83 FR 5063 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Haines Ferry Terminal Modification Project

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 24 (February 5, 2018)

Page Range		5063-5072
FR Document		2018-02254

In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) to incidentally take, by Level A and/or Level B harassment, six species of marine mammals during the Haines Ferry Terminal Modification Project, Haines, Alaska.

Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 24 (Monday, February 5, 2018)

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 24 (Monday, February 5, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5063-5072]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02254]

[[Page 5063]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

XRIN 0648-XF547

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Haines Ferry Terminal
Modification Project

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

ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Incidental Harassment Authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF)
to incidentally take, by Level A and/or Level B harassment, six species
of marine mammals during the Haines Ferry Terminal Modification
Project, Haines, Alaska.

DATES: The IHA is valid from October 1, 2018, through September 30,
2019.

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

Availability

An electronic copy of the IHA and supporting documents, as well as
a list of the references cited in this document, 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 (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

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.
NMFS has defined ``unmitigable adverse impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103
as an impact resulting from the specified activity:
(1) That is likely to reduce the availability of the species to a
level insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by: (i)
Causing the marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas; (ii)
directly displacing subsistence users; or (iii) placing physical
barriers between the marine mammals and the subsistence hunters; and
(2) That cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to
increase the availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs
to be met.
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

To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must review our action with respect to environmental consequences
on the human environment. The issuance of the IHA is consistent with
categories of activities identified in categorical exclusion (CE) B4 of
the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A. These
activities do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for
significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for
which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would
preclude use of this categorical exclusion.

Summary of Request

On January 9, 2017, NMFS received a request from ADOT&PF for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to the Haines Ferry Terminal
Modification Project. ADOT&PF submitted a subsequent application on May
30, 2017, which we considered adequate and complete. On August 17,
2017, ADOT&PF indicated a change to the requested effective dates in
the application to accommodate a delayed construction schedule.
ADOT&PF's request is for harassment only and NMFS concurs that serious
injury or mortality is not expected to result from this activity.
Therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
NMFS has issued an IHA to ADOT&PF authorizing the take of humpback
whales (Megaptera novaeangliae), harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), harbor
porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and Dall's porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli)
by Level A and Level B harassment, and an additional two species,
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus) and killer whale (Orcinus orca)
by Level B harassment only. Pile driving will occur for 19 days and
pile removal will take 2 additional days (total of 21 days) over the
course of 4 months from October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019,
but excluding March 1 through May 31, 2019. No subsequent IHA would be
necessary to complete the project.

Description of Proposed Activity

We provided a description of the specified activity in our Federal
Register notice announcing the proposed authorization (82 FR 47700;
October 13, 2017). Please refer to that document; we provide only
summary information here.
The Haines Ferry Terminal Modification Project involves
constructing an AMHS End Berth Facility adjacent to the existing dock.
The expansion is necessary because the current configuration does not
allow for operation of the new Alaska Class vessels, which are expected
to be operational in 2018. Activities which have the potential to
harass marine mammals include include impact and vibratory pile driving
and vibratory pile removal. The terminal is located in southeast Alaska
in Lutak Inlet.
To construct the new infrastructure, ADOT&PF will install 37 new
piles (22 30-in. piles and 15 36-in. piles). Each pile will require 45
to 60 minutes of vibratory driving (to account for proper

[[Page 5064]]

placement and alignment of the pile) followed by an average of 700
strikes (15 to 30 minutes) of the impact hammer for a total average
installation time of 60-90 minutes. Pile driving the 30-in. piles is
expected to take 11 days while an additional 8 days would be necessary
to install the 36-in. piles. In addition, 4 existing 30-in. piles would
be removed over the course of 2 days. In total, ADOT&PF would be
elevating noise levels around the project area for 21 days (two days of
pile removal plus 19 days of pile driving) of a 4 month construction
window (four months from October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019,
excluding March 1, 2019, through May, 31 2019.

Comments and Responses

A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to ADOT&PF was
published in the Federal Register on October 13, 2017 (82 FR 47700).
That notice described, in detail, ADOT&PF's activity, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activity, the anticipated effects
on marine mammals and their habitat, proposed amount and manner of
take, and proposed mitigation, monitoring and reporting measures.
During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received one comment
letter from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission); the Commission's
recommendations and our responses are provided here, and the comments
have been posted online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that NMFS share the rounding
criteria with the Commission in the near term.
Response: NMFS will share the rounding criteria with the Commission
soon (following the completion of internal edits) and looks forward to
discussing the issue with them in the future.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species.
Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be
found in NMFS Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/
), and more general information about these species (e.g., physical and
behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS website
(www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/). We provided a description of
the specified activity in our Federal Register notice announcing the
proposed authorization (82 FR 47700; October 13, 2017). Please refer to
that document; we provide only a summary table here (Table 1).

Table 1--Marine Mammals Potentially Present Within Upper Lynn Canal During the Specified Activity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance Nbest,
ESA/MMPA status; (CV, Nmin, most recent Annual M/
Common name Scientific name MMPA stock strategic (Y/N) \1\ abundance survey) \2\ PBR SI \3\

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenidae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale..................... Megaptera novaeangliae Central North Pacific. E, D, Y 10,103 (0.3, 7,890, 83 24
2006).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Killer whale....................... Orcinus orca.......... Alaska Resident....... -, N 2,347 (N/A, 2,347, 24 1
2012) \4\.
Northern Resident..... -, N 261 (N/A, 261, 2011) 1.96 0
\4\.
Gulf of Alaska, -, N 587 (N/A, 587, 2012) 5.9 1
Aleutian Islands, \4\.
Bering Sea.
West Coast Transient.. -, N 243 (N/A, 243, 2009) 2.4 0
\4\.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor porpoise.................... Phocoena phocoena..... Southeast Alaska...... -, Y 975 (0.10, 896, 2012) 8.9 \5\ 34
\5\.
Dall's porpoise.................... Phocoenoides dalli.... Alaska................ -, N 83,400 (0.097, N/A, Undet 38
1993).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller sea lion................... Eumetopias jubatus.... Western U.S........... E, D, Y 49,497 (2014)......... 297 233
Eastern U.S........... -, D, Y 60,131-74,448 (2013).. 1,645 92.3
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal........................ Phoca vitulina Lynn Canal/Stephens -, N 9,478 (8,605, 2011)... 155 50
richardii. Passage.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable (N/A).

[[Page 5065]]

\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\ N is based on counts of individual animals identified from photo-identification catalogs.
\5\ In the 2016 SAR for harbor porpoise, NMFS identified population estimates and PBR for porpoises within inland southeast Alaska waters (these
abundance estimates have not been corrected for g(0); therefore, they are likely conservative). The Annual M/SI value provided is for all Alaska
fisheries, not just inland waters of southeast Alaska.

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat

We provided a description of the anticipated effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals in our Federal Register notice
announcing the proposed authorization (82 FR 47700; October 13, 2017).
Please refer to that document for our detailed analysis; we provide
only summary information here.
The introduction of anthropogenic noise into the aquatic
environment from pile driving and removal is the primary means by which
marine mammals may be harassed from ADOT&PF's specified activity. The
effects of pile driving noise on marine mammals are dependent on
several factors, including, but not limited to, sound type (e.g.,
impulsive vs. non-impulsive), the species, age and sex class (e.g.,
adult male vs. mom with calf), duration of exposure, the distance
between the pile and the animal, received levels, behavior at time of
exposure, and previous history with exposure (Southall et al., 2007,
Wartzok et al., 2004). Animals exposed to natural or anthropogenic
sound may experience physical and behavioral effects, ranging in
magnitude from none to severe (Southall et al., 2007). In general,
exposure to pile driving noise has the potential to result in auditory
threshold shifts (permanent threshold shift (PTS) and temporary
threshold shift (TTS)) and behavioral reactions (e.g., avoidance,
temporary cessation of foraging and vocalizing, changes in dive
behavior).
In 2016, ADOT&PF documented observations of marine mammals during
pile driving and down-hole drilling at the Kodiak Ferry Dock (as
described in 80 FR 60636; October 7, 2015 [date]). In the marine mammal
monitoring report for that project (ABR 2016), 1,281 Steller sea lions
were observed within the Level B disturbance zone during pile driving
or drilling (i.e., documented as Level B take). Of these, 19
individuals demonstrated an alert behavior, 7 were fleeing, and 19 swam
away from the project site. All other animals (98 percent) were engaged
in activities such as milling, foraging, or fighting and did not change
their behavior. In addition, two sea lions approached within 20 meters
of active vibratory pile driving activities. Three harbor seals were
observed within the disturbance zone during pile-driving activities;
none of them displayed disturbance behaviors. Fifteen killer whales and
three harbor porpoise were also observed within the Level B harassment
zone during pile driving. The killer whales were travelling or milling
while all harbor porpoises were travelling. No signs of disturbance
were noted for either of these species. Given the similarities in
activities and habitat and the fact the same species are involved, we
expect similar behavioral responses of marine mammals to the specified
activity. That is, disturbance, if any, is likely to be temporary and
localized (e.g., small area movements).

Marine Mammal Habitat Effects

We provided a description of the effect of specified activity on
marine mammal habitat in our Federal Register notice announcing the
proposed authorization (82 FR 47700; October 13, 2017). Please refer to
that document; we provide only summary information here.
Construction activities at the Haines Ferry terminal could have
localized, temporary impacts on marine mammal habitat and their prey by
increasing in-water sound pressure levels and slightly decreasing water
quality. ADOT&PF will employ standard construction best management
practices (BMPs; see section 9 and 11.1 in ADOT's application),
thereby, reducing any impacts. Any impacts are anticipated to be
localized, short-term, and minimal.

Estimated Take

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).
NMFS has authorized the taking of six species of marine mammals, by
Level A and B harassment, incidental to pile driving and removal.
Authorized takes will primarily be by Level B harassment, as use of the
impact and vibratory hammers has the potential to result in disruption
of behavioral patterns and/or TTS for individual marine mammals. Impact
pile driving may also result in auditory injury (Level A harassment)
for mysticetes, high frequency cetaceans, and phocids based on modeled
auditory injury zones if those species are exposed to certain noise
levels generated from installing two piles per day. However, there are
multiple hours between impact pile driving each pile; therefore, these
zones are conservative as animals are not known to linger in the area.
Therefore, PTS potential is low and, if occurs, would likely be minimal
(e.g., PTS onset). Auditory injury is not expected for mid-frequency
species and otariids as the accumulation of energy does not reach NMFS'
PTS thresholds. The death of a marine mammal is also a type of
incidental take. However, as described previously, no mortality is
authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take were
calculated.
We estimated take by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above
which NMFS believes the best available science indicates marine mammals
may 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.

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).
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 decibel
(dB) re 1 microPascal ([mu]Pa) root mean square (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, impact pile

[[Page 5066]]

driving) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources. ADOT&PF
includes the use of continuous (vibratory pile driving) and impulsive
(impact pile driving); therefore, the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
thresholds are 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) for 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).
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 Table 2. 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 2--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset acoustic thresholds *
(received level)
Hearing group -----------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans.. Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 Cell 2:
dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB. LE,LF,24h: 199
dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans.. Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 Cell 4:
dB; LE,MF,24h: 185 dB. LE,MF,24h: 198
dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans. Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 Cell 6:
dB; LE,HF,24h: 155 dB. LE,HF,24h: 173
dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 Cell 8:
(Underwater). dB; LE,PW,24h: 185 dB. LE,PW,24h: 201
dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 Cell 10:
(Underwater). dB; LE,OW,24h: 203 dB. LE,OW,24h: 219
dB.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever
results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-
impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure
level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds
should also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [mu]Pa, and
cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of
1[mu]Pa\2\s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect
American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However,
peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency
weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence,
the subscript ``flat'' is being included to indicate peak sound
pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized
hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure
level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory
weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds)
and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The
cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a
multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty
cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to
indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
exceeded.

Ensonified Area

Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds.
ADOT&PF prepared an acoustic modeling report that discusses their
modeling approach and identifies modeled source levels and harassment
zones for the Haines Ferry Terminal project (Quijano et al., 2016). A
summary of the methods of the modeling effort is presented here; the
full report is available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.
To assess potential underwater noise exposure of marine mammals
during pile driving, ADOT&PF used two models: a Pile Driving Source
Model (PDSM) to estimate the sound radiation generated by the pile
driver acting upon the pile (i.e., source levels), and a Full Waveform
Range-dependent Acoustic Model (FWRAM) to simulate sound propagation
away from the pile. The modeling considered the effect of pile driving
equipment, bathymetry, sound speed profile, and seabed geoacoustic
parameters to predict the acoustic footprint from impact and vibratory
pile driving of cylindrical pipe piles with respect to NMFS Level A and
Level B thresholds. The report presents scenarios in which one pile or
two piles are driven per day; however, for purposes here, NMFS
considered only the two pile scenario since ADOT&PF has indicated that
up to two piles could be driven per day. The resulting Level A
harassment distances represent the location at which an animal would
have to remain for the entire duration it takes to drive one pile,
reset, and then drive another pile that, in reality, occurs over
multiple hours in one day. The Level B isopleth distances represent
instantaneous exposure to the Level B harassment criterion.
To model sounds resulting from impact and vibratory pile driving of
30-in and 36-in cylindrical pipe pipes, the PDSM was used in
conjunction with GRL Engineer's Wave Equation Analysis Program
(GRLWEAP) pile driving simulation software to obtain an equivalent pile
source signature (i.e., source level) consisting of a vertical array of
discrete point sources (Table 3). This signature accounts for several
parameters that describe the operation: Pile type, material, size, and
length; the pile driving equipment; and approximate pile penetration
rate. The amplitude and phase of the point sources along the array were
computed so that they collectively mimicked the time-frequency
characteristics of the acoustic wave at the pile wall that results from
a hammer strike (impact driving) or from forced vibration (vibratory
driving) at the top end of the pile. This approach estimates spectral
levels within the band 10-800 Hz where most of the energy from pile
driving is concentrated. An extrapolation method (Zykov et al., 2016)
was used to extend modeled levels in \1/3\-octave-bands up to 25 kHz,
by applying a -2 dB per \1/3\-octave-band roll-off coefficient to the
SEL value starting at the 800 Hz band. This was done to estimate the
acoustic energy at higher frequencies to compare to NMFS thresholds.
Once the pile source signature was computed, the FWRAM sound
propagation modeling code was used to determine received levels as a
function of depth, range, and azimuth direction. FWRAM is a time-domain
acoustic model that used, as input, the PDSM-generated array of point
sources representing the pile and computes synthetic pressure
waveforms. To exclude sound field outliers, NMFS uses the maximum range
at which the given sound level was encountered after excluding 5
percent of the farthest such points (R95) to
estimate harassment threshold distances. To account for hearing groups,
full-spectrum frequency-dependent weighting functions were applied at
each

[[Page 5067]]

frequency. The model also showed the transition from down-slope to up-
slope propagation as the sound crosses Lutak Inlet, resulting in a
sound field that decays at a constant rate with range.
Steel cylindrical pipe piles 41 m (135 ft) long with \1/2\ in thick
walls were modeled for a total penetration of 14 m (46 ft) into the
sediment. In the case of vibratory pile driving, both pile sizes were
assumed to be driven by an ICE-44B vibratory pile driver. For impact
pile driving, the parameters corresponding to the Delmag D30-32 and
D36-32 impact pile drivers were used to model scenarios with 30-in and
36-in diameter piles, respectively. Sound energy was accumulated over a
specified number of hammer strikes, not as a function of time. The
number of strikes required to install a single pile (assumed to be 700
strikes per pile) was estimated based on pile driving logs from another
pile driving project at Haines. Sound footprints were calculated for
the installation of two piles (thus, accumulated over 1400 strikes).
For vibratory pile driving, sound energy was accumulated for the two
piles that could be installed or removed in a 24-hour period.
Modeled source levels and distances to NMFS acoustic thresholds
based on these source levels and the sound propagation model are
presented in Table 3 and 4.

Table 3--Impact Pile Driving: Modeled Source Levels and Harassment Zones
for Impact Driving Two Piles per Day
[A dash indicates the threshold was not reached *]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A
threshold Level A Level B (160 Level B
Hearing group distance threshold area dB) threshold threshold area
(R95%) (km) (km\2\) distance (km) (km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 inch piles: modeled SL = 179.5 dB SEL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency cetacean.......................... 1.65 3.17 1.98 4.52
Mid-frequency cetacean.......................... -- --
High-frequency cetacean......................... 1.45 1.13
Phocid pinniped................................. 0.26 0.09
Otarrid pinniped................................ -- --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36 inch piles: modeled SL = 180.9 dB SEL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency cetacean.......................... 2.04 4.78 2.67 6.79
Mid-frequency cetacean.......................... -- --
High-frequency cetacean......................... 1.49 2.17
Phocid pinniped................................. 0.33 0.15
Otarrid pinniped................................ -- --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* NMFS also considers peak sound pressure levels; however, in no case were these thresholds reached or greater
than the SEL distances.

Table 4--Vibratory Pile Driving: Modeled Source Levels and Harassment Zones
for Vibratory Driving Two Piles per Day
[A dash indicates the threshold was not reached*]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A
threshold Level A Level B (120 Level B
Hearing group Distance threshold area dB) threshold threshold area
(R95%) (km) (km\2\) distance (km) (km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 inch piles: modeled SL = 177.6 dB rms
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALL............................................. - - 5.61 21.14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36 inch piles: modeled SL = 179.8 dB rms
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency cetacean.......................... 0.02 <0.01 5.62 21.17
Mid-frequency cetacean.......................... -- --
High-frequency cetacean......................... -- --
Phocid pinniped................................. -- --
Otarrid pinniped................................ -- --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* NMFS also considers peak sound pressure levels; however, in no case were these thresholds reached or greater
than the SEL distances.

The modeling approach described above and in ADOT&PF's application
constitutes a new approach in that it models both source levels and
propagation loss to estimate distances to NMFS harassment thresholds.
Some preliminary data comparing measured sound levels to those produced
by the models has been presented, but no peer reviewed analysis has
been undertaken. To test the validity of the model, NMFS has included a
proposed requirement that ADOT&PF conduct a source source verification
(SSV) study upon the onset of pile driving to validate the model or, if
necessary, adjust the harassment zones based on measured data. This SSV
study will also provide the first measurements of sound levels
generated by 36-in piles driven by ADOT&PF. ADOT&PF has prepared a
draft acoustic

[[Page 5068]]

monitoring plan which can be found at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. We welcome comments on the ADOT&PF's
source level modeling approach and the acoustic monitoring plan.

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.
The data on marine mammals in this area are diverse and fairly
robust due mostly to ADF&G surveys. Strong seasonal occurrence of
marine mammals in this area is well documented; therefore, density
estimates for each species were calculated by month rather than
averaged throughout the year. For example, we have already discussed
the seasonality of Steller sea lions and how prey aggregations affect
their abundance. Monthly Steller sea lion densities were calculated
based on abundance surveys conducted at Gran Point (ADF&G, pers. comm).
Considering the Steller sea lion data used to calculate density is from
Gran Point, ADOT&PF used this location to mark the southern boundary of
the action area. The area from Gran Point north that encompasses Lutak
Inlet and Lynn Canal is 91.3 km\2\; this area was used for all species'
density estimates. For species other than Steller sea lion, average
sighting rate was used to calculate density (i.e., species occurrence
rate per month/91.3km\2\). Harbor seals are generally present in the
action area throughout the year, but their local abundance is clearly
defined by the presence of available prey. During mid-March through
mid- June, they are abundant in Lutak Inlet. For these months, an
average of 100 seals per day in the inlet is considered a conservative
estimate. For all other months, an estimate of 10 seals per month was
incorporated into the density equation. Humpback whales are present in
the action area from mid-April through June at a rate of five whales
per month and given that a few whales have atypically remained in the
area through the fall months (MOS 2016), we assumed two whales may
remain within the action area from August through November. Densities
for killer whales were calculated assuming five animals enter the area
seasonally from one of the resident or transient stocks, and may remain
from April through November. Harbor porpoise may be present in low
numbers (average of five per month) throughout the year. Finally,
Dall's porpoise are not sighted very frequently but tend to travel in
larger groups; therefore, ten animals per for the four months of
construction were considered in the density calculations. Table 5
provides the resulting marine mammal densities for months when terminal
construction would occur (again, no pile activities would occur from
March 1 through May 31 to avoid peak marine mammal abundance and
critical foraging periods). Although the table provides all relevant
months, we used the months with highest density to calculate estimated
take for each species, thus producing the most conservative estimates.
Please refer to section 6.6.1 in ADOT's application for supporting data
information.

Table 5--Marine Mammal Density Estimates (Animals/km\2\) During Months When Pile Activities May Occur
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Jan Feb June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller sea lion..................................... 2.06 1.87 \1\ 7.65 1.35 0 0.01 1.85 1.59 2.47
Harbor seal.......................................... 0.109 0.109 1.09 0.109 0.109 0.109 0.109 0.109 0.109
Humpback whale....................................... 0 0 0.054 0.054 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0
Killer whale......................................... 0 0 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0
Harbor porpoise...................................... 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054
Dall's porpoise \2\.................................. 0 0 0 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The application and proposed IHA Federal Register notice incorrectly calculated a density of 7.55. No change to Steller sea lion takes result from
this correction.
\2\ For all months where Dall's porpoise may be present (July through October), the application and proposed IHA Federal Register notice incorrectly
calculated a density of 0.03. Because Dall's porpoise take numbers are based on group size, this density increase warranted an increase to the number
of groups, and therefore the number of takes, potentially exposed to noise about NMFS acoustic thresholds (see Table 6).

Take Calculation and Estimation

Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
The following equation was used to calculate potential Level A take
per species per pile type: Level A harassment zone//pile type * June
density * # of pile driving days/pile type.
Also for Level B takes, we only considered the vibratory zone of
21.1 km\2\. In the proposed IHA notice, we had included calculations
for the Level B harassment zone from impact pile driving but have since
determined that this grossly overestimates take as the Level B zone for
vibratory pile driving and removal essentially subsumes the Level B
zone for impact hammering. As such, our Level B takes for all species,
except those which are based on group size, are reduced from the
proposed IHA notice stage.
As described above, there would be 19 days of pile driving and 2
days of pile removal for a total of 21 pile activity days. We used the
June density because, when densities changed throughout the year, this
is when the highest density of all species occurs in the project area
within the project in-water work window (with the exception of Dall's
porpoise-see below) and ADOT&PF could conduct activities during this
month. Therefore, the resulting take estimates assume all work is
conducted in June, producing conservative estimates.
ADOT&PF may take 1.9 humpback whales by Level A harassment when
impact driving 30'' piles (i.e., 3.17 km\2\ * 0.054 animals/km\2\ * 11
days). ADOT&PF may take 2.1 humpback whales by Level A harassment when
impact driving 36-in piles (i.e., 4.78 km\2\ * 0.054 animals/km\2\ * 8
days). Together, these equal 4 (i.e., 1.9 from 30-in + 2.1 from 36'')
potential Level A takes (Table 6). However, humpback whales may travel
in small groups (up to four animals per group); therefore, in the IHA
we doubled this number to account for two groups of humpback whales for
a total of eight Level A takes. Potential Level B takes from vibratory
pile driving and removal (Level B area = 21.1 km\2\) was calculated
using the equation described above: 21.1 km\2\ * 0.054 animals/km\2\ *
21 days = 24 animals. The IHA authorizes 24 Level B takes of humpback
whales.
For killer whales, Level B takes from vibratory pile driving were
calculated using June density and the full 21.1 km\2\ Level B: 21.1
km\2\ * 0.054 animals/km\2\ * 21 days = 24 animals. However, the
density used in the equation used in

[[Page 5069]]

ADOT&PF's application was based on transient killer whale average group
size of 4-6 animals when a resident group can average 20 animals.
Therefore, the IHA authorizes a total of 60 takes of killer whales to
account for larger resident groups passing through the Level B
harassment zone.
For Dall's porpoise, we increased the number of groups that may be
within the calculated Level A thresholds area from one group in the
proposed IHA notice to two groups to account for the increase in
estimated density. We also increase the number of groups potentially
exposed to noise levels about the Level B threshold to four groups. For
Level B take, calculated take between 10 and 20 animals; therefore, we
assumed two groups of ten each may occur within the Level B zone and
are proposing to authorize 20 Level B takes.
Harbor porpoise take estimates were based on a density of .054
porpoise/km\2\ with a Level A isopleth of 1.13 km\2\ and 2.17 km\2\ for
impact pile driving 30-in (11 days) and 36-in (8 days) piles,
respectively. The resulting one take is less than the average group
size of three animals. Further, harbor porpoise are cryptic species and
could enter the Level A zone unnoticed during impact pile driving.
Therefore, the IHA authorizes six Level A takes of harbor porpoise to
account for missing animals. Level B take numbers for harbor porpoise
were based on the conservative assumption four groups of porpoise could
be exposed to noise levels at or above the Level B vibratory pile
driving threshold for a total of 12 takes.
Harbor seals may linger in the area for multiple days; therefore,
we conservatively estimate one harbor seal could be around the terminal
on any given day for a total of 21 Level A takes. For Level B takes, we
used the equation above using a density of 1.09 seals/km\2\. It is
important to note that given harbor seals are more likely to haul-out
and linger within the Level A and B harassment zone, it is more likely
the take numbers represent exposures and not individual seals. As with
all other species, it is also likely animals will travel through the
Level B zone heading up the inlet and then back down again. Because
individual identification is not always possible, these separate
sighting events would be counted as individual takes.
For Steller sea lions, no Level A takes are authorized. Level B
takes from vibratory pile driving were calculated using the most
conservative June density (assuming worst case scenario that all work
occurs in June) and the full 21.1 km\2\ Level B zone since no Level A
takes are predicted: 21.1 km\2\ * 7.65 animals/km\2\ * 21 days = 3390
animals. Similar to harbor seals, this amount is not believed to be the
number of individual Steller sea lions harassed but some lesser amount
of individuals with repeated exposures.
Table 6 includes the total proposed take levels, by species, manner
of taking, and the percentage of stock potentially taken by harassment.

Table 6--Estimated Take by Level A and Level B Harassment, by Species and Month, Resulting From Impact and Vibratory Pile Driving
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Stock Stock size \1\ Level A Level B % of Stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller sea lion............................... eastern U.S............................ 60,131 0 \2\ 3307 5.5
western U.S............................ 49,497 0 \2\ 83 0.17
Harbor Seal.................................... Lynn Canal/Stephens Passage............ 9,478 21 483 5.3
Humpback whale................................. Central North Pacific.................. 10,103 \3\ 4 \3\ 24 0.3
Killer whale................................... Alaska Resident........................ 2,347 0 60 \4\ 2.6-24.7
Northern Resident...................... 261 0
Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian Islands, 587 0
Bering Sea.
West Coast Transient................... 243 0
Harbor porpoise................................ Southeast Alaska....................... 975 \5\ 6 24 3.08
Dall's porpoise................................ Alaska................................. 83,400 \5\ 20 \5\ 48 0.08
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Stock size is Nbest according to NMFS 2016 Stock Assessment Reports.
\2\ Calculated Level B take of all SSL's is based on a June density of 7.65 animals which equals 3390 individuals. We then subtracted the 83 animals
which could belong to the western U.S. stock based a 2 percent distinction factor calculated from takes estimated in the proposed IHA Federal Register
notice.
\3\ Calculated Level A takes for humpback whales did not cover average group size; therefore, we are authorizing four takes. For ESA section 7
consultation purposes, 6.1 percent are designated to the Mexico DPS and the remaining are designated to the Hawaii DPS; therefore, we predict 2 Level
B takes from the Mexico DPS.
\4\ The percentages calculated here assume all 60 takes are from a single stock. It is unlikely all takes would be from the West Coast Transient stock;
therefore, the percentage of the population taken is likely a gross overestimate.
\5\ The calculated Level A take for harbor porpoise and Dall's porpoise is less than the average group size; therefore, we are proposing to authorize
Level A take of two groups of each species (i.e., 6 and 20 animals, respectively). The calculated amount of Level B take for harbor porpoise is
sufficient to cover multiple groups; therefore, we used the take equation.

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, as
well as subsistence uses. 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

[[Page 5070]]

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.
The following mitigation measures are included in the IHA:
Schedule: No pile driving or removal would occur from
March 1 through May 31 to avoid peak marine mammal abundance periods
and critical foraging periods. In addition, the daily construction
window for pile removal and driving shall begin no sooner than 30
minutes after sunrise and shall end no later than 30 minutes prior to
sunset;
Pile Driving Delay/Shut-Down: If an animal comes within 10
m (33 ft) of a pile being driven or removed, ADOT&PF would shut down.
Pile driving activities would only be conducted during daylight hours
when it is possible to visually monitor for marine mammals. If poor
environmental conditions restrict visibility (e.g., from excessive wind
or fog, high Beaufort state), pile installation would be delayed. If a
species for which authorization has not been granted or if a species
for which authorization has been granted but the authorized takes are
met, ADOT&PF would delay or shut-down pile driving if the marine
mammals approaches or is observed within the Level A and/or B
harassment zone. In the unanticipated event that the specified activity
clearly causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by
the IHA, such as serious injury or mortality, the protected species
observer (PSO) on watch would immediately call for the cessation of the
specified activities and immediately report the incident to the Chief
of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, and NMFS Alaska Regional Office;
Soft-start: For all impact pile driving, a ``soft start''
technique will be used at the beginning of each pile installation to
allow any marine mammal that may be in the immediate area to leave
before hammering at full energy. The soft start requires ADOT&PF to
provide an initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at 40
percent energy, followed by a one-minute waiting period, then two
subsequent 3-strike sets. If any marine mammal is sighted within the
Level A zone designated for that species prior to pile-driving, or
during the soft start, ADOT&PF will delay pile-driving until the animal
is confirmed to have moved outside and on a path away from Level A zone
or if 30 minutes have elapsed since the last sighting of a humpback
whale or 15 minutes have elapsed since the last sighting of any other
marine mammal species; and
Other best management practices: ADOT&PF will drive all
piles with a vibratory hammer to the maximum extent possible (i.e.,
until a desired depth is achieved or to refusal) prior to using an
impact hammer; use the minimum hammer energy needed to safely install
the piles; utilize sound attenuation devices (e.g., pile caps/cushions)
to reduce source levels and, by association, received levels; and
remove piles using a direct pull method instead of a vibratory hammer,
if feasible. It is noted that although sound attentutation devices have
proven effective at reducing source levels, because the actual amount
of reduction of sound energy from using those devices in unknown,
ADOT&PF and NMFS relied on unattenuated source levels to calculate
harassment zones.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, we have determined that the
proposed 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.

Visual Monitoring

Monitoring would be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30
minutes after pile driving and removal activities. In addition,
observers shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence,
regardless of distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral
reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven or removed.
Pile driving activities include the time to install or remove a single
pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of
the pile driving equipment is no more than thirty minutes.
A primary PSO would be placed at the terminal where pile driving
would occur and a second observer would be placed at Tanani Point,
located approximately 1 mi (1.6 km) southeast of the terminal. This
second observer is at an advantage to observe species prior to entering
the Level A zone as they move up Chilkoot Inlet, covering a majority of
the Level B zone. PSOs would scan the waters using binoculars, and/or
spotting scopes, and would use a handheld GPS or range-finder device to
verify the distance to each sighting from the project site. All PSOs
would be trained in marine mammal identification and behaviors and are
required to have no other project-related tasks while conducting
monitoring. The following measures also apply to visual monitoring:

[[Page 5071]]

(1) Monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will
be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for
marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable
by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. Qualified observers
are trained biologists, with the following minimum qualifications:
(a) Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible)
sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface
with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars
may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
(b) Advanced education in biological science or related field
(undergraduate degree or higher required);
(c) Experience and ability to conduct field observations and
collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic
experience);
(d) Experience or training in the field identification of marine
mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
(e) Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
(f) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations
including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals
observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were
conducted; dates and times when in-water construction activities were
suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from construction sound
of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown zone; and marine
mammal behavior; and
(g) Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
A draft marine mammal monitoring report would be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities. It will include an overall description of work completed, a
narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and associated marine
mammal observation data sheets. Specifically, the report must include:
Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from
pile driving activity;
Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
Locations of all marine mammal observations; and
Other human activity in the area.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
final report will constitute the final report. If comments are
received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted
within 30 days after receipt of comments.
In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA
(if issued), such as an injury, serious injury or mortality, ADOT&PF
would immediately cease the specified activities and report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office
of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Alaska Regional Stranding
Coordinator. The report would include the following information:
Description of the incident;
Environmental conditions (e.g., Beaufort sea state,
visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS would work with ADOT&PF to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. ADOT&PF would not be able
to resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
In the event that ADOT&PF discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (e.g., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph),
ADOT&PF would immediately report the incident to the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the Alaska
Regional Stranding Coordinator. The report would include the same
information identified in the paragraph above. Activities would be able
to continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS
would work with ADOT&PF to determine whether modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
In the event that ADOT&PF discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), ADOT&PF would report the incident
to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or
by email to the Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinator, within 24 hours
of the discovery. ADOT&PF would provide photographs or video footage
(if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting
to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.

Acoustic Monitoring

ADOT&PF relied on source level and sound propagation models to
estimate Level A and harassment zones. To validate the outputs of these
models, ADOT&PF will conduct acoustic monitoring during the first two
days of pile driving. The acoustic monitoring plan is available for
review at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In summary, ADOT&PF will deploy three bottom-mounted
Autonomous Multichannel Acoustic Recorders (AMARs) and conduct spot
measurements with a hydrophone over the side of a vessel. The AMARs
will be set 10 m, 1000 m and 5,000 m from the pile. Within one week,
ADOT&PF will provide NMFS a report of their acoustic measurements. NMFS
will review the report and if empirical data demonstrates adjustments
to Level A and B take zones are warranted, those adjustments will be
made.

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

[[Page 5072]]

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 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).
The Level A harassment zones identified in Tables 3 and 4 are based
upon an animal exposed to impact pile driving two piles per day.
Considering duration of impact driving each pile (up to 15 minutes) and
breaks between pile installations (to reset equipment and move pile
into place), this means an animal would have to remain within the area
estimated to be ensonified above the Level A harassment threshold for
multiple hours. This is highly unlikely given marine mammal movement
throughout the area. If an animal was exposed to accumulated sound
energy, the resulting PTS would likely be small (e.g., PTS onset) at
lower frequencies where pile driving energy is concentrated.
Nevertheless, we propose authorizing a small amount of Level A take for
four species which is considered in our analysis.
Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving and removal
at the Terminal, if any, are expected to be mild and temporary. Marine
mammals within the Level B harassment zone may not show any visual cues
they are disturbed by activities (as noted during modification to the
Kodiak Ferry Dock) or could become alert, avoid the area, leave the
area, or display other mild responses that are not observable such as
changes in vocalization patterns. Given the short duration of noise-
generating activities per day and that pile driving and removal would
occur on 21 days across 4 months, any harassment would be temporary. In
addition, ADOT&PF would not conduct pile driving or removal during the
spring eulachon and herring runs as well as the fall salmon runs, when
marine mammals are in greatest abundance and engaging in concentrated
foraging behavior.
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 mortality is anticipated or authorized.
ADOT&PF would avoid pile driving and removal during peak
periods of marine mammals abundance and foraging (i.e., March 1 through
May 31 eulachon and herring runs).
ADOT&PF would implement mitigation measures such as
vibratory driving piles to the maximum extent practicable, soft-starts,
use of sound attenuation devices, and shut downs.
Monitoring reports from similar work in Alaska have
documented little to no effect on individuals of the same species
impacted by the specified activities.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from
the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers

As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under 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, where estimated numbers are
available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most
appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in
our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small
numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative factors may
be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of
the activities.
The amount of take NMFS proposes to authorize is 0.03 to 12.3
percent of any stock's best population estimate. The 12.3 percent is
based on the possibility all 30 takes of killer whales are from the
West Coast Transient stock (population size 243) which is highly
unlikely. The next lowest percent of stock is for the Steller sea lion
eDPS at 6.7 percent; however, this is also conservative because it
assumes all pile driving occurs in June which has the highest Steller
sea lion density and assumes all takes are of individual animals which
is likely not the case. Harbor seal takes represent 6.3 percent of the
Lynn Canal/Stephens passage population while takes for the remaining
five species, including the Steller sea lion wDPS, represent less than
1 percent of all stocks.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of
marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the
affected species or stocks.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally, in this case with NMFS Alaska Protected
Resources Division Office, whenever we propose to authorize take for
endangered or threatened species.
On October 20, 2017, NMFS Alaska Region issued a Biological Opinion
to NMFS Office of Protected Resources and the Federal Highway
Administration which concluded the Terminal Modification Project is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of WDPS Steller sea lions
or Mexico DPS humpback whales or adversely modify critical habitat
because none exists within the action area.

Authorization

NMFS has issued an IHA to ADOT&PF for the potential harassment of
small numbers of six marine mammal species incidental to pile driving
and removal activities in Lutak Inlet, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements are
incorporated.

Dated: January 31, 2018.
Donna Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-02254 Filed 2-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2018 / Notices 5063

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE not have an unmitigable adverse impact have not identified any extraordinary
on the availability of the species or circumstances that would preclude use
National Oceanic and Atmospheric stock(s) for subsistence uses (where of this categorical exclusion.
Administration relevant), and if the permissible
Summary of Request
methods of taking and requirements
XRIN 0648–XF547 On January 9, 2017, NMFS received a
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such takings are set request from ADOT&PF for an IHA to
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
forth. take marine mammals incidental to the
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible Haines Ferry Terminal Modification
Mammals Incidental to the Haines
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact Project. ADOT&PF submitted a
Ferry Terminal Modification Project
resulting from the specified activity that subsequent application on May 30,
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 2017, which we considered adequate
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and not reasonably likely to, adversely affect and complete. On August 17, 2017,
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the species or stock through effects on ADOT&PF indicated a change to the
Commerce. annual rates of recruitment or survival. requested effective dates in the
ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Incidental NMFS has defined ‘‘unmitigable application to accommodate a delayed
Harassment Authorization. adverse impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as construction schedule. ADOT&PF’s
an impact resulting from the specified request is for harassment only and
SUMMARY: In accordance with the activity: NMFS concurs that serious injury or
regulations implementing the Marine (1) That is likely to reduce the mortality is not expected to result from
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as availability of the species to a level this activity. Therefore, an IHA is
amended, notification is hereby given insufficient for a harvest to meet appropriate.
that NMFS has issued an incidental subsistence needs by: (i) Causing the NMFS has issued an IHA to
harassment authorization (IHA) to the marine mammals to abandon or avoid ADOT&PF authorizing the take of
Alaska Department of Transportation hunting areas; (ii) directly displacing humpback whales (Megaptera
and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) to subsistence users; or (iii) placing novaeangliae), harbor seals (Phoca
incidentally take, by Level A and/or physical barriers between the marine vitulina), harbor porpoise (Phocoena
Level B harassment, six species of mammals and the subsistence hunters; phocoena), and Dall’s porpoise
marine mammals during the Haines and (Phocoenoides dalli) by Level A and
Ferry Terminal Modification Project, (2) That cannot be sufficiently Level B harassment, and an additional
Haines, Alaska. mitigated by other measures to increase two species, Steller sea lion
DATES: The IHA is valid from October 1,
the availability of marine mammals to (Eumetopias jubatus) and killer whale
2018, through September 30, 2019. allow subsistence needs to be met. (Orcinus orca) by Level B harassment
The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’ only. Pile driving will occur for 19 days
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or and pile removal will take 2 additional
Jaclyn Daly, Office of Protected attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill days (total of 21 days) over the course
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. any marine mammal. of 4 months from October 1, 2018,
Availability Except with respect to certain through September 30, 2019, but
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA excluding March 1 through May 31,
An electronic copy of the IHA and defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: any act of 2019. No subsequent IHA would be
supporting documents, as well as a list pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) necessary to complete the project.
of the references cited in this document, has the potential to injure a marine
may be obtained online at: mammal or marine mammal stock in the Description of Proposed Activity
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has We provided a description of the
incidental/construction.htm. In case of the potential to disturb a marine specified activity in our Federal
problems accessing these documents, mammal or marine mammal stock in the Register notice announcing the
please call the contact listed above (see wild by causing disruption of behavioral proposed authorization (82 FR 47700;
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). patterns, including, but not limited to, October 13, 2017). Please refer to that
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, document; we provide only summary
feeding, or sheltering (Level B information here.
Background
harassment). The Haines Ferry Terminal
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the Modification Project involves
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct National Environmental Policy Act constructing an AMHS End Berth
the Secretary of Commerce to allow, To comply with the National Facility adjacent to the existing dock.
upon request, the incidental, but not Environmental Policy Act of 1969 The expansion is necessary because the
intentional, taking of small numbers of (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and current configuration does not allow for
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) operation of the new Alaska Class
engage in a specified activity (other than 216–6A, NMFS must review our action vessels, which are expected to be
commercial fishing) within a specified with respect to environmental operational in 2018. Activities which
geographical region if certain findings consequences on the human have the potential to harass marine
are made and either regulations are environment. The issuance of the IHA is mammals include include impact and
issued or, if the taking is limited to consistent with categories of activities
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

vibratory pile driving and vibratory pile
harassment, a notice of a proposed identified in categorical exclusion (CE) removal. The terminal is located in
authorization is provided to the public B4 of the Companion Manual for NOAA southeast Alaska in Lutak Inlet.
for review. Administrative Order 216–6A. These To construct the new infrastructure,
An authorization for incidental activities do not individually or ADOT&PF will install 37 new piles (22
takings shall be granted if NMFS finds cumulatively have the potential for 30-in. piles and 15 36-in. piles). Each
that the taking will have a negligible significant impacts on the quality of the pile will require 45 to 60 minutes of
impact on the species or stock(s), will human environment and for which we vibratory driving (to account for proper

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Feb 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2018 / Notices 5065
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 N is based on counts of individual animals identified from photo-identification catalogs.
5 In the 2016 SAR for harbor porpoise, NMFS identified population estimates and PBR for porpoises within inland southeast Alaska waters
(these abundance estimates have not been corrected for g(0); therefore, they are likely conservative). The Annual M/SI value provided is for all
Alaska fisheries, not just inland waters of southeast Alaska.

Potential Effects of Specified Activities during pile-driving activities; none of will primarily be by Level B harassment,
on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat them displayed disturbance behaviors. as use of the impact and vibratory
We provided a description of the Fifteen killer whales and three harbor hammers has the potential to result in
anticipated effects of the specified porpoise were also observed within the disruption of behavioral patterns and/or
activity on marine mammals in our Level B harassment zone during pile TTS for individual marine mammals.
Federal Register notice announcing the driving. The killer whales were Impact pile driving may also result in
proposed authorization (82 FR 47700; travelling or milling while all harbor auditory injury (Level A harassment) for
October 13, 2017). Please refer to that porpoises were travelling. No signs of mysticetes, high frequency cetaceans,
document for our detailed analysis; we disturbance were noted for either of and phocids based on modeled auditory
provide only summary information these species. Given the similarities in injury zones if those species are exposed
here. activities and habitat and the fact the to certain noise levels generated from
The introduction of anthropogenic same species are involved, we expect installing two piles per day. However,
noise into the aquatic environment from similar behavioral responses of marine there are multiple hours between impact
pile driving and removal is the primary mammals to the specified activity. That pile driving each pile; therefore, these
means by which marine mammals may is, disturbance, if any, is likely to be zones are conservative as animals are
be harassed from ADOT&PF’s specified temporary and localized (e.g., small area not known to linger in the area.
activity. The effects of pile driving noise movements). Therefore, PTS potential is low and, if
on marine mammals are dependent on occurs, would likely be minimal (e.g.,
Marine Mammal Habitat Effects
several factors, including, but not PTS onset). Auditory injury is not
limited to, sound type (e.g., impulsive We provided a description of the expected for mid-frequency species and
vs. non-impulsive), the species, age and effect of specified activity on marine otariids as the accumulation of energy
sex class (e.g., adult male vs. mom with mammal habitat in our Federal Register does not reach NMFS’ PTS thresholds.
calf), duration of exposure, the distance notice announcing the proposed The death of a marine mammal is also
between the pile and the animal, authorization (82 FR 47700; October 13, a type of incidental take. However, as
received levels, behavior at time of 2017). Please refer to that document; we described previously, no mortality is
exposure, and previous history with provide only summary information authorized for this activity. Below we
exposure (Southall et al., 2007, Wartzok here. describe how the take were calculated.
et al., 2004). Animals exposed to natural Construction activities at the Haines We estimated take by considering: (1)
or anthropogenic sound may experience Ferry terminal could have localized, Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS
physical and behavioral effects, ranging temporary impacts on marine mammal believes the best available science
in magnitude from none to severe habitat and their prey by increasing in- indicates marine mammals may be
(Southall et al., 2007). In general, water sound pressure levels and slightly behaviorally harassed or incur some
exposure to pile driving noise has the decreasing water quality. ADOT&PF degree of permanent hearing
potential to result in auditory threshold will employ standard construction best impairment; (2) the area or volume of
shifts (permanent threshold shift (PTS) management practices (BMPs; see water that will be ensonified above
and temporary threshold shift (TTS)) section 9 and 11.1 in ADOT’s these levels in a day; (3) the density or
and behavioral reactions (e.g., application), thereby, reducing any occurrence of marine mammals within
avoidance, temporary cessation of impacts. Any impacts are anticipated to these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the
foraging and vocalizing, changes in dive be localized, short-term, and minimal. number of days of activities.
behavior).
In 2016, ADOT&PF documented Estimated Take Acoustic Thresholds
observations of marine mammals during Harassment is the only type of take Using the best available science,
pile driving and down-hole drilling at expected to result from these activities. NMFS has developed acoustic
the Kodiak Ferry Dock (as described in Except with respect to certain activities thresholds that identify the received
80 FR 60636; October 7, 2015 [date]). In not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the level of underwater sound above which
the marine mammal monitoring report MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any exposed marine mammals would be
for that project (ABR 2016), 1,281 Steller act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance reasonably expected to be behaviorally
sea lions were observed within the which (i) has the potential to injure a harassed (equated to Level B
Level B disturbance zone during pile marine mammal or marine mammal harassment) or to incur PTS of some
driving or drilling (i.e., documented as stock in the wild (Level A harassment); degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B take). Of these, 19 individuals or (ii) has the potential to disturb a NMFS predicts that marine mammals
demonstrated an alert behavior, 7 were marine mammal or marine mammal are likely to be behaviorally harassed in
fleeing, and 19 swam away from the stock in the wild by causing disruption a manner we consider Level B
project site. All other animals (98 of behavioral patterns, including, but harassment when exposed to
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

percent) were engaged in activities such not limited to, migration, breathing, underwater anthropogenic noise above
as milling, foraging, or fighting and did nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering received levels of 120 decibel (dB) re 1
not change their behavior. In addition, (Level B harassment). microPascal (mPa) root mean square
two sea lions approached within 20 NMFS has authorized the taking of six (rms) for continuous (e.g. vibratory pile-
meters of active vibratory pile driving species of marine mammals, by Level A driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1
activities. Three harbor seals were and B harassment, incidental to pile mPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive
observed within the disturbance zone driving and removal. Authorized takes (e.g., seismic airguns, impact pile

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Feb 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2018 / Notices 5067

frequency. The model also showed the pile driving, the parameters Haines. Sound footprints were
transition from down-slope to up-slope corresponding to the Delmag D30–32 calculated for the installation of two
propagation as the sound crosses Lutak and D36–32 impact pile drivers were piles (thus, accumulated over 1400
Inlet, resulting in a sound field that used to model scenarios with 30-in and strikes). For vibratory pile driving,
decays at a constant rate with range. 36-in diameter piles, respectively. sound energy was accumulated for the
Steel cylindrical pipe piles 41 m (135 Sound energy was accumulated over a two piles that could be installed or
ft) long with 1⁄2 in thick walls were specified number of hammer strikes, not removed in a 24-hour period.
modeled for a total penetration of 14 m as a function of time. The number of Modeled source levels and distances
(46 ft) into the sediment. In the case of strikes required to install a single pile to NMFS acoustic thresholds based on
vibratory pile driving, both pile sizes (assumed to be 700 strikes per pile) was these source levels and the sound
were assumed to be driven by an ICE– estimated based on pile driving logs propagation model are presented in
44B vibratory pile driver. For impact from another pile driving project at Table 3 and 4.

TABLE 3—IMPACT PILE DRIVING: MODELED SOURCE LEVELS AND HARASSMENT ZONES
FOR IMPACT DRIVING TWO PILES PER DAY
[A dash indicates the threshold was not reached *]

Level A Level A Level B Level B
threshold threshold (160 dB) threshold
Hearing group distance area threshold area
(R95%) (km2) distance (km2)
(km) (km)

30 inch piles: modeled SL = 179.5 dB SEL

Low-frequency cetacean .................................................................................. 1.65 3.17 1.98 4.52
Mid-frequency cetacean .................................................................................. — —
High-frequency cetacean ................................................................................. 1.45 1.13
Phocid pinniped ............................................................................................... 0.26 0.09
Otarrid pinniped ............................................................................................... — —

36 inch piles: modeled SL = 180.9 dB SEL

Low-frequency cetacean .................................................................................. 2.04 4.78 2.67 6.79
Mid-frequency cetacean .................................................................................. — —
High-frequency cetacean ................................................................................. 1.49 2.17
Phocid pinniped ............................................................................................... 0.33 0.15
Otarrid pinniped ............................................................................................... — —
* NMFS also considers peak sound pressure levels; however, in no case were these thresholds reached or greater than the SEL distances.

TABLE 4—VIBRATORY PILE DRIVING: MODELED SOURCE LEVELS AND HARASSMENT ZONES
FOR VIBRATORY DRIVING TWO PILES PER DAY
[A dash indicates the threshold was not reached*]

Level A Level B Level B
Level A threshold (120 dB) threshold
threshold
Hearing group area threshold area
Distance (km2) distance (km2)
(R95%) (km) (km)

30 inch piles: modeled SL = 177.6 dB rms

ALL ................................................................................................................... - - 5.61 21.14

36 inch piles: modeled SL = 179.8 dB rms

Low-frequency cetacean .................................................................................. 0.02 <0.01 5.62 21.17
Mid-frequency cetacean .................................................................................. — —
High-frequency cetacean ................................................................................. — —
Phocid pinniped ............................................................................................... — —
Otarrid pinniped ............................................................................................... — —
* NMFS also considers peak sound pressure levels; however, in no case were these thresholds reached or greater than the SEL distances.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

The modeling approach described sound levels to those produced by the of pile driving to validate the model or,
above and in ADOT&PF’s application models has been presented, but no peer if necessary, adjust the harassment
constitutes a new approach in that it reviewed analysis has been undertaken. zones based on measured data. This
models both source levels and To test the validity of the model, NMFS SSV study will also provide the first
propagation loss to estimate distances to has included a proposed requirement measurements of sound levels generated
NMFS harassment thresholds. Some that ADOT&PF conduct a source source by 36-in piles driven by ADOT&PF.
preliminary data comparing measured verification (SSV) study upon the onset ADOT&PF has prepared a draft acoustic

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Feb 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1

5068 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2018 / Notices

monitoring plan which can be found at Point, ADOT&PF used this location to remain within the action area from
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ mark the southern boundary of the August through November. Densities for
incidental/construction.htm. We action area. The area from Gran Point killer whales were calculated assuming
welcome comments on the ADOT&PF’s north that encompasses Lutak Inlet and five animals enter the area seasonally
source level modeling approach and the Lynn Canal is 91.3 km2; this area was from one of the resident or transient
acoustic monitoring plan. used for all species’ density estimates. stocks, and may remain from April
Marine Mammal Occurrence For species other than Steller sea lion, through November. Harbor porpoise
average sighting rate was used to may be present in low numbers (average
In this section we provide the calculate density (i.e., species of five per month) throughout the year.
information about the presence, density, occurrence rate per month/91.3km2). Finally, Dall’s porpoise are not sighted
or group dynamics of marine mammals
Harbor seals are generally present in the very frequently but tend to travel in
that will inform the take calculations.
The data on marine mammals in this action area throughout the year, but larger groups; therefore, ten animals per
area are diverse and fairly robust due their local abundance is clearly defined for the four months of construction were
mostly to ADF&G surveys. Strong by the presence of available prey. considered in the density calculations.
seasonal occurrence of marine mammals During mid-March through mid- June, Table 5 provides the resulting marine
in this area is well documented; they are abundant in Lutak Inlet. For mammal densities for months when
therefore, density estimates for each these months, an average of 100 seals terminal construction would occur
species were calculated by month rather per day in the inlet is considered a (again, no pile activities would occur
than averaged throughout the year. For conservative estimate. For all other from March 1 through May 31 to avoid
example, we have already discussed the months, an estimate of 10 seals per peak marine mammal abundance and
seasonality of Steller sea lions and how month was incorporated into the critical foraging periods). Although the
prey aggregations affect their density equation. Humpback whales are table provides all relevant months, we
abundance. Monthly Steller sea lion present in the action area from mid- used the months with highest density to
densities were calculated based on April through June at a rate of five calculate estimated take for each
abundance surveys conducted at Gran whales per month and given that a few species, thus producing the most
Point (ADF&G, pers. comm). whales have atypically remained in the conservative estimates. Please refer to
Considering the Steller sea lion data area through the fall months (MOS section 6.6.1 in ADOT’s application for
used to calculate density is from Gran 2016), we assumed two whales may supporting data information.

TABLE 5—MARINE MAMMAL DENSITY ESTIMATES (ANIMALS/KM2) DURING MONTHS WHEN PILE ACTIVITIES MAY OCCUR
Species Jan Feb June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Steller sea lion ............................. 2.06 1.87 1 7.65 1.35 0 0.01 1.85 1.59 2.47
Harbor seal .................................. 0.109 0.109 1.09 0.109 0.109 0.109 0.109 0.109 0.109
Humpback whale ......................... 0 0 0.054 0.054 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0
Killer whale ................................... 0 0 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0
Harbor porpoise ........................... 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054
Dall’s porpoise 2 ........................... 0 0 0 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0 0
1 The application and proposed IHA Federal Register notice incorrectly calculated a density of 7.55. No change to Steller sea lion takes result
from this correction.
2 For all months where Dall’s porpoise may be present (July through October), the application and proposed IHA Federal Register notice in-
correctly calculated a density of 0.03. Because Dall’s porpoise take numbers are based on group size, this density increase warranted an in-
crease to the number of groups, and therefore the number of takes, potentially exposed to noise about NMFS acoustic thresholds (see Table 6).

Take Calculation and Estimation size, are reduced from the proposed IHA impact driving 36-in piles (i.e., 4.78 km2
notice stage. * 0.054 animals/km2 * 8 days).
Here we describe how the information Together, these equal 4 (i.e., 1.9 from
As described above, there would be
provided above is brought together to 30-in + 2.1 from 36″) potential Level A
19 days of pile driving and 2 days of
produce a quantitative take estimate. takes (Table 6). However, humpback
pile removal for a total of 21 pile
The following equation was used to activity days. We used the June density whales may travel in small groups (up
calculate potential Level A take per because, when densities changed to four animals per group); therefore, in
species per pile type: Level A throughout the year, this is when the the IHA we doubled this number to
harassment zone//pile type * June highest density of all species occurs in account for two groups of humpback
density * # of pile driving days/pile the project area within the project in- whales for a total of eight Level A takes.
type. water work window (with the exception Potential Level B takes from vibratory
Also for Level B takes, we only of Dall’s porpoise-see below) and pile driving and removal (Level B area
considered the vibratory zone of 21.1 ADOT&PF could conduct activities = 21.1 km2) was calculated using the
km2. In the proposed IHA notice, we during this month. Therefore, the equation described above: 21.1 km2 *
had included calculations for the Level resulting take estimates assume all work 0.054 animals/km2 * 21 days = 24
B harassment zone from impact pile is conducted in June, producing animals. The IHA authorizes 24 Level B
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

driving but have since determined that conservative estimates. takes of humpback whales.
this grossly overestimates take as the ADOT&PF may take 1.9 humpback For killer whales, Level B takes from
Level B zone for vibratory pile driving whales by Level A harassment when vibratory pile driving were calculated
and removal essentially subsumes the impact driving 30″ piles (i.e., 3.17 km2 using June density and the full 21.1 km2
Level B zone for impact hammering. As * 0.054 animals/km2 * 11 days). Level B: 21.1 km2 * 0.054 animals/km2
such, our Level B takes for all species, ADOT&PF may take 2.1 humpback * 21 days = 24 animals. However, the
except those which are based on group whales by Level A harassment when density used in the equation used in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Feb 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2018 / Notices 5069

ADOT&PF’s application was based on respectively. The resulting one take is not individual seals. As with all other
transient killer whale average group size less than the average group size of three species, it is also likely animals will
of 4–6 animals when a resident group animals. Further, harbor porpoise are travel through the Level B zone heading
can average 20 animals. Therefore, the cryptic species and could enter the up the inlet and then back down again.
IHA authorizes a total of 60 takes of Level A zone unnoticed during impact Because individual identification is not
killer whales to account for larger pile driving. Therefore, the IHA always possible, these separate sighting
resident groups passing through the authorizes six Level A takes of harbor events would be counted as individual
Level B harassment zone. porpoise to account for missing animals. takes.
For Dall’s porpoise, we increased the Level B take numbers for harbor For Steller sea lions, no Level A takes
number of groups that may be within porpoise were based on the conservative are authorized. Level B takes from
the calculated Level A thresholds area assumption four groups of porpoise vibratory pile driving were calculated
from one group in the proposed IHA could be exposed to noise levels at or using the most conservative June
notice to two groups to account for the above the Level B vibratory pile driving density (assuming worst case scenario
increase in estimated density. We also threshold for a total of 12 takes. that all work occurs in June) and the full
increase the number of groups
potentially exposed to noise levels Harbor seals may linger in the area for 21.1 km2 Level B zone since no Level A
about the Level B threshold to four multiple days; therefore, we takes are predicted: 21.1 km2 * 7.65
groups. For Level B take, calculated take conservatively estimate one harbor seal animals/km2 * 21 days = 3390 animals.
between 10 and 20 animals; therefore, could be around the terminal on any Similar to harbor seals, this amount is
we assumed two groups of ten each may given day for a total of 21 Level A takes. not believed to be the number of
occur within the Level B zone and are For Level B takes, we used the equation individual Steller sea lions harassed but
proposing to authorize 20 Level B takes. above using a density of 1.09 seals/km2. some lesser amount of individuals with
Harbor porpoise take estimates were It is important to note that given harbor repeated exposures.
based on a density of .054 porpoise/km2 seals are more likely to haul-out and Table 6 includes the total proposed
with a Level A isopleth of 1.13 km2 and linger within the Level A and B take levels, by species, manner of
2.17 km2 for impact pile driving 30-in harassment zone, it is more likely the taking, and the percentage of stock
(11 days) and 36-in (8 days) piles, take numbers represent exposures and potentially taken by harassment.

TABLE 6—ESTIMATED TAKE BY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT, BY SPECIES AND MONTH, RESULTING FROM IMPACT
AND VIBRATORY PILE DRIVING

Species Stock Stock size 1 Level A Level B % of Stock

Steller sea lion ............... eastern U.S. ......................................................... 60,131 0 2 3307 5.5
western U.S. ........................................................ 49,497 0 2 83 0.17
Harbor Seal ................... Lynn Canal/Stephens Passage ........................... 9,478 21 483 5.3
Humpback whale ........... Central North Pacific ........................................... 10,103 34 3 24 0.3
Killer whale .................... Alaska Resident ................................................... 2,347 0 60 4 2.6–24.7

Northern Resident ............................................... 261 0
Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian Islands, Bering Sea ...... 587 0
West Coast Transient .......................................... 243 0
Harbor porpoise ............. Southeast Alaska ................................................. 975 56 24 3.08
Dall’s porpoise ............... Alaska .................................................................. 83,400 5 20 5 48 0.08
1 Stocksize is Nbest according to NMFS 2016 Stock Assessment Reports.
2 Calculated Level B take of all SSL’s is based on a June density of 7.65 animals which equals 3390 individuals. We then subtracted the 83
animals which could belong to the western U.S. stock based a 2 percent distinction factor calculated from takes estimated in the proposed IHA
Federal Register notice.
3 Calculated Level A takes for humpback whales did not cover average group size; therefore, we are authorizing four takes. For ESA section 7
consultation purposes, 6.1 percent are designated to the Mexico DPS and the remaining are designated to the Hawaii DPS; therefore, we predict
2 Level B takes from the Mexico DPS.
4 The percentages calculated here assume all 60 takes are from a single stock. It is unlikely all takes would be from the West Coast Transient
stock; therefore, the percentage of the population taken is likely a gross overestimate.
5 The calculated Level A take for harbor porpoise and Dall’s porpoise is less than the average group size; therefore, we are proposing to au-
thorize Level A take of two groups of each species (i.e., 6 and 20 animals, respectively). The calculated amount of Level B take for harbor por-
poise is sufficient to cover multiple groups; therefore, we used the take equation.

Mitigation regulations require applicants for applicable, we carefully consider two
incidental take authorizations to include primary factors:
In order to issue an IHA under information about the availability and (1) The manner in which, and the
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, feasibility (economic and technological) degree to which, the successful
NMFS must set forth the permissible of equipment, methods, and manner of implementation of the measure(s) is
methods of taking pursuant to such conducting such activity or other means expected to reduce impacts to marine
activity, and other means of effecting of effecting the least practicable adverse mammals, marine mammal species or
the least practicable impact on such stocks, and their habitat, as well as
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

impact upon the affected species or
species or stock and its habitat, paying stocks and their habitat (50 CFR subsistence uses. This considers the
particular attention to rookeries, mating 216.104(a)(11)). nature of the potential adverse impact
grounds, and areas of similar In evaluating how mitigation may or being mitigated (likelihood, scope,
significance, and on the availability of may not be appropriate to ensure the range). It further considers the
such species or stock for taking for least practicable adverse impact on likelihood that the measure will be
certain subsistence uses (latter not species or stocks and their habitat, as effective if implemented (probability of
applicable for this action). NMFS well as subsistence uses where accomplishing the mitigating result if

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Feb 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1

5070 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2018 / Notices

implemented as planned) the likelihood ADOT&PF will delay pile-driving until • Nature, scope, or context of likely
of effective implementation (probability the animal is confirmed to have moved marine mammal exposure to potential
implemented as planned); and outside and on a path away from Level stressors/impacts (individual or
(2) the practicability of the measures A zone or if 30 minutes have elapsed cumulative, acute or chronic), through
for applicant implementation, which since the last sighting of a humpback better understanding of: (1) Action or
may consider such things as cost, whale or 15 minutes have elapsed since environment (e.g., source
impact on operations, and, in the case the last sighting of any other marine characterization, propagation, ambient
of a military readiness activity, mammal species; and noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life
personnel safety, practicality of • Other best management practices: history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
implementation, and impact on the ADOT&PF will drive all piles with a of marine mammal species with the
effectiveness of the military readiness vibratory hammer to the maximum action; or (4) biological or behavioral
activity. extent possible (i.e., until a desired context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or
The following mitigation measures are depth is achieved or to refusal) prior to feeding areas);
included in the IHA: using an impact hammer; use the • Individual marine mammal
• Schedule: No pile driving or minimum hammer energy needed to responses (behavioral or physiological)
removal would occur from March 1 safely install the piles; utilize sound to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
through May 31 to avoid peak marine attenuation devices (e.g., pile caps/ cumulative), other stressors, or
mammal abundance periods and critical cushions) to reduce source levels and, cumulative impacts from multiple
foraging periods. In addition, the daily by association, received levels; and stressors;
construction window for pile removal remove piles using a direct pull method • How anticipated responses to
and driving shall begin no sooner than instead of a vibratory hammer, if stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
30 minutes after sunrise and shall end feasible. It is noted that although sound fitness and survival of individual
no later than 30 minutes prior to sunset; attentutation devices have proven marine mammals; or (2) populations,
• Pile Driving Delay/Shut-Down: If an effective at reducing source levels, species, or stocks;
animal comes within 10 m (33 ft) of a because the actual amount of reduction • Effects on marine mammal habitat
pile being driven or removed, of sound energy from using those (e.g., marine mammal prey species,
ADOT&PF would shut down. Pile devices in unknown, ADOT&PF and acoustic habitat, or other important
driving activities would only be NMFS relied on unattenuated source physical components of marine
conducted during daylight hours when levels to calculate harassment zones. mammal habitat); and
it is possible to visually monitor for Based on our evaluation of the • Mitigation and monitoring
marine mammals. If poor environmental applicant’s proposed measures, as well effectiveness.
conditions restrict visibility (e.g., from as other measures considered by NMFS,
excessive wind or fog, high Beaufort Visual Monitoring
we have determined that the proposed
state), pile installation would be mitigation measures provide the means Monitoring would be conducted 30
delayed. If a species for which effecting the least practicable impact on minutes before, during, and 30 minutes
authorization has not been granted or if the affected species or stocks and their after pile driving and removal activities.
a species for which authorization has habitat, paying particular attention to In addition, observers shall record all
been granted but the authorized takes rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of incidents of marine mammal
are met, ADOT&PF would delay or shut- similar significance. occurrence, regardless of distance from
down pile driving if the marine activity, and shall document any
mammals approaches or is observed Monitoring and Reporting behavioral reactions in concert with
within the Level A and/or B harassment In order to issue an IHA for an distance from piles being driven or
zone. In the unanticipated event that the activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the removed. Pile driving activities include
specified activity clearly causes the take MMPA states that NMFS must set forth the time to install or remove a single
of a marine mammal in a manner requirements pertaining to the pile or series of piles, as long as the time
prohibited by the IHA, such as serious monitoring and reporting of such taking. elapsed between uses of the pile driving
injury or mortality, the protected The MMPA implementing regulations at equipment is no more than thirty
species observer (PSO) on watch would 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that minutes.
immediately call for the cessation of the requests for authorizations must include A primary PSO would be placed at
specified activities and immediately the suggested means of accomplishing the terminal where pile driving would
report the incident to the Chief of the the necessary monitoring and reporting occur and a second observer would be
Permits and Conservation Division, that will result in increased knowledge placed at Tanani Point, located
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, of the species and of the level of taking approximately 1 mi (1.6 km) southeast
and NMFS Alaska Regional Office; or impacts on populations of marine of the terminal. This second observer is
• Soft-start: For all impact pile mammals that are expected to be at an advantage to observe species prior
driving, a ‘‘soft start’’ technique will be present in the proposed action area. to entering the Level A zone as they
used at the beginning of each pile Effective reporting is critical both to move up Chilkoot Inlet, covering a
installation to allow any marine compliance as well as ensuring that the majority of the Level B zone. PSOs
mammal that may be in the immediate most value is obtained from the required would scan the waters using binoculars,
area to leave before hammering at full monitoring. and/or spotting scopes, and would use
energy. The soft start requires Monitoring and reporting a handheld GPS or range-finder device
ADOT&PF to provide an initial set of to verify the distance to each sighting
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

requirements prescribed by NMFS
three strikes from the impact hammer at should contribute to improved from the project site. All PSOs would be
40 percent energy, followed by a one- understanding of one or more of the trained in marine mammal
minute waiting period, then two following: identification and behaviors and are
subsequent 3–strike sets. If any marine • Occurrence of marine mammal required to have no other project-related
mammal is sighted within the Level A species or stocks in the area in which tasks while conducting monitoring. The
zone designated for that species prior to take is anticipated (e.g., presence, following measures also apply to visual
pile-driving, or during the soft start, abundance, distribution, density); monitoring:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Feb 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2018 / Notices 5071

(1) Monitoring will be conducted by • Species, numbers, and, if possible, report would include the same
qualified observers, who will be placed sex and age class of marine mammals; information identified in the paragraph
at the best vantage point(s) practicable • Description of any observable above. Activities would be able to
to monitor for marine mammals and marine mammal behavior patterns, continue while NMFS reviews the
implement shutdown/delay procedures including bearing and direction of travel circumstances of the incident. NMFS
when applicable by calling for the and distance from pile driving activity; would work with ADOT&PF to
shutdown to the hammer operator. • Distance from pile driving activities determine whether modifications in the
Qualified observers are trained to marine mammals and distance from activities are appropriate.
biologists, with the following minimum the marine mammals to the observation In the event that ADOT&PF discovers
qualifications: point; an injured or dead marine mammal and
(a) Visual acuity in both eyes • Locations of all marine mammal the lead PSO determines that the injury
(correction is permissible) sufficient for observations; and or death is not associated with or related
discernment of moving targets at the • Other human activity in the area. to the activities authorized in the IHA
water’s surface with ability to estimate If no comments are received from (e.g., previously wounded animal,
target size and distance; use of NMFS within 30 days, the draft final carcass with moderate to advanced
binoculars may be necessary to correctly report will constitute the final report. If decomposition, or scavenger damage),
identify the target; comments are received, a final report ADOT&PF would report the incident to
(b) Advanced education in biological addressing NMFS comments must be the Chief of the Permits and
science or related field (undergraduate submitted within 30 days after receipt of Conservation Division, Office of
degree or higher required); comments. Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
(c) Experience and ability to conduct In the unanticipated event that the NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or
field observations and collect data specified activity clearly causes the take by email to the Alaska Regional
according to assigned protocols (this of a marine mammal in a manner Stranding Coordinator, within 24 hours
may include academic experience); prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such of the discovery. ADOT&PF would
as an injury, serious injury or mortality, provide photographs or video footage (if
(d) Experience or training in the field
ADOT&PF would immediately cease the available) or other documentation of the
identification of marine mammals,
specified activities and report the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and
including the identification of
incident to the Chief of the Permits and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
behaviors;
Conservation Division, Office of
(e) Sufficient training, orientation, or Acoustic Monitoring
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
experience with the construction ADOT&PF relied on source level and
Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinator.
operation to provide for personal safety sound propagation models to estimate
The report would include the following
during observations; Level A and harassment zones. To
information:
(f) Writing skills sufficient to prepare • Description of the incident; validate the outputs of these models,
a report of observations including but • Environmental conditions (e.g., ADOT&PF will conduct acoustic
not limited to the number and species Beaufort sea state, visibility); monitoring during the first two days of
of marine mammals observed; dates and • Description of all marine mammal pile driving. The acoustic monitoring
times when in-water construction observations in the 24 hours preceding plan is available for review at http://
activities were conducted; dates and the incident; www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
times when in-water construction • Species identification or incidental/construction.htm. In
activities were suspended to avoid description of the animal(s) involved; summary, ADOT&PF will deploy three
potential incidental injury from • Fate of the animal(s); and bottom-mounted Autonomous
construction sound of marine mammals • Photographs or video footage of the Multichannel Acoustic Recorders
observed within a defined shutdown animal(s) (if equipment is available). (AMARs) and conduct spot
zone; and marine mammal behavior; Activities would not resume until measurements with a hydrophone over
and NMFS is able to review the the side of a vessel. The AMARs will be
(g) Ability to communicate orally, by circumstances of the prohibited take. set 10 m, 1000 m and 5,000 m from the
radio or in person, with project NMFS would work with ADOT&PF to pile. Within one week, ADOT&PF will
personnel to provide real-time determine what is necessary to provide NMFS a report of their acoustic
information on marine mammals minimize the likelihood of further measurements. NMFS will review the
observed in the area as necessary. prohibited take and ensure MMPA report and if empirical data
A draft marine mammal monitoring compliance. ADOT&PF would not be demonstrates adjustments to Level A
report would be submitted to NMFS able to resume their activities until and B take zones are warranted, those
within 90 days after the completion of notified by NMFS via letter, email, or adjustments will be made.
pile driving and removal activities. It telephone.
will include an overall description of In the event that ADOT&PF discovers Negligible Impact Analysis and
work completed, a narrative regarding an injured or dead marine mammal, and Determination
marine mammal sightings, and the lead PSO determines that the cause NMFS has defined negligible impact
associated marine mammal observation of the injury or death is unknown and as an impact resulting from the
data sheets. Specifically, the report must the death is relatively recent (e.g., in specified activity that cannot be
include: less than a moderate state of reasonably expected to, and is not
• Date and time that monitored decomposition as described in the next reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

activity begins or ends; paragraph), ADOT&PF would species or stock through effects on
• Construction activities occurring immediately report the incident to the annual rates of recruitment or survival
during each observation period; Chief of the Permits and Conservation (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact
• Weather parameters (e.g., percent Division, Office of Protected Resources, finding is based on the lack of likely
cover, visibility); NMFS, and the NMFS Alaska Stranding adverse effects on annual rates of
• Water conditions (e.g., sea state, Hotline and/or by email to the Alaska recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
tide state); Regional Stranding Coordinator. The level effects). An estimate of the number

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Feb 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1

5072 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2018 / Notices

of takes alone is not enough information spring eulachon and herring runs as however, this is also conservative
on which to base an impact well as the fall salmon runs, when because it assumes all pile driving
determination. In addition to marine mammals are in greatest occurs in June which has the highest
considering estimates of the number of abundance and engaging in Steller sea lion density and assumes all
marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ concentrated foraging behavior. takes are of individual animals which is
through harassment, NMFS considers In summary and as described above, likely not the case. Harbor seal takes
other factors, such as the likely nature the following factors primarily support represent 6.3 percent of the Lynn Canal/
of any responses (e.g., intensity, our determination that the impacts Stephens passage population while
duration), the context of any responses resulting from this activity are not takes for the remaining five species,
(e.g., critical reproductive time or expected to adversely affect the species including the Steller sea lion wDPS,
location, migration), as well as effects or stock through effects on annual rates represent less than 1 percent of all
on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of recruitment or survival: stocks.
of the mitigation. We also assess the • No mortality is anticipated or
authorized. Based on the analysis contained
number, intensity, and context of
• ADOT&PF would avoid pile driving herein of the proposed activity
estimated takes by evaluating this
and removal during peak periods of (including the proposed mitigation and
information relative to population
marine mammals abundance and monitoring measures) and the
status. Consistent with the 1989
foraging (i.e., March 1 through May 31 anticipated take of marine mammals,
preamble for NMFS implementing
eulachon and herring runs). NMFS finds that small numbers of
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29,
• ADOT&PF would implement marine mammals will be taken relative
1989), the impacts from other past and
ongoing anthropogenic activities are mitigation measures such as vibratory to the population size of the affected
incorporated into this analysis via their driving piles to the maximum extent species or stocks.
impacts on the environmental baseline practicable, soft-starts, use of sound Endangered Species Act (ESA)
(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status attenuation devices, and shut downs.
of the species, population size and • Monitoring reports from similar Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered
growth rate where known, ongoing work in Alaska have documented little Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C.
sources of human-caused mortality, or to no effect on individuals of the same 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal
ambient noise levels). species impacted by the specified agency insure that any action it
The Level A harassment zones activities. authorizes, funds, or carries out is not
identified in Tables 3 and 4 are based Based on the analysis contained likely to jeopardize the continued
upon an animal exposed to impact pile herein of the likely effects of the existence of any endangered or
driving two piles per day. Considering specified activity on marine mammals threatened species or result in the
duration of impact driving each pile (up and their habitat, and taking into destruction or adverse modification of
to 15 minutes) and breaks between pile consideration the implementation of the designated critical habitat. To ensure
installations (to reset equipment and proposed monitoring and mitigation ESA compliance for the issuance of
move pile into place), this means an measures, NMFS finds that the total IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this
animal would have to remain within the marine mammal take from the proposed case with NMFS Alaska Protected
area estimated to be ensonified above activity will have a negligible impact on Resources Division Office, whenever we
the Level A harassment threshold for all affected marine mammal species or propose to authorize take for
multiple hours. This is highly unlikely stocks. endangered or threatened species.
given marine mammal movement Small Numbers On October 20, 2017, NMFS Alaska
throughout the area. If an animal was Region issued a Biological Opinion to
exposed to accumulated sound energy, As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized NMFS Office of Protected Resources and
the resulting PTS would likely be small
under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA the Federal Highway Administration
(e.g., PTS onset) at lower frequencies
for specified activities other than which concluded the Terminal
where pile driving energy is
military readiness activities. The MMPA Modification Project is not likely to
concentrated. Nevertheless, we propose
does not define small numbers and so, jeopardize the continued existence of
authorizing a small amount of Level A
in practice, where estimated numbers WDPS Steller sea lions or Mexico DPS
take for four species which is
are available, NMFS compares the humpback whales or adversely modify
considered in our analysis.
Behavioral responses of marine number of individuals taken to the most critical habitat because none exists
mammals to pile driving and removal at appropriate estimation of abundance of within the action area.
the Terminal, if any, are expected to be the relevant species or stock in our Authorization
mild and temporary. Marine mammals determination of whether an
within the Level B harassment zone may authorization is limited to small NMFS has issued an IHA to
not show any visual cues they are numbers of marine mammals. ADOT&PF for the potential harassment
disturbed by activities (as noted during Additionally, other qualitative factors of small numbers of six marine mammal
modification to the Kodiak Ferry Dock) may be considered in the analysis, such species incidental to pile driving and
or could become alert, avoid the area, as the temporal or spatial scale of the removal activities in Lutak Inlet,
leave the area, or display other mild activities. provided the previously mentioned
responses that are not observable such The amount of take NMFS proposes to mitigation, monitoring and reporting
authorize is 0.03 to 12.3 percent of any
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

as changes in vocalization patterns. requirements are incorporated.
Given the short duration of noise- stock’s best population estimate. The
Dated: January 31, 2018.
generating activities per day and that 12.3 percent is based on the possibility
pile driving and removal would occur all 30 takes of killer whales are from the Donna Wieting,
on 21 days across 4 months, any West Coast Transient stock (population Director, Office of Protected Resources,
harassment would be temporary. In size 243) which is highly unlikely. The National Marine Fisheries Service.
addition, ADOT&PF would not conduct next lowest percent of stock is for the [FR Doc. 2018–02254 Filed 2–2–18; 8:45 am]
pile driving or removal during the Steller sea lion eDPS at 6.7 percent; BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Feb 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1

Document Created: 2018-02-03 01:25:10
Document Modified: 2018-02-03 01:25:10

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 Incidental Harassment Authorization.
Dates		The IHA is valid from October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019.
Contact		Jaclyn Daly, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
FR Citation		83 FR 5063

83 FR 5063 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Haines Ferry Terminal Modification Project

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 24 (February 5, 2018)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration