82 FR 50628 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. 101/Chehalis River Bridge-Scour Repair in Washington State

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 210 (November 1, 2017)

Page Range		50628-50638
FR Document		2017-23748

In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to take small numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to U.S. 101/ Chehalis River Bridge--Scour Repair in Washington State.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 210 (Wednesday, November 1, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50628-50638]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23748]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XF574

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. 101/Chehalis River Bridge--
Scour Repair in Washington State

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to take small
numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to U.S. 101/
Chehalis River Bridge--Scour Repair in Washington State.

DATES: This authorization is valid from July 1, 2018, through June 30,
2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as the issued IHA, may be obtained
online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In
case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact
listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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.
The MMPA states that the term ``take'' means to harass, hunt,
capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine
mammal.
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, 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).

National Environmental Policy Act

Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)(D) authorization requires compliance
with the National Environmental Policy Act.
NMFS determined the issuance of the proposed IHA is consistent with
categories of activities identified in CE B4 (issuance of incidental
harassment authorizations under section 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA for which no serious injury or mortality is

[[Page 50629]]

anticipated) of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A and we have not
identified any extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the
Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A that would preclude this categorical
exclusion.

Summary of Request

NMFS received a request from WSDOT for an IHA to take marine
mammals incidental to U.S. 101/Chehalis River Bridge--Scour Repair in
the State of Washington. WSDOT's request was for harassment only and
NMFS concurs that serious injury or mortality is not expected to result
from this activity. Therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
In November 2016, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an
IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of marine mammal
species incidental to U.S. 101/Chehalis River Bridge-Scour Repair in
Washington State, between July 16 to September 30, 2018. WSDOT
subsequently updated its project scope and submitted a revised IHA
application on July 5, 2017. NMFS determined the IHA application was
complete on July 14, 2017. NMFS issued an IHA to WSDOT to take by Level
B harassment of the following marine mammal species: Harbor seal (Phoca
vitulina); California sea lion (Zalophus californianus); Steller sea
lion (Eumetopias jubatus); gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus); and
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena).

Description of Proposed Activity

Overview

WSDOT is proposing to repair an area of scour associated with Pier
14 of the U.S. 101 Chehalis River Bridge (Figures 1-3 and 1-4 in the
IHA application). The bridge foundation at Pier 14 is ``scour
critical'' due to the bridge foundation being unstable for calculated
scour depths. The southwest quadrant of Pier 14 is undermined by scour
void as much as 8 feet deep, and some of the untreated timber pilings
have been directly exposed to river/estuary water since 2008. Marine
borers may weaken enough pilings to require more extensive pier repair
if this project is not built in the near future. In addition, the
footing and seal are exposed at the other three quadrants of Pier 14.
The purpose of the U.S. 101/Chehalis River Bridge Project is to
make the bridge foundation stable for calculated scour depths, protect
the foundation from further scour by removing debris, filling the scour
void under Pier 14 with cementitious material (to protect the pilings
from marine borers), and filling the scour hole and protecting the pier
with scour resistant material.

Dates and Duration

Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water
work timing restrictions to protect ESA-listed salmonids, planned WSDOT
in-water construction is limited each year to July 16 through February
15. For this project, in-water construction is planned to take place
between July 16 to September 30, 2018. The total worst-case time for
pile installation and removal is 50 hours over 12 days (Table 1).

Specified Geographic Region

The U.S. 101 Chehalis River Bridge is located in the City of
Aberdeen, Grays Harbor County, Washington (Figure 1-1 in the IHA
application). The bridge is located in Township 17 North, Range 9 West,
Section 9, where the Chehalis River enters Grays Harbor. Land use in
the Aberdeen area is a mix of residential, commercial, industrial, and
open space and/or undeveloped lands (Figure 1-2 in the IHA
application).

Detailed Description of In-Water Pile Driving Associated With the U.S.
101 Chehalis River Bridge Repair Project

The proposed project involves noise production that may affect
marine mammals: Vibratory hammer driving and removal. Details of the
pile driving and pile removal activities are provided in the Federal
Register notice (82 FR 37426; August 10, 2017) for the proposed IHA and
is summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1--Summary of In-Water Pile Driving and Removal Durations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile size Duration (min) Duration
Method Pile type (inch) Pile No. per pile (days)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory driving............. Steel H pile.... 12 6 30 1
Vibratory driving............. Sheet pile...... .............. 44 30 5
Vibratory removal............. Steel H pile.... 12 6 30 1
Vibratory removal............. Sheet pile...... .............. 44 30 5
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total..................... ................ .............. .............. .............. 12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments and Responses

A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA was published in the
Federal Register on August 10, 2017 (82 FR 37426). During the 30-day
public comment period, NMFS received a comment letter from the Marine
Mammal Commission (Commission). No other comments were received.
Specific comments and responses are provided below.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that NMFS (1) determine
whether action proponents would be required to implement delay or shut-
down procedures for vibratory pile driving and removal and (2) include
standard mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures consistently
for all authorizations involving those actions.
Response: As stated in the Federal Register notice for the proposed
IHA (82 FR 37426, August 10, 2017), WSDOT is required to implement
delay and shutdown measures if a marine mammal is detected to approach
the exclusion zone. The language is further clarified that after a
shutdown measure, the construction cannot be resumed until the animal
is seen leaving the exclusion zone, or 30 minutes have passed since the
last sight of the animal within the zone. These measures are consistent
with all authorizations involving in-water pile driving.
Comment 2: The Commission states that the method NMFS used to
estimate the numbers of takes during the proposed activities, which
summed fractions of takes for each species across project days, does
not account for and negates the intent of NMFS's 24-hour reset policy.
The Commission states that it noted NMFS developed criteria associated
with rounding and recommend that NMFS share these with the Commission.
Response: While for certain projects NMFS has rounded to the whole
number for daily takes, for projects like

[[Page 50630]]

this one, when the objective of take estimation is to provide more
accurate assessments of potential impacts to marine mammals for the
entire project, rounding in the middle of a calculation would introduce
large errors into the process. In addition, while NMFS uses a 24-hour
reset for its take calculation to ensure that individual animals are
not counted as a take more than once per day, that fact does not make
the calculation and subsequent rounding of take across the entire
activity period inherently incorrect. There is no need for daily (24-
hour) rounding in this case because there is no daily limit of takes,
as long as total authorized takes of marine mammal are not exceeded.
NMFS is working on general guidance for take calculation and will share
it with the Commission in the near future.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

We have reviewed the applicants' species information--which
summarizes available information regarding status and trends,
distribution and habitat preferences, behavior and life history, and
auditory capabilities of the potentially affected species--for accuracy
and completeness and refer the reader to Sections 3 and 4 of the
applications, as well as to NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SAR;
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/), instead of reprinting all of the
information here. Additional general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's Web
site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/), or in the U.S. Navy's
Marine Resource Assessments (MRA) for relevant operating areas. The
MRAs are available online at: www.navfac.navy.mil/products_and_services/ev/products_and_services/marine_resources/marine_resource_assessments.html. Table 2 lists all species with
expected potential for occurrence in Chehalis Bridge project area and
summarizes information related to the population or stock, including
potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we
follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR, defined by the MMPA as the
maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may
be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to
reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population, is considered in
concert with known sources of ongoing anthropogenic mortality to assess
the population-level effects of the anticipated mortality from a
specific project (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is
anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and
mortality are included here as gross indicators of the status of the
species and other threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study area. NMFS's stock
abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of
individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that
stock.
Five species (with five managed stocks) are considered to have the
potential to co-occur with the proposed construction activities. All
values presented in Table 2 are the most recent available at the time
of publication and are available in the 2015 SARs (Carretta et al.,
2016) and draft 2016 SARs (available online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/draft.htm).

Table 2--Marine Mammals With Potential Presence Within the Proposed Project Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock
ESA/MMPA abundance
status; (CV, Nmin, Annual M/
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic most recent PBR SI \3\
(Y/N) \1\ abundance
survey) \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale.................. Eschrichtius Eastern North N 20,990 624 132
robustus. Pacific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor porpoise............. Phocoena Washington N 11,233 66 7.2
phocoena. inland waters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion......... Zalophus U.S............ N 296,750 9,200 389
californianus.
Steller sea lion............ Eumetopias Eastern U.S.... N 71,562 2,498 108
jubatus.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal................. Phoca vitulina. Washington N \4\ 11,036 1,641 43
northern
inland waters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-)
indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the
MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is
determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or
stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of
variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury
from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined
precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality
due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\4\ Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are 8 years old, but this is the best available information for
use here.

[[Page 50631]]

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat

This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that
components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and
their habitat. The ``Estimated Take 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 and Determination'' section will
consider the content of this section, the ``Estimated Take by
Incidental Harassment'' section, and the ``Mitigation'' section, to
draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on
the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those
impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or
stocks.
Potential impacts to marine mammals from the proposed US 101/
Chehalis Bridge repair project are from noise generated during in-water
pile driving and pile removal activities.

Acoustic Effects

Here, we first provide background information on marine mammal
hearing before discussing the potential effects of the use of active
acoustic sources on marine mammals.
Marine Mammal Hearing--Hearing is the most important sensory
modality for marine mammals underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic
sound can have deleterious effects. To appropriately assess the
potential effects of exposure to sound, it is necessary to understand
the frequency ranges marine mammals are able to hear. Current data
indicate that not all marine mammal species have equal hearing
capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999;
Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007)
recommended that marine mammals be divided into functional hearing
groups based on directly measured or estimated hearing ranges on the
basis of available behavioral response data, audiograms derived using
auditory evoked potential techniques, anatomical modeling, and other
data. Note that no direct measurements of hearing ability have been
successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency cetaceans).
Subsequently, NMFS (2016) described generalized hearing ranges for
these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized hearing ranges were
chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold from the
normalized composite audiograms, with the exception for lower limits
for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to be
biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al.
(2007) retained. The functional groups and the associated frequencies
are indicated below (note that these frequency ranges correspond to the
range for the composite group, with the entire range not necessarily
reflecting the capabilities of every species within that group):
Low-frequency cetaceans (mysticetes): Generalized hearing
is estimated to occur between approximately 7 Hertz (Hz) and 35
kilohertz (kHz), with best hearing estimated to be from 100 Hz to 8
kHz;
Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger toothed whales, beaked
whales, and most delphinids): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz, with best hearing from 10 to
less than 100 kHz;
High-frequency cetaceans (porpoises, river dolphins, and
members of the genera Kogia and Cephalorhynchus; including two members
of the genus Lagenorhynchus, on the basis of recent echolocation data
and genetic data): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz.
Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true seals): Generalized
hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 50 Hz to 86 kHz,
with best hearing between 1-50 kHz;
Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae (eared seals): Generalized
hearing is estimated to occur between 60 Hz and 39 kHz, with best
hearing between 2-48 kHz.
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2016) for a review of available information.
Five marine mammal species (2 cetacean and 3 pinniped (2 otariid and 1
phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the
proposed construction activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the
cetacean species that may be present, one species is classified as low-
frequency cetaceans (i.e., gray whale), and one is classified as high-
frequency cetaceans (i.e., harbor porpoise).
The WSDOT's US 101 Chehalis River Bridge Project using in-water
pile driving and pile removal could adversely affect marine mammal
species and stocks by exposing them to elevated noise levels in the
vicinity of the activity area.
Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may
result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift
(TS)--an increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise
(Finneran et al., 2005). Factors that influence the amount of threshold
shift include the amplitude, duration, frequency content, temporal
pattern, and energy distribution of noise exposure. The magnitude of
hearing threshold shift normally decreases over time following
cessation of the noise exposure. The amount of TS just after exposure
is the initial TS. If the TS eventually returns to zero (i.e., the
threshold returns to the pre-exposure value), it is a temporary
threshold shift (TTS) (Southall et al., 2007).
Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of hearing)--When animals
exhibit reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds must be louder for an
animal to detect them) following exposure to an intense sound or sound
for long duration, it is referred to as a noise-induced TS. An animal
can experience TTS) or permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS can last
from minutes or hours to days (i.e., there is complete recovery), can
occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e., an animal might only have a
temporary loss of hearing sensitivity between the frequencies of 1 and
10 kHz), and can be of varying amounts (for example, an animal's
hearing sensitivity might be reduced initially by only 6 dB or reduced
by 30 dB). PTS is permanent, but some recovery is possible. PTS can
also occur in a specific frequency range and amount as mentioned above
for TTS.
For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive
bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless
porpoise (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a, 2010b;
Finneran and Schlundt, 2010; Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a,
2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b; Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et
al., 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For pinnipeds in water, data
are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal,
and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al.,
2012b).
Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a harbor porpoise after exposing
it to airgun noise with a received sound pressure level (SPL) at 200.2
dB (peak-to-peak) re: 1 micropascal ([mu]Pa), which corresponds to a
sound exposure level of 164.5 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa\2\ s after integrating

[[Page 50632]]

exposure. Because the airgun noise is a broadband impulse, one cannot
directly determine the equivalent of root mean square (rms) SPL from
the reported peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a conservative
conversion factor of 16 dB for broadband signals from seismic surveys
(McCauley, et al., 2000) to correct for the difference between peak-to-
peak levels reported in Lucke et al. (2009) and rms SPLs, the rms SPL
for TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa, and the received
levels associated with PTS (Level A harassment) would be higher.
Therefore, based on these studies, NMFS recognizes that TTS of harbor
porpoises is lower than other cetacean species empirically tested
(Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et al., 2002; Kastelein and
Jennings, 2012).
Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with
conspecifics, and interpretation of environmental cues for purposes
such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree
(elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and
frequency range of TTS, and the context in which it is experienced, TTS
can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to serious
(similar to those discussed in auditory masking, below). For example, a
marine mammal may be able to readily compensate for a brief, relatively
small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency range that occurs
during a time where ambient noise is lower and there are not as many
competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and longer
duration of TTS sustained during time when communication is critical
for successful mother/calf interactions could have more serious
impacts. Also, depending on the degree and frequency range, the effects
of PTS on an animal could range in severity, although it is considered
generally more serious because it is a permanent condition. Of note,
reduced hearing sensitivity as a simple function of aging has been
observed in marine mammals, as well as humans and other taxa (Southall
et al., 2007), so one can infer that strategies exist for coping with
this condition to some degree, though likely not without cost.
In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-
intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for
marine mammals, which utilize sound for vital biological functions
(Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic masking is when other noises such as
from human sources interfere with animal detection of acoustic signals
such as communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental
sounds important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain
circumstances, marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment
are being severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their
performance fitness in survival and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band that the animals utilize.
Therefore, since noise generated from vibratory pile driving is mostly
concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect on high
frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes (toothed whales). However,
lower frequency man-made noises are more likely to affect detection of
communication calls and other potentially important natural sounds such
as surf and prey noise. It may also affect communication signals when
they occur near the noise band and thus reduce the communication space
of animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and cause increased stress levels
(e.g., Foote et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009).
Unlike TS, masking, which can occur over large temporal and spatial
scales, can potentially affect the species at population, community, or
even ecosystem levels, as well as individual levels. Masking affects
both senders and receivers of the signals and could have long-term
chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent
science suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased
by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms of sound pressure
level) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of
these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). For
WSDOT's Chehalis Bridge repair activities, noises from vibratory pile
driving and pile removal contribute to the elevated ambient noise
levels in the project area, thus increasing potential for or severity
of masking. Baseline ambient noise levels in the vicinity of project
area are high due to ongoing shipping, construction and other
activities in the Puget Sound.
Finally, marine mammals' exposure to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as: Changing
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities;
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g.,
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise
depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and
their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et
al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from impulse noises
(such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for
continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the WSDOT's US
101 Chehalis River Bridge Project, only the 120-dB level is considered
for effects analysis because WSDOT plans to use vibratory pile driving
and pile removal.
The biological significance of many of these behavioral
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral
modification could be biologically significant if the change affects
growth, survival, and/or reproduction, which depends on the severity,
duration, and context of the effects.

Potential Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat

The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are
associated with elevated sound levels produced by vibratory pile
removal and pile driving in the area. However, other potential impacts
to the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance are also possible.
With regard to fish as a prey source for cetaceans and pinnipeds,
fish are known to hear and react to sounds and to use sound to
communicate (Tavolga et al., 1981) and possibly avoid predators (Wilson
and Dill, 2002). Experiments have shown that fish can sense both the
strength and direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors
determining whether a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially
react to it, are the frequency of the signal and the strength of the
signal in relation to the natural background noise level.
The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior
is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to
react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the
detection level of 120 dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response threshold
can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition
(Engas et al., 1993). In general, fish react more strongly to pulses of
sound (such as noise from impact pile driving) rather than continuous
signals (such as noise from vibratory pile driving) (Blaxter et al.,
1981), and a quicker alarm response is elicited when the sound signal
intensity

[[Page 50633]]

rises rapidly compared to sound rising more slowly to the same level.
During the coastal construction only a small fraction of the
available habitat would be ensonified at any given time. Disturbance to
fish species would be short-term and fish would return to their pre-
disturbance behavior once the pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the
proposed construction would have little, if any, impact on marine
mammals' prey availability in the area where construction work is
planned.
Finally, the time of the proposed construction activity would avoid
the spawning season of the ESA-listed salmonid species.

Estimated Take

This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration
of whether the number of takes is ``small'' and the negligible impact
determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to noise generated from vibratory pile driving
and removal. Based on the nature of the activity and the anticipated
effectiveness of the mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown measures--
discussed in detail below in Mitigation section), Level A harassment is
neither anticipated nor authorized.
As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized
for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
Described in the most basic way, we estimate take by considering:
(1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available
science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur
some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of
water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the
density or occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas;
and, (4) and the number of days of activities. Below, we describe these
components in more detail and present the take estimate.

Acoustic Thresholds

Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic
thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above
which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS
of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources--Though significantly
driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from
anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by
other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving
animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral
context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007,
Ellison et al., 2011). Based on what the available science indicates
and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is
both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a
generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for continuous (e.g.
vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
Applicant's proposed activity includes the use of continuous
(vibratory pile driving and removal) source, and therefore the 120 dB
re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) is applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance, 2016) identifies dual criteria to
assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine
mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to
noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive).
Applicant's proposed activity includes the use non-impulsive (vibratory
pile driving and pile removal) source.
These thresholds were developed by compiling and synthesizing the
best available science and soliciting input multiple times from both
the public and peer reviewers to inform the final product, and are
provided in the table below. The references, analysis, and methodology
used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS 2016
Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.

Table 3--Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria for Non-Explosive Sound Underwater
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset thresholds Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans... Lpk,flat: 219 LE,LF,24h: 199 dB Lrms,flat: 160 dB Lrms,flat: 120
dB,LE,LF,24h: 183 dB. dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans... Lpk,flat: 230 LE,MF,24h: 198 dB
dB,LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans.. Lpk,flat: 202 LE,HF,24h: 173 dB
dB,LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) Lpk,flat: 218 LE,PW,24h: 201 dB
(Underwater). dB,LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) Lpk,flat: 232 LE,OW,24h: 219 dB
(Underwater). dB,LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for
calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level
thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.

[[Page 50634]]

Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [mu]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has
a reference value of 1[mu]Pa2s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National
Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating
frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ``flat'' is
being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized
hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the
designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and
that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be
exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it
is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
exceeded.

Ensonified Area

Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds.

Source Levels

The project includes vibratory pile driving and removal of steel H
piles and sheet piles. The dimension of the H piles is unknown, but not
is expected to be more than 12 inches (in).
Source levels for the steel H pile vibratory driving are based on
in-water measurements reported by CALTRANS (2015) of 12-in steel H
pile, which are 150 dBrms and 165 dBpeak re 1
[micro]Pa at 10 meters (m). Source levels for the sheet pile are based
on in-water measurements at the Elliot Bay Seawall Project (The
Greenbush Group, 2015), which is 165 dBrms and 180
dBpeak re 1 [micro]Pa at 10 m. For vibratory pile removal,
the source levels are conservatively estimated using the pile driving
source levels as proxies.
A summary of source levels from different pile driving and pile
removal activities is provided in Table 4.

Table 4--Summary of In-Water Pile Driving Source Levels
[At 10 m from source]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEL (dB re 1 SPLrms (dB re 1
Method Pile type/size [micro]Pa \2\-s) [micro]Pa)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory driving/removal.................. 12-in steel H pile........... 150 150
Vibratory driving/removal.................. Sheet pile................... 165 165
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These source levels are used to compute the Level A injury zones
and to estimate the Level B harassment zones. For Level A harassment
zones, since the peak source levels for both pile driving are below the
injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were used to do the calculations
using the NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016).

Estimating Injury Zones

When NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in recognition
of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more technically
challenging to predict because of the duration component in the new
thresholds, we developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools to help
predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with marine
mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that
because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for
these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going
to be overestimates of some degree, which will result in some degree of
overestimate of Level A take. However, these tools offer the best way
to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D modeling
methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways to
quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address the
output where appropriate.
For cumulative SEL (LE), distances to marine mammal
injury thresholds were estimated using NMFS Optional User Spreadsheet
based on the noise exposure guidance.
Isopleths to Level B behavioral zones are based on rms SPL
(SPLrms) that are specific for non-impulse (vibratory pile
driving) sources. Distances to marine mammal behavior thresholds were
calculated using practical spreading.
A summary of the measured and modeled harassment zones is provided
in Table 5.

Table 5--Distances to Harassment Zones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury zone (m)
------------------------------------------------------- Behavior
Pile type, size and pile driving method LF MF HF zone (m)
cetacean cetacean cetacean Phocid Otariid
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory driving & removal, sheet pile, 10 36.9 3.3 54.6 22.4 1.6 10,000
piles/day....................................
Vibratory driving & removal, steel H pile, 6 2.6 0.2 3.9 1.6 0.1 1,000
piles/day....................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marine Mammal Occurrence

In this section we provide the information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations.
In most cases, marine mammal density data are from the U.S. Navy
Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015). Harbor seal density
is based on a counts of harbor seals at 44 low-tide haul outs in Grays
Harbor by Jeffries, et al. (2000), the estimated density of harbor
seals in the US 101 Chehalis River Bridge project area is 29.4 animals
per square kilometer (km\2\).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates
the density of California sea lions in the waters offshore of Grays
Harbor as 0.033 animals/km\2\. This estimate will be used as a
surrogate for Grays Harbor.
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates
the density of Steller sea lions in the waters offshore of Grays Harbor
as 0.0145 animals/km\2\. This estimate will be used as a surrogate for
Grays Harbor.
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates
the density of harbor porpoises in the waters offshore of Grays Harbor
as a range between 0.69 and 1.67 animals

[[Page 50635]]

per square kilometer. According to Evenson, et al. (2016), the maximum
harbor porpoise density in the Strait of Juan de Fuca (approximately
105 miles north of Grays Harbor) in 2014 was 0.768 animals/km\2\. The
higher density estimate for waters offshore of Grays Harbor (1.67) will
be used for this analysis.
According to counts conducted by Calambokidis et al. (2012), 29
gray whales were observed over a 12-year period during the months of
July through September (the proposed period of project activities).
Based on this data, an average of 2.25 gray whales may be present in
Grays Harbor/south Washington coast during the 3-month period.

Take Calculation and Estimation

Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate. For all marine mammal
species except gray whale, estimated takes are calculated based on
ensonified area for a specific pile driving activity multiplied by the
marine mammal density in the action area, multiplied by the number of
pile driving (or removal) days. Distances to and areas of different
harassment zones are listed in Tables 5 and 6. Total days for sheet
pile driving and removal are five days each, and the total day for
steel H pile driving and removal is one day each.

Table 6--Areas of Harassment Zones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury zone (km\2\)
------------------------------------------------------- Behavior
Pile type, size and pile driving method LF MF HF zone
cetacean cetacean cetacean Phocid Otariid (km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory driving & removal, sheet pile, 10 0.004 0.000 0.009 0.002 0.000 2.13
piles/day....................................
Vibratory driving & removal, steel H pile, 6 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.67
piles/day....................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The results predicted that a total of 666 harbor seals, 1
California sea lion, 0 Steller sea lion, and 38 harbor porpoise could
be exposure to received levels that would cause Level B harassment.
However, owing to the prior observations that California sea lion and
Steller sea lion's presence in the project area, we adjusted the take
number of these species to 10.
For gray whales, the Level B takes were estimate based on an
average sighting of 2.25 whales in Grays Harbor/south Washington Coast
during the months of July through September (Calambokidis et al.,
(2012) adjusted upwards to 3 animals.
Due to the extreme small injury zones (maximum zone is 0.009 km\2\
for high-frequency cetacean), the calculation predicted no animals
would be exposed to noise levels that could cause Level A harassment,
and therefore no Level A take is authorized. A summary of estimated
marine mammal Level B takes is listed in Table 7.

Table 7--Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals That May Be Exposed to Received Noise Levels That Cause Level B
Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density
Species (animals/ Estimated Abundance Percentage
km\2\) Level B take
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal............................. 29.4 666 11,036 6.03
California sea lion............................. 0.033 10 296,750 0.00
Steller sea lion................................ 0.0145 10 71,562 0.00
Gray whale...................................... NA 3 20,990 0.00
Harbor porpoise................................. 1.67 38 11,233 0.34
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mitigation

In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully consider two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat.
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned) the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned) and;
(2) The practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

1. Time Restriction
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 July 16, 2018, and
September 30, 2018.

[[Page 50636]]

2. Establishing and Monitoring Level A, Level B Harassment Zones, and
Exclusion Zones
Before the commencement of in-water construction activities, which
include vibratory pile driving and pile removal, WSDOT shall establish
Level A harassment zones where received underwater SELcum
could cause PTS (see above).
WSDOT shall also establish Level B harassment zones where received
underwater SPLs are higher than 120 dBrms re 1 [mu]Pa for
non-impulsive noise sources (vibratory pile driving and pile removal).
WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones within which marine mammals
could be taken by Level A harassment. For Level A harassment zones that
is less than 10 m from the source, a minimum of 10 m distance should be
established as an exclusion zone.
A summary of exclusion zones is provided in Table 8.

Table 8--Exclusion Zones for Various Pile Driving Activities and Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exclusion zone (m)
Pile type, size and pile driving -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
method LF cetacean MF cetacean HF cetacean Phocid Otariid
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory driving and removal, 37 10 55 22 10
sheet pile, 10 piles/day.......
Vibratory driving & removal, 10 10 10 10 10
steel H pile, 6 piles/day......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSO) shall conduct an
initial survey of the exclusion zones to ensure that no marine mammals
are seen within the Level A zones before pile driving and pile removal
of a pile segment begins. If marine mammals are found within the
exclusion zone, pile driving of the segment would be delayed until they
move out of the area. If a marine mammal is seen above water and then
dives below, the contractor would wait 30 minutes. If no marine mammals
are seen by the observer in that time it can be assumed that the animal
has moved beyond the exclusion zone.
If pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a
marine mammal is sighted within the designated exclusion zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the pile
driving operator (or other authorized individual) immediately and
continue to monitor the exclusion zone. Operations may not resume until
the marine mammal has exited the exclusion zone or 30 minutes have
elapsed since the last sighting.
3. Shutdown Measures
WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is
detected within an exclusion zone or is about to enter an exclusion
zone listed in Table 8. In-water pile driving may not resume until the
animal is seen leaving the exclusion zone, or 30 minutes have passed
since the sighting of the animal within the exclusion zone.
Further, WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the
IHA (if issued) and if such marine mammals are sighted within the
vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment
zone during in-water construction activities.
Based on our evaluation of the required measures, NMFS has
determined that the prescribed mitigation measures provide the means
effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

Monitoring and Reporting

In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, ``requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Monitoring Measures

WSDOT shall employ NMFS-approved PSOs to conduct marine mammal
monitoring for its U.S. 101/Chehalis Bridge Repair Project. The
purposes of marine mammal monitoring are to implement mitigation
measures and learn more about impacts to marine mammals from WSDOT's
construction activities. The PSOs will observe and collect data on
marine mammals in and around the project area for 30 minutes before,
during, and for 30 minutes after all pile removal and pile installation
work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the following requirements:
1. Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required;
2. At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer;
3. Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree
in biological science or related field) or training for experience;
4. Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer

[[Page 50637]]

should be designated as lead observer or monitoring coordinator. The
lead observer must have prior experience working as an observer; and
5. NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs.
Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall be
conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power).
Due to the different sizes of ZOIs from different pile types, two
different ZOIs and different monitoring protocols corresponding to a
specific pile type will be established.
For vibratory pile driving and pile removal of sheet
piles, a total of four land-based PSOs will monitor the exclusion zones
and Level B harassment zone.
For vibratory pile driving and pile removal of H piles, a
total of three land-based PSOs will monitor the exclusion zones and
Level B harassment zone.
Locations of the land-based PSOs and routes of monitoring vessels
are shown in WSDOT's Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, which is available
online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.
To verify the required monitoring distance, the exclusion zones and
ZOIs will be determined by using a range finder or hand-held global
positioning system device.

Reporting Measures

WSDOT is required to submit a draft monitoring report within 90
days after completion of the construction work or the expiration of the
IHA, whichever comes earlier. This report would detail the monitoring
protocol, summarize the data recorded during monitoring, and estimate
the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed. NMFS would
have an opportunity to provide comments on the report, and if NMFS has
comments, WSDOT would address the comments and submit a final report to
NMFS within 30 days.
In addition, NMFS would require WSDOT to notify NMFS' Office of
Protected Resources and NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator within
48 hours of sighting an injured or dead marine mammal in the
construction site. WSDOT shall provide NMFS and the Stranding Network
with the species or description of the animal(s), the condition of the
animal(s) (including carcass condition, if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and
photo or video.
In the event that WSDOT finds an injured or dead marine mammal that
is not in the construction area, WSDOT would report the same
information as listed above to NMFS as soon as operationally feasible.

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, this introductory discussion of our analyses
applies to all the species listed in Table 7, given that the
anticipated effects of WSDOT's Chehalis Bridge repair project
activities involving pile driving and pile removal on marine mammals
are expected to be relatively similar in nature. There is no
information about the nature or severity of the impacts, or the size,
status, or structure of any species or stock that would lead to a
different analysis by species for this activity, or else species-
specific factors would be identified and analyzed.
For all marine mammal species, takes that are anticipated and
authorized are expected to be limited to short-term Level B harassment
(behavioral) because of the small scale (only a total of 100 piles to
be installed and removed), lower source levels (small piles by
vibratory pile driving and pile removal), and short durations (maximum
five hours pile driving or pile removal per day). Marine mammals
present in the vicinity of the action area and taken by Level B
harassment would most likely show overt brief disturbance (startle
reaction) and avoidance of the area from elevated noise levels during
pile driving and pile removal. For these reasons, these behavioral
impacts are not expected to affect marine mammals' growth, survival,
and reproduction, especially considering the limited geographic area
that would be affected in comparison to the much larger habitat for
marine mammals in the Pacific Northwest.
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. There is
no ESA designated critical area in the vicinity of the Chehalis Bridge
Project area. The project activities would not permanently modify
existing marine mammal habitat. The activities may kill some fish and
cause other fish to leave the area temporarily, thus impacting marine
mammals' foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging
range; 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. Therefore, given the consideration of
potential impacts to marine mammal prey species and their physical
environment, WSDOT's proposed construction activity at Chehalis Bridge
would not adversely affect marine mammal habitat.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No injury, series injury, or mortality is anticipated or
authorized;
All harassment is Level B harassment in the form of short-
term behavioral modification; and
No areas of specific importance to affected species are
impacted.
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 prescribed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total take from the proposed
activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal
species or stocks.

[[Page 50638]]

Small Numbers

As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not
define small numbers and so, in practice, NMFS compares the number of
individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of
the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an
authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals.
The estimated takes are below seven percent of the population for
all marine mammals (Table 7).
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the prescribed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of
marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the
affected species or stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Subsistence Analysis and Determination

There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that
formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this
action.

Authorization

As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to the
Washington State Department of Transportation for the U.S. 101/Chehalis
River Bridge--Scour Repair in Washington State, provided the previously
described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are
incorporated.

Dated: October 26, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-23748 Filed 10-31-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

50628 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices

information provided in the ADDRESSES received prior to the closing date incidental/construction.htm. In case of
section. NIST will then provide each provided in the DATES section. problems accessing these documents,
interested party with a letter of interest Eligibility will be determined based on please call the contact listed above.
template, which the party must the information provided by the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
complete and submit to NIST. Each organization in response to the above
party’s letter of interest must include request for specific information. NIST Background
the following information: will notify an applicant in writing of its Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
1. Whether the LTS to be tested is eligibility to participate in the LTS MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
commercially available now or at an Testing Consortium. To participate, the the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
advanced productization stages so that eligible applicant will be required to upon request, the incidental, but not
it would be commercially available by sign a Cooperative Research and intentional, taking of small numbers of
the end of 2018. Development Agreement (CRADA) with marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
2. Market the indoor LTS is targeting. NIST. Each participant’s CRADA will engage in a specified activity (other than
3. Given that large buildings will be have identical terms and conditions that commercial fishing) within a specified
used for testing, whether the number of are consistent with the requirements of geographical region if certain findings
units available to install in these Title 15, United States Code, Chapter are made and either regulations are
buildings is sufficient for the system to 63, Section 3710a (Cooperative Research issued or, if the taking is limited to
go through a suite of tests, one building and Development Agreements). NIST harassment, a notice of a proposed
at a time. (As a point of information, the does not guarantee participation or any authorization is provided to the public
largest building to be used for testing other collaboration to any organization for review.
covers 100,000 square feet of space.) submitting a Letter of Interest. An authorization for incidental
4. The willingness and ability to send takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 3710a.
an adequate number of staff members to that the taking will have a negligible
install and uninstall the indoor LTS in Kevin Kimball, impact on the species or stock(s), will
test buildings and operate the Chief of Staff. not have an unmitigable adverse impact
equipment to administer the tests under [FR Doc. 2017–23807 Filed 10–31–17; 8:45 am] on the availability of the species or
NIST supervision for a period of about BILLING CODE 3510–13–P stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
3 days. If for any reason a LTS runs into relevant), and if the permissible
technical problems and cannot complete methods of taking and requirements
the tests in each building in the allotted DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
time slot, NIST has designated the last and reporting of such takings are set
two days of the week as ‘‘make-up National Oceanic and Atmospheric forth.
days’’, where tests that were not Administration NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
completed in their allotted time slots RIN 0648–XF574 impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact
can be redone. NIST will not be resulting from the specified activity that
responsible for shipping equipment to Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
NIST and back to your company. Specified Activities; Taking Marine not reasonably likely to, adversely affect
5. Willingness to provide all data form Mammals Incidental to U.S. 101/ the species or stock through effects on
T&E activities to the NIST Consortium Chehalis River Bridge—Scour Repair annual rates of recruitment or survival.
Manager for purposes of this project. in Washington State The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’
6. A statement regarding whether the means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or
LTS requires deployment of equipment AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill
inside/outside a building in order to be Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and any marine mammal.
tested; please specify the types of Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Except with respect to certain
equipment that need to be deployed and Commerce. activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
how many per every 10,000 square feet ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of
of space. harassment authorization. pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
7. If the LTS uses RF technology, has the potential to injure a marine
please specify the frequency band(s) and SUMMARY: In accordance with the
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
power levels the LTS uses. regulations implementing the Marine
wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has
8. Whether the installation, Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
the potential to disturb a marine
uninstallation, or operation of the LTS amended, notification is hereby given
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
is likely to cause damage of any type to that we have issued an incidental
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
the buildings or furnishing during harassment authorization (IHA) to
patterns, including, but not limited to,
testing. Washington State Department of
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
Letters of interest may be submitted to Transportation (WSDOT) to take small
feeding, or sheltering (Level B
the LTS Testing Consortium Manager numbers of marine mammals, by
harassment).
electronically using the email address harassment, incidental to U.S. 101/
provided in the ADDRESSES section. Chehalis River Bridge—Scour Repair in National Environmental Policy Act
Letters of interest must include the Washington State. Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)(D)
name of the organization and the name DATES: This authorization is valid from authorization requires compliance with
and contact information for an official July 1, 2018, through June 30, 2019.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

the National Environmental Policy Act.
representing the organization. Letters of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: NMFS determined the issuance of the
interest must not include any Shane Guan, Office of Protected proposed IHA is consistent with
confidential information. NIST will not Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. categories of activities identified in CE
treat any information provided in the Electronic copies of the application and B4 (issuance of incidental harassment
letters of interest as confidential or supporting documents, as well as the authorizations under section
proprietary. NIST will review the letters issued IHA, may be obtained online at: 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
of interest from each organization www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ which no serious injury or mortality is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:16 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices 50631

Potential Effects of Specified Activities exception for lower limits for low- driving and pile removal could
on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat frequency cetaceans where the lower adversely affect marine mammal species
This section includes a summary and bound was deemed to be biologically and stocks by exposing them to elevated
discussion of the ways that components implausible and the lower bound from noise levels in the vicinity of the
of the specified activity may impact Southall et al. (2007) retained. The activity area.
functional groups and the associated Exposure to high intensity sound for
marine mammals and their habitat. The
frequencies are indicated below (note a sufficient duration may result in
‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental
that these frequency ranges correspond auditory effects such as a noise-induced
Harassment’’ section later in this
to the range for the composite group, threshold shift (TS)—an increase in the
document will include a quantitative
with the entire range not necessarily auditory threshold after exposure to
analysis of the number of individuals noise (Finneran et al., 2005). Factors
reflecting the capabilities of every
that are expected to be taken by this that influence the amount of threshold
species within that group):
activity. The ‘‘Negligible Impact • Low-frequency cetaceans shift include the amplitude, duration,
Analysis and Determination’’ section (mysticetes): Generalized hearing is frequency content, temporal pattern,
will consider the content of this section, estimated to occur between and energy distribution of noise
the ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental approximately 7 Hertz (Hz) and 35 exposure. The magnitude of hearing
Harassment’’ section, and the kilohertz (kHz), with best hearing threshold shift normally decreases over
‘‘Mitigation’’ section, to draw estimated to be from 100 Hz to 8 kHz; time following cessation of the noise
conclusions regarding the likely impacts • Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger exposure. The amount of TS just after
of these activities on the reproductive toothed whales, beaked whales, and exposure is the initial TS. If the TS
success or survivorship of individuals most delphinids): Generalized hearing is eventually returns to zero (i.e., the
and how those impacts on individuals estimated to occur between threshold returns to the pre-exposure
are likely to impact marine mammal approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz, value), it is a temporary threshold shift
species or stocks. with best hearing from 10 to less than (TTS) (Southall et al., 2007).
Potential impacts to marine mammals 100 kHz; Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of
from the proposed US 101/Chehalis • High-frequency cetaceans hearing)—When animals exhibit
Bridge repair project are from noise (porpoises, river dolphins, and members reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds
generated during in-water pile driving of the genera Kogia and must be louder for an animal to detect
and pile removal activities. Cephalorhynchus; including two them) following exposure to an intense
Acoustic Effects members of the genus Lagenorhynchus, sound or sound for long duration, it is
on the basis of recent echolocation data referred to as a noise-induced TS. An
Here, we first provide background and genetic data): Generalized hearing animal can experience TTS) or
information on marine mammal hearing is estimated to occur between permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS
before discussing the potential effects of approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz. can last from minutes or hours to days
the use of active acoustic sources on • Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true (i.e., there is complete recovery), can
marine mammals. seals): Generalized hearing is estimated occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e.,
Marine Mammal Hearing—Hearing is to occur between approximately 50 Hz an animal might only have a temporary
the most important sensory modality for to 86 kHz, with best hearing between 1– loss of hearing sensitivity between the
marine mammals underwater, and 50 kHz; frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can
exposure to anthropogenic sound can • Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae be of varying amounts (for example, an
have deleterious effects. To (eared seals): Generalized hearing is animal’s hearing sensitivity might be
appropriately assess the potential effects estimated to occur between 60 Hz and reduced initially by only 6 dB or
of exposure to sound, it is necessary to 39 kHz, with best hearing between 2–48 reduced by 30 dB). PTS is permanent,
understand the frequency ranges marine kHz. but some recovery is possible. PTS can
mammals are able to hear. Current data The pinniped functional hearing also occur in a specific frequency range
indicate that not all marine mammal group was modified from Southall et al. and amount as mentioned above for
species have equal hearing capabilities (2007) on the basis of data indicating TTS.
(e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok that phocid species have consistently For marine mammals, published data
and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, demonstrated an extended frequency are limited to the captive bottlenose
2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. range of hearing compared to otariids, dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and
(2007) recommended that marine especially in the higher frequency range Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran et
mammals be divided into functional (Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a,
hearing groups based on directly 2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013). 2010b; Finneran and Schlundt, 2010;
measured or estimated hearing ranges For more detail concerning these Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a,
on the basis of available behavioral groups and associated frequency ranges, 2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b;
response data, audiograms derived please see NMFS (2016) for a review of Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et al.,
using auditory evoked potential available information. Five marine 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For
techniques, anatomical modeling, and mammal species (2 cetacean and 3 pinnipeds in water, data are limited to
other data. Note that no direct pinniped (2 otariid and 1 phocid) measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an
measurements of hearing ability have species) have the reasonable potential to elephant seal, and California sea lions
been successfully completed for co-occur with the proposed construction (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et
mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the al., 2012b).
cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2016) cetacean species that may be present, Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a
described generalized hearing ranges for one species is classified as low- harbor porpoise after exposing it to
these marine mammal hearing groups. frequency cetaceans (i.e., gray whale), airgun noise with a received sound
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen and one is classified as high-frequency pressure level (SPL) at 200.2 dB (peak–
based on the approximately 65 decibel cetaceans (i.e., harbor porpoise). to-peak) re: 1 micropascal (mPa), which
(dB) threshold from the normalized The WSDOT’s US 101 Chehalis River corresponds to a sound exposure level
composite audiograms, with the Bridge Project using in-water pile of 164.5 dB re: 1 mPa2 s after integrating

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:16 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

50632 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices

exposure. Because the airgun noise is a marine mammals. Therefore, under The onset of behavioral disturbance
broadband impulse, one cannot directly certain circumstances, marine mammals from anthropogenic noise depends on
determine the equivalent of root mean whose acoustical sensors or both external factors (characteristics of
square (rms) SPL from the reported environment are being severely masked noise sources and their paths) and the
peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a could also be impaired from maximizing receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
conservative conversion factor of 16 dB their performance fitness in survival experience, demography) and is also
for broadband signals from seismic and reproduction. difficult to predict (Southall et al.,
surveys (McCauley, et al., 2000) to Masking occurs at the frequency band 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received
correct for the difference between peak- that the animals utilize. Therefore, since level of 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) to predict
to-peak levels reported in Lucke et al. noise generated from vibratory pile the onset of behavioral harassment from
(2009) and rms SPLs, the rms SPL for driving is mostly concentrated at low impulse noises (such as impact pile
TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: frequency ranges, it may have less effect driving), and 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for
1 mPa, and the received levels associated on high frequency echolocation sounds continuous noises (such as vibratory
with PTS (Level A harassment) would by odontocetes (toothed whales). pile driving). For the WSDOT’s US 101
be higher. Therefore, based on these However, lower frequency man-made Chehalis River Bridge Project, only the
studies, NMFS recognizes that TTS of noises are more likely to affect detection 120-dB level is considered for effects
harbor porpoises is lower than other of communication calls and other analysis because WSDOT plans to use
cetacean species empirically tested potentially important natural sounds vibratory pile driving and pile removal.
(Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et such as surf and prey noise. It may also The biological significance of many of
al., 2002; Kastelein and Jennings, 2012). affect communication signals when they these behavioral disturbances is difficult
Marine mammal hearing plays a occur near the noise band and thus to predict, especially if the detected
critical role in communication with reduce the communication space of disturbances appear minor. However,
conspecifics, and interpretation of animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and the consequences of behavioral
environmental cues for purposes such cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote modification could be biologically
as predator avoidance and prey capture. et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009). significant if the change affects growth,
Depending on the degree (elevation of survival, and/or reproduction, which
Unlike TS, masking, which can occur
threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery depends on the severity, duration, and
over large temporal and spatial scales,
time), and frequency range of TTS, and context of the effects.
can potentially affect the species at
the context in which it is experienced,
population, community, or even Potential Effects on Marine Mammal
TTS can have effects on marine
ecosystem levels, as well as individual Habitat
mammals ranging from discountable to
levels. Masking affects both senders and The primary potential impacts to
serious (similar to those discussed in
receivers of the signals and could have marine mammal habitat are associated
auditory masking, below). For example,
long-term chronic effects on marine with elevated sound levels produced by
a marine mammal may be able to readily
mammal species and populations. vibratory pile removal and pile driving
compensate for a brief, relatively small
amount of TTS in a non-critical Recent science suggests that low in the area. However, other potential
frequency range that occurs during a frequency ambient sound levels have impacts to the surrounding habitat from
time where ambient noise is lower and increased by as much as 20 dB (more physical disturbance are also possible.
there are not as many competing sounds than three times in terms of sound With regard to fish as a prey source
present. Alternatively, a larger amount pressure level) in the world’s ocean for cetaceans and pinnipeds, fish are
and longer duration of TTS sustained from pre-industrial periods, and most of known to hear and react to sounds and
during time when communication is these increases are from distant to use sound to communicate (Tavolga
critical for successful mother/calf shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). For et al., 1981) and possibly avoid
interactions could have more serious WSDOT’s Chehalis Bridge repair predators (Wilson and Dill, 2002).
impacts. Also, depending on the degree activities, noises from vibratory pile Experiments have shown that fish can
and frequency range, the effects of PTS driving and pile removal contribute to sense both the strength and direction of
on an animal could range in severity, the elevated ambient noise levels in the sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors
although it is considered generally more project area, thus increasing potential determining whether a fish can sense a
serious because it is a permanent for or severity of masking. Baseline sound signal, and potentially react to it,
condition. Of note, reduced hearing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of are the frequency of the signal and the
sensitivity as a simple function of aging project area are high due to ongoing strength of the signal in relation to the
has been observed in marine mammals, shipping, construction and other natural background noise level.
as well as humans and other taxa activities in the Puget Sound. The level of sound at which a fish
(Southall et al., 2007), so one can infer Finally, marine mammals’ exposure to will react or alter its behavior is usually
that strategies exist for coping with this certain sounds could lead to behavioral well above the detection level. Fish
condition to some degree, though likely disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), have been found to react to sounds
not without cost. such as: Changing durations of surfacing when the sound level increased to about
In addition, chronic exposure to and dives, number of blows per 20 dB above the detection level of 120
excessive, though not high-intensity, surfacing, or moving direction and/or dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response
noise could cause masking at particular speed; reduced/increased vocal threshold can depend on the time of
frequencies for marine mammals, which activities; changing/cessation of certain year and the fish’s physiological
behavioral activities (such as socializing condition (Engas et al., 1993). In
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

utilize sound for vital biological
functions (Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic or feeding); visible startle response or general, fish react more strongly to
masking is when other noises such as aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke pulses of sound (such as noise from
from human sources interfere with slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of impact pile driving) rather than
animal detection of acoustic signals areas where noise sources are located; continuous signals (such as noise from
such as communication calls, and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds vibratory pile driving) (Blaxter et al.,
echolocation sounds, and flushing into water from haulouts or 1981), and a quicker alarm response is
environmental sounds important to rookeries). elicited when the sound signal intensity

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:16 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices 50633

rises rapidly compared to sound rising mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown and measurable for most activities,
more slowly to the same level. measures—discussed in detail below in NMFS uses a generalized acoustic
During the coastal construction only a Mitigation section), Level A harassment threshold based on received level to
small fraction of the available habitat is neither anticipated nor authorized. estimate the onset of behavioral
would be ensonified at any given time. As described previously, no mortality harassment. NMFS predicts that marine
Disturbance to fish species would be is anticipated or authorized for this mammals are likely to be behaviorally
short-term and fish would return to activity. Below we describe how the harassed in a manner we consider Level
their pre-disturbance behavior once the take is estimated. B harassment when exposed to
pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the Described in the most basic way, we underwater anthropogenic noise above
proposed construction would have estimate take by considering: (1) received levels of 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms)
little, if any, impact on marine Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS for continuous (e.g. vibratory pile-
mammals’ prey availability in the area believes the best available science driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1
where construction work is planned. indicates marine mammals will be mPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive
Finally, the time of the proposed behaviorally harassed or incur some (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
construction activity would avoid the degree of permanent hearing (e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
spawning season of the ESA-listed impairment; (2) the area or volume of
salmonid species. water that will be ensonified above Applicant’s proposed activity
these levels in a day; (3) the density or includes the use of continuous
Estimated Take (vibratory pile driving and removal)
occurrence of marine mammals within
This section provides an estimate of these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the source, and therefore the 120 dB re 1
the number of incidental takes number of days of activities. Below, we mPa (rms) is applicable.
authorized through this IHA, which will describe these components in more Level A harassment for non-explosive
inform both NMFS’ consideration of detail and present the take estimate. sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance
whether the number of takes is ‘‘small’’ for Assessing the Effects of
and the negligible impact Acoustic Thresholds
Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
determination. Using the best available science, Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance,
Harassment is the only type of take NMFS has developed acoustic 2016) identifies dual criteria to assess
expected to result from these activities. thresholds that identify the received
auditory injury (Level A harassment) to
Except with respect to certain activities level of underwater sound above which
five different marine mammal groups
not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the exposed marine mammals would be
MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result
reasonably expected to be behaviorally
act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance of exposure to noise from two different
harassed (equated to Level B
which (i) has the potential to injure a types of sources (impulsive or non-
harassment) or to incur PTS of some
marine mammal or marine mammal degree (equated to Level A harassment). impulsive). Applicant’s proposed
stock in the wild (Level A harassment); Level B Harassment for non-explosive activity includes the use non-impulsive
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a sources—Though significantly driven by (vibratory pile driving and pile removal)
marine mammal or marine mammal received level, the onset of behavioral source.
stock in the wild by causing disruption disturbance from anthropogenic noise These thresholds were developed by
of behavioral patterns, including, but exposure is also informed to varying compiling and synthesizing the best
not limited to, migration, breathing, degrees by other factors related to the available science and soliciting input
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering source (e.g., frequency, predictability, multiple times from both the public and
(Level B harassment). duty cycle), the environment (e.g., peer reviewers to inform the final
Authorized takes would be by Level B bathymetry), and the receiving animals product, and are provided in the table
harassment only, in the form of (hearing, motivation, experience, below. The references, analysis, and
disruption of behavioral patterns for demography, behavioral context) and methodology used in the development
individual marine mammals resulting can be difficult to predict (Southall et of the thresholds are described in NMFS
from exposure to noise generated from al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2011). Based on 2016 Technical Guidance, which may
vibratory pile driving and removal. what the available science indicates and be accessed at: http://
Based on the nature of the activity and the practical need to use a threshold www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/
the anticipated effectiveness of the based on a factor that is both predictable guidelines.htm.

TABLE 3—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA FOR NON-EXPLOSIVE SOUND UNDERWATER
PTS onset thresholds Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group
Impulsive Non-impulsive Impulsive Non-impulsive

Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ........... Lpk,flat: 219 dB,LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ......... LE,LF,24h: 199 dB .. Lrms,flat: 160 dB ..... Lrms,flat: 120 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ........... Lpk,flat: 230 dB,LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ........ LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans .......... Lpk,flat: 202 dB,LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ......... LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) .. Lpk,flat: 218 dB,LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ........ LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) .. Lpk,flat: 232 dB,LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ........ LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impul-
sive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should
also be considered.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:16 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices 50635

per square kilometer. According to period during the months of July gray whale, estimated takes are
Evenson, et al. (2016), the maximum through September (the proposed period calculated based on ensonified area for
harbor porpoise density in the Strait of of project activities). Based on this data, a specific pile driving activity
Juan de Fuca (approximately 105 miles an average of 2.25 gray whales may be multiplied by the marine mammal
north of Grays Harbor) in 2014 was present in Grays Harbor/south density in the action area, multiplied by
0.768 animals/km2. The higher density Washington coast during the 3-month the number of pile driving (or removal)
estimate for waters offshore of Grays period. days. Distances to and areas of different
Harbor (1.67) will be used for this Take Calculation and Estimation harassment zones are listed in Tables 5
analysis. Here we describe how the information and 6. Total days for sheet pile driving
According to counts conducted by provided above is brought together to and removal are five days each, and the
Calambokidis et al. (2012), 29 gray produce a quantitative take estimate. total day for steel H pile driving and
whales were observed over a 12-year For all marine mammal species except removal is one day each.

TABLE 6—AREAS OF HARASSMENT ZONES
Injury zone (km2) Behavior
Pile type, size and pile driving method zone
LF MF HF Phocid Otariid (km2)
cetacean cetacean cetacean

Vibratory driving & removal, sheet pile, 10 piles/day .............................. 0.004 0.000 0.009 0.002 0.000 2.13
Vibratory driving & removal, steel H pile, 6 piles/day ............................. 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.67

The results predicted that a total of the project area, we adjusted the take Due to the extreme small injury zones
666 harbor seals, 1 California sea lion, number of these species to 10. (maximum zone is 0.009 km2 for high-
0 Steller sea lion, and 38 harbor For gray whales, the Level B takes frequency cetacean), the calculation
porpoise could be exposure to received were estimate based on an average predicted no animals would be exposed
levels that would cause Level B sighting of 2.25 whales in Grays Harbor/ to noise levels that could cause Level A
harassment. However, owing to the south Washington Coast during the harassment, and therefore no Level A
prior observations that California sea months of July through September take is authorized. A summary of
lion and Steller sea lion’s presence in (Calambokidis et al., (2012) adjusted estimated marine mammal Level B takes
upwards to 3 animals. is listed in Table 7.

TABLE 7—ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY BE EXPOSED TO RECEIVED NOISE LEVELS THAT CAUSE
LEVEL B HARASSMENT
Density Estimated
Species Abundance Percentage
(animals/km2) Level B take

Pacific harbor seal ........................................................................................... 29.4 666 11,036 6.03
California sea lion ............................................................................................ 0.033 10 296,750 0.00
Steller sea lion ................................................................................................. 0.0145 10 71,562 0.00
Gray whale ....................................................................................................... NA 3 20,990 0.00
Harbor porpoise ............................................................................................... 1.67 38 11,233 0.34

Mitigation stocks and their habitat (50 CFR of effective implementation (probability
216.104(a)(11)). implemented as planned) and;
In order to issue an IHA under section In evaluating how mitigation may or
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must (2) The practicability of the measures
may not be appropriate to ensure the for applicant implementation, which
set forth the permissible methods of least practicable adverse impact on may consider such things as cost,
taking pursuant to such activity, and species or stocks and their habitat, as impact on operations, and, in the case
other means of effecting the least well as subsistence uses where of a military readiness activity,
practicable impact on such species or applicable, we carefully consider two personnel safety, practicality of
stock and its habitat, paying particular primary factors: implementation, and impact on the
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, (1) The manner in which, and the effectiveness of the military readiness
and areas of similar significance, and on degree to which, the successful activity.
the availability of such species or stock implementation of the measure(s) is
for taking for certain subsistence uses expected to reduce impacts to marine Mitigation for Marine Mammals and
(latter not applicable for this action). mammals, marine mammal species or Their Habitat
NMFS regulations require applicants for stocks, and their habitat. This considers
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

1. Time Restriction
incidental take authorizations to include the nature of the potential adverse
information about the availability and impact being mitigated (likelihood, Work would occur only during
feasibility (economic and technological) scope, range). It further considers the daylight hours, when visual monitoring
of equipment, methods, and manner of likelihood that the measure will be of marine mammals can be conducted.
conducting such activity or other means effective if implemented (probability of In addition, all in-water construction
of effecting the least practicable adverse accomplishing the mitigating result if will be limited to the period between
impact upon the affected species or implemented as planned) the likelihood July 16, 2018, and September 30, 2018.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:16 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

50636 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices

2. Establishing and Monitoring Level A, underwater SELcum could cause PTS (see WSDOT shall establish exclusion
Level B Harassment Zones, and above). zones within which marine mammals
Exclusion Zones WSDOT shall also establish Level B could be taken by Level A harassment.
harassment zones where received For Level A harassment zones that is
Before the commencement of in-water less than 10 m from the source, a
construction activities, which include underwater SPLs are higher than 120
minimum of 10 m distance should be
vibratory pile driving and pile removal, dBrms re 1 mPa for non-impulsive noise
established as an exclusion zone.
WSDOT shall establish Level A sources (vibratory pile driving and pile
A summary of exclusion zones is
harassment zones where received removal). provided in Table 8.

TABLE 8—EXCLUSION ZONES FOR VARIOUS PILE DRIVING ACTIVITIES AND MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS
Exclusion zone (m)
Pile type, size and pile driving method
LF cetacean MF cetacean HF cetacean Phocid Otariid

Vibratory driving and removal, sheet pile, 10 piles/day ...... 37 10 55 22 10
Vibratory driving & removal, steel H pile, 6 piles/day ......... 10 10 10 10 10

NMFS-approved protected species Level B harassment zone during in- history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
observers (PSO) shall conduct an initial water construction activities. of marine mammal species with the
survey of the exclusion zones to ensure Based on our evaluation of the action; or (4) biological or behavioral
that no marine mammals are seen required measures, NMFS has context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or
within the Level A zones before pile determined that the prescribed feeding areas);
driving and pile removal of a pile mitigation measures provide the means • Individual marine mammal
segment begins. If marine mammals are effecting the least practicable impact on responses (behavioral or physiological)
found within the exclusion zone, pile the affected species or stocks and their to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
driving of the segment would be habitat, paying particular attention to cumulative), other stressors, or
delayed until they move out of the area. rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of cumulative impacts from multiple
If a marine mammal is seen above water similar significance. stressors;
and then dives below, the contractor • How anticipated responses to
Monitoring and Reporting stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
would wait 30 minutes. If no marine
mammals are seen by the observer in In order to issue an IHA for an fitness and survival of individual
that time it can be assumed that the activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the marine mammals; or (2) populations,
animal has moved beyond the exclusion MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, species, or stocks;
zone. ‘‘requirements pertaining to the • Effects on marine mammal habitat
monitoring and reporting of such (e.g., marine mammal prey species,
If pile driving of a segment ceases for acoustic habitat, or other important
30 minutes or more and a marine taking.’’ The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) physical components of marine
mammal is sighted within the mammal habitat); and
indicate that requests for authorizations
designated exclusion zone prior to
must include the suggested means of • Mitigation and monitoring
commencement of pile driving, the effectiveness.
observer(s) must notify the pile driving accomplishing the necessary monitoring
operator (or other authorized and reporting that will result in Monitoring Measures
individual) immediately and continue increased knowledge of the species and WSDOT shall employ NMFS-
to monitor the exclusion zone. of the level of taking or impacts on approved PSOs to conduct marine
Operations may not resume until the populations of marine mammals that are mammal monitoring for its U.S. 101/
marine mammal has exited the expected to be present in the proposed Chehalis Bridge Repair Project. The
exclusion zone or 30 minutes have action area. Effective reporting is critical purposes of marine mammal monitoring
elapsed since the last sighting. both to compliance as well as ensuring are to implement mitigation measures
that the most value is obtained from the and learn more about impacts to marine
3. Shutdown Measures required monitoring. mammals from WSDOT’s construction
Monitoring and reporting activities. The PSOs will observe and
WSDOT shall implement shutdown requirements prescribed by NMFS
measures if a marine mammal is collect data on marine mammals in and
should contribute to improved around the project area for 30 minutes
detected within an exclusion zone or is understanding of one or more of the
about to enter an exclusion zone listed before, during, and for 30 minutes after
following: all pile removal and pile installation
in Table 8. In-water pile driving may not • Occurrence of marine mammal
resume until the animal is seen leaving work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet
species or stocks in the area in which the following requirements:
the exclusion zone, or 30 minutes have take is anticipated (e.g., presence,
passed since the sighting of the animal 1. Independent observers (i.e., not
abundance, distribution, density); construction personnel) are required;
within the exclusion zone. • Nature, scope, or context of likely
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

2. At least one observer must have
Further, WSDOT shall implement marine mammal exposure to potential prior experience working as an observer;
shutdown measures if the number of stressors/impacts (individual or 3. Other observers may substitute
authorized takes for any particular cumulative, acute or chronic), through education (undergraduate degree in
species reaches the limit under the IHA better understanding of: (1) Action or biological science or related field) or
(if issued) and if such marine mammals environment (e.g., source training for experience;
are sighted within the vicinity of the characterization, propagation, ambient 4. Where a team of three or more
project area and are approaching the noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life observers are required, one observer

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:11 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices 50637

should be designated as lead observer or listed above to NMFS as soon as hours pile driving or pile removal per
monitoring coordinator. The lead operationally feasible. day). Marine mammals present in the
observer must have prior experience vicinity of the action area and taken by
Negligible Impact Analysis and
working as an observer; and Level B harassment would most likely
Determination
5. NMFS will require submission and show overt brief disturbance (startle
approval of observer CVs. NMFS has defined negligible impact reaction) and avoidance of the area from
Monitoring of marine mammals as an impact resulting from the elevated noise levels during pile driving
around the construction site shall be specified activity that cannot be and pile removal. For these reasons,
conducted using high-quality binoculars reasonably expected to, and is not these behavioral impacts are not
(e.g., Zeiss, 10 × 42 power). Due to the reasonably likely to, adversely affect the expected to affect marine mammals’
different sizes of ZOIs from different species or stock through effects on growth, survival, and reproduction,
pile types, two different ZOIs and annual rates of recruitment or survival especially considering the limited
different monitoring protocols (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact geographic area that would be affected
corresponding to a specific pile type finding is based on the lack of likely in comparison to the much larger
will be established. adverse effects on annual rates of habitat for marine mammals in the
• For vibratory pile driving and pile recruitment or survival (i.e., population- Pacific Northwest.
removal of sheet piles, a total of four level effects). An estimate of the number The project also is not expected to
land-based PSOs will monitor the of takes alone is not enough information have significant adverse effects on
exclusion zones and Level B harassment on which to base an impact affected marine mammals’ habitat, as
zone. determination. In addition to analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Anticipated
• For vibratory pile driving and pile considering estimates of the number of Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat’’
removal of H piles, a total of three land- marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ section. There is no ESA designated
based PSOs will monitor the exclusion through harassment, NMFS considers critical area in the vicinity of the
zones and Level B harassment zone. other factors, such as the likely nature Chehalis Bridge Project area. The project
Locations of the land-based PSOs and of any responses (e.g., intensity, activities would not permanently
routes of monitoring vessels are shown duration), the context of any responses
modify existing marine mammal habitat.
in WSDOT’s Marine Mammal (e.g., critical reproductive time or
The activities may kill some fish and
Monitoring Plan, which is available location, migration), as well as effects
cause other fish to leave the area
online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
temporarily, thus impacting marine
permits/incidental/construction.htm. of the mitigation. We also assess the
mammals’ foraging opportunities in a
To verify the required monitoring number, intensity, and context of
limited portion of the foraging range;
distance, the exclusion zones and ZOIs estimated takes by evaluating this
but, because of the short duration of the
will be determined by using a range information relative to population
activities and the relatively small area of
finder or hand-held global positioning status. Consistent with the 1989
the habitat that may be affected, the
system device. preamble for NMFS’s implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, impacts to marine mammal habitat are
Reporting Measures 1989), the impacts from other past and not expected to cause significant or
WSDOT is required to submit a draft ongoing anthropogenic activities are long-term negative consequences.
monitoring report within 90 days after incorporated into this analysis via their Therefore, given the consideration of
completion of the construction work or impacts on the environmental baseline potential impacts to marine mammal
the expiration of the IHA, whichever (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status prey species and their physical
comes earlier. This report would detail of the species, population size and environment, WSDOT’s proposed
the monitoring protocol, summarize the growth rate where known, ongoing construction activity at Chehalis Bridge
data recorded during monitoring, and sources of human-caused mortality, or would not adversely affect marine
estimate the number of marine ambient noise levels). mammal habitat.
mammals that may have been harassed. To avoid repetition, this introductory In summary and as described above,
NMFS would have an opportunity to discussion of our analyses applies to all the following factors primarily support
provide comments on the report, and if the species listed in Table 7, given that our determination that the impacts
NMFS has comments, WSDOT would the anticipated effects of WSDOT’s resulting from this activity are not
address the comments and submit a Chehalis Bridge repair project activities expected to adversely affect the species
final report to NMFS within 30 days. involving pile driving and pile removal or stock through effects on annual rates
In addition, NMFS would require on marine mammals are expected to be of recruitment or survival:
WSDOT to notify NMFS’ Office of relatively similar in nature. There is no • No injury, series injury, or mortality
Protected Resources and NMFS’ West information about the nature or severity is anticipated or authorized;
Coast Stranding Coordinator within 48 of the impacts, or the size, status, or • All harassment is Level B
hours of sighting an injured or dead structure of any species or stock that harassment in the form of short-term
marine mammal in the construction site. would lead to a different analysis by behavioral modification; and
WSDOT shall provide NMFS and the species for this activity, or else species- • No areas of specific importance to
Stranding Network with the species or specific factors would be identified and affected species are impacted.
description of the animal(s), the analyzed. Based on the analysis contained
condition of the animal(s) (including For all marine mammal species, takes herein of the likely effects of the
that are anticipated and authorized are specified activity on marine mammals
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

carcass condition, if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery, expected to be limited to short-term and their habitat, and taking into
observed behaviors (if alive), and photo Level B harassment (behavioral) because consideration the implementation of the
or video. of the small scale (only a total of 100 prescribed monitoring and mitigation
In the event that WSDOT finds an piles to be installed and removed), measures, NMFS finds that the total take
injured or dead marine mammal that is lower source levels (small piles by from the proposed activity will have a
not in the construction area, WSDOT vibratory pile driving and pile removal), negligible impact on all affected marine
would report the same information as and short durations (maximum five mammal species or stocks.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:16 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

50638 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices

Small Numbers DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b
Dated: October 26, 2017.
As noted above, only small numbers Department of the Navy E.K. Baldini,
of incidental take may be authorized
under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA Meeting of the U.S. Naval Academy Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate
Board of Visitors General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register
for specified activities other than Liaison Officer.
military readiness activities. The MMPA AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. [FR Doc. 2017–23809 Filed 10–31–17; 8:45 am]
does not define small numbers and so,
ACTION:Notice of partially closed BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P
in practice, NMFS compares the number
meeting.
of individuals taken to the most
appropriate estimation of abundance of SUMMARY: The U.S. Naval Academy DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
the relevant species or stock in our Board of Visitors will meet to make such
determination of whether an inquiry, as the Board shall deem National Assessment Governing Board
authorization is limited to small necessary, into the state of morale and Quarterly Board Meeting
numbers of marine mammals. discipline, the curriculum, instruction,
physical equipment, fiscal affairs, and AGENCY: National Assessment
The estimated takes are below seven
academic methods of the Naval Governing Board, U.S. Department of
percent of the population for all marine Education.
mammals (Table 7). Academy.
ACTION: Announcement of open and
Based on the analysis contained DATES: The open session of the meeting
closed meetings.
herein of the proposed activity will be held on December 4, 2017, from
(including the prescribed mitigation and 9:00 a.m. to 11:15 a.m. The executive SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the
monitoring measures) and the session held from 11:15 a.m. to 12:00 agenda for the November 16–18, 2017
anticipated take of marine mammals, p.m., will be the closed portion of the Quarterly Board Meeting of the National
NMFS finds that small numbers of meeting. Assessment Governing Board (hereafter
marine mammals will be taken relative ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at referred to as Governing Board). This
to the population size of the affected the United States Naval Academy in notice provides information to members
species or stocks. Annapolis, MD. The meeting will be of the public who may be interested in
handicap accessible. attending the meeting or providing
Unmitigable Adverse Impact FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: written comments related to the work of
Subsistence Analysis and Lieutenant Commander Lawrence the Governing Board. Notice of this
Determination Heyworth IV, USN, Executive Secretary meeting is required under § 10(a)(2) of
to the Board of Visitors, Office of the the Federal Advisory Committee Act
There are no relevant subsistence uses (FACA).
of the affected marine mammal stocks or Superintendent, U.S. Naval Academy,
species implicated by this action. Annapolis, MD 21402–5000, 410–293– DATES: The Quarterly Board Meeting
1503. will be held on the following dates:
Therefore, NMFS has determined that
the total taking of affected species or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This • November 16, 2017 from 11:15 a.m.
stocks would not have an unmitigable notice of meeting is provided per the to 6:00 p.m.
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as • November 17, 2017 from 8:30 a.m.
adverse impact on the availability of
amended (5 U.S.C. App.). The executive to 4:30 p.m.
such species or stocks for taking for
session of the meeting from 11:15 a.m. • November 18, 2017 from 7:30 a.m.
subsistence purposes.
to 12:00 p.m. on December 4, 2017, will to 12:00 p.m.
Endangered Species Act (ESA) consist of discussions of new and ADDRESSES: Washington Marriott
pending administrative/minor Georgetown, 1221 22nd Street NW.,
No incidental take of ESA-listed Washington, DC 20037.
disciplinary infractions and non-judicial
species is authorized or expected to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
punishments involving midshipmen
result from this activity. Therefore, Munira Mwalimu, Executive Officer/
attending the Naval Academy to include
NMFS has determined that formal but not limited to, individual honor/ Designated Federal Official for the
consultation under section 7 of the ESA conduct violations within the Brigade, Governing Board, 800 North Capitol
is not required for this action. the disclosure of which would Street NW., Suite 825, Washington, DC
Authorization constitute a clearly unwarranted 20002, telephone: (202) 357–6938, fax:
invasion of personal privacy. For this (202) 357–6945, email:
As a result of these determinations, reason, the executive session of this Munira.Mwalimu@ed.gov.
NMFS has issued an IHA to the meeting will be closed to the public, as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Washington State Department of the discussion of such information Statutory Authority and Function:
Transportation for the U.S. 101/Chehalis cannot be adequately segregated from The Governing Board is established
River Bridge—Scour Repair in other topics, which precludes opening under the National Assessment of
Washington State, provided the the executive session of this meeting to Educational Progress Authorization Act,
previously described mitigation, the public. Accordingly, the Department Title III of Public Law 107–279. Written
monitoring, and reporting requirements of the Navy/Assistant for comments may be submitted
Administration has determined in
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

are incorporated. electronically or in hard copy to the
Dated: October 26, 2017.
writing that the meeting shall be attention of the Executive Officer/
partially closed to the public because Designated Federal Official (see contact
Donna S. Wieting, the discussions during the executive information noted above). Information
Director, Office of Protected Resources, session from 11:15 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on the Governing Board and its work
National Marine Fisheries Service. will be concerned with matters can be found at www.nagb.gov.
[FR Doc. 2017–23748 Filed 10–31–17; 8:45 am] protected under sections 552b(c) (5), (6), The Governing Board is established to
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P and (7) of title 5, United States Code. formulate policy for the National

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:16 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

Document Created: 2017-11-01 02:02:56
Document Modified: 2017-11-01 02:02:56

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
Dates		This authorization is valid from July 1, 2018, through June 30, 2019.
Contact		Shane Guan, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application and supporting documents, as well as the issued IHA, may be obtained online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.
FR Citation		82 FR 50628
RIN Number		0648-XF57

82 FR 50628 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. 101/Chehalis River Bridge-Scour Repair in Washington State

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 210 (November 1, 2017)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration