note: Italicized species are not expected to be taken or proposed for authorization.
All species that could potentially occur in the project area are
included in Table 1. However, the temporal and/or spatial occurrence of
gray whale, fin whale, minke whale, Pacific white-sided dolphin, harbor
porpoise, and California sea lion are such that take is not expected to
occur, and they are not discussed further beyond the explanation
provided here. Gray whales do not regularly enter Prince William Sound,
and charter operators have only observed gray whales in Passage Canal
twice in the past 20 years (M. Bender, Lazy Otter Charters, pers.
comm.; M. Kopec, Whittier Marine Charters, pers. comm.). Fin whales
typically arrive to the Gulf of Alaska in May, well after the February
and March work window, and there is only one record of a fin whale
occurring within Passage Canal in the past 20 years (M. Kopec, Whittier
Marine Charters, pers. comm.). Minke whales are not expected to occur
in the ensonified area, as in the past 20 years, marine mammal charter
operators have seen fewer than five minke whales within Passage Canal,
and they are typically found farther south during winter months (NMFS
2018b). Extensive marine mammal surveys conducted within Prince William
Sound by Hall (1979) and Waite (2003) yielded no sightings of Pacific
white-sided dolphins. Based on habitat preferences and past survey
results, this dolphin is unlikely to occur in the Action Area,
especially given the early spring work-window. Over the last 20 years,
none
[[Page 72325]]
have been observed in the inlet by charter operators (M. Bender, Lazy
Otter Charters, pers. comm.; M. Kopec, Whittier Marine Charters, pers.
comm.). Harbor porpoise have not been observed in Passage Canal during
over two decades of whale watching by one charter operator (M. Bender,
Lazy Otter Charters, pers. comm.), and are considered extremely rare in
Passage Canal by another (M. Kopec, Whittier Marine Charters, pers.
comm.). California sea lions are rarely sighted in southern Alaska.
NMFS' anecdotal sighting database includes four sightings in Seward and
Kachemak Bay, and they were also documented during the Apache 2012
seismic survey in Cook Inlet. However, California sea lions have not
been observed in Passage Canal.
In addition, the northern sea otter may be found in Whittier, AK.
However, northern sea otters are managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and are not considered further in this document.
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by the
Whittier Ferry Terminal ACF Modification 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
notification for the proposed IHA (84 FR 56427; October 22, 2019);
since that time, the Draft 2019 Stock Assessment Reports have been
published, which include changes for the Prince William Sound stock of
harbor seals and the western stock of Steller sea lion. However, take
estimates are still based on the information on presence in Passage
Canal, such as expected group size, outlined in the Federal Register
notification for the proposed IHA (84 FR 56427; October 22, 2019);
therefore, detailed descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to
that Federal Register notification for these descriptions. Please also
refer to NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species)
for generalized species accounts.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
Underwater noise from impact and vibratory pile driving activities
associated with the project have the potential to result in harassment
of marine mammals in the vicinity of the action area. The Federal
Register notification for the proposed IHA (84 FR 56427; October 22,
2019) included a discussion of the potential effects of such
disturbances on marine mammals and their habitat, therefore that
information is not repeated in detail here; please refer to the Federal
Register notification (84 FR 56427; October 22, 2019) for that
information.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
for authorization through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS's
consideration of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact
determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to pile driving and removal activities. Based
on the nature of the activity and the anticipated effectiveness of the
mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown zones) discussed in detail below in
the Mitigation Measures section, Level A harassment is not authorized.
As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized for
this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic
thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science
indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some
degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water
that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or
occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4)
and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the
factors considered here in more detail and present the take estimate.
Acoustic Thresholds
Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic
thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above
which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS
of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B harassment for non-explosive sources--Though significantly
driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from
anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by
other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving
animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral
context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007,
Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what the available science indicates
and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is
both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a
generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 dB re 1 microPascal ([mu]Pa) root mean square
(rms) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above
160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic
airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
ADOT&PF's activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory pile
driving and removal) and impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, and
therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) thresholds are
applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (NMFS, 2018a) 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).
ADOT&PF's activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile driving)
and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving and removal) sources.
These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/
[[Page 72326]]
marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
Table 2--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift (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 standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating
frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ``flat'' is
being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized
hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the
designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and
that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be
exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it
is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
exceeded.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
The sound field in the project area is the existing background
noise plus additional construction noise from the project. Marine
mammals are expected to be affected via sound generated by the primary
components of the project (i.e., impact pile driving, vibratory pile
driving and removal). The maximum (underwater) area ensonified above
the thresholds for behavioral harassment referenced above is 20.5 km\2\
(7.9 mi\2\) and is governed by the inlet topography.
The project includes vibratory and impact pile installation of
steel pipe piles and vibratory removal of steel pipe piles. Source
levels of pile installation and removal activities are based on reviews
of measurements of the same or similar types and dimensions of piles
available in the literature. Source levels for each pile size and
driving method are presented in Table 3. The vibratory and impact
source levels for 30-inch (0.76m) pile installation is from pile
driving activities at the Auke Bay Ferry Terminal in November 2015
(Denes et al., 2016). Source levels for vibratory installation and
removal of piles of the same diameter are assumed to be the same.
Table 3--Sound Source Levels for Pile Driving Methods
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source level (SPL at 10m)
Pile size and method ------------------------------------------------ Literature source
dB RMS dB SEL \a\ dB peak
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-inch Vibratory................ 168.0 N/A N/A Denes et al. 2016.
30-inch Impact................... 191.3 177.4 206.0 Denes et al. 2016.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Sound exposure level (dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-sec).
Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an
acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary
with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and
receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition
and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is:
TL = B * Log10 (R1/R2),
Where:
TL = transmission loss in dB
B = transmission loss coefficient
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven
pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial
measurement
Absent site-specific acoustical monitoring with differing measured
transmission loss, a practical spreading value of 15 is used as the
transmission loss coefficient in the above formula. Site-specific
transmission loss data for Whittier are not available; therefore, the
default coefficient of 15 is used to determine the distances to the
Level A and Level B harassment thresholds.
Table 4--Pile Driving Source Levels and Distances to Level B Harassment Thresholds
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B
Source level at Level B threshold Propagation Distance to Level harassment
Pile size and method 10m (dB re 1 (dB re 1 [mu]Pa (xLogR) B threshold (km) ensonified area
[mu]Pa rms) rms) (km\2\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-inch Vibratory........................................ 168.0 120 15 15.85 20.5
30-inch Impact........................................... 191.3 160 15 1.221 1.24
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 72327]]
When the NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in
recognition of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more
technically challenging to predict because of the duration component in
the new thresholds, we developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools
to help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with
marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that
because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for
these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going
to be overestimates of some degree, which may result in some degree of
overestimate of Level A harassment take. However, these tools offer the
best way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D
modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways
to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address
the output where appropriate. For stationary sources such as pile
driving, NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the distance at which, if a
marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the
activity, it would incur PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet, and
the resulting isopleths are reported below.
Table 5--User Spreadsheet Input Parameters Used for Calculating Level A Harassment Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-inch pile vibratory 30-inch pile impact
Pile size and installation method installation and installation (SELcum) 30-inch pile impact
removal installation (PK)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spreadsheet Tab Used................. (A.1) Vibratory pile (E.1) Impact pile (E.1) Impact pile
driving. driving. driving.
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz).... 2.5.................... 2...................... 2.
Source Level (@10m).................. 168.0 dB RMS SPL....... 177.4 dB............... 206 dB.
Number of piles within 24-h period... 2...................... 2......................
Duration to drive a single pile 45.....................
(minutes).
Strike Duration (seconds)............
Number of strikes per pile........... ....................... 400....................
Activity Duration (seconds) within 24- 5400...................
h period.
Propagation (xLogR).................. 15..................... 15.....................
Distance from source level 10..................... 10..................... 10.
measurement (meters).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Calculated Distances to Level A Harassment Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment zone (m)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Low-frequency Mid-frequency High-frequency Phocid Otariid
cetaceans cetaceans cetaceans pinnipeds pinnipeds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-inch Pile Vibratory 26.2 2.3 38.8 15.9 1.1
Installation and Removal.....
30-inch Pile Impact 364.3 13.0 433.9 195.0 14.2
Installation (SELcum)........
30-inch Pile Impact 1 NA 19 2 N/A
Installation (PK)............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation
In this section we provide the information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations. No systematic surveys for marine mammals have occurred in
Passage Canal. Animal presence is based on the observations by whale
watching charters based out of Whittier, which specifically search for
marine mammals in Passage Canal and one of which operates during the
February and March construction window.
Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate. Because reliable
densities are not available and marine mammal presence in Passage Canal
is minimal, take requests are species specific and a general take
calculation formula does not apply. All take estimates remain the same
as in the proposed IHA, except for harbor seals which have been
increased in the final IHA.
Humpback Whale
Based on over two decades of whale watching activity in Passage
Canal, humpback whales have been observed in Passage Canal on only very
rare occasions and remained for very short periods (M. Bender, Lazy
Otter Charters, pers. comm.). Reported occurrence is approximately once
per year (M. Kopec, Whittier Marine Charters, pers. comm.).
ADOT&PF estimated that one humpback whale (Straley et al., 2018)
may enter Passage Canal and remain in the Canal for several days during
the project if herring are present. Therefore, NMFS has authorized take
of one whale for each of the six project days for a total of six
humpback whale takes.
The largest Level A harassment zone for humpback whales extends
364.3m from the source during impact installation of 30-inch (0.76m)
piles (Table 6). The SELcum Level A harassment zone includes
a time component, and we do not expect humpback whales to remain in the
area within 364.3m during impact pile driving for long enough to
experience Level A harassment. Therefore, Level A harassment takes of
humpback whales were not requested and are not authorized.
Killer Whale
On rare occasions killer whales have been reported to make brief
sorties into Passage Canal, but they are not regular residents there
(M. Bender, Lazy Otter Charters, pers. comm.). They are seen in the
inlet approximately once each year (M. Kopec, Whittier Marine Charters,
pers. comm.). ADOT&PF estimates that one pod may enter the Level B
harassment zone during the project. Based on that estimate, NMFS has
authorized 20 killer whale takes, which equates to the largest, single
pod (AB) entering the project area on one day of pile driving.
The largest Level A harassment zone for killer whales extends 13m
from the source during impact installation of 30-inch (0.76m) piles
(Table 6). Given the irregular and small presence of killer whales in
Passage Canal, and the fact
[[Page 72328]]
that PSOs are expected to detect killer whales before they enter the
Level A harassment zone and implement shutdown zones to prevent take by
Level A harassment, Level A harassment takes of killer whales have not
been requested and are not authorized.
Dall's Porpoise
Dall's porpoises have occasionally been observed near the entrance
of Passage Canal, but within the inlet they are considered exceedingly
rare (M. Bender, Lazy Otter Charters, pers. comm.; M. Kopec, Whittier
Marine Charters, pers. comm.). NMFS has authorized take of five Dall's
porpoise, based on the springtime average group size (4.59 individuals)
from Prince William Sound surveys conducted by Moran et al. (2018). The
estimate assumes that one group enters the Level B harassment zone on
one day of pile driving.
The largest SELcum Level A harassment zone for Dall's
porpoise extends 433.9m from the source during impact installation of
30-inch (0.76m) piles (Table 6), while the Peak Level A harassment zone
for the same activity is 19m (Table 6). As noted in Table 8, a 400-m
shutdown zone will be implemented for Dall's porpoises. The
SELcum Level A harassment zone includes a time component,
however, we do not expect Dall's porpoises to remain in the area within
433.9m during impact pile driving for a long enough period to
experience Level A harassment. Therefore, takes of Dall's porpoises by
Level A harassment were not requested and are not authorized.
Steller Sea Lion
Steller sea lions are often seen near Whittier during May to August
salmon runs but are irregularly seen in the Action Area the rest of the
year, although as many as ten sea lions haul out year-round on a
channel buoy within Shotgun Cove approximately 6 km (3.7 mi) northeast
of the Action Area (M. Bender, Lazy Otter Charters, pers. comm.; M.
Kopec, Whittier Marine Charters, pers. comm.).
An average of five Steller sea lions haul out on the buoy in
Shotgun Cove. ADOT&PF estimates that half of those animals (average of
2.5) may enter the Level B harassment zone on each of the six days of
pile driving, and requested 15 Level B harassment takes of Steller sea
lions. Due to the limited prey availability in the project area in
February and March (Bishop and Green 2009, NMFS 2019), NMFS
acknowledges that the requested Level B harassment takes are unlikely
to occur. However, the takes were analyzed and are being authorized at
the request of the applicant to ensure MMPA coverage should they occur
in the ensonified zone during the specified activities.
The largest Level A harassment zone for otariid pinnipeds extends
14.2m from the source during impact installation of 30-inch (0.76m)
piles (Table 6). ADOT&PF will implement a minimum 25-m shutdown zone
during all pile installation and removal activities (see Mitigation
Measures section), which is expected to eliminate the potential for
Level A harassment take of Steller sea lions. Therefore, takes of
Steller sea lions by Level A harassment were not requested and are not
authorized.
Harbor Seal
Harbor seal use of the project area is occasional and sporadic. If
food is available, small numbers of harbor seals may remain for
extended periods in the Whittier boat harbors feeding on sessile
invertebrates growing on harbor pilings. Otherwise, they are only
occasionally seen in the mid-inlet, although sightings do occur year-
round. Recently, four to ten seals (typically about five) have been
observed hauling out on a rock pinnacle in Logging Camp Bay located
12.4 km (7.7 mi) east of the project area, just outside of the Level B
harassment zone (M. Bender, Lazy Otter Charters, pers. comm.). In the
proposed authorization, ADOT&PF assumed that on any given day, half
(2.5 average) of these seals might occur in the Level B harassment zone
during each of the six days of pile driving, and therefore requested 15
Level B harassment takes of harbor seals. However, during informal
correspondence, the Commission suggested that all ten seals have the
potential to enter the Level B harassment zone and be taken on each of
the six days of pile driving. NMFS agrees, and is authorizing 60 Level
B harassment takes of harbor seals.
The largest SELcum Level A harassment zone for phocid
pinnipeds extends 195m from the source during impact installation of
30-inch (0.76m) piles (Table 6), while the Peak Level A harassment zone
for the same activity is 1.6m (Table 6). ADOT&PF is planning to
implement a 25-m shutdown zone during vibratory pile installation and
removal activities and a 200-m shutdown zone during impact pile
installation for phocid pinnipeds (Table 8). These shutdown zones are
expected to eliminate the potential for Level A harassment take of
harbor seals. Therefore, takes of harbor seals by Level A harassment
were not requested and are not authorized.
Table 7--Authorized Take by Level B Harassment Only, by Species and Stock
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized
Stock take as
Common name Stock abundance \a\ Level B take percentage of
stock
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale........................ Central North Pacific... 10,103 \b\ 6 0.06
Killer whale.......................... Eastern North Pacific, 2,347 20 0.85
Alaska Resident.
Gulf, Aleutian, Bering 587 20 3.41
Transient.
Dall's porpoise....................... Alaska.................. 83,400 5 0.01
Steller sea lion...................... Western U.S............. 53,624 15 0.03
Harbor seal........................... Prince William Sound.... 44,756 \c\ 60 0.13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Stock or DPS size is Nbest according to NMFS 2018 SARs or 2019 Draft SARs.
\b\ For ESA Section 7 consultation purposes, 89% of humpbacks in the project area are designated to the Hawaii
DPS. Therefore, this individual humpback whale is expected to be from the Hawaii DPS, as are all authorized
humpback whale takes.
\c\ Updated based on informal correspondence with the Commission.
Mitigation Measures
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for
[[Page 72329]]
certain subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully consider two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat.
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned); and,
(2) the practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
In addition to the measures described later in this section,
ADOT&PF will employ the following standard mitigation measures:
Conduct briefings between construction supervisors and
crews and the marine mammal monitoring team prior to the start of all
pile driving activity, and when new personnel join the work, to explain
responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring
protocol, and operational procedures;
For in-water heavy machinery work other than pile driving
(e.g., standard barges, etc.), if a marine mammal comes within 10 m,
operations shall cease and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum
level required to maintain steerage and safe working conditions. This
type of work could include the following activities: (1) Movement of
the barge to the pile location; or (2) positioning of the pile on the
substrate via a crane (i.e., stabbing the pile);
To minimize impacts from vessel interactions with marine
mammals, the crew aboard project vessels (tugs, barges, and monitoring
vessels) will follow NMFS's marine mammal viewing guidelines and
regulations as practicable;
Work may only occur during daylight hours, when visual
monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted;
For those marine mammals for which Level B harassment take
has not been requested, in-water pile installation/removal will shut
down immediately if such species are observed within or on a path
towards the monitoring zone (i.e., Level B harassment zone); and
If take reaches the authorized limit for an authorized
species, pile installation will be stopped as these species approach
the Level B harassment zone to avoid additional take.
The following mitigation measures would apply to ADOT&PF's in-water
construction activities:
Establishment of Shutdown Zone for Level A Harassment--For all pile
driving/removal and drilling activities, ADOT&PF will establish a
shutdown zone. The purpose of a shutdown zone is generally to define an
area within which shutdown of activity would occur upon sighting of a
marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined
area). Shutdown zones will vary based on the activity type and marine
mammal hearing group (see Table 8). The largest shutdown zones are
generally for low frequency and high frequency cetaceans as shown in
Table 8. The placement of Protected Species Observers (PSOs) during all
pile driving and pile removal activities (described in detail in the
Monitoring and Reporting Section) will ensure that the entire shutdown
zone is visible during pile installation.
Table 8--Shutdown Zones During Pile Installation and Removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shutdown zone (m)
Activity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LF cetaceans MF cetaceans HF cetaceans Phocids Otariids
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile installation and 25 25 50 25 10
removal........................
Impact pile installation........ 550 25 400 200 25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishment of Monitoring Zones for Level B Harassment--ADOT&PF
would establish monitoring zones to correlate with Level B harassment
zones or zones of influence which are areas where SPLs are equal to or
exceed the 160 dB rms threshold for impact driving and the 120 dB rms
threshold during vibratory driving and drilling. Monitoring zones
provide utility for observing by establishing monitoring protocols for
areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. Monitoring zones enable observers
to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the
project area outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for a potential
cease of activity should the animal enter the shutdown zone. Placement
of PSOs on the shorelines around Passage Canal allow PSOs to observe
marine mammals within Passage Canal. As noted by the Commission, PSOs
will not be able to observe the entire Level B harassment zone during
all activities. Therefore, Level B harassment takes will be recorded
and extrapolated based upon the number of observed taked and the
percentage of the Level B harassment zone that was not visible.
Table 9--Marine Mammal Monitoring Zones
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitoring
Activity zone (m)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile installation and removal................. \a\ 9,000
Impact pile installation................................ 1,200
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Maximum distance that PSOs will be able to monitor. The monitored
area will depend on the number of PSOs and how close animals are to
the opposite side of Passage Canal from the observer.
Soft Start--The use of soft-start procedures are believed to
provide additional protection to marine
[[Page 72330]]
mammals by providing warning and/or giving marine mammals a chance to
leave the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity. For
impact pile driving, contractors would be required to provide an
initial set of strikes from the hammer at reduced energy, with each
strike followed by a 30-second waiting period. This procedure would be
conducted a total of three times before impact pile driving begins.
Soft start would be implemented at the start of each day's impact pile
driving and at any time following cessation of impact pile driving for
a period of thirty minutes or longer. Soft start is not required during
vibratory pile driving and removal activities.
Pre-Activity Monitoring--Prior to the start of daily in-water
construction activity, or whenever a break in pile driving/removal or
drilling 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 cleared when a marine mammal has not been observed within the zone
for that 30-minute period. If a marine mammal is observed within the
shutdown zone, a soft-start cannot proceed until the animal has left
the zone or has not been observed for 15 minutes (for pinnipeds) or 30
minutes (for cetaceans). If the Level B harassment zone has been
observed for 30 minutes and no species for which take is not authorized
are present within the zone, soft start procedures can commence and
work can continue even if visibility becomes impaired within the Level
B harassment monitoring zone. When a marine mammal for which Level B
harassment take is authorized is present in the Level B harassment
zone, activities may begin and Level B harassment take will be
recorded. As stated above, if the entire Level B harassment zone is not
visible at the start of construction, pile driving activities can
begin. If work ceases for more than 30 minutes, the pre-activity
monitoring of both the Level B harassment and shutdown zones will
commence.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well
as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Visual Monitoring
Monitoring would 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
activities include the time to install or remove a single pile or
series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile
driving equipment is no more than thirty minutes.
There will be at least two PSOs employed during all pile driving/
removal activities. PSO will not perform duties for more than 12 hours
in a 24-hour period. For impact and vibratory pile driving and removal,
one PSO would be positioned at the end of the terminal catwalk near the
pile driving/removal activities at the best practical vantage point. A
second PSO would be stationed approximately 2.5 km down Shotgun Cove
Road and Trail. For vibratory pile driving and removal, two additional
PSOs will be stationed along Shotgun Cove Road and Trail, each
approximately 2.5 km down the trail from the previous PSO. Observed
take will be extrapolated across unobserved portions of the Level B
harassment zone.
If Station 2 is not accessible via snowmobile on Shotgun Cove Road
and Trail, a vessel will be used as a monitoring station. The vessel
will be mostly stationary, however, it will be somewhat influenced by
the tides. If Stations 3 or 4 are not accessible via snowmobile on
Shotgun Cove Road and Trail, take observed by PSOs at Stations 1 and 2
will be extrapolated across the unobserved portion of the project area.
As part of monitoring, PSOs would scan the waters using binoculars,
and/or spotting scopes, and would use a handheld GPS or range-finder
device to verify the distance to each sighting from the project site.
All PSOs would be trained in marine mammal identification and behaviors
and are required to have no other project-related tasks while
conducting monitoring. In addition, monitoring will be conducted by
qualified observers who will be placed at the best vantage point(s)
practicable to monitor for marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay
procedures when applicable by calling for the shutdown to the hammer
operator. Qualified observers are trained and/or experienced
professionals, with the following minimum qualifications:
Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible)
sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface
with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars
may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel);
Observers must have their CVs/resumes submitted to and
approved by NMFS;
Advanced education in biological science or related field
(i.e., undergraduate degree or higher). Observers may substitute
education or training for experience;
Experience and ability to conduct field observations and
collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic
experience);
At least one observer must have prior experience working
as an observer;
Experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals,
[[Page 72331]]
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 and times when in-water construction
activities were suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from
construction sound of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown
zone; 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.
Reporting
A draft marine mammal monitoring report would be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities. The report will include an overall description of work
completed, a narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and
associated PSO data sheets. Specifically, the report must include:
Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from
pile driving activity;
Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
Locations of all marine mammal observations;
An estimate of total take based on proportion of the
monitoring zone that was observed; and
Other human activity in the area.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
final report will constitute the final report. If comments are
received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted
within 30 days after receipt of comments.
In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA
(if issued), such as an injury, serious injury or mortality, ADOT&PF
would immediately cease the specified activities and report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office
of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Alaska Regional Stranding
Coordinator. The report would include the following information:
Description of the incident;
Environmental conditions (e.g., Beaufort sea state,
visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS would work with ADOT&PF to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. ADOT&PF would not be able
to resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
In the event that ADOT&PF discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (e.g., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph),
ADOT&PF would immediately report the incident to the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the Alaska
Regional Stranding Coordinator. The report would include the same
information identified in the paragraph above. Activities would be able
to continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS
would work with ADOT&PF to determine whether modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
In the event that ADOT&PF discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), ADOT&PF would report the incident
to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or
by email to the Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinator, within 24 hours
of the discovery. ADOT&PF would provide photographs, video footage (if
available), or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to
NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
Pile driving installation and removal activities associated with
the project as outlined previously, have the potential to disturb or
displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may
result in take, in the form of Level B harassment, from underwater
sounds generated from pile driving and removal. Potential takes could
occur if individuals of these species are present in zones ensonified
above the thresholds for Level B harassment identified above when these
activities are underway.
The takes from Level B harassment would be due to potential
behavioral disturbance. No Level A harassment is anticipated given the
nature of the activity and measures designed to
[[Page 72332]]
minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for
Level A harassment and the scale and intensity of Level B harassment
are minimized through the construction method and the implementation of
the planned mitigation measures (see Mitigation Measures section).
Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the
basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other
similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as
increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased
foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff
2006; HDR, Inc. 2012; Lerma 2014; ABR 2016). Most likely for pile
driving, individuals will simply move away from the sound source and be
temporarily displaced from the areas of pile driving and drilling,
although even this reaction has been observed primarily only in
association with impact pile driving. Level B harassment will be
reduced to the level of least practicable adverse impact through use of
mitigation measures described herein and, if sound produced by project
activities is sufficiently disturbing, animals are likely to simply
avoid the area while the activity is occurring. While vibratory driving
associated with the project may produce sound at distances of many
kilometers from the project site, thus intruding on some habitat, the
ensonified area is already less-preferred habitat when the project is
not underway. Therefore, we expect that animals annoyed by project
sound would simply avoid the area and use more-preferred habitats.
The project is also not expected to have significant adverse
effects on affected marine mammals' habitats. The project activities
would not modify existing marine mammal habitat for a significant
amount of time. The activities may cause some fish to leave the area of
disturbance, thus temporarily impacting marine mammals' foraging
opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range; but, because
of the short duration of the activities and the relatively small area
of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal
habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative
consequences.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No mortality is anticipated or authorized;
No injury is anticipated or authorized;
Any resulting Level B harassment is expected to be short-
term and of relatively low impact;
In fact, nearby habitat is considered non-optimal given
the low likelihood of many known prey resources during the months of
the activity;
The area impacted by the specified activity is very small
relative to the overall habitat ranges of all species;
The project area does not include ESA-designated critical
habitat and does not overlap with any Biologically Important Areas
(BIAs);
The project is only taking place over six total pile
driving/removal days;
The project has the potential to impact less than 3.5
percent of each impacted stock; and
The mitigation measures are expected to reduce the effects
of the specified activity to the level of least practicable adverse
impact.
In addition, although affected Steller sea lions are from a DPS
that is listed under the ESA, it is unlikely that minor noise effects
in a small, localized area of habitat would have any effect on the
stocks' ability to recover. In combination, we believe that these
factors, as well as the available body of evidence from other similar
activities, demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified
activities 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.
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
activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal
species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to
small numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative
factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or
spatial scale of the activities.
Table 7 demonstrates the number of animals that could be exposed to
received noise levels that could cause Level B harassment for the work
in Whittier. Our analysis shows that less than 1 percent of most
affected stocks could be taken by Level B harassment, with the
exception of the Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian Islands, and Bering Sea
Transient stock of killer whales, for which less than 3.5 percent of
the stock could be taken. The numbers of animals authorized to be taken
for these stocks would be considered small relative to the relevant
stock's abundances even if each estimated taking occurred to a new
individual, which is an extremely unlikely scenario.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the activity (including
the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of
marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be
taken relative to the population size of the affected species or
stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must find that the specified
activity will not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' on the
subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal species or stocks by
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined ``unmitigable adverse impact'' in 50
CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity: (1)
That is likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level
insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by: (i) Causing
the marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas; (ii) Directly
displacing subsistence users; or (iii) Placing physical barriers
between the marine mammals and the subsistence hunters; and (2) That
cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to increase the
availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs to be met.
Hunters from two native villages--Chenega Bay and Tatitlek--and
native hunters living in Cordova annually harvest marine mammals within
Prince William Sound as part of a subsistence lifestyle (Fall and
Zimpelman 2016). Chenega Bay hunters annually harvest a few harbor
seals and sea otters and have hunted Steller sea lions in the past
(Wolfe et al. 2009). Most hunting occurs locally. Hunters from Tatitlek
harvest harbor seals and sea lions over most of central Prince William
Sound, although their hunting range does not extend to Passage Canal
(Fall and Zimpelman 2016). Native hunters living in Cordova mostly
harvest harbor seals but
[[Page 72333]]
occasionally take sea otters and sea lions (Fall and Zimpelman 2016).
All villages are greater than 100 km (62 mi) by boat travel from
Passage Canal. The short-term, relatively low-impact, Level B
harassment takes resulting from construction activities associated with
the Whittier Ferry Terminal modifications project will have no impact
on the ability of hunters from these villages to harvest marine
mammals. 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 (ESA)
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally, in this case with the Alaska Region,
Protected Resource Division Office, whenever we propose to authorize
take for endangered or threatened species.
NMFS is authorizing take of western stock Steller sea lions under
the MMPA. For purposes of the Endangered Species Act, the NMFS Permits
and Conservation Division has determined that while this action may
affect western DPS Steller sea lions, it is not likely to adversely
affect the DPS because we do not expect Steller sea lions to use
habitats near Whittier during the season when construction will occur.
On December 4, 2019, per section 7 of the ESA, the NMFS Alaska Region
concurred that the proposed action may affect, but is not likely to
adversely affect, the western distinct population segment (DPS) of
Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) or the Mexico or Western North
Pacific DPSs of humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae).
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to ADOT&PF for the incidental take of marine
mammals due to in-water construction work associated with the Whittier
Ferry Terminal ACF Modification project in Whittier, AK from February
1, 2020 to January 31, 2021, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: December 23, 2019.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-28213 Filed 12-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P