[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 225 (Thursday, November 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69825-69834]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27867]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XC824
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Pier Maintenance Project
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the
U.S. Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only,
two species of marine mammals during construction activities associated
with a pier maintenance project at Naval Base Kitsap Bremerton,
Washington.
DATES: This authorization is effective from December 1, 2013, through
March 1, 2014.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the Navy's application and any supporting
documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document,
may be obtained by visiting the internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. In the case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed below. A memorandum
describing our adoption of the Navy's Environmental Assessment (2013)
and our associated Finding of No Significant Impact, prepared pursuant
to the National Environmental Policy Act, are also available at the
same site.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
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 by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial
fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional,
taking of small numbers of marine mammals, providing that certain
findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established.
The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals may be
allowed only if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary)
finds that the total taking by the specified activity during the
specified time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species
or stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact
[[Page 69826]]
on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking and
requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of
such taking must be set forth, either in specific regulations or in an
authorization.
The allowance of such incidental taking under section 101(a)(5)(A),
by harassment, serious injury, death or a combination thereof, requires
that regulations be established. Subsequently, a Letter of
Authorization may be issued pursuant to the prescriptions established
in such regulations, providing that the level of taking will be
consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under
the specific regulations. Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may
authorize such incidental taking by harassment only, for periods of not
more than 1 year, pursuant to requirements and conditions contained
within an Incidental Harassment Authorization. The establishment of
prescriptions through either specific regulations or an authorization
requires notice and opportunity for public comment.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``. . .
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.'' Except with respect to certain activities
not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment''
as: ``. . . any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild;
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.'' The former is termed Level A harassment and
the latter is termed Level B harassment.
Summary of Request
On May 22, 2013, we received a request from the Navy for
authorization of the taking, by Level B harassment only, of marine
mammals incidental to pile driving in association with the Pier 6 pile
replacement project at Naval Base Kitsap Bremerton, WA (NBKB). That
request was modified on June 5, 2013, and a final version, which we
deemed adequate and complete, was submitted on June 12, 2013. In-water
work associated with the project will be conducted over three years and
will occur only during the approved in-water work window from June 15
to March 1. This IHA is valid from December 1, 2013, through March 1,
2014. Two species of marine mammal are expected to be affected by the
specified activities: California sea lion (Zalophus californianus
californianus) and harbor seal (Phoca vitulina richardii). These
species may occur year-round in the action area, although California
sea lions are less common and potentially absent in the summer months.
NBKB serves as the homeport for a nuclear aircraft carrier and
other Navy vessels and as a shipyard capable of overhauling and
repairing all types and sizes of ships. Other significant capabilities
include alteration, construction, deactivation, and dry-docking of
naval vessels. Pier 6 was completed in 1926 and requires substantial
maintenance to maintain readiness. Over the length of the entire
project, the Navy plans to remove up to 400 deteriorating fender piles
and to replace them with up to 330 new pre-stressed concrete fender
piles. Under this IHA, the Navy plans to conduct 20 days of vibratory
pile removal and 45 days of pile installation with an impact hammer.
Effects to marine mammals from the specified activity are expected
to result from underwater sound produced by vibratory and impact pile
driving. In order to assess project impacts, the Navy used thresholds
recommended by NMFS, outlined later in this document. The Navy assumed
practical spreading loss and used empirically-measured source levels
from representative pile driving events to estimate potential marine
mammal exposures. Predicted exposures are described later in this
document. The calculations predict that only Level B harassment would
occur associated with pile driving activities, and required mitigation
measures further ensure that no more than Level B harassment would
occur.
Description of the Specified Activity
Additional details regarding the specified activity were described
in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (78 FR 56659;
September 13, 2013; hereafter, the FR notice); please see that document
or the Navy's application for more information.
Specific Geographic Region and Duration
NBKB is located on the north side of Sinclair Inlet in Puget Sound
(see Figures 1-1 and 2-1 of the Navy's application). Sinclair Inlet, an
estuary of Puget Sound extending 3.5 miles southwesterly from its
connection with the Port Washington Narrows, connects to the main basin
of Puget Sound through Port Washington Narrows and then Agate Pass to
the north or Rich Passage to the east. Sinclair Inlet has been
significantly modified by development activities. Fill associated with
transportation, commercial, and residential development of NBKB, the
City of Bremerton, and the local ports of Bremerton and Port Orchard
has resulted in significant changes to the shoreline. The area
surrounding Pier 6 is industrialized, armored and adjacent to railroads
and highways. Sinclair Inlet is also the receiving body for a
wastewater treatment plant located just west of NBKB. Sinclair Inlet is
relatively shallow and does not flush fully despite freshwater stream
inputs.
The project is expected to require a maximum of 135 days of in-
water impact pile driving work and 65 days of in-water vibratory pile
removal work over a 3-year period. In-water work will occur only from
June 15 to March 1 of any year. During the timeframe of this IHA
(December 1, 2013-March 1, 2014), 45 days of impact pile driving and 20
days of vibratory removal are planned.
Description of Specified Activity
The Navy plans to remove deteriorated fender piles at Pier 6 and
replace them with prestressed concrete piles. The entire project calls
for the removal of 380 12-in diameter creosoted timber piles and twenty
12-in steel pipe piles. These would be replaced with 240 18-in square
concrete piles and 90 24-in square concrete piles. It is not possible
to specify accurately the number of piles that might be installed or
removed in any given work window, due to various delays that may be
expected during construction work and uncertainty inherent to
estimating production rates. The Navy assumes a notional production
rate of four piles per day in determining the number of days of pile
driving expected, and scheduling--as well as exposure analyses--is
based on this assumption.
All piles are planned for removal via vibratory driver. The driver
is suspended from a barge-mounted crane and positioned on top of a
pile. Vibration from the activated driver loosens the pile from the
substrate. Once the pile is released, the crane raises the driver and
pulls the pile from the sediment. Vibratory extraction is expected to
take approximately 5-30 minutes per pile. If piles break during
removal, the remaining portion may be removed via direct pull or with a
clamshell bucket. Replacement piles will be installed via impact driver
and are expected to require approximately 15-60 minutes of driving time
per pile,
[[Page 69827]]
depending on subsurface conditions. Impact driving and/or vibratory
removal could occur on any work day during the period of the IHA, but a
maximum of one pile driving rig will be operating at any given time.
Description of Sound Sources and Distances to Thresholds
An in-depth description of sound sources in general was provided in
the FR notice (78 FR 56659; September 13, 2013). Significant sound-
producing in-water construction activities associated with the project
include vibratory and impact pile driving.
Sound Thresholds
NMFS currently uses acoustic exposure thresholds as important tools
to help better characterize and quantify the effects of human-induced
noise on marine mammals. These thresholds have predominantly been
presented in the form of single received levels for particular source
categories (e.g., impulse, continuous, or explosive) above which an
exposed animal would be predicted to incur auditory injury or be
behaviorally harassed. Current NMFS practice (in relation to the MMPA)
regarding exposure of marine mammals to sound is that cetaceans and
pinnipeds exposed to sound levels of 180 and 190 dB rms or above,
respectively, are considered to have been taken by Level A (i.e.,
injurious) harassment, while behavioral harassment (Level B) is
considered to have occurred when marine mammals are exposed to sounds
at or above 120 dB rms for continuous sound (such as will be produced
by vibratory pile driving) and 160 dB rms for pulsed sound (produced by
impact pile driving), but below injurious thresholds. NMFS uses these
levels as guidelines to estimate when harassment may occur.
NMFS is in the process of revising these acoustic thresholds, with
the first step being to identify new auditory injury criteria for all
source types and new behavioral criteria for seismic activities
(primarily airgun-type sources). For more information on that process,
please visit http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.
Distance to Sound Thresholds
Underwater Sound--Pile driving generates underwater noise that can
potentially result in disturbance to marine mammals in the project
area. Please see the FR notice (78 FR 56659; September 13, 2013) for a
detailed description of the calculations and information used to
estimate distances to relevant threshold levels. In general, the sound
pressure level (SPL) at some distance away from the source (e.g.,
driven pile) is governed by a measured source level, minus the
transmission loss of the energy as it dissipates with distance. A
practical spreading value of 15 (4.5 dB reduction in sound level for
each doubling of distance) is often used under intermediate conditions,
and is assumed here.
Source level, or the intensity of pile driving sound, is greatly
influenced by factors such as the type of piles, hammers, and the
physical environment in which the activity takes place. A number of
studies have measured sound produced during underwater pile driving
projects, primarily during work conducted by the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the California Department of
Transportation (CalTrans). In order to determine reasonable SPLs that
are likely to result from pile driving at NBKB, the Navy evaluated
existing data on the basis of pile materials and driver type.
Representative data for pile driving SPLs recorded from similar
construction activities in recent years were presented in the FR notice
(78 FR 56659; September 13, 2013). Underwater sound levels from pile
driving for this project are assumed to be as follows:
For impact driving of concrete piles, 191 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(rms). This value was selected as representative of the largest
concrete pile size to be installed and may be conservative when smaller
concrete piles are driven (CalTrans, 2012).
For vibratory removal of steel piles, 170 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(rms). This proxy value, from the CalTrans compendium of pile driving
data (CalTrans, 2012), is for vibratory installation and would likely
be conservative when applied to vibratory extraction, which would be
expected to produce lower SPLs than vibratory installation of same-
sized piles.
For vibratory removal of timber piles, 168 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(rms). This proxy value was measured by the Washington State Department
of Transportation for vibratory removal of timber piles and is the only
information we are aware of for this event type (Laughlin, 2011). All
calculated distances to and the total area encompassed by the marine
mammal sound thresholds are provided in Table 1.
Table 1--Calculated Distance(s) to and Area Encompassed by Underwater Marine Mammal Sound Thresholds During Pile
Installation \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance to threshold (m) and associated area of ensonification (km
\2\)
Description -----------------------------------------------------------------------
190 dB 180 dB 160 dB 120 dB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concrete piles, impact.................. 1.2, <0.0001 5.4, 0.0001 117, 0.04 n/a
Steel piles, vibratory.................. 0 0 n/a \2\ 2,154, 7.5
Timber piles, vibratory................. 0 0 n/a 1,585; 5.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SPLs (levels at source) used for calculations were: 191 dB for impact driving, 170 dB for vibratory removal
of steel piles, and 168 dB for vibratory removal of timber piles.
\2\ Areas presented take into account attenuation and/or shadowing by land. Please see Figures B-1 and B-2 in
the Navy's application.
Sinclair Inlet does not represent open water, or free field,
conditions. Therefore, sounds would attenuate according to the
shoreline topography. Distances shown in Table 1 are estimated for
free-field conditions, but areas are calculated per the actual
conditions of the action area. See Figures B-1 and B-2 of the Navy's
application for a depiction of areas in which each underwater sound
threshold is predicted to occur at the project area due to pile
driving.
Airborne Sound--Pile driving can generate airborne sound that could
potentially result in disturbance to marine mammals (specifically,
pinnipeds) which are hauled out or have their heads above the water's
surface. As a result, the Navy analyzed the potential for pinnipeds
hauled out or swimming at the surface near NBKB to be exposed to
airborne SPLs that could result in Level B behavioral harassment.
Although there is no official airborne sound threshold, NMFS assumes
for purposes of the MMPA that behavioral disturbance can occur upon
[[Page 69828]]
exposure to sounds above 100 dB re 20 [micro]Pa rms (unweighted) for
all pinnipeds, except harbor seals. For harbor seals, the threshold is
90 dB re 20 [micro]Pa rms (unweighted).
The potential effects of airborne sound on pinnipeds were discussed
in greater detail in the FR notice (78 FR 56659; September 13, 2013).
Based on available proxy data from the Navy's Test Pile Program in the
Hood Canal (Illingworth & Rodkin, 2012) and from WSDOT (Laughlin,
2010), we determined that only very small zones (< 169 m\2\) would be
ensonified. There are no haul-out opportunities within these small
zones, which are encompassed by the zones estimated for underwater
sound. Protective measures will be in place out to the distances
calculated for the underwater thresholds, and the distances for the
airborne thresholds will be covered fully by mitigation and monitoring
measures in place for underwater sound thresholds. We recognize that
pinnipeds in water that are within the area of ensonification for
airborne sound could be incidentally taken by either underwater or
airborne sound or both. We consider these incidences of harassment to
be accounted for in the take estimates for underwater sound. The
effects of airborne sound are not considered further in this document's
analysis.
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of receipt of the Navy's application and
proposed IHA in the Federal Register on September 13, 2013 (78 FR
56659). NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission). The Commission's comments and our responses are provided
here, and the comments have been posted on the Internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that we require the Navy to
conduct empirical in-water and in-air sound measurements during removal
and installation of piles of various types and sizes and use those data
to inform future IHA applications at NBKB.
Response: We agree with the Commission's statement that conducting
empirical sound measurements during the first year of activities for
the 3-year project at NBKB would augment the available data for the
respective pile types, sizes, and locations (for which little data are
available) and also would provide important information regarding
verification of assumed source levels and propagation loss for use in
subsequent IHA requests at NBKB. In a constrained fiscal environment,
such as currently exists, applicants are generally not able to conduct
acoustic source verifications in all situations where it may be
desirable but must prioritize such efforts. However, the Navy has
agreed to conduct acoustic monitoring during the first year of this
project as recommended by the Commission. Further details are provided
below (see ``Monitoring and Reporting'').
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
There are five marine mammal species with records of occurrence in
waters of Sinclair Inlet in the action area. These are the California
sea lion, harbor seal, Steller sea lion (eastern stock only; Eumetopias
jubatus monteriensis), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), and killer
whale (Orcinus orca). For the killer whale, both transient (west coast
stock) and resident (southern stock) animals, which are currently
considered unnamed subspecies (Committee on Taxonomy, 2012), have
occurred in the area. However, southern resident animals are known to
have occurred only once, with the last confirmed sighting from 1997 in
Dyes Inlet. A group of 19 whales from the L-25 subpod entered and
stayed in Dyes Inlet, which connects to Sinclair Inlet northeast of
NBKB, for 30 days. Dyes Inlet may be reached only by traversing from
Sinclair Inlet through the Port Washington Narrows, a narrow connecting
body that is crossed by two bridges, and it was speculated at the time
that the whales' long stay was the result of a reluctance to traverse
back through the Narrows and under the two bridges. There is one other
unconfirmed report of a single southern resident animal occurring in
the project area, in January 2009. Of these stocks, the Steller sea
lion and southern resident killer whales are listed under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA), with the eastern stock of Steller sea
lions listed as threatened and the southern resident stock of killer
whales listed as endangered. The FR notice (78 FR 56659; September 13,
2013) summarizes the population status and abundance of these species
and discusses additional species known from Puget Sound, and the Navy's
application provides detailed life history information. Table 2 lists
the marine mammal species with expected potential for occurrence in the
vicinity of NBKB during the project timeframe.
Table 2--Marine Mammals Potentially Present in the Vicinity of NBKB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance Relative occurrence in
Species \1\ (CV, Nmin) Sinclair Inlet Season of occurrence
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion U.S. Stock......... 296,750 Common.................... Year-round, excluding
(n/a, 153,337) July.
Harbor seal WA inland waters stock..... \2\14,612 Common.................... Year-round.
(0.15, 12,844)
Steller sea lion Eastern stock......... 58,334-72,223 Occasional presence....... Seasonal (Oct-May).
(n/a, 52,847)
Killer whale West Coast transient stock 354 (n/a) Uncommon.................. Year-round.
Gray whale Eastern North Pacific stock. 19,126 Uncommon.................. Year-round.
(0.071, 18,017)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm. CV is
coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
\2\ This abundance estimate is greater than eight years old and is therefore not considered current.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals
We have determined that pile driving, as outlined in the project
description, has the potential to result in behavioral harassment of
marine mammals that may be present in the project vicinity while
construction activity is being conducted. The FR notice (78 FR 56659;
September 13, 2013) provides a detailed description of marine mammal
hearing and of the potential effects of these construction activities
on marine mammals.
[[Page 69829]]
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The planned activities at NBKB would not result in permanent
impacts to habitats used directly by marine mammals, but may have
potential short-term impacts to food sources such as forage fish and
may affect acoustic habitat (see masking discussion in proposed IHA FR
notice). There are no rookeries or major haul-out sites, no known
foraging hotspots, or other ocean bottom structure of significant
biological importance to marine mammals present in the marine waters in
the vicinity of the project area. Therefore, the main impact issue
associated with the specified activity would be temporarily elevated
sound levels and the associated direct effects on marine mammals, as
discussed previously in the proposed IHA FR notice. The most likely
impact to marine mammal habitat occurs from pile driving effects on
likely marine mammal prey (i.e., fish) near NBKB and minor impacts to
the immediate substrate during installation and removal of piles during
the project. The FR notice (78 FR 56659; September 13, 2013) describes
these potential impacts in greater detail.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, we 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 (where relevant).
Measurements from proxy pile driving events were coupled with
practical spreading loss to estimate zones of influence (ZOIs; see
``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment''); these values were used to
develop mitigation measures for pile driving activities at NBKB. The
ZOIs effectively represent the mitigation zone that would be
established around each pile to prevent Level A harassment to marine
mammals, while providing estimates of the areas within which Level B
harassment might occur. In addition to the specific measures described
later in this section, the Navy will conduct briefings between
construction supervisors and crews, marine mammal monitoring team, and
Navy staff prior to the start of all pile driving activity, and when
new personnel join the work, in order to explain responsibilities,
communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and
operational procedures.
Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile Driving
The following measures apply to the Navy's mitigation through
shutdown and disturbance zones:
Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving and removal activities, the
Navy will establish a shutdown zone intended to contain the area in
which SPLs equal or exceed the 190 dB rms acoustic injury criterion.
The purpose of a shutdown zone is to define an area within which
shutdown of activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or
in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area), thus
preventing injury, serious injury, or death of marine mammals. Radial
distances for shutdown zones are shown in Table 1. However, for this
project, a minimum shutdown zone of 10 m will be established during all
pile driving activities, regardless of the estimated zone. Vibratory
pile driving activities are not predicted to produce sound exceeding
the Level A standard, but these precautionary measures are intended to
prevent the already unlikely possibility of physical interaction with
construction equipment and to further reduce any possibility of
acoustic injury.
Disturbance Zone--Disturbance zones are the areas in which SPLs
equal or exceed 160 and 120 dB rms (for pulsed and non-pulsed sound,
respectively). Disturbance zones provide utility for monitoring
conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone monitoring) by
establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown
zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones enables observers to be aware of
and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area but
outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of
activity. However, the primary purpose of disturbance zone monitoring
is for documenting incidents of Level B harassment; disturbance zone
monitoring is discussed in greater detail later (see ``Monitoring and
Reporting''). Nominal radial distances for disturbance zones are shown
in Table 1.
In order to document observed incidences of harassment, monitors
record all marine mammal observations, regardless of location. The
observer's location, as well as the location of the pile being driven,
is known from a GPS. The location of the animal is estimated as a
distance from the observer, which is then compared to the location from
the pile. It may then be estimated whether the animal was exposed to
sound levels constituting incidental harassment on the basis of
predicted distances to relevant thresholds in post-processing of
observational and acoustic data, and a precise accounting of observed
incidences of harassment created. This information may then be used to
extrapolate observed takes to reach an approximate understanding of
actual total takes.
Monitoring Protocols--Monitoring will be conducted before, during,
and after pile driving activities. In addition, observers shall record
all incidences of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from
activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with
distance from piles being driven. Observations made outside the
shutdown zone will not result in shutdown; that pile segment would be
completed without cessation, unless the animal approaches or enters the
shutdown zone, at which point all pile driving activities would be
halted. Please see the Monitoring Plan (Appendix C in the Navy's
application), developed by the Navy in agreement with NMFS, for full
details of the monitoring protocols. Monitoring will take place from 15
minutes prior to initiation through 30 minutes post-completion of pile
driving activities. Pile driving activities include the time to remove
a single pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between
uses of the pile driving equipment is no more than 30 minutes. The
following additional measures apply to visual monitoring:
(1) Monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will
be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for
marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable
by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. Qualified observers
are trained biologists, with the following minimum qualifications:
Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible)
sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface
with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars
may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
Advanced education in biological science, wildlife
management, mammalogy, or related fields (bachelor's degree or higher
is required);
Experience and ability to conduct field observations and
collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic
experience);
Experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
[[Page 69830]]
Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of
observations including but not limited to the number and species of
marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates and times when in-water construction
activities were suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from
construction sound of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown
zone; and marine mammal behavior; and
Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
(2) Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone
will be monitored for 15 minutes to ensure that it is clear of marine
mammals. Pile driving will only commence once observers have declared
the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals; animals will be allowed to
remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition)
and their behavior will be monitored and documented. The shutdown zone
may only be declared clear, and pile driving started, when the entire
shutdown zone is visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog,
etc.). In addition, if such conditions should arise during impact pile
driving that is already underway, the activity will be halted.
(3) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone
during the course of pile driving operations, activity will be halted
and delayed until either the animal has voluntarily left and been
visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone or 15 minutes have passed
without re-detection of the animal. Monitoring will be conducted
throughout the time required to drive a pile.
Special Conditions
The Navy has not requested the authorization of incidental take for
Steller sea lions, killer whales, or gray whales (see discussion in
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment). Therefore, shutdown would be
implemented in the event that a Steller sea lion or any cetacean is
observed upon sighting within (or in anticipation of entering) the
defined disturbance zone. As described later in this document, we
believe that occurrence of any of these species during the in-water
work window would be uncommon. For gray and killer whales, in
particular, the occurrence of an individual or group would likely be
highly noticeable and would attract significant attention in local
media and with local whale watchers and interested citizens.
Prior to the start of pile driving on any day, the Navy will
contact and/or review the latest sightings data from the Orca Network
and/or Center for Whale Research to determine the location of the
nearest marine mammal sightings. The Orca Sightings Network consists of
a list of over 600 residents, scientists, and government agency
personnel in the U.S. and Canada, and includes passive acoustic
detections. The presence of a killer whale or gray whale in the
southern reaches of Puget Sound would be a notable event, drawing
public attention and media scrutiny. With this level of coordination in
the region of activity, the Navy should be able to effectively receive
real-time information on the presence or absence of whales, sufficient
to inform the day's activities. Pile removal or driving would not occur
if there was the risk of incidental harassment of a species for which
incidental take was not authorized.
Prior to beginning pile driving on each day, monitors will scan the
floating security barrier to ensure that no Steller sea lions are
present. During vibratory pile removal, four land-based observers will
monitor the area; these will be positioned with two at the pier work
site, one at the eastern extent of the ZOI in the Manette neighborhood
of Bremerton, and one at the southern extent of the ZOI near the
Annapolis ferry landing in Port Orchard (please see Figure 1 of
Appendix C in the Navy's application). Additionally, one vessel-based
observer will travel through the monitoring area, completing an entire
loop approximately every 30 minutes. If any killer whales, grey whales,
or Steller sea lions are detected, activity will not begin or will shut
down.
Timing Restrictions
In the project area, designated timing restrictions exist to avoid
in-water work when salmonids and other spawning forage fish are likely
to be present. The in-water work window is June 15-March 1. All in-
water construction activities would occur only during daylight hours
(sunrise to sunset).
Soft Start
The use of a soft-start procedure is believed to provide additional
protection to marine mammals by warning or providing a chance to leave
the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity, and typically
involves a requirement to initiate sound from vibratory hammers for
fifteen seconds at reduced energy followed by a 30-second waiting
period. This procedure is repeated two additional times. However,
implementation of soft start for vibratory pile driving during previous
pile driving work conducted by the Navy at another location has led to
equipment failure and serious human safety concerns. Therefore,
vibratory soft start is not required as a mitigation measure for this
project, as we have determined it not to be practicable. We have
further determined this measure unnecessary to providing the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals and their
habitat. Prior to issuing any further IHAs to the Navy for pile driving
activities in 2014 and beyond, we plan to facilitate consultation
between the Navy and other practitioners (e.g., Washington State
Department of Transportation and/or the California Department of
Transportation) in order to determine whether the potentially
significant human safety issue is inherent to implementation of the
measure or is due to operator error. For impact driving, soft start
will be required, and contractors will provide an initial set of three
strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a 30-
second waiting period, then two subsequent three-strike sets.
We have carefully evaluated the applicant's planned mitigation
measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of
ensuring that we prescribe the means of effecting the least practicable
impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their
habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of
the following factors in relation to one another: (1) The manner in
which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the
measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals; (2)
the proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize
adverse impacts as planned; and (3) the practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's planned measures, as
well as any other potential measures that may be relevant to the
specified activity, we have determined that these mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine
mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention
to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that we must set forth
[[Page 69831]]
``requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such
taking''. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13)
indicate that requests for ITAs must include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result
in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or
impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be
present in the action area. The Navy's planned monitoring and reporting
is also described in their Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan (Appendix C of
the Navy's application).
Acoustic Monitoring
The Navy will implement a sound source level verification study
during the specified activities. Data will be collected in order to
estimate airborne and underwater source levels for vibratory removal of
timber piles and impact driving of concrete piles, with measurements
conducted for ten piles of each type. Monitoring will include one
underwater and one airborne monitoring position. These exact positions
will be determined in the field during consultation with Navy
personnel, subject to constraints related to logistics and security
requirements. Reporting of measured sound level signals will include
the average, minimum, and maximum rms value and frequency spectra for
each pile monitored. Please see section 11.4.4 for details of the
Navy's acoustic monitoring plan.
Visual Marine Mammal Observations
The Navy will collect sighting data and behavioral responses to
construction for marine mammal species observed in the region of
activity during the period of activity. All observers will be trained
in marine mammal identification and behaviors and are required to have
no other construction-related tasks while conducting monitoring. The
Navy will monitor the shutdown zone and disturbance zone before,
during, and after pile driving, with observers located at the best
practicable vantage points. Based on our requirements, the Navy will
implement the following procedures for pile driving:
MMOs will be located at the best vantage point(s) in order
to properly see the entire shutdown zone and as much of the disturbance
zone as possible.
During all observation periods, observers will use
binoculars and the naked eye to search continuously for marine mammals.
If the shutdown zones are obscured by fog or poor lighting
conditions, pile driving at that location will not be initiated until
that zone is visible. Should such conditions arise while impact driving
is underway, the activity would be halted.
The shutdown and disturbance zones around the pile will be
monitored for the presence of marine mammals before, during, and after
any pile driving or removal activity.
During vibratory pile removal, four observers will be deployed as
described under the preceding mitigation discussion, including four
land-based observers and one-vessel-based observer traversing the
extent of the Level B harassment zone. During impact driving, one
observer will be positioned at or near the pile to observe the much
smaller disturbance zone.
Individuals implementing the monitoring protocol will assess its
effectiveness using an adaptive approach. Monitoring biologists will
use their best professional judgment throughout implementation and seek
improvements to these methods when deemed appropriate. Any
modifications to protocol will be coordinated between NMFS and the
Navy.
Data Collection
We require that observers use approved data forms. Among other
pieces of information, the Navy will record detailed information about
any implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to
the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting
behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, the Navy will attempt to
distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the
number of incidences of take. We require that, at a minimum, the
following information be collected on the sighting forms:
Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel, and if possible,
the correlation to SPLs;
Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
Locations of all marine mammal observations;
Other human activity in the area; and
Description of implementation of mitigation measures
(e.g., shutdown or delay).
Reporting
A draft report will be submitted to NMFS within 45 days of the
completion of marine mammal and acoustic monitoring, or 60 days prior
to the issuance of any subsequent IHA for this project, whichever comes
first. The report will include marine mammal observations pre-activity,
during-activity, and post-activity during pile driving days, and will
also provide descriptions of any adverse responses to construction
activities by marine mammals and a complete description of all
mitigation shutdowns and the results of those actions and a refined
take estimate based on the number of marine mammals observed during the
course of construction. Reporting will also include the results of the
acoustic monitoring effort. A final report will be prepared and
submitted within 30 days following resolution of comments on the draft
report.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
With respect to the activities described 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].'' All anticipated takes will be by Level B harassment,
involving temporary changes in behavior. The planned mitigation and
monitoring measures are expected to minimize the possibility of
injurious or lethal takes such that take by Level A harassment, serious
injury, or mortality is considered discountable. However, it is
unlikely that injurious or lethal takes would occur even in the absence
of the planned mitigation and monitoring measures.
If a marine mammal responds to a stimulus by changing its behavior
(e.g., through relatively minor changes in locomotion direction/speed
or vocalization behavior), the response may or may not constitute
taking at the individual level, and is unlikely to affect the stock or
the species as a whole. However, if a sound source displaces marine
mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for a
[[Page 69832]]
prolonged period, impacts on animals or on the stock or species could
potentially be significant (Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007).
Given the many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types of
impacts of sound on marine mammals, it is common practice to estimate
how many animals are likely to be present within a particular distance
of a given activity, or exposed to a particular level of sound. This
practice potentially overestimates the numbers of marine mammals taken.
In addition, it is often difficult to distinguish between the number of
individuals harassed and incidences of harassment. In particular, for
stationary activities, it is more likely that some smaller number of
individuals may accrue a number of incidences of harassment per
individual than for each incidence to accrue to a new individual,
especially if those individuals display some degree of residency or
site fidelity and the impetus to use the site (e.g., because of
foraging opportunities) is stronger than the deterrence presented by
the harassing activity.
The project area is not believed to be particularly important
habitat for marine mammals, nor is it considered an area frequented by
marine mammals, although harbor seals may be present year-round and sea
lions are known to haul-out on man-made objects at the NBKB waterfront.
Sightings of other species are rare. Therefore, behavioral disturbances
that could result from anthropogenic sound associated with these
activities are expected to affect only a relatively small number of
individual marine mammals, although those effects could be recurring
over the life of the project if the same individuals remain in the
project vicinity. The Navy requested authorization for the incidental
taking of small numbers of harbor seals and California sea lions in
Sinclair Inlet and nearby waters that may be ensonified by project
activities.
Marine Mammal Densities
For all species, the best scientific information available was used
to derive density estimates and the maximum appropriate density value
for each species was considered for use in the marine mammal take
assessment calculations. These values, shown in Table 3 below, were
derived or confirmed by experts convened to develop such information
for use in Navy environmental compliance efforts in the Pacific
Northwest, including Washington inland waters. The Navy Marine Species
Density Database (NMSDD) density estimates were recently finalized, and
use data from local marine mammal data sets, expert opinion, and survey
data from Navy biologists and other agencies. A technical report
documenting methodologies used to derive these densities and relevant
background data is still in development (DoN, in prep.). These data are
generally considered the best available information for Washington
inland waters, except where specific local abundance information is
available. At NBKB, the Navy began collecting opportunistic
observational data of animals hauled-out on the floating security
barrier. These surveys began in February 2010 and have been conducted
approximately monthly from September 2010 through present (DoN, 2013).
In addition, WSDOT recently conducted in-water pile driving over the
course of multiple work windows as part of the Manette Bridge
construction project in the nearby Port Washington Narrows. WSDOT
conducted required marine mammal monitoring as part of this project
(WSDOT, 2011, 2012; Rand, 2011). We determined, for both harbor seals
and California sea lions, that these sources of local abundance
information comprise the best available data for use in the take
assessment calculations, as described below.
Table 3--Maximum Marine Mammal Density Estimates for NBKB (Sinclair
Inlet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density
(Sinclair
Species Inlet), /km\2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal............................................. 0.4267
California sea lion..................................... 0.13
Steller sea lion........................................ 0.037
Transient killer whale.................................. 0.0024
Gray whale.............................................. 0.0005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Take Calculation
The take calculations presented here rely on the best data
currently available for marine mammal populations in Puget Sound. The
methodology for estimating take was described in detail in the FR
notice (78 FR 56659; September 13, 2013). The ZOI impact area is the
estimated range of impact to the sound criteria. The distances
specified in Table 1 were used to calculate ZOIs around each pile. The
ZOI impact area calculations took into consideration the possible
affected area with attenuation due to the topographical constraints of
Sinclair Inlet, and the radial distances to thresholds are not always
reached.
While pile driving can occur any day, and the analysis is conducted
on a per day basis, only a fraction of that time (typically a matter of
hours on any given day) is actually spent pile driving. The exposure
assessment methodology is an estimate of the numbers of individuals
exposed to the effects of pile driving activities exceeding NMFS-
established thresholds. Of note in these exposure estimates, mitigation
methods (i.e., visual monitoring and the use of shutdown zones; soft
start for impact pile driving) were not quantified within the
assessment and successful implementation of mitigation is not reflected
in exposure estimates. In addition, equating exposure with response
(i.e., a behavioral response meeting the definition of take under the
MMPA) is simplistic and conservative assumption. For these reasons,
results from this acoustic exposure assessment likely overestimate take
estimates to some degree. Species-specific information and
considerations in the take estimation process are detailed here.
Harbor Seal--While no harbor seal haul-outs are present in the
action area or in the immediate vicinity of NBKB, haul-outs are present
elsewhere in Sinclair Inlet and in other nearby waters and harbor seals
may haul out on available objects opportunistically. Use of the NMSDD
density value (0.4267 animals/km\2\; corrected for proportion of
animals hauled-out at any given time) would result in an estimate of 2-
3 incidences of harassment per day; it is likely that this would not
adequately represent the potential presence of harbor seals given
observed occurrence at other nearby construction projects. Marine
mammal monitoring conducted during pile driving work on the Manette
Bridge showed variable numbers of harbor seals (but generally greater
than indicated by the NMSDD density). During the first year of
construction (in-water work window only), an average of 3.7 harbor
seals were observed per day of monitoring with a maximum of 59 observed
in October 2011 (WSDOT, 2011; Rand, 2011). During the most recent
construction period (July-November 2012), an average of eleven harbor
seals per monitoring day was observed, though some animals were likely
counted multiple times (WSDOT, 2012). Given the potential for similar
occurrence of harbor seals in the vicinity of NBKB during the in-water
construction period, we determined it appropriate to use this most
recent, local abundance information in the take assessment calculation.
California Sea Lion--Similar to harbor seals, it is not likely that
use of the NMSDD density value for California sea lions (0.13 animals/
km\2\) would adequately represent their potential occurrence in the
project area. California sea lions are commonly
[[Page 69833]]
observed hauled out on the floating security barrier which is in close
proximity to Pier 6; counts from 34 surveys (March 2010-June 2013)
showed an average of 42 individuals per survey day (range 0-144; DoN,
2013). These counts represent the best local abundance data available
and were used in the take assessment calculation.
Steller Sea Lion--No Steller sea lion haul-outs are present within
or near the action area, and Steller sea lions have not been observed
during Navy waterfront surveys or during monitoring associated with the
Manette Bridge construction project. It is assumed that the possibility
exists that a Steller sea lion could occur in the project area, but
there is no known attractant in Sinclair Inlet, which is a relatively
muddy, industrialized area, and the floating security barrier that
California sea lions use as an opportunistic haul-out cannot generally
accommodate the larger adult Steller sea lions (juveniles could haul-
out on the barrier). Use of the NMSDD density estimate (0.037 animals/
km\2\) results in an estimate of zero exposures, and there are no
existing data to indicate that Steller sea lions would occur more
frequently locally. Therefore, the Navy did not request the
authorization of incidental take for Steller sea lions and we have not
issued such authorization. The Navy would not begin activity or would
shut down upon report of a Steller sea lion present within or
approaching the relevant ZOI.
Killer Whale--Transient killer whales are rarely observed in the
project area, with records since 2002 showing one group transiting
through the area in May 2004 and a subsequent, similar observation in
May 2010. No other observations have occurred during Navy surveys or
during project monitoring for Manette Bridge. Use of the NMSDD density
estimate (0.0024 animals/km\2\) results in an estimate of zero
exposures, and there are no existing data to indicate that killer
whales would occur more frequently locally. Therefore, the Navy did not
request the authorization of incidental take for transient killer
whales and we have not issued such authorization. The Navy would not
begin activity or would shut down upon report of a killer whale present
within or approaching the relevant ZOI.
Gray Whale--Gray whales are rarely observed in the project area,
and the majority of in-water work would occur when whales are
relatively less likely to occur (i.e., outside of March-May). Since
2002 and during the in-water work window, there are observational
records of three whales (all during winter 2008-09) and a stranding
record of a fourth whale (January 2013). No other observations have
occurred during Navy surveys or during project monitoring for Manette
Bridge. Use of the NMSDD density estimate (0.0005 animals/km\2\)
results in an estimate of zero exposures, and there are no existing
data to indicate that gray whales would occur more frequently locally.
Therefore, the Navy did not request the authorization of incidental
take for gray whales and we have not issued such authorization. The
Navy would not begin activity or would shut down upon report of a gray
whale present within or approaching the relevant ZOI.
Table 4. Number of Potential Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exposure
Species estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal\1\.......................................... 715
California sea lion\2\.................................. 2,730
Steller sea lion........................................ 0
Transient killer whale.................................. 0
Gray whale.............................................. 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Use of NMSDD density results in estimated range of potential
exposures of 130-195. Local abundance data were used in exposure
assessment, i.e., 11 harbor seals potentially exposed per day for 65
days of pile driving.
\2\ Use of NMSDD density results in estimated potential exposures of 65.
Local abundance data were used in exposure assessment, i.e., 42
California sea lions potentially exposed per day for 65 days of pile
driving.
For the Steller sea lion, transient killer whale, and gray whale,
available information indicates that presence of these species is
sufficiently rare to make exposure unlikely. Further, the Navy's
monitoring plan further mitigates any such possibility to the point
that we consider it discountable and have not authorized incidental
take for these three species.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analyses and Determinations
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.'' In making a negligible impact determination,
we considers a variety of factors, including but not limited to: (1)
The number of anticipated mortalities; (2) the number and nature of
anticipated injuries; (3) the number, nature, intensity, and duration
of Level B harassment; and (4) the context in which the take occurs.
Small Numbers Analysis
The number of incidences of take authorized for harbor seals and
California sea lions would be considered small relative to the relevant
stocks or populations (less than five percent and one percent,
respectively) even if each estimated taking occurred to a new
individual. This is an extremely unlikely scenario as, for pinnipeds in
estuarine/inland waters, there is likely to be some overlap in
individuals present day-to-day.
Negligible Impact Analysis
Pile driving activities associated with the Navy's pier maintenance
project, as outlined previously, have the potential to disturb or
displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may
result in take, in the form of Level B harassment (behavioral
disturbance) only, from underwater sounds generated from pile driving
and removal. Potential takes could occur if individuals of these
species are present in the ensonified zone when the specified activity
is occurring.
No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated given the
nature of the activity and measures designed to minimize the
possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for these
outcomes is minimized through the construction method and the
implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Specifically, piles
will be removed via vibratory means--an activity that does not have the
potential to cause injury to marine mammals due to the relatively low
source levels produced (less than 180 dB) and the lack of potentially
injurious source characteristics--and, while impact pile driving
produces short, sharp pulses with higher peak levels and much sharper
rise time to reach those peaks, only small diameter concrete piles are
planned for impact driving. Predicted source levels for such impact
driving events are significantly lower than those typical of impact
driving of steel piles and/or larger diameter piles. In addition,
implementation of soft start and shutdown zones significantly reduces
any possibility of injury. Given sufficient ``notice'' through use of
soft start (for impact driving), marine mammals are expected to move
away from a sound source that is annoying prior to its becoming
potentially injurious. Environmental conditions in Sinclair Inlet are
expected to generally be good, with calm sea states, although Sinclair
Inlet waters may be more turbid than those further north in Puget Sound
or in Hood Canal. Nevertheless, we
[[Page 69834]]
expect conditions in Sinclair Inlet to allow a high marine mammal
detection capability for the trained observers required, enabling a
high rate of success in implementation of shutdowns to avoid injury,
serious injury, or mortality. In addition, the topography of Sinclair
Inlet should allow for placement of observers sufficient to detect
cetaceans, should any occur (see Figure 1 of Appendix C in the Navy's
application).
Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the
basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other
similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as
increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased
foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff,
2006; HDR, Inc., 2012). Most likely, individuals will simply move away
from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the areas of
pile driving, although even this reaction has been observed primarily
only in association with impact pile driving. The pile driving
activities analyzed here are similar to, or less impactful than,
numerous other construction activities conducted in San Francisco Bay
and in the Puget Sound region, which have taken place with no reported
injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long-term adverse
consequences from behavioral harassment. Repeated exposures of
individuals to levels of sound that may cause Level B harassment are
unlikely to result in hearing impairment or to significantly disrupt
foraging behavior. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small
subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant
realized decrease in viability for the affected individuals, and thus
would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B
harassment will be reduced to the level of least practicable impact
through use of mitigation measures described herein and, if sound
produced by project activities is sufficiently disturbing, animals are
likely to simply avoid the area--which is not believed to provide any
habitat of special significance--while the activity is occurring.
In summary, this negligible impact analysis is founded on the
following factors: (1) The possibility of injury, serious injury, or
mortality may reasonably be considered discountable; (2) the
anticipated incidences of Level B harassment consist of, at worst,
temporary modifications in behavior; (3) the absence of any significant
habitat within the project area, including rookeries, significant haul-
outs, or known areas or features of special significance for foraging
or reproduction; (4) the presumed efficacy of the planned mitigation
measures in reducing the effects of the specified activity to the level
of least practicable impact. In addition, neither of these stocks are
listed under the ESA or considered depleted under the MMPA. In
combination, we believe that these factors, as well as the available
body of evidence from other similar activities, demonstrate that the
potential effects of the specified activity will have only short-term
effects on individuals. The specified activity is not expected to
impact rates of recruitment or survival and will therefore not result
in population-level impacts.
Determinations
The number of marine mammals actually incidentally harassed by the
project will depend on the distribution and abundance of marine mammals
in the vicinity of the activity. However, we find that the number of
potential takings authorized (by level B harassment only), which we
consider to be a conservative, maximum estimate, is small relative to
the relevant regional stock or population numbers, and that the effect
of the activity will be mitigated to the level of least practicable
impact through implementation of the mitigation and monitoring measures
described previously. Based on the analysis contained herein of the
likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their
habitat, we find that the total taking from the activity will have a
negligible impact on the affected species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action. Therefore, we have determined that the total taking of
affected species or stocks will not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are no ESA-listed marine mammals expected to occur in the
action area. Therefore, the Navy has not requested authorization of the
incidental take of ESA-listed species and no such authorization is
issued; therefore, no consultation under the ESA is required.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published
by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the
Navy prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) to consider the direct,
indirect and cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from
the pier maintenance project. NMFS made the Navy's EA available to the
public for review and comment, in relation to its suitability for
adoption by NMFS in order to assess the impacts to the human
environment of issuance of an IHA to the Navy. Also in compliance with
NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well as NOAA Administrative Order 216-
6, NMFS has reviewed the Navy's EA, determined it to be sufficient, and
adopted that EA and signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
on November 8, 2013. The Navy's EA and NMFS' FONSI for this action may
be found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to the
Navy to conduct the specified activities at Naval Base Kitsap
Bremerton, WA for the period from December 1, 2013, through March 1,
2014, provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: November 15, 2013.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-27867 Filed 11-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P