80 FR 36510 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Wharf Maintenance Project
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 122 (June 25, 2015)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 122 (June 25, 2015)
| Page Range | 36510-36519 | |
| FR Document | 2015-15621 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 122 (Thursday, June 25, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 36510-36519] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-15621] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD857 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Wharf Maintenance Project 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. Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only, five species of marine mammals during construction activities as part of a wharf maintenance project conducted in the Hood Canal, Washington. DATES: This IHA is effective from July 16, 2015, through January 15, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability An electronic copy of the Navy's application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained by visiting the Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Background Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals, providing that certain findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established. The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals may be allowed only if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary) finds that the total taking by the specified activity during the specified time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking must be set forth. The allowance of such incidental taking under section 101(a)(5)(A), by harassment, serious injury, death, or a combination thereof, requires that regulations be established. Subsequently, a Letter of Authorization may be issued pursuant to the prescriptions established in such regulations, providing that the level of taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under the specific regulations. Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may authorize such incidental taking by harassment only, for periods of not more than one year, pursuant to requirements and conditions contained within an IHA. The establishment of these prescriptions requires notice and opportunity for public comment. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 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.'' 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].'' Summary of Request On November 4, 2014, we received a request from the Navy for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving and removal associated with maintenance of an explosives handling wharf (EHW-1) in the Hood Canal at Naval Base Kitsap in Bangor, WA (NBKB). The Navy submitted revised versions of the request on February 27 and March 17, 2015. The latter of these was deemed adequate and complete. The Navy plans to replace four structurally unsound piles, between July 16, 2015, and January 15, 2016. The use of both vibratory and impact pile driving is expected to produce underwater sound at levels that have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals. Species with the expected potential to be present during all or a portion of the in-water work window include the Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus monteriensis), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), harbor seal (Phoca vitulina richardii), killer whale (transient only; Orcinus orca), and harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena vomerina). These species may occur year-round in the Hood Canal, with the exception of the Steller sea lion, which is present only from fall to late spring (approximately late September to early May), and the California sea lion, which is only present from late summer to late spring (approximately late August to early June). This is the third such IHA for similar work on the same structure. The Navy previously received IHAs for a two-year maintenance project at EHW-1 conducted in 2011-12 and 2012-13 (76 FR 30130 and 77 FR 43049). Additional IHAs were issued to the Navy in recent years for marine construction projects on the NBKB waterfront, including the construction of a second explosives handling wharf (EHW-2) immediately adjacent to EHW-1. Three consecutive IHAs were issued for that project, in 2012-13 (77 FR 42279), 2013-14 (78 FR 43148), and 2014-15 (79 FR 43429). Additional projects include the Test Pile Project (TPP), conducted in 2011-12 in the proposed footprint of the EHW-2 to collect geotechnical data and test methodology in advance of the project (76 FR 38361) and a minor project to install a new mooring for an existing research barge, conducted in 2013-14 (78 FR 43165). In-water work associated with all projects was conducted only during the approved in- water work window (July 16-February 15). Monitoring reports for all of these projects are available on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm and provide environmental information related to issuance of this IHA. Description of the Specified Activity Additional detail regarding the specified activity was provided in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 22477; April 22, 2015); please see that document or [[Page 36511]] Navy's application for more information. Overview NBKB provides berthing and support services to Navy submarines and other fleet assets. The Navy plans to complete necessary maintenance at the EHW-1 facility at NBKB as part of ongoing maintenance conducted as necessary to maintain the structural integrity of the wharf and ensure its continued functionality to support necessary operational requirements. The EHW-1 facility, constructed in 1977, requires ongoing maintenance due to the deterioration of the wharf's existing piling sub-structure. The planned action includes the replacement of four existing 24-in hollow pre-stressed octagonal concrete piles with four new 30-in concrete filled steel pipe piles. Existing piles will be removed using a pneumatic hammer and a crane. Vibratory pile driving will be the primary method used to install new piles, though an impact hammer may be used if substrate conditions prevent the advancement of piles to the required depth or to verify the load-bearing capacity. Sound attenuation measures (i.e., bubble curtain) would be used during all impact hammer operations. Dates and Duration The Navy's specified activity will occur only during July 16 through January 15, within the allowable season for in-water work at NBKB. This window is established by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife in coordination with NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to protect juvenile salmon. A maximum of eight pile driving days will occur, but the eight days could occur at any time during the window. Vibratory driving, as compared with impact driving or pile removal via pneumatic chipping, is expected to occur on only four total days. Impact pile driving during the first half of the in-water work window (July 16 to September 23) may only occur between two hours after sunrise and two hours before sunset to protect breeding marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus; an Endangered Species Act [ESA]- listed bird under the jurisdiction of USFWS). Vibratory driving during the first half of the window, and all in-water work conducted between September 23 and January 15, may occur during daylight hours (sunrise to sunset). Other construction (not in-water) may occur between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., year-round. Therefore, in-water work is restricted to daylight hours (at minimum) and there is at least a nine-hour break during the 24-hour cycle from all construction activity. Specific Geographic Region NBKB is located on the Hood Canal approximately 32 km west of Seattle, Washington (see Figures 2-1 through 2-3 in the Navy's application). The Hood Canal is a long, narrow fjord-like basin of the western Puget Sound. Throughout its 108-km length, the width of the canal varies from 1.6-3.2 km and exhibits strong depth/elevation gradients and irregular seafloor topography in many areas. Although no official boundaries exist along the waterway, the northeastern section extending from the mouth of the canal at Admiralty Inlet to the southern tip of Toandos Peninsula is referred to as northern Hood Canal. NBKB is located within this region. Please see Section 2 of the Navy's application for detailed information about the specific geographic region, including physical and oceanographic characteristics. Detailed Description of Activities Maintenance of necessary facilities for handling of explosive materials is part of the Navy's sea-based strategic deterrence mission, and the Navy has determined that EHW-1 structural integrity is compromised due to deterioration of the wharf's piling sub-structure. The EHW-1 consists of two 30-m access trestles and a main pier deck that measures approximately 215 m in length. The wharf is supported by both 16-in and 24-in hollow octagonal pre-cast concrete piles. Additionally, there are steel and timber fender piles on the outboard and inboard edges of the wharf (see Figures 1-1 through 1-4 in the Navy's application). The Navy plans to replace four structurally unsound 24-in hollow prestressed octagonal concrete piles, as well as performing additional repair and replacement work above water that would not be expected to result in effects to marine mammals. The piles will be replaced with four 30-in concrete filled steel piles. Piles to be removed will first be scored by a diver using a small pneumatic hammer and then removed by crane. Pile installation will utilize vibratory pile drivers to the greatest extent possible, and the Navy anticipates that most piles will be able to be vibratory driven to within several feet of the required depth. Pile drivability is, to a large degree, a function of soil conditions and the type of pile hammer. The soil conditions encountered during geotechnical explorations at NBKB indicate existing conditions generally consist of fill or sediment of very dense glacially overridden soils, and recent experience at other construction locations along the NBKB waterfront indicates that most piles should be able to be driven with a vibratory hammer to proper embedment depth. However, difficulties during pile driving may be encountered as a result of obstructions, such as rocks or boulders, which may exist throughout the project area. If difficult driving conditions occur, usage of an impact hammer will occur. Impact driving may also be used to verify load- bearing capacity, or proof, installed piles. Comments and Responses We published a notice of receipt of Navy's application and proposed IHA in the Federal Register on April 22, 2015 (80 FR 22477). During the thirty-day comment period, we received a letter from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission). The comments and our responses are provided here, and the comments have been posted on the Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. Please see the comment letters for full rationale behind the recommendations we respond to below. Comment 1: The Commission recommends that we require the Navy to use the relevant ensonified areas associated with EHW-1 activities and the unadjusted harbor seal density estimate of 9.92 rather than 7.93 seals/km\2\ to estimate the number of seals that could be taken during those activities. Response: We addressed the Commission's concern, which was previously known to us, in detail on pages 22496-22497 of our notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 22477; April 22, 2015). While the Commission makes several valid points, we disagree with the recommendation in relation to the specific context of this project. As we do with all applicants and for all proposed authorizations, we will consider all available information and the most appropriate use of that information in the context of the specified activity and in light of the Commission's position on this issue prior to proposing any future authorizations related to Navy activity in the Hood Canal. Comment 2: The Commission recommends that we require the Navy to use vessel-based observers to monitor the full extent of the Level B harassment zones, including areas beyond the port security barrier and waterfront restricted area (WRA), for impact and vibratory pile driving and pile removal to (1) determine the numbers of marine mammals taken and total number of takes during those activities and (2) [[Page 36512]] characterize the effects on those mammals, including cetaceans. Response: The Commission states that the proposed visual monitoring plan is insufficient because a significant portion of the Level B harassment zone resulting from vibratory pile driving cannot be observed from the shore-based positions reasonably available to the Navy. Expanding visual coverage of the 120-dB root mean square (rms) harassment zone (estimated at 41.6 km\2\) would require deployment of small vessels beyond the WRA, because no viable access exists to get observers onto the far shoreline and because the beach area is lost at high tide. NBKB is a nuclear weapons-handling facility with strict security protocols regarding entrance or exit from the WRA that would make deployment of small vessels impracticable for such a small-scale project (maximum of eight days). There is no available facility for housing such vessels outside NBKB. We routinely deal with actions involving very large Level B harassment zones and typically require, at most, only limited monitoring of the further reaches of such zones due to practicability concerns. Monitoring of farther reaches of such zones during a subset of activity is typically an acceptable way to understand marine mammal occurrence in the action area such that extent of incidental take may be estimated. In anticipation of the particular situation at NBKB, i.e., poor ability to readily deploy vessel-based monitors outside the WRA, we worked with Navy to develop a strong monitoring effort (including dedicated vessel-based line-transect surveys in the absence of noise-producing activity) in 2011 that was intended to inform knowledge of the occurrence of marine mammals in the far-field for multiple years of work. In context of this specified activity, we do not believe that further such effort is commensurate with the level of activity proposed and have determined it to be impracticable. Prior to proposing any future authorizations related to Navy activity in the Hood Canal, we will consider whether additional monitoring requirements are warranted. Comment 3: The Commission recommends that we require the Navy to use better methods to estimate the numbers of marine mammals taken and the total numbers of takes during EHW-1 activities rather than the extrapolation method recently used for other waterfront activities. Response: We agree with the Commission's recommendation and will consider methodological improvements in concert with the Navy and the Commission. Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity The marine mammal species that may be harassed incidental to the specified activity are the harbor seal, California sea lion, Steller sea lion, harbor porpoise, and transient killer whales. We presented a detailed discussion of the status of these stocks and their occurrence in the action area in the notice of the proposed IHA (80 FR 22477; April 22, 2015). Table 1 lists the marine mammal species with expected potential for occurrence in the vicinity of NBKB during the project timeframe and summarizes key information regarding stock status and abundance. Taxonomically, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2014). Please see NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR), available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars, for more detailed accounts of these stocks' status and abundance. The harbor seal, California sea lion and harbor porpoise are addressed in the Pacific SARs (e.g., Carretta et al., 2014, 2015), while the Steller sea lion and transient killer whale are treated in the Alaska SARs (e.g., Allen and Angliss, 2014, 2015). Table 1--Marine Mammals Potentially Present in the Vicinity of NBKB -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Stock abundance Relative ESA/MMPA status; (CV, Nmin, most Annual M/ occurrence in Hood Species Stock strategic (Y/N) \1\ recent abundance PBR \3\ SI \4\ Canal; season of survey) \2\ occurrence -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Family Delphinidae -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Killer whale......................... West coast -; N 243 (n/a; 2009).... 2.4 0 Rare; year-round transient \6\. (but last observed in 2005). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Family Phocoenidae (porpoises) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Harbor porpoise...................... Washington inland -; N 10,682 (0.38; unk >=2.2 Possible regular waters \7\. 7,841; 2003). presence; year- round. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- California sea lion.................. U.S................ -; N 296,750 (n/a; 9,200 389 Seasonal/common; 153,337; 2011). Fall to late spring (Aug to Jun). Steller sea lion..................... Eastern U.S. \5\... -; N 60,131-74,448 (n/a; \9\ 1,645 92.3 Seasonal/ 36,551; 2008-13) occasional; Fall \8\. to late spring (Sep to May). [[Page 36513]] Family Phocidae (earless seals) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Harbor seal.......................... Hood Canal \7\..... -; N 3,555 (0.15; unk; unk 0.2 Common; Year-round 1999). resident. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see footnote 3) 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\ CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For killer whales, the abundance values represent direct counts of individually identifiable animals; therefore there is only a single abundance estimate with no associated CV. For certain stocks of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals (often pups) ashore multiplied by some correction factor derived from knowledge of the species (or similar species) life history to arrive at a best abundance estimate; therefore, there is no associated CV. In these cases, the minimum abundance may represent actual counts of all animals ashore. \3\ Potential biological removal, 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 size (OSP). \4\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, subsistence hunting, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value. All values presented here are from the draft 2014 SARs (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/draft.htm). \5\ Abundance estimates (and resulting PBR values) for these stocks are new values presented in the draft 2014 SARs. This information was made available for public comment and is currently under review and therefore may be revised prior to finalizing the 2014 SARs. However, we consider this information to be the best available for use in this document. \6\ The abundance estimate for this stock includes only animals from the ``inner coast'' population occurring in inside waters of southeastern Alaska, British Columbia, and Washington--excluding animals from the ``outer coast'' subpopulation, including animals from California--and therefore should be considered a minimum count. For comparison, the previous abundance estimate for this stock, including counts of animals from California that are now considered outdated, was 354. \7\ Abundance estimates for these stocks are greater than eight years old and are therefore not considered current. PBR is considered undetermined for these stocks, as there is no current minimum abundance estimate for use in calculation. We nevertheless present the most recent abundance estimates, as these represent the best available information for use in this document. \8\ Best abundance is calculated as the product of pup counts and a factor based on the birth rate, sex and age structure, and growth rate of the population. A range is presented because the extrapolation factor varies depending on the vital rate parameter resulting in the growth rate (i.e., high fecundity or low juvenile mortality). \9\ PBR is calculated for the U.S. portion of the stock only (excluding animals in British Columbia) and assumes that the stock is not within its OSP. If we assume that the stock is within its OSP, PBR for the U.S. portion increases to 2,193. Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat We provided a detailed discussion of the potential effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat in the notice of the proposed IHA (80 FR 22477; April 22, 2015). Please see that document for more information. 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. Please see our notice of the proposed IHA (80 FR 22477; April 22, 2015) for a more detailed description of the planned mitigation. Measurements from similar pile driving events, including from previously monitored construction activity on the NBKB waterfront, were coupled with practical spreading loss to estimate zones of influence. These values were then used to develop mitigation measures for EHW-1 pile driving activities. In addition to the measures described later in this section, the Navy will employ the following standard mitigation measures: (a) Conduct briefings between construction supervisors and crews, marine mammal monitoring team, and Navy staff prior to the start of all pile driving activity, and when new personnel join the work, in order to explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and operational procedures. (b) For in-water heavy machinery work other than pile driving (using, e.g., standard barges, tug boats, barge-mounted excavators, or clamshell equipment used to place or remove material), if a marine mammal comes within 10 m, operations shall cease and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and safe working conditions. This type of work could include the following activities: (1) Movement of the barge to the pile location; (2) positioning of the pile on the substrate via a crane (i.e., stabbing the pile); (3) removal of the pile from the water column/substrate via a crane (i.e., deadpull); or (4) the placement of sound attenuation devices around the piles. For these activities, monitoring will take place from 15 minutes prior to initiation until the action is complete. Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile Driving The following measures will apply to the Navy's mitigation through shutdown and disturbance zones: Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving activities, the Navy will establish a shutdown zone intended to contain the area in which SPLs equal or exceed the 180/190 dB rms acoustic injury criteria. Modeled distances for shutdown zones are shown in Table 2. The Navy will implement a minimum shutdown zone of 29 m radius for cetaceans and 10 m radius for pinnipeds around all pile driving activity. However, no cetaceans have been observed within the floating port security barrier, which is approximately 500 m from the wharf. Disturbance Zone--Disturbance zones are the areas in which SPLs equal or exceed 160 and 120 dB rms (for pulsed and non-pulsed continuous sound, respectively). Nominal radial distances for disturbance zones are shown in Table 2. Given the size of the disturbance zone for vibratory pile driving, it is impossible to guarantee [[Page 36514]] that all animals would be observed or to make comprehensive observations of fine-scale behavioral reactions to sound, and only a portion of the zone (e.g., what may be reasonably observed by visual observers stationed within the WRA) will be monitored. In order to document observed incidents of harassment, monitors record all marine mammal observations, regardless of location. Monitoring Protocols--Monitoring will be conducted before, during, and after pile driving activities. In addition, observers will record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from activity, and will document any behavioral reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven. Observations made outside the shutdown zone will not result in shutdown; that pile segment would be completed without cessation, unless the animal approaches or enters the shutdown zone, at which point all pile driving activities would be halted. Monitoring will take place from fifteen minutes prior to initiation through thirty minutes post-completion of pile driving activities. Pile driving activities include the time to 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. Please see the Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan (available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/ and as Appendix C of the Navy's application), developed by the Navy with our approval, for full details of the monitoring protocols. The following additional measures apply to visual monitoring: (1) 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 biologists, 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; Advanced education in biological science or related field (undergraduate degree or higher required); Experience and ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic experience); 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. (2) Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone will be monitored for fifteen minutes to ensure that it is clear of marine mammals. Pile driving will only commence once observers have declared the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals; animals will be allowed to remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition) and their behavior will be monitored and documented. The shutdown zone may only be declared clear, and pile driving started, when the entire shutdown zone is visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog, etc.). In addition, if such conditions should arise during impact pile driving that is already underway, the activity would be halted. (3) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone during the course of pile driving operations, activity will be halted and delayed until either the animal has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone or fifteen minutes have passed without re-detection of the animal. Monitoring will be conducted throughout the time required to drive a pile. Sound Attenuation Devices Bubble curtains will be used during all impact pile driving. The device must distribute air bubbles around one hundred percent of the piling perimeter for the full depth of the water column, and the lowest bubble ring must be in contact with the mudline for the full circumference of the ring. In order to avoid loss of attenuation from design and implementation errors in the absence of such testing, a performance test of the device must be conducted prior to initial use. The performance test will confirm the calculated pressures and flow rates at each manifold ring. In addition, the contractor must train personnel in the proper balancing of air flow to the bubblers and must submit an inspection/performance report to the Navy within 72 hours following the performance test. Timing Restrictions In Hood Canal, designated timing restrictions exist for pile driving activities to avoid in-water work when juvenile salmonids are likely to be present. The in-water work window is July 16-January 15. Until September 23, impact pile driving will only occur starting two hours after sunrise and ending two hours before sunset due to marbled murrelet nesting season. After September 23, in-water construction activities will occur during daylight hours (sunrise to sunset). Soft Start Soft start will be required for impact and vibratory pile driving. For impact driving, contractors will provide an initial set of strikes from the impact hammer at reduced energy, followed by a thirty-second waiting period, then two subsequent reduced energy strike sets. Soft start for impact driving will be required at the beginning of each day's pile driving work and at any time following a cessation of impact pile driving of thirty minutes or longer. Vibratory soft start involves a requirement to initiate sound from vibratory hammers for fifteen seconds at reduced energy followed by a thirty-second waiting period. This procedure is repeated two additional times. However, if a variable moment hammer proves infeasible for use with this project, or if unsafe working conditions during soft starts are reported by the contractor and verified by an independent safety inspection, the Navy may discontinue use of the vibratory soft start measure. We have carefully evaluated the Navy's planned mitigation measures and considered their effectiveness in past implementation to determine whether they are likely to effect the least practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the following factors in relation to one another: (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2) the proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse impacts as planned; [[Page 36515]] and (3) the practicability of the measure for applicant implementation. Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe should be able to accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of the general goals listed below: (1) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal). (2) A reduction in the number (total number or number at biologically important time or location) of individual marine mammals exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment only). (3) A reduction in the number (total number or number at biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment only). (4) A reduction in the intensity of exposure to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing the severity of behavioral harassment only). (5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal habitat, paying particular attention to the prey base, blockage or limitation of passage to or from biologically important areas, permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary disturbance of habitat during a biologically important time. (6) For monitoring directly related to mitigation, an increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation. Based on our evaluation of the Navy's planned measures, including information from monitoring of the Navy's implementation of the mitigation measures as prescribed under previous IHAs for this and other projects in the Hood Canal, we have determined that the planned mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal 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 incidental take 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. Any monitoring requirement we prescribe should accomplish one or more of the following general goals: 1. An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, both within defined zones of effect (thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation) and in general to generate more data to contribute to the analyses mentioned below; 2. An increase in our understanding of how many marine mammals are likely to be exposed to stimuli that we associate with specific adverse effects, such as behavioral harassment or hearing threshold shifts; 3. An increase in our understanding of how marine mammals respond to stimuli expected to result in incidental take and how anticipated adverse effects on individuals may impact the population, stock, or species (specifically through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival) through any of the following methods: Behavioral observations in the presence of stimuli compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to accurately predict pertinent information, e.g., received level, distance from source); Physiological measurements in the presence of stimuli compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to accurately predict pertinent information, e.g., received level, distance from source); Distribution and/or abundance comparisons in times or areas with concentrated stimuli versus times or areas without stimuli; 4. An increased knowledge of the affected species; or 5. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of certain mitigation and monitoring measures. The Navy submitted a marine mammal monitoring plan as part of their IHA application, which can be found on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/. Similar plans have been successfully implemented by the Navy under previous IHAs issued for work conducted at NBKB. Visual Marine Mammal Observations The Navy will collect sighting data and behavioral responses to construction for marine mammal species observed in the region of activity during the period of activity. All observers will be trained in marine mammal identification and behaviors and are required to have no other construction-related tasks while conducting monitoring. The Navy will monitor the shutdown zone and disturbance zone before, during, and after pile driving, with observers located at the best practicable vantage points. Based on our requirements, the Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan would implement the following procedures for pile driving: A dedicated monitoring coordinator will be on-site during all construction days. The monitoring coordinator will oversee marine mammal observers. The monitoring coordinator will serve as the liaison between the marine mammal monitoring staff and the construction contractor to assist in the distribution of information. MMOs would be located at the best vantage point(s) in order to properly see the entire shutdown zone and as much of the disturbance zone as possible. A minimum of three MMOs will be on duty during all pile driving activity, with two of these monitoring the shutdown zones. During all observation periods, observers will use binoculars and the naked eye to search continuously for marine mammals. If the shutdown zones are obscured by fog or poor lighting conditions, pile driving at that location will not be initiated until that zone is visible. Should such conditions arise while impact driving is underway, the activity would be halted. The shutdown and disturbance zones around the pile will be monitored for the presence of marine mammals before, during, and after any pile driving or removal activity. Individuals implementing the monitoring protocol will assess its effectiveness using an adaptive approach. Monitoring biologists will use their best professional judgment throughout implementation and seek improvements to these methods when deemed appropriate. Any modifications to protocol will be coordinated between NMFS and the Navy. Data Collection We require that observers use approved data forms. Among other pieces of information, the Navy will record detailed information about any [[Page 36516]] implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, the Navy will attempt to distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the number of incidents of take. We require that, at a minimum, the following information be collected on the sighting forms: 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; and Other human activity in the area. Reporting A draft report will be submitted within ninety calendar days of the completion of the in-water work window. The report will include marine mammal observations pre-activity, during-activity, and post-activity during pile driving days, and will also provide descriptions of any problems encountered in deploying sound attenuating devices, any behavioral responses to construction activities by marine mammals and a complete description of all mitigation shutdowns and the results of those actions and an extrapolated total take estimate based on the number of marine mammals observed during the course of construction. A final report must be submitted within thirty days following resolution of comments on the draft report. Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment 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].'' All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment resulting from vibratory and impact pile driving and involving temporary changes in behavior. The proposed mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to minimize the possibility of injurious or lethal takes such that take by Level A harassment, serious injury, or mortality is considered discountable. However, it is unlikely that injurious or lethal takes would occur even in the absence of the planned mitigation and monitoring measures. Estimated take by incidental harassment was described in detail in our notice of proposed IHA (80 FR 22477; April 22, 2015) and is summarized here. The Navy has requested authorization for the incidental taking of small numbers of Steller sea lions, California sea lions, harbor seals, transient killer whales, and harbor porpoises in the Hood Canal that may result from pile driving during construction activities associated with the wharf maintenance project described previously in this document. In order to estimate the potential incidents of take that may occur incidental to the specified activity, we first estimated the extent of the sound field that may be produced by the activity and then considered those estimated sound fields in combination with information about marine mammal density or abundance in the project area. In order to determine reasonable SPLs and their associated effects on marine mammals that are likely to result from pile driving at NBKB, studies with similar properties to the specified activity were evaluated, including measurements conducted for driving of steel piles at NBKB as part of the TPP (Illingworth & Rodkin, 2012). Please see Appendix B of the Navy's application for a detailed description of the information considered in determining reasonable proxy source level values. The Navy used representative source levels (for installation of 30-in steel pipe pile) of 195 dB rms for impact driving and 166 dB rms for vibratory driving. For impact driving, 8 dB effective attenuation was assumed due to use of a bubble curtain and was therefore subtracted from the source level. Practical spreading was assumed in determining appropriate transmission loss. We assumed that vibratory pile driving could occur on any of the eight days and that sound levels associated with vibratory removal would be conservative in relation to pile removal via pneumatic chipping. Acoustic measurements for pneumatic chipping were previously performed during maintenance work at EHW-1 in 2012, with an average value of 141 dB rms measured at 10 m (RMDT, 2013). Therefore, we do not explicitly consider pile removal (via pneumatic chipping) separately from pile installation activity. Table 2--Calculated Distance(s) to and Area Encompassed by Underwater Marine Mammal Sound Thresholds During Pile Installation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Threshold Distance Area ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Impact driving, pinniped injury 6 m................ 113 m\2\. (190 dB). Impact driving, cetacean injury 29 m............... 2,630 m\2\. (180 dB). Impact driving, disturbance 631 m.............. 0.9 km\2\. (160 dB). Vibratory driving, pinniped n/a................ injury (190 dB). Vibratory driving, cetacean n/a................ injury (180 dB). Vibratory driving, disturbance 6.3 km............. 41.6 km\2\. (120 dB). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hood Canal does not represent open water, or free field, conditions. Therefore, sounds would attenuate as they encounter land masses or bends in the canal. As a result, the calculated distance and areas of impact for the 120-dB threshold cannot actually be attained at the project area. See Figure 6-1 of the Navy's application for a depiction of the size of areas in which each underwater sound threshold is predicted to occur at the project area due to pile driving. For all species, the most appropriate information available was used to estimate the number of potential [[Page 36517]] incidents of take. For harbor seals, this involved published literature describing harbor seal research conducted in Washington and Oregon, including counts and research specific to Hood Canal (Huber et al., 2001; Jeffries et al., 2003; London et al., 2012). Killer whales are known from two periods of occurrence (2003 and 2005) and are not known to preferentially use any specific portion of the Hood Canal. Therefore, potential occurrence was assumed as likely maximum group size (Houghton et al., in prep.) in concert with a nominal number of days present, in order to provide for small possibility that killer whales could be present. The best information available for the remaining species in Hood Canal came from surveys conducted by the Navy at the NBKB waterfront or in the vicinity of the project area (see Appendix A of the Navy's application). Density or abundance information, used in concert with the information provided in Table 2 and with an assumption of eight total days of pile driving and removal, is provided with authorized numbers of take in Table 3. Table 3--Number of Potential Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals Within Various Acoustic Threshold Zones ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Underwater -------------------------------- Percentage of Species Density Level B (120 stock Level A dB) \1\ \2\ abundance ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- California sea lion............................. \3\ 71 0 568 0.2 Steller sea lion................................ \3\ 6 0 48 0.1 Harbor seal..................................... 7.93 0 2,640 74 Killer whale (transient)........................ n/a 0 12 \4\ 4.9 Harbor porpoise................................. 0.149 0 48 0.4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The 160-dB acoustic harassment zone associated with impact pile driving would always be subsumed by the 120- dB harassment zone produced by vibratory driving. Therefore, takes are not calculated separately for the two zones. \2\ For species with associated density, density was multiplied by largest ZOI (i.e., 41.6 km\2\). The resulting value was rounded to the nearest whole number and multiplied by the days of activity. For species with abundance only, that value was multiplied directly by the days of activity. We assume for reasons described earlier that no takes would result from airborne noise. \3\ Figures presented are abundance numbers, not density, and are calculated as the average of average daily maximum numbers per month, and presented for the month with the highest value. Abundance numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number for take estimation. \4\ We assumed that a single pod of six killer whales could be present for as many as two days of the duration, and that harbor porpoise have the likely potential to be affected by project activities for as many as four days of the duration. Changes From the Proposed Authorization In the proposed authorization, we provided an erroneous estimate of 32.4 km\2\ for the 120-dB Level B harassment zone. That estimate has been corrected to 41.6 km\2\, as shown in Table 2. This change resulted in increased take estimates for the two species for which density, rather than abundance, is used. The authorized take number for harbor seals and harbor porpoise has been increased from 2,056 to 2,640 and from 40 to 48, respectively. We assessed these changes in relation to our preliminary determinations, and concluded that the increased numbers do not affect those determinations, described below. Analyses and Determinations Negligible Impact Analysis NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 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.'' 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 Level B harassment 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 behavioral harassment, we consider 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 the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat. Pile driving activities associated with the wharf maintenance project, as outlined previously, have the potential to disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may result in take, in the form of Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) only, from underwater sounds generated from pile driving. Potential takes could occur if individuals of these species are present in the ensonified zone when pile driving is happening, which is likely to occur because (1) harbor seals, which are frequently observed along the NBKB waterfront, are present within the WRA; (2) sea lions, which are less frequently observed, transit the WRA en route to haul-outs to the south at Delta Pier; or (3) cetaceans or pinnipeds transit the larger Level B harassment zone outside of the WRA. No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated given the methods of installation and measures designed to minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for these outcomes is minimized through the construction method and duration and the implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Specifically, vibratory hammers will be the primary method of installation, and this activity does not have significant potential to cause injury to marine mammals due to the relatively low source levels produced (less than 180 dB rms) and the lack of potentially injurious source characteristics. Impact pile driving produces short, sharp pulses with higher peak levels and much sharper rise time to reach those peaks. The entire duration of the specified activity would be eight days; given the intensity of potential effects as described below, we do not expect that such a short duration could produce a greater than negligible impact on the affected stocks. When impact driving is necessary, required measures (use of a sound attenuation system, which reduces overall source levels as well as dampening the sharp, potentially injurious peaks, and implementation of shutdown zones) significantly reduce any possibility of injury. Given sufficient ``notice'' through use of soft start, marine mammals are expected to move away from a sound source that is annoying prior to its becoming [[Page 36518]] potentially injurious. The likelihood that marine mammal detection ability by trained observers is high under the environmental conditions described for Hood Canal further enables the implementation of shutdowns to avoid injury, serious injury, or mortality. Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from past projects at NBKB, will likely be limited to reactions such as increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased foraging (if such activity were occurring). Most likely, individuals will simply move away from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the areas of pile driving, although even this reaction has been observed primarily only in association with impact pile driving. In response to vibratory driving, harbor seals (which may be somewhat habituated to human activity along the NBKB waterfront) have been observed to orient towards and sometimes move towards the sound. Repeated exposures of individuals to levels of sound that may cause Level B harassment are unlikely to result in hearing impairment or to significantly disrupt foraging behavior. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in fitness to those individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B harassment will be reduced to the level of least practicable impact through use of mitigation measures described herein and, if sound produced by project activities is sufficiently disturbing, animals are likely to simply avoid the project area while the activity is occurring. For pinnipeds, no rookeries are present in the project area, there are no haul-outs other than those provided opportunistically by man- made objects, and the project area is not known to provide foraging habitat of any special importance. No cetaceans are expected within the WRA. The pile driving activities analyzed here are similar to other nearby construction activities within the Hood Canal, including recent projects conducted by the Navy at the same location as well as work conducted in 2005 for the Hood Canal Bridge (SR-104) by the Washington State Department of Transportation, which have taken place with no reported injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long- term adverse consequences from behavioral harassment. In summary, this negligible impact analysis is founded on the following factors: (1) The possibility of injury, serious injury, or mortality may reasonably be considered discountable; (2) the anticipated incidences of Level B harassment consist of, at worst, temporary (maximum of eight days) modifications in behavior; (3) the absence of any major rookeries and only a few isolated and opportunistic haul-out areas near or adjacent to the project site; (4) the absence of cetaceans within the WRA and generally sporadic occurrence outside the WRA; (5) the absence of any other known areas or features of special significance for foraging or reproduction within the project area; and (6) the presumed efficacy of the planned mitigation measures in reducing the effects of the specified activity to the level of least practicable impact. In addition, none of these stocks are listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. All of the stocks for which take is authorized are thought to be increasing or to be within OSP size. In combination, we believe that these factors, as well as the available body of evidence from other similar activities, including those conducted at the same time of year and in the same location, demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified activity will have only short-term effects on individuals. The specified activity is not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival and will therefore not result in population-level impacts. Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, we find that the total marine mammal take from Navy's wharf maintenance activities will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks. Small Numbers Analysis The numbers of animals authorized to be taken for all stocks (other than harbor seals) would be considered small relative to the relevant stocks or populations (ranging from 0.1 to 4.9 percent) even if each estimated taking occurred to a new individual--an extremely unlikely scenario. For pinnipeds occurring at the NBKB waterfront, there will almost certainly be some overlap in individuals present day-to-day. Further, for the pinniped species, these takes could potentially occur only within some small portion of the overall regional stock. For example, of the estimated 296,750 California sea lions, only certain adult and subadult males--believed to number approximately 3,000-5,000 by Jeffries et al. (2000)--travel north during the non-breeding season. That number has almost certainly increased with the population of California sea lions--the 2000 SAR for California sea lions reported an estimated population size of 204,000-214,000 animals--but likely remains a relatively small portion of the overall population. For harbor seals, takes are likely to occur only within some portion of the population, rather than to animals from the Hood Canal stock as a whole. As described previously (see ``Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity'' in our notice of proposed authorization), established harbor seal haul-outs are located at such a distance from the project site that we would not expect the majority of individual animals comprising the total stock to occur within the affected area, especially over such a short duration (eight days maximum). Therefore, we expect that the authorized take level represents repeated exposures of a much smaller number of individuals in relation to the total stock size. Further, animals that are resident to Hood Canal, to which any incidental take would accrue, represent only seven percent of the best estimate of the larger Washington inland waters harbor seal abundance. 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 mitigation and monitoring measures, we find that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the populations of the affected species or stocks. Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated by this action. Therefore, we have determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes. Endangered Species Act (ESA) No marine mammal species listed under the ESA are expected to be affected by these activities. Therefore, we have determined that a section 7 consultation under the ESA is not required. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 [[Page 36519]] U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the Navy prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) to consider the direct, indirect and cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from the wharf maintenance project. NMFS made the Navy's EA available to the public for review and comment, in relation to its suitability for adoption by NMFS in order to assess the impacts to the human environment of issuance of an IHA to the Navy. Also in compliance with NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well as NOAA Administrative Order 216- 6, NMFS has reviewed the Navy's EA, determined it to be sufficient, and adopted that EA and signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on June 8, 2015. The Navy's EA and NMFS' FONSI for this action may be found on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. Authorization As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to the Navy for the described wharf maintenance activities in the Hood Canal, from July 16, 2015 through January 15, 2016, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. Dated: June 22, 2015. Donna S. Wieting, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2015-15621 Filed 6-24-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
![36510 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices
Dated: June 19, 2015. The incidental taking of small February 27 and March 17, 2015. The
Sarah Brabson, numbers of marine mammals may be latter of these was deemed adequate and
NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. allowed only if NMFS (through complete. The Navy plans to replace
[FR Doc. 2015–15584 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am] authority delegated by the Secretary) four structurally unsound piles,
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
finds that the total taking by the between July 16, 2015, and January 15,
specified activity during the specified 2016.
time period will (i) have a negligible The use of both vibratory and impact
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE impact on the species or stock(s) and (ii) pile driving is expected to produce
not have an unmitigable adverse impact underwater sound at levels that have the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric on the availability of the species or potential to result in behavioral
Administration stock(s) for subsistence uses (where harassment of marine mammals. Species
relevant). Further, the permissible with the expected potential to be
RIN 0648–XD857
methods of taking and requirements present during all or a portion of the in-
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring water work window include the Steller
Specified Activities; Taking Marine and reporting of such taking must be set sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus
Mammals Incidental to a Wharf forth. monteriensis), California sea lion
Maintenance Project The allowance of such incidental (Zalophus californianus), harbor seal
taking under section 101(a)(5)(A), by (Phoca vitulina richardii), killer whale
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries harassment, serious injury, death, or a (transient only; Orcinus orca), and
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and combination thereof, requires that harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), regulations be established. vomerina). These species may occur
Commerce. Subsequently, a Letter of Authorization year-round in the Hood Canal, with the
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental may be issued pursuant to the exception of the Steller sea lion, which
harassment authorization. prescriptions established in such is present only from fall to late spring
regulations, providing that the level of (approximately late September to early
SUMMARY: In accordance with the taking will be consistent with the May), and the California sea lion, which
regulations implementing the Marine findings made for the total taking is only present from late summer to late
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as allowable under the specific regulations. spring (approximately late August to
amended, notification is hereby given Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may early June).
that NMFS has issued an incidental authorize such incidental taking by This is the third such IHA for similar
harassment authorization (IHA) to the harassment only, for periods of not more work on the same structure. The Navy
U.S. Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass, than one year, pursuant to requirements previously received IHAs for a two-year
by Level B harassment only, five species and conditions contained within an maintenance project at EHW–1
of marine mammals during construction IHA. The establishment of these conducted in 2011–12 and 2012–13 (76
activities as part of a wharf maintenance prescriptions requires notice and FR 30130 and 77 FR 43049). Additional
project conducted in the Hood Canal, opportunity for public comment. IHAs were issued to the Navy in recent
Washington. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible years for marine construction projects
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘. . . an on the NBKB waterfront, including the
DATES: This IHA is effective from July impact resulting from the specified construction of a second explosives
16, 2015, through January 15, 2016. activity that cannot be reasonably handling wharf (EHW–2) immediately
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben expected to, and is not reasonably likely adjacent to EHW–1. Three consecutive
Laws, Office of Protected Resources, to, adversely affect the species or stock IHAs were issued for that project, in
NMFS, (301) 427–8401. through effects on annual rates of 2012–13 (77 FR 42279), 2013–14 (78 FR
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: recruitment or survival.’’ Except with 43148), and 2014–15 (79 FR 43429).
respect to certain activities not pertinent Additional projects include the Test Pile
Availability
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines Project (TPP), conducted in 2011–12 in
An electronic copy of the Navy’s ‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘. . . any act of the proposed footprint of the EHW–2 to
application and supporting documents, pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) collect geotechnical data and test
as well as a list of the references cited has the potential to injure a marine methodology in advance of the project
in this document, may be obtained by mammal or marine mammal stock in the (76 FR 38361) and a minor project to
visiting the Internet at: wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has install a new mooring for an existing
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ the potential to disturb a marine research barge, conducted in 2013–14
incidental/construction.htm. In case of mammal or marine mammal stock in the (78 FR 43165). In-water work associated
problems accessing these documents, wild by causing disruption of behavioral with all projects was conducted only
please call the contact listed above (see patterns, including, but not limited to, during the approved in-water work
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, window (July 16-February 15).
Background feeding, or sheltering [Level B Monitoring reports for all of these
harassment].’’ projects are available on the Internet at
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct Summary of Request
incidental/construction.htm and
the Secretary of Commerce to allow, On November 4, 2014, we received a
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
provide environmental information
upon request by U.S. citizens who request from the Navy for authorization related to issuance of this IHA.
engage in a specified activity (other than to take marine mammals incidental to
commercial fishing) within a specified pile driving and removal associated Description of the Specified Activity
area, the incidental, but not intentional, with maintenance of an explosives Additional detail regarding the
taking of small numbers of marine handling wharf (EHW–1) in the Hood specified activity was provided in our
mammals, providing that certain Canal at Naval Base Kitsap in Bangor, Federal Register notice of proposed
findings are made and the necessary WA (NBKB). The Navy submitted authorization (80 FR 22477; April 22,
prescriptions are established. revised versions of the request on 2015); please see that document or
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Jun 24, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_36632/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices 36511
Navy’s application for more 24-hour cycle from all construction overridden soils, and recent experience
information. activity. at other construction locations along the
NBKB waterfront indicates that most
Overview Specific Geographic Region
piles should be able to be driven with
NBKB provides berthing and support NBKB is located on the Hood Canal a vibratory hammer to proper
services to Navy submarines and other approximately 32 km west of Seattle, embedment depth. However, difficulties
fleet assets. The Navy plans to complete Washington (see Figures 2–1 through 2– during pile driving may be encountered
necessary maintenance at the EHW–1 3 in the Navy’s application). The Hood as a result of obstructions, such as rocks
facility at NBKB as part of ongoing Canal is a long, narrow fjord-like basin or boulders, which may exist
maintenance conducted as necessary to of the western Puget Sound. Throughout throughout the project area. If difficult
maintain the structural integrity of the its 108-km length, the width of the canal driving conditions occur, usage of an
wharf and ensure its continued varies from 1.6–3.2 km and exhibits impact hammer will occur. Impact
functionality to support necessary strong depth/elevation gradients and driving may also be used to verify load-
operational requirements. The EHW–1 irregular seafloor topography in many bearing capacity, or proof, installed
facility, constructed in 1977, requires areas. Although no official boundaries piles.
ongoing maintenance due to the exist along the waterway, the
deterioration of the wharf’s existing northeastern section extending from the Comments and Responses
piling sub-structure. The planned action mouth of the canal at Admiralty Inlet to We published a notice of receipt of
includes the replacement of four the southern tip of Toandos Peninsula is Navy’s application and proposed IHA in
existing 24-in hollow pre-stressed referred to as northern Hood Canal. the Federal Register on April 22, 2015
octagonal concrete piles with four new NBKB is located within this region. (80 FR 22477). During the thirty-day
30-in concrete filled steel pipe piles. Please see Section 2 of the Navy’s comment period, we received a letter
Existing piles will be removed using a application for detailed information from the Marine Mammal Commission
pneumatic hammer and a crane. about the specific geographic region, (Commission). The comments and our
Vibratory pile driving will be the including physical and oceanographic responses are provided here, and the
primary method used to install new characteristics. comments have been posted on the
piles, though an impact hammer may be Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
Detailed Description of Activities
used if substrate conditions prevent the permits/incidental/construction.htm.
advancement of piles to the required Maintenance of necessary facilities for Please see the comment letters for full
depth or to verify the load-bearing handling of explosive materials is part rationale behind the recommendations
capacity. Sound attenuation measures of the Navy’s sea-based strategic we respond to below.
(i.e., bubble curtain) would be used deterrence mission, and the Navy has Comment 1: The Commission
during all impact hammer operations. determined that EHW–1 structural recommends that we require the Navy to
integrity is compromised due to use the relevant ensonified areas
Dates and Duration deterioration of the wharf’s piling sub- associated with EHW–1 activities and
The Navy’s specified activity will structure. The EHW–1 consists of two the unadjusted harbor seal density
occur only during July 16 through 30-m access trestles and a main pier estimate of 9.92 rather than 7.93 seals/
January 15, within the allowable season deck that measures approximately 215 km2 to estimate the number of seals that
for in-water work at NBKB. This m in length. The wharf is supported by could be taken during those activities.
window is established by the both 16-in and 24-in hollow octagonal Response: We addressed the
Washington Department of Fish and pre-cast concrete piles. Additionally, Commission’s concern, which was
Wildlife in coordination with NMFS there are steel and timber fender piles previously known to us, in detail on
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the outboard and inboard edges of pages 22496–22497 of our notice of
(USFWS) to protect juvenile salmon. A the wharf (see Figures 1–1 through 1–4 proposed authorization (80 FR 22477;
maximum of eight pile driving days will in the Navy’s application). April 22, 2015). While the Commission
occur, but the eight days could occur at The Navy plans to replace four makes several valid points, we disagree
any time during the window. Vibratory structurally unsound 24-in hollow with the recommendation in relation to
driving, as compared with impact prestressed octagonal concrete piles, as the specific context of this project. As
driving or pile removal via pneumatic well as performing additional repair and we do with all applicants and for all
chipping, is expected to occur on only replacement work above water that proposed authorizations, we will
four total days. would not be expected to result in consider all available information and
Impact pile driving during the first effects to marine mammals. The piles the most appropriate use of that
half of the in-water work window (July will be replaced with four 30-in information in the context of the
16 to September 23) may only occur concrete filled steel piles. Piles to be specified activity and in light of the
between two hours after sunrise and two removed will first be scored by a diver Commission’s position on this issue
hours before sunset to protect breeding using a small pneumatic hammer and prior to proposing any future
marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus then removed by crane. Pile installation authorizations related to Navy activity
marmoratus; an Endangered Species Act will utilize vibratory pile drivers to the in the Hood Canal.
[ESA]-listed bird under the jurisdiction greatest extent possible, and the Navy Comment 2: The Commission
of USFWS). Vibratory driving during the anticipates that most piles will be able recommends that we require the Navy to
first half of the window, and all in-water to be vibratory driven to within several use vessel-based observers to monitor
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
work conducted between September 23 feet of the required depth. Pile the full extent of the Level B harassment
and January 15, may occur during drivability is, to a large degree, a zones, including areas beyond the port
daylight hours (sunrise to sunset). Other function of soil conditions and the type security barrier and waterfront restricted
construction (not in-water) may occur of pile hammer. The soil conditions area (WRA), for impact and vibratory
between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., year-round. encountered during geotechnical pile driving and pile removal to (1)
Therefore, in-water work is restricted to explorations at NBKB indicate existing determine the numbers of marine
daylight hours (at minimum) and there conditions generally consist of fill or mammals taken and total number of
is at least a nine-hour break during the sediment of very dense glacially takes during those activities and (2)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Jun 24, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_36632/page/2.svg)
![36516 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices
implementation of shutdowns, observed during the course of document. In order to estimate the
including the distance of animals to the construction. A final report must be potential incidents of take that may
pile and description of specific actions submitted within thirty days following occur incidental to the specified
that ensued and resulting behavior of resolution of comments on the draft activity, we first estimated the extent of
the animal, if any. In addition, the Navy report. the sound field that may be produced by
will attempt to distinguish between the Estimated Take by Incidental the activity and then considered those
number of individual animals taken and Harassment estimated sound fields in combination
the number of incidents of take. We with information about marine mammal
require that, at a minimum, the Except with respect to certain density or abundance in the project
following information be collected on activities not pertinent here, section area.
the sighting forms: 3(18) of the MMPA defines
• Date and time that monitored ‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘. . . Any act of In order to determine reasonable SPLs
activity begins or ends; pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) and their associated effects on marine
• Construction activities occurring has the potential to injure a marine mammals that are likely to result from
during each observation period; mammal or marine mammal stock in the pile driving at NBKB, studies with
• Weather parameters (e.g., percent wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has similar properties to the specified
cover, visibility); the potential to disturb a marine activity were evaluated, including
• Water conditions (e.g., sea state, mammal or marine mammal stock in the measurements conducted for driving of
tide state); wild by causing disruption of behavioral steel piles at NBKB as part of the TPP
• Species, numbers, and, if possible, patterns, including, but not limited to, (Illingworth & Rodkin, 2012). Please see
sex and age class of marine mammals; migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, Appendix B of the Navy’s application
• Description of any observable feeding, or sheltering [Level B for a detailed description of the
marine mammal behavior patterns, harassment].’’ information considered in determining
including bearing and direction of travel All anticipated takes would be by reasonable proxy source level values.
and distance from pile driving activity; Level B harassment resulting from The Navy used representative source
• Distance from pile driving activities vibratory and impact pile driving and levels (for installation of 30-in steel pipe
to marine mammals and distance from involving temporary changes in pile) of 195 dB rms for impact driving
the marine mammals to the observation behavior. The proposed mitigation and and 166 dB rms for vibratory driving.
point; monitoring measures are expected to For impact driving, 8 dB effective
• Locations of all marine mammal minimize the possibility of injurious or attenuation was assumed due to use of
observations; and lethal takes such that take by Level A a bubble curtain and was therefore
• Other human activity in the area. harassment, serious injury, or mortality subtracted from the source level.
is considered discountable. However, it Practical spreading was assumed in
Reporting
is unlikely that injurious or lethal takes determining appropriate transmission
A draft report will be submitted would occur even in the absence of the loss.
within ninety calendar days of the planned mitigation and monitoring
completion of the in-water work measures. Estimated take by incidental We assumed that vibratory pile
window. The report will include marine harassment was described in detail in driving could occur on any of the eight
mammal observations pre-activity, our notice of proposed IHA (80 FR days and that sound levels associated
during-activity, and post-activity during 22477; April 22, 2015) and is with vibratory removal would be
pile driving days, and will also provide summarized here. conservative in relation to pile removal
descriptions of any problems The Navy has requested authorization via pneumatic chipping. Acoustic
encountered in deploying sound for the incidental taking of small measurements for pneumatic chipping
attenuating devices, any behavioral numbers of Steller sea lions, California were previously performed during
responses to construction activities by sea lions, harbor seals, transient killer maintenance work at EHW–1 in 2012,
marine mammals and a complete whales, and harbor porpoises in the with an average value of 141 dB rms
description of all mitigation shutdowns Hood Canal that may result from pile measured at 10 m (RMDT, 2013).
and the results of those actions and an driving during construction activities Therefore, we do not explicitly consider
extrapolated total take estimate based on associated with the wharf maintenance pile removal (via pneumatic chipping)
the number of marine mammals project described previously in this separately from pile installation activity.
TABLE 2—CALCULATED DISTANCE(S) TO AND AREA ENCOMPASSED BY UNDERWATER MARINE MAMMAL SOUND
THRESHOLDS DURING PILE INSTALLATION
Threshold Distance Area
Impact driving, pinniped injury (190 dB) ..................................................................................................................... 6 m ............... 113 m2.
Impact driving, cetacean injury (180 dB) .................................................................................................................... 29 m ............. 2,630 m2.
Impact driving, disturbance (160 dB) ......................................................................................................................... 631 m ........... 0.9 km2.
Vibratory driving, pinniped injury (190 dB) ................................................................................................................. n/a.
Vibratory driving, cetacean injury (180 dB) ................................................................................................................ n/a.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Vibratory driving, disturbance (120 dB) ...................................................................................................................... 6.3 km .......... 41.6 km2.
Hood Canal does not represent open distance and areas of impact for the 120- sound threshold is predicted to occur at
water, or free field, conditions. dB threshold cannot actually be attained the project area due to pile driving.
Therefore, sounds would attenuate as at the project area. See Figure 6–1 of the For all species, the most appropriate
they encounter land masses or bends in Navy’s application for a depiction of the information available was used to
the canal. As a result, the calculated size of areas in which each underwater estimate the number of potential
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Jun 24, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_36632/page/7.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices 36519
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by below), and docket number (see above), CFPB has developed a portal for state
the regulations published by the by any of the following methods: users as part of its secure web portal
Council on Environmental Quality (40 • Electronic: http:// offerings (the Government Portal).
CFR parts 1500–1508), the Navy www.regulations.gov. Follow the Through the Congressional Portal,
prepared an Environmental Assessment instructions for submitting comments. congressional offices can view
(EA) to consider the direct, indirect and • Mail: Consumer Financial consumer submitted complaint data in a
cumulative effects to the human Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA user-friendly format that allows easy
environment resulting from the wharf Office), 1700 G Street NW., Washington, identification of complaints currently
maintenance project. NMFS made the DC 20552. active in the CFPB process, complaints
Navy’s EA available to the public for • Hand Delivery/Courier: Consumer referred to prudential federal regulators,
review and comment, in relation to its Financial Protection Bureau (Attention:
and complaints that are closed or
suitability for adoption by NMFS in PRA Office), 1275 First Street NE.,
archived. The Portal includes features
order to assess the impacts to the human Washington, DC 20002.
Please note that comments submitted for congressional offices to export
environment of issuance of an IHA to
after the comment period will not be selected complaint data and search by
the Navy. Also in compliance with
NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well accepted. In general, all comments company, consumer name, consumer
as NOAA Administrative Order 216–6, received will become public records, financial product and more. It also
NMFS has reviewed the Navy’s EA, including any personal information allows congressional offices to identify
determined it to be sufficient, and provided. Sensitive personal whether a named company has
adopted that EA and signed a Finding information, such as account numbers responded to a complaint and view the
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on or social security numbers, should not company closure response category.
June 8, 2015. The Navy’s EA and NMFS’ be included. Through the portal, Agencies can view
FONSI for this action may be found on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: consumer submitted complaint data in a
the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ Documentation prepared in support of user-friendly format that allows easy
permits/incidental/construction.htm. this information collection request is identification of complaints currently
available at www.regulations.gov. active in the CFPB process, complaints
Authorization
Requests for additional information referred to a prudential federal regulator
As a result of these determinations, should be directed to the Consumer and other closed/archived complaints.
we have issued an IHA to the Navy for Financial Protection Bureau, (Attention: The portal includes features for State
the described wharf maintenance PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., agencies to export selected complaint
activities in the Hood Canal, from July Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435–9575, data and search by company, consumer
16, 2015 through January 15, 2016, or email: PRA@cfpb.gov. Please do not name, consumer financial product and
provided the previously mentioned submit comments to this mailbox. more. It also allows State agencies to
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: identify whether a named company has
requirements are incorporated.
Title of Collection: Consumer responded to a complaint and view the
Dated: June 22, 2015. Response Government and company closure response category.
Donna S. Wieting, Congressional Boarding Forms. Request for Comments: Comments are
Director, Office of Protected Resources, OMB Control Number: 3170–XXXX.
invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
National Marine Fisheries Service. Type of Review: New collection
information is necessary for the proper
[FR Doc. 2015–15621 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am] (Request for a new OMB Control
Number). performance of the functions of the
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
Affected Public: State, Local, and Bureau, including whether the
Tribal Governments; Federal information will have practical utility;
Government. (b) The accuracy of the Bureau’s
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL
Estimated Number of Respondents: estimate of the burden of the collection
PROTECTION
150. of information, including the validity of
[Docket No CFFPB–2015–0028] Estimated Total Annual Burden the methods and the assumptions used;
Hours: 59. (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility,
Agency Information Collection
Abstract: The Dodd-Frank Wall Street and clarity of the information to be
Activities: Comment Request
Reform and Consumer Protection Act, collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the
AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial Public Law 111–203, Title X (the Act), burden of the collection of information
Protection. provides for CFPB’s consumer on respondents, including through the
ACTION: Notice and request for comment. complaint handling function. Among use of automated collection techniques
other things, the CFPB is to facilitate the or other forms of information
SUMMARY: In accordance with the centralized collection of, monitoring of, technology. Comments submitted in
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and response to complaints concerning response to this notice will be
(PRA), the Consumer Financial consumer financial products and summarized and/or included in the
Protection Bureau (Bureau) is requesting services. The Act further provides for request for Office of Management and
a new information collection titled, consumer complaint sharing and
‘‘Consumer Response Government and Budget (OMB) approval. All comments
reporting to Congress. To fulfill this
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Congressional Boarding Forms.’’ will become a matter of public record.
mandate, the CFPB has developed a
DATES: Written comments are portal for congressional users as part of Dated: June 18, 2015.
encouraged and must be received on or its secure web portal offerings (the Ashwin Vasan,
before August 24, 2015 to be assured of Congressional Portal). The Act further Chief Information Officer, Bureau of
consideration. provides for consumer complaint Consumer Financial Protection.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, information sharing between the CFPB [FR Doc. 2015–15569 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am]
identified by the title of the information and State and Federal agencies BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P
collection, OMB Control Number (see (Agencies). To fulfill this mandate, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Jun 24, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_36632/page/10.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-15 14:16:50
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 14:16:50
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization. | |
| Dates | This IHA is effective from July 16, 2015, through January 15, 2016. | |
| Contact | Ben Laws, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 36510 | |
| RIN Number | 0648-XD85 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR