80_FR_43861 80 FR 43720 - Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: Mukilteo Multimodal Project Tank Farm Pier Removal

80 FR 43720 - Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: Mukilteo Multimodal Project Tank Farm Pier Removal

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 141 (July 23, 2015)

Page Range43720-43739
FR Document2015-18020

Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an authorization to WSF to incidentally take, by harassment, small numbers of marine mammals for a period of 1 year.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 141 (Thursday, July 23, 2015)
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 141 (Thursday, July 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43720-43739]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18020]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XD977


Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: 
Mukilteo Multimodal Project Tank Farm Pier Removal

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request 
for comments and information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is 
requesting comments on its proposal to issue an authorization to WSF to 
incidentally take, by harassment, small numbers of marine mammals for a 
period of 1 year.

DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than August 
24, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to Robert 
Pauline, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox 
address for providing email comments is [email protected]. NMFS is 
not responsible for email comments sent to addresses other than the one 
provided here. Comments sent via email, including all attachments, must 
not exceed a 25-megabyte file size.
    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 
and will generally be posted to http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm without change. All Personal Identifying Information 
(for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the 
commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential 
Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
    A copy of the application may be obtained by writing to the address 
specified above or visiting the internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. Documents cited in this notice 
may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular business hours, at 
the aforementioned address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Pauline, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

[[Page 43721]]

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, the 
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine 
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than 
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain 
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking 
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is 
provided to the public for review.
    An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS 
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or 
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements 
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings 
are set forth. 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.''
    Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process 
by which citizens of the U.S. can apply for a one-year authorization to 
incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment, 
provided that there is no potential for serious injury or mortality to 
result from the activity. Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day 
time limit for NMFS review of an application followed by a 30-day 
public notice and comment period on any proposed authorizations for the 
incidental harassment of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of 
the comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny the authorization.

Summary of Request

    On November 6, 2014, Washington State Department of Transportation 
Ferries System (WSF) submitted a request to NOAA requesting an IHA for 
the possible harassment of small numbers of eight marine mammal species 
incidental to construction work associated with the Mukilteo Ferry 
Terminal replacement project in Mukilteo, Snohomish County, Washington. 
The new terminal will be located to the east of the existing location 
at the site of the former U.S. Department of Defense Fuel Supply Point 
facility, known as the Tank Farm property, which includes a large pier 
extending into Possession Sound (Figure 1-2 and 1-3 of the WSF IHA 
application which may be found at URL: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm). Completion of the entire project 
will occur over 4 consecutive years. WSF plans to submit an IHA request 
for each consecutive year of construction. WSF previously received an 
IHA on July 25, 2014 (79 FR 43424) which was active from September 1, 
2014 through August 31, 2015. However, the project was delayed for one 
year. The IHA application currently under review would cover work from 
September 1, 2015 through August 31, 2016. All existing pile work will 
be done under these two successive permits. Due to NMFS, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Washington State Department of Fish and 
Wildlife (WDFW) in-water work timing restrictions to protect salmonids 
listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), planned WSF in-water 
construction is limited each year to August 1 through February 15. For 
removal of the Tank Farm Pier, in-water construction is planned to take 
place between August 1, 2015 and February 15, 2016; and continue in 
August 1, 2016 to February 15, 2017 if pier removal and dredging is not 
completed during the 2015/16 work window. A new MMPA IHA application 
will be submitted for subsequent construction years for this project.
    The action discussed in this document is based on WSF's November 6, 
2014 IHA application. NMFS is proposing to authorize the Level B 
harassment of the following marine mammal species: Pacific harbor seal 
(Phoca vitulina richardsi), California sea lion (Zalophus 
californianus), Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), harbor porpoise 
(Phocoena phocoena), Dall's porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli), killer whale 
(Orcinus orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), and humpback whale 
(Megaptera novaeangliae)

Specific Geographic Region

    The Mukilteo Tank Farm is located within the city limits of 
Mukilteo and Everett, Snohomish County, Washington. The property is 
located on the shore of Possession Sound, an embayment of the inland 
marine waters of Puget Sound (see Figures 1-1 and 1-2 in the 
Application).

Description of the Specified Activity

    The Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier, which has not been used for fuel 
transfers since the late 1970s, covers approximately 138,080 ft\2\ 
(3.17 acres) over-water and contains approximately 3,900 12-inch 
diameter creosote-treated piles. Demolition of the pier will remove 
approximately 7,300 tons of creosote-treated timber from the aquatic 
environment. Demolition will take approximately ten months over two in-
water work windows. Removal of the pier will occur from land and from a 
barge containing a derrick, crane and other necessary equipment.
    Piles will be removed with a vibratory hammer or by direct pull 
using a chain wrapped around the pile. The crane operator will take 
measures to reduce turbidity, such as vibrating the pile slightly to 
break the bond between the pile and surrounding soil, and removing the 
pile slowly; or if using direct pull, keep the rate at which piles are 
removed low enough to meet regulatory turbidity limit requirements. If 
piles are so deteriorated they cannot be removed using either the 
vibratory or direct pull method, the operator will use a clamshell to 
pull the piles from below the mudline, or cut at or just below the 
mudline (up to one foot) using a hydraulic saw.
    Pile removal and demolition of creosote-treated timber elements of 
the Tank Farm Pier will take place between August 1 and February 15. 
All work will occur in water depths between 0 and -30 feet mean lower-
low water.
    The first year of construction activities for the Mukilteo 
Multimodal Project is limited to removing the Tank Farm Pier. The noise 
produced by the proposed vibratory pile extraction may impact marine 
mammals. Direct pull and clamshell removal are not expected to exceed 
noise levels that would injure or harass marine mammals. These 
extraction methods are described below.

Vibratory Hammer Removal

    Vibratory hammer extraction is a common method for removing timber 
piling. A vibratory hammer is suspended by cable from a crane and 
derrick, and positioned on the top of a pile. The pile is then unseated 
from the sediments by engaging the hammer, creating a vibration that 
loosens the sediments binding the pile, and then slowly lifting up on 
the hammer with the aid of the crane. Once unseated, the crane 
continues to raise the hammer and pulls the pile from the sediment.
    When the pile is released from the sediment, the vibratory hammer 
is disengaged and the pile is pulled from the water and placed on a 
barge for transfer upland. Vibratory removal will take approximately 10 
to 15 minutes per pile, depending on sediment conditions.

[[Page 43722]]

Direct Pull and Clamshell Removal

    Older timber pilings are particularly prone to breaking at the 
mudline because of damage from marine borers and vessel impacts. In 
some cases, removal with a vibratory hammer is not possible if the pile 
is too fragile to withstand the hammer force. Broken or damaged piles 
may be removed by wrapping the piles with a cable and pulling them 
directly from the sediment with a crane. If the piles break below the 
waterline, the pile stubs will be removed with a clamshell bucket, a 
hinged steel apparatus that operates like a set of steel jaws. The 
bucket will be lowered from a crane and the jaws will grasp the pile 
stub as the crane pulled up. The broken piling and stubs will be loaded 
onto the barge for off-site disposal. Clamshell removal will be used 
only if necessary, as it will produce temporary, localized turbidity 
impacts. Turbidity will be kept within required regulatory limits. 
Direct pull and clamshell removal do not produce noise that could 
impact marine mammals.

Dates and Duration

    The subject IHA application addresses Year One and a first month of 
Year Two. The first month of the project is covered by the existing IHA 
permit (expiring in August 2015). The new IHA would be active from 
September 1, 2015 through August 31, 2016, which allows for one month 
of pier removal if necessary in Year Two. If the rate of pier removal 
in Year One is slow enough to suggest that pier removal will continue 
beyond the first month (August) of Year Two, an additional IHA request 
will be submitted to ensure that pier removal can be completed.
    The daily construction window for pile removal will begin no sooner 
than 30 minutes after sunrise to allow for initial marine mammal 
monitoring, and will end at sunset (or soon after), when visibility 
decreases to the point that effective marine mammal monitoring is not 
possible.
    Vibratory pile removal will take approximately 10 to 15 minutes per 
pile. Assuming the worst case of 15 minutes per pile (with no direct 
pull or clamshell removal), removal of 3,900 piles will take and 
estimated 675-975 hours over 140-180 days of pile removal (Table 2-2 in 
the Application). The estimate of 180 days provides for some shorter 
pile pulling days during winter, transition time to dig out broken 
piles, and removal of decking. The actual number of days may be closer 
to 140 for pile work.
    It is likely that the actual hours of vibratory pile removal will 
be less, as the duration conservatively assumes that every pile will be 
removed with a vibratory hammer. It is likely that many will be require 
direct pull or clamshell removal if necessary, both of which are 
quicker than vibratory extraction.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    The marine mammal species under NMFS jurisdiction most likely to 
occur in the proposed construction area include Pacific harbor seal 
(Phoca vitulina richardsi), California sea lion (Zalophus 
californianus), Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), harbor porpoise 
(Phocoena phocoena), Dall's porpoise (P. dalli), killer whale (Orcinus 
orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), and humpback whale 
(Megaptera novaeangliae).
    General information on the marine mammal species found in 
California waters can be found in Carretta et al. (2013), which is 
available at the following URL: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/pacific2013_final.pdf and in Table 1 below. Refer to that document for 
information on these species. Specific information concerning these 
species in the vicinity of the proposed action area is provided below.

  Table 1--List of Marine Species Under NMFS Jurisdiction That Occur in the Vicinity of the Mukilteo Tank Farm
                                                  Pier Project
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Timing of         Frequency of
             Species                  ESA Status          MMPA Status         occurrence          occurrence
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor Seal.....................  Unlisted..........  Non-depleted......  Year-round........  Common.
California Sea Lion.............  Unlisted..........  Non-depleted......  August-April......  Common.
Steller Sea Lion................  Delisted..........  Strategic/Depleted  October-May.......  Rare.
Harbor Porpoise.................  Unlisted..........  Non-depleted......  Year-round........  Occasional.
Dall's Porpoise.................  Unlisted..........  Non-depleted......  Year-round (more    Occasional.
                                                                           common in winter).
Killer Whale....................  Endangered........  Strategic/Depleted  October-March.....  Occasional.
(Southern Resident).............
Killer Whale....................  Unlisted..........  Strategic/Depleted  March-May           Occasional.
(Transient).....................                                           (intermittently
                                                                           year-round).
Gray Whale......................  Delisted..........  Non-depleted......  January-May.......  Occasional.
Humpback Whale..................  Endangered........  Strategic/Depleted  April-June........  Occasional.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harbor Seal

    Harbor seals are members of the true seal family (Phocidae). For 
management purposes, differences in mean pupping date (Temte 1986), 
movement patterns (Brown 1988), pollutant loads (Calambokidis et al. 
1985), and fishery interactions have led to the recognition of three 
separate harbor seal stocks along the west coast of the continental 
U.S. (Boveng 1988). The three distinct stocks are: (1) Inland waters of 
Washington State (including Hood Canal, Puget Sound, Georgia Basin and 
the Strait of Juan de Fuca out to Cape Flattery), (2) outer coast of 
Oregon and Washington, and (3) California (Carretta et al. 2011).
    The Washington Inland Waters stock (which includes Hood Canal, 
Puget Sound, Georgia Basin and the Strait of Juan de Fuca out to Cape 
Flattery) may be present near the project site. Pupping seasons vary by 
geographic region. For the northern Puget Sound region, pups are born 
from late June through August (WDFW 2012a). After October 1 all pups in 
the inland waters of Washington are weaned. Of the three pinniped 
species that commonly occur within the region of activity, harbor seals 
are the most numerous and the only one that breeds in the inland marine 
waters of Washington (Calambokidis and Baird, 1994).
    In 1999, Jeffries et al. (2003) recorded a mean count of 9,550 
harbor seals in Washington's inland marine waters, and estimated the 
total population to be approximately 14,612 animals (including the 
Strait of Juan de Fuca).

[[Page 43723]]

According to the 2014 Stock Assessment Report (SAR), the most recent 
estimate for the Washington Northern Inland Waters Stock is 11,036 
(Carretta et al. 2014). No minimum population estimate is available. 
However, there are an estimated 32,000 harbor seals in Washington 
today, and their population appears to have stabilized (Jeffries 2013), 
so the estimate of 11,036 may be low.
    Harbor seals are the most numerous marine mammal species in Puget 
Sound. Harbor seals are non-migratory; their local movements are 
associated with such factors as tides, weather, season, food 
availability and reproduction (Scheffer and Slipp 1944; Fisher 1952; 
Bigg 1969, 1981). They are not known to make extensive pelagic 
migrations, although some long-distance movements of tagged animals in 
Alaska (174 km) and along the U.S. west coast (up to 550 km) have been 
recorded (Pitcher and McAllister 1981; Brown and Mate 1983; Herder 
1983).
    Harbor seals haul out on rocks, reefs and beaches, and feed in 
marine, estuarine and occasionally fresh waters. Harbor seals display 
strong fidelity for haul-out sites (Pitcher and Calkins 1979; Pitcher 
and McAllister 1981). The closest documented harbor seal haul-out sites 
to the Tank Farm Pier are the Naval Station Everett floating security 
fence, and the Port Gardner log booms, both approximately 4.5 miles 
northeast of the project site. Harbor seals may also haul-out on 
undocumented sites in the area, such as beaches.
    Since June 2012, Naval Station Everett personnel have been 
conducting counts of the number of harbor seals that use the in-water 
security fence floats as haul-outs. As of April 18, 2013, the highest 
count was 343 seals observed during one day in October 2012 (U.S. Navy 
2013). The average number of seals hauled out for the 8 days of 
monitoring falling within the Tank Farm Pier removal work window (July 
15-February 15) was 117 (U.S. Navy 2013). However, given the distance 
from the haul-out to the Tank Farm Pier, the number of affected seals 
would be less.
    Since 2007, the Everett Community College Ocean Research College 
Academy (ORCA) has conducted quarterly cruises that include monitoring 
stations within the ZOI. Marine mammal sightings data were collected 
during these cruises. During 24 cruises within the ZOI falling within 
the Tank Farm Pier removal window (July 15-February 15), the highest 
count was 13 seals observed during one day in November of 2012. The 
average number of seals observed during these cruises was 2.4 (ORCA 
2013).
    According to the NMFS National Stranding Database (2007-2013), 
there were 7 confirmed harbor seal strandings within 0.5 miles of Tank 
Farm Pier (NMFS 2013b).

California Sea Lion

    Washington California sea lions are part of the U.S. stock, which 
begins at the U.S./Mexico border and extends northward into Canada. The 
U.S. stock was estimated at 296,750 in the 2012 Stock Assessment Report 
(SAR) and may be at carrying capacity, although more data are needed to 
verify that determination (Carretta et al. 2013). Some 3,000 to 5,000 
animals are estimated to move into northwest waters (both Washington 
and British Columbia) during the fall (September) and remain until the 
late spring (May) when most return to breeding rookeries in California 
and Mexico (Jeffries et al. 2000). Peak counts of over 1,000 animals 
have been made in Puget Sound (Jeffries et al. 2000).
    California sea lions breed on islands off Baja Mexico and southern 
California with primarily males migrating to feed in the northern 
waters (Everitt et al. 1980). Females remain in the waters near their 
breeding rookeries off California and Mexico. All age classes of males 
are seasonally present in Washington waters (WDFW 2000).
    California sea lions do not avoid areas with heavy or frequent 
human activity, but rather may approach certain areas to investigate. 
This species typically does not flush from a buoy or haulout if 
approached.
    California sea lions were unknown in Puget Sound until 
approximately 1979 (Steiger and Calambokidis 1986). Everitt et al. 
(1980) reported the initial occurrence of large numbers at Port 
Gardner, Everett (northern Puget Sound) in the spring of 1979. The 
number of California sea lions using the Everett haul-out at that time 
numbered around 1,000. Similar sightings and increases in numbers were 
documented throughout the region after the initial sighting in 1979 
(Steiger and Calambokidis 1986), including urbanized areas such as 
Elliot Bay near Seattle and heavily used areas of central Puget Sound 
(Gearin et al. 1986). In Washington, California sea lions use haul-out 
sites within all inland water regions (WDFW 2000). The movement of 
California sea lions into Puget Sound could be an expansion in range of 
a growing population (Steiger and Calambokidis 1986).
    The closest documented California sea lion haul-out sites to the 
Tank Farm Pier are the Everett Harbor navigation buoys (3.0/3.5 miles 
NE), and the Naval Station Everett floating security fence and Port 
Gardner log booms (both 4.5 miles NE).
    Since June 2012, Naval Station Everett personnel have been 
conducting counts of the number of sea lions that use the in-water 
security fence floats as haul-outs. As of April 18, 2013, the highest 
count has been 123 California sea lions observed during one day in 
November 2012. The average number of California sea lions hauled out 
for the 8 days of monitoring falling within the Tank Farm Pier removal 
work window (July 15-February 15) is 61 (U.S. Navy 2013). However, 
given the distance from the haul-out to the Tank Farm Pier, it is not 
expected that the same numbers would be present in the ZOI.
    Since 2007, the Everett Community College ORCA has conducted 
quarterly cruises that include monitoring stations within the ZOI. 
Marine mammal sightings data were collected during these cruises. 
During 10 cruises within the ZOI falling within the Tank Farm Pier 
removal window (July 15-February 15), the highest count was 6 
California sea lions observed during one day in October of 2008. The 
average number of sea lions observed during these cruises was 2.8 (ORCA 
2013).
    According to the NMFS National Stranding Database (2007-2013), 
there was one confirmed California sea lion stranding within 0.5 miles 
of the Tank Farm Pier (NMFS 2013b).

Steller Sea Lion

    The Eastern stock of Steller sea lion may be present near the 
project site. The eastern stock of Steller sea lions is estimated at 
63,160 with a Washington minimum population estimate of 1,749 (Carretta 
et al., 2013). For Washington inland waters, Steller sea lion 
abundances vary seasonally with a minimum estimate of 1,000 to 2000 
individuals present or passing through the Strait of Juan de Fuca in 
fall and winter months.
    Steller sea lion numbers in Washington State decline during the 
summer months, which correspond to the breeding season at Oregon and 
British Columbia rookeries (approximately late May to early June) and 
peak during the fall and winter months (WDFW 2000). A few Steller sea 
lions can be observed year-round in Puget Sound although most of the 
breeding age animals return to rookeries in the spring and summer.
    The eastern stock of Steller sea lions are ``depleted/strategic'' 
under the MMPA and were ``delisted'' as a distinct population segment 
under the ESA on November 4, 2013 (78 FR 66140). On August 27, 1993, 
NMFS published a final rule designating critical habitat for

[[Page 43724]]

the Steller sea lion associated with breeding and haul-out areas in 
Alaska, California, and Oregon (58 FR 45269). That critical habitat 
remains in effect for the western DPS of Steller sea lions, which 
remain listed under the ESA. No critical habitat has been designated in 
Washington.
    Breeding rookeries for the eastern stock are located along the 
California, Oregon, British Columbia, and southeast Alaska coasts, but 
not along the Washington coast or in inland Washington waters (Angliss 
and Outlaw 2007). Adult Steller sea lions congregate at rookeries in 
Oregon, California, and British Columbia for pupping and breeding from 
late May to early June (Gisiner 1985).
    Steller sea lions primarily use haul-out sites on the outer coast 
of Washington and in the Strait of Juan de Fuca along Vancouver Island 
in British Columbia. Only sub-adults or non-breeding adults may be 
found in the inland waters of Washington (Pitcher et al. 2007). 
However, the number of inland waters haul-out sites has increased in 
recent years.
    Since June 2012, Naval Station Everett personnel have been 
conducting counts of the number of sea lions that use the in-water 
security fence floats as haul-outs. No Steller sea lions have been 
observed using the security barrier floats haul-out to date (U.S Navy. 
2013).
    Since 2007, the Everett Community College ORCA has conducted 
quarterly cruises that include monitoring stations within the ZOI. No 
Steller sea lions have been observed in the ZOI during these cruises 
(ORCA 2013).
    The closest documented Steller Sea lion haul-outs to the Tank Farm 
Pier are the Orchard Rocks and Rich Passage buoys near S. Bainbridge 
Island (19 miles SW), and Craven Rock near Marrowstone Island (23 miles 
NW). Haul-outs are generally occupied from October through May, which 
overlaps with the in-water work window. Any Steller sea lions near the 
Tank Farm Pier would be transiting through the area.
    There is no data available on the number of Steller sea lions that 
use the Orchard Rocks. Up to 12 Steller sea lions have been observed 
using the Craven Rock haul-out off of Marrowstone Island in northern 
Puget Sound (WSF 2010). However, given the distance from this haul-out 
to the Tank Farm Pier, it is not expected that the same numbers would 
be present in the ZOI.

Harbor Porpoise

    The Washington Inland Waters Stock of harbor porpoise may be found 
near the project site. The Washington Inland Waters Stock occurs in 
waters east of Cape Flattery (Strait of Juan de Fuca, San Juan Island 
Region, and Puget Sound).
    The Washington Inland Waters Stock mean abundance estimate based on 
2002 and 2003 aerial surveys conducted in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, 
San Juan Islands, Gulf Islands, and Strait of Georgia is 10,682 harbor 
porpoises (Carretta et al. 2011). No minimum population estimate is 
available.
    No harbor porpoise were observed within Puget Sound proper during 
comprehensive harbor porpoise surveys (Osmek et al. 1994) or Puget 
Sound Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP) surveys conducted in the 1990s 
(WDFW 2008). Declines were attributed to gill-net fishing, increased 
vessel activity, contaminants, and competition with Dall's porpoise.
    However, populations appear to be rebounding with increased 
sightings in central Puget Sound (Carretta et al. 2007b) and southern 
Puget Sound (D. Nysewander pers. comm. 2008; WDFW 2008). Recent 
systematic boat surveys of the main basin indicate that at least 
several hundred and possibly as many as low thousands of harbor 
porpoise are now present. While the reasons for this recolonization are 
unclear, it is possible that changing conditions outside of Puget 
Sound, as evidenced by a tripling of the population in the adjacent 
waters of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and San Juan Islands since the 
early 1990s, and the recent higher number of harbor porpoise 
mortalities in coastal waters of Oregon and Washington, may have played 
a role in encouraging harbor porpoise to explore and shift into areas 
like Puget Sound (Hanson, et. al. 2011).
    The Washington Inland Waters Stock of harbor porpoise is ``non-
depleted'' under MMPA, and ``unlisted'' under the ESA.
    Harbor porpoises are common in the Strait of Juan de Fuca and south 
into Admiralty Inlet, especially during the winter, and are becoming 
more common south of Admiralty Inlet. Little information exists on 
harbor porpoise movements and stock structure near the Mukilteo area, 
although it is suspected that in some areas harbor porpoises migrate 
(based on seasonal shifts in distribution). For instance Hall (2004; 
pers. comm. 2008) found harbor porpoises off Canada's southern 
Vancouver Island to peak during late summer, while the Washington State 
Department of Fish and Wildlife's (WDFW) Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring 
Program (PSAMP) data show peaks in Washington waters to occur during 
the winter.
    Hall (2004) found that the frequency of sighting of harbor 
porpoises decreased with increasing depth beyond 150 m with the highest 
numbers observed at water depths ranging from 61 to 100 m. Although 
harbor porpoises have been spotted in deep water, they tend to remain 
in shallower shelf waters (<150 m) where they are most often observed 
in small groups of one to eight animals (Baird 2003). Water depths 
within the Tank Farm Pier ZOI range from 0 to 192 m.
    Since 2007, the Everett Community College Ocean Research College 
Academy (ORCA) has conducted quarterly cruises that include monitoring 
stations within the ZOI. No harbor porpoise have been observed within 
the ZOI during these cruises (ORCA 2013). According to the NMFS 
National Stranding Database, there was one confirmed harbor porpoise 
stranding within 0.5 miles of the Tank Farm Pier from 2007 to 2013 
(NMFS 2013b).

Dall's Porpoise

    The California, Oregon, and Washington Stock of Dall's porpoise may 
be found near the project site. Dall's porpoise are high-frequency 
hearing range cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007).
    The most recent estimate of Dall's porpoise stock abundance is 
42,000, based on 2005 and 2008 summer/autumn vessel-based line transect 
surveys of California, Oregon, and Washington waters (Carretta et al. 
2011). Within the inland waters of Washington and British Columbia, 
this species is most abundant in the Strait of Juan de Fuca east to the 
San Juan Islands. The most recent Washington's inland waters estimate 
is 900 animals (Calambokidis et al. 1997). Prior to the 1940s, Dall's 
porpoises were not reported in Puget Sound.
    The California, Oregon, and Washington Stock of Dall's porpoise is 
``non-depleted'' under the MMPA, and ``unlisted'' under the ESA. Dall's 
porpoises are migratory and appear to have predictable seasonal 
movements driven by changes in oceanographic conditions (Green et al. 
1992, 1993), and are most abundant in Puget Sound during the winter 
(Nysewander et al. 2005; WDFW 2008). Despite their migrations, Dall's 
porpoises occur in all areas of inland Washington at all times of year 
(Calambokidis pers. comm. 2006), but with different distributions 
throughout Puget Sound from winter to summer. The average winter group 
size is three animals (WDFW 2008).
    Since 2007, the Everett Community College Ocean Research College

[[Page 43725]]

Academy (ORCA) has conducted quarterly cruises that include monitoring 
stations within the ZOI. No Dall's porpoise have been observed within 
the ZOI during these cruises (ORCA 2013). According to the NMFS 
National Stranding Database (2007-2013), there were no Dall's porpoise 
strandings in the area of the Tank Farm Pier (NMFS 2013b).

Killer Whale

    The Eastern North Pacific Southern Resident and West Coast 
Transient stocks of killer whale may be found near the project site.
A. Southern Resident Stock
    The Southern Residents live in three family groups known as the J, 
K and L pods. As of July 15, 2014, the stock collectively numbers 82 
individuals (Carretta et al. 2014).
    Southern Residents are documented in coastal waters ranging from 
central California to the Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia 
(NMFS 2008). They occur in all inland marine waters. SR killer whales 
generally spend more time in deeper water and only occasionally enter 
water less than 15 feet deep (Baird 2000). Distribution is strongly 
associated with areas of greatest salmon abundance, with heaviest 
foraging activity occurring over deep open water and in areas 
characterized by high-relief underwater topography, such as subsurface 
canyons, seamounts, ridges, and steep slopes (Wiles 2004).
    Sightings compiled by the Orca Network from 1990-2013 show that SR 
killer whale occurs most frequently in the general area of the Tank 
Farm Pier in the fall and winter, and are far less common from April 
through September (Osborne 2008; Orca Network 2013). Since 2007, the 
Everett Community College ORCA has conducted quarterly cruises that 
include monitoring stations within the ZOI. No killer whales have been 
observed within the ZOI during these cruises (ORCA 2013).
    Records from 1976 through 2013 document Southern Residents in the 
inland waters of Washington during the months of March through June and 
October through December, with the primary area of occurrence in inland 
waters north of Admiralty Inlet, located in north Puget Sound (Osborne 
2008; Orca Network 2013).
    Beginning in May or June and through the summer months, all three 
pods (J, K, and L) of Southern Residents are most often located in the 
protected inshore waters of Haro Strait (west of San Juan Island), in 
the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and Georgia Strait near the Fraser River.
    Historically, the J pod also occurred intermittently during this 
time in Puget Sound; however, records from 1997-2007 show that J pod 
did not enter Puget Sound south of the Strait of Juan de Fuca from 
approximately June through August (Osborne 2008).
    In fall, all three pods occur in areas where migrating salmon are 
concentrated such as the mouth of the Fraser River. They may also enter 
areas in Puget Sound where migrating chum and Chinook salmon are 
concentrated (Osborne 1999). In the winter months, the K and L pods 
spend progressively less time in inland marine waters and depart for 
coastal waters in January or February. The J pod is most likely to 
appear year-round near the San Juan Islands, and in the fall/winter, in 
the lower Puget Sound and in Georgia Strait at the mouth of the Fraser 
River.
    According to the NMFS National Stranding Database (2007-2013), 
there were no killer whale strandings in the area of the Tank Farm Pier 
(NMFS 2013b).
    The SR killer whale stock was declared ``depleted/strategic'' under 
the MMPA in May 2003 (68 FR 31980). On November 18, 2005, the SR stock 
was listed as ``endangered'' under the ESA (70 FR 69903). On November 
29, 2006, NMFS published a final rule designating critical habitat for 
the SR killer whale DPS. Both Puget Sound and the San Juan Islands are 
designated as core areas of critical habitat under the ESA, excluding 
areas less than 20 feet deep relative to extreme high water are not 
designated as critical habitat (71 FR 69054). A final recovery plan for 
Southern Residents was published in January of 2008 (NMFS 2008).
B. West Coast Transient Stock
    Transient killer whales generally occur in smaller (1-5 
individuals), less structured pods (Allen and Angliss. 2013). According 
to the Center for Whale Research (CWR 2014), they tend to travel in 
small groups of one to five individuals, staying close to shorelines, 
often near seal rookeries when pups are being weaned.
    The West Coast Transient stock, which includes individuals from 
California to southeastern Alaska, is estimated to have a minimum 
number of 243 (Allen and Angliss, 2013).
    The West Coast Transient stock occurs in California, Oregon, 
Washington, British Columbia, and southeastern Alaskan waters. Within 
the inland waters, they may frequent areas near seal rookeries when 
pups are weaned (Baird and Dill 1995).
    Sightings compiled by the Orca Network from 1990-2013 show that 
transient killer whale occurs most frequently in the general area of 
the Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier in the spring and summer, and are far less 
common from September through February (Orca Network 2013). However, 
transient killer whale occurrence is less predictable than SR killer 
whale occurrence, and they may be present at any time of the year. 
Since 2007, the Everett Community College ORCA has conducted quarterly 
cruises that include monitoring stations within the ZOI. No killer 
whales have been observed within the ZOI during these cruises (ORCA 
2013).

Gray Whale

    Gray whales are recorded in Washington waters during feeding 
migrations between late spring and autumn with occasional sightings 
during winter months (Calambokidis et al. 1994, 2002; Orca Network 
2013). The Eastern North Pacific stock of gray whale may be found near 
the project site. Gray whales are low-frequency hearing range cetaceans 
(Southall et al. 2007).
    The Eastern North Pacific stock of gray whales is ``non-depleted'' 
under the MMPA, and was ``delisted'' under the ESA in 1994 after a 5-
year review by NOAA Fisheries. In 2001 NOAA Fisheries received a 
petition to relist the stock under the ESA, but it was determined that 
there was not sufficient information to warrant the petition (Angliss 
and Outlaw 2007).
    Although typically seen during their annual migrations on the outer 
coast, a regular group of gray whales annually comes into the inland 
waters at Saratoga Passage and Port Susan (7.5 miles north) from March 
through May to feed on ghost shrimp (Weitkamp et al. 1992; Calambokidis 
pers. comm. 2006). During this time frame they are also seen in the 
Strait of Juan de Fuca, the San Juan Islands, and areas of Puget Sound, 
although the observations in Puget Sound are highly variable between 
years (Calambokidis et al. 1994). The average tenure within Washington 
inland waters is 47 days and the longest stay was 112 days (J. 
Calambokidis pers. comm. 2007).
    Sightings compiled by the Orca Network from 1990-2013 show that 
gray whales are most frequently in the general area of the Mukilteo 
Tank Farm Pier from January through May, and are far less common from 
June through September (Orca Network 2013). Table 3-6 in the 
Application presents total gray whale sightings (individual) per month 
in the area between 1990 and 2013. Sightings in Puget Sound are usually 
of a single individual, so Table

[[Page 43726]]

3-6 sightings are likely of the same individual or low number of 
individuals over a number of days that month.
    Since 2007, the Everett Community College Ocean Research College 
Academy (ORCA) has conducted quarterly cruises that include monitoring 
stations within the ZOI. No gray whales have been observed within the 
ZOI during these cruises (ORCA 2013).

Humpback Whale

    The California-Oregon-Washington (CA-OR-WA) stock of humpback whale 
may be found near the project site. Humpback whales are low-frequency 
hearing range cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007). The SAR abundance 
estimate is 1,918 individuals. (Carretta et al. 2014).
    The humpback whale was listed as ``endangered'' throughout its 
range under the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969. This 
protection was transferred to the ESA in 1973. A recovery plan was 
adopted in 1991 (NMFS 1991). The humpback whale is also listed as 
``depleted/strategic'' under the MMPA.
    Historically, humpback whales were common in inland waters of Puget 
Sound and the San Juan Islands (Calambokidis et al. 2004b). In the 
early part of this century, there was a productive commercial hunt for 
humpbacks in Georgia Strait that was probably responsible for their 
long disappearance from local waters (Osborne et al. 1988). Commercial 
hunts ended in the 1960's. Since the mid-1990s, sightings in Puget 
Sound have increased.
    This stock calves and mates in coastal Central America and Mexico 
and migrates up the coast from California to southern British Columbia 
in the summer and fall to feed (NMFS 1991; Marine Mammal Commission 
2003; Carretta et al. 2007b). Few humpback whales are seen in Puget 
Sound, but more frequent sightings occur in the Strait of Juan de Fuca 
and near the San Juan Islands. Most sightings are in spring and summer.
    Sightings compiled by the Orca Network from 1990-2013 show that 
humpback whales are most frequently in the general area of the Tank 
Farm Pier from April through June, and are far less common from July to 
March (Orca Network 2013). Table 3-7 presents total humpback whale 
sightings (individual) per month in the area between 1990 and 2013. 
Sightings in Puget Sound are usually of a single individual.
    Since 2007, the Everett Community College Ocean Research College 
Academy (ORCA) has conducted quarterly cruises that include monitoring 
stations within the ZOI. No humpback whales have been observed within 
the ZOI during these cruises (ORCA 2013).

Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that 
stressors, (e.g. vibratory hammer pile extraction) and potential 
mitigation activities, associated with the Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier 
Removal project may impact marine mammals and their habitat. The 
``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment'' section later in this 
document will include a quantitative analysis of the number of 
individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The 
``Negligible Impact Analysis'' section will include the analysis of how 
this specific activity will impact marine mammals and will consider the 
content of this section, the ``Estimated Take by Incidental 
Harassment'' section, and the ``Proposed Mitigation'' section to draw 
conclusions regarding the likely impacts of this activity on the 
reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and from that on 
the affected marine mammal populations or stocks. In the following 
discussion, we provide general background information on sound and 
marine mammal hearing before considering potential effects to marine 
mammals from sound produced by vibratory pile driving.

Description of Sound Sources

    Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are 
frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number 
of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and 
is measured in hertz (Hz) or cycles per second. Wavelength is the 
distance between two peaks of a sound wave; lower frequency sounds have 
longer wavelengths than higher frequency sounds and attenuate 
(decrease) more rapidly in shallower water. Amplitude is the height of 
the sound pressure wave or the `loudness' of a sound and is typically 
measured using the decibel (dB) scale. A dB is the ratio between a 
measured pressure (with sound) and a reference pressure (sound at a 
constant pressure, established by scientific standards). It is a 
logarithmic unit that accounts for large variations in amplitude; 
therefore, relatively small changes in dB ratings correspond to large 
changes in sound pressure. When referring to sound pressure levels 
(SPLs; the sound force per unit area), sound is referenced in the 
context of underwater sound pressure to 1 microPascal ([mu]Pa). One 
pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of one newton exerted 
over an area of one square meter. The source level (SL) represents the 
sound level at a distance of 1 m from the source (referenced to 1 
[mu]Pa). The received level is the sound level at the listener's 
position. Note that all underwater sound levels in this document are 
referenced to a pressure of 1 [mu]Pa and all airborne sound levels in 
this document are referenced to a pressure of 20 [mu]Pa.
    Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over 
the duration of an impulse. Rms is calculated by squaring all of the 
sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the square 
root of the average (Urick, 1983). Rms accounts for both positive and 
negative values; squaring the pressures makes all values positive so 
that they may be accounted for in the summation of pressure levels 
(Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often used in the 
context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because behavioral 
effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be better expressed 
through averaged units than by peak pressures.
    When underwater objects vibrate or activity occurs, sound-pressure 
waves are created. These waves alternately compress and decompress the 
water as the sound wave travels. Underwater sound waves radiate in all 
directions away from the source (similar to ripples on the surface of a 
pond), except in cases where the source is directional. The 
compressions and decompressions associated with sound waves are 
detected as changes in pressure by aquatic life and man-made sound 
receptors such as hydrophones.
    Even in the absence of sound from the specified activity, the 
underwater environment is typically loud due to ambient sound. Ambient 
sound is defined as environmental background sound levels lacking a 
single source or point (Richardson et al., 1995), and the sound level 
of a region is defined by the total acoustical energy being generated 
by known and unknown sources. These sources may include physical (e.g., 
waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric sound), biological (e.g., sounds 
produced by marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates), and anthropogenic 
sound (e.g., vessels, dredging, aircraft, construction). A number of 
sources contribute to ambient sound, including the following 
(Richardson et al., 1995):
     Wind and waves: The complex interactions between wind and 
water surface, including processes such as breaking waves and wave-
induced bubble oscillations and cavitation, are a main source of 
naturally occurring

[[Page 43727]]

ambient noise for frequencies between 200 Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). 
In general, ambient sound levels tend to increase with increasing wind 
speed and wave height. Surf noise becomes important near shore, with 
measurements collected at a distance of 8.5 km from shore showing an 
increase of 10 dB in the 100 to 700 Hz band during heavy surf 
conditions.
     Precipitation: Sound from rain and hail impacting the 
water surface can become an important component of total noise at 
frequencies above 500 Hz, and possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet 
times.
     Biological: Marine mammals can contribute significantly to 
ambient noise levels, as can some fish and shrimp. The frequency band 
for biological contributions is from approximately 12 Hz to over 100 
kHz.
     Anthropogenic: Sources of ambient noise related to human 
activity include transportation (surface vessels and aircraft), 
dredging and construction, oil and gas drilling and production, seismic 
surveys, sonar, explosions, and ocean acoustic studies. Shipping noise 
typically dominates the total ambient noise for frequencies between 20 
and 300 Hz. In general, the frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are 
below 1 kHz and, if higher frequency sound levels are created, they 
attenuate rapidly (Richardson et al., 1995). Sound from identifiable 
anthropogenic sources other than the activity of interest (e.g., a 
passing vessel) is sometimes termed background sound, as opposed to 
ambient sound.
    The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources at 
any given location and time--which comprise ``ambient'' or 
``background'' sound--depends not only on the source levels (as 
determined by current weather conditions and levels of biological and 
shipping activity) but also on the ability of sound to propagate 
through the environment. In turn, sound propagation is dependent on the 
spatially and temporally varying properties of the water column and sea 
floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of the dependence on a 
large number of varying factors, ambient sound levels can be expected 
to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial and temporal scales. 
Sound levels at a given frequency and location can vary by 10-20 dB 
from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result is that, 
depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from the 
specified activity may be a negligible addition to the local 
environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect marine 
mammals.

                          Table 2--Representative Sound Levels of Anthropogenic Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Frequency range
              Sound source                      (Hz)          Underwater sound level           References
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small vessels..........................          250-1,000  151 dB rms at 1 m........  Richardson et al., 1995.
Tug docking gravel barge...............          200-1,000  149 dB rms at 100 m......  Blackwell and Greene,
                                                                                        2002.
Vibratory driving of 72-in steel pipe             10-1,500  180 dB rms at 10 m.......  Reyff, 2007.
 pile.
Impact driving of 36-in steel pipe pile           10-1,500  195 dB rms at 10 m.......  Laughlin, 2007.
Impact driving of 66-in cast-in-steel-            10-1,500  195 dB at rms 10 m.......  Reviewed in Hastings and
 shell (CISS) pile.                                                                     Popper, 2005.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In-water construction activities associated with the project would 
consist mainly of vibratory pile extraction and direct pull of piles 
using a chain wrapped around the pile. The latter activity is not 
expected to produce sound that would approach Level B harassment. There 
are two general categories of sound types: Impulse and non-pulse 
(defined in the following). Vibratory pile driving is considered to be 
continuous or non-pulsed while impact pile driving is considered to be 
an impulse or pulsed sound type. The distinction between these two 
sound types is important because they have differing potential to cause 
physical effects, particularly with regard to hearing (Southall et al., 
2007). Please see Southall et al., (2007) for an in-depth discussion of 
these concepts.
    Pulsed sound sources (e.g., explosions, gunshots, sonic booms, 
impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically 
considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients 
(ANSI, 1986; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003; ANSI, 2005) and 
occur either as isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed 
sounds are all characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient 
pressure to a maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period 
that may include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and 
minimal pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce 
physical injury as compared with sounds that lack these features. Note 
that there is no impact driving planned as part of this project.
    Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or 
prolonged, and may be either continuous or non-continuous (ANSI, 1995; 
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals 
of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses (e.g., 
rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced 
by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or 
dredging, vibratory pile driving and removal, and active sonar systems 
(such as those used by the U.S. Navy). The duration of such sounds, as 
received at a distance, can be greatly extended in a highly reverberant 
environment.
    The likely or possible impacts of the proposed vibratory hammer 
pile extraction at the MukilteoTank Farm Pier on marine mammals could 
involve both non-acoustic and acoustic stressors. Potential non-
acoustic stressors could result from the physical presence of the 
equipment and personnel. Any impacts to marine mammals, however, are 
expected to primarily be acoustic in nature.

Marine Mammal Hearing

    When considering the influence of various kinds of sound on the 
marine environment, it is necessary to understand that different kinds 
of marine life are sensitive to different frequencies of sound. Based 
on available behavioral data, audiograms have been derived using 
auditory evoked potentials, anatomical modeling, and other data, 
Southall et al. (2007) designate ``functional hearing groups'' for 
marine mammals and estimate the lower and upper frequencies of 
functional hearing of the groups. The functional groups and the 
associated frequencies are indicated below (though animals are less 
sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of their functional range and 
most sensitive to sounds of frequencies within a smaller range 
somewhere in the middle of their functional hearing range):

[[Page 43728]]

     Low frequency cetaceans (13 species of mysticetes): 
Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 Hz and 
30 kHz;
     Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 species of dolphins, six 
species of larger toothed whales, and 19 species of beaked and 
bottlenose whales): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between 
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;
     High frequency cetaceans (eight species of true porpoises, 
six species of river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, and four species 
of cephalorhynchids): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between 
approximately 200 Hz and 180 kHz;
     Phocid pinnipeds in Water: Functional hearing is estimated 
to occur between approximately 75 Hz and 100 kHz; and
     Otariid pinnipeds in Water: Functional hearing is 
estimated to occur between approximately 100 Hz and 40 kHz.
    As mentioned previously in this document, eight marine mammal 
species (seven cetacean and two pinniped) may occur in the Icy Strait 
project area. Of the five cetacean species likely to occur in the 
proposed project area and for which take is requested, two are 
classified as low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., humpback and gray whales), 
one is classified as a mid-frequency cetacean (i.e., killer whale), and 
two are classified as high-frequency cetaceans (i.e., harbor and Dall's 
porpoises) (Southall et al., 2007). Additionally, harbor seals are 
classified as members of the phocid pinnipeds in water functional 
hearing group while California and Stellar sea lions are grouped under 
the Otariid pinnipeds in water functional hearing group. A species' 
functional hearing group is a consideration when we analyze the effects 
of exposure to sound on marine mammals.

Acoustic Impacts

    Potential Effects of Pile Driving and Removal Sound--The effects of 
sounds from pile driving might result in one or more of the following: 
Temporary or permanent hearing impairment, non-auditory physical or 
physiological effects, behavioral disturbance, and masking (Richardson 
et al., 1995; Gordon et al., 2004; Nowacek et al., 2007; Southall et 
al., 2007). The effects of pile driving and removal on marine mammals 
are dependent on several factors, including the size, type, and depth 
of the animal; the depth, intensity, and duration of the pile driving 
sound; the depth of the water column; the substrate of the habitat; the 
standoff distance between the pile and the animal; and the sound 
propagation properties of the environment. Impacts to marine mammals 
from pile driving and removal activities are expected to result 
primarily from acoustic pathways. As such, the degree of effect is 
intrinsically related to the received level and duration of the sound 
exposure, which are in turn influenced by the distance between the 
animal and the source. The further away from the source, the less 
intense the exposure should be. The substrate and depth of the habitat 
affect the sound propagation properties of the environment. Shallow 
environments are typically more structurally complex, which leads to 
rapid sound attenuation. In addition, substrates that are soft (e.g., 
sand) would absorb or attenuate the sound more readily than hard 
substrates (e.g., rock) which may reflect the acoustic wave. Soft 
porous substrates would also likely require less time to drive the 
pile, and possibly less forceful equipment, which would ultimately 
decrease the intensity of the acoustic source.
    In the absence of mitigation, impacts to marine species would be 
expected to result from physiological and behavioral responses to both 
the type and strength of the acoustic signature (Viada et al., 2008). 
The type and severity of behavioral impacts are more difficult to 
define due to limited studies addressing the behavioral effects of 
impulse sounds on marine mammals. Potential effects from impulse sound 
sources can range in severity from effects such as behavioral 
disturbance or tactile perception to physical discomfort, slight injury 
of the internal organs and the auditory system, or mortality (Yelverton 
et al., 1973).
    Hearing Impairment and Other Physical Effects--Marine mammals 
exposed to high intensity sound repeatedly or for prolonged periods can 
experience hearing threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing 
sensitivity at certain frequency ranges (Kastak et al., 1999; Schlundt 
et al., 2000; Finneran et al., 2002, 2005). TS can be permanent (PTS), 
in which case the loss of hearing sensitivity is not recoverable, or 
temporary (TTS), in which case the animal's hearing threshold would 
recover over time (Southall et al., 2007). Marine mammals depend on 
acoustic cues for vital biological functions, (e.g., orientation, 
communication, finding prey, avoiding predators); thus, TTS may result 
in reduced fitness in survival and reproduction. However, this depends 
on the frequency and duration of TTS, as well as the biological context 
in which it occurs. TTS of limited duration, occurring in a frequency 
range that does not coincide with that used for recognition of 
important acoustic cues, would have little to no effect on an animal's 
fitness. Repeated sound exposure that leads to TTS could cause PTS. The 
following subsections discuss in somewhat more detail the possibilities 
of TTS, PTS, and non-auditory physical effects.
    Temporary Threshold Shift--TTS is the mildest form of hearing 
impairment that can occur during exposure to a strong sound (Kryter, 
1985). While experiencing TTS, the hearing threshold rises, and a sound 
must be stronger in order to be heard. In terrestrial mammals, TTS can 
last from minutes or hours to days (in cases of strong TTS). For sound 
exposures at or somewhat above the TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity 
in both terrestrial and marine mammals recovers rapidly after exposure 
to the sound ends. Few data on sound levels and durations necessary to 
elicit mild TTS have been obtained for marine mammals, and none of the 
published data concern TTS elicited by exposure to multiple pulses of 
sound. Available data on TTS in marine mammals are summarized in 
Southall et al. (2007). TTS is not currently classified as an injury 
(Southall et al., 2007).
    Given the available data, the received level of a single pulse 
(with no frequency weighting) might need to be approximately 186 dB re 
1 [mu]Pa \2\-s (i.e., 186 dB sound exposure level [SEL] or 
approximately 221-226 dB p-p [peak]) in order to produce brief, mild 
TTS. Exposure to several strong pulses that each have received levels 
near 190 dB rms (175-180 dB SEL) might result in cumulative exposure of 
approximately 186 dB SEL and thus slight TTS in a small odontocete, 
assuming the TTS threshold is (to a first approximation) a function of 
the total received pulse energy.
    The above TTS information for odontocetes is derived from studies 
on the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and beluga whale 
(Delphinapterus leucas). There is no published TTS information for 
other species of cetaceans. However, preliminary evidence from a harbor 
porpoise exposed to pulsed sound suggests that its TTS threshold may 
have been lower (Lucke et al., 2009). As summarized above, data that 
are now available imply that TTS is unlikely to occur unless 
odontocetes are exposed to pile driving pulses stronger than 180 dB re 
1 [mu]Pa rms.
    Permanent Threshold Shift--When PTS occurs, there is physical 
damage (injury) to the sound receptors in the ear. In severe cases, 
there can be total or

[[Page 43729]]

partial deafness, while in other cases the animal has an impaired 
ability to hear sounds in specific frequency ranges (Kryter, 1985). 
There is no specific evidence that exposure to pulses of sound can 
cause PTS in any marine mammal. However, given the possibility that 
mammals close to a sound source can incur TTS, it is possible that some 
individuals might incur PTS. Single or occasional occurrences of mild 
TTS are not indicative of permanent auditory damage, but repeated or 
(in some cases) single exposures to a level well above that causing TTS 
onset might elicit PTS.
    Relationships between TTS and PTS thresholds have not been studied 
in marine mammals but are assumed to be similar to those in humans and 
other terrestrial mammals, based on anatomical similarities. PTS might 
occur at a received sound level at least several decibels above that 
inducing mild TTS if the animal were exposed to strong sound pulses 
with rapid rise time. Based on data from terrestrial mammals, a 
precautionary assumption is that the PTS threshold for impulse sounds 
(such as pile driving pulses as received close to the source) is at 
least 6 dB higher than the TTS threshold on a peak-pressure basis and 
probably greater than 6 dB (Southall et al., 2007). On an SEL basis, 
Southall et al. (2007) estimated that received levels would need to 
exceed the TTS threshold by at least 15 dB for there to be risk of PTS. 
Thus, for cetaceans, Southall et al. (2007) estimate that the PTS 
threshold might be an M-weighted SEL (for the sequence of received 
pulses) of approximately 198 dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s (15 dB higher than the 
TTS threshold for an impulse). Given the higher level of sound 
necessary to cause PTS as compared with TTS, it is considerably less 
likely that PTS could occur.
    Measured source levels from impact pile driving can be as high as 
214 dB rms. Although no marine mammals have been shown to experience 
TTS or PTS as a result of being exposed to pile driving activities, 
captive bottlenose dolphins and beluga whales exhibited changes in 
behavior when exposed to strong pulsed sounds (Finneran et al., 2000, 
2002, 2005). The animals tolerated high received levels of sound before 
exhibiting aversive behaviors. Experiments on a beluga whale showed 
that exposure to a single watergun impulse at a received level of 207 
kPa (30 psi) p-p, which is equivalent to 228 dB p-p, resulted in a 7 
and 6 dB TTS in the beluga whale at 0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively. 
Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of the pre-exposure level within 
four minutes of the exposure (Finneran et al., 2002). Although the 
source level of pile driving from one hammer strike is expected to be 
much lower than the single watergun impulse cited here, animals being 
exposed for a prolonged period to repeated hammer strikes could receive 
more sound exposure in terms of SEL than from the single watergun 
impulse (estimated at 188 dB re 1 [mu]Pa \2\-s) in the aforementioned 
experiment (Finneran et al., 2002). However, in order for marine 
mammals to experience TTS or PTS, the animals have to be close enough 
to be exposed to high intensity sound levels for a prolonged period of 
time. Based on the best scientific information available, these SPLs 
are far below the thresholds that could cause TTS or the onset of PTS.
    Non-auditory Physiological Effects--Non-auditory physiological 
effects or injuries that theoretically might occur in marine mammals 
exposed to strong underwater sound include stress, neurological 
effects, bubble formation, resonance effects, and other types of organ 
or tissue damage (Cox et al., 2006; Southall et al., 2007). Studies 
examining such effects are limited. In general, little is known about 
the potential for pile driving to cause auditory impairment or other 
physical effects in marine mammals. Available data suggest that such 
effects, if they occur at all, would presumably be limited to short 
distances from the sound source and to activities that extend over a 
prolonged period. The available data do not allow identification of a 
specific exposure level above which non-auditory effects can be 
expected (Southall et al., 2007) or any meaningful quantitative 
predictions of the numbers (if any) of marine mammals that might be 
affected in those ways. Marine mammals that show behavioral avoidance 
of pile driving, including some odontocetes and some pinnipeds, are 
especially unlikely to incur auditory impairment or non-auditory 
physical effects.

Disturbance Reactions

    Disturbance includes a variety of effects, including subtle changes 
in behavior, more conspicuous changes in activities, and displacement. 
Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-specific 
and reactions, if any, depend on species, state of maturity, 
experience, current activity, reproductive state, auditory sensitivity, 
time of day, and many other factors (Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok 
et al., 2003; Southall et al., 2007).
    Habituation can occur when an animal's response to a stimulus wanes 
with repeated exposure, usually in the absence of unpleasant associated 
events (Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most likely to habituate to 
sounds that are predictable and unvarying. The opposite process is 
sensitization, when an unpleasant experience leads to subsequent 
responses, often in the form of avoidance, at a lower level of 
exposure. Behavioral state may affect the type of response as well. For 
example, animals that are resting may show greater behavioral change in 
response to disturbing sound levels than animals that are highly 
motivated to remain in an area for feeding (Richardson et al., 1995; 
NRC, 2003; Wartzok et al., 2003).
    Controlled experiments with captive marine mammals showed 
pronounced behavioral reactions, including avoidance of loud sound 
sources (Ridgway et al., 1997; Finneran et al., 2003). Observed 
responses of wild marine mammals to loud pulsed sound sources 
(typically seismic guns or acoustic harassment devices, but also 
including pile driving) have been varied but often consist of avoidance 
behavior or other behavioral changes suggesting discomfort (Morton and 
Symonds, 2002; Thorson and Reyff, 2006; see also Gordon et al., 2004; 
Wartzok et al., 2003; Nowacek et al., 2007). Responses to continuous 
sound, such as vibratory pile installation and removal, have not been 
documented as well as responses to pulsed sounds.
    With both types of pile driving, it is likely that the onset of 
pile driving could result in temporary, short term changes in an 
animal's typical behavior and/or avoidance of the affected area. These 
behavioral changes may include (Richardson et al., 1995): Changing 
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or 
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities; 
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as 
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive 
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of 
areas where sound sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g., 
pinnipeds flushing into water from haul-outs or rookeries). Pinnipeds 
may increase their haul-out time, possibly to avoid in-water 
disturbance (Thorson and Reyff, 2006).
    The biological significance of many of these behavioral 
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected 
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral 
modification could include effects on growth, survival, or 
reproduction. Significant behavioral modifications that could 
potentially lead to effects on growth, survival, or reproduction 
include:

[[Page 43730]]

     Drastic changes in diving/surfacing patterns;
     Habitat abandonment due to loss of desirable acoustic 
environment; and
     Cessation of feeding or social interaction.
    The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic sound 
depends on both external factors (characteristics of sound sources and 
their paths) and the specific characteristics of the receiving animals 
(hearing, motivation, experience, demography) and is difficult to 
predict (Southall et al., 2007).
    Auditory Masking--Natural and artificial sounds can disrupt 
behavior by masking, or interfering with, a marine mammal's ability to 
hear other sounds. Masking occurs when the receipt of a sound is 
interfered with by another coincident sound at similar frequencies and 
at similar or higher levels. Chronic exposure to excessive, though not 
high-intensity, sound could cause masking at particular frequencies for 
marine mammals that utilize sound for vital biological functions. 
Masking can interfere with detection of acoustic signals such as 
communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds 
important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain circumstances, 
marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment are being 
severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their 
performance fitness in survival and reproduction. If the coincident 
(masking) sound were anthropogenic, it could be potentially harassing 
if it disrupted hearing-related behavior. It is important to 
distinguish TTS and PTS, which persist after the sound exposure, from 
masking, which occurs only during the sound exposure. Because masking 
(without resulting in TS) is not associated with abnormal physiological 
function, it is not considered a physiological effect, but rather a 
potential behavioral effect.
    Masking occurs at the frequency band which the animals utilize so 
the frequency range of the potentially masking sound is important in 
determining any potential behavioral impacts. Because sound generated 
from in-water vibratory pile driving and removal is mostly concentrated 
at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect on high frequency 
echolocation sounds made by porpoises. However, lower frequency man-
made sounds are more likely to affect detection of communication calls 
and other potentially important natural sounds such as surf and prey 
sound. It may also affect communication signals when they occur near 
the sound band and thus reduce the communication space of animals 
(e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., 
Foote et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009).
    Masking has the potential to impact species at the population or 
community levels as well as at individual levels. Masking affects both 
senders and receivers of the signals and can potentially have long-term 
chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent 
research suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have 
increased by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms of SPL) 
in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and that most of 
these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). All 
anthropogenic sound sources, such as those from vessel traffic, pile 
driving, and dredging activities, contribute to the elevated ambient 
sound levels, thus intensifying masking.
    Vibratory pile driving and removal is relatively short-term, with 
rapid oscillations occurring for 10 to 30 minutes per installed or 
removed pile. It is possible that vibratory driving and removal 
resulting from this proposed action may mask acoustic signals important 
to the behavior and survival of marine mammal species, but the short-
term duration and limited affected area would result in insignificant 
impacts from masking. Any masking event that could possibly rise to 
Level B harassment under the MMPA would occur concurrently within the 
zones of behavioral harassment already estimated for vibratory pile 
driving, and which have already been taken into account in the exposure 
analysis.
    Acoustic Effects, Airborne--Marine mammals that occur in the 
project area could be exposed to airborne sounds associated with pile 
removal that have the potential to cause harassment, depending on their 
distance from pile driving activities. Airborne pile removal sound 
would have less impact on cetaceans than pinnipeds because sound from 
atmospheric sources does not transmit well underwater (Richardson et 
al., 1995); thus, airborne sound would only be an issue for pinnipeds 
either hauled-out or looking with heads above water in the project 
area. Most likely, airborne sound would cause behavioral responses 
similar to those discussed above in relation to underwater sound. For 
instance, anthropogenic sound could cause hauled-out pinnipeds to 
exhibit changes in their normal behavior, such as reduction in 
vocalizations, or cause them to temporarily abandon their habitat and 
move further from the source. Studies by Blackwell et al. (2004) and 
Moulton et al. (2005) indicate a tolerance or lack of response to 
unweighted airborne sounds as high as 112 dB peak and 96 dB rm.

Vessel Interaction

    Besides being susceptible to vessel strikes, cetacean and pinniped 
responses to vessels may result in behavioral changes, including 
greater variability in the dive, surfacing, and respiration patterns; 
changes in vocalizations; and changes in swimming speed or direction 
(NRC 2003). There will be a temporary and localized increase in vessel 
traffic during construction. At least one work barge will be present at 
any time during the in-water and over water work.

Potential Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat

    The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are 
associated with elevated sound levels produced by vibratory pile 
removal. However, other potential impacts to the surrounding habitat 
from physical disturbance are also possible.
    Potential Pile Driving and Removal Effects on Prey--With regard to 
fish as a prey source for cetaceans and pinnipeds, fish are known to 
hear and react to sounds and to use sound to communicate (Tavolga et 
al., 1981) and possibly avoid predators (Wilson and Dill, 2002). 
Experiments have shown that fish can sense both the strength and 
direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors determining whether 
a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially react to it, are the 
frequency of the signal and the strength of the signal in relation to 
the natural background noise level.
    The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior 
is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to 
react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the 
detection level of 120 dB; however, the response threshold can depend 
on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition (Engas et 
al., 1996). In general, fish react more strongly to pulses of sound 
rather than non-pulse signals (such as noise from vessels) (Blaxter et 
al., 1981), and a quicker alarm response is elicited when the sound 
signal intensity rises rapidly compared to sound rising more slowly to 
the same level.
    Further, during the coastal construction only a small fraction of 
the available habitat would be ensonified at any given time. 
Disturbance to fish species would be short-term and fish would return 
to their pre-disturbance behavior once the pile driving activity 
ceases. Thus, the proposed construction would have little, if any, 
impact on the

[[Page 43731]]

abilities of marine mammals to feed in the area where construction work 
is planned.
    Finally, the time of the proposed construction activity would avoid 
the spawning season of the ESA-listed salmonid species.
    Effects to Foraging Habitat--Short-term turbidity is a water 
quality effect of most in-water work, including pile removal. WSF must 
comply with state water quality standards during these operations by 
limiting the extent of turbidity to the immediate project area. Roni 
and Weitkamp (1996) monitored water quality parameters during a pier 
replacement project in Manchester, Washington. The study measured water 
quality before, during and after pile removal and driving. The study 
found that construction activity at the site had ``little or no effect 
on dissolved oxygen, water temperature and salinity'', and turbidity 
(measured in nephelometric turbidity units [NTU]) at all depths nearest 
the construction activity was typically less than 1 NTU higher than 
stations farther from the project area throughout construction.
    Similar results were recorded during pile removal operations at two 
WSF ferry facilities. At the Friday Harbor terminal, localized 
turbidity levels within the regulatory compliance radius of 150 feet 
(from three timber pile removal events) were generally less than 0.5 
NTU higher than background levels and never exceeded 1 NTU. At the 
Eagle Harbor maintenance facility, within 150 feet, local turbidity 
levels (from removal of timber and steel piles) did not exceed 0.2 NTU 
above background levels (WSF 2012). In general, turbidity associated 
with pile installation is localized to about a 25-foot radius around 
the pile (Everitt et al., 1980).
    Cetaceans are not expected to be close enough to the Tank Farm Pier 
to experience turbidity, and any pinnipeds will be transiting the area 
and could avoid localized turbidity. Therefore, the impact from 
increased turbidity levels is expected to be discountable to marine 
mammals.
    Removal of the Tank Farm Pier will result in 3,900 creosote-treated 
piles (~7,300 tons) removed from the marine environment. This will 
result in temporary and localized sediment re-suspension of some of the 
contaminants associated with creosote, such as polycyclic aromatic 
hydrocarbons.
    However, the removal of the creosote-treated wood piles from the 
marine environment will result in a long-term improvement in water and 
sediment quality, meeting the goals of WSF's Creosote Removal 
Initiative started in 2000. The net impact is a benefit to marine 
organisms, especially toothed whales and pinnipeds that are high on the 
food chain and bioaccumulate these toxins. This is especially a concern 
for long-lived species that spend much of their life in Puget Sound, 
such as Southern Resident killer whales (NMFS 2008).

Proposed Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to 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. For the proposed project, WSF worked with NMFS and 
proposed the following mitigation measures to minimize the potential 
impacts to marine mammals in the project vicinity. The primary purposes 
of these mitigation measures are to minimize sound levels from the 
activities, and to monitor marine mammals within designated zones of 
influence corresponding to NMFS' current Level A and B harassment 
thresholds which are depicted in Table 3 found later in the Estimated 
Take by Incidental Harassment section.

Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile Driving

    The following measures would apply to WSF's mitigation through 
shutdown and disturbance zones:
    Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving activities, WSF will establish 
a shutdown zone. Shutdown zones are typically used to contain the area 
in which SPLs equal or exceed the 180/190 dB rms acoustic injury 
criteria for cetaceans and pinnipeds, respectively, with the purpose 
being to define an area within which shutdown of activity would occur 
upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal 
entering the defined area), thus preventing injury of marine mammals. 
For vibratory driving, WSF's activities are not expected to produce 
sound at or above the 180 dB rms injury criterion (see ``Estimated Take 
by Incidental Harassment''). WSF would, however, implement a minimum 
shutdown zone of 10 m radius for all marine mammals around all 
vibratory extraction activity. This precautionary measure is intended 
to further reduce the unlikely possibility of injury from direct 
physical interaction with construction operations.
    Disturbance Zone Monitoring--WSF will establish disturbance zones 
corresponding to the areas in which SPLs equal or exceed 122 dB rms 
(Level B harassment threshold for continuous sound) for pile driving 
installation and removal. The disturbance zones will provide utility 
for monitoring conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone 
monitoring) by establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to 
the shutdown zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones will enable 
observers to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals 
in the project area but outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for 
potential shutdowns of activity. However, the primary purpose of 
disturbance zone monitoring will be to document incidents of Level B 
harassment; disturbance zone monitoring is discussed in greater detail 
later (see ``Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
    Ramp Up (Soft Start)--Vibratory hammer use for pile removal and 
pile driving shall be initiated at reduced power for 15 seconds with a 
1 minute interval, and be repeated with this procedure for an 
additional two times. This will allow marine mammals to move away from 
the sound source.
    Time Restrictions--Work would occur only during daylight hours, 
when visual monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted. In addition, 
all in-water construction will be limited to the period between August 
1, 2015 and February 15, 2016; and continue in August 1, 2016 until IHA 
expires on August 31, 2016.
    Southern Resident Killer Whale--The following steps will be 
implemented for southern resident killer whales to avoid or minimize 
take (see Appendix B of the application--Monitoring Plan):
    [ssquf] If Southern Residents approach the zone of influence (ZOI) 
during vibratory pile removal, work will be paused until the Southern 
Residents exit the ZOI. The ZOI is the area co-extensive with the Level 
A and Level B harassment zones.
    [ssquf] If killer whales approach the ZOI during vibratory pile 
removal, and it is unknown whether they are Southern Resident killer 
whales or transients, it shall be assumed they are Southern Residents 
and work will be paused until the whales exit the ZOI.
    [ssquf] If Southern Residents enter the ZOI before they are 
detected, work will be paused until the Southern Residents exit the ZOI 
to avoid further Level B harassment take.

Mitigation Conclusions

    NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation in 
the context of ensuring that NMFS

[[Page 43732]]

prescribes the means of effecting 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:
     The manner in which, and the degree to which, the 
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize 
adverse impacts to marine mammals.
     The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to 
minimize adverse impacts as planned.
     The practicability of the measure for applicant 
implementation.
    Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS 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 numbers of marine mammals (total number or 
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to received 
levels of pile driving, or other activities expected to result in the 
take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to 
reducing harassment takes only).
    3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed 
to received levels of pile removal, or other activities expected to 
result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, 
above, or to reducing harassment takes only).
    4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number 
or number at biologically important time or location) to received 
levels of pile driving, or other activities expected to result in the 
take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to a, above, or to 
reducing the severity of harassment takes only).
    5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal 
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that 
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas, 
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/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 applicant's proposed measures, as 
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily 
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of 
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals species or 
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, 
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an ITA 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 ITAs 
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.

Proposed Monitoring Measures

    The monitoring plan proposed by WSF can be found in its IHA 
application. The plan may be modified or supplemented based on comments 
or new information received from the public during the public comment 
period. A summary of the primary components of the plan follows.
(1) Marine Mammal Monitoring Coordination
    WSF would conduct briefings between the construction supervisors 
and the crew and protected species observers (PSOs) prior to the start 
of pile-driving activity, marine mammal monitoring protocol and 
operational procedures.
    Prior to the start of pile driving, the Orca Network and/or Center 
for Whale Research would be contacted to find out the location of the 
nearest marine mammal sightings. The Orca Sightings Network consists of 
a list of over 600 (and growing) residents, scientists, and government 
agency personnel in the U.S. and Canada. Sightings are called or 
emailed into the Orca Network and immediately distributed to other 
sighting networks including: The NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science 
Center, the Center for Whale Research, Cascadia Research, the Whale 
Museum Hotline and the British Columbia Sightings Network.
    Sighting information collected by the Orca Network includes 
detection by hydrophone. The SeaSound Remote Sensing Network is a 
system of interconnected hydrophones installed in the marine 
environment of Haro Strait (west side of San Juan Island) to study 
killer whale communication, in-water noise, bottom fish ecology and 
local climatic conditions. A hydrophone at the Port Townsend Marine 
Science Center measures average in-water sound levels and automatically 
detects unusual sounds. These passive acoustic devices allow 
researchers to hear when different marine mammals come into the region. 
This acoustic network, combined with the volunteer (incidental) visual 
sighting network allows researchers to document presence and location 
of various marine mammal species.
    With this level of coordination in the region of activity, WSF will 
be able to get real-time information on the presence or absence of 
whales before starting any pile removal or driving.
(2) Protected Species Observers (PSOs)
    WSF will employ qualified PSOs to monitor the 122 dBrms 
re 1 [mu]Pa for marine mammals. Qualifications for marine mammal 
observers include:
     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 
will be necessary to correctly identify the target.
     Advanced education in biological science, wildlife 
management, mammalogy or related fields (Bachelor's degree or higher is 
preferred), but not required.
     Experience or training in the field identification of 
marine mammals (cetaceans and pinnipeds).
     Sufficient training, orientation or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations.
     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.
     Experience and ability to conduct field observations and 
collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic 
experience).
     Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of 
observations that would include such information as the number and type 
of marine mammals observed; the behavior of marine mammals in the 
project area during construction, dates and times when observations 
were conducted; dates and times when in-

[[Page 43733]]

water construction activities were conducted; and dates and times when 
marine mammals were present at or within the defined ZOI.
(3) Monitoring Protocols
    PSOs would be present on site at all times during pile removal and 
driving. Marine mammal behavior, overall numbers of individuals 
observed, frequency of observation, and the time corresponding to the 
daily tidal cycle would be recorded.
    WSF proposes the following methodology to estimate marine mammals 
that were taken as a result of the proposed Mukilteo Multimodal Tank 
Farm Pier removal project:
     During vibratory pile removal, two land-based biologists 
will monitor the area from the best observation points available. If 
weather conditions prevent adequate land-based observations, boat-based 
monitoring may be implemented.
     To verify the required monitoring distance, the vibratory 
Level B behavioral harassment ZOI will be determined by using a range 
finder or hand-held global positioning system device.
     The vibratory Level B acoustical harassment ZOI will be 
monitored for the presence of marine mammals 30 minutes before, during, 
and 30 minutes after any pile removal activity.
     Monitoring will be continuous unless the contractor takes 
a significant break, in which case, monitoring will be required 30 
minutes prior to restarting pile removal.
     If marine mammals are observed, their location within the 
ZOI, and their reaction (if any) to pile-driving activities will be 
documented.
    NMFS has reviewed the WSF's proposed marine mammal monitoring 
protocol, and has preliminarily determined the applicant's monitoring 
program is adequate, particularly as it relates to assessing the level 
of taking or impacts to affected species. The land-based PSO is 
expected to be positioned in a location that will maximize his/her 
ability to detect marine mammals and will also utilize binoculars to 
improve detection rates. NMFS has reviewed the WSF's proposed marine 
mammal monitoring protocol, and has determined the applicant's 
monitoring program is adequate, particularly as it relates to assessing 
the level of taking or impacts to affected species. The land-based PSO 
is expected to be positioned in a location that will maximize his/her 
ability to detect marine mammals and will also utilize binoculars to 
improve detection rates.

Proposed Reporting Measures

    WSF would provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within 90 
days of the conclusion of the proposed construction work. This report 
will detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during 
monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have 
been harassed.
    If comments are received from the NMFS Northwest Regional 
Administrator or NMFS Office of Protected Resources on the draft 
report, a final report will be submitted to NMFS within 30 days 
thereafter. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft report 
will be considered to be the final 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 pile removal and are likely to involve temporary changes in 
behavior. Injurious or lethal takes are not expected due to the 
expected source levels and sound source characteristics associated with 
the activity, and the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures are 
expected to further minimize the possibility of such take.
    If a marine mammal responds to a stimulus by changing its behavior 
(e.g., through relatively minor changes in locomotion direction/speed 
or vocalization behavior), the response may or may not constitute 
taking at the individual level, and is unlikely to affect the stock or 
the species as a whole. However, if a sound source displaces marine 
mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for a prolonged 
period, impacts on animals or on the stock or species could potentially 
be significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007). Given 
the many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types of impacts 
of sound on marine mammals, it is common practice to estimate how many 
animals are likely to be present within a particular distance of a 
given activity, or exposed to a particular level of sound.
    WSF has requested authorization for the incidental taking of small 
numbers of humpback whale, Steller sea lion, California sea lion, 
Dall's porpoise, gray whale, harbor porpoise and killer whale near the 
Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier that may result from vibratory pile extraction 
activities.
    In order to estimate the potential incidents of take that may occur 
incidental to the specified activity, we must first estimate the extent 
of the sound field that may be produced by the activity and then 
consider in combination with information about marine mammal density or 
abundance in the project area. We first provide information on 
applicable sound thresholds for determining effects to marine mammals 
before describing the information used in estimating the sound fields, 
the available marine mammal density or abundance information, and the 
method of estimating potential incidences of take.

Sound Thresholds

    We use generic sound exposure thresholds to determine when an 
activity that produces sound might result in impacts to a marine mammal 
such that a take by harassment might occur. To date, no studies have 
been conducted that explicitly examine impacts to marine mammals from 
pile driving sounds or from which empirical sound thresholds have been 
established. These thresholds (Table 3) are used to estimate when 
harassment may occur (i.e., when an animal is exposed to levels equal 
to or exceeding the relevant criterion) in specific contexts; however, 
useful contextual information that may inform our assessment of 
behavioral effects is typically lacking and we consider these 
thresholds as step functions. NMFS is working to revise these acoustic 
guidelines; for more information on that process, please visit 
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.

[[Page 43734]]



             Table 3--Underwater Injury and Disturbance Threshold Decibel Levels for Marine Mammals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Criterion                          Criterion definition                       Threshold
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment....................  PTS (injury) conservatively based on TTS  190 dB RMS for pinnipeds. 180
                                                                                   dB RMS for cetaceans.
Level B harassment....................  Behavioral disruption for impulse noise   160 dB RMS.
                                         (e.g., impact pile driving).
Level B harassment....................  Behavioral disruption for non-pulse       120 dB RMS.
                                         noise (e.g., vibratory pile driving,
                                         drilling).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distance to Sound Thresholds

    WSF and NMFS have determined that open-water vibratory pile 
extraction during the Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier Removal project has the 
potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammal species 
and stocks in the vicinity of the proposed activity.
    As Table 3 shows, under current NMFS guidelines, the received 
exposure level for Level A harassment is defined at >=180 dB (rms) re 1 
[mu]Pa for cetaceans and >=190 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa for pinnipeds. The 
measured source levels from vibratory removal of 12-inch timber piles 
are between 149 and 152 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa at 16 m from the hammer 
(Laughlin 2011a). Therefore, the proposed Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier 
Removal construction project is not expected to cause Level A 
harassment or TTS to marine mammals.
    Masking affects both senders and receivers of the signals and 
therefore can have consequences at the population level. Recent science 
suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased by as 
much as 20 dB (more than 3 times in terms of SPL) in the world's ocean 
from pre-industrial periods, and most of these increases are from 
distant shipping (Hildebrand 2009). All anthropogenic noise sources, 
such as those from vessel traffic, pile driving, dredging, and 
dismantling existing bridge by mechanic means, contribute to the 
elevated ambient noise levels, thus intensify masking.
    Nevertheless, the levels of noise from the proposed WSF 
construction activities are relatively low and are blocked by landmass 
southward. Therefore, the noise generated is not expected to contribute 
to increased ocean ambient noise in a manner that will notably increase 
the ability of marine mammals in the vicinity to detect critical 
acoustic cues. Due to shallow water depths near the ferry terminals, 
underwater sound propagation for low-frequency sound (which is the 
major noise source from pile driving) is expected to be poor.
    Currently NMFS uses 120 dBrms re 1 [mu]Pa received level 
for non-impulse noises (such as vibratory pile driving, saw cutting, 
drilling, and dredging) for the onset of marine mammal Level B 
behavioral harassment. However, since the ambient noise level at the 
vicinity of the proposed project area is between 122 to 124 dB re 1 
[mu]Pa, depending on marine mammal functional hearing groups (Laughlin 
2011b), the received level of 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa would be below the 
ambient level. Therefore, for this proposed project, 122 dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
is used as the threshold for Level B behavioral harassment. The 
distance to the 122 dB contour Level B acoustical harassment threshold 
due to vibratory pile removal extends a maximum of 1.6 km as is shown 
in Figure 1-5 in the Application.
    As far as airborne noise is concerned, the estimated in-air source 
level from vibratory pile driving a 30-in steel pile is estimated at 
97.8 dB re 1 [mu]Pa at 15 m (50 feet) from the pile (Laughlin 2010b). 
Using the spreading loss of 6 dB per doubling of distance, it is 
estimated that the distances to the 90 dB and 100 dB thresholds were 
estimated at 37 m and 12 m, respectively.
    The closest documented harbor seal haul-out is the Naval Station 
Everett floating security fence, and the Port Gardner log booms, both 
approximately 4.5 miles to the northeast of the project site). The 
closest documented California sea lion haul out site are the Everett 
Harbor navigation buoys, located approximately 3 miles to the northeast 
of the project site (Figure 3-1). In-air disturbance will be limited to 
those animals moving on the surface through the immediate pier area, 
within approximately 37 meters (123 feet) for harbor seals and within 
12 meters (39 feet) for other pinnipeds of vibratory pile removal 
(Figure 1-6 in Application).
    Incidental take is estimated for each species by estimating the 
likelihood of a marine mammal being present within a ZOI during active 
pile removal or driving. Expected marine mammal presence is determined 
by past observations and general abundance near the Tank Farm Pier 
during the construction window. Typically, potential take is estimated 
by multiplying the area of the ZOI by the local animal density. This 
provides an estimate of the number of animals that might occupy the ZOI 
at any given moment. However, in some cases take requests were 
estimated using local marine mammal data sets (e.g., Orca Network, 
state and federal agencies), opinions from state and federal agencies, 
and observations from Navy biologists.

Harbor Seal

    Based on the ORCA monitoring, NMFS' analysis uses a conservative 
estimate of 13 harbor seals per day potentially within the ZOI. For 
Year One pile removal, the duration estimate is 975 hours over 140 
days. For the exposure estimate, it will be conservatively assumed that 
13 harbor seals may be present within the ZOI and be exposed multiple 
times during the project. The calculation for marine mammal exposures 
is estimated by:

Exposure estimate = N * 140 days of vibratory pile removal activity,

where:
N = # of animals (13)
Exposure estimate = 13 * 140 days = 1,820

    NMFS is proposing the authorization for Level B acoustical 
harassment of 1,820 harbor seals. However, many of these takes are 
likely to be repeated exposures of individual animals.

California Sea Lion

    Based on the ORCA monitoring this analysis uses a conservative 
estimate of 6 California sea lions per day potentially within the ZOI.

Exposure estimate = 6 * 140 days = 840

    NMFS is proposing the authorization for Level B acoustical 
harassment take of 840 California sea lions. Many of these takes are 
likely to be repeated exposures of individual animals.

Steller Sea Lion

    Based on the observation data from Craven Rock, this analysis uses 
a conservative estimate of 12 Steller sea lions per day potentially 
near the ZOI. However, given the distance from this haul-out to the 
Tank Farm Pier, it is not expected that the same numbers would be 
present in the ZOI. For the exposure estimate, it will be 
conservatively assumed that \1/6\th of the Steller sea lions observed 
at Craven Rock (2

[[Page 43735]]

animals) may be present within the ZOI and be exposed multiple times 
during the project for total of 2 animals

Exposure estimate = 2 * 140 days = 280

    NMFS is proposing the authorization for Level B acoustical 
harassment take of 280 Steller sea lions. It is likely that many of 
these takes are likely to be repeated exposures of individual animals..

Harbor Porpoise

    Based on the water depth within the ZOI and group size, this 
analysis uses a conservative estimate of 8 harbor porpoises per day 
potentially near the ZOI.

Exposure estimate = 8 * 140 days = 1,120

    WSF is requesting authorization for Level B acoustical harassment 
take of 1,120 Harbor porpoise. Note that many of these takes are likely 
to be repeated exposures of individual animals.

Dall's Porpoise

    Based on the average winter group size, as described in Section 3.0 
of the Application, this analysis uses a conservative estimate of 3 
Dall's porpoises per day potentially near the ZOI.

Exposure estimate = 3 * 140 days = 420

    NMFS is proposing authorization for Level B acoustical harassment 
take of 420 Dall's porpoise. A number of these anticipated takes are 
likely to be repeated exposures of individual animals.

Killer Whale

    Southern Resident Killer Whale--In order to estimate anticipated 
take, NMFS used Southern Resident killer whale density data from the 
Pacific Marine Species Density Database (US Navy 2014) that measured 
density per km\2\ per season in the waters in the vicinity of the 
Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier. Data was provided as a range by the Navy. NMFS 
took the high end of the range for the summer, fall, and winter seasons 
to estimate density and multiplied that figure by the ensonified area 
(~5 km\2\.)

Exposure estimate = (0.00090 [summer] + 0.000482 [fall] + 0.000250 
[winter]) * 5 km\2\ = 0.0258 Southern Resident killer whales.

    Note that pod size of Southern Resident killer whales can range 
from 3-50. NMFS will assume that one pod of 15 whales will be sighted 
during this authorization period and proposes to authorize that amount. 
However, it is possible that a larger group may be observed. In order 
to limit the take of southern resident killer whales NMFS proposes to 
require additional steps applicable to killer whales. These steps are 
described below and in Appendix B of the Application.
    Transient Killer Whale--NMFS estimated the take of transient killer 
whales by applying the same methodology used to estimate Southern 
Resident killer whale.

Exposure estimate = (0.001582 [summer] + 0.002373 [fall] + 0.002373 
[winter]) * 5 km\2\ = 0.03163 transient killer whales.

    Note that pod size of transients can range from 1-5. NMFS will 
assume that two pods of 5 whales will be sighted during this 
authorization period. Therefore, NMFS is proposing 10 takes of 
transient killer whales.

Gray Whale

    Based on the frequency of sightings during the in-water work 
window, this analysis uses a conservative estimate of 3 gray whales per 
day potentially near the ZOI.
    It is assumed that Gray whales will not enter the ZOI each day of 
the project, but may be present in the ZOI for 5 days per month as they 
forage in the area, for a total of 30 days. For the exposure estimate, 
it will be conservatively assumed that up to 3 animals may be present 
within the ZOI and be exposed multiple times during the project.

Exposure estimate = 3 * 30 days = 90

    NMFS is proposing authorization for Level B acoustical harassment 
take of 90 Gray whales. It is assumed that this number will include 
multiple harassments of a single individual animal.

Humpback Whale

    Based on the frequency of sightings during the in-water work 
window, this analysis uses a conservative estimate of 2 humpback whales 
potentially near the ZOI.
    It is assumed that humpback whales will not enter the ZOI each day 
of the project, but may be present in the ZOI for 3 days per month as 
they forage in the area, for a total of 18 days. For the exposure 
estimate, it will be conservatively assumed that up to 2 animals may be 
present within the ZOI and be exposed multiple times during the 
project.

Exposure estimate = 2 * 18 days = 36

    NMFS is proposing authorization for Level B acoustical harassment 
take of 36 humpback whales. It is assumed that this number will include 
multiple harassments of the same individuals.
    Based on the estimates, approximately 1,820 Pacific harbor seals, 
840 California sea lions, 280 Steller sea lions, 1,120 Harbor porpoise, 
420 Dall's porpoise, 94 killer whales (10 transient, 15 Southern 
Resident killer whales), 90 gray whales, and 36 humpback whales could 
be exposed to received sound levels above 122 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) from 
the proposed Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier Removal project. A summary of the 
estimated takes is presented in Table 4.

   Table 4--Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals That May Be Exposed to
         Vibratory Hammer Sound Levels Above 122 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
                                  [rms]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Percentage
                                                   Estimated       of
                     Species                        marine      species
                                                    mammal     or stock
                                                    takes *       (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal.............................       1,820        16.5
California sea lion.............................         840         0.3
Steller sea lion................................         280         0.4
Harbor porpoise.................................       1,120        10.5
Dall's porpoise.................................         420         1.0
Killer whale, transient.........................          10         4.1
Killer whale, Southern Resident.................          15        18.2
Gray whale......................................          90         0.5
Humpback whale..................................          36         2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents maximum estimate of animals due to likelihood that some
  individuals will be taken more than once

Analysis and Preliminary Determinations

Negligible Impact Analysis

    Negligible impact is ``an impact resulting from the specified 
activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably 
likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on 
annual rates of recruitment or survival'' (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of 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, 
NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any 
responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any 
responses (critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as 
well as the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, 
the number of

[[Page 43736]]

estimated mortalities, effects on habitat, and the status of the 
species.
    To avoid repetition, the following discussion applies to the 
affected stocks of harbor seals, California sea lions, Steller sea 
lions, harbor porpoises, Dall's porpoises, gray whales and humpback 
whales, except where a separate discussion is provided for killer 
whales, as the best available information indicates that effects of the 
specified activity on individuals of those stocks will be similar, and 
there is no information about the population size, status, structure, 
or habitat use of the areas to warrant separate discussion.
    Pile removal activities associated with the Mukilteo Tank Farm 
removal 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 
extraction. Potential takes could occur if individuals of these species 
are present in the ensonified zone when pile driving is happening.
    No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated given the 
nature of the activity and measures designed to minimize the 
possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for these 
outcomes is minimized through the construction method and the 
implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Specifically, 
vibratory hammers will be the primary method of extraction and no 
impact driving will occurs. Vibratory driving and removal does not have 
significant potential to cause injury to marine mammals due to the 
relatively low source levels produced (site-specific acoustic 
monitoring data show no source level measurements above 180 dB rms) and 
the lack of potentially injurious source characteristics. Given 
sufficient ``notice'' through use of soft start, marine mammals are 
expected to move away from a sound source. The likelihood that marine 
mammal detection ability by trained observers is high under the 
environmental conditions described for waters around the Mukilteo Tank 
Farm further enables the implementation of shutdowns if animals come 
within 10 meters of operational activity to avoid injury, serious 
injury, or mortality.
    WSF proposed activities are localized and of relatively short 
duration. The entire project area is limited to water in close 
proximity to the tank farm. The project will require the extraction of 
3,900 piles and will require 675-975 hours over 140-180 days. These 
localized and short-term noise exposures may cause brief startle 
reactions or short-term behavioral modification by the animals. These 
reactions and behavioral changes are expected to subside quickly when 
the exposures cease. Moreover, the proposed mitigation and monitoring 
measures are expected to reduce potential exposures and behavioral 
modifications even further.

Southern Resident Killer Whale

    Critical habitat for Southern Resident killer whales has been 
identified in the area and may be impacted. The proposed action will 
have short-term adverse effects on Chinook salmon, the primary prey of 
Southern Resident killer whales. However, the Puget Sound Chinook 
salmon ESU comprises a small percentage of the Southern Resident killer 
whale diet. Hanson et al. (2010) found only six to 14 percent of 
Chinook salmon eaten in the summer were from Puget Sound. Therefore, 
NMFS concludes that both the short-term adverse effects and the long-
term beneficial effects on Southern Resident killer whale prey quantity 
and quality will be insignificant. Also, the sound from vibratory pile 
driving and removal may interfere with whale passage. For example, 
exposed killer whales are likely to redirect around the sound instead 
of passing through the area. However, the effect of the additional 
distance traveled is unlikely to cause a measureable increase in an 
individual's energy budget, and the effects would therefore be 
temporary and insignificant. Additionally, WSF will employ additional 
mitigation measures to avoid or minimize impacts to Southern Residents. 
These measures were described previously in the section Monitoring and 
Shutdown for Pile Driving.
    The project also is not expected to have significant adverse 
effects on affected marine mammals' habitat, as analyzed in detail in 
the ``Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat'' section. The 
project activities would not modify existing marine mammal habitat. The 
activities may cause some fish to leave the area of disturbance, thus 
temporarily impacting marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a 
limited portion of the foraging range; but, because of the short 
duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat 
that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not 
expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences. 
Furthermore, no important feeding and/or reproductive areas for other 
marine mammals are known to be near the proposed action area.
    Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the 
basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other 
similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as 
increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased 
foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 
2006; Lerma, 2014). 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 and removal, pinnipeds (which may become somewhat habituated to 
human activity in industrial or urban waterways) have been observed to 
orient towards and sometimes move towards the sound. The pile removal 
activities analyzed here are similar to, or less impactful than, 
numerous construction activities conducted in other similar locations, 
which have taken place with no reported injuries or mortality to marine 
mammals, and no known long-term adverse consequences from behavioral 
harassment. 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 
for the affected 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.
    In summary, we considered the following factors: (1) The 
possibility of injury, serious injury, or mortality may reasonably be 
considered discountable; (2) the anticipated incidents of Level B 
harassment consist of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior; 
(3) the absence of any significant habitat, other than identified 
critical habitat for Southern Resident killer whales within the project 
area, including rookeries, significant haul-outs, or known areas or 
features of special significance for foraging or reproduction; (4) the 
expected efficacy of the proposed mitigation measures in minimizing the 
effects of the specified activity on the affected species or stocks and 
their

[[Page 43737]]

habitat to the level of least practicable impact. In combination, we 
believe that these factors, as well as the available body of evidence 
from other similar activities, demonstrate that the potential effects 
of the specified activity will have only short-term effects on 
individuals. The take resulting from the proposed WSF Mukilteo 
Multimodal Project Tank Farm Pier Removal project is not reasonably 
expected to and is not reasonably likely to adversely affect the marine 
mammal species or stocks through effects on annual rates of recruitment 
or survival.
    Therefore, based on the analysis contained herein of the likely 
effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, 
and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed 
monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the 
total marine mammal take from WSF's Mukilteo Multimodal Project Tank 
Farm Pier Removal project will have a negligible impact on the affected 
marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers Analysis

    Based on long-term marine mammal monitoring and studies in the 
vicinity of the proposed construction areas, it is estimated that 
approximately 1,820 Pacific harbor seals, 840 California sea lions, 280 
Steller sea lions, 1,120 harbor porpoises, 420 Dall's porpoises, 10 
transient killer whales, 15 Southern Resident killer whales, 90 gray 
whales, and 36 humpback whales could be exposed to received noise 
levels above 122 dBrms re 1 [mu]Pa from the proposed construction work 
at the Mukilteo Multimodal Ferry Terminal. These numbers represent 
approximately 0.3%-18.2% of the stocks and populations of these species 
that could be affected by Level B behavioral harassment.
    The numbers of animals authorized to be taken for all species would 
be considered small relative to the relevant stocks or populations even 
if each estimated taking occurred to a new individual--an extremely 
unlikely scenario. 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 population sizes of the affected species or 
stocks.

Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence 
Uses

    There are no subsistence uses of marine mammals in Puget Sound or 
the San Juan Islands relevant to section 101(a)(5)(D).

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    The humpback whale and Southern Resident stock of killer whale are 
the only marine mammal species currently listed under the ESA that 
could occur in the vicinity of WSF's proposed construction projects. 
NMFS issued a Biological Opinion that covers the proposed action on 
July 31, 2013, and concluded that the proposed action is not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of Southern Resident killer whales 
or humpback whales, and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify 
Southern Resident killer whales critical habitat.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    NMFS re-affirms the document titled Final Environmental Assessment 
Issuance of Marine Mammal Incidental Take Authorizations to the 
Washington State Department of Transportation to Take Marine Mammals 
which was issued in February 2014. A Finding of No Significant Impact 
(FONSI) was signed on February 28, 2014. In the FONSI NMFS determined 
that the issuance of IHAs for the take, by harassment, of small numbers 
of marine mammals incidental to the WSF's Mukilteo Ferry Terminal 
replacement project in Washington State, will not significantly impact 
the quality of the human environment, as described in this document and 
in the Mukilteo EA. These documents are found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.

Proposed Authorization

    For the reasons discussed in this document, NMFS has preliminarily 
determined that the vibratory pile removal associated with the Mukilteo 
Tank Farm Pier Removal Project would result, at worst, in the Level B 
harassment of small numbers of eight marine mammal species that inhabit 
or visit the area. While behavioral modifications, including 
temporarily vacating the area around the project site, may be made by 
these species to avoid the resultant visual and acoustic disturbance, 
the availability of alternate areas within Washington coastal waters 
and haul-out sites has led NMFS to preliminarily determine that this 
action will have a negligible impact on these species in the vicinity 
of the proposed project area.
    In addition, no take by TTS, Level A harassment (injury) or death 
is anticipated and harassment takes should be at the lowest level 
practicable due to incorporation of the mitigation and monitoring 
measures mentioned previously in this document.
    As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to 
issue an IHA to WSF for conducting the Mukilteo Tank Farm removal 
project, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and 
reporting requirements are incorporated. The proposed IHA language is 
provided next.
    This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording 
contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if 
issued).
    1. This Authorization is valid from September 1, 2015, through 
August 31, 2016.
    2. This Authorization is valid only for activities associated with 
in-water construction work at the Mukilteo Multimodal Ferry Terminals 
in the State of Washington.
    3. (a) The species authorized for incidental harassment takings, 
Level B harassment only, are: Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina 
richardsi), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller sea 
lion (Eumetopias jubatus), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Dall's 
porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli), transient and Southern Resident killer 
whales (Orcinus orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), and humpback 
whale (Megaptera novaeangliae).
    (b) The authorization for taking by harassment is limited to the 
following acoustic sources and from the following activities:
    (i) Vibratory pile removal; and
    (ii) Work associated with pile removal activities.
    (c) The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under 
this Authorization must be reported within 24 hours of the taking to 
the Northwest Regional Administrator (206-526-6150), National Marine 
Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Chief of the Permits and Conservation 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at (301) 427-8401.
    4. The holder of this Authorization must notify Monica DeAngelis of 
the West Coast Regional Office (phone: (562) 980-3232) at least 24 
hours prior to starting activities.
    5. Prohibitions:
    (a) The taking, by incidental harassment only, is limited to the 
species listed under condition 3(a) above and by the numbers listed in 
Table 3 of this Federal Register notice. The taking by Level A 
harassment,

[[Page 43738]]

injury or death of these species or the taking by harassment, injury or 
death of any other species of marine mammal is prohibited and may 
result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this 
Authorization.
    (b) The taking of any marine mammal is prohibited whenever the 
required protected species observers (PSOs), required by condition 
7(a), are not present in conformance with condition 7(a) of this 
Authorization.
    6. Mitigation:
    (a) Ramp Up (Soft Start): Vibratory hammer for pile removal and 
pile driving shall be initiated at reduced power for 15 seconds with a 
1 minute interval, and be repeated with this procedure for an 
additional two times.
    (b) Marine Mammal Monitoring: Monitoring for marine mammal presence 
shall take place 30 minutes before, during and 30 minutes after pile 
driving.
    (c) Power Down and Shutdown Measures:
    (i) A shutdown zone of 10 m radius for all marine mammals will be 
established around all vibratory extraction activity.
    (ii) WSF shall implement shutdown measures if Southern Resident 
killer whales (SRKWs) are sighted within the vicinity of the project 
area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone (zone of 
influence, or ZOI) during in-water construction activities.
    (iii) If a killer whale approaches the ZOI during pile driving or 
removal, and it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or a transient killer 
whale, it shall be assumed to be a SRKW and WSF shall implement the 
shutdown measure identified in 6(c)(i).
    (iv) If a SRKW enters the ZOI undetected, in-water pile driving or 
pile removal shall be suspended until the SRKW exits the ZOI to avoid 
further level B harassment.
    (d) Time Restrictions--Work would occur only during daylight hours, 
when visual monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted. In addition, 
all in-water construction will be limited to the period between August 
1, 2015 and February 15, 2016; and August 1, 2016 until IHA expires on 
August 31, 2016.
    7. Monitoring:
    (a) Protected Species Observers: WSF shall employ qualified 
protected species observers (PSOs) to monitor the 122 dBrms re 1 [mu]Pa 
(nominal ambient level) zone of influence (ZOI) for marine mammals. 
Qualifications for marine mammal observers include:
    (i) 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 
will be required to correctly identify the target.
    (ii) Experience or training in the field identification of marine 
mammals (cetaceans and pinnipeds).
    (iii) Sufficient training, orientation or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations.
    (iv) 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.
    (v) Experience and ability to conduct field observations and 
collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic 
experience).
    (vi) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations 
that would include such information as the number and type of marine 
mammals observed; the behavior of marine mammals in the project area 
during construction, dates and times when observations were conducted; 
dates and times when in-water construction activities were conducted; 
and dates and times when marine mammals were present at or within the 
defined ZOI.
    (b) Monitoring Protocols: PSOs shall be present on site at all 
times during pile removal.
    (i) During vibratory pile removal, two land-based biologists will 
monitor the area from the best observation points available. If weather 
conditions prevent adequate land-based observations, boat-based 
monitoring shall be implemented.
    (ii) The vibratory Level B acoustical harassment ZOI shall be 
monitored for the presence of marine mammals 30 minutes before, during, 
and 30 minutes after any pile removal activity.
    (iii) Monitoring shall be continuous unless the contractor takes a 
significant break, in which case, monitoring shall be required 30 
minutes prior to restarting pile removal.
    (iv) A range finder or hand-held global positioning system device 
shall be used to ensure that the 122 dBrms re 1 [mu]Pa Level B 
behavioral harassment ZOI is monitored.
    (v) If marine mammals are observed, the following information will 
be documented:
    (A) Species of observed marine mammals;
    (B) Number of observed marine mammal individuals;
    (C) Behavioral of observed marine mammals;
    (D) Location within the ZOI; and
    (E) Animals' reaction (if any) to pile-driving activities
    8. Reporting:
    (a) WSDOT shall provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within 
90 days of the conclusion of the construction work. This report shall 
detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during 
monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have 
been harassed.
    (b) If comments are received from the NMFS Northwest Regional 
Administrator or NMFS Office of Protected Resources on the draft 
report, a final report shall be submitted to NMFS within 30 days 
thereafter. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft report 
will be considered to be the final report.
    (c) In the unanticipated event that the construction activities 
clearly cause the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by 
this Authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury or 
mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement), 
WSF shall immediately cease all operations and immediately report the 
incident to the Chief Incidental Take Program, Permits and Conservation 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401and/or be 
email to Jolie.H[email protected] and [email protected] and the 
West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator Brent Norberg 
([email protected]). The report must include the following 
information:
    (i) Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
    (ii) Description of the incident;
    (iii) Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the 
incident;
    (iv) Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, 
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility, and water depth);
    (v) Description of marine mammal observations in the 24 hours 
preceding the incident;
    (vi) Species identification or description of the animal(s) 
involved;
    (vii) The fate of the animal(s); and
    (viii) Photographs or video footage of the animal (if equipment is 
available).
    Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the 
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS shall work with WSF to 
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further 
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. WSF may not resume their 
activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.
    (d) In the event that WSF discovers an injured or dead marine 
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or 
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than 
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph), 
WSF will immediately report the

[[Page 43739]]

incident to the Chief Incidental Take Program, Permits and Conservation 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and/or 
be email to [email protected] and [email protected] and the 
West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator Brent Norberg 
([email protected]).
    The report must include the same information identified above. 
Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the 
incident. NMFS will work with WSF to determine whether modifications in 
the activities are appropriate.
    (e) In the event that WSF discovers an injured or dead marine 
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not 
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA 
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced 
decomposition, or scavenger damage), WSF shall report the incident to 
the Chief, Incidental Take Program, Permits and Conservation Division, 
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401and/or be email to 
[email protected] and [email protected] and the West Coast 
Regional Stranding Coordinator Brent Norberg ([email protected]) 
within 24 hours of the discovery. WSF shall provide photographs or 
video footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded 
animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. WSF 
can continue its operations under such a case.
    9. This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if 
the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if the 
authorized taking is having more than a negligible impact on the 
species or stock of affected marine mammals, or if there is an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or 
stocks for subsistence uses.
    10. A copy of this Authorization and the Incidental Take Statement 
must be in the possession of each contractor who performs the 
construction work at Mukilteo Multimodal Ferry Terminals.
    11. WSF is required to comply with the Terms and Conditions of the 
Incidental Take Statement corresponding to NMFS' Biological Opinion.

Request for Public Comments

    NMFS requests comment on our analysis, the draft authorization, and 
any other aspect of the Notice of Proposed IHA for WSF's Mukilteo Tank 
Farm removal project. Please include with your comments any supporting 
data or literature citations to help inform our final decision on WSF's 
request for an MMPA authorization.

    Dated: July 16, 2015.
Perry Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-18020 Filed 7-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P



                                                  43720                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                  Fisheries Research Foundation contains                   trap would include a closed escape                     DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                                                  all of the required information and                      vent, single parlor, and smaller mesh
                                                  warrants further consideration; and that                 size and entrance head.                                National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                                                  the activities authorized under the                                                                             Administration
                                                                                                              The CFRF is requesting exemptions
                                                  Exempted Fishing Permit would be
                                                                                                           from the following Federal lobster
                                                  consistent with the goals and objectives                                                                        RIN 0648–XD977
                                                                                                           regulations:
                                                  of the Interstate Fisheries Management
                                                  Plan for American lobster. Regulations                      • Gear specifications in 50 CFR                     Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
                                                  under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery                       697.21(c) to allow for closed escape                   to Specified Activities: Mukilteo
                                                  Conservation and Management Act and                      vents, and smaller mesh and entrance                   Multimodal Project Tank Farm Pier
                                                  the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries                           heads;                                                 Removal
                                                  Cooperative Management Act require                          • Trap limits as listed in 50 CFR                   AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries
                                                  publication of this notification to                      697.19(b) for Area 2, and 50 CFR                       Service, National Oceanic and
                                                  provide interested parties the                           697.19(c) for Area 3, to be exceeded by                Atmospheric Administration,
                                                  opportunity to comment on Exempted                       3 additional traps per fishing vessel for              Commerce.
                                                  Fishing Permit applications.                             a total of 36 additional traps;                        ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
                                                  DATES: Comments must be received on
                                                                                                              • Trap tag requirements, as specified               harassment authorization; request for
                                                  or before August 7, 2015.                                                                                       comments and information.
                                                  ADDRESSES: Written comments on this
                                                                                                           in 50 CFR 697.19(i), to allow for the use
                                                  notice may be submitted by the                           of untagged traps; and                                 SUMMARY:   Pursuant to the Marine
                                                  following methods:                                          • Possession restrictions in 50 CFR                 Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS
                                                     • Email to: nmfs.gar.efp@noaa.gov.                    697.20(a), to allow for onboard                        is requesting comments on its proposal
                                                  Include in the subject line ‘‘Comments                   biological sampling of juvenile, v-                    to issue an authorization to WSF to
                                                  on CFRF Lobster EFP.’’                                   notched, and egg-bearing lobsters.                     incidentally take, by harassment, small
                                                     • Mail to: John K. Bullard, Regional                                                                         numbers of marine mammals for a
                                                                                                              All lobsters caught by modified gear
                                                  Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic                                                                           period of 1 year.
                                                  Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great                      would remain onboard for a short
                                                                                                           period of time to allow for biological                 DATES: Comments and information must
                                                  Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.                                                                           be received no later than August 24,
                                                  Mark the outside of the envelope                         sampling and data collection, after
                                                                                                           which they would be returned to the                    2015.
                                                  ‘‘Comments on CFRF Lobster EFP.’’
                                                  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                                                                           water. Biological information will be                  ADDRESSES:    Comments on the
                                                  Cynthia Hanson, NOAA Affiliate, 978–                     collected on both kept and discarded                   application should be addressed to
                                                  281–9180.                                                lobsters, including: Carapace length;                  Robert Pauline, Office of Protected
                                                                                                           sex; and presence of eggs, v-notches,                  Resources, National Marine Fisheries
                                                  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
                                                                                                           and shell disease. This study would use                Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver
                                                  Commercial Fisheries Research
                                                                                                           several data recording devices,                        Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox address
                                                  Foundation (CFRF) submitted a
                                                                                                           including electronic calipers for length               for providing email comments is
                                                  complete application for a 2-year
                                                                                                           measurements, video cameras, and                       itp.pauline@noaa.gov. NMFS is not
                                                  renewal to an existing Exempted
                                                                                                           waterproof tablets. Once the vessels                   responsible for email comments sent to
                                                  Fishing Permit (EFP) on June 25, 2015.
                                                                                                           return to shore, data would be relayed                 addresses other than the one provided
                                                  The purpose of this study is to test
                                                                                                           to a central database and made available               here. Comments sent via email,
                                                  electronic data collection while
                                                                                                           via the Atlantic Coastal Cooperative                   including all attachments, must not
                                                  conducting research on the abundance
                                                                                                           Statistic Program.                                     exceed a 25-megabyte file size.
                                                  and distribution of juvenile American
                                                                                                                                                                     Instructions: All comments received
                                                  lobster. Funding for this study will be                     If approved, CFRF may request minor                 are a part of the public record and will
                                                  provided through a NOAA grant, as part                   modifications and extensions to the EFP                generally be posted to http://
                                                  of the Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant                         throughout the study period. EFP                       www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
                                                  Program. The EFP proposes to use a                       modifications and extensions may be                    incidental.htm without change. All
                                                  total of 36 ventless, untagged traps in
                                                                                                           granted without further notice if they                 Personal Identifying Information (for
                                                  Lobster Management Areas 2 and 3;
                                                                                                           are deemed essential to facilitate                     example, name, address, etc.)
                                                  covering statistical areas 464, 465, 512,
                                                                                                           completion of the proposed research                    voluntarily submitted by the commenter
                                                  515, 522, 525, 526, 537, 561, 562, 613,
                                                                                                           and have minimal impacts that do not                   may be publicly accessible. Do not
                                                  615, and 616. Maps depicting these
                                                                                                           change the scope or impact of the                      submit Confidential Business
                                                  areas are available on request.
                                                     The study would take place during                     initially approved EFP request. Any                    Information or otherwise sensitive or
                                                  regular fishing activity on 12 federally                 fishing activity conducted outside the                 protected information.
                                                  permitted commercial fishing vessels; 6                  scope of the exempted fishing activity                    A copy of the application may be
                                                  vessels in each of the two management                    would be prohibited.                                   obtained by writing to the address
                                                  areas. Sampling would occur during                                                                              specified above or visiting the internet
                                                                                                                Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.                 at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
                                                  scheduled fishing trips on each vessel
                                                  once per week in Area 2, and once every                    Dated: July 17, 2015.                                permits/incidental/construction.htm.
                                                                                                           Emily H. Menashes,                                     Documents cited in this notice may also
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  10 days in Area 3. If an EFP extension
                                                  is granted, there would be an additional                 Acting Director, Office of Sustainable                 be viewed, by appointment, during
                                                  36 modified, untagged traps in the water                 Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.          regular business hours, at the
                                                  during any given time, for a period of                   [FR Doc. 2015–18054 Filed 7–22–15; 8:45 am]
                                                                                                                                                                  aforementioned address.
                                                  two years. Each participating vessel                                                                            FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                                                                           BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
                                                  would have up to three modified traps                                                                           Robert Pauline, Office of Protected
                                                  attached to a regular trap trawl.                                                                               Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
                                                  Modifications to a conventional lobster                                                                         SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:



                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000    Frm 00016   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                          43721

                                                  Background                                               property, which includes a large pier                 over-water and contains approximately
                                                     Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the                  extending into Possession Sound                       3,900 12-inch diameter creosote-treated
                                                  MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct                     (Figure 1–2 and 1–3 of the WSF IHA                    piles. Demolition of the pier will
                                                  the Secretary of Commerce to allow,                      application which may be found at URL:                remove approximately 7,300 tons of
                                                  upon request, the incidental, but not                    http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/                  creosote-treated timber from the aquatic
                                                  intentional, taking of small numbers of                  incidental/construction.htm).                         environment. Demolition will take
                                                  marine mammals by U.S. citizens who                      Completion of the entire project will                 approximately ten months over two in-
                                                  engage in a specified activity (other than               occur over 4 consecutive years. WSF                   water work windows. Removal of the
                                                                                                           plans to submit an IHA request for each               pier will occur from land and from a
                                                  commercial fishing) within a specified
                                                                                                           consecutive year of construction. WSF                 barge containing a derrick, crane and
                                                  geographical region if certain findings
                                                                                                           previously received an IHA on July 25,                other necessary equipment.
                                                  are made and either regulations are
                                                                                                           2014 (79 FR 43424) which was active                      Piles will be removed with a vibratory
                                                  issued or, if the taking is limited to
                                                                                                           from September 1, 2014 through August                 hammer or by direct pull using a chain
                                                  harassment, a notice of a proposed
                                                                                                           31, 2015. However, the project was                    wrapped around the pile. The crane
                                                  authorization is provided to the public
                                                                                                           delayed for one year. The IHA                         operator will take measures to reduce
                                                  for review.
                                                                                                           application currently under review                    turbidity, such as vibrating the pile
                                                     An authorization for incidental
                                                                                                           would cover work from September 1,                    slightly to break the bond between the
                                                  takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
                                                                                                           2015 through August 31, 2016. All                     pile and surrounding soil, and removing
                                                  that the taking will have a negligible
                                                                                                           existing pile work will be done under                 the pile slowly; or if using direct pull,
                                                  impact on the species or stock(s), will
                                                                                                           these two successive permits. Due to
                                                  not have an unmitigable adverse impact                                                                         keep the rate at which piles are removed
                                                                                                           NMFS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                                                  on the availability of the species or                                                                          low enough to meet regulatory turbidity
                                                                                                           (USFWS), and Washington State
                                                  stock(s) for subsistence uses (where                                                                           limit requirements. If piles are so
                                                                                                           Department of Fish and Wildlife
                                                  relevant), and if the permissible                                                                              deteriorated they cannot be removed
                                                                                                           (WDFW) in-water work timing
                                                  methods of taking and requirements                                                                             using either the vibratory or direct pull
                                                                                                           restrictions to protect salmonids listed
                                                  pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring                                                                       method, the operator will use a
                                                                                                           under the Endangered Species Act
                                                  and reporting of such takings are set                                                                          clamshell to pull the piles from below
                                                                                                           (ESA), planned WSF in-water
                                                  forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible                                                                           the mudline, or cut at or just below the
                                                                                                           construction is limited each year to
                                                  impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘. . . an                                                                       mudline (up to one foot) using a
                                                                                                           August 1 through February 15. For
                                                  impact resulting from the specified                      removal of the Tank Farm Pier, in-water               hydraulic saw.
                                                  activity that cannot be reasonably                       construction is planned to take place                    Pile removal and demolition of
                                                  expected to, and is not reasonably likely                between August 1, 2015 and February                   creosote-treated timber elements of the
                                                  to, adversely affect the species or stock                15, 2016; and continue in August 1,                   Tank Farm Pier will take place between
                                                  through effects on annual rates of                       2016 to February 15, 2017 if pier                     August 1 and February 15. All work will
                                                  recruitment or survival.’’                               removal and dredging is not completed                 occur in water depths between 0 and
                                                     Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA                      during the 2015/16 work window. A                     ¥30 feet mean lower-low water.
                                                  established an expedited process by                      new MMPA IHA application will be                         The first year of construction
                                                  which citizens of the U.S. can apply for                 submitted for subsequent construction                 activities for the Mukilteo Multimodal
                                                  a one-year authorization to incidentally                 years for this project.                               Project is limited to removing the Tank
                                                  take small numbers of marine mammals                        The action discussed in this                       Farm Pier. The noise produced by the
                                                  by harassment, provided that there is no                 document is based on WSF’s November                   proposed vibratory pile extraction may
                                                  potential for serious injury or mortality                6, 2014 IHA application. NMFS is                      impact marine mammals. Direct pull
                                                  to result from the activity. Section                     proposing to authorize the Level B                    and clamshell removal are not expected
                                                  101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time                   harassment of the following marine                    to exceed noise levels that would injure
                                                  limit for NMFS review of an application                  mammal species: Pacific harbor seal                   or harass marine mammals. These
                                                  followed by a 30-day public notice and                   (Phoca vitulina richardsi), California sea            extraction methods are described below.
                                                  comment period on any proposed                           lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller
                                                  authorizations for the incidental                        sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), harbor                 Vibratory Hammer Removal
                                                  harassment of marine mammals. Within                     porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Dall’s
                                                  45 days of the close of the comment                                                                               Vibratory hammer extraction is a
                                                                                                           porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli), killer                 common method for removing timber
                                                  period, NMFS must either issue or deny                   whale (Orcinus orca), gray whale
                                                  the authorization.                                                                                             piling. A vibratory hammer is
                                                                                                           (Eschrichtius robustus), and humpback                 suspended by cable from a crane and
                                                  Summary of Request                                       whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)                        derrick, and positioned on the top of a
                                                    On November 6, 2014, Washington                        Specific Geographic Region                            pile. The pile is then unseated from the
                                                  State Department of Transportation                                                                             sediments by engaging the hammer,
                                                                                                              The Mukilteo Tank Farm is located
                                                  Ferries System (WSF) submitted a                                                                               creating a vibration that loosens the
                                                                                                           within the city limits of Mukilteo and
                                                  request to NOAA requesting an IHA for                                                                          sediments binding the pile, and then
                                                                                                           Everett, Snohomish County,
                                                  the possible harassment of small                                                                               slowly lifting up on the hammer with
                                                                                                           Washington. The property is located on
                                                  numbers of eight marine mammal                                                                                 the aid of the crane. Once unseated, the
                                                                                                           the shore of Possession Sound, an
                                                  species incidental to construction work                                                                        crane continues to raise the hammer and
                                                                                                           embayment of the inland marine waters
                                                                                                                                                                 pulls the pile from the sediment.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  associated with the Mukilteo Ferry                       of Puget Sound (see Figures 1–1 and 1–
                                                  Terminal replacement project in                          2 in the Application).                                   When the pile is released from the
                                                  Mukilteo, Snohomish County,                                                                                    sediment, the vibratory hammer is
                                                  Washington. The new terminal will be                     Description of the Specified Activity                 disengaged and the pile is pulled from
                                                  located to the east of the existing                        The Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier, which                  the water and placed on a barge for
                                                  location at the site of the former U.S.                  has not been used for fuel transfers                  transfer upland. Vibratory removal will
                                                  Department of Defense Fuel Supply                        since the late 1970s, covers                          take approximately 10 to 15 minutes per
                                                  Point facility, known as the Tank Farm                   approximately 138,080 ft2 (3.17 acres)                pile, depending on sediment conditions.


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00017   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                  43722                                  Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                  Direct Pull and Clamshell Removal                                      August 2015). The new IHA would be                              the duration conservatively assumes
                                                                                                                         active from September 1, 2015 through                           that every pile will be removed with a
                                                     Older timber pilings are particularly
                                                                                                                         August 31, 2016, which allows for one                           vibratory hammer. It is likely that many
                                                  prone to breaking at the mudline
                                                                                                                         month of pier removal if necessary in                           will be require direct pull or clamshell
                                                  because of damage from marine borers
                                                                                                                         Year Two. If the rate of pier removal in                        removal if necessary, both of which are
                                                  and vessel impacts. In some cases,                                     Year One is slow enough to suggest that
                                                  removal with a vibratory hammer is not                                                                                                 quicker than vibratory extraction.
                                                                                                                         pier removal will continue beyond the
                                                  possible if the pile is too fragile to                                 first month (August) of Year Two, an                            Description of Marine Mammals in the
                                                  withstand the hammer force. Broken or                                  additional IHA request will be                                  Area of the Specified Activity
                                                  damaged piles may be removed by                                        submitted to ensure that pier removal
                                                  wrapping the piles with a cable and                                    can be completed.                                                  The marine mammal species under
                                                  pulling them directly from the sediment                                   The daily construction window for                            NMFS jurisdiction most likely to occur
                                                  with a crane. If the piles break below the                             pile removal will begin no sooner than                          in the proposed construction area
                                                  waterline, the pile stubs will be                                      30 minutes after sunrise to allow for                           include Pacific harbor seal (Phoca
                                                  removed with a clamshell bucket, a                                     initial marine mammal monitoring, and                           vitulina richardsi), California sea lion
                                                  hinged steel apparatus that operates like                              will end at sunset (or soon after), when                        (Zalophus californianus), Steller sea
                                                  a set of steel jaws. The bucket will be                                visibility decreases to the point that                          lion (Eumetopias jubatus), harbor
                                                  lowered from a crane and the jaws will                                 effective marine mammal monitoring is                           porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Dall’s
                                                  grasp the pile stub as the crane pulled                                not possible.                                                   porpoise (P. dalli), killer whale (Orcinus
                                                  up. The broken piling and stubs will be                                   Vibratory pile removal will take                             orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius
                                                  loaded onto the barge for off-site                                     approximately 10 to 15 minutes per                              robustus), and humpback whale
                                                  disposal. Clamshell removal will be                                    pile. Assuming the worst case of 15                             (Megaptera novaeangliae).
                                                  used only if necessary, as it will                                     minutes per pile (with no direct pull or
                                                  produce temporary, localized turbidity                                                                                                    General information on the marine
                                                                                                                         clamshell removal), removal of 3,900
                                                  impacts. Turbidity will be kept within                                 piles will take and estimated 675–975                           mammal species found in California
                                                  required regulatory limits. Direct pull                                hours over 140–180 days of pile removal                         waters can be found in Carretta et al.
                                                  and clamshell removal do not produce                                   (Table 2–2 in the Application). The                             (2013), which is available at the
                                                  noise that could impact marine                                         estimate of 180 days provides for some                          following URL: http://www.nmfs.noaa.
                                                  mammals.                                                               shorter pile pulling days during winter,                        gov/pr/sars/pdf/pacific2013_final.pdf
                                                                                                                         transition time to dig out broken piles,                        and in Table 1 below. Refer to that
                                                  Dates and Duration                                                                                                                     document for information on these
                                                                                                                         and removal of decking. The actual
                                                    The subject IHA application addresses                                number of days may be closer to 140 for                         species. Specific information
                                                  Year One and a first month of Year Two.                                pile work.                                                      concerning these species in the vicinity
                                                  The first month of the project is covered                                 It is likely that the actual hours of                        of the proposed action area is provided
                                                  by the existing IHA permit (expiring in                                vibratory pile removal will be less, as                         below.

                                                    TABLE 1—LIST OF MARINE SPECIES UNDER NMFS JURISDICTION THAT OCCUR IN THE VICINITY OF THE MUKILTEO TANK
                                                                                            FARM PIER PROJECT
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Frequency of
                                                                           Species                                     ESA Status                   MMPA Status                        Timing of occurrence                          occurrence

                                                  Harbor Seal ................................................      Unlisted   .............   Non-depleted .............   Year-round ........................................    Common.
                                                  California Sea Lion ....................................          Unlisted   .............   Non-depleted .............   August–April .....................................     Common.
                                                  Steller Sea Lion .........................................        Delisted   .............   Strategic/Depleted .....     October–May ....................................       Rare.
                                                  Harbor Porpoise .........................................         Unlisted   .............   Non-depleted .............   Year-round ........................................    Occasional.
                                                  Dall’s Porpoise ...........................................       Unlisted   .............   Non-depleted .............   Year-round (more common in win-                        Occasional.
                                                                                                                                                                              ter).
                                                  Killer Whale ................................................     Endangered ......          Strategic/Depleted .....     October–March .................................        Occasional.
                                                  (Southern Resident) ...................................
                                                  Killer Whale ................................................     Unlisted .............     Strategic/Depleted .....     March–May (intermittently year-                        Occasional.
                                                  (Transient) ..................................................                                                              round).
                                                  Gray Whale ................................................       Delisted .............     Non-depleted .............   January–May ....................................       Occasional.
                                                  Humpback Whale .......................................            Endangered ......          Strategic/Depleted .....     April–June .........................................   Occasional.



                                                  Harbor Seal                                                            Canal, Puget Sound, Georgia Basin and                           in the inland waters of Washington are
                                                                                                                         the Strait of Juan de Fuca out to Cape                          weaned. Of the three pinniped species
                                                    Harbor seals are members of the true                                 Flattery), (2) outer coast of Oregon and                        that commonly occur within the region
                                                  seal family (Phocidae). For management                                 Washington, and (3) California (Carretta                        of activity, harbor seals are the most
                                                  purposes, differences in mean pupping                                  et al. 2011).                                                   numerous and the only one that breeds
                                                  date (Temte 1986), movement patterns                                      The Washington Inland Waters stock                           in the inland marine waters of
                                                  (Brown 1988), pollutant loads                                                                                                          Washington (Calambokidis and Baird,
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                                                                                         (which includes Hood Canal, Puget
                                                  (Calambokidis et al. 1985), and fishery                                Sound, Georgia Basin and the Strait of                          1994).
                                                  interactions have led to the recognition                               Juan de Fuca out to Cape Flattery) may                             In 1999, Jeffries et al. (2003) recorded
                                                  of three separate harbor seal stocks                                   be present near the project site. Pupping                       a mean count of 9,550 harbor seals in
                                                  along the west coast of the continental                                seasons vary by geographic region. For                          Washington’s inland marine waters, and
                                                  U.S. (Boveng 1988). The three distinct                                 the northern Puget Sound region, pups                           estimated the total population to be
                                                  stocks are: (1) Inland waters of                                       are born from late June through August                          approximately 14,612 animals
                                                  Washington State (including Hood                                       (WDFW 2012a). After October 1 all pups                          (including the Strait of Juan de Fuca).


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014        18:39 Jul 22, 2015      Jkt 235001         PO 00000    Frm 00018       Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM         23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                            43723

                                                  According to the 2014 Stock Assessment                     According to the NMFS National                      and Port Gardner log booms (both 4.5
                                                  Report (SAR), the most recent estimate                   Stranding Database (2007–2013), there                 miles NE).
                                                  for the Washington Northern Inland                       were 7 confirmed harbor seal strandings                  Since June 2012, Naval Station Everett
                                                  Waters Stock is 11,036 (Carretta et al.                  within 0.5 miles of Tank Farm Pier                    personnel have been conducting counts
                                                  2014). No minimum population                             (NMFS 2013b).                                         of the number of sea lions that use the
                                                  estimate is available. However, there are                                                                      in-water security fence floats as haul-
                                                                                                           California Sea Lion                                   outs. As of April 18, 2013, the highest
                                                  an estimated 32,000 harbor seals in
                                                  Washington today, and their population                      Washington California sea lions are                count has been 123 California sea lions
                                                  appears to have stabilized (Jeffries                     part of the U.S. stock, which begins at               observed during one day in November
                                                  2013), so the estimate of 11,036 may be                  the U.S./Mexico border and extends                    2012. The average number of California
                                                  low.                                                     northward into Canada. The U.S. stock                 sea lions hauled out for the 8 days of
                                                     Harbor seals are the most numerous                    was estimated at 296,750 in the 2012                  monitoring falling within the Tank Farm
                                                  marine mammal species in Puget                           Stock Assessment Report (SAR) and                     Pier removal work window (July 15–
                                                  Sound. Harbor seals are non-migratory;                   may be at carrying capacity, although                 February 15) is 61 (U.S. Navy 2013).
                                                  their local movements are associated                     more data are needed to verify that                   However, given the distance from the
                                                  with such factors as tides, weather,                     determination (Carretta et al. 2013).                 haul-out to the Tank Farm Pier, it is not
                                                  season, food availability and                            Some 3,000 to 5,000 animals are                       expected that the same numbers would
                                                  reproduction (Scheffer and Slipp 1944;                   estimated to move into northwest waters               be present in the ZOI.
                                                  Fisher 1952; Bigg 1969, 1981). They are                  (both Washington and British Columbia)                   Since 2007, the Everett Community
                                                  not known to make extensive pelagic                      during the fall (September) and remain                College ORCA has conducted quarterly
                                                  migrations, although some long-distance                  until the late spring (May) when most                 cruises that include monitoring stations
                                                  movements of tagged animals in Alaska                    return to breeding rookeries in                       within the ZOI. Marine mammal
                                                  (174 km) and along the U.S. west coast                   California and Mexico (Jeffries et al.                sightings data were collected during
                                                  (up to 550 km) have been recorded                        2000). Peak counts of over 1,000                      these cruises. During 10 cruises within
                                                  (Pitcher and McAllister 1981; Brown                      animals have been made in Puget Sound                 the ZOI falling within the Tank Farm
                                                  and Mate 1983; Herder 1983).                             (Jeffries et al. 2000).                               Pier removal window (July 15–February
                                                     Harbor seals haul out on rocks, reefs                    California sea lions breed on islands              15), the highest count was 6 California
                                                  and beaches, and feed in marine,                         off Baja Mexico and southern California               sea lions observed during one day in
                                                  estuarine and occasionally fresh waters.                 with primarily males migrating to feed                October of 2008. The average number of
                                                  Harbor seals display strong fidelity for                 in the northern waters (Everitt et al.                sea lions observed during these cruises
                                                  haul-out sites (Pitcher and Calkins 1979;                1980). Females remain in the waters                   was 2.8 (ORCA 2013).
                                                  Pitcher and McAllister 1981). The                        near their breeding rookeries off                        According to the NMFS National
                                                  closest documented harbor seal haul-out                  California and Mexico. All age classes of             Stranding Database (2007–2013), there
                                                  sites to the Tank Farm Pier are the Naval                males are seasonally present in                       was one confirmed California sea lion
                                                  Station Everett floating security fence,                 Washington waters (WDFW 2000).                        stranding within 0.5 miles of the Tank
                                                  and the Port Gardner log booms, both                        California sea lions do not avoid areas            Farm Pier (NMFS 2013b).
                                                  approximately 4.5 miles northeast of the                 with heavy or frequent human activity,
                                                                                                           but rather may approach certain areas to              Steller Sea Lion
                                                  project site. Harbor seals may also haul-
                                                  out on undocumented sites in the area,                   investigate. This species typically does                 The Eastern stock of Steller sea lion
                                                  such as beaches.                                         not flush from a buoy or haulout if                   may be present near the project site. The
                                                     Since June 2012, Naval Station Everett                approached.                                           eastern stock of Steller sea lions is
                                                  personnel have been conducting counts                       California sea lions were unknown in               estimated at 63,160 with a Washington
                                                  of the number of harbor seals that use                   Puget Sound until approximately 1979                  minimum population estimate of 1,749
                                                  the in-water security fence floats as                    (Steiger and Calambokidis 1986). Everitt              (Carretta et al., 2013). For Washington
                                                  haul-outs. As of April 18, 2013, the                     et al. (1980) reported the initial                    inland waters, Steller sea lion
                                                  highest count was 343 seals observed                     occurrence of large numbers at Port                   abundances vary seasonally with a
                                                  during one day in October 2012 (U.S.                     Gardner, Everett (northern Puget Sound)               minimum estimate of 1,000 to 2000
                                                  Navy 2013). The average number of                        in the spring of 1979. The number of                  individuals present or passing through
                                                  seals hauled out for the 8 days of                       California sea lions using the Everett                the Strait of Juan de Fuca in fall and
                                                  monitoring falling within the Tank Farm                  haul-out at that time numbered around                 winter months.
                                                  Pier removal work window (July 15–                       1,000. Similar sightings and increases in                Steller sea lion numbers in
                                                  February 15) was 117 (U.S. Navy 2013).                   numbers were documented throughout                    Washington State decline during the
                                                  However, given the distance from the                     the region after the initial sighting in              summer months, which correspond to
                                                  haul-out to the Tank Farm Pier, the                      1979 (Steiger and Calambokidis 1986),                 the breeding season at Oregon and
                                                  number of affected seals would be less.                  including urbanized areas such as Elliot              British Columbia rookeries
                                                     Since 2007, the Everett Community                     Bay near Seattle and heavily used areas               (approximately late May to early June)
                                                  College Ocean Research College                           of central Puget Sound (Gearin et al.                 and peak during the fall and winter
                                                  Academy (ORCA) has conducted                             1986). In Washington, California sea                  months (WDFW 2000). A few Steller sea
                                                  quarterly cruises that include                           lions use haul-out sites within all inland            lions can be observed year-round in
                                                  monitoring stations within the ZOI.                      water regions (WDFW 2000). The                        Puget Sound although most of the
                                                  Marine mammal sightings data were                        movement of California sea lions into                 breeding age animals return to rookeries
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  collected during these cruises. During                   Puget Sound could be an expansion in                  in the spring and summer.
                                                  24 cruises within the ZOI falling within                 range of a growing population (Steiger                   The eastern stock of Steller sea lions
                                                  the Tank Farm Pier removal window                        and Calambokidis 1986).                               are ‘‘depleted/strategic’’ under the
                                                  (July 15–February 15), the highest count                    The closest documented California                  MMPA and were ‘‘delisted’’ as a distinct
                                                  was 13 seals observed during one day in                  sea lion haul-out sites to the Tank Farm              population segment under the ESA on
                                                  November of 2012. The average number                     Pier are the Everett Harbor navigation                November 4, 2013 (78 FR 66140). On
                                                  of seals observed during these cruises                   buoys (3.0/3.5 miles NE), and the Naval               August 27, 1993, NMFS published a
                                                  was 2.4 (ORCA 2013).                                     Station Everett floating security fence               final rule designating critical habitat for


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00019   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                  43724                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                  the Steller sea lion associated with                     Waters Stock occurs in waters east of                    Hall (2004) found that the frequency
                                                  breeding and haul-out areas in Alaska,                   Cape Flattery (Strait of Juan de Fuca,                of sighting of harbor porpoises
                                                  California, and Oregon (58 FR 45269).                    San Juan Island Region, and Puget                     decreased with increasing depth beyond
                                                  That critical habitat remains in effect for              Sound).                                               150 m with the highest numbers
                                                  the western DPS of Steller sea lions,                       The Washington Inland Waters Stock                 observed at water depths ranging from
                                                  which remain listed under the ESA. No                    mean abundance estimate based on                      61 to 100 m. Although harbor porpoises
                                                  critical habitat has been designated in                  2002 and 2003 aerial surveys conducted                have been spotted in deep water, they
                                                  Washington.                                              in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, San Juan               tend to remain in shallower shelf waters
                                                     Breeding rookeries for the eastern                    Islands, Gulf Islands, and Strait of                  (<150 m) where they are most often
                                                  stock are located along the California,                  Georgia is 10,682 harbor porpoises                    observed in small groups of one to eight
                                                  Oregon, British Columbia, and southeast                  (Carretta et al. 2011). No minimum                    animals (Baird 2003). Water depths
                                                  Alaska coasts, but not along the                         population estimate is available.                     within the Tank Farm Pier ZOI range
                                                  Washington coast or in inland                               No harbor porpoise were observed                   from 0 to 192 m.
                                                  Washington waters (Angliss and Outlaw                    within Puget Sound proper during                         Since 2007, the Everett Community
                                                  2007). Adult Steller sea lions congregate                comprehensive harbor porpoise surveys                 College Ocean Research College
                                                  at rookeries in Oregon, California, and                  (Osmek et al. 1994) or Puget Sound                    Academy (ORCA) has conducted
                                                  British Columbia for pupping and                         Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP)                    quarterly cruises that include
                                                  breeding from late May to early June                     surveys conducted in the 1990s (WDFW                  monitoring stations within the ZOI. No
                                                  (Gisiner 1985).                                          2008). Declines were attributed to gill-              harbor porpoise have been observed
                                                     Steller sea lions primarily use haul-                 net fishing, increased vessel activity,               within the ZOI during these cruises
                                                  out sites on the outer coast of                          contaminants, and competition with                    (ORCA 2013). According to the NMFS
                                                  Washington and in the Strait of Juan de                  Dall’s porpoise.                                      National Stranding Database, there was
                                                  Fuca along Vancouver Island in British                      However, populations appear to be                  one confirmed harbor porpoise
                                                  Columbia. Only sub-adults or non-                        rebounding with increased sightings in                stranding within 0.5 miles of the Tank
                                                  breeding adults may be found in the                      central Puget Sound (Carretta et al.                  Farm Pier from 2007 to 2013 (NMFS
                                                  inland waters of Washington (Pitcher et                  2007b) and southern Puget Sound (D.                   2013b).
                                                  al. 2007). However, the number of                        Nysewander pers. comm. 2008; WDFW                     Dall’s Porpoise
                                                  inland waters haul-out sites has                         2008). Recent systematic boat surveys of
                                                  increased in recent years.                                                                                        The California, Oregon, and
                                                                                                           the main basin indicate that at least                 Washington Stock of Dall’s porpoise
                                                     Since June 2012, Naval Station Everett
                                                                                                           several hundred and possibly as many                  may be found near the project site.
                                                  personnel have been conducting counts
                                                                                                           as low thousands of harbor porpoise are               Dall’s porpoise are high-frequency
                                                  of the number of sea lions that use the
                                                                                                           now present. While the reasons for this               hearing range cetaceans (Southall et al.
                                                  in-water security fence floats as haul-
                                                                                                           recolonization are unclear, it is possible            2007).
                                                  outs. No Steller sea lions have been
                                                                                                           that changing conditions outside of                      The most recent estimate of Dall’s
                                                  observed using the security barrier floats
                                                                                                           Puget Sound, as evidenced by a tripling               porpoise stock abundance is 42,000,
                                                  haul-out to date (U.S Navy. 2013).
                                                     Since 2007, the Everett Community                     of the population in the adjacent waters              based on 2005 and 2008 summer/
                                                  College ORCA has conducted quarterly                     of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and San                 autumn vessel-based line transect
                                                  cruises that include monitoring stations                 Juan Islands since the early 1990s, and               surveys of California, Oregon, and
                                                  within the ZOI. No Steller sea lions                     the recent higher number of harbor                    Washington waters (Carretta et al. 2011).
                                                  have been observed in the ZOI during                     porpoise mortalities in coastal waters of             Within the inland waters of Washington
                                                  these cruises (ORCA 2013).                               Oregon and Washington, may have                       and British Columbia, this species is
                                                     The closest documented Steller Sea                    played a role in encouraging harbor                   most abundant in the Strait of Juan de
                                                  lion haul-outs to the Tank Farm Pier are                 porpoise to explore and shift into areas              Fuca east to the San Juan Islands. The
                                                  the Orchard Rocks and Rich Passage                       like Puget Sound (Hanson, et. al. 2011).              most recent Washington’s inland waters
                                                  buoys near S. Bainbridge Island (19                         The Washington Inland Waters Stock                 estimate is 900 animals (Calambokidis
                                                  miles SW), and Craven Rock near                          of harbor porpoise is ‘‘non-depleted’’                et al. 1997). Prior to the 1940s, Dall’s
                                                  Marrowstone Island (23 miles NW).                        under MMPA, and ‘‘unlisted’’ under the                porpoises were not reported in Puget
                                                  Haul-outs are generally occupied from                    ESA.                                                  Sound.
                                                  October through May, which overlaps                         Harbor porpoises are common in the                    The California, Oregon, and
                                                  with the in-water work window. Any                       Strait of Juan de Fuca and south into                 Washington Stock of Dall’s porpoise is
                                                  Steller sea lions near the Tank Farm Pier                Admiralty Inlet, especially during the                ‘‘non-depleted’’ under the MMPA, and
                                                  would be transiting through the area.                    winter, and are becoming more common                  ‘‘unlisted’’ under the ESA. Dall’s
                                                     There is no data available on the                     south of Admiralty Inlet. Little                      porpoises are migratory and appear to
                                                  number of Steller sea lions that use the                 information exists on harbor porpoise                 have predictable seasonal movements
                                                  Orchard Rocks. Up to 12 Steller sea                      movements and stock structure near the                driven by changes in oceanographic
                                                  lions have been observed using the                       Mukilteo area, although it is suspected               conditions (Green et al. 1992, 1993), and
                                                  Craven Rock haul-out off of                              that in some areas harbor porpoises                   are most abundant in Puget Sound
                                                  Marrowstone Island in northern Puget                     migrate (based on seasonal shifts in                  during the winter (Nysewander et al.
                                                  Sound (WSF 2010). However, given the                     distribution). For instance Hall (2004;               2005; WDFW 2008). Despite their
                                                  distance from this haul-out to the Tank                  pers. comm. 2008) found harbor                        migrations, Dall’s porpoises occur in all
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  Farm Pier, it is not expected that the                   porpoises off Canada’s southern                       areas of inland Washington at all times
                                                  same numbers would be present in the                     Vancouver Island to peak during late                  of year (Calambokidis pers. comm.
                                                  ZOI.                                                     summer, while the Washington State                    2006), but with different distributions
                                                                                                           Department of Fish and Wildlife’s                     throughout Puget Sound from winter to
                                                  Harbor Porpoise                                          (WDFW) Puget Sound Ambient                            summer. The average winter group size
                                                    The Washington Inland Waters Stock                     Monitoring Program (PSAMP) data                       is three animals (WDFW 2008).
                                                  of harbor porpoise may be found near                     show peaks in Washington waters to                       Since 2007, the Everett Community
                                                  the project site. The Washington Inland                  occur during the winter.                              College Ocean Research College


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00020   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                            43725

                                                  Academy (ORCA) has conducted                                Historically, the J pod also occurred              transient killer whale occurs most
                                                  quarterly cruises that include                           intermittently during this time in Puget              frequently in the general area of the
                                                  monitoring stations within the ZOI. No                   Sound; however, records from 1997–                    Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier in the spring
                                                  Dall’s porpoise have been observed                       2007 show that J pod did not enter                    and summer, and are far less common
                                                  within the ZOI during these cruises                      Puget Sound south of the Strait of Juan               from September through February (Orca
                                                  (ORCA 2013). According to the NMFS                       de Fuca from approximately June                       Network 2013). However, transient
                                                  National Stranding Database (2007–                       through August (Osborne 2008).                        killer whale occurrence is less
                                                  2013), there were no Dall’s porpoise                        In fall, all three pods occur in areas             predictable than SR killer whale
                                                  strandings in the area of the Tank Farm                  where migrating salmon are                            occurrence, and they may be present at
                                                  Pier (NMFS 2013b).                                       concentrated such as the mouth of the                 any time of the year. Since 2007, the
                                                                                                           Fraser River. They may also enter areas               Everett Community College ORCA has
                                                  Killer Whale                                             in Puget Sound where migrating chum                   conducted quarterly cruises that include
                                                    The Eastern North Pacific Southern                     and Chinook salmon are concentrated                   monitoring stations within the ZOI. No
                                                  Resident and West Coast Transient                        (Osborne 1999). In the winter months,                 killer whales have been observed within
                                                  stocks of killer whale may be found near                 the K and L pods spend progressively                  the ZOI during these cruises (ORCA
                                                  the project site.                                        less time in inland marine waters and                 2013).
                                                                                                           depart for coastal waters in January or
                                                  A. Southern Resident Stock                                                                                     Gray Whale
                                                                                                           February. The J pod is most likely to
                                                     The Southern Residents live in three                  appear year-round near the San Juan                      Gray whales are recorded in
                                                  family groups known as the J, K and L                    Islands, and in the fall/winter, in the               Washington waters during feeding
                                                  pods. As of July 15, 2014, the stock                     lower Puget Sound and in Georgia Strait               migrations between late spring and
                                                  collectively numbers 82 individuals                      at the mouth of the Fraser River.                     autumn with occasional sightings
                                                  (Carretta et al. 2014).                                     According to the NMFS National                     during winter months (Calambokidis et
                                                     Southern Residents are documented                     Stranding Database (2007–2013), there                 al. 1994, 2002; Orca Network 2013). The
                                                  in coastal waters ranging from central                   were no killer whale strandings in the                Eastern North Pacific stock of gray
                                                  California to the Queen Charlotte                        area of the Tank Farm Pier (NMFS                      whale may be found near the project
                                                                                                           2013b).                                               site. Gray whales are low-frequency
                                                  Islands, British Columbia (NMFS 2008).
                                                                                                              The SR killer whale stock was                      hearing range cetaceans (Southall et al.
                                                  They occur in all inland marine waters.
                                                                                                           declared ‘‘depleted/strategic’’ under the             2007).
                                                  SR killer whales generally spend more                                                                             The Eastern North Pacific stock of
                                                  time in deeper water and only                            MMPA in May 2003 (68 FR 31980). On
                                                                                                           November 18, 2005, the SR stock was                   gray whales is ‘‘non-depleted’’ under
                                                  occasionally enter water less than 15                                                                          the MMPA, and was ‘‘delisted’’ under
                                                  feet deep (Baird 2000). Distribution is                  listed as ‘‘endangered’’ under the ESA
                                                                                                           (70 FR 69903). On November 29, 2006,                  the ESA in 1994 after a 5-year review by
                                                  strongly associated with areas of greatest                                                                     NOAA Fisheries. In 2001 NOAA
                                                  salmon abundance, with heaviest                          NMFS published a final rule designating
                                                                                                           critical habitat for the SR killer whale              Fisheries received a petition to relist the
                                                  foraging activity occurring over deep                                                                          stock under the ESA, but it was
                                                  open water and in areas characterized                    DPS. Both Puget Sound and the San
                                                                                                           Juan Islands are designated as core areas             determined that there was not sufficient
                                                  by high-relief underwater topography,                                                                          information to warrant the petition
                                                  such as subsurface canyons, seamounts,                   of critical habitat under the ESA,
                                                                                                           excluding areas less than 20 feet deep                (Angliss and Outlaw 2007).
                                                  ridges, and steep slopes (Wiles 2004).                                                                            Although typically seen during their
                                                     Sightings compiled by the Orca                        relative to extreme high water are not
                                                                                                           designated as critical habitat (71 FR                 annual migrations on the outer coast, a
                                                  Network from 1990–2013 show that SR                                                                            regular group of gray whales annually
                                                  killer whale occurs most frequently in                   69054). A final recovery plan for
                                                                                                           Southern Residents was published in                   comes into the inland waters at Saratoga
                                                  the general area of the Tank Farm Pier                                                                         Passage and Port Susan (7.5 miles north)
                                                  in the fall and winter, and are far less                 January of 2008 (NMFS 2008).
                                                                                                                                                                 from March through May to feed on
                                                  common from April through September                      B. West Coast Transient Stock                         ghost shrimp (Weitkamp et al. 1992;
                                                  (Osborne 2008; Orca Network 2013).                          Transient killer whales generally                  Calambokidis pers. comm. 2006).
                                                  Since 2007, the Everett Community                        occur in smaller (1–5 individuals), less              During this time frame they are also
                                                  College ORCA has conducted quarterly                     structured pods (Allen and Angliss.                   seen in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, the
                                                  cruises that include monitoring stations                 2013). According to the Center for                    San Juan Islands, and areas of Puget
                                                  within the ZOI. No killer whales have                    Whale Research (CWR 2014), they tend                  Sound, although the observations in
                                                  been observed within the ZOI during                      to travel in small groups of one to five              Puget Sound are highly variable
                                                  these cruises (ORCA 2013).                               individuals, staying close to shorelines,             between years (Calambokidis et al.
                                                     Records from 1976 through 2013                        often near seal rookeries when pups are               1994). The average tenure within
                                                  document Southern Residents in the                       being weaned.                                         Washington inland waters is 47 days
                                                  inland waters of Washington during the                      The West Coast Transient stock,                    and the longest stay was 112 days (J.
                                                  months of March through June and                         which includes individuals from                       Calambokidis pers. comm. 2007).
                                                  October through December, with the                       California to southeastern Alaska, is                    Sightings compiled by the Orca
                                                  primary area of occurrence in inland                     estimated to have a minimum number of                 Network from 1990–2013 show that gray
                                                  waters north of Admiralty Inlet, located                 243 (Allen and Angliss, 2013).                        whales are most frequently in the
                                                  in north Puget Sound (Osborne 2008;                         The West Coast Transient stock                     general area of the Mukilteo Tank Farm
                                                  Orca Network 2013).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                                                                           occurs in California, Oregon,                         Pier from January through May, and are
                                                     Beginning in May or June and through                  Washington, British Columbia, and                     far less common from June through
                                                  the summer months, all three pods (J, K,                 southeastern Alaskan waters. Within the               September (Orca Network 2013). Table
                                                  and L) of Southern Residents are most                    inland waters, they may frequent areas                3–6 in the Application presents total
                                                  often located in the protected inshore                   near seal rookeries when pups are                     gray whale sightings (individual) per
                                                  waters of Haro Strait (west of San Juan                  weaned (Baird and Dill 1995).                         month in the area between 1990 and
                                                  Island), in the Strait of Juan de Fuca,                     Sightings compiled by the Orca                     2013. Sightings in Puget Sound are
                                                  and Georgia Strait near the Fraser River.                Network from 1990–2013 show that                      usually of a single individual, so Table


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00021   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                  43726                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                  3–6 sightings are likely of the same                     monitoring stations within the ZOI. No                One pascal is the pressure resulting
                                                  individual or low number of individuals                  humpback whales have been observed                    from a force of one newton exerted over
                                                  over a number of days that month.                        within the ZOI during these cruises                   an area of one square meter. The source
                                                    Since 2007, the Everett Community                      (ORCA 2013).                                          level (SL) represents the sound level at
                                                  College Ocean Research College                                                                                 a distance of 1 m from the source
                                                  Academy (ORCA) has conducted                             Potential Effects of the Specified
                                                                                                                                                                 (referenced to 1 mPa). The received level
                                                  quarterly cruises that include                           Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
                                                                                                                                                                 is the sound level at the listener’s
                                                  monitoring stations within the ZOI. No                   Habitat
                                                                                                                                                                 position. Note that all underwater sound
                                                  gray whales have been observed within                       This section includes a summary and                levels in this document are referenced
                                                  the ZOI during these cruises (ORCA                       discussion of the ways that stressors,                to a pressure of 1 mPa and all airborne
                                                  2013).                                                   (e.g. vibratory hammer pile extraction)               sound levels in this document are
                                                                                                           and potential mitigation activities,                  referenced to a pressure of 20 mPa.
                                                  Humpback Whale                                           associated with the Mukilteo Tank Farm                   Root mean square (rms) is the
                                                     The California-Oregon-Washington                      Pier Removal project may impact                       quadratic mean sound pressure over the
                                                  (CA-OR-WA) stock of humpback whale                       marine mammals and their habitat. The                 duration of an impulse. Rms is
                                                  may be found near the project site.                      ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental                        calculated by squaring all of the sound
                                                  Humpback whales are low-frequency                        Harassment’’ section later in this                    amplitudes, averaging the squares, and
                                                  hearing range cetaceans (Southall et al.                 document will include a quantitative                  then taking the square root of the
                                                  2007). The SAR abundance estimate is                     analysis of the number of individuals                 average (Urick, 1983). Rms accounts for
                                                  1,918 individuals. (Carretta et al. 2014).               that are expected to be taken by this                 both positive and negative values;
                                                     The humpback whale was listed as                      activity. The ‘‘Negligible Impact                     squaring the pressures makes all values
                                                  ‘‘endangered’’ throughout its range                      Analysis’’ section will include the                   positive so that they may be accounted
                                                  under the Endangered Species                             analysis of how this specific activity                for in the summation of pressure levels
                                                  Conservation Act of 1969. This                           will impact marine mammals and will                   (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This
                                                  protection was transferred to the ESA in                 consider the content of this section, the             measurement is often used in the
                                                  1973. A recovery plan was adopted in                     ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental                        context of discussing behavioral effects,
                                                  1991 (NMFS 1991). The humpback                           Harassment’’ section, and the ‘‘Proposed              in part because behavioral effects,
                                                  whale is also listed as ‘‘depleted/                      Mitigation’’ section to draw conclusions              which often result from auditory cues,
                                                  strategic’’ under the MMPA.                              regarding the likely impacts of this                  may be better expressed through
                                                     Historically, humpback whales were                    activity on the reproductive success or               averaged units than by peak pressures.
                                                  common in inland waters of Puget                         survivorship of individuals and from                     When underwater objects vibrate or
                                                  Sound and the San Juan Islands                           that on the affected marine mammal                    activity occurs, sound-pressure waves
                                                  (Calambokidis et al. 2004b). In the early                populations or stocks. In the following               are created. These waves alternately
                                                  part of this century, there was a                        discussion, we provide general                        compress and decompress the water as
                                                  productive commercial hunt for                           background information on sound and                   the sound wave travels. Underwater
                                                  humpbacks in Georgia Strait that was                     marine mammal hearing before                          sound waves radiate in all directions
                                                  probably responsible for their long                      considering potential effects to marine               away from the source (similar to ripples
                                                  disappearance from local waters                          mammals from sound produced by                        on the surface of a pond), except in
                                                  (Osborne et al. 1988). Commercial hunts                  vibratory pile driving.                               cases where the source is directional.
                                                  ended in the 1960’s. Since the mid-                                                                            The compressions and decompressions
                                                                                                           Description of Sound Sources
                                                  1990s, sightings in Puget Sound have                                                                           associated with sound waves are
                                                  increased.                                                  Sound travels in waves, the basic                  detected as changes in pressure by
                                                     This stock calves and mates in coastal                components of which are frequency,                    aquatic life and man-made sound
                                                  Central America and Mexico and                           wavelength, velocity, and amplitude.                  receptors such as hydrophones.
                                                  migrates up the coast from California to                 Frequency is the number of pressure                      Even in the absence of sound from the
                                                  southern British Columbia in the                         waves that pass by a reference point per              specified activity, the underwater
                                                  summer and fall to feed (NMFS 1991;                      unit of time and is measured in hertz                 environment is typically loud due to
                                                  Marine Mammal Commission 2003;                           (Hz) or cycles per second. Wavelength is              ambient sound. Ambient sound is
                                                  Carretta et al. 2007b). Few humpback                     the distance between two peaks of a                   defined as environmental background
                                                  whales are seen in Puget Sound, but                      sound wave; lower frequency sounds                    sound levels lacking a single source or
                                                  more frequent sightings occur in the                     have longer wavelengths than higher                   point (Richardson et al., 1995), and the
                                                  Strait of Juan de Fuca and near the San                  frequency sounds and attenuate                        sound level of a region is defined by the
                                                  Juan Islands. Most sightings are in                      (decrease) more rapidly in shallower                  total acoustical energy being generated
                                                  spring and summer.                                       water. Amplitude is the height of the                 by known and unknown sources. These
                                                     Sightings compiled by the Orca                        sound pressure wave or the ‘loudness’                 sources may include physical (e.g.,
                                                  Network from 1990–2013 show that                         of a sound and is typically measured                  waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric
                                                  humpback whales are most frequently                      using the decibel (dB) scale. A dB is the             sound), biological (e.g., sounds
                                                  in the general area of the Tank Farm                     ratio between a measured pressure (with               produced by marine mammals, fish, and
                                                  Pier from April through June, and are far                sound) and a reference pressure (sound                invertebrates), and anthropogenic sound
                                                  less common from July to March (Orca                     at a constant pressure, established by                (e.g., vessels, dredging, aircraft,
                                                  Network 2013). Table 3–7 presents total                  scientific standards). It is a logarithmic            construction). A number of sources
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  humpback whale sightings (individual)                    unit that accounts for large variations in            contribute to ambient sound, including
                                                  per month in the area between 1990 and                   amplitude; therefore, relatively small                the following (Richardson et al., 1995):
                                                  2013. Sightings in Puget Sound are                       changes in dB ratings correspond to                      • Wind and waves: The complex
                                                  usually of a single individual.                          large changes in sound pressure. When                 interactions between wind and water
                                                     Since 2007, the Everett Community                     referring to sound pressure levels (SPLs;             surface, including processes such as
                                                  College Ocean Research College                           the sound force per unit area), sound is              breaking waves and wave-induced
                                                  Academy (ORCA) has conducted                             referenced in the context of underwater               bubble oscillations and cavitation, are a
                                                  quarterly cruises that include                           sound pressure to 1 microPascal (mPa).                main source of naturally occurring


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00022   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                                                         Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                                      43727

                                                  ambient noise for frequencies between                                 transportation (surface vessels and                         weather conditions and levels of
                                                  200 Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In                                  aircraft), dredging and construction, oil                   biological and shipping activity) but
                                                  general, ambient sound levels tend to                                 and gas drilling and production, seismic                    also on the ability of sound to propagate
                                                  increase with increasing wind speed                                   surveys, sonar, explosions, and ocean                       through the environment. In turn, sound
                                                  and wave height. Surf noise becomes                                   acoustic studies. Shipping noise                            propagation is dependent on the
                                                  important near shore, with                                            typically dominates the total ambient                       spatially and temporally varying
                                                  measurements collected at a distance of                               noise for frequencies between 20 and                        properties of the water column and sea
                                                  8.5 km from shore showing an increase                                 300 Hz. In general, the frequencies of                      floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a
                                                  of 10 dB in the 100 to 700 Hz band                                    anthropogenic sounds are below 1 kHz                        result of the dependence on a large
                                                  during heavy surf conditions.                                         and, if higher frequency sound levels                       number of varying factors, ambient
                                                     • Precipitation: Sound from rain and                               are created, they attenuate rapidly
                                                  hail impacting the water surface can                                                                                              sound levels can be expected to vary
                                                                                                                        (Richardson et al., 1995). Sound from                       widely over both coarse and fine spatial
                                                  become an important component of total                                identifiable anthropogenic sources other
                                                  noise at frequencies above 500 Hz, and                                                                                            and temporal scales. Sound levels at a
                                                                                                                        than the activity of interest (e.g., a                      given frequency and location can vary
                                                  possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet                                  passing vessel) is sometimes termed
                                                  times.                                                                                                                            by 10–20 dB from day to day
                                                                                                                        background sound, as opposed to
                                                     • Biological: Marine mammals can                                                                                               (Richardson et al., 1995). The result is
                                                                                                                        ambient sound.
                                                  contribute significantly to ambient noise                                                                                         that, depending on the source type and
                                                  levels, as can some fish and shrimp. The                                 The sum of the various natural and                       its intensity, sound from the specified
                                                  frequency band for biological                                         anthropogenic sound sources at any                          activity may be a negligible addition to
                                                  contributions is from approximately 12                                given location and time—which                               the local environment or could form a
                                                  Hz to over 100 kHz.                                                   comprise ‘‘ambient’’ or ‘‘background’’                      distinctive signal that may affect marine
                                                     • Anthropogenic: Sources of ambient                                sound—depends not only on the source                        mammals.
                                                  noise related to human activity include                               levels (as determined by current

                                                                                         TABLE 2—REPRESENTATIVE SOUND LEVELS OF ANTHROPOGENIC SOURCES
                                                                                                                                 Frequency range
                                                                              Sound source                                                               Underwater sound level                         References
                                                                                                                                      (Hz)

                                                  Small vessels ..............................................................           250–1,000     151   dB   rms at   1 m ...........   Richardson et al., 1995.
                                                  Tug docking gravel barge ...........................................                   200–1,000     149   dB   rms at   100 m .......     Blackwell and Greene, 2002.
                                                  Vibratory driving of 72-in steel pipe pile .....................                        10–1,500     180   dB   rms at   10 m .........    Reyff, 2007.
                                                  Impact driving of 36-in steel pipe pile .........................                       10–1,500     195   dB   rms at   10 m .........    Laughlin, 2007.
                                                  Impact driving of 66-in cast-in-steel-shell (CISS) pile                                 10–1,500     195   dB   at rms   10 m .........    Reviewed in Hastings and Popper,
                                                                                                                                                                                               2005.



                                                     In-water construction activities                                   pressure to a maximal pressure value                       both non-acoustic and acoustic
                                                  associated with the project would                                     followed by a rapid decay period that                      stressors. Potential non-acoustic
                                                  consist mainly of vibratory pile                                      may include a period of diminishing,                       stressors could result from the physical
                                                  extraction and direct pull of piles using                             oscillating maximal and minimal                            presence of the equipment and
                                                  a chain wrapped around the pile. The                                  pressures, and generally have an                           personnel. Any impacts to marine
                                                  latter activity is not expected to produce                            increased capacity to induce physical                      mammals, however, are expected to
                                                  sound that would approach Level B                                     injury as compared with sounds that                        primarily be acoustic in nature.
                                                  harassment. There are two general                                     lack these features. Note that there is no
                                                  categories of sound types: Impulse and                                impact driving planned as part of this                     Marine Mammal Hearing
                                                  non-pulse (defined in the following).                                 project.
                                                                                                                           Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal,                            When considering the influence of
                                                  Vibratory pile driving is considered to
                                                                                                                        narrowband, or broadband, brief or                         various kinds of sound on the marine
                                                  be continuous or non-pulsed while
                                                                                                                        prolonged, and may be either                               environment, it is necessary to
                                                  impact pile driving is considered to be
                                                  an impulse or pulsed sound type. The                                  continuous or non-continuous (ANSI,                        understand that different kinds of
                                                  distinction between these two sound                                   1995; NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-                     marine life are sensitive to different
                                                  types is important because they have                                  pulsed sounds can be transient signals                     frequencies of sound. Based on available
                                                  differing potential to cause physical                                 of short duration but without the                          behavioral data, audiograms have been
                                                  effects, particularly with regard to                                  essential properties of pulses (e.g., rapid                derived using auditory evoked
                                                  hearing (Southall et al., 2007). Please                               rise time). Examples of non-pulsed                         potentials, anatomical modeling, and
                                                  see Southall et al., (2007) for an in-                                sounds include those produced by                           other data, Southall et al. (2007)
                                                  depth discussion of these concepts.                                   vessels, aircraft, machinery operations                    designate ‘‘functional hearing groups’’
                                                     Pulsed sound sources (e.g.,                                        such as drilling or dredging, vibratory                    for marine mammals and estimate the
                                                  explosions, gunshots, sonic booms,                                    pile driving and removal, and active                       lower and upper frequencies of
                                                  impact pile driving) produce signals                                  sonar systems (such as those used by the                   functional hearing of the groups. The
                                                                                                                                                                                   functional groups and the associated
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  that are brief (typically considered to be                            U.S. Navy). The duration of such
                                                  less than one second), broadband, atonal                              sounds, as received at a distance, can be                  frequencies are indicated below (though
                                                  transients (ANSI, 1986; Harris, 1998;                                 greatly extended in a highly reverberant                   animals are less sensitive to sounds at
                                                  NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003; ANSI, 2005)                                   environment.                                               the outer edge of their functional range
                                                  and occur either as isolated events or                                   The likely or possible impacts of the                   and most sensitive to sounds of
                                                  repeated in some succession. Pulsed                                   proposed vibratory hammer pile                             frequencies within a smaller range
                                                  sounds are all characterized by a                                     extraction at the MukilteoTank Farm                        somewhere in the middle of their
                                                  relatively rapid rise from ambient                                    Pier on marine mammals could involve                       functional hearing range):


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014       18:39 Jul 22, 2015      Jkt 235001      PO 00000      Frm 00023   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM          23JYN1


                                                  43728                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                     • Low frequency cetaceans (13                         standoff distance between the pile and                that does not coincide with that used for
                                                  species of mysticetes): Functional                       the animal; and the sound propagation                 recognition of important acoustic cues,
                                                  hearing is estimated to occur between                    properties of the environment. Impacts                would have little to no effect on an
                                                  approximately 7 Hz and 30 kHz;                           to marine mammals from pile driving                   animal’s fitness. Repeated sound
                                                     • Mid-frequency cetaceans (32                         and removal activities are expected to                exposure that leads to TTS could cause
                                                  species of dolphins, six species of larger               result primarily from acoustic pathways.              PTS. The following subsections discuss
                                                  toothed whales, and 19 species of                        As such, the degree of effect is                      in somewhat more detail the
                                                  beaked and bottlenose whales):                           intrinsically related to the received level           possibilities of TTS, PTS, and non-
                                                  Functional hearing is estimated to occur                 and duration of the sound exposure,                   auditory physical effects.
                                                  between approximately 150 Hz and 160                     which are in turn influenced by the                      Temporary Threshold Shift—TTS is
                                                  kHz;                                                     distance between the animal and the                   the mildest form of hearing impairment
                                                     • High frequency cetaceans (eight                     source. The further away from the                     that can occur during exposure to a
                                                  species of true porpoises, six species of                source, the less intense the exposure                 strong sound (Kryter, 1985). While
                                                  river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana,                  should be. The substrate and depth of                 experiencing TTS, the hearing threshold
                                                  and four species of cephalorhynchids):                   the habitat affect the sound propagation              rises, and a sound must be stronger in
                                                  Functional hearing is estimated to occur                 properties of the environment. Shallow                order to be heard. In terrestrial
                                                  between approximately 200 Hz and 180                     environments are typically more                       mammals, TTS can last from minutes or
                                                  kHz;                                                     structurally complex, which leads to                  hours to days (in cases of strong TTS).
                                                     • Phocid pinnipeds in Water:                          rapid sound attenuation. In addition,                 For sound exposures at or somewhat
                                                  Functional hearing is estimated to occur                 substrates that are soft (e.g., sand) would           above the TTS threshold, hearing
                                                  between approximately 75 Hz and 100                      absorb or attenuate the sound more                    sensitivity in both terrestrial and marine
                                                  kHz; and                                                 readily than hard substrates (e.g., rock)             mammals recovers rapidly after
                                                     • Otariid pinnipeds in Water:                         which may reflect the acoustic wave.                  exposure to the sound ends. Few data
                                                  Functional hearing is estimated to occur                 Soft porous substrates would also likely              on sound levels and durations necessary
                                                  between approximately 100 Hz and 40                      require less time to drive the pile, and              to elicit mild TTS have been obtained
                                                  kHz.                                                     possibly less forceful equipment, which               for marine mammals, and none of the
                                                     As mentioned previously in this                       would ultimately decrease the intensity               published data concern TTS elicited by
                                                  document, eight marine mammal                            of the acoustic source.                               exposure to multiple pulses of sound.
                                                  species (seven cetacean and two                             In the absence of mitigation, impacts              Available data on TTS in marine
                                                  pinniped) may occur in the Icy Strait                    to marine species would be expected to                mammals are summarized in Southall et
                                                  project area. Of the five cetacean species               result from physiological and behavioral              al. (2007). TTS is not currently
                                                  likely to occur in the proposed project                  responses to both the type and strength               classified as an injury (Southall et al.,
                                                  area and for which take is requested,                    of the acoustic signature (Viada et al.,              2007).
                                                  two are classified as low-frequency                      2008). The type and severity of                          Given the available data, the received
                                                  cetaceans (i.e., humpback and gray                       behavioral impacts are more difficult to              level of a single pulse (with no
                                                  whales), one is classified as a mid-                     define due to limited studies addressing              frequency weighting) might need to be
                                                  frequency cetacean (i.e., killer whale),                 the behavioral effects of impulse sounds              approximately 186 dB re 1 mPa 2-s (i.e.,
                                                  and two are classified as high-frequency                 on marine mammals. Potential effects                  186 dB sound exposure level [SEL] or
                                                  cetaceans (i.e., harbor and Dall’s                       from impulse sound sources can range                  approximately 221–226 dB p-p [peak])
                                                  porpoises) (Southall et al., 2007).                      in severity from effects such as                      in order to produce brief, mild TTS.
                                                  Additionally, harbor seals are classified                behavioral disturbance or tactile                     Exposure to several strong pulses that
                                                  as members of the phocid pinnipeds in                    perception to physical discomfort, slight             each have received levels near 190 dB
                                                  water functional hearing group while                     injury of the internal organs and the                 rms (175–180 dB SEL) might result in
                                                  California and Stellar sea lions are                     auditory system, or mortality (Yelverton              cumulative exposure of approximately
                                                  grouped under the Otariid pinnipeds in                   et al., 1973).                                        186 dB SEL and thus slight TTS in a
                                                  water functional hearing group. A                           Hearing Impairment and Other                       small odontocete, assuming the TTS
                                                  species’ functional hearing group is a                   Physical Effects—Marine mammals                       threshold is (to a first approximation) a
                                                  consideration when we analyze the                        exposed to high intensity sound                       function of the total received pulse
                                                  effects of exposure to sound on marine                   repeatedly or for prolonged periods can               energy.
                                                  mammals.                                                 experience hearing threshold shift (TS),                 The above TTS information for
                                                                                                           which is the loss of hearing sensitivity              odontocetes is derived from studies on
                                                  Acoustic Impacts                                                                                               the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
                                                                                                           at certain frequency ranges (Kastak et
                                                     Potential Effects of Pile Driving and                 al., 1999; Schlundt et al., 2000;                     truncatus) and beluga whale
                                                  Removal Sound—The effects of sounds                      Finneran et al., 2002, 2005). TS can be               (Delphinapterus leucas). There is no
                                                  from pile driving might result in one or                 permanent (PTS), in which case the loss               published TTS information for other
                                                  more of the following: Temporary or                      of hearing sensitivity is not recoverable,            species of cetaceans. However,
                                                  permanent hearing impairment, non-                       or temporary (TTS), in which case the                 preliminary evidence from a harbor
                                                  auditory physical or physiological                       animal’s hearing threshold would                      porpoise exposed to pulsed sound
                                                  effects, behavioral disturbance, and                     recover over time (Southall et al., 2007).            suggests that its TTS threshold may
                                                  masking (Richardson et al., 1995;                        Marine mammals depend on acoustic                     have been lower (Lucke et al., 2009). As
                                                  Gordon et al., 2004; Nowacek et al.,                     cues for vital biological functions, (e.g.,           summarized above, data that are now
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  2007; Southall et al., 2007). The effects                orientation, communication, finding                   available imply that TTS is unlikely to
                                                  of pile driving and removal on marine                    prey, avoiding predators); thus, TTS                  occur unless odontocetes are exposed to
                                                  mammals are dependent on several                         may result in reduced fitness in survival             pile driving pulses stronger than 180 dB
                                                  factors, including the size, type, and                   and reproduction. However, this                       re 1 mPa rms.
                                                  depth of the animal; the depth,                          depends on the frequency and duration                    Permanent Threshold Shift—When
                                                  intensity, and duration of the pile                      of TTS, as well as the biological context             PTS occurs, there is physical damage
                                                  driving sound; the depth of the water                    in which it occurs. TTS of limited                    (injury) to the sound receptors in the
                                                  column; the substrate of the habitat; the                duration, occurring in a frequency range              ear. In severe cases, there can be total or


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00024   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                           43729

                                                  partial deafness, while in other cases the               source level of pile driving from one                 likely to habituate to sounds that are
                                                  animal has an impaired ability to hear                   hammer strike is expected to be much                  predictable and unvarying. The opposite
                                                  sounds in specific frequency ranges                      lower than the single watergun impulse                process is sensitization, when an
                                                  (Kryter, 1985). There is no specific                     cited here, animals being exposed for a               unpleasant experience leads to
                                                  evidence that exposure to pulses of                      prolonged period to repeated hammer                   subsequent responses, often in the form
                                                  sound can cause PTS in any marine                        strikes could receive more sound                      of avoidance, at a lower level of
                                                  mammal. However, given the possibility                   exposure in terms of SEL than from the                exposure. Behavioral state may affect
                                                  that mammals close to a sound source                     single watergun impulse (estimated at                 the type of response as well. For
                                                  can incur TTS, it is possible that some                  188 dB re 1 mPa 2-s) in the                           example, animals that are resting may
                                                  individuals might incur PTS. Single or                   aforementioned experiment (Finneran et                show greater behavioral change in
                                                  occasional occurrences of mild TTS are                   al., 2002). However, in order for marine              response to disturbing sound levels than
                                                  not indicative of permanent auditory                     mammals to experience TTS or PTS, the                 animals that are highly motivated to
                                                  damage, but repeated or (in some cases)                  animals have to be close enough to be                 remain in an area for feeding
                                                  single exposures to a level well above                   exposed to high intensity sound levels                (Richardson et al., 1995; NRC, 2003;
                                                  that causing TTS onset might elicit PTS.                 for a prolonged period of time. Based on              Wartzok et al., 2003).
                                                     Relationships between TTS and PTS                     the best scientific information available,               Controlled experiments with captive
                                                  thresholds have not been studied in                      these SPLs are far below the thresholds               marine mammals showed pronounced
                                                  marine mammals but are assumed to be                     that could cause TTS or the onset of                  behavioral reactions, including
                                                  similar to those in humans and other                     PTS.                                                  avoidance of loud sound sources
                                                  terrestrial mammals, based on                               Non-auditory Physiological Effects—                (Ridgway et al., 1997; Finneran et al.,
                                                  anatomical similarities. PTS might                       Non-auditory physiological effects or                 2003). Observed responses of wild
                                                  occur at a received sound level at least                 injuries that theoretically might occur in            marine mammals to loud pulsed sound
                                                  several decibels above that inducing                     marine mammals exposed to strong                      sources (typically seismic guns or
                                                  mild TTS if the animal were exposed to                   underwater sound include stress,                      acoustic harassment devices, but also
                                                  strong sound pulses with rapid rise                      neurological effects, bubble formation,               including pile driving) have been varied
                                                  time. Based on data from terrestrial                     resonance effects, and other types of                 but often consist of avoidance behavior
                                                  mammals, a precautionary assumption                      organ or tissue damage (Cox et al., 2006;             or other behavioral changes suggesting
                                                  is that the PTS threshold for impulse                    Southall et al., 2007). Studies examining             discomfort (Morton and Symonds, 2002;
                                                  sounds (such as pile driving pulses as                   such effects are limited. In general, little          Thorson and Reyff, 2006; see also
                                                  received close to the source) is at least                is known about the potential for pile                 Gordon et al., 2004; Wartzok et al.,
                                                  6 dB higher than the TTS threshold on                    driving to cause auditory impairment or               2003; Nowacek et al., 2007). Responses
                                                  a peak-pressure basis and probably                       other physical effects in marine                      to continuous sound, such as vibratory
                                                  greater than 6 dB (Southall et al., 2007).               mammals. Available data suggest that                  pile installation and removal, have not
                                                  On an SEL basis, Southall et al. (2007)                  such effects, if they occur at all, would             been documented as well as responses
                                                  estimated that received levels would                     presumably be limited to short distances              to pulsed sounds.
                                                  need to exceed the TTS threshold by at                   from the sound source and to activities                  With both types of pile driving, it is
                                                  least 15 dB for there to be risk of PTS.                 that extend over a prolonged period.                  likely that the onset of pile driving
                                                  Thus, for cetaceans, Southall et al.                     The available data do not allow                       could result in temporary, short term
                                                  (2007) estimate that the PTS threshold                   identification of a specific exposure                 changes in an animal’s typical behavior
                                                  might be an M-weighted SEL (for the                      level above which non-auditory effects                and/or avoidance of the affected area.
                                                  sequence of received pulses) of                          can be expected (Southall et al., 2007)               These behavioral changes may include
                                                  approximately 198 dB re 1 mPa2-s (15 dB                  or any meaningful quantitative                        (Richardson et al., 1995): Changing
                                                  higher than the TTS threshold for an                     predictions of the numbers (if any) of                durations of surfacing and dives,
                                                  impulse). Given the higher level of                      marine mammals that might be affected                 number of blows per surfacing, or
                                                  sound necessary to cause PTS as                          in those ways. Marine mammals that                    moving direction and/or speed;
                                                  compared with TTS, it is considerably                    show behavioral avoidance of pile                     reduced/increased vocal activities;
                                                  less likely that PTS could occur.                        driving, including some odontocetes                   changing/cessation of certain behavioral
                                                     Measured source levels from impact                    and some pinnipeds, are especially                    activities (such as socializing or
                                                  pile driving can be as high as 214 dB                    unlikely to incur auditory impairment                 feeding); visible startle response or
                                                  rms. Although no marine mammals                          or non-auditory physical effects.                     aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke
                                                  have been shown to experience TTS or                                                                           slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
                                                  PTS as a result of being exposed to pile                 Disturbance Reactions                                 areas where sound sources are located;
                                                  driving activities, captive bottlenose                      Disturbance includes a variety of                  and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds
                                                  dolphins and beluga whales exhibited                     effects, including subtle changes in                  flushing into water from haul-outs or
                                                  changes in behavior when exposed to                      behavior, more conspicuous changes in                 rookeries). Pinnipeds may increase their
                                                  strong pulsed sounds (Finneran et al.,                   activities, and displacement. Behavioral              haul-out time, possibly to avoid in-
                                                  2000, 2002, 2005). The animals tolerated                 responses to sound are highly variable                water disturbance (Thorson and Reyff,
                                                  high received levels of sound before                     and context-specific and reactions, if                2006).
                                                  exhibiting aversive behaviors.                           any, depend on species, state of                         The biological significance of many of
                                                  Experiments on a beluga whale showed                     maturity, experience, current activity,               these behavioral disturbances is difficult
                                                  that exposure to a single watergun                       reproductive state, auditory sensitivity,             to predict, especially if the detected
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  impulse at a received level of 207 kPa                   time of day, and many other factors                   disturbances appear minor. However,
                                                  (30 psi) p-p, which is equivalent to 228                 (Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok et al.,             the consequences of behavioral
                                                  dB p-p, resulted in a 7 and 6 dB TTS                     2003; Southall et al., 2007).                         modification could include effects on
                                                  in the beluga whale at 0.4 and 30 kHz,                      Habituation can occur when an                      growth, survival, or reproduction.
                                                  respectively. Thresholds returned to                     animal’s response to a stimulus wanes                 Significant behavioral modifications
                                                  within 2 dB of the pre-exposure level                    with repeated exposure, usually in the                that could potentially lead to effects on
                                                  within four minutes of the exposure                      absence of unpleasant associated events               growth, survival, or reproduction
                                                  (Finneran et al., 2002). Although the                    (Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most              include:


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00025   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                  43730                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                     • Drastic changes in diving/surfacing                 animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and                sounds as high as 112 dB peak and 96
                                                  patterns;                                                cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote            dB rm.
                                                     • Habitat abandonment due to loss of                  et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009).
                                                  desirable acoustic environment; and                         Masking has the potential to impact                Vessel Interaction
                                                     • Cessation of feeding or social                      species at the population or community                   Besides being susceptible to vessel
                                                  interaction.                                             levels as well as at individual levels.               strikes, cetacean and pinniped
                                                     The onset of behavioral disturbance                   Masking affects both senders and                      responses to vessels may result in
                                                  from anthropogenic sound depends on                      receivers of the signals and can                      behavioral changes, including greater
                                                  both external factors (characteristics of                potentially have long-term chronic                    variability in the dive, surfacing, and
                                                  sound sources and their paths) and the                   effects on marine mammal species and                  respiration patterns; changes in
                                                  specific characteristics of the receiving                populations. Recent research suggests                 vocalizations; and changes in swimming
                                                  animals (hearing, motivation,                            that low frequency ambient sound levels               speed or direction (NRC 2003). There
                                                  experience, demography) and is difficult                 have increased by as much as 20 dB                    will be a temporary and localized
                                                  to predict (Southall et al., 2007).                      (more than three times in terms of SPL)               increase in vessel traffic during
                                                     Auditory Masking—Natural and                          in the world’s ocean from pre-industrial              construction. At least one work barge
                                                  artificial sounds can disrupt behavior by                periods, and that most of these increases             will be present at any time during the
                                                  masking, or interfering with, a marine                   are from distant shipping (Hildebrand,                in-water and over water work.
                                                  mammal’s ability to hear other sounds.                   2009). All anthropogenic sound sources,
                                                  Masking occurs when the receipt of a                                                                           Potential Effects on Marine Mammal
                                                                                                           such as those from vessel traffic, pile               Habitat
                                                  sound is interfered with by another                      driving, and dredging activities,
                                                  coincident sound at similar frequencies                  contribute to the elevated ambient                       The primary potential impacts to
                                                  and at similar or higher levels. Chronic                 sound levels, thus intensifying masking.              marine mammal habitat are associated
                                                  exposure to excessive, though not high-                     Vibratory pile driving and removal is              with elevated sound levels produced by
                                                  intensity, sound could cause masking at                  relatively short-term, with rapid                     vibratory pile removal. However, other
                                                  particular frequencies for marine                        oscillations occurring for 10 to 30                   potential impacts to the surrounding
                                                  mammals that utilize sound for vital                     minutes per installed or removed pile.                habitat from physical disturbance are
                                                  biological functions. Masking can                        It is possible that vibratory driving and             also possible.
                                                  interfere with detection of acoustic                     removal resulting from this proposed                     Potential Pile Driving and Removal
                                                  signals such as communication calls,                     action may mask acoustic signals                      Effects on Prey—With regard to fish as
                                                  echolocation sounds, and                                 important to the behavior and survival                a prey source for cetaceans and
                                                  environmental sounds important to                        of marine mammal species, but the                     pinnipeds, fish are known to hear and
                                                  marine mammals. Therefore, under                         short-term duration and limited affected              react to sounds and to use sound to
                                                  certain circumstances, marine mammals                    area would result in insignificant                    communicate (Tavolga et al., 1981) and
                                                  whose acoustical sensors or                              impacts from masking. Any masking                     possibly avoid predators (Wilson and
                                                  environment are being severely masked                    event that could possibly rise to Level               Dill, 2002). Experiments have shown
                                                  could also be impaired from maximizing                   B harassment under the MMPA would                     that fish can sense both the strength and
                                                  their performance fitness in survival                    occur concurrently within the zones of                direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981).
                                                  and reproduction. If the coincident                      behavioral harassment already                         Primary factors determining whether a
                                                  (masking) sound were anthropogenic, it                   estimated for vibratory pile driving, and             fish can sense a sound signal, and
                                                  could be potentially harassing if it                     which have already been taken into                    potentially react to it, are the frequency
                                                  disrupted hearing-related behavior. It is                account in the exposure analysis.                     of the signal and the strength of the
                                                  important to distinguish TTS and PTS,                       Acoustic Effects, Airborne—Marine                  signal in relation to the natural
                                                  which persist after the sound exposure,                  mammals that occur in the project area                background noise level.
                                                  from masking, which occurs only during                   could be exposed to airborne sounds                      The level of sound at which a fish
                                                  the sound exposure. Because masking                      associated with pile removal that have                will react or alter its behavior is usually
                                                  (without resulting in TS) is not                         the potential to cause harassment,                    well above the detection level. Fish
                                                  associated with abnormal physiological                   depending on their distance from pile                 have been found to react to sounds
                                                  function, it is not considered a                         driving activities. Airborne pile removal             when the sound level increased to about
                                                  physiological effect, but rather a                       sound would have less impact on                       20 dB above the detection level of 120
                                                  potential behavioral effect.                             cetaceans than pinnipeds because sound                dB; however, the response threshold can
                                                     Masking occurs at the frequency band                  from atmospheric sources does not                     depend on the time of year and the
                                                  which the animals utilize so the                         transmit well underwater (Richardson et               fish’s physiological condition (Engas et
                                                  frequency range of the potentially                       al., 1995); thus, airborne sound would                al., 1996). In general, fish react more
                                                  masking sound is important in                            only be an issue for pinnipeds either                 strongly to pulses of sound rather than
                                                  determining any potential behavioral                     hauled-out or looking with heads above                non-pulse signals (such as noise from
                                                  impacts. Because sound generated from                    water in the project area. Most likely,               vessels) (Blaxter et al., 1981), and a
                                                  in-water vibratory pile driving and                      airborne sound would cause behavioral                 quicker alarm response is elicited when
                                                  removal is mostly concentrated at low                    responses similar to those discussed                  the sound signal intensity rises rapidly
                                                  frequency ranges, it may have less effect                above in relation to underwater sound.                compared to sound rising more slowly
                                                  on high frequency echolocation sounds                    For instance, anthropogenic sound                     to the same level.
                                                  made by porpoises. However, lower                        could cause hauled-out pinnipeds to                      Further, during the coastal
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  frequency man-made sounds are more                       exhibit changes in their normal                       construction only a small fraction of the
                                                  likely to affect detection of                            behavior, such as reduction in                        available habitat would be ensonified at
                                                  communication calls and other                            vocalizations, or cause them to                       any given time. Disturbance to fish
                                                  potentially important natural sounds                     temporarily abandon their habitat and                 species would be short-term and fish
                                                  such as surf and prey sound. It may also                 move further from the source. Studies                 would return to their pre-disturbance
                                                  affect communication signals when they                   by Blackwell et al. (2004) and Moulton                behavior once the pile driving activity
                                                  occur near the sound band and thus                       et al. (2005) indicate a tolerance or lack            ceases. Thus, the proposed construction
                                                  reduce the communication space of                        of response to unweighted airborne                    would have little, if any, impact on the


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00026   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                          43731

                                                  abilities of marine mammals to feed in                   marine organisms, especially toothed                  corresponding to the areas in which
                                                  the area where construction work is                      whales and pinnipeds that are high on                 SPLs equal or exceed 122 dB rms (Level
                                                  planned.                                                 the food chain and bioaccumulate these                B harassment threshold for continuous
                                                     Finally, the time of the proposed                     toxins. This is especially a concern for              sound) for pile driving installation and
                                                  construction activity would avoid the                    long-lived species that spend much of                 removal. The disturbance zones will
                                                  spawning season of the ESA-listed                        their life in Puget Sound, such as                    provide utility for monitoring
                                                  salmonid species.                                        Southern Resident killer whales (NMFS                 conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e.,
                                                     Effects to Foraging Habitat—Short-                    2008).                                                shutdown zone monitoring) by
                                                  term turbidity is a water quality effect                                                                       establishing monitoring protocols for
                                                  of most in-water work, including pile                    Proposed Mitigation
                                                                                                                                                                 areas adjacent to the shutdown zones.
                                                  removal. WSF must comply with state                         In order to issue an IHA under section             Monitoring of disturbance zones will
                                                  water quality standards during these                     101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must                   enable observers to be aware of and
                                                  operations by limiting the extent of                     set forth the permissible methods of                  communicate the presence of marine
                                                  turbidity to the immediate project area.                 taking pursuant to such activity, ‘‘and               mammals in the project area but outside
                                                  Roni and Weitkamp (1996) monitored                       other means of effecting the least                    the shutdown zone and thus prepare for
                                                  water quality parameters during a pier                   practicable impact on such species or                 potential shutdowns of activity.
                                                  replacement project in Manchester,                       stock and its habitat, paying particular              However, the primary purpose of
                                                  Washington. The study measured water                     attention to rookeries, mating grounds,               disturbance zone monitoring will be to
                                                  quality before, during and after pile                    and areas of similar significance, and on             document incidents of Level B
                                                  removal and driving. The study found                     the availability of such species or stock             harassment; disturbance zone
                                                  that construction activity at the site had               for taking’’ for certain subsistence uses.            monitoring is discussed in greater detail
                                                  ‘‘little or no effect on dissolved oxygen,               For the proposed project, WSF worked                  later (see ‘‘Proposed Monitoring and
                                                  water temperature and salinity’’, and                    with NMFS and proposed the following                  Reporting
                                                  turbidity (measured in nephelometric                     mitigation measures to minimize the                      Ramp Up (Soft Start)—Vibratory
                                                  turbidity units [NTU]) at all depths                     potential impacts to marine mammals in                hammer use for pile removal and pile
                                                  nearest the construction activity was                    the project vicinity. The primary                     driving shall be initiated at reduced
                                                  typically less than 1 NTU higher than                    purposes of these mitigation measures                 power for 15 seconds with a 1 minute
                                                  stations farther from the project area                   are to minimize sound levels from the                 interval, and be repeated with this
                                                  throughout construction.                                 activities, and to monitor marine                     procedure for an additional two times.
                                                     Similar results were recorded during                  mammals within designated zones of                    This will allow marine mammals to
                                                  pile removal operations at two WSF                       influence corresponding to NMFS’                      move away from the sound source.
                                                  ferry facilities. At the Friday Harbor                   current Level A and B harassment                         Time Restrictions—Work would occur
                                                  terminal, localized turbidity levels                     thresholds which are depicted in Table                only during daylight hours, when visual
                                                  within the regulatory compliance radius                  3 found later in the Estimated Take by                monitoring of marine mammals can be
                                                  of 150 feet (from three timber pile                      Incidental Harassment section.                        conducted. In addition, all in-water
                                                  removal events) were generally less than                                                                       construction will be limited to the
                                                  0.5 NTU higher than background levels                    Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile
                                                                                                           Driving                                               period between August 1, 2015 and
                                                  and never exceeded 1 NTU. At the Eagle                                                                         February 15, 2016; and continue in
                                                  Harbor maintenance facility, within 150                    The following measures would apply                  August 1, 2016 until IHA expires on
                                                  feet, local turbidity levels (from removal               to WSF’s mitigation through shutdown                  August 31, 2016.
                                                  of timber and steel piles) did not exceed                and disturbance zones:                                   Southern Resident Killer Whale—The
                                                  0.2 NTU above background levels (WSF                       Shutdown Zone—For all pile driving                  following steps will be implemented for
                                                  2012). In general, turbidity associated                  activities, WSF will establish a                      southern resident killer whales to avoid
                                                  with pile installation is localized to                   shutdown zone. Shutdown zones are                     or minimize take (see Appendix B of the
                                                  about a 25-foot radius around the pile                   typically used to contain the area in                 application—Monitoring Plan):
                                                  (Everitt et al., 1980).                                  which SPLs equal or exceed the 180/190                   D If Southern Residents approach the
                                                     Cetaceans are not expected to be close                dB rms acoustic injury criteria for                   zone of influence (ZOI) during vibratory
                                                  enough to the Tank Farm Pier to                          cetaceans and pinnipeds, respectively,                pile removal, work will be paused until
                                                  experience turbidity, and any pinnipeds                  with the purpose being to define an area              the Southern Residents exit the ZOI.
                                                  will be transiting the area and could                    within which shutdown of activity                     The ZOI is the area co-extensive with
                                                  avoid localized turbidity. Therefore, the                would occur upon sighting of a marine                 the Level A and Level B harassment
                                                  impact from increased turbidity levels is                mammal (or in anticipation of an animal               zones.
                                                  expected to be discountable to marine                    entering the defined area), thus                         D If killer whales approach the ZOI
                                                  mammals.                                                 preventing injury of marine mammals.                  during vibratory pile removal, and it is
                                                     Removal of the Tank Farm Pier will                    For vibratory driving, WSF’s activities               unknown whether they are Southern
                                                  result in 3,900 creosote-treated piles                   are not expected to produce sound at or               Resident killer whales or transients, it
                                                  (∼7,300 tons) removed from the marine                    above the 180 dB rms injury criterion                 shall be assumed they are Southern
                                                  environment. This will result in                         (see ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental                   Residents and work will be paused until
                                                  temporary and localized sediment re-                     Harassment’’). WSF would, however,                    the whales exit the ZOI.
                                                  suspension of some of the contaminants                   implement a minimum shutdown zone                        D If Southern Residents enter the ZOI
                                                  associated with creosote, such as                        of 10 m radius for all marine mammals                 before they are detected, work will be
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.                        around all vibratory extraction activity.             paused until the Southern Residents
                                                     However, the removal of the creosote-                 This precautionary measure is intended                exit the ZOI to avoid further Level B
                                                  treated wood piles from the marine                       to further reduce the unlikely possibility            harassment take.
                                                  environment will result in a long-term                   of injury from direct physical
                                                  improvement in water and sediment                        interaction with construction                         Mitigation Conclusions
                                                  quality, meeting the goals of WSF’s                      operations.                                             NMFS has carefully evaluated the
                                                  Creosote Removal Initiative started in                     Disturbance Zone Monitoring—WSF                     applicant’s proposed mitigation in the
                                                  2000. The net impact is a benefit to                     will establish disturbance zones                      context of ensuring that NMFS


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00027   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                  43732                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                  prescribes the means of effecting the                    effective implementation of the                          Sighting information collected by the
                                                  least practicable impact on the affected                 mitigation.                                           Orca Network includes detection by
                                                  marine mammal species and stocks and                        Based on our evaluation of the                     hydrophone. The SeaSound Remote
                                                  their habitat. Our evaluation of potential               applicant’s proposed measures, as well                Sensing Network is a system of
                                                  measures included consideration of the                   as other measures considered by NMFS,                 interconnected hydrophones installed
                                                  following factors in relation to one                     NMFS has preliminarily determined                     in the marine environment of Haro
                                                  another:                                                 that the proposed mitigation measures                 Strait (west side of San Juan Island) to
                                                     • The manner in which, and the                        provide the means of effecting the least              study killer whale communication, in-
                                                  degree to which, the successful                          practicable impact on marine mammals                  water noise, bottom fish ecology and
                                                  implementation of the measure is                         species or stocks and their habitat,                  local climatic conditions. A hydrophone
                                                  expected to minimize adverse impacts                     paying particular attention to rookeries,             at the Port Townsend Marine Science
                                                  to marine mammals.                                       mating grounds, and areas of similar                  Center measures average in-water sound
                                                     • The proven or likely efficacy of the                significance.                                         levels and automatically detects
                                                  specific measure to minimize adverse                                                                           unusual sounds. These passive acoustic
                                                  impacts as planned.                                      Proposed Monitoring and Reporting                     devices allow researchers to hear when
                                                     • The practicability of the measure                      In order to issue an ITA for an                    different marine mammals come into
                                                  for applicant implementation.                            activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the                 the region. This acoustic network,
                                                     Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed                  MMPA states that NMFS must set forth                  combined with the volunteer
                                                  by NMFS should be able to accomplish,                    ‘‘requirements pertaining to the                      (incidental) visual sighting network
                                                  have a reasonable likelihood of                          monitoring and reporting of such                      allows researchers to document
                                                  accomplishing (based on current                          taking.’’ The MMPA implementing                       presence and location of various marine
                                                  science), or contribute to the                           regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13)                  mammal species.
                                                  accomplishment of one or more of the                     indicate that requests for ITAs must                     With this level of coordination in the
                                                  general goals listed below:                              include the suggested means of                        region of activity, WSF will be able to
                                                     1. Avoidance or minimization of                       accomplishing the necessary monitoring                get real-time information on the
                                                  injury or death of marine mammals                        and reporting that will result in                     presence or absence of whales before
                                                  wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may                 increased knowledge of the species and                starting any pile removal or driving.
                                                  contribute to this goal).                                of the level of taking or impacts on                  (2) Protected Species Observers (PSOs)
                                                     2. A reduction in the numbers of                      populations of marine mammals that are
                                                  marine mammals (total number or                          expected to be present in the proposed                   WSF will employ qualified PSOs to
                                                  number at biologically important time                    action area.                                          monitor the 122 dBrms re 1 mPa for
                                                  or location) exposed to received levels                                                                        marine mammals. Qualifications for
                                                                                                           Proposed Monitoring Measures                          marine mammal observers include:
                                                  of pile driving, or other activities
                                                                                                             The monitoring plan proposed by                        • Visual acuity in both eyes
                                                  expected to result in the take of marine
                                                                                                           WSF can be found in its IHA                           (correction is permissible) sufficient for
                                                  mammals (this goal may contribute to 1,
                                                                                                           application. The plan may be modified                 discernment of moving targets at the
                                                  above, or to reducing harassment takes
                                                                                                           or supplemented based on comments or                  water’s surface with ability to estimate
                                                  only).
                                                                                                           new information received from the                     target size and distance. Use of
                                                     3. A reduction in the number of times
                                                                                                           public during the public comment                      binoculars will be necessary to correctly
                                                  (total number or number at biologically
                                                                                                           period. A summary of the primary                      identify the target.
                                                  important time or location) individuals                                                                           • Advanced education in biological
                                                  would be exposed to received levels of                   components of the plan follows.
                                                                                                                                                                 science, wildlife management,
                                                  pile removal, or other activities                                                                              mammalogy or related fields (Bachelor’s
                                                                                                           (1) Marine Mammal Monitoring
                                                  expected to result in the take of marine                                                                       degree or higher is preferred), but not
                                                                                                           Coordination
                                                  mammals (this goal may contribute to 1,                                                                        required.
                                                  above, or to reducing harassment takes                     WSF would conduct briefings                            • Experience or training in the field
                                                  only).                                                   between the construction supervisors                  identification of marine mammals
                                                     4. A reduction in the intensity of                    and the crew and protected species                    (cetaceans and pinnipeds).
                                                  exposures (either total number or                        observers (PSOs) prior to the start of                   • Sufficient training, orientation or
                                                  number at biologically important time                    pile-driving activity, marine mammal                  experience with the construction
                                                  or location) to received levels of pile                  monitoring protocol and operational                   operation to provide for personal safety
                                                  driving, or other activities expected to                 procedures.                                           during observations.
                                                  result in the take of marine mammals                       Prior to the start of pile driving, the                • Ability to communicate orally, by
                                                  (this goal may contribute to a, above, or                Orca Network and/or Center for Whale                  radio or in person, with project
                                                  to reducing the severity of harassment                   Research would be contacted to find out               personnel to provide real time
                                                  takes only).                                             the location of the nearest marine                    information on marine mammals
                                                     5. Avoidance or minimization of                       mammal sightings. The Orca Sightings                  observed in the area as necessary.
                                                  adverse effects to marine mammal                         Network consists of a list of over 600                   • Experience and ability to conduct
                                                  habitat, paying special attention to the                 (and growing) residents, scientists, and              field observations and collect data
                                                  food base, activities that block or limit                government agency personnel in the                    according to assigned protocols (this
                                                  passage to or from biologically                          U.S. and Canada. Sightings are called or              may include academic experience).
                                                                                                                                                                    • Writing skills sufficient to prepare a
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  important areas, permanent destruction                   emailed into the Orca Network and
                                                  of habitat, or temporary destruction/                    immediately distributed to other                      report of observations that would
                                                  disturbance of habitat during a                          sighting networks including: The NMFS                 include such information as the number
                                                  biologically important time.                             Northwest Fisheries Science Center, the               and type of marine mammals observed;
                                                     6. For monitoring directly related to                 Center for Whale Research, Cascadia                   the behavior of marine mammals in the
                                                  mitigation—an increase in the                            Research, the Whale Museum Hotline                    project area during construction, dates
                                                  probability of detecting marine                          and the British Columbia Sightings                    and times when observations were
                                                  mammals, thus allowing for more                          Network.                                              conducted; dates and times when in-


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00028   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                           43733

                                                  water construction activities were                       in a location that will maximize his/her              prolonged period, impacts on animals or
                                                  conducted; and dates and times when                      ability to detect marine mammals and                  on the stock or species could potentially
                                                  marine mammals were present at or                        will also utilize binoculars to improve               be significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder,
                                                  within the defined ZOI.                                  detection rates.                                      2007; Weilgart, 2007). Given the many
                                                                                                                                                                 uncertainties in predicting the quantity
                                                  (3) Monitoring Protocols                                 Proposed Reporting Measures
                                                                                                                                                                 and types of impacts of sound on
                                                     PSOs would be present on site at all                     WSF would provide NMFS with a                      marine mammals, it is common practice
                                                  times during pile removal and driving.                   draft monitoring report within 90 days                to estimate how many animals are likely
                                                  Marine mammal behavior, overall                          of the conclusion of the proposed                     to be present within a particular
                                                  numbers of individuals observed,                         construction work. This report will                   distance of a given activity, or exposed
                                                  frequency of observation, and the time                   detail the monitoring protocol,                       to a particular level of sound.
                                                  corresponding to the daily tidal cycle                   summarize the data recorded during
                                                                                                           monitoring, and estimate the number of                  WSF has requested authorization for
                                                  would be recorded.                                                                                             the incidental taking of small numbers
                                                     WSF proposes the following                            marine mammals that may have been
                                                                                                           harassed.                                             of humpback whale, Steller sea lion,
                                                  methodology to estimate marine                                                                                 California sea lion, Dall’s porpoise, gray
                                                  mammals that were taken as a result of                      If comments are received from the
                                                                                                           NMFS Northwest Regional                               whale, harbor porpoise and killer whale
                                                  the proposed Mukilteo Multimodal                                                                               near the Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier that
                                                  Tank Farm Pier removal project:                          Administrator or NMFS Office of
                                                                                                           Protected Resources on the draft report,              may result from vibratory pile extraction
                                                     • During vibratory pile removal, two                                                                        activities.
                                                  land-based biologists will monitor the                   a final report will be submitted to NMFS
                                                  area from the best observation points                    within 30 days thereafter. If no                        In order to estimate the potential
                                                  available. If weather conditions prevent                 comments are received from NMFS, the                  incidents of take that may occur
                                                  adequate land-based observations, boat-                  draft report will be considered to be the             incidental to the specified activity, we
                                                  based monitoring may be implemented.                     final report.                                         must first estimate the extent of the
                                                     • To verify the required monitoring                   Estimated Take by Incidental                          sound field that may be produced by the
                                                  distance, the vibratory Level B                          Harassment                                            activity and then consider in
                                                  behavioral harassment ZOI will be                                                                              combination with information about
                                                                                                              Except with respect to certain                     marine mammal density or abundance
                                                  determined by using a range finder or                    activities not pertinent here, section
                                                  hand-held global positioning system                                                                            in the project area. We first provide
                                                                                                           3(18) of the MMPA defines                             information on applicable sound
                                                  device.                                                  ‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘. . . any act of
                                                     • The vibratory Level B acoustical                                                                          thresholds for determining effects to
                                                                                                           pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)              marine mammals before describing the
                                                  harassment ZOI will be monitored for                     has the potential to injure a marine
                                                  the presence of marine mammals 30                                                                              information used in estimating the
                                                                                                           mammal or marine mammal stock in the                  sound fields, the available marine
                                                  minutes before, during, and 30 minutes                   wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has
                                                  after any pile removal activity.                                                                               mammal density or abundance
                                                                                                           the potential to disturb a marine                     information, and the method of
                                                     • Monitoring will be continuous                       mammal or marine mammal stock in the
                                                  unless the contractor takes a significant                                                                      estimating potential incidences of take.
                                                                                                           wild by causing disruption of behavioral
                                                  break, in which case, monitoring will be                 patterns, including, but not limited to,              Sound Thresholds
                                                  required 30 minutes prior to restarting                  migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
                                                  pile removal.                                            feeding, or sheltering [Level B                          We use generic sound exposure
                                                     • If marine mammals are observed,                     harassment].’’                                        thresholds to determine when an
                                                  their location within the ZOI, and their                    All anticipated takes would be by                  activity that produces sound might
                                                  reaction (if any) to pile-driving activities             Level B harassment resulting from                     result in impacts to a marine mammal
                                                  will be documented.                                      vibratory pile removal and are likely to              such that a take by harassment might
                                                     NMFS has reviewed the WSF’s                           involve temporary changes in behavior.                occur. To date, no studies have been
                                                  proposed marine mammal monitoring                        Injurious or lethal takes are not                     conducted that explicitly examine
                                                  protocol, and has preliminarily                          expected due to the expected source                   impacts to marine mammals from pile
                                                  determined the applicant’s monitoring                    levels and sound source characteristics               driving sounds or from which empirical
                                                  program is adequate, particularly as it                  associated with the activity, and the                 sound thresholds have been established.
                                                  relates to assessing the level of taking or              proposed mitigation and monitoring                    These thresholds (Table 3) are used to
                                                  impacts to affected species. The land-                   measures are expected to further                      estimate when harassment may occur
                                                  based PSO is expected to be positioned                   minimize the possibility of such take.                (i.e., when an animal is exposed to
                                                  in a location that will maximize his/her                    If a marine mammal responds to a                   levels equal to or exceeding the relevant
                                                  ability to detect marine mammals and                     stimulus by changing its behavior (e.g.,              criterion) in specific contexts; however,
                                                  will also utilize binoculars to improve                  through relatively minor changes in                   useful contextual information that may
                                                  detection rates. NMFS has reviewed the                   locomotion direction/speed or                         inform our assessment of behavioral
                                                  WSF’s proposed marine mammal                             vocalization behavior), the response                  effects is typically lacking and we
                                                  monitoring protocol, and has                             may or may not constitute taking at the               consider these thresholds as step
                                                  determined the applicant’s monitoring                    individual level, and is unlikely to                  functions. NMFS is working to revise
                                                  program is adequate, particularly as it                  affect the stock or the species as a                  these acoustic guidelines; for more
                                                  relates to assessing the level of taking or              whole. However, if a sound source                     information on that process, please visit
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  impacts to affected species. The land-                   displaces marine mammals from an                      www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/
                                                  based PSO is expected to be positioned                   important feeding or breeding area for a              guidelines.htm.




                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00029   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                  43734                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                             TABLE 3—UNDERWATER INJURY AND DISTURBANCE THRESHOLD DECIBEL LEVELS FOR MARINE MAMMALS
                                                           Criterion                                            Criterion definition                                                       Threshold

                                                  Level A harassment ......      PTS (injury) conservatively based on TTS ...........................................   190 dB RMS for pinnipeds. 180 dB RMS for
                                                                                                                                                                          cetaceans.
                                                  Level B harassment ......      Behavioral disruption for impulse noise (e.g., impact pile driving) .......            160 dB RMS.
                                                  Level B harassment ......      Behavioral disruption for non-pulse noise (e.g., vibratory pile driving,               120 dB RMS.
                                                                                   drilling).



                                                  Distance to Sound Thresholds                             the onset of marine mammal Level B                           might occupy the ZOI at any given
                                                     WSF and NMFS have determined that                     behavioral harassment. However, since                        moment. However, in some cases take
                                                  open-water vibratory pile extraction                     the ambient noise level at the vicinity of                   requests were estimated using local
                                                  during the Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier                       the proposed project area is between                         marine mammal data sets (e.g., Orca
                                                  Removal project has the potential to                     122 to 124 dB re 1 mPa, depending on                         Network, state and federal agencies),
                                                  result in behavioral harassment of                       marine mammal functional hearing                             opinions from state and federal
                                                  marine mammal species and stocks in                      groups (Laughlin 2011b), the received                        agencies, and observations from Navy
                                                  the vicinity of the proposed activity.                   level of 120 dB re 1 mPa would be below                      biologists.
                                                     As Table 3 shows, under current                       the ambient level. Therefore, for this
                                                                                                           proposed project, 122 dB re 1 mPa is                         Harbor Seal
                                                  NMFS guidelines, the received exposure
                                                  level for Level A harassment is defined                  used as the threshold for Level B                               Based on the ORCA monitoring,
                                                  at ≥180 dB (rms) re 1 mPa for cetaceans                  behavioral harassment. The distance to                       NMFS’ analysis uses a conservative
                                                  and ≥190 dB (rms) re 1 mPa for                           the 122 dB contour Level B acoustical                        estimate of 13 harbor seals per day
                                                  pinnipeds. The measured source levels                    harassment threshold due to vibratory                        potentially within the ZOI. For Year
                                                  from vibratory removal of 12-inch                        pile removal extends a maximum of 1.6                        One pile removal, the duration estimate
                                                  timber piles are between 149 and 152                     km as is shown in Figure 1–5 in the                          is 975 hours over 140 days. For the
                                                  dB (rms) re 1 mPa at 16 m from the                       Application.                                                 exposure estimate, it will be
                                                  hammer (Laughlin 2011a). Therefore,                         As far as airborne noise is concerned,                    conservatively assumed that 13 harbor
                                                  the proposed Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier                     the estimated in-air source level from                       seals may be present within the ZOI and
                                                  Removal construction project is not                      vibratory pile driving a 30-in steel pile                    be exposed multiple times during the
                                                  expected to cause Level A harassment or                  is estimated at 97.8 dB re 1 mPa at 15                       project. The calculation for marine
                                                  TTS to marine mammals.                                   m (50 feet) from the pile (Laughlin                          mammal exposures is estimated by:
                                                     Masking affects both senders and                      2010b). Using the spreading loss of 6 dB                     Exposure estimate = N * 140 days of
                                                  receivers of the signals and therefore                   per doubling of distance, it is estimated                         vibratory pile removal activity,
                                                  can have consequences at the                             that the distances to the 90 dB and 100
                                                                                                                                                                        where:
                                                  population level. Recent science                         dB thresholds were estimated at 37 m
                                                                                                                                                                        N = # of animals (13)
                                                  suggests that low frequency ambient                      and 12 m, respectively.                                      Exposure estimate = 13 * 140 days = 1,820
                                                  sound levels have increased by as much                      The closest documented harbor seal
                                                  as 20 dB (more than 3 times in terms of                  haul-out is the Naval Station Everett                          NMFS is proposing the authorization
                                                  SPL) in the world’s ocean from pre-                      floating security fence, and the Port                        for Level B acoustical harassment of
                                                  industrial periods, and most of these                    Gardner log booms, both approximately                        1,820 harbor seals. However, many of
                                                  increases are from distant shipping                      4.5 miles to the northeast of the project                    these takes are likely to be repeated
                                                  (Hildebrand 2009). All anthropogenic                     site). The closest documented California                     exposures of individual animals.
                                                  noise sources, such as those from vessel                 sea lion haul out site are the Everett                       California Sea Lion
                                                  traffic, pile driving, dredging, and                     Harbor navigation buoys, located
                                                                                                           approximately 3 miles to the northeast                         Based on the ORCA monitoring this
                                                  dismantling existing bridge by mechanic
                                                                                                           of the project site (Figure 3–1). In-air                     analysis uses a conservative estimate of
                                                  means, contribute to the elevated
                                                                                                           disturbance will be limited to those                         6 California sea lions per day potentially
                                                  ambient noise levels, thus intensify
                                                  masking.                                                 animals moving on the surface through                        within the ZOI.
                                                     Nevertheless, the levels of noise from                the immediate pier area, within                              Exposure estimate = 6 * 140 days = 840
                                                  the proposed WSF construction                            approximately 37 meters (123 feet) for                         NMFS is proposing the authorization
                                                  activities are relatively low and are                    harbor seals and within 12 meters (39                        for Level B acoustical harassment take
                                                  blocked by landmass southward.                           feet) for other pinnipeds of vibratory                       of 840 California sea lions. Many of
                                                  Therefore, the noise generated is not                    pile removal (Figure 1–6 in                                  these takes are likely to be repeated
                                                  expected to contribute to increased                      Application).                                                exposures of individual animals.
                                                  ocean ambient noise in a manner that                        Incidental take is estimated for each
                                                                                                           species by estimating the likelihood of                      Steller Sea Lion
                                                  will notably increase the ability of
                                                  marine mammals in the vicinity to                        a marine mammal being present within                            Based on the observation data from
                                                  detect critical acoustic cues. Due to                    a ZOI during active pile removal or                          Craven Rock, this analysis uses a
                                                  shallow water depths near the ferry                      driving. Expected marine mammal                              conservative estimate of 12 Steller sea
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  terminals, underwater sound                              presence is determined by past                               lions per day potentially near the ZOI.
                                                  propagation for low-frequency sound                      observations and general abundance                           However, given the distance from this
                                                  (which is the major noise source from                    near the Tank Farm Pier during the                           haul-out to the Tank Farm Pier, it is not
                                                  pile driving) is expected to be poor.                    construction window. Typically,                              expected that the same numbers would
                                                     Currently NMFS uses 120 dBrms re 1                    potential take is estimated by                               be present in the ZOI. For the exposure
                                                  mPa received level for non-impulse                       multiplying the area of the ZOI by the                       estimate, it will be conservatively
                                                  noises (such as vibratory pile driving,                  local animal density. This provides an                       assumed that 1⁄6th of the Steller sea
                                                  saw cutting, drilling, and dredging) for                 estimate of the number of animals that                       lions observed at Craven Rock (2


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00030    Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703    E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM     23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                                         43735

                                                  animals) may be present within the ZOI                   southern resident killer whales NMFS                     Based on the estimates, approximately
                                                  and be exposed multiple times during                     proposes to require additional steps                  1,820 Pacific harbor seals, 840
                                                  the project for total of 2 animals                       applicable to killer whales. These steps              California sea lions, 280 Steller sea
                                                  Exposure estimate = 2 * 140 days = 280                   are described below and in Appendix B                 lions, 1,120 Harbor porpoise, 420 Dall’s
                                                    NMFS is proposing the authorization                    of the Application.                                   porpoise, 94 killer whales (10 transient,
                                                  for Level B acoustical harassment take                     Transient Killer Whale—NMFS                         15 Southern Resident killer whales), 90
                                                  of 280 Steller sea lions. It is likely that              estimated the take of transient killer                gray whales, and 36 humpback whales
                                                  many of these takes are likely to be                     whales by applying the same                           could be exposed to received sound
                                                  repeated exposures of individual                         methodology used to estimate Southern                 levels above 122 dB re 1 mPa (rms) from
                                                  animals..                                                Resident killer whale.                                the proposed Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier
                                                                                                           Exposure estimate = (0.001582                         Removal project. A summary of the
                                                  Harbor Porpoise                                               [summer] + 0.002373 [fall] +                     estimated takes is presented in Table 4.
                                                    Based on the water depth within the                         0.002373 [winter]) * 5 km2 =
                                                  ZOI and group size, this analysis uses a                      0.03163 transient killer whales.                    TABLE 4—ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF
                                                  conservative estimate of 8 harbor                          Note that pod size of transients can                   MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY BE
                                                  porpoises per day potentially near the                   range from 1–5. NMFS will assume that                    EXPOSED TO VIBRATORY HAMMER
                                                  ZOI.                                                     two pods of 5 whales will be sighted                     SOUND LEVELS ABOVE 122 dB re 1
                                                  Exposure estimate = 8 * 140 days =                       during this authorization period.                        μPa
                                                      1,120                                                Therefore, NMFS is proposing 10 takes                                               [rms]
                                                    WSF is requesting authorization for                    of transient killer whales.
                                                  Level B acoustical harassment take of                                                                                                                         Percent-
                                                                                                           Gray Whale                                                                           Estimated          age
                                                  1,120 Harbor porpoise. Note that many                                                                                  Species                 marine        of species
                                                  of these takes are likely to be repeated                   Based on the frequency of sightings                                                mammal          or stock
                                                                                                           during the in-water work window, this                                                 akes *
                                                  exposures of individual animals.                                                                                                                                 (%)
                                                                                                           analysis uses a conservative estimate of
                                                  Dall’s Porpoise                                          3 gray whales per day potentially near                Pacific harbor seal                   1,820         16.5
                                                    Based on the average winter group                      the ZOI.                                              California sea lion                     840          0.3
                                                  size, as described in Section 3.0 of the                   It is assumed that Gray whales will                 Steller sea lion ......                 280          0.4
                                                                                                           not enter the ZOI each day of the                     Harbor porpoise ....                  1,120         10.5
                                                  Application, this analysis uses a                                                                              Dall’s porpoise ......                  420          1.0
                                                  conservative estimate of 3 Dall’s                        project, but may be present in the ZOI
                                                                                                                                                                 Killer whale, tran-
                                                  porpoises per day potentially near the                   for 5 days per month as they forage in                  sient ...................             10           4.1
                                                  ZOI.                                                     the area, for a total of 30 days. For the             Killer whale, South-
                                                  Exposure estimate = 3 * 140 days = 420                   exposure estimate, it will be                           ern Resident ......                   15          18.2
                                                                                                           conservatively assumed that up to 3                   Gray whale ...........                  90           0.5
                                                    NMFS is proposing authorization for                    animals may be present within the ZOI                 Humpback whale ..                       36           2.0
                                                  Level B acoustical harassment take of                    and be exposed multiple times during
                                                  420 Dall’s porpoise. A number of these                   the project.
                                                                                                                                                                   * Represents maximum estimate of animals
                                                  anticipated takes are likely to be                                                                             due to likelihood that some individuals will be
                                                                                                           Exposure estimate = 3 * 30 days = 90                  taken more than once
                                                  repeated exposures of individual
                                                  animals.                                                   NMFS is proposing authorization for                 Analysis and Preliminary
                                                                                                           Level B acoustical harassment take of 90              Determinations
                                                  Killer Whale                                             Gray whales. It is assumed that this
                                                    Southern Resident Killer Whale—In                      number will include multiple                          Negligible Impact Analysis
                                                  order to estimate anticipated take,                      harassments of a single individual                       Negligible impact is ‘‘an impact
                                                  NMFS used Southern Resident killer                       animal.                                               resulting from the specified activity that
                                                  whale density data from the Pacific                                                                            cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
                                                                                                           Humpback Whale
                                                  Marine Species Density Database (US                                                                            not reasonably likely to, adversely affect
                                                  Navy 2014) that measured density per                       Based on the frequency of sightings                 the species or stock through effects on
                                                  km2 per season in the waters in the                      during the in-water work window, this                 annual rates of recruitment or survival’’
                                                  vicinity of the Mukilteo Tank Farm Pier.                 analysis uses a conservative estimate of              (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact
                                                  Data was provided as a range by the                      2 humpback whales potentially near the                finding is based on the lack of likely
                                                  Navy. NMFS took the high end of the                      ZOI.                                                  adverse effects on annual rates of
                                                  range for the summer, fall, and winter                     It is assumed that humpback whales                  recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
                                                  seasons to estimate density and                          will not enter the ZOI each day of the                level effects). An estimate of the number
                                                  multiplied that figure by the ensonified                 project, but may be present in the ZOI                of Level B harassment takes, alone, is
                                                  area (∼5 km2.)                                           for 3 days per month as they forage in                not enough information on which to
                                                  Exposure estimate = (0.00090 [summer]                    the area, for a total of 18 days. For the             base an impact determination. In
                                                       + 0.000482 [fall] + 0.000250                        exposure estimate, it will be                         addition to considering estimates of the
                                                       [winter]) * 5 km2 = 0.0258 Southern                 conservatively assumed that up to 2                   number of marine mammals that might
                                                       Resident killer whales.                             animals may be present within the ZOI                 be ‘‘taken’’ through behavioral
                                                                                                           and be exposed multiple times during
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                    Note that pod size of Southern                                                                               harassment, NMFS must consider other
                                                  Resident killer whales can range from                    the project.                                          factors, such as the likely nature of any
                                                  3–50. NMFS will assume that one pod                      Exposure estimate = 2 * 18 days = 36                  responses (their intensity, duration,
                                                  of 15 whales will be sighted during this                   NMFS is proposing authorization for                 etc.), the context of any responses
                                                  authorization period and proposes to                     Level B acoustical harassment take of 36              (critical reproductive time or location,
                                                  authorize that amount. However, it is                    humpback whales. It is assumed that                   migration, etc.), as well as the number
                                                  possible that a larger group may be                      this number will include multiple                     and nature of estimated Level A
                                                  observed. In order to limit the take of                  harassments of the same individuals.                  harassment takes, the number of


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00031   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                  43736                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                  estimated mortalities, effects on habitat,               exposures may cause brief startle                        Effects on individuals that are taken
                                                  and the status of the species.                           reactions or short-term behavioral                    by Level B harassment, on the basis of
                                                     To avoid repetition, the following                    modification by the animals. These                    reports in the literature as well as
                                                  discussion applies to the affected stocks                reactions and behavioral changes are                  monitoring from other similar activities,
                                                  of harbor seals, California sea lions,                   expected to subside quickly when the                  will likely be limited to reactions such
                                                  Steller sea lions, harbor porpoises,                     exposures cease. Moreover, the                        as increased swimming speeds,
                                                  Dall’s porpoises, gray whales and                        proposed mitigation and monitoring                    increased surfacing time, or decreased
                                                  humpback whales, except where a                          measures are expected to reduce                       foraging (if such activity were occurring)
                                                  separate discussion is provided for                      potential exposures and behavioral                    (e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 2006; Lerma,
                                                  killer whales, as the best available                     modifications even further.                           2014). Most likely, individuals will
                                                  information indicates that effects of the                                                                      simply move away from the sound
                                                  specified activity on individuals of                     Southern Resident Killer Whale
                                                                                                                                                                 source and be temporarily displaced
                                                  those stocks will be similar, and there                     Critical habitat for Southern Resident             from the areas of pile driving, although
                                                  is no information about the population                   killer whales has been identified in the              even this reaction has been observed
                                                  size, status, structure, or habitat use of               area and may be impacted. The                         primarily only in association with
                                                  the areas to warrant separate discussion.                proposed action will have short-term                  impact pile driving. In response to
                                                     Pile removal activities associated with               adverse effects on Chinook salmon, the                vibratory driving and removal,
                                                  the Mukilteo Tank Farm removal                           primary prey of Southern Resident killer              pinnipeds (which may become
                                                  project, as outlined previously, have the                whales. However, the Puget Sound                      somewhat habituated to human activity
                                                  potential to disturb or displace marine                  Chinook salmon ESU comprises a small                  in industrial or urban waterways) have
                                                  mammals. Specifically, the specified                     percentage of the Southern Resident                   been observed to orient towards and
                                                  activities may result in take, in the form               killer whale diet. Hanson et al. (2010)               sometimes move towards the sound.
                                                  of Level B harassment (behavioral                        found only six to 14 percent of Chinook               The pile removal activities analyzed
                                                  disturbance) only, from underwater                       salmon eaten in the summer were from                  here are similar to, or less impactful
                                                  sounds generated from pile extraction.                   Puget Sound. Therefore, NMFS                          than, numerous construction activities
                                                  Potential takes could occur if                           concludes that both the short-term                    conducted in other similar locations,
                                                  individuals of these species are present                 adverse effects and the long-term                     which have taken place with no
                                                  in the ensonified zone when pile                         beneficial effects on Southern Resident               reported injuries or mortality to marine
                                                  driving is happening.                                    killer whale prey quantity and quality                mammals, and no known long-term
                                                     No injury, serious injury, or mortality               will be insignificant. Also, the sound
                                                                                                                                                                 adverse consequences from behavioral
                                                  is anticipated given the nature of the                   from vibratory pile driving and removal
                                                                                                                                                                 harassment. Repeated exposures of
                                                  activity and measures designed to                        may interfere with whale passage. For
                                                                                                                                                                 individuals to levels of sound that may
                                                  minimize the possibility of injury to                    example, exposed killer whales are
                                                                                                                                                                 cause Level B harassment are unlikely
                                                  marine mammals. The potential for                        likely to redirect around the sound
                                                                                                                                                                 to result in hearing impairment or to
                                                  these outcomes is minimized through                      instead of passing through the area.
                                                  the construction method and the                                                                                significantly disrupt foraging behavior.
                                                                                                           However, the effect of the additional
                                                  implementation of the planned                                                                                  Thus, even repeated Level B harassment
                                                                                                           distance traveled is unlikely to cause a
                                                  mitigation measures. Specifically,                                                                             of some small subset of the overall stock
                                                                                                           measureable increase in an individual’s
                                                  vibratory hammers will be the primary                                                                          is unlikely to result in any significant
                                                                                                           energy budget, and the effects would
                                                  method of extraction and no impact                       therefore be temporary and                            realized decrease in fitness for the
                                                  driving will occurs. Vibratory driving                   insignificant. Additionally, WSF will                 affected individuals, and thus would
                                                  and removal does not have significant                    employ additional mitigation measures                 not result in any adverse impact to the
                                                  potential to cause injury to marine                      to avoid or minimize impacts to                       stock as a whole. Level B harassment
                                                  mammals due to the relatively low                        Southern Residents. These measures                    will be reduced to the level of least
                                                  source levels produced (site-specific                    were described previously in the section              practicable impact through use of
                                                  acoustic monitoring data show no                         Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile                      mitigation measures described herein
                                                  source level measurements above 180                      Driving.                                              and, if sound produced by project
                                                  dB rms) and the lack of potentially                         The project also is not expected to                activities is sufficiently disturbing,
                                                  injurious source characteristics. Given                  have significant adverse effects on                   animals are likely to simply avoid the
                                                  sufficient ‘‘notice’’ through use of soft                affected marine mammals’ habitat, as                  project area while the activity is
                                                  start, marine mammals are expected to                    analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Anticipated               occurring.
                                                  move away from a sound source. The                       Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat’’                       In summary, we considered the
                                                  likelihood that marine mammal                            section. The project activities would not             following factors: (1) The possibility of
                                                  detection ability by trained observers is                modify existing marine mammal habitat.                injury, serious injury, or mortality may
                                                  high under the environmental                             The activities may cause some fish to                 reasonably be considered discountable;
                                                  conditions described for waters around                   leave the area of disturbance, thus                   (2) the anticipated incidents of Level B
                                                  the Mukilteo Tank Farm further enables                   temporarily impacting marine                          harassment consist of, at worst,
                                                  the implementation of shutdowns if                       mammals’ foraging opportunities in a                  temporary modifications in behavior; (3)
                                                  animals come within 10 meters of                         limited portion of the foraging range;                the absence of any significant habitat,
                                                  operational activity to avoid injury,                    but, because of the short duration of the             other than identified critical habitat for
                                                  serious injury, or mortality.                            activities and the relatively small area of           Southern Resident killer whales within
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                     WSF proposed activities are localized                 the habitat that may be affected, the                 the project area, including rookeries,
                                                  and of relatively short duration. The                    impacts to marine mammal habitat are                  significant haul-outs, or known areas or
                                                  entire project area is limited to water in               not expected to cause significant or                  features of special significance for
                                                  close proximity to the tank farm. The                    long-term negative consequences.                      foraging or reproduction; (4) the
                                                  project will require the extraction of                   Furthermore, no important feeding and/                expected efficacy of the proposed
                                                  3,900 piles and will require 675–975                     or reproductive areas for other marine                mitigation measures in minimizing the
                                                  hours over 140–180 days. These                           mammals are known to be near the                      effects of the specified activity on the
                                                  localized and short-term noise                           proposed action area.                                 affected species or stocks and their


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00032   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                           43737

                                                  habitat to the level of least practicable                Impact on Availability of Affected                       In addition, no take by TTS, Level A
                                                  impact. In combination, we believe that                  Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses               harassment (injury) or death is
                                                  these factors, as well as the available                    There are no subsistence uses of                    anticipated and harassment takes
                                                  body of evidence from other similar                      marine mammals in Puget Sound or the                  should be at the lowest level practicable
                                                  activities, demonstrate that the potential               San Juan Islands relevant to section                  due to incorporation of the mitigation
                                                  effects of the specified activity will have              101(a)(5)(D).                                         and monitoring measures mentioned
                                                  only short-term effects on individuals.                                                                        previously in this document.
                                                                                                           Endangered Species Act (ESA)                             As a result of these preliminary
                                                  The take resulting from the proposed
                                                  WSF Mukilteo Multimodal Project Tank                        The humpback whale and Southern                    determinations, NMFS proposes to issue
                                                  Farm Pier Removal project is not                         Resident stock of killer whale are the                an IHA to WSF for conducting the
                                                                                                           only marine mammal species currently                  Mukilteo Tank Farm removal project,
                                                  reasonably expected to and is not
                                                                                                           listed under the ESA that could occur in              provided the previously mentioned
                                                  reasonably likely to adversely affect the
                                                                                                           the vicinity of WSF’s proposed                        mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
                                                  marine mammal species or stocks
                                                                                                           construction projects. NMFS issued a                  requirements are incorporated. The
                                                  through effects on annual rates of                                                                             proposed IHA language is provided
                                                                                                           Biological Opinion that covers the
                                                  recruitment or survival.                                                                                       next.
                                                                                                           proposed action on July 31, 2013, and
                                                     Therefore, based on the analysis                      concluded that the proposed action is                    This section contains a draft of the
                                                  contained herein of the likely effects of                not likely to jeopardize the continued                IHA itself. The wording contained in
                                                  the specified activity on marine                         existence of Southern Resident killer                 this section is proposed for inclusion in
                                                  mammals and their habitat, and taking                    whales or humpback whales, and is not                 the IHA (if issued).
                                                  into consideration the implementation                    likely to destroy or adversely modify                    1. This Authorization is valid from
                                                  of the proposed monitoring and                           Southern Resident killer whales critical              September 1, 2015, through August 31,
                                                  mitigation measures, NMFS                                habitat.                                              2016.
                                                  preliminarily finds that the total marine                                                                         2. This Authorization is valid only for
                                                                                                           National Environmental Policy Act                     activities associated with in-water
                                                  mammal take from WSF’s Mukilteo                          (NEPA)                                                construction work at the Mukilteo
                                                  Multimodal Project Tank Farm Pier
                                                                                                              NMFS re-affirms the document titled                Multimodal Ferry Terminals in the State
                                                  Removal project will have a negligible                   Final Environmental Assessment                        of Washington.
                                                  impact on the affected marine mammal                     Issuance of Marine Mammal Incidental                     3. (a) The species authorized for
                                                  species or stocks.                                       Take Authorizations to the Washington                 incidental harassment takings, Level B
                                                  Small Numbers Analysis                                   State Department of Transportation to                 harassment only, are: Pacific harbor seal
                                                                                                           Take Marine Mammals which was                         (Phoca vitulina richardsi), California sea
                                                     Based on long-term marine mammal                      issued in February 2014. A Finding of                 lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller
                                                  monitoring and studies in the vicinity of                No Significant Impact (FONSI) was                     sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), harbor
                                                  the proposed construction areas, it is                   signed on February 28, 2014. In the                   porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Dall’s
                                                  estimated that approximately 1,820                       FONSI NMFS determined that the                        porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli), transient
                                                  Pacific harbor seals, 840 California sea                 issuance of IHAs for the take, by                     and Southern Resident killer whales
                                                  lions, 280 Steller sea lions, 1,120 harbor               harassment, of small numbers of marine                (Orcinus orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius
                                                  porpoises, 420 Dall’s porpoises, 10                      mammals incidental to the WSF’s                       robustus), and humpback whale
                                                  transient killer whales, 15 Southern                     Mukilteo Ferry Terminal replacement                   (Megaptera novaeangliae).
                                                  Resident killer whales, 90 gray whales,                  project in Washington State, will not                    (b) The authorization for taking by
                                                  and 36 humpback whales could be                          significantly impact the quality of the               harassment is limited to the following
                                                                                                           human environment, as described in                    acoustic sources and from the following
                                                  exposed to received noise levels above
                                                                                                           this document and in the Mukilteo EA.                 activities:
                                                  122 dBrms re 1 mPa from the proposed                                                                              (i) Vibratory pile removal; and
                                                                                                           These documents are found at http://
                                                  construction work at the Mukilteo                        www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/                            (ii) Work associated with pile removal
                                                  Multimodal Ferry Terminal. These                         incidental/construction.htm.                          activities.
                                                  numbers represent approximately                                                                                   (c) The taking of any marine mammal
                                                  0.3%–18.2% of the stocks and                             Proposed Authorization                                in a manner prohibited under this
                                                  populations of these species that could                    For the reasons discussed in this                   Authorization must be reported within
                                                  be affected by Level B behavioral                        document, NMFS has preliminarily                      24 hours of the taking to the Northwest
                                                  harassment.                                              determined that the vibratory pile                    Regional Administrator (206–526–6150),
                                                     The numbers of animals authorized to                  removal associated with the Mukilteo                  National Marine Fisheries Service
                                                                                                           Tank Farm Pier Removal Project would                  (NMFS) and the Chief of the Permits
                                                  be taken for all species would be
                                                                                                           result, at worst, in the Level B                      and Conservation Division, Office of
                                                  considered small relative to the relevant
                                                                                                           harassment of small numbers of eight                  Protected Resources, NMFS, at (301)
                                                  stocks or populations even if each                       marine mammal species that inhabit or                 427–8401.
                                                  estimated taking occurred to a new                       visit the area. While behavioral                         4. The holder of this Authorization
                                                  individual—an extremely unlikely                         modifications, including temporarily                  must notify Monica DeAngelis of the
                                                  scenario. Based on the analysis                          vacating the area around the project site,            West Coast Regional Office (phone:
                                                  contained herein of the likely effects of                may be made by these species to avoid                 (562) 980–3232) at least 24 hours prior
                                                  the specified activity on marine
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                                                                           the resultant visual and acoustic                     to starting activities.
                                                  mammals and their habitat, and taking                    disturbance, the availability of alternate               5. Prohibitions:
                                                  into consideration the implementation                    areas within Washington coastal waters                   (a) The taking, by incidental
                                                  of the mitigation and monitoring                         and haul-out sites has led NMFS to                    harassment only, is limited to the
                                                  measures, we find that small numbers of                  preliminarily determine that this action              species listed under condition 3(a)
                                                  marine mammals will be taken relative                    will have a negligible impact on these                above and by the numbers listed in
                                                  to the population sizes of the affected                  species in the vicinity of the proposed               Table 3 of this Federal Register notice.
                                                  species or stocks.                                       project area.                                         The taking by Level A harassment,


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00033   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                  43738                          Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices

                                                  injury or death of these species or the                  target size and distance. Use of                      of the conclusion of the construction
                                                  taking by harassment, injury or death of                 binoculars will be required to correctly              work. This report shall detail the
                                                  any other species of marine mammal is                    identify the target.                                  monitoring protocol, summarize the
                                                  prohibited and may result in the                            (ii) Experience or training in the field           data recorded during monitoring, and
                                                  modification, suspension, or revocation                  identification of marine mammals                      estimate the number of marine
                                                  of this Authorization.                                   (cetaceans and pinnipeds).                            mammals that may have been harassed.
                                                     (b) The taking of any marine mammal                      (iii) Sufficient training, orientation or             (b) If comments are received from the
                                                  is prohibited whenever the required                      experience with the construction                      NMFS Northwest Regional
                                                  protected species observers (PSOs),                      operation to provide for personal safety              Administrator or NMFS Office of
                                                  required by condition 7(a), are not                      during observations.                                  Protected Resources on the draft report,
                                                  present in conformance with condition                       (iv) Ability to communicate orally, by             a final report shall be submitted to
                                                  7(a) of this Authorization.                              radio or in person, with project                      NMFS within 30 days thereafter. If no
                                                     6. Mitigation:                                        personnel to provide real time                        comments are received from NMFS, the
                                                     (a) Ramp Up (Soft Start): Vibratory                   information on marine mammals                         draft report will be considered to be the
                                                  hammer for pile removal and pile                         observed in the area as necessary.                    final report.
                                                  driving shall be initiated at reduced                       (v) Experience and ability to conduct                 (c) In the unanticipated event that the
                                                  power for 15 seconds with a 1 minute                     field observations and collect data                   construction activities clearly cause the
                                                  interval, and be repeated with this                      according to assigned protocols (this                 take of a marine mammal in a manner
                                                  procedure for an additional two times.                   may include academic experience).                     prohibited by this Authorization (if
                                                     (b) Marine Mammal Monitoring:                            (vi) Writing skills sufficient to prepare          issued), such as an injury, serious injury
                                                  Monitoring for marine mammal                             a report of observations that would                   or mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear
                                                  presence shall take place 30 minutes                     include such information as the number                interaction, and/or entanglement), WSF
                                                  before, during and 30 minutes after pile                 and type of marine mammals observed;                  shall immediately cease all operations
                                                  driving.                                                 the behavior of marine mammals in the                 and immediately report the incident to
                                                     (c) Power Down and Shutdown                           project area during construction, dates               the Chief Incidental Take Program,
                                                  Measures:                                                and times when observations were
                                                                                                                                                                 Permits and Conservation Division,
                                                     (i) A shutdown zone of 10 m radius                    conducted; dates and times when in-
                                                                                                                                                                 Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at
                                                  for all marine mammals will be                           water construction activities were
                                                                                                                                                                 301–427–8401and/or be email to
                                                  established around all vibratory                         conducted; and dates and times when
                                                                                                                                                                 Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
                                                  extraction activity.                                     marine mammals were present at or
                                                                                                                                                                 Robert.pauline@noaa.gov and the West
                                                     (ii) WSF shall implement shutdown                     within the defined ZOI.
                                                                                                              (b) Monitoring Protocols: PSOs shall               Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator
                                                  measures if Southern Resident killer                                                                           Brent Norberg (Brent.Norbert@
                                                  whales (SRKWs) are sighted within the                    be present on site at all times during
                                                                                                           pile removal.                                         noaa.gov). The report must include the
                                                  vicinity of the project area and are                                                                           following information:
                                                  approaching the Level B harassment                          (i) During vibratory pile removal, two
                                                                                                           land-based biologists will monitor the                   (i) Time, date, and location (latitude/
                                                  zone (zone of influence, or ZOI) during                                                                        longitude) of the incident;
                                                  in-water construction activities.                        area from the best observation points
                                                                                                           available. If weather conditions prevent                 (ii) Description of the incident;
                                                     (iii) If a killer whale approaches the                                                                         (iii) Status of all sound source use in
                                                  ZOI during pile driving or removal, and                  adequate land-based observations, boat-
                                                                                                                                                                 the 24 hours preceding the incident;
                                                  it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or                    based monitoring shall be implemented.
                                                                                                                                                                    (iv) Environmental conditions (e.g.,
                                                                                                              (ii) The vibratory Level B acoustical
                                                  a transient killer whale, it shall be                                                                          wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
                                                                                                           harassment ZOI shall be monitored for
                                                  assumed to be a SRKW and WSF shall                                                                             state, cloud cover, visibility, and water
                                                                                                           the presence of marine mammals 30
                                                  implement the shutdown measure                                                                                 depth);
                                                                                                           minutes before, during, and 30 minutes
                                                  identified in 6(c)(i).                                                                                            (v) Description of marine mammal
                                                     (iv) If a SRKW enters the ZOI                         after any pile removal activity.
                                                                                                              (iii) Monitoring shall be continuous               observations in the 24 hours preceding
                                                  undetected, in-water pile driving or pile                                                                      the incident;
                                                                                                           unless the contractor takes a significant
                                                  removal shall be suspended until the                                                                              (vi) Species identification or
                                                                                                           break, in which case, monitoring shall
                                                  SRKW exits the ZOI to avoid further                                                                            description of the animal(s) involved;
                                                                                                           be required 30 minutes prior to
                                                  level B harassment.                                                                                               (vii) The fate of the animal(s); and
                                                                                                           restarting pile removal.                                 (viii) Photographs or video footage of
                                                     (d) Time Restrictions—Work would
                                                                                                              (iv) A range finder or hand-held
                                                  occur only during daylight hours, when                                                                         the animal (if equipment is available).
                                                                                                           global positioning system device shall                   Activities shall not resume until
                                                  visual monitoring of marine mammals
                                                                                                           be used to ensure that the 122 dBrms re               NMFS is able to review the
                                                  can be conducted. In addition, all in-
                                                                                                           1 mPa Level B behavioral harassment                   circumstances of the prohibited take.
                                                  water construction will be limited to the
                                                                                                           ZOI is monitored.                                     NMFS shall work with WSF to
                                                  period between August 1, 2015 and                           (v) If marine mammals are observed,
                                                  February 15, 2016; and August 1, 2016                                                                          determine what is necessary to
                                                                                                           the following information will be
                                                  until IHA expires on August 31, 2016.                                                                          minimize the likelihood of further
                                                                                                           documented:
                                                     7. Monitoring:                                           (A) Species of observed marine                     prohibited take and ensure MMPA
                                                     (a) Protected Species Observers: WSF                  mammals;                                              compliance. WSF may not resume their
                                                  shall employ qualified protected species                    (B) Number of observed marine                      activities until notified by NMFS via
                                                  observers (PSOs) to monitor the 122                      mammal individuals;                                   letter, email, or telephone.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  dBrms re 1 mPa (nominal ambient level)                      (C) Behavioral of observed marine                     (d) In the event that WSF discovers an
                                                  zone of influence (ZOI) for marine                       mammals;                                              injured or dead marine mammal, and
                                                  mammals. Qualifications for marine                          (D) Location within the ZOI; and                   the lead PSO determines that the cause
                                                  mammal observers include:                                   (E) Animals’ reaction (if any) to pile-            of the injury or death is unknown and
                                                     (i) Visual acuity in both eyes                        driving activities                                    the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less
                                                  (correction is permissible) sufficient for                  8. Reporting:                                      than a moderate state of decomposition
                                                  discernment of moving targets at the                        (a) WSDOT shall provide NMFS with                  as described in the next paragraph),
                                                  water’s surface with ability to estimate                 a draft monitoring report within 90 days              WSF will immediately report the


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00034   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1


                                                                                 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices                                           43739

                                                  incident to the Chief Incidental Take                    data or literature citations to help                  Internet at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
                                                  Program, Permits and Conservation                        inform our final decision on WSF’s                    pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm
                                                  Division, Office of Protected Resources,                 request for an MMPA authorization.                    without change. All personal identifying
                                                  NMFS, at 301–427–8401 and/or be                            Dated: July 16, 2015.                               information (e.g., name, address)
                                                  email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and                     Perry Gayaldo,
                                                                                                                                                                 voluntarily submitted by the commenter
                                                  Robert.pauline@noaa.gov and the West                                                                           may be publicly accessible. Do not
                                                                                                           Deputy Director, Office of Protected
                                                  Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator                                                                           submit confidential business
                                                                                                           Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
                                                  Brent Norberg (Brent.Norbert@                                                                                  information or otherwise sensitive or
                                                                                                           [FR Doc. 2015–18020 Filed 7–22–15; 8:45 am]
                                                  noaa.gov).                                                                                                     protected information.
                                                     The report must include the same                      BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
                                                                                                                                                                 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                  information identified above. Activities                                                                       Robert Pauline, Office of Protected
                                                  may continue while NMFS reviews the                                                                            Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
                                                  circumstances of the incident. NMFS                      DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                                                                                                                                                                 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                                                  will work with WSF to determine                          National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                                                  whether modifications in the activities                  Administration                                        Availability
                                                  are appropriate.
                                                     (e) In the event that WSF discovers an                RIN 0648–XD978                                          An electronic copy of the Corps’
                                                  injured or dead marine mammal, and                                                                             application and supporting documents,
                                                  the lead PSO determines that the injury                  Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to                 as well as a list of the references cited
                                                  or death is not associated with or related               Specified Activities; Taking Marine                   in this document, may be obtained by
                                                  to the activities authorized in the IHA                  Mammals Incidental to the                             visiting the Internet at: http://
                                                  (e.g., previously wounded animal,                        Rehabilitation of Jetty A at the Mouth                www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
                                                  carcass with moderate to advanced                        of the Columbia River                                 incidental/construction.htm. In case of
                                                  decomposition, or scavenger damage),                                                                           problems accessing these documents,
                                                                                                           AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries                    please call the contact listed above.
                                                  WSF shall report the incident to the                     Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
                                                  Chief, Incidental Take Program, Permits                  Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),                    Background
                                                  and Conservation Division, Office of                     Commerce.
                                                  Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301–                                                                                Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
                                                                                                           ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental                   MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
                                                  427–8401and/or be email to
                                                                                                           harassment authorization; request for                 the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
                                                  Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
                                                                                                           comments.                                             upon request, the incidental, but not
                                                  Robert.pauline@noaa.gov and the West
                                                  Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator                                                                           intentional, taking of small numbers of
                                                                                                           SUMMARY:    NMFS has received a request               marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
                                                  Brent Norberg (Brent.Norbert@noaa.gov)                   from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
                                                  within 24 hours of the discovery. WSF                                                                          engage in a specified activity (other than
                                                                                                           Portland District (Corps) for                         commercial fishing) within a specified
                                                  shall provide photographs or video                       authorization to take marine mammals
                                                  footage (if available) or other                                                                                geographical region if certain findings
                                                                                                           incidental to the rehabilitation of jetty             are made and either regulations are
                                                  documentation of the stranded animal                     system at the mouth of the Columbia
                                                  sighting to NMFS and the Marine                                                                                issued or, if the taking is limited to
                                                                                                           River (MCR): North Jetty, South Jetty,                harassment, a notice of a proposed
                                                  Mammal Stranding Network. WSF can                        and Jetty A. The Corps is requesting an
                                                  continue its operations under such a                                                                           authorization is provided to the public
                                                                                                           Incidental Harassment Authorization                   for review.
                                                  case.                                                    (IHA) for the first season of pile
                                                     9. This Authorization may be                                                                                   An authorization for incidental
                                                                                                           installation and removal at Jetty A only.             takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
                                                  modified, suspended or withdrawn if                      DATES: Comments and information must
                                                  the holder fails to abide by the                                                                               that the taking will have a negligible
                                                                                                           be received no later than August 24,                  impact on the species or stock(s), will
                                                  conditions prescribed herein or if the                   2015.
                                                  authorized taking is having more than a                                                                        not have an unmitigable adverse impact
                                                  negligible impact on the species or stock                ADDRESSES: Comments on the                            on the availability of the species or
                                                  of affected marine mammals, or if there                  application should be addressed to Jolie              stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
                                                  is an unmitigable adverse impact on the                  Harrison, Chief, Permits and                          relevant), and if the permissible
                                                  availability of such species or stocks for               Conservation Division, Office of                      methods of taking and requirements
                                                  subsistence uses.                                        Protected Resources, National Marine                  pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
                                                     10. A copy of this Authorization and                  Fisheries Service. Physical comments                  and reporting of such takings are set
                                                  the Incidental Take Statement must be                    should be sent to 1315 East-West                      forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
                                                  in the possession of each contractor who                 Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and                  impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘an
                                                  performs the construction work at                        electronic comments should be sent to                 impact resulting from the specified
                                                  Mukilteo Multimodal Ferry Terminals.                     ITP.Pauline@noaa.gov.                                 activity that cannot be reasonably
                                                     11. WSF is required to comply with                       Instructions: NMFS is not responsible              expected to, and is not reasonably likely
                                                  the Terms and Conditions of the                          for comments sent by any other method,                to, adversely affect the species or stock
                                                  Incidental Take Statement                                to any other address or individual, or                through effects on annual rates of
                                                  corresponding to NMFS’ Biological                        received after the end of the comment                 recruitment or survival.’’
                                                  Opinion.                                                 period. Comments received                                Except with respect to certain
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                                                                           electronically, including all                         activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
                                                  Request for Public Comments                              attachments, must not exceed a 25-                    defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: any act of
                                                    NMFS requests comment on our                           megabyte file size. Attachments to                    pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
                                                  analysis, the draft authorization, and                   electronic comments will be accepted in               has the potential to injure a marine
                                                  any other aspect of the Notice of                        Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF                  mammal or marine mammal stock in the
                                                  Proposed IHA for WSF’s Mukilteo Tank                     file formats only. All comments                       wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has
                                                  Farm removal project. Please include                     received are a part of the public record              the potential to disturb a marine
                                                  with your comments any supporting                        and will generally be posted to the                   mammal or marine mammal stock in the


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:39 Jul 22, 2015   Jkt 235001   PO 00000   Frm 00035   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM   23JYN1



Document Created: 2015-12-15 12:53:34
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 12:53:34
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionNotice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request for comments and information.
DatesComments and information must be received no later than August 24, 2015.
ContactRobert Pauline, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
FR Citation80 FR 43720 
RIN Number0648-XD97

2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR