[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 131 (Wednesday, July 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40992-41006]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14617]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XA211]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock in Washington State
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments on proposed authorization and possible renewal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the Washington State
Department Transportation (WSDOT) for authorization to take marine
mammals incidental to Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in
Seattle, Washington State. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an
incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to incidentally take marine
mammals during the specified activities. NMFS is also requesting
comments on a possible one-year renewal that could be issued under
certain circumstances and if all requirements are met, as described in
Request for Public Comments at the end of this notice. NMFS will
consider public comments prior to making any final decision on the
issuance of the requested MMPA authorizations and agency responses will
be summarized in the final notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than August
7, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service. Written comments should be submitted
via email to [email protected].
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the
end of the comment period. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the
commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, 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 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
[[Page 40993]]
taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and
will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the
species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses (where relevant).
Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods of taking and
other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact'' on
the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth.
The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above
are included in the relevant sections below.
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 IHA)
with respect to potential impacts on the human environment.
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or
mortality) of the Companion Manual for 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
preliminarily determined that the issuance of the proposed IHA
qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice
prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the
IHA request.
Summary of Request
On April 21, 2020, NMFS received a request from WSDOT for an IHA to
take marine mammals incidental to the fourth year of work associated
with the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in Seattle,
Washington. The application was deemed adequate and complete on May 13,
2020. WSDOT's request is for take of a small number of 11 species of
marine mammals by Level A and Level B harassment. Neither WSDOT nor
NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to result from this activity
and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
This proposed IHA would cover one year of a larger project for
which WSDOT obtained prior IHAs (82 FR 31579, July 7, 2017; 83 FR
35226, July 25, 2018; 84 FR 36581, July 29, 2019). The project will
reconfigure the dock while maintaining approximately the same vehicle
holding capacity as current conditions. WSDOT complied with all the
requirements (e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of the
previous IHAs and information regarding their monitoring results may be
found in the Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and
their Habitat section. WSDOT's previous monitoring reports are
available online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
The purpose of the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock is to
preserve the transportation function of an aging, deteriorating and
seismically deficient facility to continue providing safe and reliable
service. The project will also address existing safety concerns related
to conflicts between vehicles and pedestrian traffic and operational
inefficiencies.
Key project elements include:
Replacing and re-configuring the timber trestle portion of
the dock;
Replacing the main terminal building;
Reconfiguring the dock layout to provide safer and more
efficient operations;
Replacing the vehicle transfer span and the overhead
loading structures of Slip 3;
Replacing vessel landing aids;
Maintaining a connection to the Marion Street pedestrian
overpass;
Moving the current passenger only ferry (POF) slip
temporarily to the north to make way for south trestle construction,
and then constructing a new POF slip in the south trestle area.
Mitigating for additional 5,400 square feet (ft\2\) (502
square meters (m\2\)) of overwater coverage; and
Capping contaminated sediments.
The Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock involves in-water
impact and vibratory pile driving and vibratory pile removal. Details
of the proposed construction activities are provided below.
Dates and Duration
Due to NMFS and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water
work timing restrictions to protect Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed
salmonids, planned WSDOT in-water construction is limited each year to
July 15 through February 15 at this location. For this project, in-
water construction is planned to take place between August 1, 2020 and
February 15, 2021. The total worst-case time for pile installation and
removal is 47 days (Table 1).
Specific Geographic Region
The Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman Dock, serving State Route 519,
is located on the downtown Seattle waterfront, in King County,
Washington. The terminal services vessels from the Bainbridge Island
and Bremerton routes, and is the most heavily used terminal in the WSF
system. The Seattle terminal is located in Section 6, Township 24
North, Range 4 East, and is adjacent to Elliott Bay, a tributary to
Puget Sound (Figure 1). Land use in the area is highly urban, and
includes business, industrial, the Port of Seattle container loading
facility, residential, the Pioneer Square Historic District and local
parks.
[[Page 40994]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN08JY20.000
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
Construction activities during the Year 4 Seattle Multimodal
Project at Colman Dock include the following components.
The project will remove the northern timber trestle and replace a
portion of it with a new concrete trestle. The area from Marion Street
to the north edge of the property will not be rebuilt and after
demolition will become a new area of open water. A section of fill
contained behind a bulkhead underneath the northeast section of the
dock will be removed. WSDOT will construct a new steel and concrete
trestle from Columbia Street northward to Marion Street.
The project will maintain the current King County POF functions on
site, and address safety concerns related to pedestrian/vehicle
conflicts at Yesler Street. A new covered pier, sized to accommodate
POF passenger waiting and connected by a new overhead pedestrian bridge
to the terminal building and the Marion Street Overpass, will be
constructed along the south side of Colman Dock.
The reconfiguration will increase total permanent overwater
coverage (OWC) by about 5,400 ft\2\ (502 m\2\, about 1.7 percent more
than existing overwater coverage at the site), due to the new walkway
from the POF facility to Alaskan Way and new stairways and elevators
from the POF to the upper level of the terminal. Removal of at least
5,400 ft\2\ (502 m\2\) from Pier 48, a condemned timber structure, will
serve as mitigation for the permanent OWC increase.
Construction of the reconfigured dock will narrow (reduce) the OWC
along the shoreline (at the landward edge) by 180 linear feet (ft) at
the north end of the site, while 30 linear ft of new trestle will be
constructed along the shoreline at the south end of the site. The net
reduction of OWC in the nearshore zone is 150 linear ft.
The project includes demolition of the existing terminal building
and construction of a new terminal building. The new terminal building
will be located along the west edge of the dock, spanning all three
slips to handle passenger traffic more efficiently, and will connect to
the Marion Street Overpass by an elevated deck.
The project includes reconstruction of the vehicle transfer span
and the passenger overhead loading (OHL) structures of Slip 3,
including new hydraulic systems. The new OHL will be wider than the
existing OHL, to accommodate the increased walk-on passenger volumes.
Sediment beneath the terminal has been contaminated by the
creosote-treated piles and other chemicals discharged to the
environment over the years. A cap was installed to cover contaminated
sediment on the south half of the site prior to trestle expansion in
1990. WSDOT will place a new
[[Page 40995]]
sediment cap to the north and south of the current cap during
construction of the project to contain existing contamination.
Specific in-water pile driving and pile removal activities include
the follow components:
Vibratory driving followed by impact proofing (driving) of
36-inch steel piles. A total of 73 piles will be installed using the
vibratory hammer over 9 days, with an average of approximately 8 piles
installed per day. Vibratory pile driving and impact proofing will
occur on different days, and an additional nine days is estimated for
impact proofing.
Vibratory driving and then removal of 24-inch temporary
steel piles. A total of 30 piles will be installed and later removed,
with an average of 8 piles installed/removed per day. Vibratory pile
driving and removal will occur on different days.
Vibratory removal of 355 14-inch timber piles over 18
days, with approximately 20 piles removed per day.
Vibratory removal of 30 12-inch steel piles over 3 days,
with 10 piles removed per day.
A summary of the pile driving and pile removal activities for the
Year 4 Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock is provided in Table
1.
Table 1--Summary of In-Water Pile Driving Durations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile size Duration
Method Pile type (inch) Pile No. Piles/day Minutes/pile (days)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact drive (proof)...................... Steel....................... 36 * 73 8 10 9
Vibratory drive........................... Steel....................... 36 * 73 8 20 9
Vibratory drive........................... Steel (temporary)........... 24 * 30 8 20 4
Vibratory remove.......................... Steel (temporary)........... 24 * 30 8 20 4
Vibratory remove.......................... Timber...................... 14 355 20 15 18
Vibratory remove.......................... Steel....................... 12 30 10 20 3
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................. ............................ .............. 488 .............. .............. 47
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These are same piles.
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 2 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
proposed to be authorized for this action, 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 (2019). 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 all species represent the total
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that
comprises that stock. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS's U.S Pacific and Alaska SARs (e.g., Carretta et al., 2020; Muto
et al., 2020). All values presented in Table 2 are the most recent
available at the time of publication and are available in the 2018 SARs
(Carretta et al., 2019; Muto et al., 2019) and draft 2019 SARs
(available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).
Table 2--Marine Mammals With Potential Presence Within the Proposed 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
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Humpback whale.................. Megaptera novaeangliae. California/Oregon/ Y 2,900 (0.05, 2,784)... 16.7 unk
Washington.
Minke whale..................... Balaenoptera California/Oregon/ N 636 (0.72, 369)....... 3.5 1.3
acutorostrata. Washington.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale.................... Orcinus orca........... Eastern North Pacific Y 75 (NA, 75)........... 0 0
Southern Resident.
West coast transient... N 243 (NA, 243)......... 2.4 0
[[Page 40996]]
Bottlenose dolphin.............. Tursiops truncatus..... California/Oregon/ N 1,924 (0.54, 1,255)... 11 1.6
Washington offshore.
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise................. Phocoena phocoena...... Washington inland N 11,233 (0.37, 8,308).. 66 7.2
waters.
Dall's porpoise................. P. dalli............... California/Oregon/ N 25,750 (0.45, 17,954). 172 0.3
Washington.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California sea lion............. Zalophus californianus. U.S.................... N 257,606 (NA, 233,515). 14,011 321
Steller sea lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Eastern U.S............ N 43,201 (NA, 43,201)... 2,592 113
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal..................... Phoca vitulina......... Washington northern N \4\ 11,036............ NA 10.6
inland waters.
Northern elephant seal.......... Mirounga angustirostris California breeding.... N 179,000 (NA, 81,368).. 4,882 8.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments assessments. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g.,
commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual serious injury/mortality 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.
\4\ Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are 9 years old, but this is the best available information for use here.
As indicated above, all 11 species (with 12 managed stocks) in
Table 2 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur, and we have proposed
authorizing it, with the exception of the Southern Resident killer
whale (SPKW). Take of SRKW can be avoided by implementing strict
monitoring and mitigation measures (see Proposed Mitigation and
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting sections below). All species that
could potentially occur in the proposed survey areas are included in
Table 2 of the IHA application.
In addition, the sea otter may be found in inland waters of
Washington. However, this species is managed by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and is not considered further in this document.
A detailed description of the marine mammals in the area of the
activities is found in the notice of the Year 3 Seattle Multimodal
Project at Colman Dock proposed IHA (84 FR 25757, June 4, 2019). This
information remains valid so we do not repeat it here but provide a
summary table with marine mammal species and stock details (Table 2).
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine
mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et
al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect
this, Southall et al., (2007) recommended that marine mammals be
divided into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or
estimated hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response
data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques,
anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements
of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes
(i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with
the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the
lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower
bound from Southall et al., (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing
groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 3.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups (NMFS, 2018)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized hearing
Hearing group range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales).... 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
Kogia, river dolphins, cephalorhynchid,
Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals). 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
[[Page 40997]]
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al., (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
11 marine mammal species (7 cetacean and 4 pinniped (2 otariid and 2
phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the
proposed survey activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean
species that may be present, 3 are classified as low-frequency
cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete species), 2 are classified as mid-
frequency cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid species), and 2 are classified
as high-frequency cetaceans (i.e., porpoise species).
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that
components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and
their habitat. The Estimated Take section later in this document
includes a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are
expected to be taken by this activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis
and Determination section considers the content of this section, the
Estimated Take section, and the Proposed Mitigation section, to draw
conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the
reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those
impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or
stocks.
The WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock construction
work using in-water pile driving and pile removal could adversely
affect marine mammal species and stocks by exposing them to elevated
noise levels in the vicinity of the activity area.
Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may
result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift--an
increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise (Finneran et
al., 2005). Factors that influence the amount of threshold shift
include the amplitude, duration, frequency content, temporal pattern,
and energy distribution of noise exposure. The magnitude of hearing
threshold shift normally decreases over time following cessation of the
noise exposure. The amount of threshold shift just after exposure is
the initial threshold shift. If the threshold shift eventually returns
to zero (i.e., the threshold returns to the pre-exposure value), it is
a temporary threshold shift (Southall et al., 2007).
Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of hearing)--When animals
exhibit reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds must be louder for an
animal to detect them) following exposure to an intense sound or sound
for long duration, it is referred to as a noise-induced threshold shift
(TS). An animal can experience temporary threshold shift (TTS) or
permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS can last from minutes or hours to
days (i.e., there is complete recovery), can occur in specific
frequency ranges (i.e., an animal might only have a temporary loss of
hearing sensitivity between the frequencies of 1 and 10 kilohertz
(kHz), and can be of varying amounts (for example, an animal's hearing
sensitivity might be reduced initially by only 6 dB or reduced by 30
dB). PTS is permanent, but some recovery is possible. PTS can also
occur in a specific frequency range and amount as mentioned above for
TTS.
For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive
bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless
porpoise (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a, 2010b;
Finneran and Schlundt, 2010; Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a,
2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b; Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et
al., 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For pinnipeds in water, data
are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal,
and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al.,
2012b).
Lucke et al., (2009) found a TS of a harbor porpoise after exposing
it to airgun noise with a received sound pressure level (SPL) at 200.2
dB (peak-to-peak) re: 1 microPascal ([mu]Pa), which corresponds to a
sound exposure level of 164.5 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa\2\s after integrating
exposure. Because the airgun noise is a broadband impulse, one cannot
directly determine the equivalent of SPLrms (root-mean-
square sound pressure level) from the reported peak-to-peak SPLs.
However, applying a conservative conversion factor of 16 dB for
broadband signals from seismic surveys (McCauley et al., 2000) to
correct for the difference between peak-to-peak levels reported in
Lucke et al., (2009) and SPLrms, the SPLrms for
TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa, and the received levels
associated with PTS (Level A harassment) would be higher. Therefore,
based on these studies, NMFS recognizes that TTS of harbor porpoises is
lower than other cetacean species empirically tested (Finneran and
Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et al., 2002; Kastelein and Jennings, 2012).
Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with
conspecifics, and interpretation of environmental cues for purposes
such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree
(elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and
frequency range of TTS, and the context in which it is experienced, TTS
can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to serious
(similar to those discussed in auditory masking, below). For example, a
marine mammal may be able to readily compensate for a brief, relatively
small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency range that occurs
during a time where ambient noise is lower and there are not as many
competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and longer
duration of TTS sustained during time when communication is critical
for successful mother/calf interactions could have more serious
impacts. Also, depending on the degree and frequency range, the effects
of PTS on an animal could range in severity, although it is considered
generally more serious because it is a permanent condition. Of note,
reduced hearing sensitivity as a simple function of aging has been
observed in marine mammals, as well as humans and other taxa (Southall
et al., 2007), so one can infer that strategies exist for coping with
this condition to some degree, though likely not without cost.
In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-
intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for
marine mammals, which utilize sound for vital biological functions
(Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic masking is when other noises such as
from human sources interfere with animal detection of acoustic signals
such as communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental
sounds important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain
circumstances, marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment
are being severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their
performance fitness in survival and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band that the animals utilize.
Therefore, since noise generated from vibratory pile driving is mostly
concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect on high
frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes (toothed whales). However,
lower frequency man-made noises are more likely to affect detection of
communication calls and other
[[Page 40998]]
potentially important natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. It
may also affect communication signals when they occur near the noise
band and thus reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et
al., 2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al., 2004;
Holt et al., 2009).
Unlike TS, masking, which can occur over large temporal and spatial
scales, can potentially affect the species at population, community, or
even ecosystem levels, as well as individual levels. Masking affects
both senders and receivers of the signals and could have long-term
chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent
science suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased
by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms of sound pressure
level) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of
these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand 2009). For
WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock Year 4 construction
activities, noises from vibratory pile driving and pile removal
contribute to the elevated ambient noise levels in the project area,
thus increasing potential for or severity of masking. Baseline ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of project area are high due to ongoing
shipping, construction and other activities in the Puget Sound.
Finally, marine mammals' exposure to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as: Changing
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities;
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g.,
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise
depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and
their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et
al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from intermittent
noises (such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for
continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the WSDOT's
Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock construction activities, both
of these noise levels are considered for effects analysis because WSDOT
plans to use impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving and pile
removal.
The biological significance of many of these behavioral
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral
modification could be biologically significant if the change affects
growth, survival, and/or reproduction, which depends on the severity,
duration, and context of the effects.
During the previous years of the project, WSDOT conducted the
required marine mammal mitigation and monitoring and did not exceed the
authorized levels of take. Marine mammal monitoring report for the 2019
Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock construction activity shows
that a total of 190 harbor seals, 225 California sea lions, 9 Steller
sea lions, 1 gray whale, 1 humpback whale, and 49 harbor porpoises were
observed within the Level A or Level B harassment zones. These numbers
are well under the authorized take numbers issued in the 2019 IHA to
WSDOT. In addition, no abnormal or drastic change of behavior of marine
mammals was observed by the protected species observers (PSOs) during
WSDOT's 2019 Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock construction
activity.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are
associated with elevated sound levels produced by vibratory pile
removal and pile driving in the area. However, other potential impacts
to the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance are also possible.
With regard to fish as a prey source for cetaceans and pinnipeds,
fish are known to hear and react to sounds and to use sound to
communicate (Tavolga et al., 1981) and possibly avoid predators (Wilson
and Dill, 2002). Experiments have shown that fish can sense both the
strength and direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors
determining whether a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially
react to it, are the frequency of the signal and the strength of the
signal in relation to the natural background noise level.
The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior
is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to
react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the
detection level of 120 dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response threshold
can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition
(Engas et al., 1993). In general, fish react more strongly to pulses of
sound (such as noise from impact pile driving) rather than continuous
signals (such as noise from vibratory pile driving) (Blaxter et al.,
1981), and a quicker alarm response is elicited when the sound signal
intensity rises rapidly compared to sound rising more slowly to the
same level.
During the coastal construction only a small fraction of the
available habitat would be ensonified at any given time. Disturbance to
fish species would be short-term and fish would return to their pre-
disturbance behavior once the pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the
proposed construction would have little, if any, impact on marine
mammals' prey availability in the area where construction work is
planned.
Finally, the time of the proposed construction activity would avoid
the spawning season of the ESA-listed salmonid species.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed for authorization 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 noise
from in-water 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 cetaceans and
phocids because predicted auditory injury zones are relatively large.
Auditory injury is unlikely to occur for low- and mid-frequency
cetaceans and otariids. The proposed mitigation and monitoring measures
are expected to minimize the severity of the taking to the extent
practicable.
As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or proposed to
be authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is
estimated.
[[Page 40999]]
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 proposed 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.
WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock Year 4
construction activity includes the use impact pile driving, vibratory
pile driving and pile removal, and therefore the 120 dB 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). WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock Year 4 construction activity includes the use of impulsive
(impact pile driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving)
sources.
These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
Table 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.
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.
Source Levels
The project includes impact pile driving (proofing) of 36-inch
steel piles, vibratory pile driving of 36- and 24-inch steel piles, and
vibratory pile removal of 24- and 12-inch steel piles, and 14-inch
timber piles. Near source levels (defined as noise level at 10-m from
the pile) of these pile driving and removal activities are all based on
prior measurements conducted by WSDOT. A summary of the 10-m near
source levels of the pile driving and removal activities is provided in
Table 5, along with references.
[[Page 41000]]
Table 5--Near Source Noise Levels at 10-m From the Pile for Various Pile
Driving and Removal at Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock Year 4
Project
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source level (at
Activity/pile size 10m) Literature source
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact pile drive (proof) 36 174 dB (SELss)... WSDOT Colman Year 1
inch steel pile. measurement (2018).
Vibratory drive/remove 36 inch 177 dB (SPLrms).. WSDOT Port Townsend
steel pile. measurement (2010).
Vibratory drive 24 inch steel 174 dB (SPLrms).. WSDOT Port Townsend
pile. measurement (2010).
Vibratory removal 14 inch 155 dB (SPLrms).. WSDOT Port Townsend
timber pile. measurement (2011).
Vibratory removal 12 inch 155 dB (SPLrms).. Caltrans (2015) data
steel pile. for same pile.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Harassment Distances and Areas
Distances to Level A harassment were estimated using the NMFS User
Spreadsheet. 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 vibratory
pile driving and pile removal, 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.
A summary of the calculated Level A harassment distances and areas
is presented in Table 6.
Level B Harassment Distances and Areas
Level B harassment distances from impact pile driving of 36-inch
steel piles and from vibratory pile removal of 12-inch steel piles and
14-inch timber piles are calculated using a practical spreading model
of the sonar equation
EL = SL - 15 log10(R)
where EL is the echo level (or received level), which is the sound
threshold level at the Level B harassment (160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa for
impact pile driving and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa for vibratory pile
driving and pile removal); R is the Level B harassment distance in
meters.
Level B harassment distance for vibratory pile driving and removal
of the 24-inch steel piles, and the vibratory driving of 36-inch piles
is based on in situ measurements of vibratory pile driving of 36-inch
piles conducted during Year One of the Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock (WSDOT 2018). The results show that underwater pile driving
noise cannot be detected at a distance of 8.69 km (WSDOT 2018).
The Level B harassment areas were estimated by WSDOT using
geographic information system (GIS) tools to eliminate land masses and
other obstacles that block sound propagation.
A summary of the measured Level B harassment distances and areas is
presented in Table 6.
Table 6--Level A and Level B Harassment Distances and Areas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment distance (m)/area (km\2\) Level B
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- harassment
Pile type, size & pile driving method distance (m)/
LF cetacean MF cetacean HF cetacean Phocid Otariid area (km\2\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact drive (proof) 36-inch steel pile................. 343.2/0.37 12.2/0.00 408.7/0.52 183.6/0.11 13.4/0.00 736/1.70
Vibratory drive 36-inch steel pile...................... 153.1/0.07 13.6/0.00 226.4/0.16 93.1/0.03 6.5/0.00 8,690/40.53
Vibratory drive/removal, 24-inch steel piles............ 96.6/0.03 8.6/0.00 142.8/0.06 58.7/0.01 4.1/0.00 8,690/40.53
Vibratory removal 14-inch timber pile................... 8.0/0.00 0.7/0.00 11.8/0.00 4.8/0.00 0.3/0.00 2,154/5.47
Vibratory removal 12-inch steel pile.................... 6.5/0.00 0.6/0.00 9.6/0.00 3.9/0.00 0.3/0.00 2,154/5.47
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide the information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations.
Marine mammal occurrence are based on the U.S. Navy Marine Species
Density Database (U.S. Navy, 2019) and on WSDOT marine mammal
monitoring efforts during prior years of construction work at Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock. A summary of the marine mammal
density is provided in Table 7.
Table 7--Marine Mammal Density in the Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock Construction Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density
Marine mammals (animals/
km\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale.............................................. 0.0048
Humpback whale.......................................... 0.00074
Minke whale............................................. 0.00045
Killer whale (West Coast transient)..................... 0.005141
Bottlenose dolphin...................................... NA
Harbor porpoise......................................... 0.75
Dall's porpoise......................................... 0.00045
Harbor seal............................................. 3.91
Northern elephant seal.................................. 0
California sea lion..................................... 0.2211
Steller sea lion........................................ 0.0478
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
The fundamental approach for take calculation is to use the
information aggregated in the Navy density database
[[Page 41001]]
(U.S. Navy, 2019) with the following equation:
Total Take = marine mammal density x ensonified area x pile driving
days
Some adjustments were made based on prior observation of marine
mammals in the project area and account for group numbers. Specific
adjustments for calculating take numbers are provided below.
Humpback whale--During the prior year WSDOT Multimodal
Project construction, three individuals have been observed. Given that
humpback whales are occasionally present in the area, it is unlikely
they would be present on a daily basis. Instead it is assumed that
three individuals may be present in the Level B harassment zones once a
month during the in-water work window (7 months), or 21 exposures.
Minke whale--During the prior year WSDOT Multimodal
Project work, one individual minke whale was observed. Observations
have been of single individuals, not groups. It is assumed that one
individual may be present in the Level B harassment zone once a month
during the in-water work window (7 months), or 7 exposures.
West Coast transient killer whale--Level B harassment
exposures were calculated to be two. However, two groups of 10
individuals have been observed. It is assumed that one group size of 10
animals may be present in the Level B harassment zones once a month
during the in-water work window (7 months), or 70 exposures.
Bottlenose dolphin--The bottlenose dolphin estimate is
based on sightings data from Cascadia Research Collective. Between
September 2017 and March 2018, a group of up to seven individuals was
sighted in South Puget Sound (EPS, 2018). It is assumed that this group
is still present in the area. Given how rare bottlenose dolphins are in
the area, it is unlikely they would be present on a daily basis.
Instead it is assumed that one group size of seven animals may be
present in the Level B harassment zone once a month during the in-water
work window (7 months), or 49 exposures.
Northern elephant seal--Estimated northern elephant seals
Level B harassment exposures were calculated to be zero. However, one
individual of this species was observed in the project area once.
Therefore, the take number was adjusted to seven takes based on one
animal for the project duration of 7 months.
California sea lion--Estimated California sea lion Level B
harassment exposures were calculated to be 104. However, there were 763
observations during project monitoring, with a high of 29 individuals
in one day. Conservatively assuming that 29 individuals may be present
in the Level B harassment zones during 47 days of pile driving or
removal, it is assumed that 1,363 exposures to pile driving noise may
occur.
Harbor porpoise--Estimated harbor porpoise Level A
harassment exposures were calculated to be five. However, given the
relatively larger Level A harassment distance for high-frequency
cetaceans, we assume that two incidents of Level A harassment may occur
per month for the 7 months work window to yield a total of 14 takes by
Level A harassment.
Harbor seal--Estimated harbor seal Level A harassment
exposures were calculated to be three. However, WSDOT made a total of
243 harbor seal observations in the 60-184 m Level A zone, with a high
of two individuals in one day. This portion of the Level A harassment
zone would be beyond the proposed shutdown zone, and this estimated
zone would occur on 26 days. Assuming that two individuals may be
present once a day for 26 days results in 52 potential Level A
harassment takes.
A summary of estimated marine mammal takes is listed in Table 8.
Table 8--Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals That May Be Exposed to Received Noise Levels That Cause Level A and
Level B Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated Estimated
Marine mammals level A level B total Abundance Percentage (%)
harassment harassment harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale...................... 0 5 5 26,906 0.02
Humpback whale.................. 0 21 21 2,900 0.72
Minke whale..................... 0 7 7 636 1.10
Killer whale (West Coast 0 70 70 243 28.81
transient).....................
Bottlenose dolphin.............. 0 49 49 1,924 2.55
Harbor porpoise................. 14 649 663 11,233 5.90
Dall's porpoise................. 0 40 40 25,750 0.16
Harbor seal..................... 52 3,155 3,207 11,036 21.50
Northern elephant seal.......... 0 7 7 179,000 0.02
California sea lion............. 0 1,363 1,363 257,606 0.72
Steller sea lion................ 0 39 39 43,201 0.09
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to the
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting the
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, 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
[[Page 41002]]
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.
Time Restriction
The applicant stated that work would occur only during daylight
hours, when visual monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted. In
addition, all in-water construction will be limited to the period
between August 1, 2020, and February 15, 2021.
Establishing and Monitoring Level A, Level B Harassment Zones, and
Exclusion Zones
Before the commencement of in-water construction activities, which
include vibratory pile driving and pile removal, WSDOT shall establish
Level A harassment zones where received underwater SPLs or
SELcum could cause PTS.
WSDOT shall also establish Level B harassment zones where received
underwater SPLs are higher than 160 dBrms re 1 [micro]Pa for
impulse noise sources (impact pile driving) and 120 dBrms re
1 [micro]Pa for continuous noise sources (vibratory pile driving and
pile removal).
WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones as shown in Table 9 to
prevent Level A harassment takes of all cetaceans and otariids, and to
minimize Level A harassment takes of phocids. In addition, a minimum of
10 m exclusion zone must be in place during anytime when in-water
construction activity is ongoing.
WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones for SRKW and all marine
mammals that takes are not authorized at the Level B harassment
distances. Specifically, impact pile driving of 36-inch steel piles, a
750 m exclusion zone shall be established. For vibratory driving of 24-
and 36-inch steel piles and vibratory pile removal of 24-inch steel
piles, a 8.7 km exclusion zone shall be established. For vibratory pile
removal of 14-inch timber piles and 12-inch steel piles, a 2.2 km
exclusion zone shall be established.
A summary of exclusion zones is provided in Table 9.
Table 9--Exclusion Zones (m) for Various Marine Mammals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exclusion distance (m)
Pile type, size & pile driving method ------------------------------------------------------- SRKW (m)
LF MF HF Phocid Otariid
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact drive 36-inch steel pile............... 350 15 410 60 15 750
Vibratory drive 36-inch steel pile............ 160 15 230 60 10 8,700
Vibratory drive/removal, 24-inch steel piles.. 100 10 150 60 10 8,700
Vibratory remove, 14-inch timber pile or 12- 10 10 15 10 10 2,200
inch steel pile..............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*LF = low-frequency cetacean; MF = mid-frequency cetacean; HF = high-frequency cetacean; PW = phocid; OW =
otariids; SRKW = Southern Resident killer whale
NMFS-approved PSO shall conduct an initial survey of the exclusion
zones to ensure that no marine mammals are seen within the zones
beginning 30 minutes before pile driving and pile removal of a pile
segment begins. If marine mammals are found within the exclusion zone,
pile driving of the segment would be delayed until they move out of the
area. If a marine mammal is seen above water and then dives below, the
contractor would wait 15 minutes. If no marine mammals are seen by the
observer in that time it can be assumed that the animal has moved
beyond the exclusion zone.
If pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a
marine mammal is sighted within the designated exclusion zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the pile
driving operator (or other authorized individual) immediately and
continue to monitor the exclusion zone. Operations may not resume until
the marine mammal has exited the exclusion zone or 15 minutes have
elapsed since the last sighting.
Shutdown Measures
WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is
detected within or entering an exclusion zone listed in Table 9.
WSDOT shall also implement shutdown measures if SRKW are sighted
within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B
harassment zone during in-water construction activities.
If a killer whale approaches the Level B harassment zone during
pile driving or removal, and it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or a
transient killer whale, it shall be assumed to be a SRKW and WSDOT
shall implement the shutdown measure.
If a SRKW or an unidentified killer whale enters the Level B
harassment zone undetected, in-water pile driving or pile removal shall
be suspended until the whale exits the Level B harassment zone, or 15
minutes have elapsed with no sighting of the animal, to avoid further
Level B harassment.
Further, WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the
IHA (if issued) and if such marine mammals are sighted within the
vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment
zone during in-water construction activities.
Coordination With Local Marine Mammal Research Network
Prior to the start of pile driving for the day, the Orca Network
and/or Center for Whale Research will be contacted by WSDOT to find out
the location of the nearest marine mammal sightings. The Orca Sightings
Network consists of a list of over 600 (and growing) residents,
scientists, and government agency personnel in the U.S. and Canada.
Sightings are called or emailed into the Orca Network and immediately
distributed to other sighting networks including: The NMFS Northwest
Fisheries Science Center, the Center for Whale Research, Cascadia
Research, the Whale Museum Hotline and the British Columbia Sightings
Network.
Sightings information collected by the Orca Network includes
detection by hydrophone. The SeaSound Remote Sensing Network is a
system of interconnected hydrophones installed in the marine
environment of Haro Strait (west side of San Juan Island) to study orca
communication, in-water noise, bottom fish ecology and local
[[Page 41003]]
climatic conditions. A hydrophone at the Port Townsend Marine Science
Center measures average in-water sound levels and automatically detects
unusual sounds. These passive acoustic devices allow researchers to
hear when different marine mammals come into the region. This acoustic
network, combined with the volunteer (incidental) visual sighting
network allows researchers to document presence and location of various
marine mammal species.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, all of which are described
above, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation
measures provide the means 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.
Proposed 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
proposed 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).
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
WSDOT shall employ NMFS-approved PSOs to conduct marine mammal
monitoring for its Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock. The PSOs
will observe and collect data on marine mammals in and around the
project area for 30 minutes before, during, and for 30 minutes after
all pile removal and pile installation work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall
meet the following requirements:
1. Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required;
2. At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer;
3. Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree
in biological science or related field) or training for experience;
4. Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an
observer; and
5. NMFS will require submission and approval of observer Curriculum
Vitas;
Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall be
conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power).
Due to the different sizes of ZOIs from different pile sizes, several
different ZOIs and different monitoring protocols corresponding to a
specific pile size will be established.
During vibratory driving of 36-inch pile or vibratory
driving/removal of 24-inch piles, four land-based PSOs and one ferry-
based PSO will monitor the zone.
During vibratory removal of 12-inch or 14-inch piles, four
land-based PSOs will monitor the zone.
During impact driving of 36-nch piles, three land-based
PSOs will monitor the zone.
Locations of the land-based PSOs and routes of monitoring vessels
are shown in WSDOT's Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, which is available
online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.
To verify the required monitoring distance, the exclusion zones and
zones of influence will be determined by using a range finder or hand-
held global positioning system device.
Proposed Reporting Measures
WSDOT is required to submit a draft report on all marine mammal
monitoring conducted under the IHA (if issued) within 90 calendar days
of the completion of the project. A final report shall be prepared and
submitted within 30 days following resolution of comments on the draft
report from NMFS.
The marine mammal report must contain the informational elements
described in the Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, dated May 12, 2020,
including, but not limited to:
1. Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal monitoring.
2. Construction activities occurring during each daily observation
period, including how many and what type of piles were driven or
removed.
3. Weather parameters and water conditions during each monitoring
period (e.g., wind speed, percent cover, visibility, sea state).
4. The number of marine mammals observed, by species, relative to
the pile location and if pile driving or removal was occurring at time
of sighting.
5. Age and sex class, if possible, of all marine mammals observed.
6. PSO locations during marine mammal monitoring.
7. Distances and bearings of each marine mammal observed to the
pile being driven or removed for each sighting (if pile driving or
removal was occurring at time of sighting).
8. Description of any marine mammal behavior patterns during
observation, including direction of travel and estimated time spent
within the Level B harassment zones while the source was active.
9. Number of individuals of each species (differentiated by month
as appropriate) detected within the monitoring zone.
10. Detailed information about any implementation of any mitigation
triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a description of specific
actions that ensued, and resulting behavior of the animal, if any.
11. Description of attempts to distinguish between the number of
individual animals taken and the
[[Page 41004]]
number of incidences of take, such as ability to track groups or
individuals.
12. Submit all PSO datasheets and/or raw sighting data (in a
separate file from the Final Report referenced immediately above).
In the event that personnel involved in the construction activities
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, WSDOT shall report the
incident to the Office of Protected Resources (OPR) (301-427-8401),
NMFS and to the West Coast Region (WCR) regional stranding coordinator
(1-866-767-6114) as soon as feasible. If the death or injury was
clearly caused by the specified activity, WSDOT must immediately cease
the specified activities until NMFS is able to review the circumstances
of the incident and determine what, if any, additional measures are
appropriate to ensure compliance with the terms of the IHA. WSDOT must
not resume their activities until notified by NMFS.
The report must include the following information:
1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
2. Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
3. Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the
animal is dead);
4. Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
5. If available, photographs or video footage of the animal(s); and
6. General circumstances under which the animal was discovered.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any 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, this introductory discussion of our analyses
applies to all the species listed in Table 8, given that the
anticipated effects of WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman
Dock activities involving pile driving and pile removal on marine
mammals are expected to be relatively similar in nature. There is no
information about the nature or severity of the impacts, or the size,
status, or structure of any species or stock that would lead to a
different analysis by species for this activity, or else species-
specific factors would be identified and analyzed.
Although some marine mammals could experience, and are authorized
for Level A harassment in the form of PTS if they stay within the Level
A harassment zone during the entire pile driving for the day, the
degree of injury is expected to be mild and is not likely to affect the
reproduction or survival of the individual animals. It is expected
that, if hearing impairments occurs, most likely the affected animal
would lose a few dB in its hearing sensitivity, which in most cases is
not likely to affect its survival and recruitment. Hearing impairment
that occur for these individual animals would be limited to the
dominant frequency of the noise sources i.e., in the low-frequency
region below 2 kHz. Therefore, the degree of PTS is not likely to
affect the echolocation performance of the harbor porpoise specie which
uses frequencies mostly above 100 kHz. Nevertheless, for all marine
mammal species, it is known that in general animals avoid areas where
sound levels could cause hearing impairment. Nonetheless, we evaluate
the estimated take in this negligible impact analysis.
Most marine mammal takes that are anticipated and proposed to be
authorized are expected to be limited to short-term Level B harassment
(behavioral and TTS) only. Marine mammals present in the vicinity of
the action area and taken by Level B harassment would most likely show
overt brief disturbance (startle reaction) and avoidance of the area
from elevated noise levels during pile driving and pile removal and the
implosion noise. These behavioral distances are not expected to affect
marine mammals' growth, survival, and reproduction due to the limited
geographic area that would be affected in comparison to the much larger
habitat for marine mammals in the Puget Sound. A few marine mammals
could experience TTS if they occur within the Level B TTS zone.
However, as discussed earlier in this document, TTS is a temporary loss
of hearing sensitivity when exposed to loud sound, and the hearing
threshold is expected to recover completely within minutes to hours.
Therefore, it is not considered an injury.
Portions of the SRKW range is within the proposed action area. In
addition, the entire Puget Sound is designated as the SRKW critical
habitat under the ESA. However, WSDOT would be required to implement
strict mitigation measures to suspend pile driving or pile removal
activities when this stock is detected in the vicinity of the project
area. We anticipate that take of SRKW would be avoided. There are no
other known important areas for other marine mammals, such as feeding
or pupping, areas.
The project also is not expected to have significant adverse
effects on affected marine mammals' habitat, as analyzed in detail in
the Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and
their Habitat section. There is no other ESA designated critical
habitat in the vicinity of the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman
Dock construction area. The project activities would not permanently
modify existing marine mammal habitat. The activities may kill some
fish and cause other fish to leave the area temporarily, thus impacting
marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the
foraging range. However, 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. Therefore, given
the consideration of potential impacts to marine mammal prey species
and their physical environment, WSDOT's proposed construction activity
at the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock would not adversely
affect marine mammal habitat.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from
this activity are not expected to adversely affect the
[[Page 41005]]
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival:
Injury--a few individuals of harbor seal and harbor
porpoise could experience Level A harassment in the form of mild PTS;
Behavioral disturbance--eleven species/stocks of marine
mammals could experience behavioral disturbance and TTS from the
WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock construction.
However, as discussed earlier, the area to be affected is small and the
duration of the project is short. In addition, the nature of the take
would involve mild behavioral modification; and
Although portion of the SWKR critical habitat is within
the project area, strict mitigation measures such as implementing
shutdown measures and suspending pile driving are expected to avoid
take of SRKW, and impacts to prey species and the habitat itself are
expected to be minimal. No other important habitat for marine mammals
exist in the vicinity of the project area.
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 proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted 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.
The estimated takes are below 30 percent of the population for all
marine mammals (Table 8).
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily 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.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally, in this case with the West Coast Regional
Office, whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or
threatened species.
The only species listed under the ESA with the potential to be
present in the action area is the Mexico Distinct Population Segment
(DPS) of humpback whales. The effects of this proposed Federal action
were adequately analyzed in NMFS' Biological Opinion for the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock, Seattle, Washington, dated October
1, 2018, which concluded that issuance of an IHA would not jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
destroy or adversely modify any designated critical habitat. NMFS West
Coast Region has confirmed the Incidental Take Statement (ITS) issued
in 2017 is applicable for the IHA. That ITS authorizes the take of
seven humpback whales from the Mexico DPS.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to WSDOT for conducting Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock Year 4 construction in the Seattle, Washington, between
August 1, 2020, through July 31, 2021, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are
incorporated. A draft of the proposed IHA can be found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and
any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA for the proposed
Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock Year 4 construction. We also
request at this time comment on the potential Renewal of this proposed
IHA as described in the paragraph below. Please include with your
comments any supporting data or literature citations to help inform
decisions on the request for this IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-time one-year Renewal
IHA following notice to the public providing an additional 15 days for
public comments when (1) up to another year of identical or nearly
identical, or nearly identical, activities as described in the
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
section of this notice is planned or (2) the activities as described in
the Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
section of this notice would not be completed by the time the IHA
expires and a Renewal would allow for completion of the activities
beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section of this notice,
provided all of the following conditions are met:
A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days
prior to the needed Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing that the
Renewal IHA expiration date cannot extend beyond one year from
expiration of the initial IHA).
The request for renewal must include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the
requested Renewal IHA are identical to the activities analyzed under
the initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so
minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) that the changes do not affect the
previous analyses, mitigation and monitoring requirements, or take
estimates (with the exception of reducing the type or amount of take).
(2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the
required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the
monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not
previously analyzed or authorized.
Upon review of the request for Renewal, the status of the
affected species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS
determines that there are no more than minor changes in the activities,
the mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and
appropriate,
[[Page 41006]]
and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid.
Dated: June 30, 2020.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-14617 Filed 7-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P