[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 54 (Thursday, March 20, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15573-15586]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06140]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XD131


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Construction of the Block Island 
Transmission System

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

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

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from Deepwater Wind Block 
Island Transmission, LLC (DWBIT) for an Incidental Harassment 
Authorization (IHA) to take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental 
to construction of the Block Island Transmission System. Pursuant to 
the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on 
its proposal to issue an IHA to DWBIT to incidentally take, by Level B 
harassment only, marine mammals during the specified activity.

DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than April 
21, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to Jolie 
Harrison, Supervisor, Incidental Take Program, Permits and Conservation 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox 
address for providing email comments is [email protected]. 
Comments sent via email, including all attachments, must not exceed a 
25-megabyte file size. NMFS is not responsible for comments sent to 
addresses other than those provided here.
    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 
and will generally be posted to http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm without change. All Personal Identifying Information 
(for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the 
commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential 
Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
    An electronic copy of the application may be obtained by writing to 
the address specified above, telephoning the contact listed below (see 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or visiting the Internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. Documents cited in this 
notice may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular business 
hours, at the aforementioned address.
    NMFS is also preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) in 
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and will 
consider comments submitted in response to this notice as part of that 
process. The EA will be posted at the Web site listed above once it is 
finalized.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Magliocca, 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, 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.''
    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].

Summary of Request

    On March 11, 2013, NMFS received an application from DWBIT for the 
taking of marine mammals incidental to construction of the Block Island 
Transmission System. The application went through a series of revisions 
and the final version was submitted on November 26, 2013. NMFS 
determined that the application was adequate and complete on December 
2, 2013.
    DWBIT proposes to develop the Block Island Transmission System 
(BITS), a bi-directional submarine transmission cable, over a 1-year 
period. The proposed activity could begin in late 2014 and last through 
late 2015; however, portions of the project would only occur for short, 
sporadic periods of

[[Page 15574]]

times over the 1-year period. The following specific aspects of the 
proposed activities are likely to result in the take of marine mammals: 
vibratory pile driving and the use of dynamically positioned (DP) 
vessel thrusters. Take, by Level B Harassment only, of individuals of 
nine species is anticipated to result from the specified activity.

Description of the Specified Activity

Overview

    DWBIT proposes to construct a bi-directional submarine transmission 
cable that will run from Block Island to the Rhode Island mainland. 
Construction of the marine portion of the BITS will involve three 
activities: Cable landfall construction on Block Island using a short-
distance horizontal directional drill (HDD) from a temporary excavated 
trench box on Crescent Beach; cable landfall construction on 
Scarborough State Beach in Narragansett, Rhode Island using a long-
distance HDD from a temporary offshore cofferdam; and installation of 
the submarine BITS cable. Cable landfall construction may require the 
installation and removal of a temporary offshore cofferdam, which would 
involve vibratory pile driving. The generation of underwater noise from 
vibratory pile driving and the DP vessel thruster may result in the 
incidental take of marine mammals.
    The BITS will interconnect Block Island to the existing 
Narragansett Electric Company National Grid distribution system on the 
Rhode Island mainland. In connection with the BITS, Deepwater Wind 
Block Island, LLC (a different applicant) proposes to develop the Block 
Island Wind Farm, a 30-megawatt offshore wind farm. Incidental take of 
marine mammals resulting from construction of the Block Island Wind 
Farm project will be assessed separately.

Dates and Duration

    Construction activities could begin in late 2014 and are scheduled 
to be complete by August 2015. The anticipated project work windows are 
provided in Table 1.

                Table 1--Anticipated Project Work Windows
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Activity                     Anticipated work window
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contracting, mobilization,     January 2014-December 2014.
 and verification.
Onshore short-distance HDD     December 2014-June 2015.
 installation.
Onshore/offshore long-         January 2015-June 2015.
 distance HDD installation.
Onshore cable installation...  October 2014-May 2015.
Substation construction......  October 2014-May 2015.
Offshore cable installation..  April 2015-August 2015.
Landfall demobilization and    May 2015-June 2015.
 remediation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NMFS is proposing to issue an authorization effective December 2014 
through December 2015, based on the anticipated work windows for in-
water construction that could result in the incidental take of marine 
mammals. While project activities may occur for 1 year, in-water 
vibratory pile driving is only expected to occur for up to of 4 days (2 
days each for construction of the cofferdam and 2 days each for removal 
of the cofferdam). Use of the DP vessel thruster during cable 
installation activities is expected to occur for 4 to 6 weeks (42 days 
maximum). Vibratory pile driving would occur during daylight hours 
only, starting approximately 30 minutes after dawn and ending 30 
minutes prior to dusk. Cable installation (and subsequent use of the DP 
vessel thruster) would be conducted 24 hours per day.

Specified Geographic Region

    The BITS cable would originate from a manhole on Block Island and 
traverse federal and state submerged lands in Rhode Island Sound from 
Block Island to Narragansett for a total distance of 19.8 miles with 
water depths reaching up to 39 meters (m). Figure 1.2-1 of DWBIT's 
application shows the project location in detail (see ADDRESSES). 
Vibratory pile driving for temporary offshore cofferdam would occur at 
a site located off of Scarborough State Beach. The temporary offshore 
cofferdam would be located between 685.8 m and 1,112.5 m from shore. 
Terrestrial cables and other terrestrial facilities associated with the 
BITS will be located in the towns of New Shoreham (Block Island) and 
Narragansett in Washington County, Rhode Island. Construction staging 
and laydown for offshore components of the project will occur at the 
Quonset Point port facility in North Kingstown, also in Washington 
County, Rhode Island.

Detailed Description of Activities

    The following sections provide additional details associated with 
each portion of the BITS marine construction activities.
1. Landfall Construction
    On Block Island, DWBIT plans to bring the BITS cable ashore via a 
short-distance HDD. DWBIT would use the short-distance HDD to install 
either a steel or high density polyethylene conduit for the cable from 
the parking lot under Crescent Beach to a temporary excavated trench 
beginning at about mean high water. The excavated trench on Crescent 
Beach would be approximately 2 to 3 m wide, 4 m deep, and 11 m long. 
Spoils from the trench excavation would be stored on the respective 
beach and returned to the trench after cable installation. To support 
the short-distance HDD on Crescent Beach, DWBIT would install steel 
sheet piling to stabilize the excavated trench, possibly using a 
vibratory pile driver. The HDD would enter through the shore side of 
the excavated trench and the cable conduit would be installed between 
the trench and the manhole. The BITS cable would then be pulled from 
the excavated trench into the respective manhole through the newly 
installed conduit. Sheet piling installations would occur at low tide.
    The coupling of land-based vibrations and nearshore sounds into the 
underwater acoustic field is not well understood and cannot be 
accurately predicted using current models. However, because the 
excavation for the cable trench and the HDD installation on the beach 
would occur onshore and because sand is generally a very poor conductor 
of vibrations, NMFS considers it unlikely that the underwater noise 
generated from either of these installations would result in harassment 
of marine mammals.
    DWBIT is proposing to conduct the cable landfall on Scarborough 
State Beach using a long-distance HDD from the manhole located within 
the RIDEM parking lot to a temporary offshore cofferdam located between 
685.8 m and 1,112.5 m from shore. From this location, a jet plow, 
supported by a DP cable installation barge, would be used

[[Page 15575]]

to install the BITS cable below the seabed. Construction of the 
temporary cofferdam would consist of the installation of steel sheet 
piles to create an enclosed area approximately 15.2 by 6.1 m. The steel 
sheet piles would be installed and later removed using a vibratory 
hammer supported by a spud barge. DWBIT expects the cofferdam to be in 
place between January and the end of May.
    Vibratory pile driving would be required to install the temporary 
cofferdam off of Scarborough State Beach. DWBIT assumes a 1,800 kilo 
Newton vibratory force for estimating source levels and frequency 
spectra. DWBIT modeled vibratory hammering at a source level of 194 
decibels (dB) re 1 micro Pascal, using adjusted \1/3\-octave band 
source levels from measurements of a similar offshore construction, and 
adjusted to account for the estimated force necessary for driving of 
the BITS cofferdam sheet piles. Detailed information on the acoustic 
modeling for this source is provided in Appendix A of DWBIT's 
application (see ADDRESSES).
2. Offshore Cable Installation
    DWBIT would use a jet plow, supported by a DP cable installation 
barge, to install the BITS cable below the seabed. The jet plow would 
be positioned over the trench and pulled from shore by the cable 
installation vessel. The jet plow would likely be a rubber-tired or 
skid-mounted plow with a maximum width of about 4.6 m, and pulled along 
the seafloor behind the cable-laying barge with assistance of a non-DP 
material barge. High-pressure water from vessel-mounted pumps would be 
injected into the sediments through nozzles situated along the plow, 
causing the sediments to temporarily fluidize and create a liquefied 
trench. DWBIT anticipates a temporary trench width of up to 1.5 m. As 
the plow is pulled along the route behind the barge, the cable would be 
laid into the temporary, liquefied trench through the back of the plow. 
The trench would be backfilled by the water current and the natural 
settlement of the suspended material. Umbilical cords would connect the 
submerged jet plow to control equipment on the vessel to allow the 
operators to monitor and control the installation process and make 
adjustments to the speed and alignment as the installation proceeds 
across the water.
    The BITS cable would be buried to a target depth of 1.8 m beneath 
the seafloor. The actual burial depth depends on substrate encountered 
along the route and could vary from 1.2 to 2.4 m. Where the BITS 
crosses two existing submarine cables on the outer continental shelf, 
the cable would be installed directly on the seafloor and protected 
from external aggression using a combination of sand bags and concrete 
mattresses. Anchored vessels would be used to install both the BITS and 
the associated cable armoring at these locations.
    DP systems maintain their precise coordinates in waters through the 
use of automatic controls. These control systems use variable levels of 
power to counter forces from current and wind. During cable-lay 
activities, DWBIT expects that a reduced 50 percent power level will be 
used by DP vessels. DWBIT modeled scenarios using a source level of 180 
dB re 1 micro Pascal for the DP vessel thruster, assuming water depths 
of 7, 10, 20, and 40 m, and thruster power of 50 percent. Detailed 
information on the acoustic modeling for this source is provided in 
Appendix A of DWBIT's application (see ADDRESSES).

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    There are 34 marine mammal species with possible or confirmed 
occurrence in the proposed area of the specified activity (Table 2).

                                                Table 2--Marine Mammal Species With Possible or Confirmed Occurrence in the Proposed Project Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Common name                    Scientific name                  Status                 Occurrence              Seasonality                   Range                   Abundance
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toothed whales (Odontocetes):
    Atlantic white-sided dolphin  Lagenorhynchus acutus.........  .......................  Confirmed..............  Year-round.............  North Carolina to Canada..  23,390.
    Atlantic spotted dolphin....  Stenella frontalis............  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  50,978.
    Bottlenose dolphin..........  Tursiops truncatus............  Strategic (northern      .......................  .......................  ..........................  9,604.
                                                                   coastal stock).
    Short-beaked common dolphin.  Delphinus delphis.............  .......................  Common.................  Year-round.............  North Carolina to Canada..  120,743.
    Harbor porpoise.............  Phocoena phocoena.............  Strategic..............  Common.................  Year-round.............  North Carolina to           89,054.
                                                                                                                                              Greenland.
    Killer whale................  Orcinus orca..................  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  Unknown.
    False killer whale..........  Pseudorca crassidens..........  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  Unknown.
    Long-finned pilot whale.....  Globicephala malaena..........  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  12,619.
    Short-finned pilot whale....  Globicephala macrohynchus.....  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  24,674.
    Risso's dolphin.............  Grampus griseus...............  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  20,479.
    Striped dolphin.............  Stenella coeruleoalba.........  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  94,462.
    White-beaked dolphin........  Lagenorhynchus albirostris....  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  2,003.
    Sperm whale.................  Physeter macrocephalus........  Endangered.............  .......................  .......................  ..........................  4,804.
    Pygmy sperm whale...........  Kogia breviceps...............  Strategic..............  .......................  .......................  ..........................  395.
    Dwarf sperm whale...........  Kogia sima....................  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  395.
    Cuvier's beaked whale.......  Ziphius cavirostris...........  Strategic..............  .......................  .......................  ..........................  3,513.

[[Page 15576]]

 
    Blainville's beaked whale...  Mesoplodon densirostris.......  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  3,513.
    Gervais' beaked whale.......  Mesoplodon europaeus..........  Strategic..............  .......................  .......................  ..........................  3,513.
    True's beaked whale.........  Mesoplodon mirus..............  Strategic..............  .......................  .......................  ..........................  3,513.
    Bryde's whale...............  Balaenoptera edeni............  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  .......................
    Northern bottlenose whale...  Hyperoodon ampullatus.........  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  .......................
Baleen whales (Mysticetes):
    Minke whale.................  Balaenoptera acutorostrata....  .......................  Common (spring and       Spring, summer, fall...  Caribbean to Greenland....  8,987.
                                                                                            summer).
    Blue whale..................  Balaenoptera musculus.........  Endangered.............  .......................  .......................  ..........................  Unknown.
    Fin whale...................  Balaenoptera physalus.........  Endangered.............  Common.................  Year-round.............  Caribbean to Greenland....  3,985.
    Humpback whale..............  Megaptera novaeangliae........  Endangered.............  Confirmed..............  Year-round.............  Caribbean to Greenland....  11,570.
    North Atlantic right whale..  Eubalaena glacialis...........  Endangered.............  Confirmed..............  Year-round.............  Southeastern U.S. to        444.
                                                                                                                                              Candada.
    Sei whale...................  Balaenoptera borealis.........  Endangered.............  .......................  .......................  ..........................  Unknown.
Pinnipeds:
    Gray seals..................  Halichoerus grypus............  .......................  Confirmed..............  Year-round.............  New England to Canada.....  348,900.
    Harbor seals................  Phoca vitulina................  .......................  Common.................  Spring, summer, winter.  Florida to Canada.........  99,340.
    Hooded seals................  Cystophora cristata...........  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  Unknown.
    Harp seal...................  Phoca groenlandica............  .......................  .......................  .......................  ..........................  Unknown.
    West Indian manatee.........  Trichechus manatus............  Endangered.............  .......................  .......................  ..........................  3,802.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The highlighted species in Table 2 are pelagic and/or northern 
species, or are so rarely sighted that their presence in the proposed 
project area, and therefore take, is unlikely. These species are not 
considered further in this proposed IHA notice. The West Indian manatee 
is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is also not 
considered further in this proposed IHA notice. Further information on 
the biology and local distribution of these species can be found in 
section 4 of DWBIT's application (see ADDRESSES), and the NMFS Marine 
Mammal Stock Assessment Reports, which are available online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/.

Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that the 
types of stressors associated with the specified activity (i.e., 
vibratory pile driving and use of the DP vessel thruster) have been 
observed to impact marine mammals. This discussion may also include 
reactions that we consider to rise to the level of a take and those 
that we do not consider to rise to the level of a take (for example, 
with acoustics, we may include a discussion of studies that showed 
animals not reacting at all to sound or exhibiting barely measurable 
avoidance). This section is intended as a background of potential 
effects and does not consider either the specific manner in which this 
activity will be carried out or the mitigation that will be 
implemented, and how either of those will shape the anticipated impacts 
from this specific activity. The ``Estimated Take by Incidental 
Harassment'' section later in this document will include a quantitative 
analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by 
this activity. The ``Negligible Impact Analysis'' section will include 
the analysis of how this specific activity will impact marine mammals 
and will consider the content of this ``Potential Effects of the 
Specified Activity on Marine Mammals'' section, the ``Estimated Take by 
Incidental Harassment'' section, the ``Proposed Mitigation'' section, 
and the ``Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat'' section to 
draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of this activity on the 
reproductive success or survivorship of individuals, and from that on 
the affected marine mammal populations or stocks.

Background on Sound

    Sound is a physical phenomenon consisting of minute vibrations that 
travel through a medium, such as air or water, and is generally 
characterized by several variables. Frequency describes the sound's 
pitch and is measured in hertz (Hz) or kilohertz (kHz), while sound 
level describes the sound's intensity and is measured in decibels (dB). 
Sound level increases or decreases exponentially with each dB of 
change. The logarithmic nature of the scale means that each 10-dB 
increase is a 10-fold increase in acoustic power (and a 20-dB increase 
is then a 100-fold increase in power). A 10-fold increase in acoustic 
power does not mean that the sound is perceived as being 10 times 
louder, however. Sound levels are compared to a reference sound 
pressure (micro-Pascal) to identify the medium. For air and water, 
these reference pressures are ``re: 20 [micro]Pa'' and ``re: 1 
[micro]Pa,'' respectively. Root mean square (RMS) is the quadratic mean 
sound pressure over the duration of an impulse. RMS is calculated by 
squaring all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then 
taking the square root of the average (Urick, 1975). RMS accounts for 
both positive and negative

[[Page 15577]]

values; squaring the pressures makes all values positive so that they 
may be accounted for in the summation of pressure levels (Hastings and 
Popper, 2005). This measurement is often used in the context of 
discussing behavioral effects, in part because behavioral effects, 
which often result from auditory cues, may be better expressed through 
averaged units rather than by peak pressures.

Acoustic Impacts

    Vibratory pile driving and use of the DP vessel thruster during the 
BITS project may temporarily impact marine mammals in the area due to 
elevated in-water sound levels. Marine mammals are continually exposed 
to many sources of sound. Naturally occurring sounds such as lightning, 
rain, sub-sea earthquakes, and biological sounds (e.g., snapping 
shrimp, whale songs) are widespread throughout the world's oceans. 
Marine mammals produce sounds in various contexts and use sound for 
various biological functions including, but not limited to: (1) Social 
interactions; (2) foraging; (3) orientation; and (4) predator 
detection. Interference with producing or receiving these sounds may 
result in adverse impacts. Audible distance, or received levels of 
sound depend on the nature of the sound source, ambient noise 
conditions, and the sensitivity of the receptor to the sound 
(Richardson et al., 1995). Type and significance of marine mammal 
reactions to sound are likely dependent on a variety of factors 
including, but not limited to, (1) the behavioral state of the animal 
(e.g., feeding, traveling, etc.); (2) frequency of the sound; (3) 
distance between the animal and the source; and (4) the level of the 
sound relative to ambient conditions (Southall et al., 2007).
    When considering the influence of various kinds of sound on the 
marine environment, it is necessary to understand that different kinds 
of marine life are sensitive to different frequencies of sound. Based 
on available behavioral data, audiograms have been derived using 
auditory evoked potentials, anatomical modeling, and other data, 
Southall et al. (2007) designate ``functional hearing groups'' for 
marine mammals and estimate the lower and upper frequencies of 
functional hearing of the groups. The functional groups and the 
associated frequencies are indicated below (though animals are less 
sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of their functional range and 
most sensitive to sounds of frequencies within a smaller range 
somewhere in the middle of their functional hearing range):
     Low frequency cetaceans (13 species of mysticetes): 
functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 Hz and 
22 kHz (however, a study by Au et al. (2006) of humpback whale songs 
indicate that the range may extend to at least 24 kHz);
     Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 species of dolphins, six 
species of larger toothed whales, and 19 species of beaked and 
bottlenose whales): functional hearing is estimated to occur between 
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;
     High frequency cetaceans (eight species of true porpoises, 
six species of river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, and four species 
of cephalorhynchids): functional hearing is estimated to occur between 
approximately 200 Hz and 180 kHz; and
     Pinnipeds in Water: functional hearing is estimated to 
occur between approximately 75 Hz and 75 kHz, with the greatest 
sensitivity between approximately 700 Hz and 20 kHz.
    As mentioned previously in this document, nine marine mammal 
species (seven cetaceans and two pinnipeds) are likely to occur in the 
proposed project area. Of the seven cetacean species likely to occur in 
DWBIT's proposed project area, four are classified as low-frequency 
cetaceans (i.e., minke whale, fin whale, humpback whale, and North 
Atlantic right whale), two are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans 
(i.e., Atlantic white-sided dolphin and short-beaked common dolphin), 
and one is classified as a high-frequency cetacean (i.e., harbor 
porpoise) (Southall et al., 2007). A species' functional hearing group 
is a consideration when we analyze the effects of exposure to sound on 
marine mammals.
1. Hearing Impairment
    Marine mammals may experience temporary or permanent hearing 
impairment when exposed to loud sounds. Hearing impairment is 
classified by temporary threshold shift (TTS) and permanent threshold 
shift (PTS). There are no empirical data for onset of PTS in any marine 
mammal; therefore, PTS-onset must be estimated from TTS-onset 
measurements and from the rate of TTS growth with increasing exposure 
levels above the level eliciting TTS-onset. PTS is presumed to be 
likely if the hearing threshold is reduced by >=40 dB (that is, 40 dB 
of TTS). PTS is considered auditory injury (Southall et al., 2007) and 
occurs in a specific frequency range and amount. Irreparable damage to 
the inner or outer cochlear hair cells may cause PTS; however, other 
mechanisms are also involved, such as exceeding the elastic limits of 
certain tissues and membranes in the middle and inner ears and 
resultant changes in the chemical composition of the inner ear fluids 
(Southall et al., 2007).
2. Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS)
    TTS is the mildest form of hearing impairment that can occur during 
exposure to a loud sound (Kryter, 1985). While experiencing TTS, the 
hearing threshold rises and a sound must be stronger in order to be 
heard. At least in terrestrial mammals, TTS can last from minutes or 
hours to (in cases of strong TTS) days, can be limited to a particular 
frequency range, and can occur to varying degrees (i.e., a loss of a 
certain number of dBs of sensitivity). For sound exposures at or 
somewhat above the TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity in both 
terrestrial and marine mammals recovers rapidly after exposure to the 
noise ends.
    Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with 
conspecifics and in interpretation of environmental cues for purposes 
such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree 
(elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and 
frequency range of TTS and the context in which it is experienced, TTS 
can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to 
serious. For example, a marine mammal may be able to readily compensate 
for a brief, relatively small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency 
range that takes place during a time when the animals is traveling 
through the open ocean, where ambient noise is lower and there are not 
as many competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and 
longer duration of TTS sustained during a time when communication is 
critical for successful mother/calf interactions could have more 
serious impacts if it were in the same frequency band as the necessary 
vocalizations and of a severity that it impeded communication. The fact 
that animals exposed to levels and durations of sound that would be 
expected to result in this physiological response would also be 
expected to have behavioral responses of a comparatively more severe or 
sustained nature is also notable and potentially of more importance 
than the simple existence of a TTS.
    Scientific literature highlights the inherent complexity of 
predicting TTS onset in marine mammals, as well as the importance of 
considering exposure duration when assessing potential impacts (Mooney 
et al., 2009a, 2009b; Kastak et al., 2007). Generally, with sound 
exposures of equal energy,

[[Page 15578]]

quieter sounds (lower SPL) of longer duration were found to induce TTS 
onset more than louder sounds (higher SPL) of shorter duration (more 
similar to subbottom profilers). For intermittent sounds, less 
threshold shift will occur than from a continuous exposure with the 
same energy (some recovery will occur between intermittent exposures) 
(Kryter et al., 1966; Ward, 1997). For sound exposures at or somewhat 
above the TTS-onset threshold, hearing sensitivity recovers rapidly 
after exposure to the sound ends. Southall et al. (2007) considers a 6 
dB TTS (that is, baseline thresholds are elevated by 6 dB) to be a 
sufficient definition of TTS-onset. NMFS considers TTS as Level B 
harassment that is mediated by physiological effects on the auditory 
system; however, NMFS does not consider TTS-onset to be the lowest 
level at which Level B harassment may occur. The potential for TTS is 
considered within NMFS' analysis of potential impacts from Level B 
harassment.
3. Tolerance
    Numerous studies have shown that underwater sounds from industrial 
activities are often readily detectable by marine mammals in the water 
at distances of many kilometers. However, other studies have shown that 
marine mammals at distances more than a few kilometers away often show 
no apparent response to industrial activities of various types (Miller 
et al., 2005). This is often true even in cases when the sounds must be 
readily audible to the animals based on measured received levels and 
the hearing sensitivity of that mammal group. Although various baleen 
whales, toothed whales, and (less frequently) pinnipeds have been shown 
to react behaviorally to underwater sound from sources such as airgun 
pulses or vessels under some conditions, at other times, mammals of all 
three types have shown no overt reactions (e.g., Malme et al., 1986; 
Richardson et al., 1995; Madsen and Mohl, 2000; Croll et al., 2001; 
Jacobs and Terhune, 2002; Madsen et al., 2002; Miller et al., 2005). In 
general, pinnipeds seem to be more tolerant of exposure to some types 
of underwater sound than are baleen whales. Richardson et al. (1995) 
found that vessel sound does not seem to strongly affect pinnipeds that 
are already in the water. Richardson et al. (1995) went on to explain 
that seals on haul-outs sometimes respond strongly to the presence of 
vessels and at other times appear to show considerable tolerance of 
vessels, and Brueggeman et al. (1992) observed ringed seals (Pusa 
hispida) hauled out on ice pans displaying short-term escape reactions 
when a ship approached within 0.16-0.31 mi (0.25-0.5 km).
4. Masking
    Masking is the obscuring of sounds of interest to an animal by 
other sounds, typically at similar frequencies. Marine mammals are 
highly dependent on sound, and their ability to recognize sound signals 
amid other sound is important in communication and detection of both 
predators and prey. Background ambient sound may interfere with or mask 
the ability of an animal to detect a sound signal even when that signal 
is above its absolute hearing threshold. Even in the absence of 
anthropogenic sound, the marine environment is often loud. Natural 
ambient sound includes contributions from wind, waves, precipitation, 
other animals, and (at frequencies above 30 kHz) thermal sound 
resulting from molecular agitation (Richardson et al., 1995).
    Background sound may also include anthropogenic sound, and masking 
of natural sounds can result when human activities produce high levels 
of background sound. Conversely, if the background level of underwater 
sound is high (e.g., on a day with strong wind and high waves), an 
anthropogenic sound source would not be detectable as far away as would 
be possible under quieter conditions and would itself be masked. 
Ambient sound is highly variable on continental shelves (Thompson, 
1965; Myrberg, 1978; Chapman et al., 1998; Desharnais et al., 1999). 
This results in a high degree of variability in the range at which 
marine mammals can detect anthropogenic sounds.
    Although masking is a phenomenon which may occur naturally, the 
introduction of loud anthropogenic sounds into the marine environment 
at frequencies important to marine mammals increases the severity and 
frequency of occurrence of masking. For example, if a baleen whale is 
exposed to continuous low-frequency sound from an industrial source, 
this would reduce the size of the area around that whale within which 
it can hear the calls of another whale. The components of background 
noise that are similar in frequency to the signal in question primarily 
determine the degree of masking of that signal. In general, little is 
known about the degree to which marine mammals rely upon detection of 
sounds from conspecifics, predators, prey, or other natural sources. In 
the absence of specific information about the importance of detecting 
these natural sounds, it is not possible to predict the impact of 
masking on marine mammals (Richardson et al., 1995). In general, 
masking effects are expected to be less severe when sounds are 
transient than when they are continuous. Masking is typically of 
greater concern for those marine mammals that utilize low-frequency 
communications, such as baleen whales, because of how far low-frequency 
sounds propagate.
5. Behavioral Disturbance
    Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-
specific. An animal's perception of and response to (in both nature and 
magnitude) an acoustic event can be influenced by prior experience, 
perceived proximity, bearing of the sound, familiarity of the sound, 
etc. (Southall et al., 2007). If a marine mammal does react briefly to 
an underwater sound by changing its behavior or moving a small 
distance, the impacts of the change are unlikely to be significant to 
the individual, let alone the stock or population. However, if a sound 
source displaces marine mammals from an important feeding or breeding 
area for a prolonged period, impacts on individuals and populations 
could be significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007).
    The studies that address responses of low-frequency cetaceans to 
non-pulse sounds (such as vibratory pile driving or the sound emitted 
from a DP vessel thruster) include data gathered in the field and 
related to several types of sound sources (of varying similarity to 
chirps), including: Vessel noise, drilling and machinery playback, low-
frequency M-sequences (sine wave with multiple phase reversals) 
playback, tactical low-frequency active sonar playback, drill ships, 
and non-pulse playbacks. These studies generally indicate no (or very 
limited) responses to received levels in the 90 to 120 dB re: 1[mu]Pa 
range and an increasing likelihood of avoidance and other behavioral 
effects in the 120 to 160 dB range. As mentioned earlier, though, 
contextual variables play a very important role in the reported 
responses and the severity of effects are not linear when compared to 
received level. Also, few of the laboratory or field datasets had 
common conditions, behavioral contexts, or sound sources, so it is not 
surprising that responses differ.
    The studies that address responses of mid-frequency cetaceans to 
non-pulse sounds include data gathered both in the field and the 
laboratory and related to several different sound sources (of varying 
similarity to chirps) including: Pingers, drilling playbacks, ship and 
ice-breaking noise, vessel noise, Acoustic harassment devices (AHDs),

[[Page 15579]]

Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs), mid-frequency active sonar, and non-
pulse bands and tones. Southall et al. (2007) were unable to come to a 
clear conclusion regarding the results of these studies. In some cases 
animals in the field showed significant responses to received levels 
between 90 and 120 dB, while in other cases these responses were not 
seen in the 120 to 150 dB range. The disparity in results was likely 
due to contextual variation and the differences between the results in 
the field and laboratory data (animals typically responded at lower 
levels in the field).
    The studies that address responses of high-frequency cetaceans to 
non-pulse sounds include data gathered both in the field and the 
laboratory and related to several different sound sources (of varying 
similarity to chirps), including: Pingers, AHDs, and various laboratory 
non-pulse sounds. All of these data were collected from harbor 
porpoises. Southall et al. (2007) concluded that the existing data 
indicate that harbor porpoises are likely sensitive to a wide range of 
anthropogenic sounds at low received levels (around 90 to 120 dB), at 
least for initial exposures. All recorded exposures above 140 dB 
induced profound and sustained avoidance behavior in wild harbor 
porpoises (Southall et al., 2007). Rapid habituation was noted in some 
but not all studies.
    The studies that address the responses of pinnipeds in water to 
non-pulse sounds include data gathered both in the field and the 
laboratory and related to several different sound sources (of varying 
similarity to chirps), including: AHDs, various non-pulse sounds used 
in underwater data communication, underwater drilling, and construction 
noise. Few studies exist with enough information to include them in the 
analysis. The limited data suggest that exposures to non-pulse sounds 
between 90 and 140 dB generally do not result in strong behavioral 
responses of pinnipeds in water, but no data exist at higher received 
levels (Southall et al., 2007).
    Given the many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types 
of impacts of noise on marine mammals, it is common practice to 
estimate how many mammals would be present within a particular distance 
of activities and/or exposed to a particular level of sound. In most 
cases, this approach likely overestimates the numbers of marine mammals 
that would be affected in some biologically-important manner.
6. Vessel Strike
    Vessels and in-water structures have the potential to cause 
physical disturbance to marine mammals. Various types of vessels 
already use the water surrounding Rhode Island and Block Island in 
particular. Tug boats and barges, both of which would be required 
during the BITS construction are slow moving and follow a predictable 
course. Marine mammals would be able to easily avoid these vessels and 
are likely already habituated to the presence of numerous vessels.

Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat

    There are no feeding areas, rookeries, or mating grounds known to 
be biologically important to marine mammals within the proposed project 
area. There is also no designated critical habitat for any ESA-listed 
marine mammals. Harbor seals haul out on Block Island and points along 
Narragansett Bay, the most important haul-out being on the edge of New 
Harbor, about 2.4 km from the proposed BITS landfall on Block Island. 
The only consistent haul-out locations for gray seals within the 
vicinity of Rhode Island are around Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 
and Nantucket Sound in Massachusetts (more than 80 nautical miles from 
the proposed project area). NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR 224 designated 
the nearshore waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as the Mid-Atlantic U.S. 
Seasonal Management Area (SMA) for right whales in 2008. Mandatory 
vessel speed restrictions are in place in that SMA from November 1 
through April 30 to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and 
right whales around their migratory route and calving grounds.
    The BITS involves activities that would disturb the seafloor and 
potentially affect benthic and finfish communities. Installation of the 
BITS cable and the temporary offshore cofferdam would result in the 
temporary disturbance of no more than 45.3 acres of seafloor. These 
installation activities would also result in temporary and localized 
increases in turbidity around the proposed project area. DWBIT is 
required to install additional protective armoring over the BITS where 
it would cross two existing marine cables in federal waters. At the 
cable crossing locations, the installation of additional protective 
armoring would result in the permanent conversion of about 1.7 acre of 
soft substrate to hard substrate. The BITS cable may also require 
additional protective armoring in areas where the burial depth achieved 
is less than 1.2 m. DWBIT expects that additional protection would be 
required at a maximum of 1 percent of the entire BITS cable, resulting 
in a conversion of up to 1 acre of soft substrate to hard substrate 
along the cable route. During the installation of additional protective 
armoring at the cable crossings and as necessary along the cable route, 
anchors and anchor chains would temporarily impact about 1.8 acres of 
bottom substrate during each anchoring event.
    Jet-plowing and cofferdam installation would cause either the 
displacement or loss of benthic and finfish resources in the immediate 
areas of disturbance. This may result in a temporary loss of forage 
items and a temporary reduction in the amount of benthic habitat 
available for foraging marine mammals in the immediate proposed project 
area. However, the amount of habitat affected represents a very small 
percentage of the available foraging habitat in the proposed project 
area. Increased underwater sound levels from cofferdam installation and 
use of the DP vessel thruster may temporarily result in marine mammals 
avoiding or abandoning the area.
    Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance, the 
availability of similar habitat and resources in the surrounding area, 
and the lack of important or unique marine mammal habitat, the impacts 
to marine mammals and the food sources that they utilize are not 
expected to cause significant or long-term consequences for individual 
marine mammals or their populations.

Proposed Mitigation

    In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) 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 (where relevant).

Proposed Mitigation Measures

    With NMFS' input during the application process, DWBIT is proposing 
the following mitigation measures during vibratory pile driving and use 
of the DP vessel thruster:
1. Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone
    Protected species observers would visually monitor a 200-m radius 
during all in-water vibratory pile driving. This distance is estimated 
to be the 160 dB isopleth based on DWBIT's sound

[[Page 15580]]

exposure model. A minimum of two observers would be stationed aboard 
each noise-producing construction support vessel. Each observer would 
visually monitor a 360-degree field of vision from the vessel. 
Observers would begin monitoring at least 30 minutes prior to vibratory 
pile driving, continue monitoring during vibratory pile driving, and 
stop monitoring 30 minutes after vibratory pile driving has ended. If a 
marine mammal is seen approaching or entering the 200-m zone during 
vibratory pile driving, DWBIT would stop vibratory pile driving as a 
precautionary measure to minimize noise impacts on the animal.
2. Soft-Start Procedures
    DWBIT would use a soft-start (or ramp-up) procedure at the 
beginning of vibratory pile driving. This procedure would require an 
initial set of three strikes from the vibratory hammer at 40 percent 
energy with a 1-minute waiting period between subsequent 3-strike sets. 
DWBIT would repeat the procedure two additional times. DWBIT would 
initiate a soft-start at the beginning of each day of pile driving and 
if pile driving stops for more than 30 minutes. DWBIT would not 
initiate a soft-start if the monitoring zone is obscured by fog, 
inclement weather, poor lighting conditions, etc.
3. Delay and Shut-Down Procedures
    DWBIT would delay vibratory pile driving and reduce DP vessel 
thruster use if a marine mammal is observed within the exclusion zone 
and until the exclusion zone is clear of marine mammals. DWBIT proposes 
to stop vibratory pile driving if a marine mammal is seen within a 200-
m radius from the sound source at the Scarborough State Beach cofferdam 
and would not be reinitiated until the 200-m radius is clear of marine 
mammals for at least 30 minutes.
4. DP Thruster Power Reduction
    A constant tension must be maintained during cable installation and 
any significant stoppage in vessel maneuverability during jet plow 
activities would result in damage to the cable. Therefore, during DP 
vessel operations, DWBIT proposes to reduce DP thruster power to the 
maximum extent possible if a marine mammal approaches or enters a 5-m 
radius from the vessel (estimated to be the 160-dB isopleth from the 
vessel). This reduction would not be implemented at the risk of 
compromising safety and/or the integrity of the BITS. DWBIT would not 
increase power until the 5-m zone is clear of marine mammals for 30 
minutes.
5. Time of Day and Weather Restrictions
    DWBIT would conduct vibratory pile driving off of Scarborough State 
Beach during daylight hours only, starting approximately 30 minutes 
after dawn and ending 30 minutes before dusk. If a soft-start is 
initiated before the onset of inclement weather, DWBIT would complete 
that segment of vibratory pile driving. DWBIT would not initiate new 
vibratory pile driving activities until the entire monitoring zone is 
visible.

Mitigation Conclusions

    NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation 
measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of 
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least 
practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and 
their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included 
consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:
     The manner in which, and the degree to which, the 
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize 
adverse impacts to marine mammals;
     The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to 
minimize adverse impacts as planned; and
     The practicability of the measure for applicant 
implementation.
    Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS should be able to 
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on 
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of 
the general goals listed below:
    1. Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals 
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).
    2. A reduction in the numbers of marine mammals (total number or 
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to received 
levels of continuous noise, or other activities expected to result in 
the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to 
reducing harassment takes only).
    3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed 
to received levels of continuous noise, or other activities expected to 
result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, 
above, or to reducing harassment takes only).
    4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number 
or number at biologically important time or location) to received 
levels of continuous noise, or other activities expected to result in 
the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to a, above, or to 
reducing the severity of harassment takes only).
    5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal 
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that 
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas, 
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance 
of habitat during a biologically important time.
    6. For monitoring directly related to mitigation--an increase in 
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more 
effective implementation of the mitigation.
    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as 
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily 
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of 
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals species or 
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, 
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an ITA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, ``requirements pertaining to 
the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' The MMPA implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for ITAs 
must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary 
monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the 
species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine 
mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area. 
Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or more of 
the following general goals:
    1. An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, both 
within the mitigation zone (thus allowing for more effective 
implementation of the mitigation) and in general to generate more data 
to contribute to the analyses mentioned below;
    2. An increase in our understanding of how many marine mammals are 
likely to be exposed to levels of continuous noise from vibratory pile 
driving and use of a DP vessel thruster that we associate with specific 
adverse effects, such as behavioral harassment, TTS, or PTS;

[[Page 15581]]

    3. An increase in our understanding of how marine mammals respond 
to stimuli expected to result in take and how anticipated adverse 
effects on individuals (in different ways and to varying degrees) may 
impact the population, species, or stock (specifically through effects 
on annual rates of recruitment or survival) through any of the 
following methods:
     Behavioral observations in the presence of stimuli 
compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to 
accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other 
pertinent information);
     Physiological measurements in the presence of stimuli 
compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to 
accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other 
pertinent information);
     Distribution and/or abundance comparisons in times or 
areas with concentrated stimuli versus times or areas without stimuli;
    4. An increased knowledge of the affected species; and
    5. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of certain 
mitigation and monitoring measures.

Proposed Monitoring Measures

    DWBIT submitted a marine mammal monitoring plan as part of the IHA 
application. It can be found in section 12 of their application. The 
plan may be modified or supplemented based on comments or new 
information received from the public during the public comment period.
1. Visual Monitoring
    DWBIT would use protected species observers to visually monitor the 
surrounding area during all in-water vibratory pile driving and use of 
DP vessel thrusters. These observers would monitor beyond the estimated 
160-dB isopleths, in addition to conducting mitigation monitoring 
within these zones. Observers would estimate distances to marine 
mammals visually, using laser range finders, or by using reticle 
binoculars during daylight hours. During night operations (DP vessel 
thruster use only), observers would use night-vision binoculars. 
Observers would record their position using hand-held or vessel global 
positioning system units for each sighting, vessel position change, and 
any environmental change. Each observer would scan the surrounding area 
for visual indication of marine mammal presence. Observers would be 
located from the highest available vantage point on the associated 
operational platform (e.g., support vessel, barge or tug), estimated to 
be at least 6 m above the waterline.
    Prior to initiation of construction work, all crew members on 
barges, tugs, and support vessels would undergo environmental training, 
a component of which would focus on the procedures for sighting and 
protection of marine mammals. DWBIT would also conduct a briefing with 
the construction supervisors and crews and observers to define chains 
of command, discuss communication procedures, provide an overview of 
the monitoring purposes, and review operational procedures. The DWBIT 
Construction Compliance Manager (or other authorized individual) would 
have the authority to stop or delay vibratory pile driving activities 
if deemed necessary.
2. Acoustic Field Verification
    DWBIT would conduct field verification of the estimated 160-dB 
isopleths during vibratory pile driving and use of the DP vessel 
thruster to determine whether the proposed distances are adequate to 
minimize impacts to marine mammals.
    DWBIT would conduct field verification of the 200-m radius marine 
mammal exclusion zone at the Scarborough State Beach cofferdam. DWBIT 
would take acoustic measurements during vibratory pile driving of the 
last half (deepest sheet pile segment) for any given open-water pile 
and would also measure from two reference locations at two water depths 
(a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m above the seafloor). If the 
field measurements determine that the 160-dB isopleth is less than or 
beyond the proposed 200-m distance, a new zone may be established 
accordingly. DWBIT would notify NMFS and the USACE within 24 hours if a 
new marine mammal exclusion zone is established that extends beyond 200 
m. Implementation of a smaller zone would be contingent on NMFS' review 
and would not be used until NMFS approves the change.
    DWBIT would also perform field verification of the 160-dB isopleth 
associated with DP vessel thruster use during cable installation. DWBIT 
would take acoustic measurements from two reference locations at two 
water depths (a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m above the 
seafloor). Similar to field verification during vibratory pile driving, 
the DP thruster power reduction zone may be modified as necessary.

Proposed Reporting Measures

    Observers would record dates and locations of construction 
operations; times of observations; location and weather; details of 
marine mammal sightings (e.g., species, age, numbers, behavior); and 
details of any observed take.
    DWBIT proposes to provide the following notifications and reports 
during construction activities:
     Notification to NMFS and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(USACE) within 24-hours of beginning construction activities and again 
within 24-hours of completion;
     Detailed report of field-verification measurements within 
7 days of completion (including: sound levels, durations, spectral 
characteristics, DP thruster use, etc.) and notification to NMFS and 
the USACE within 24-hours if a new zone is established;
     Notification to NMFS and USACE within 24-hours if field 
verification measurements suggest a larger marine mammal exclusion 
zone;
     Final technical report to NMFS and the USACE within 120 
days of completion of the specified activity documenting methods and 
monitoring protocols, mitigation implementation, marine mammal 
observations, other results, and discussion of mitigation 
effectiveness.
    In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly 
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner not permitted by the 
authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or 
mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement), 
DWBIT shall immediately cease the specified activities and immediately 
report the incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits 
and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-
427-8401 and/or by email to [email protected] and 
[email protected] and the Northeast Regional Stranding 
Coordinator at 978-281-9300 ([email protected]). The report must 
include the following information:
     Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the 
incident;
     Name and type of vessel involved;
     Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
     Description of the incident;
     Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding 
the incident;
     Water depth;
     Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, 
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
     Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 
hours preceding the incident;
     Species identification or description of the animal(s) 
involved;

[[Page 15582]]

     Fate of the animal(s); and
     Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if 
equipment is available).
    DWBIT shall not resume its activities until we are able to review 
the circumstances of the prohibited take. We will work with DWBIT to 
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further 
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. DWBIT may not resume their 
activities until notified by us via letter, email, or telephone.
    In the event that DWBIT discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, 
and the lead visual observer determines that the cause of the injury or 
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than 
a moderate state of decomposition), DWBIT shall immediately report the 
incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and 
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401 
and/or by email to [email protected] and 
[email protected] and the Northeast Regional Stranding 
Coordinator at 978-281-9300 ([email protected]). The report must 
include the same information identified in the paragraph above this 
section. Activities may continue while we review the circumstances of 
the incident. We would work with DWBIT to determine whether 
modifications in the activities are appropriate.
    In the event that DWBIT discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, 
and the lead visual observer determines that the injury or death is not 
associated with or related to the authorized activities (e.g., 
previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced 
decomposition, or scavenger damage), DWBIT would report the incident to 
the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401 and/or by 
email to [email protected] and [email protected] and 
the Northeast Regional Stranding Coordinator at 978-281-9300 
([email protected]), within 24 hours of the discovery. DWBIT would 
provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other 
documentation of the stranded animal sighting to us.

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

    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].
    Project activities that have the potential to harass marine 
mammals, as defined by the MMPA, include noise associated with 
vibratory pile driving of the temporary cofferdam, and noise associated 
with the use of DP vessel thrusters during cable installation. 
Harassment could take the form of masking, temporary threshold shift, 
avoidance, or other changes in marine mammal behavior. NMFS anticipates 
that impacts to marine mammals would be in the form of behavioral 
harassment and no take by injury, serious injury, or mortality is 
proposed. NMFS does not anticipate take resulting from the movement of 
vessels associated with construction because there will be a limited 
number of vessels moving at slow speeds over a relatively shallow, 
nearshore area.
    NMFS' current acoustic exposure criteria are shown in Table 3 
below. Sound levels from vibratory pile driving or use of the DP vessel 
thruster would not reach the Level A harassment threshold of 180/190 dB 
(cetaceans/pinnipeds) during the proposed BITS project. DWBIT modeled 
distances to these acoustic exposure criteria are shown in Table 4. 
Details on the model characteristics and results are provided in the 
Underwater Acoustic Report at the end of DWBIT's application (see 
ADDRESSES). DWBIT and NMFS believe that this estimate represents the 
worst-case scenario and that the actual distance to the Level B 
harassment threshold may be shorter.

            Table 3--NMFS' Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria
                          [Non-explosive sound]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Criterion           Criterion definition        Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Harassment (Injury).  Permanent Threshold   180 dB re 1 microPa-
                               Shift (PTS) (Any      m (cetaceans)/190
                               level above that      dB re 1 microPa-m
                               which is known to     (pinnipeds) root
                               cause TTS).           mean square (rms).
Level B Harassment..........  Behavioral            160 dB re 1 microPa-
                               Disruption (for       m (rms).
                               impulse noises).
Level B Harassment..........  Behavioral            120 dB re 1 microPa-
                               Disruption (for       m (rms).
                               continuous, noise).
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                        Table 4--DWBIT's Modeled Distances to Acoustic Exposure Criteria
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Distance to Level B         Distance to Level A
                        Activity                              harassment (120 dB)       harassment (180/190 dB)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile driving (for long-distance HDD)..........                      >40 km                         N/A
DP vessel thruster use..................................                     4,750 m                         N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DWBIT estimated species densities within the proposed project area 
in order to estimate the number of marine mammal exposures to sound 
levels above 120 dB. DWBIT used sightings per unit effort (SPUE) from 
Kenney and Vigness-Raposa (2009) for relative cetacean abundance and 
the Northeast Navy OPAREA Density Estimates (DoN, 2007) for seal 
abundance. Based on multiple reports, harbor seal abundance off the 
coast of Rhode Island is thought to be about 20 percent of the total 
abundance for southern New England. Because the seasonality and habitat 
use of gray seals off the coast of Rhode Island roughly overlaps with 
harbor seals, DWBIT applied this 20 percent estimate to both pinniped 
species. While the density estimates relied upon for this proposed 
authorization are from 2007 and 2009, they are the best scientific data 
available. NMFS is not aware of any efforts to collect more recent 
density estimates than those relied upon here.

[[Page 15583]]

    Estimated takes were calculated by multiplying the average highest 
species density (per 100 km\2\) by the zone of influence (maximum 
ensonified area of 120 dB), multiplied by a correction factor of 1.5 to 
account for marine mammals underwater, multiplied by the number of days 
of the specified activity. A detailed description of the DWBIT's model 
used to calculate zones of influence is provided in the Underwater 
Acoustic Report at the end of their application (see ADDRESSES).
    DWBIT used a zone of influence of 4,352 km\2\ and a total 
construction period of 4 days to estimate take from vibratory pile 
driving. In contrast to their application, DWBIT clarified that the 
vibratory pile driving would likely occur over a 2-day period during 
the winter and a 2-day period during the spring. Their take 
calculations were revised after the application was submitted. For each 
species, DWBIT used the estimated seasonal density (winter and spring) 
to calculate take for a total of 4 days (2 days each season). DWBIT's 
requested take numbers are provided in Table 5 and this is also the 
number of takes NMFS is proposing to authorize. DWBIT's calculations do 
not take into account whether a single animal is harassed multiple 
times or whether each exposure is a different animal. Therefore, the 
numbers in Table 5 are the maximum number of animals that may be 
harassed during vibratory pile driving (i.e., DWBIT assumes that each 
exposure event is a different animal). These estimates do not account 
for mitigation measures that DWBIT would implement during vibratory 
pile driving.
    DWBIT used a zone of influence of 23.0 km\2\ and a maximum 
installation period of 42 days to estimate take from use of the DP 
vessel thruster during cable installation. The zone of influence 
represents the average ensonified area across the three representative 
water depths along the cable route (7 m, 10 m, 20 m, and 40 m). DWBIT 
expects cable installation to occur between April and August; to be 
conservative, DWBIT used the highest seasonal species density to 
calculate take. Again, DWBIT's calculations do not take into account 
whether a single animal is harassed multiple times or whether each 
exposure is a different animal. Therefore, the numbers in Table 5 are 
the maximum number of animals that may be harassed during cable 
installation. These estimates do not account for mitigation measures 
that DWBIT would implement during the cable installation.
    DWBIT did not request, and NMFS is not proposing, take from vessel 
strike. We do not anticipate marine mammals to be impacted by vessel 
movement because a limited number of vessels would be involved in 
construction activities and they would mostly move at slow speeds 
throughout construction.

                                                  Table 5--DWBIT's Estimated Take for the BITS Project
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Vibratory pile driving                    DP Vessel thruster
                                                         --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Estimated       Estimated                        Maximum                          Total
                   Common species name                    winter density  spring density  Estimated take     seasonal     Estimated take  estimated take
                                                             (per 100        (per 100       by Level B     density (per     by Level B
                                                              km\2\)          km\2\)        harassment      100 km\2\)      harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic white-sided dolphin............................            2.12            1.23             438            2.12              18             456
Short-beaked common dolphin.............................            2.04            2.59             604            2.59              38             644
Harbor porpoise.........................................            0.00            0.74              97            0.74              11             108
Minke whale.............................................            0.19            0.12              40            0.19               3              43
Fin whale...............................................            0.30            0.62             121            2.15              32             153
Humpback whale..........................................            0.00            0.11              15            0.11               2              17
North Atlantic right whale..............................            0.00            0.06               7            0.06               1               8
Gray seal...............................................           14.16           14.16             739           14.16              41             780
Harbor seal.............................................            9.74            9.74             509            9.74              29             538
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                    Table 6--Species Information and Take Proposed for Authorization by NMFS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Percentage of
                                        Take proposed   Abundance of        stock
         Common species name                 for            stock        potentially        Population trend
                                        authorization                     affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic white-sided dolphin.........             456          23,390            1.95  N/A.
Short-beaked common dolphin..........             644         120,743            0.53  N/A.
Harbor porpoise......................             108          89,054            0.12  N/A.
Minke whale..........................              43           8,987            0.48  N/A.
Fin whale............................             153           3,985            3.84  N/A.
Humpback whale.......................              17          11,570            0.15  Increasing.
North Atlantic right whale...........               8             444            1.80  Increasing.
Gray seal............................             784         348,900            0.22  Increasing.
Harbor seal..........................             540          99,340            0.54  N/A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis and Preliminary Determinations

Negligible Impact

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

[[Page 15584]]

and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of 
estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.
    DWBIT did not request, and NMFS is not proposing, take of marine 
mammals by injury, serious injury, or mortality. NMFS expects that take 
would be in the form of behavioral harassment. Exposure to sound levels 
above 120 dB during vibratory pile driving would not last for more than 
12 hours per day for 4 non-consecutive days. Exposure to sound levels 
above 120 dB during use of the DP vessel thruster may last for 24 hours 
per day for 42 days. While use of the DP thruster may last for 
consecutive days, the vessel would be moving and therefore not focused 
on one specific area for the entire duration. Given the duration and 
intensity of the activity, and the fact that shipping contributes to 
the ambient sound levels around Rhode Island, NMFS does not anticipate 
the proposed take estimates to impact annual rates of recruitment or 
survival. Animals may temporarily avoid the immediate area, but are not 
expected to permanently abandon the area. Marine mammal habitat may be 
impacted by elevated sound levels and sediment disturbance, but these 
impacts would be temporary. Furthermore, there are no feeding areas, 
rookeries, or mating grounds known to be biologically important to 
marine mammals within the proposed project area. There is also no 
designated critical habitat for any ESA-listed marine mammals. The 
proposed mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number and/or 
severity of takes by (1) giving animals the opportunity to move away 
from the sound source before the pile driver reaches full energy; (2) 
reducing the intensity of exposure within a certain distance by 
reducing the DP vessel thruster power; and (3) preventing animals from 
being exposed to increased sound levels within 200 m of vibratory pile 
driving.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into 
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and 
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine 
mammal take from DWBIT's BITS project will have a negligible impact on 
the affected marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers

    The number of individual animals that may be exposed to sound 
levels above 120 dB is small relative to the species or stock size 
(Table 6). The proposed take numbers are the maximum numbers of animals 
that are expected to be harassed during the BITS project; it is 
possible that some of these exposures may occur to the same individual. 
NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be 
taken relative to the populations of the affected species or stocks.

Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence 
Uses

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

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    There are three marine mammal species that are listed as endangered 
under the ESA: Fin whale, humpback whale, and North Atlantic right 
whale. Under section 7 of the ESA, the USACE (the federal permitting 
agency for the actual construction) consulted with NMFS on the proposed 
BITS project. NMFS Northeast Region issued a Biological Opinion on 
January 30, 2014, concluding that the Block Island Wind Farm project 
(which includes the BITS) may adversely affect but is not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of fin whale, humpback whale, or 
North Atlantic right whale. NMFS is also consulting internally on the 
issuance of an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this 
activity. The Biological Opinion may be amended to include an 
incidental take exemption for these marine mammal species.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    The USACE is preparing an Environmental Assessment on the 
construction and operation of the BITS. The USACE's EA is not expected 
to be finalized prior to NMFS making a determination on the issuance of 
an IHA. Therefore, NMFS is currently conducting an analysis, pursuant 
to the NEPA, to determine whether or not DWBIT's proposed activity may 
have a significant effect on the human environment. This analysis will 
be completed prior to the issuance or denial of this proposed IHA.

Proposed Authorization

    As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to 
issue an IHA to DWBIT for conducting vibratory pile driving and use of 
a DP vessel thruster during construction of the BITS from late 2014 to 
late 2015, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, 
and reporting requirements are incorporated. The proposed IHA language 
is provided next.
    This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording 
contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if 
issued).
    Deepwater Wind Block Island Transmission, LLC (DWBIT) (56 Exchange 
Terrace, Suite 101, Providence, RI 02903-1772) is hereby authorized 
under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) and 50 CFR 216.107, to harass marine mammals 
incidental to vibratory pile driving and DP vessel thruster use during 
construction of the Block Island Transmission System (BITS).
    1. This Authorization is valid from December 1, 2014 through 
November 31, 2015.
    2. This Authorization is valid for construction of the BITS off 
Block Island, Rhode Island, as described in the Incidental Harassment 
Authorization (IHA) application.
    3. The holder of this authorization (Holder) is hereby authorized 
to take, by Level B harassment only, 456 Atlantic white-sided dolphins 
(Lagenorhynchus acutus), 644 short-beaked common dolphins (Delphinus 
delphis), 108 harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), 43 minke whales 
(Balaenoptera acutorostrata), 153 fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus), 
17 humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae), 8 North Atlantic right 
whales (Eubalaena glacialis), 780 gray seals (Halichoerus grypus), and 
538 harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) incidental to vibratory pile driving 
DP vessel thruster use associated with construction of the BITS.
    4. The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under 
this IHA must be reported immediately to NMFS' Northeast Region, 55 
Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2276; phone 978-281-9328, 
and NMFS' Office of Protected Resources, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver 
Spring, MD 20910; phone 301-427-8401; fax 301-713-0376.
    5. The Holder or designees must notify NMFS' Northeast Region and 
Headquarters at least 24 hours prior to the seasonal commencement of 
the specified activity (see contact information in 4 above).
6. Mitigation Requirements
    The Holder is required to abide by the following mitigation 
conditions listed in 6(a)-(e). Failure to comply with these conditions 
may result in the

[[Page 15585]]

modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
    (a) Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone: Protected species observers shall 
visually monitor an estimated 160-dB isopleth during all vibratory pile 
driving activity to ensure that no marine mammals enter this zone. A 
minimum of two observers shall be stationed aboard the noise-producing 
support vessel and shall monitor a 360-degree field of vision. 
Observers shall begin monitoring at least 30 minutes prior to vibratory 
pile driving, continue monitoring during vibratory pile driving, and 
stop monitoring 30 minutes after vibratory pile driving has ended.
    (b) Soft-start Procedures: Soft-start procedures shall be 
implemented at the beginning of each day and if pile driving has 
stopped for more than 30 minutes. Contractors shall initiate a set of 
three strikes form the vibratory hammer at 40 percent energy with a 1-
minute waiting period between subsequent three-strike sets. This 
procedure shall be repeated two additional times before full energy is 
reached.
    (c) Delay and Shutdown Procedures: The Holder shall delay vibratory 
pile driving if a marine mammal is observed within the estimated 160-dB 
isopleth marine mammal exclusion zone and until the exclusion zone is 
clear of marine mammals. The Holder shall stop vibratory pile driving 
if a marine mammal is seen within the estimated 160-dB isopleth from 
the sound source at the Scarborough State Beach cofferdam and would not 
reinitiate vibratory pile driving until the exclusion zone is clear of 
marine mammals for at least 30 minutes.
    (d) DP Thruster Power Reduction: The Holder shall reduce DP 
thruster power to the maximum extent possible if a marine mammal 
approaches or enters the estimated 160-dB isopleth from the vessel. The 
Holder shall not increase power until the zone is clear of marine 
mammals for 30 minutes.
    (e) Time of Day and Weather Restrictions: The Holder shall conduct 
vibratory pile driving during daylight hours only, starting 
approximately 30 minutes after dawn and ending 30 minutes before dusk. 
The Holder shall not initiate vibratory pile driving until the entire 
marine mammal exclusion zone is visible.
7. Monitoring Requirements
    The Holder is required to abide by the following monitoring 
conditions listed in 7(a)-(b). Failure to comply with these conditions 
may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
    (a) General: If the Level B harassment area is obscured by fog or 
poor lighting conditions, the start of vibratory pile driving shall be 
delayed until the area is visible.
    (b) Visual Monitoring: Protected species observers shall survey 
beyond the estimated 160-dB isopleths 30 minutes before, during, and 30 
minutes after all in-water vibratory pile driving and use of DP vessel 
thrusters. The observers shall be stationed on the highest available 
vantage point on the associated operating platform. Observers shall 
estimate distances to marine mammals visually, using laser range 
finders, or by using reticle binoculars during daylight hours. During 
night operations (DP vessel thruster use only), observers shall use 
night-vision binoculars. Information recorded during each observation 
shall be used to estimate numbers of animals potentially taken and 
shall include the following:
     Numbers of individuals observed;
     Frequency of observation;
     Location (i.e., distance from the sound source);
     Vibratory pile driving status (i.e., soft-start, active, 
post pile driving, etc.);
     DP vessel thruster status (i.e., energy level); and
     Reaction of the animal(s) to relevant sound source (if 
any) and observed behavior, including bearing and direction of travel.
    (c) Acoustic Field Verification: The Holder shall conduct field 
verification of the estimated 160-dB isopleths during vibratory pile 
driving and use of the DP vessel thruster. Acoustic measurements shall 
be taken during vibratory pile driving of the last half (deepest sheet 
pile segment) for any given open-water pile and from two reference 
locations at two water depths (a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m 
above the seafloor). If the field measurements show that the 160-dB 
isopleth is less than or beyond the initially proposed 200-m distance, 
a new zone may be established accordingly. The Holder shall notify NMFS 
within 24 hours if a new marine mammal exclusion zone is established 
that extends beyond 200 m. Implementation of a smaller zone shall be 
contingent on NMFS' review and shall not be used until NMFS approves 
the change.
    The Holder shall also perform field verification of the 160-dB 
isopleth associated with DP vessel thruster use during cable 
installation. Acoustic measurements shall be taken from two reference 
locations at two water depths (a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m 
above the seafloor). Similar to field verification during vibratory 
pile driving, the DP thruster power reduction zone may be modified as 
necessary.
8. Reporting Requirements
    The Holder shall provide the following notifications during 
construction activities:
     Notification to NMFS within 24-hours of beginning 
construction and again within 24-hours of completion;
     Detailed report of field-verification measurements within 
7 days of completion and notification to NMFS within 24-hours if a new 
zone is established; and
     Notification to NMFS within 24-hours if field verification 
measurements suggest a larger marine mammal exclusion zone.
    The Holder shall submit a technical report to the Office of 
Protected Resources, NMFS, within 120 days of the conclusion of 
monitoring.
    (a) The report shall contain the following information:
     A summary of the activity and monitoring plan (i.e., 
dates, times, locations);
     A summary of mitigation implementation;
     Monitoring results and a summary that addresses the goals 
of the monitoring plan, including the following:
    [cir] Environmental conditions when observations were made:
    [cir] Water conditions (i.e., Beaufort sea-state, tidal state)
    [cir] Weather conditions (i.e., percent cloud cover, visibility, 
percent glare)
    [cir] Date and time survey initiated and terminated
    [cir] Date, time, number, species, and any other relevant data 
regarding marine mammals observed (for pre-activity, during activity, 
and post-activity surveys)
    [cir] Description of the observed behaviors (in both the presence 
and absence of activities):
    [ssquf] If possible, the correlation to underwater sound level 
occurring at the time of any observable behavior
     Estimated exposure/take numbers during activities; and
     An assessment of the implementation and effectiveness of 
prescribed mitigation and monitoring measures.
    (b) In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly 
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner not permitted by the 
authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or 
mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement), 
the Holder shall immediately cease the specified activities and 
immediately report the incident to the Incidental

[[Page 15586]]

Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of 
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and/or by email to 
[email protected] and [email protected]. The report 
must include the following information:
     Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the 
incident;
     Name and type of vessel involved;
     Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
     Description of the incident;
     Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding 
the incident;
     Water depth;
     Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, 
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and 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).
    The Holder shall not resume its activities until we are able to 
review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS will work with 
the Holder to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of 
further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. The Holder may not 
resume activities until notified by us via letter, email, or telephone.
    (c) In the event that the Holder discovers an injured or dead 
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the cause 
of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent 
(i.e., in less than a moderate state of decomposition as we describe in 
the next paragraph), the Holder shall immediately report the incident 
to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401 and/or by 
email to [email protected], [email protected], and 
[email protected]. The report must include the same information 
identified in the paragraph above this section. Activities may continue 
while we review the circumstances of the incident. NMFS will work with 
the Holder to determine whether modifications in the activities are 
appropriate.
    (d) In the event that the Holder discovers an injured or dead 
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the injury 
or death is not associated with or related to the authorized activities 
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced 
decomposition, or scavenger damage), the Holder shall report the 
incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and 
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401 
and/or by email to [email protected], 
[email protected], and [email protected] within 24 hours 
of the discovery. The Holder shall provide photographs or video footage 
(if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting 
to us.
    9. A copy of this IHA must be in the possession of the lead 
contractor on site and protected species observers operating under the 
authority of this authorization.
    10. This IHA may be modified, suspended, or withdrawn if the Holder 
fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if the authorized 
taking is having more than a negligible impact on the species or stock 
of affected marine mammals.

Request for Public Comments

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

    Dated: March 14, 2014.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-06140 Filed 3-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P