[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61026-61037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24462]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XG910
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Sand Island Pile Dike System
Test Piles Project Near the Mouth of the Columbia River
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District (Corps) to
incidentally harass, by Level A and Level B harassment only, marine
mammals during construction activities associated with the Sand Island
Pile Dike System Test Piles project near the Mouth of the Columbia
River.
DATES: This Authorization is effective for one year from the date of
issuance.
[[Page 61027]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob Pauline, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as the issued IHA, may be obtained
online at: 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 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.
Summary of Request
On March 6, 2019, NMFS received a request from the Corps for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving activities in the
Columbia River Estuary. The application was deemed adequate and
complete on June 20, 2019. The Corps' request is for take of a small
number of harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), Steller sea lions
(Eumetopias jubatus), California sea lions (Zalophus californianus),
and harbor seals (Phoca vitulina richardii) by Level B harassment and
Level A harassment. Neither the Corps nor NMFS expect serious injury or
mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
Description of Activity
Overview
The Corps plans to drive test piles in order to investigate the
feasibility of different construction methods at two of the four Sand
Island pile dikes at the Mouth of the Columbia River (MCR) (Figure 1 in
application). The Sand Island pile dikes are comprised of four pile
dikes, which are named according to river mile (RM) location, at RMs
4.01, 4.47, 5.15, and 6.37 (the pile dike at RM 6.37 is also referred
to as the Chinook pile dike). Three of the pile dikes are connected to
West Sand Island and East Sand Island, and the fourth pile dike in open
water runs parallel to the Chinook Channel on the upstream side (Figure
2 in application). The Sand Island pile dikes are part of the Columbia
River pile dike system and were installed in the 1930's. The Corps
intends to restore full functionality of pile dikes in the future but
needs to drive test piles in order to inform possible design. The
existing pile dikes have deteriorated greatly due to lack of
maintenance. Impact and vibratory pile installation and vibratory pile
removal would introduce underwater sounds at levels that may result in
take, by Level A and Level B harassment, of marine mammals in the
Columbia River Estuary. In-water construction activities are expected
to last up to 41 days. The maximum 41 days of work includes the
following estimates for various pile driving activities:
Up to 20 days of impact driving only (steel piles);
Up to 18 days of impact driving AND vibratory
installation/removal of steel piles; and
Up to 3 days for vibratory removal of timber piles only.
A detailed description of the planned test pile project is provided
in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (84 FR 38227;
August 6, 2019). Since that time, no changes have been made to the
planned pile driving 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
We published a notice of receipt of the Corps application and
proposed IHA in the Federal Register on August 6, 2019 (84 FR 38227).
We received one comment letter from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission).
Comment 1: The Commission recommended that NMFS continue to
prioritize the development of a methodology for determining the extent
of the Level A harassment zones based on the associated permanent
threshold shift (PTS) cumulative SEL (SELcum) thresholds for the
various types of sound sources. The Commission also noted that NMFS
should consider incorporating animat modeling into its user
spreadsheet.
Response: The issue of accumulation time continues to be a priority
for NMFS. The Working Group assembled by NMFS to specifically address
this issue is exploring several options, including the use of animat
modeling. Once the NMFS internal Working Group develops a proposal, it
will be shared with Federal partners and other stakeholders.
Comment 2: The Commission questioned whether the public notice
provision, for IHA renewals, including the 15-day comment period, fully
satisfy the public notice and comment provision in the MMPA. The
Commission also noted the potential burden on reviewers of reviewing
key documents and developing comments quickly. Therefore the Commission
recommended that NMFS refrain from using the proposed renewal process
for the Corps' authorization. The Commission also recommended that NMFS
use the IHA Renewal process sparingly and selectively for activities
expected to have the lowest levels of impacts to marine mammals and
that require less complex analysis. The Commission's final
recommendation to NMFS was to provide the Commission and other
reviewers the full 30-day comment period as set forth in section
101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA
Response: The Commission has raised this concern before and NMFS
refers readers to our full response, which may be found in the notice
of issuance of an IHA to [Oslash]rsted Wind Power LLC (84 FR 52464,
October 2, 2019.
Changes From Proposed to Final Authorization
Based on informal coordination with the Commission, NMFS has made
several changes since the publication of the proposed IHA. The number
of Level A and Level B harassment takes for both harbor porpoise and
harbor seal were underestimated in the proposed IHA. Therefore,
authorized take by Level A and Level B harassment for both species has
increased and is described in detail in the ``Estimated Take'' section.
In the monitoring report, NMFS will require that the Corps extrapolate
observed takes across the entirety of the Level B harassment zone based
on the area that is able to be monitored effectively. This
[[Page 61028]]
measure is described in the ``Monitoring'' section. Finally, the Corps
will be required to provide marine mammal observational datasheets or
raw data as part of the marine mammal monitoring report. These changes
are described in the ``Reporting'' section.
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).
Table 1 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence
near the test piles project area and summarizes information related to
the population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and
ESA and potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy,
we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the MMPA as
the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that
may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to
reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in
NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR
and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and
other threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area.
NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS's U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal SARs (Carretta et al., 2019) an
Alaska Marine Mammal SARS (Muto et al., 2019). All values presented in
Table 1 are the most recent available at the time of publication.
Table 1--Marine Mammal Species Likely To Be Found Near the Test Piles 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, 25849, 801 139
2016).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Humpback whale.................. Megaptera novaeangliae. California/............ -, -, Y 2,900 (0.05, 2,784, 16.7 40.2
Oregon/................ 2014).
Washington.............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale.................... Orcinus orca........... West Coast Transient... -, -, N 243 (N/A, 243, 2009).. 2.4 0
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise................. Phocoena phocoena...... Northern Oregon/....... -, -, N 21,487 (044, 15,123, 151 3.0
Washington Coast....... 2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California sea lion............. Zalophus californianus. U.S. Stock............. -, -, N 257,606 (N/A, 233,515, 14,011 >320
2014).
Steller sea lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Eastern U.S............ -, -, N 41,638 (See SAR, 2,498 108
41,638, 2015).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal..................... Phoca vitulina Oregon and Washington -, -, N UNK (UNK, UNK, 1999).. UND 10.6
richardii. Coast.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\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.
A detailed description of the of the species likely to be affected
by the test pile 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 (84 FR 38227; August 6, 2019); 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. 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).
[[Page 61029]]
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
Underwater noise from impact and vibratory pile driving activities
associated with the planned test piles project has the potential to
result in harassment of marine mammals in the vicinity of the action
area. The Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (84 FR 38227;
August 6, 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 notice (84 FR 38227; August 6, 2019).
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration
of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would primarily be by Level B harassment, as
impact and vibratory pile driving has the potential to result in
disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals. There
is also some potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment) to
result, primarily for high frequency species and phocids because
predicted auditory injury zones are larger than for low-frequency
species, mid-frequency species and otariids. Auditory injury is
unlikely to occur for low-frequency species, mid-frequency species and
otariids. The mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to
minimize the severity of such taking to the extent practicable.
As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or 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 [mu]Pa (rms) for continuous (e.g.,
vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
The Corps' planned activity includes the use of continuous
(vibratory pile driving) and impulsive (impact pile driving) sources,
and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) are applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual
criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five
different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a
result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources
(impulsive or non-impulsive). The Corp's planned activity includes the
use of impulsive (impact pile driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory
pile driving) source.
These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
Table 4--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset acoustic thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-Impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans......... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater).... Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater)... Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for
calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level
thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.
[[Page 61030]]
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE)
has a reference value of 1[micro]Pa\2\s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American
National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as
incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript
``flat'' is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the
generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates
the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds)
and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could
be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible,
it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
exceeded.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
Sound Propagation
Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an
acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary
with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and
receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition
and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is:
TL = B * log10 (R1/R2),
Where:
B = transmission loss coefficient (assumed to be 15)
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven
pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial
measurement.
This formula neglects loss due to scattering and absorption, which
is assumed to be zero here. The degree to which underwater sound
propagates away from a sound source is dependent on a variety of
factors, most notably the water bathymetry and presence or absence of
reflective or absorptive conditions including in-water structures and
sediments. Spherical spreading occurs in a perfectly unobstructed
(free-field) environment not limited by depth or water surface,
resulting in a 6 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of
distance from the source (20*log(range)). Cylindrical spreading occurs
in an environment in which sound propagation is bounded by the water
surface and sea bottom, resulting in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level
for each doubling of distance from the source (10*log(range)). As is
common practice in coastal waters, here we assume practical spreading
loss (4.5 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of distance).
Practical spreading is a compromise that is often used under conditions
where water depth increases as the receiver moves away from the
shoreline, resulting in an expected propagation environment that would
lie between spherical and cylindrical spreading loss conditions.
Sound Source Levels
The intensity of pile driving sounds is greatly influenced by
factors such as the type of piles, hammers, and the physical
environment in which the activity takes place. There are no source
level measurements available the piles planned for installation at part
of the test piles project. Sound pressure levels for impact driving of
24-in steel piles were taken from Caltrans 2015. Vibratory driving
source levels for 24-in steel piles came from the United States Navy
(2015). There was no data available pertaining to vibratory removal of
24-in timber piles. NMFS recommended that the Corps use data derived
from Washington Department of Transportation Seattle Pier 62 project
collected by the Greenbusch Group (2018) for vibratory removal of 14-in
timber piles. NMFS reviewed the Greenbusch Group (2018) report and
determined that the findings were incorrectly derived by pooling
together all steel pile and timber pile measurements at various
distances. Furthermore, the data was not normalized to the standard 10
m distance. NMFS analyzed source measurements at different distances
for all 63 individual timber piles that were removed and normalized the
values to 10 m. The results showed that the median is 152 dB SPLrms.
This value was used as the proxy source level for vibratory removal of
24-in timber piles as shown in Table 5.
Table 5--Estimated Unattenuated Underwater Sound Pressure Levels Associated with Pile Installation and Removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile type & activity Sound source level at 10 m
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-Inch Steel Pile Impact 203 dBPK............... 190 dBRMS.............. 177 dBSEL.
Installation \1\.
24-Inch Steel Piles Vibratory Not Applicable......... 161 dBRMS.............. Not Available.
Installation/Removal \2\.
24-Inch Timber Pile Vibratory Removal Not Applicable......... 152 dBRMS.............. Not Available.
\3\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ From CalTrans 2015 Table I.2-1. Summary of Near-Source (10-Meter) Unattenuated Sound Pressure Levels for In-
Water Pile Driving Using an Impact Hammer: 0.61-meter (24-inch) steel pipe pile in water ~5 meters deep.
\2\ From United States Navy. 2015. Prepared by Michael Slater, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division,
and Sharon Rainsberry, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest. Revised January 2015. Table 2-2.
\3\ Due to the lack of information for vibratory removal of 24' diameter timber piles, an estimate based on
removal of 14-inch timber piles is used as a proxy (Greenbusch Group, 2018).
Level A Harassment
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 closest distance at which,
if a marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the
activity, it would not
[[Page 61031]]
incur PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet, and the resulting
isopleths are reported below in Table 6.
Table 6--NMFS Technical Guidance (2018) User Spreadsheet Input To Calculate PTS Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-in steel impact 24-in steel vibratory 24-in timber pile
Inputs installation installation/removal removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spreadsheet Tab Used................. E.1) Impact Pile A.1) Vibratory Pile A.1) Vibratory Pile
Driving. Driving. Driving.
Source Level (Single Strike/shot SEL) 177 dB SEL/203 dB Peak. 161 dB RMS............. 152 dB RMS.
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz).... 2...................... 2.5.................... 2.5.
Number of strikes per pile........... 550.................... ....................... .......................
Number of piles per day.............. 6...................... 6/9.................... 9.
Duration to install/removal single 60..................... 30/5................... 5.
pile (minutes).
Propagation (xLogR).................. 15..................... 15..................... 15.
Distance of source level measurement 10..................... 10..................... 10.
(meters).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 7--Level A Harassment (PTS) Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS Isopleth distance (meters)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Phocid Otariid
LF cetacean MF cetacean HF cetacean pinniped pinniped
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24'' Steel Pipe Pile Impact 881.2 31.3 1,049.7 471.6 34.3
Installation...................
24'' Steel Pipe Vibratory 14.2 1.3 21.0 8.6 0.6
Installation...................
24'' Steel Pipe Vibratory 5.6 0.5 8.3 3.4 0.2
Removal........................
24'' Timber Pile Removal 1.4 0.1 2.1 0.9 0.1
Vibratory......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Harassment
Utilizing the practical spreading loss model, the Corps determined
underwater noise will fall below the behavioral effects threshold of
160 dB and 120 dB rms for marine mammals at the distances shown in
Table 8 with corresponding ensonified areas.
Table 8--Level B Harassment Isopleths
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isopleth Isopleth area
Activity distance (m) (km\2\) *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 Steel Pipe Pile Impact 1,000 3-4
Installation...........................
24 Steel Pipe Vibratory 5,412 64-73
Installation...........................
24 Steel Pipe Vibratory 5,412 64-73
Removal................................
24 Timber Pile Removal 1,359 0.6-0.7
Vibratory..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The lower limit represents the isopleth area for the pile dike at RM
4.01, which has a slightly smaller area due to land impedances. The
upper limit of the range is the calculated isopleth area for the pile
dike at RM 6.37.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation
In this section we provide the information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations. Potential exposures to impact pile driving, vibratory
pile driving and vibratory pile removal were estimated using group size
estimates and local observational data. As previously stated, take by
Level B harassment as well as small numbers of take by Level A
harassment will be will be considered for this action. Take by Level B
and Level A harassment are calculated differently for some species
based on monthly or daily sightings data and average group sizes within
the action area using the best available data. Take by Level A
harassment is authorized for two species where the Level A harassment
isopleths are very large during impact pile driving (harbor porpoise
and harbor seal). Distances to Level A harassment thresholds for other
project activities (vibratory pile driving/removal) are considerably
smaller compared to impact pile driving, and mitigation is expected to
avoid Level A harassment from these other activities.
Cetaceans
Harbor Porpoise
Harbor porpoises are regularly observed in the oceanward waters
near the MCR and are known to occur there year-round. Porpoise
abundance peaks when anchovy (Engraulis mordax) abundance in the river
and nearshore are highest, which is usually between April and August
(Litz et al. 2008). The 2016 monitoring report indicated that porpoises
were sighted on 5 separate occasions (Grette Associates, 2016) while
none were recorded as part of the 2017 LOA monitoring report. NMFS
assumed a sighting rate of one animal per day in the proposed IHA for
the Level B harassment. However, porpoises often occur in groups of 2-
3. Therefore, to estimate take for days when there is vibratory pile
driving and the Level B harassment zone is large (about five times the
distance, and 20 times the area, of the Level B harassment zone for
impact-only pile driving), NMFS has included consideration of a group
size of 2 animals and will authorize take of two animals per driving
day. With 21 days of vibratory driving (18 days of impact/vibratory and
3 days of timber pile vibratory removal), the number of authorized
harbor porpoise takes by Level B harassment has been increased from 21
to 42 to account for this
[[Page 61032]]
increase in the estimated number of harbor porpoises likely to enter
that zone per day.
For impact pile driving, the Level A harassment zone is slightly
larger than the Level B harassment zone, and as noted above, about one
twentieth of the area of the Level B harassment zone for vibratory pile
driving. For the proposed IHA, NMFS assumed that due their cryptic
behavior, it was plausible that during the 20 days of impact-only
driving, some number of porpoises could enter into the Level A
harassment zone without being detected by PSOs, and we initially
proposed that 10 would be taken (approximately one fourth of the number
currently projected for vibratory pile driving, which has a Level B
harassment zone 20 times larger). No take by Level B harassment is
proposed during impact only driving days (beyond that already counted
within the Level A harassment zone) since the Level A harassment
isopleth is greater than the Level B isopleth for HF cetaceans.
However, in the proposed IHA we neglected to consider the Level A
harassment that might occur in the 18 days that includes both vibratory
and impact pile driving, and therefore we have increased the Level A
harassment of harbor porpoises from 10 to 20.
Pinnipeds
Take calculations for Steller sea lions and California sea lions
were estimated in the IHA using abundance estimates from the South
Jetty recorded by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
between 2000 and 2014. The South Jetty is approximately four kilometers
to the south of Sand Island. The Level B harassment area includes the
entirety of the South Jetty where pinnipeds haul out. In order to
estimate take, the average number of animals seen for the months of
September, October, and November was used a basis for overall pinniped
abundance as shown in Table 9. Since there was no data available for
harbor seals during those three months, the December average was used
to represent the average during the previous three months. NMFS assumed
animals counted at the South Jetty comprised the majority of pinnipeds
present in the Lower Columbia River west of Interstate 101 between
September and November. This total area, including the jetties, was
approximately 275 km\2\. NMFS calculated the density of each pinniped
species per km\2\, then multiplied by the area of the harassment zone
and number of workdays anticipated at each pile dike (Table 10).
NMFS used the methodology described above to estimate take of
harbor seals in the proposed IHA resulting in estimated take of 3 seals
by Level A harassment and 270 seals by Level B harassment. However, the
Commission felt that the calculated harbor seal density underrepresents
the number of seal that may occur at the project area. Harbor seals
have been documented at two sites in Chinook/Baker Bay that are within
the Level B harassment zone. These sites, however, are used only
intermittently and feature less than 100 animals. There are an
additional three haulouts at Desmond Sands, located southeast of the
project area, including the main lower Columbia River seal haulout. Two
of the haulouts are described as alternate sites to the main haulout
and are used intermittently. Surveys resulted in counts of less than
100 seals at one site and 100-500 seals at the other. More than 500
seals have been recorded at the main river haulout at Desmond Sands.
However, that location is approximately 10 km from the nearest test
pile location (RM 6.37) or 5 km beyond the largest Level B harassment
zone so may over represent seal numbers in the project area. NMFS opted
to use WDFW abundance estimates from the South Jetty between 2000 and
2014 where the maximum daily number of observed seals was 57 as shown
in Table 9. This daily take rate was multiplied by the number of
driving days (41) resulting in 2,337 authorized takes by Level B
harassment. This same daily take rate was used to estimate take of
harbor seals for the recently expired IHA issued to the City of Astoria
for a waterfront bridge replacement project (83 FR 19243; May 5, 2018).
Level A harassment takes for seals could when either an animal pops
up in the 100-m shut-down zone before the operators are able to cease
pile driving or when a seal occurs within the larger Level A harassment
zone of 472-m for impact driving. NMFS has increased harbor seal
authorized take by Level A harassment by assuming that two animals
could be taken on each of the 38 days of impact driving. NMFS has
increased authorized Level A harassment takes of harbor seals from 3 to
76 and the Level B harassment takes of harbor seals from 270 to 2,337.
Table 9--Average Daily Number of Pinnipeds per Month on South Jetty
[2000-2014]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average number
Average number of California Average number
Month of steller sea sea lions/ of harbor
lions/month month seals/month
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September....................................................... 209 249 ..............
October......................................................... 384 508 ..............
November........................................................ 1,663 1,214 ..............
December........................................................ .............. .............. 57
Construction Period Average..................................... 752 657 57
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Data from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2014.
Table 10--Estimated Level B and Level A Take Calculations for Pinnipeds at River Mile (RM) 4.01 and 6.37
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Level B
Density isopleth isopleth Take/day RM Take/day RM Total take Total take Estimated
Species (animals/km\2\) Activity type area RM area RM 4.01 6.37 RM 4.01 RM 6.37 total takes
4.01 6.37 (Level B)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stellar Sea lion................................ 2.73 Impact Installation \1\........... 3 4 8.19 10.92 82 109 3,563
Vibratory Installation/Removal \2\ 64 73 174.72 199.29 1572 1794
Timber Vibratory Removal \3\...... 0.6 0.7 1.64 1.91 2 3
1657 1906
[[Page 61033]]
California Sea lion............................. 2.39 Impact Installation............... 3 4 7.17 9.56 72 96 3,119
Vibratory Installation/Removal.... 64 73 152.96 174.47 1377 1570
Timber Vibratory Removal.......... 0.6 0.7 1.43 1.67 2 3
1450 1668
Impact Installation............... 0.8 0.9 0.15 0.11 2 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Assumes 10 days each at RM 4.01 and RM 6.37 for all pinniped species.
\2\ Assumes 9 days each at RM 4.01 and RM 6.37 for all pinniped species.
\3\ Assumes 1.5 days each at RM 4.01 and RM 6.37 for all pinniped species.
Table 11 illustrates the stocks NMFS has authorize for take and the
percentage of the stock taken.
Table 11--Level A and Level B Harassment Take Estimates for the Sand Island Pile Dikes Test Piles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock Percentage of
Species Level A take Level B take abundance stock taken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor porpoise................................. 20 42 21,487 0.3
California Sea Lion............................. .............. 3,119 296,750 1.1
Stellar Sea Lion................................ .............. 3,563 61,746 5.8
Harbor Seal..................................... 76 2,337 24,732 9.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully consider two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat.
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned), and;
(2) the practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
In addition to the measures described later in this section, the
Corps must 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/
removal (e.g., standard barges, tug boats), if a marine mammal comes
within 25 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);
Work may only occur during daylight hours, when visual
monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted;
For any marine mammal species for which take by Level B
harassment has not been requested or authorized, in-water pile
installation/removal will shut down immediately when the animals are
sighted;
If take by Level B harassment 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
of them.
Establishment of Shutdown Zones and Level A Harassment Zones--For
all pile driving/removal and activities, the Corps 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 type of driving/removal activity
type and by marine mammal hearing group, (See Table 10). Here, shutdown
zones are larger than the calculated Level A harassment isopleth shown
in Table 7, except for harbor seals during impact driving when a 100-
[[Page 61034]]
m shutdown zone and a 475-m Level A harassment zone will be visually
monitored. The largest shutdown zones are generally for low frequency
and high frequency cetaceans. The placement of (PSOs) during all pile
driving/removal activities (described in detail in the Monitoring and
Reporting Section) will ensure that the entirety of all shutdown zones
are visible during pile installation.
Table 12--Shutdown Zones During Project Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance (meters)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Phocid Otariid
LF cetacean MF cetacean HF cetacean pinniped pinniped
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 Steel Pipe Pile 890 35 1050 100 35
Impact Installation............
24 Steel Pipe 25 25 25 25 25
Vibratory Installation.........
24 Steel Pipe 25 25 25 25 25
Vibratory Removal..............
24 Timber Pile 25 25 25 25 25
Removal Vibratory..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishment of Monitoring Zones for Level B Harassment--The Corps
will establish monitoring zones, based on the Level B harassment zones
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/removal. 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. Due to the large
size of the Level B harassment zones, it is impracticable for the PSOs
to consistently view the entire harassment area. Therefore, takes by
Level B harassment will be recorded and extrapolated based upon the
number of observed takes and the percentage of the Level B harassment
zone that was not visible. Distances to the Level B harassment zones
are depicted in Table 13.
Table 13--Distances to Level B Harassment Zones During Project
Activities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance
Activity (m)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 Steel Pipe Pile Impact Installation........... 1,000
24 Steel Pipe Vibratory Installation............. 5,420
24 Steel Pipe Vibratory Removal.................. 5,420
24 Timber Pile Removal Vibratory................. 1,360
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soft Start--The use of a soft-start procedures is 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
hammer operating at full capacity. For impact pile driving, contractors
will be required to provide an initial set of strikes from the hammer
at reduced percent energy, each strike followed by no less than a 30-
second waiting period. This procedure will be conducted a total of
three times before impact pile driving begins. Soft Start is not
required during vibratory pile driving and removal activities. A soft
start must be implemented at the start of each day's impact pile
driving and at any time following cessation of impact pile driving for
a period of thirty minutes or longer. If a marine mammal is present
within the Level A harassment zone, soft start will be delayed until
the animal leaves the Level A harassment zone. Soft start will begin
only after the PSO has determined, through sighting, that the animal
has moved outside the Level A harassment zone. If a marine mammal is
present in the Level B harassment zone, soft start may begin and a
Level B take will be recorded. Soft start up may occur when these
species are in the Level B harassment zone, whether they enter the
Level B zone from the Level A zone or from outside the monitoring area.
Pre-Activity Monitoring--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 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. If the Level B harassment zone has
been observed for 30 minutes and marine mammals are not present within
the zone, soft start procedures can commence and work can continue even
if visibility becomes impaired within the Level B harassment zone. When
a marine mammal permitted for take by Level B harassment is present in
the Level B harassment zone, piling activities may begin and take by
Level B will be recorded. As stated above, if the entire Level B
harassment zone is not visible at the start of construction, pile
driving/removal activities can begin. If work ceases for more than 30
minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of both the Level B harassment and
shutdown zone will commence.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, we have determined that the
mitigation measures provide the means effecting the least practicable
impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
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
[[Page 61035]]
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. One PSO would be positioned close to pile driving/
removal activities at the best practical vantage point. A second PSO
would be vessel-based to provide best coverage of the appropriate Level
A and Level B harassment zones. If waters exceed a sea-state which
restricts the observers' ability to make boat-based observations for
the full Level A shutdown zone (e.g., excessive wind, wave action, or
fog), impact pile installation will cease until conditions allow
monitoring to resume. Contractors should ensure compliance with NOAA
advisories for safe boat operations based on the size of vessel to be
used by the marine mammal observer.
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, 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 must be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving/removal activities.
This reports will include an overall description of work completed, a
narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and associated PSO data
sheets. Specifically, the reports 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;
Other human activity in the area; and
Marine mammal PSO observational datasheets or raw data.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, that phase's
draft final report will constitute the final report. If comments are
received, a final report for the given phase 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, such as an
injury, serious injury or mortality, the Corps 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 West Coast 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;
[[Page 61036]]
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 the Corps to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. The Corps would not be able
to resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
In the event that the Corps 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),
the Corps would immediately report the incident to the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the West Coast 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 the Corps to
determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
In the event that the Corps 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 these IHAs
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), the Corps would report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office
of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinator, within 24 hours of the discovery. The Corps 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).
To avoid repetition, our analysis applies to all species listed in
Table 11, given that NMFS expects the anticipated effects of the
planned pile driving/removal to be similar in nature. Where there are
meaningful differences between species or stocks, or groups of species,
in anticipated individual responses to activities, impact of expected
take on the population due to differences in population status, or
impacts on habitat, NMFS has identified species-specific factors to
inform the analysis.
NMFS does not anticipate that serious injury or mortality would
occur as a result of the Corps' planned activity. As stated in the
mitigation section, shutdown zones that equal or exceed Level A
harassment isopleths shown in Table 12 will be implemented. Take by
Level A harassment is authorized for some species (harbor seals, harbor
porpoises) to account for the slight possibility that these species
escape observation by the PSOs within the Level A harassment zone.
Further, 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, 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.
Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving and removal
at the planned test piles project sites are expected to be mild, short
term, and temporary. Marine mammals within the Level B harassment zone
may not show any visual cues they are disturbed by activities or they
could become alert, avoid the area, leave the area, or display other
mild responses that are not observable such as changes in vocalization
patterns. Given the short duration of noise-generating activities
(between 6-41 days over 3-month period), any harassment would be likely
be intermittent and temporary. Furthermore, many of the species
occurring near the MCR or in the Columbia River estuary would only be
present temporarily based on seasonal patterns or during transit
between other habitats. These temporarily present species would be
exposed to even smaller periods of noise-generating activity, further
decreasing the impacts.
In addition, for all species there are no known biologically
important areas (BIAs) within the MCR or Columbia River estuary and
there is no ESA-designated marine mammal critical habitat. The estuary
represents a very small portion of the total available habitat to
marine mammal species.
More generally, there are no known calving or rookery grounds
within the project area, but anecdotal evidence from local experts
shows that marine mammals are more prevalent during spring and summer
associated with feeding on aggregations of fish. Because the Corps'
activities would occur in the fall months, the project area represents
a small portion of available foraging habitat, and the duration of
noise-producing activities relatively is short, meaning impacts on
marine mammal feeding for all species should be minimal.
Any impacts on marine mammal prey that would occur during the
Corps' planned activity would have at most short-terms effects on
foraging of individual marine mammals, and likely no effect on the
populations of marine mammals as a whole. Therefore, indirect effects
on marine mammal prey during the construction are not expected to be
substantial, and these insubstantial effects would therefore be
unlikely to cause substantial effects on marine mammals.
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
[[Page 61037]]
or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No mortality is anticipated or authorized;
The Corps would implement mitigation measures including
soft-starts for impact pile driving and shutdown zones that exceed
Level A harassment zones for authorized species, except for harbor
seals which will help to ensure that take by Level A harassment is at
most a small degree of PTS;
Anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at
worst, temporary modifications in behavior;
There are no BIAs within the MCR and Columbia River
estuary or other known areas of particular biological importance to any
of the affected stocks are impacted by the activity;
The project area represents a very small portion of the
available foraging area for all marine mammal species and anticipated
habitat impacts are minimal; and
The required mitigation measures (e.g. shutdown zones,
soft-start) are expected to be effective in reducing the effects of the
specified activity.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the planned
activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal
species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under 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 11 in the Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and
Estimation section, present the number of animals that could be exposed
to received noise levels that may result in take by Level A harassment
or Level B harassment from the Corps' planned activities. Our analysis
shows that 9.7 percent or less of the best population estimates of each
affected stock could be taken. Additionally, the planned test piles
project is located near the pinniped haulout at the South Jetty.
Therefore, it is likely that many of these takes will be repeated takes
of the same animals over multiple days. As such, the take estimate
serves as a good estimate of instances of take, but is likely an
overestimate of individuals taken, so actual percentage of stocks taken
would be even lower.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity
(including the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated
take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species
or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
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.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an
incidental harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts
on the human environment.
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental harassment authorizations with
no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or
cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality
of the human environment and for which we have not identified any
extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical
exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the
IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
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.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to the Corps for conducting test pile
installation and removal at the Sand Island Pile Dike system near the
MCR, for one year from the date of issuance, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are
incorporated.
Dated: November 5, 2019.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-24462 Filed 11-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P