[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 227 (Monday, November 25, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64833-64847]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25425]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XR040]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Long Beach Cruise Terminal
Improvement Project in the Port of Long Beach, California
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
Carnival Corporation & PLC (Carnival) to incidentally take, by Level A
harassment and Level B harassment, five species of marine mammals
during the Port of Long Beach Cruise Terminal Improvement Project in
Port of Long Beach, California.
DATES: This Authorization is effective from November 19, 2019 through
November 18, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wendy Piniak, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the
authorization, application, and supporting documents, as well as a list
of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online at:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. In case of
problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed
above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) 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 incidental take authorization may be provided to the public
for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth. The definitions
of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the
relevant sections below.
Summary of Request
On February 15, 2019, NMFS received a request from Carnival for an
IHA to take marine mammals incidental to the Port of Long Beach Cruise
Terminal Improvement Project in Port of Long Beach (POLB), California.
The application was deemed adequate and complete on July 12, 2019.
Subsequent revisions to the application were submitted by Carnival on
September 13, 2019. Carnival's request is for take of five species of
marine mammals by Level B harassment and one of these five species by
Level A harassment. Neither Carnival nor NMFS expects serious injury or
mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate. In-water activities (pile installation and dredging)
associated with the project are anticipated to require five months.
[[Page 64834]]
Description of Activity
Carnival requested authorization for take of marine mammals
incidental to in-water activities associated with the Port of Long
Beach Cruise Terminal Improvement Project in POLB, California. The
purpose of the project is to make improvements to its existing berthing
facilities at the Long Beach Cruise Terminal at the Queen Mary located
at Pier H in the POLB, in order to accommodate a new, larger class of
cruise ships. The project will also resolve safety issues in the
existing parking structure and vessel mooring. Implementation of the
project requires installation of two high-capacity mooring dolphins,
fenders, and a new passenger bridge system, and dredging at the
existing berth and the immediate surrounding area. In-water
construction will include installation of a maximum of 49 permanent,
36-inch (91.4 centimeters (cm)) steel pipe piles using impact and
vibratory pile driving. Sounds produced by these activities may result
in take, by Level A harassment and Level B harassment, of marine
mammals located in the POLB, California.
In-water activities (pile installation and dredging) associated
with the planned project are anticipated to begin mid-November, 2019,
and be completed by mid-April, 2020, however Carnival requested the IHA
for one year from the date of issuance. Pile driving activities will
occur for 26 days and dredging activities will occur for 30 days during
the planned project dates. In-water activities will occur during
daylight hours only.
A detailed description of the planned activities is provided in the
Federal Register notice announcing the proposed IHA (84 FR 54867;
October 11, 2019). Since that time no changes have been made to
Carnival's planned activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not
provided here. Please refer to the proposed IHA Federal Register notice
for a detailed description of the activity.
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to Carnival was
published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2019 (84 FR 54867).
That notice described, in detail, Carnival's proposed activity, the
marine mammal species that may be affected by the activity, the
anticipated effects on marine mammals and their habitat, proposed
amount and manner of take, and proposed mitigation, monitoring and
reporting measures. During the 30-day public comment period NMFS
received a comment letter from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission); the Commission's recommendations and our responses are
provided here, and the comments have been posted online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities.
Comment 1: The Commission states that NMFS' standard 7-decibel (dB)
source level reduction when bubble curtains are to be used during pile
driving is not appropriate because bubble curtains that are placed
immediately around the pile do not achieve consistent reductions in
sound levels because they cannot attenuate ground-borne sound. The
Commission recommends that NMFS consult with the relevant experts
regarding the appropriate source level reduction factor to use to
minimize far-field effects on marine mammals for all relevant
incidental take authorizations and, until the experts have been
consulted, refrain from using a source level reduction factor when
bubble curtains are to be implemented.
Response: While it is true that noise level reduction measured at
different received ranges does vary, given that both Level A harassment
and Level B harassment estimation using geometric modeling is based on
noise levels measured at near-source distances (~10 meters (m)), NMFS
believes it reasonable to use a source level reduction factor for sound
attenuation device (bubble curtain) implementation during impact pile
driving. As noted in responses to previous comments on the source level
reduction factor for sound attenuation device, NMFS reviewed Caltrans'
bubble curtain ``on and off'' studies conducted in San Francisco Bay in
2003 and 2004. The equipment used for bubble curtains has likely
improved since 2004 but due to concerns for fish species, Caltrans has
not able to conduct ``on and off'' tests recently. Based on 74
measurements (37 with the bubble curtain on and 37 with the bubble
curtain off) at both near (less than 100 m) and far (greater than 100
m) distances, the linear averaged received level reduction is 6 dB. If
limiting the data points (a total of 28 measurements, with 14 during
bubble curtain on and 14 during bubble curtain off) to only near
distance measurements, the linear averaged noise level reduction is 7
dB. Based on this analysis, we conclude that there is not a significant
difference of source level reduction between near and far-distance
measurements. Based on these measures and analysis, NMFS has
conservatively used the reduction of 7 dB of the source level for
impact zone estimates. In the case of Carnival's impact and vibratory
pile driving isopleth estimates using an air bubble curtain for source
level reduction, NMFS also reviewed Austin et al. (2016), which
provided measurements of impact and vibratory pile driving using a
variety of hammer types on a variety of piles in different locations
near Anchorage, Alaska. We specifically examined the measurements in
Tables 8 and 9 for SPL rms and SELs-s data for impact pile driving and
Table 11 for SPL rms data for vibratory pile driving. At ~10 m Austin
et al. (2016) measured reductions in mean SELs-s (impact pile driving)
and SPL rms (vibratory pile driving) of 10 dB (or higher) when
comparing two piles with a hydraulic hammer (pile IP10 with bubble
curtain and IP1 unattenuated). At distances farther away from a pile
(e.g., 1 km), a variety of factors can influence the measured SPL
(including transmission loss, benthic type, pile location, etc.).
Austin et al. (2016) did not present measurements at multiple distances
for the same pile with and without bubble curtains making it difficult
to interpret or compare measurements at farther distances. NMFS will
evaluate the appropriateness of using an alternative source level
reduction factor for sound attenuation device implementation during
pile driving for all relevant incidental take authorizations as more
data become available and contact experts as appropriate. Nevertheless,
at this point, we think that a 7 dB reduction is reasonable to be used
as a source level reduction factor in this scenario.
Comment 2: The Commission notes that to estimate the 5 Level A
harassment takes for harbor seals, NMFS used the density estimate
derived from sightings data (MBC Applied Environmental Sciences 2016),
the Level A harassment ensonified area, and the number of days of
activities. To minimize unnecessary delays if the authorized numbers of
Level A harassment takes are met, the Commission recommends that NMFS
increase the Level A harassment takes from 5 to at least 26 based on
one harbor seal occurring within the 120-m Level A harassment zone on
each of the days when impact pile driving will occur.
Response: Following the method for calculating Level B harassment
takes for all species, to calculate Level A harassment takes for harbor
seals we used the following equation: Level A harassment zone area *
density * # of pile driving days. For the entire Level A harassment
zone, the calculations are as follows:
[[Page 64835]]
For impact pile driving: 0.114852 (Level A zone area) *
1.38 (density) * 26 days = 4.12 seals;
For vibratory pile driving: * 0.003154 (Level A zone area)
* 1.38 (density) * 26 days = 0.11 seals.
For the entire Level A harassment zone, the total is 4.23 seals,
rounded to the estimated 5 takes by Level A harassment for harbor
seals.
This level of take is estimated to occur if no mitigation measures
are implemented. Required mitigation measures include shutdown zones
that will likely reduce/eliminate Level A harassment take in the entire
vibratory pile driving Level A harassment zone, and a portion of the
impact pile driving Level A harassment zone (required shutdown zone of
50 m). As the closest known regularly used haul out site for pinnipeds
is approximately 3 km from the project site, we have no information to
indicate that there will be more animals than predicted by the density
estimates near the project site. We consulted with the applicants and
NMFS' West Coast Regional Office in Long Beach, CA. The applicants
conducted limited on-site surveys during winter 2018-19 and observed no
harbor seals near the project site. NMFS staff with local expertise
(and stranding coordinators) were not aware of harbor seals frequenting
the POLB, and believed that the MBC Applied Environmental Sciences
(2016) survey densities were adequate, and that an increase in the
estimated Level A harassment takes was not needed (Laura McCue,
personal communication). The MBC Applied Environmental Sciences (2016)
survey report also notes that harbor seals were ``most commonly
observed resting or foraging along riprap shorelines, particularly the
breakwaters of the Outer Harbor, and 83 percent of total observations
of this species were made in the Outer Harbor (Figure 10-1).'' Based on
the information we have on density and haul out sites, and that we have
conservatively estimated the level of take assuming no mitigation, we
believe that 5 takes by Level A harassment for harbor seals is
appropriate.
Comment 3: The Commission states that it is unclear whether
Carnival would keep a running tally of the extrapolated takes to ensure
the authorized takes are not exceeded. The Commission notes that they
do not believe that keeping track of only the observed takes is
sufficient when the Level B harassment zones extend to more than 8 km
and recommends adjusting the takes based on the extent of the Level B
harassment zone based on the sighting distance and number of PSOs
monitoring at a given time. The Commission recommends that NMFS ensure
that Carnival keeps a running tally of the total takes for each species
to comply with section 3(i) of the draft authorization (``If a species
for which authorization has not been granted, or a species for which
authorization has been granted but the authorized takes are met, is
observed entering or within the monitoring zone (Table 2), pile driving
activities must shut down immediately using delay and shutdown
procedures. Activities must not resume until the animal has been
confirmed to have left the area or the 15 minute observation time
period has elapsed.'').
Response: We agree that Carnival must ensure they do not exceed
authorized takes. We have included in the authorization that Carnival
must include extrapolation of the estimated takes by Level B harassment
based on the number of observed exposures within the Level B harassment
zone and the percentage of the Level B harassment zone that was not
visible in the draft and final reports.
Comment 4: The Commission recommended that NMFS refrain from using
the proposed renewal process for Carnival's authorization. If NMFS
elects to use the renewal process frequently or for authorizations that
require a more complex review or for which much new information has
been generated, the Commission recommended that NMFS provide the
Commission and other reviewers the full 30-day comment period as set
forth in section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA.
Response: We appreciate the Commission's input and direct the
reader to our recent response to a similar comment, which can be found
at 84 FR 52464 (October 2, 2019; 84 FR 52466).
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by
Carnival's project, including brief introductions to the species and
relevant stocks as well as available information regarding population
trends and threats, and information regarding local occurrence, were
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (84 FR
54867; October 11, 2019). Since that time, we are not aware of any
changes in the status of these species and stocks; therefore, detailed
descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to the proposed IHA
Federal Register notice for these descriptions; we provide a summary of
marine mammals that may potentially be present in the project area here
(Table 1). Additional information regarding population trends and
threats may be found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS'
website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 1 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in
the POLB and summarizes information related to the population or stock,
including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA and potential
biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we follow
Committee on Taxonomy (2018). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum
number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be
removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach
or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS'
SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and
annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and
other threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area.
NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS' U.S. Pacific SARs (e.g., Carretta et al., 2019). All values
presented in Table 1 are the most recent available at the time of
publication and are available in the 2018 Final SARs (Carretta et al.,
2019) (available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments).
[[Page 64836]]
Table 1--Marine Mammals Potentially Present Within Port of Long Beach, California During the Specified Activity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae:
Gray whale...................... Eschrichtius robustus.. Eastern North Pacific.. -, -, N 26,960 (0.05, 25,849, 801 139
2016).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Blue whale...................... Balaenoptera musculus.. Eastern North Pacific.. E, D, Y 1,647 (0.07, 1,551, 2.3 >=19
2011).
Fin whale........................... Balaenoptera physalus.. California/Oregon/ E, D, Y 9,029 (0.12, 8,127, 81 >=43.5
Washington. 2014).
Humpback whale...................... Megaptera novaeangliae. California/Oregon/ -, -, Y 2,900 (0.05, 2,784, 16.7 >=40.2
Washington. 2014).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Short-beaked common dolphin..... Delphinus delphis...... California/Oregon/ -, -, N 969,861 (0.17, 8,393 >=40
Washington. 839,325, 2014).
Long-beaked common dolphin...... Delphinus capensis \4\. California............. -, -, N 101,305 (0.49, 68,432, 657 >=35.4
2014).
Common bottlenose dolphin....... Tursiops truncates..... Coastal California..... -, -, N 453 (0.06, 346, 2011). 2.7 >=2.0
Risso's dolphin................. Grampus griseus........ California/Oregon/ -, -, N 6,336 (0.32, 4,817, 46 >=3.7
Washington. 2014).
Pacific white-sided dolphin..... Lagenorhynchus California/Oregon/ -, -, N 26,814 (0.28, 21,195, 191 7.5
obliquidens. Washington. 2014).
Northern right whale dolphin.... Lissodelphis borealis.. California/Oregon/ -, -, N 26,556 (0.44, 18,608, 179 3.8
Washington. 2014).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California sea lion............. Zalophus californianus. U.S.................... -, -, N 257,606 (N/A, 233,515, 14,011 >320
2014).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal..................... Phoca vitulina......... California............. -, -, N 30,968 (0.157, 27,348, 1,641 43
2012).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments assessments. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. California sea lion
population size was estimated from a 1975-2014 time series of pup counts (Lowry et al. 2017), combined with mark-recapture estimates of survival rates
(DeLong et al. 2017, Laake et al. 2018).
\3\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated
with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\4\ The NMFS SARs identify Delphinus capensis as the scientific name for the long-beaked common dolphin, however the Committee on Taxonomy (2018)
provisionally considers the Eastern North Pacific form of the long-beaked common dolphin as a subspecies, Delphinus delphis bairdii, following the
usage of Hershkovitz (1966).
Note:--Italicized species are not expected to be taken or authorized.
Habitat
No ESA-designated critical habitat overlaps with the project area.
A migration Biologically Important Area (BIA) for gray whales overlaps
with the project area, however as described in the Federal Register
notice for the proposed IHA (84 FR 54867; October 11, 2019) gray whales
are rarely observed in the POLB and sound from the planned project's
in-water activities is not anticipated to propagate large distances
outside the POLB.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
Underwater noise from impact and vibratory pile driving and down-
the-hole drilling activities associated with the planned Port of Long
Beach Cruise Terminal Improvement Project have the potential to result
in harassment of marine mammals in the vicinity of the action area. The
Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (84 FR 54867; October 11,
2019) included a discussion of the potential effects of such
disturbances on marine mammals and their habitat, therefore that
information is not repeated in detail here; please refer to the Federal
Register notice (84 FR 54867; October 11, 2019) for that information.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through this IHA, which informs both NMFS' consideration of
``small numbers'' and the negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes will primarily be by Level B harassment, as use of
the acoustic sources (i.e., pile driving) has the potential to result
in disruption of behavioral patterns for individual
[[Page 64837]]
marine mammals. There is also some potential for auditory injury (Level
A harassment) to result, for phocids (harbor seals) because predicted
auditory injury zones are larger than for mid-frequency species and
otariids. Auditory injury is unlikely to occur for mid-frequency
cetaceans and otariids. The planned mitigation and monitoring measures
(see Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting sections below) are
expected to minimize the severity of such taking to the extent
practicable. With implementation of the planned mitigation and
monitoring measures (see Mitigation section), no Level B harassment or
Level A harassment is anticipated or authorized for low-frequency
cetaceans (humpback whales and gray whales). As described previously,
no mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized for this
activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic
thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science
indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some
degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water
that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or
occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4)
and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the
factors considered here in more detail and present the take estimate.
Acoustic Thresholds
Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic
thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above
which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS
of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources--Though significantly
driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from
anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by
other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving
animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral
context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007;
Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what the available science indicates
and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is
both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a
generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for continuous (e.g.,
vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources. Carnival's planned activity includes
the use of continuous (vibratory pile driving) and impulsive (impact
pile driving) sources, and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(rms) thresholds are applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual
criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five
different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a
result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources
(impulsive or non-impulsive). Carnival's planned activity includes the
use includes the use of continuous (vibratory pile driving) and
impulsive (impact pile driving) sources.
These thresholds are provided in Table 2 below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
Table 2--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans........... L0-pk,flat: 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans........... L0-pk,flat: 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans.......... L0-pk,flat: 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater)..... L0-pk.flat: 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater).... L0-pk,flat: 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS
onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds
associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds are recommended for consideration.
Note: Peak sound pressure level (L0-pk) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and weighted cumulative sound
exposure level (LE,) has a reference value of 1[micro]Pa\2\s. In this table, thresholds are abbreviated to be
more reflective of International Organization for Standardization standards (ISO 2017). The subscript ``flat''
is being included to indicate peak sound pressure are flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized
hearing range of marine mammals (i.e., 7 Hz to 160 kHz). The subscript associated with cumulative sound
exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF
cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The weighted
cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure
levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the
conditions under which these thresholds will be exceeded.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
The sound field in the project area is the existing background
noise plus additional construction noise from the planned project. Pile
driving generates underwater noise that can potentially result in
disturbance to marine mammals in the project area. The maximum
(underwater) area ensonified
[[Page 64838]]
is determined by the topography of the POLB including hard structure
breakwaters which bound the southern portion of the POLB and preclude
sound from transmitting beyond the outer harbor of the POLB (see Figure
5 of the application). Additionally, vessel traffic and other
commercial and industrial activities in the project area may contribute
to elevated background noise levels which may mask sounds produced by
the project.
Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an
acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary
with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and
receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition
and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is:
TL = B * Log10 (R 1/R 2),
Where:
TL = transmission loss in dB
B = transmission loss coefficient; for practical spreading equals 15
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven
pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial
measurement
This formula neglects loss due to scattering and absorption, which
is assumed to be zero here. The degree to which underwater sound
propagates away from a sound source is dependent on a variety of
factors, most notably the water bathymetry and presence or absence of
reflective or absorptive conditions including in-water structures and
sediments. Spherical spreading occurs in a perfectly unobstructed
(free-field) environment not limited by depth or water surface,
resulting in a 6 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of
distance from the source (20*log[range]). Cylindrical spreading occurs
in an environment in which sound propagation is bounded by the water
surface and sea bottom, resulting in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level
for each doubling of distance from the source (10*log[range]). A
practical spreading value of fifteen is often used under conditions,
such as the project site at Pier H in the POLB where water increases
with depth as the receiver moves away from the shoreline, resulting in
an expected propagation environment that would lie between spherical
and cylindrical spreading loss conditions. Practical spreading loss is
assumed here.
The intensity of pile driving sounds is greatly influenced by
factors such as the type of piles, hammers, and the physical
environment in which the activity takes place. In order to calculate
distances to the Level A harassment and Level B harassment thresholds
for the 36 inch steel piles planned in this project, NMFS used acoustic
monitoring data from other locations. In their application, Carnival
presented several reference sound levels based on underwater sound
measurements documented for other pile driving projects of the west
coast of the U.S. (see Tables 1.3 and 1.5 of the application).
Empirical data from a recent sound source verification (SSV) study
conducted as part of the Anacortes Ferry Terminal Project, in the state
of Washington were used to estimate the sound source levels (SSLs) for
impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving. The Anacortes Ferry
Terminal Project were generally assumed to best approximate the
construction activities and environmental conditions found in the
Carnival's planned project in that the Anacortes Ferry Terminal Project
also involved driving 36 inch piles into a similar substrate type (sand
and silt) with a diesel hammer of similar power (ft-lbs) (WSDOT 2018).
Carnival also presented several references for the number of piles
installed per day and the number of strikes (impact pile driving) or
minutes (vibratory pile driving) required to install each pile from
similar projects on the U.S. west coast. As the Anacortes Ferry
Terminal Project was assumed to be most similar to Carnival's planned
project (and generally had the highest values), number of strikes
(impact pile driving) or minutes (vibratory pile driving) required to
install each pile from this Anacortes Ferry Terminal Project were used
to calculate Level A harassment and Level B harassment isopleths (WSDOT
2018). Based on data from these projects, the applicant anticipates
that a maximum of 5 piles could be installed via impact pile driving
per day and 5 piles could be installed via vibratory pile driving per
day.
Carnival used NMFS' Optional User Spreadsheet, available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance, to input project-specific
parameters and calculate the isopleths for the Level A harassment and
Level B harassment zones for impact and vibratory pile driving. When
the NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in recognition of the
fact that ensonified area/volume could be more technically challenging
to predict because of the duration component in the new thresholds, we
developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools to help predict a
simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with marine mammal
density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that because of
some of the assumptions included in the methods used for these tools,
we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going to be
overestimates of some degree, which may result in some degree of
overestimate of Level A harassment take. However, these tools offer the
best way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D
modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways
to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address
the output where appropriate. For stationary sources pile driving, the
NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the distance at which, if a marine
mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the activity, it
would incur PTS.
Table 3 provides the sound source values and input used in the User
Spreadsheet to calculate harassment isopleths for each source type. For
the impact pile driving source level, Carnival used levels measured at
the Anacortes Ferry Terminal Project (peak SPL [SPLpk]: 207 dB re: 1
[mu]Pa at 10 m; SPL rms: 189 dB re: 1 uPa at 10 m; and single strike
sound exposure level [SELs-s]: 175 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa at 10 m at the 90th
percentile) as reported in WSDOT (2019, Table 7-14). For the vibratory
pile driving source level, Carnival also used levels measured at the
Anacortes Ferry Terminal Project (SPL: 170 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa (rms) at 11
m) as reported in WSDOT (2019, Table 7-15). Carnival will implement
bubble curtains (e.g. pneumatic barrier typically comprised of hosing
or PVC piping that disrupts underwater noise propagation; see
Mitigation section below) and has reduced the source levels of both
impact and vibratory pile driving by 7 dB (a conservative estimate
based on several studies including Austin et al., 2016). For impact
pile driving, Level A harassment isopleths were calculated using the
cumulative SEL metric (SELs-s) as it produces larger isopleths than
SPLpk. Isopleths for Level B harassment associated with impact pile
driving (160 dB) and vibratory pile driving (120 dB) were calculated
using SPL (rms) values and can be found in Table 4.
[[Page 64839]]
Table 3--User Spreadsheet Input Parameters Used for Calculating
Harassment Isopleths
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact pile Vibratory pile
User spreadsheet parameter driving driving
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spreadsheet Tab Used............ E.(1) Impact pile A. (1) Drilling/
driving. Vibratory pile
driving.
Source Level (SELs-s or SPL rms) 168 SELs-s a b.... 163 dB SPL rms.a b
Source Level (SPLpk)............ 207............... N/A.
Weighting Factor Adjustment 2................. 2.5.
(kHz).
Number of piles................. 5................. 5.
Number of strikes per pile...... 675............... N/A.
Number of strikes per day....... 2,700............. N/A.
Estimate driving duration (min) N/A............... 31.5.
per pile.
Activity Duration (h) within 24- N/A............... 2.625.
h period.
Propagation (xLogR)............. 15 Log R.......... 15 Log R.
Distance of source level 10................ 11.
measurement (meters).
Other factors................... Using bubble Using bubble
curtain. curtain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ WSDOT (2019).
\b\ Austin et al. 2016.
Table 4--Calculated Distances to Level A Harassment and Level B Harassment Isopleths During Pile Driving
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment zone (meters) Level B Level B
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- harassment harassment
zone (meters) zone
---------------- ensonified
Source Low-frequency Mid-frequency High- Phocid Otariid area (km\2\)
cetacean cetacean frequency pinniped pinniped Cetaceans & ---------------
cetacean Pinnipeds Cetaceans &
Pinnipeds
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Pile Driving..................... 224.7 8.0 267.6 120.2 8.8 292.7 0.39
Vibratory Pile Driving.................. 19.4 1.7 28.7 11.8 0.8 8,092.1 27.42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source.................................. PTS Onset Isopleth--Peak (meters)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Pile Driving..................... 1.6 N/A 21.5 1.8 N/A
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide the information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations. Marine mammal densities were obtained from MBC Applied
Environmental Sciences (2016) and Jefferson et al. (2013). MBC Applied
Environmental Sciences (2016) conducted marine mammal and bird visual
surveys in the POLB over a 12-month period from September, 2013 to
August, 2014. The survey area included a substantial portion of the
project action area. MBC Applied Environmental Sciences (2016)
conducted point count surveys on one day each month within a number of
distinct study units including one encompassing approximately half of
the existing Carnival dock. These data are relatively recent, and
occurred in the POLB in the habitats and locations potentially impacted
by the specified activity, and as such as they are the best available
survey data for the project action area for the species they observed.
MBC Applied Environmental Sciences (2016) reported raw sightings
numbers per month per species. To estimate density from the MBC Applied
Environmental Sciences (2016) data, the two-dimensional area of their
combined survey area (based on their sampling quadrants) was calculated
using GIS and graphics in their report showing the limits of each
sampling quadrant. The maximum monthly observed number of observations
for each species observed and the total study area (30.35 km\2\) was
used to calculate density (Table 6). During POLB surveys, MBC Applied
Environmental Sciences (2016) observed common dolphins (not identified
to species, however to be conservative, this number was used for both
species), common bottlenose dolphins, California sea lions, and harbor
seals. They did not observe gray or humpback whales and therefore, did
not provide density estimates for these species.
The U.S. Department of the Navy (Phase III, 2017) created a Marine
Species Density Database (NMSDD) for the Hawaii-Southern California
Training and Testing Study Area. To characterize marine species density
for large oceanic regions, the Navy reviews, critically assesses, and
prioritizes existing density estimates from multiple sources and
developed a systematic method for selecting the most appropriate
density estimate for each combination of species, area, and season. The
resulting compilation and structure of the selected marine species
density data resulted in the Navy Marine Species Density Database
(NMSDD) (DoN, 2017). The NMSDD uses data from Jefferson et al. (2014)
to estimate densities for gray and humpback whales in Southern
California. Jefferson et al. (2014) reported the results of aerial
visual marine mammal surveys from 2008-2013 in the Southern California
Bight, including areas around the Channel Islands. Although the survey
area did not include the POLB, it did include nearshore waters not far
to the south of the Port. Density estimates were based on airborne
transects and utilized distance sampling methods and these estimates
are the best information available on densities for gray and humpback
whales in southern California (DoN, 2017) (Table 5). Note, that in the
Federal Register notice announcing the proposed IHA (84 FR 54867;
October 11, 2019) we used density estimates for gray and humpback
whales from Jefferson et al. (2013). The data presented in Jefferson
[[Page 64840]]
et al. (2014) and Jefferson et al. (2013) are from the same surveys,
and Jefferson et al. (2014) presents slight revisions from Jefferson et
al. (2013). DoN NMSDD (2017) incorporates these revisions and is
considered best available information for these species in this region,
and we have revised the density estimates presented in Table 5 for gray
and humpback whales accordingly.
Table 5--Marine Mammal Density Information
[Species densities used for take calculations are denoted by asterisks*]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLB max Max density
monthly number (km\2\) (MBC
2013-2014 (MBC Applied Max density
Common name Stock Applied Environmental (km\2\) (DoN,
Environmental Sciences 2016) 2017)
Sciences 2016) \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale............................ Eastern North Pacific... 0 0 * 0.01791
Humpback whale........................ CA/OR/WA................ 0 0 * 0.00908
Short-beaked common dolphin........... CA/OR/WA................ \2\ 40 * 1.32 0.3340
Long-beaked common dolphin............ California.............. \2\ 40 * 1.32 2.5290
Common bottlenose dolphin............. Coastal California...... 5 * 0.17 0.0765
California sea lion................... U.S..................... 95 * 3.13 0.0627
Harbor seal........................... California.............. 42 * 1.38 0183
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Surface area of MBC Applied Environmental Sciences survey region estimated as 30.35 km\2\ via GIS. Density
as # marine mammals/km\2\.
\2\ Only identified as ``Common Dolphin'' and not identified to the species level--to be conservative we used
this number for both species.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
Level B Harassment Calculations
The following equation was used to calculate potential take due to
Level B harassment per species: Level B harassment zone area * density
* # of pile driving days. As described above, there will be a maximum
of 26 days of pile driving and it is anticipated that a maximum of 5
piles could be installed via impact pile driving per day and 5 piles
could be installed via vibratory pile driving per day. We also used the
maximum density estimates reported by MBC Applied Environmental
Sciences (2016) and DoN (2017) for these species in this region (Table
5). Therefore, the resulting take estimates assume all pile driving
conducted when species are in their highest densities in the POLB
producing conservative estimates (see Table 6). We present the number
of estimated takes due to Level B harassment by impact and vibratory
pile driving separately in Table 7, however as these activities are
anticipated to occur on the same day (but not at the same time),
individuals impacted by impact pile driving are also impacted by
vibratory pile driving. As each individual can only be taken once in 24
hours, we conservatively authorize the larger estimate of takes due to
vibratory pile driving. Note that while a small number of takes by
Level B harassment are estimated using these calculations for gray
whales and humpback whales, no takes are authorized as the applicants
will implement mitigation measures (shutdowns; see Mitigation section
below) that will preclude take of these species.
Level A Harassment Calculations
Carnival intends to avoid Level A harassment take by shutting down
pile driving activities at approach of any marine mammal to the
representative Level A harassment (PTS onset) ensonification zone up to
a practical shutdown monitoring distance. As small and cryptic harbor
seals may enter the Level A harassment zone (120.2 m for impact pile
driving) before shutdown mitigation procedures can be implemented, and
some animals may occur between the maximum Level A harassment
ensonification zone (120.2 m for impact pile driving) and the maximum
shutdown zone (50 m, see Mitigation section), we based our estimates
for potential take due to Level A harassment for harbor seals on the
calculations below (Level A harassment zone/pile installation method *
density * # of pile driving days).
For impact pile driving: 0.114852 (Level A zone area) *
1.38 (density) * 26 days = 4.12 seals.
For vibratory pile driving: * 0.003154 (Level A zone area)
* 1.38 (density) * 26 days = 0.11 seals.
For the entire Level A harassment zone, the total is 4.23 seals.
Based on these calculations we conservatively estimate that 5 of the
Level B harassment takes calculated above for harbor seals have the
potential to be takes by Level A harassment (Table 6).
Table 6--Authorized Take by Level A Harassment and Level B Harassment, by Species and Stock, Resulting From Planned Carnival Project Activities
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Authorized
Density harassment Estimated Days of Total Level Level A Total take as
Common name Stock (km\2\) Activity zone take daily activity B take take authorized percentage
(km\2\) take of stock
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale............................ Eastern North Pacific... 0.01791 Impact pile driving..... 0.39 <0.01 26 0.2 0 0 0.00
Vibratory pile driving.. 27.42 0.49 26 12.77
Humpback whale........................ CA/OR/WA................ 0.00908 Impact pile driving..... 0.39 <0.01 26 0.01 0 0 0.00
[[Page 64841]]
Vibratory pile driving.. 27.42 0.25 26 6.47
Short-beaked common dolphin........... CA/OR/WA................ 1.32 Impact pile driving..... 0.39 0.51 26 13.38 0 942 0.10
........................ Vibratory 27.42 36.19 26 941.05
pile
driving
Long-beaked common dolphin............ California.............. 1.32 Impact pile driving..... 0.39 0.51 26 13.38 0 942 0.92
Vibratory pile driving.. 27.42 36.19 26 941.05
Common bottlenose dolphin............. Coastal California...... 0.17 Impact pile driving..... 0.39 0.07 26 1.72 0 122 26.93
Vibratory pile driving.. ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ...........
27.42 4.66 26 121.20 ........... ........... ...........
California sea lion................... U.S..................... 3.13 Impact pile driving..... 0.39 1.22 26 31.74 0 2,232 0.87
Vibratory pile driving.. 27.42 85.82 26 2231.44
Harbor seal........................... California.............. 1.38 Impact pile driving..... 0.39 0.54 26 13.99 5 984 3.18
Vibratory pile driving.. 27.42 37.84 26 983.83
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are a number of reasons why the estimates of potential
incidents of take are likely to be conservative. We used conservative
estimates of density to calculate takes for each species. Additionally,
in the context of stationary activities such as pile driving, and in
areas where resident animals may be present, this number represents the
number of instances of take that may occur to a small number of
individuals, with a notably smaller number of animals being exposed
more than once. While pile driving can occur any day throughout the in-
water work window, and the analysis is conducted on a per day basis,
only a fraction of that time is actually spent pile driving. The
potential effectiveness of mitigation measures in reducing the number
of takes is also not quantified in the take estimation process. For
these reasons, these take estimates may be conservative, especially if
each take is considered a separate individual animal.
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully consider two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat.
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned), and;
(2) the practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
In addition to the measures described later in this section,
Carnival will employ the following standard mitigation measures:
Conduct briefings between construction supervisors and
crews and the marine mammal monitoring team prior to the start of all
pile driving activity, and when new personnel join the work, to explain
responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring
protocol, and operational procedures;
For in-water heavy machinery work other than pile driving
(e.g., standard barges, etc.), if a marine mammal comes within 10 m,
operations shall cease and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum
level required to maintain steerage and safe working conditions. This
type of work could include the following activities: (1) Movement of
the barge to the pile location; or (2) positioning of the pile on the
substrate via a crane (i.e., stabbing the pile);
Work may only occur during daylight hours, when visual
monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted;
For those marine mammals for which Level B harassment take
has not been requested, in-water pile driving
[[Page 64842]]
will shut down immediately if such species are observed within or
entering the monitoring zone (i.e., Level B harassment zone); and
If take reaches the authorized limit for an authorized
species, pile installation will be stopped as these species approach
the Level B harassment zone to avoid additional take.
The following measures apply to Carnival's mitigation requirements:
Establishment of Shutdown Zone for Level A Harassment--For all pile
driving activities, Carnival will establish a shutdown zone. The
purpose of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within which
shutdown of activity will occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in
anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). Conservative
shutdown zones of 300 m and 8,100 m for impact and vibratory pile
driving respectively will be implemented for low-frequency cetaceans to
prevent incidental harassment exposure for these activities. Monitoring
of such a large area is practicable in the POLB because the jetties
create confined entrances to the Port and Protected Species Observers
(PSOs) monitoring at these entrances can ensure no animals enter to
Port and shutdown zones (see Figures 3 and 4 of the applicant's Marine
Mammal Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for location of PSOs). For impact
and vibratory pile driving, Carnival will implement shutdown zones of
10 m for mid-frequency cetaceans and otariid pinnipeds and 50 m for
phocid pinnipeds. These shutdown zones will be used to prevent
incidental Level A harassment exposures from impact pile driving for
mid-frequency cetaceans and otariid pinnipeds, and to reduce the
potential for such take for phocid pinnipeds (Table 7). The placement
of PSOs during all pile driving activities (described in detail in the
Monitoring and Reporting Section) will ensure shutdown zones are
visible. The 50 m zone is the practical distance Carnival anticipates
phocid pinnipeds can be effectively observed in the project area.
Table 7--Monitoring and Shutdown Zones for Each Project Activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitoring zone
Source (m) Shutdown zone (m)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Pile Driving........... \1\ 300 Low-frequency
cetaceans: 300.
Phocid pinnipeds: 50.
Mid-frequency
cetaceans and
otariid pinnipeds:
10.
Vibratory Pile Driving........ 8,100 Low-frequency
cetaceans: 8,100.
Phocid pinnipeds: 50.
Mid-frequency
cetaceans and
otariid pinnipeds:
10.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Carnival is also required to establish and implement a Level A
harassment monitoring zone during impact pile driving for harbor seals
extending to 120 m.
Establishment of Monitoring Zones for Level B Harassment--Carnival
will establish monitoring zones to correlate with Level B harassment
zones which are areas where SPLs are equal to or exceed the 160 dB re:
1 [micro]Pa (rms) threshold for impact pile driving and the 120 dB re:
1 [micro]Pa (rms) threshold during vibratory pile driving. Monitoring
zones provide utility for observing by establishing monitoring
protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. Monitoring zones
enable observers to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine
mammals in the project area outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare
for a potential cease of activity should the animal enter the shutdown
zone. Carnival will implement a 300 m monitoring zone for impact pile
driving and an 8,100 m monitoring zone for vibratory pile driving
(Table 7). Placement of PSOs on vessels at entrances to POLB outside
the breakwaters will allow PSOs to observe marine mammals traveling
into the POLB (see Figures 3 and 4 of the applicant's Marine Mammal
Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for location of PSOs). As the applicants
anticipate impact and vibratory pile driving to occur in close temporal
succession, the applicants indicate they plan to use 7 observers for
all pile driving activities.
Soft Start--The use of soft-start procedures are believed to
provide additional protection to marine mammals by providing warning
and/or giving marine mammals a chance to leave the area prior to the
hammer operating at full capacity. For impact pile driving, contractors
will be required to provide an initial set of strikes from the hammer
at reduced energy, with each strike followed by a 30-second waiting
period. This procedure will be conducted a total of three times before
impact pile driving begins. Soft start will be implemented at the start
of each day's impact pile driving and at any time following cessation
of impact pile driving for a period of 30 minutes or longer. Soft start
is not required during vibratory pile driving activities.
Pile driving energy attenuator--Use of a marine pile-driving energy
attenuator (i.e., air bubble curtain system) will be implemented by
Carnival during impact and vibratory pile driving of all steel pipe
piles. The use of sound attenuation will reduce SPLs and the size of
the zones of influence for Level A harassment and Level B harassment.
Bubble curtains will meet the following requirements:
The bubble curtain must distribute air bubbles around 100
percent of the piling perimeter for the full depth of the water column.
The lowest bubble ring shall be in contact with the
mudline for the full circumference of the ring, and the weights
attached to the bottom ring shall ensure 100 percent mudline contact.
No parts of the ring or other objects shall prevent full mudline
contact.
The bubble curtain shall be operated such that there is
proper (equal) balancing of air flow to all bubblers.
The applicant shall require that construction contractors
train personnel in the proper balancing of air flow to the bubblers and
corrections to the attenuation device to meet the performance
standards. This shall occur prior to the initiation of pile driving
activities.
Pre-Activity Monitoring--Prior to the start of daily in-water
construction activity, or whenever a break in pile driving of 30
minutes or longer occurs, PSOs will observe the shutdown and monitoring
zones for a period of 30 minutes. The shutdown zone will be cleared
when a marine mammal has not been observed within the zone for that 30-
minute period. If a marine mammal is observed within the shutdown zone,
a soft-start cannot proceed until the animal has left the zone or has
not been observed for 15 minutes. If the Level B harassment zone has
been observed for
[[Page 64843]]
30 minutes and non-permitted species are not present within the zone,
soft start procedures can commence and work can continue even if
visibility becomes impaired within the Level B harassment monitoring
zone. When a marine mammal permitted for take by Level B harassment is
present in the Level B harassment zone, activities may begin and Level
B harassment take will be recorded. If work ceases for more than 30
minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of both the Level B harassment and
shutdown zone will commence again.
Timing and Environmental Restrictions--Carnival will only conduct
pile driving activities during daylight hours. To ensure the monitoring
zone for low-frequency cetaceans can be adequately monitored to
preclude all incidental take of these species, pile driving activities
may not be conducted in conditions with limited visibility (heavy fog,
heavy rain, and Beaufort Sea states above 4) that would diminish the
PSOs ability to adequately monitor this zone.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's planned measures, NMFS
has determined that the mitigation measures provide the means effecting
the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and
their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well
as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density).
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks.
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat).
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Marine Mammal Visual Monitoring
Monitoring shall be conducted by NMFS-approved observers. Trained
observers shall be placed from the best vantage point(s) practicable to
monitor for marine mammals and implement shutdown or delay procedures
when applicable through communication with the equipment operator.
Observer training must be provided prior to project start, and shall
include instruction on species identification (sufficient to
distinguish the species in the project area), description and
categorization of observed behaviors and interpretation of behaviors
that may be construed as being reactions to the specified activity,
proper completion of data forms, and other basic components of
biological monitoring, including tracking of observed animals or groups
of animals such that repeat sound exposures may be attributed to
individuals (to the extent possible).
Monitoring will be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30
minutes after pile driving activities. In addition, observers shall
record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of
distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in
concert with distance from piles being driven. Pile driving activities
include the time to install a single pile or series of piles, as long
as the time elapsed between uses of the pile driving equipment is no
more than 30 minutes.
A total of seven PSOs will be based on land and vessels. During all
pile driving activities observers will be stationed at the project site
(Pier H) and six other locations in the POLB and at the entrance to the
POLB. These stations will allow full monitoring of the impact and
vibratory pile driving monitoring zones. At least 4 PSOs are required
during impact pile driving and at least 7 PSOs are required during
vibratory pile driving as shown in Figure 2. All PSOs locations are
required during vibratory pile driving (shown as triangles in Figure
2), and PSOs must be located at the 4 PSO locations closest to the
project site (shown as triangles next to circles) during impact pile
driving.
[[Page 64844]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN25NO19.000
PSOs will scan the waters using binoculars, and/or spotting scopes,
and will use a handheld GPS or range-finder device to verify the
distance to each sighting from the project site. All PSOs will be
trained in marine mammal identification and behaviors and are required
to have no other project-related tasks while conducting monitoring. In
addition, monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will
be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for
marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable
by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. Carnival will
adhere to the following PSO qualifications:
(i) Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required.
(ii) At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer.
(iii) Other observers may substitute education (degree in
biological science or related field) or training for experience.
(iv) Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer shall be designated as lead observer or monitoring
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an
observer.
(v) Carnival shall submit observer CVs for approval by NMFS.
Additional standard observer qualifications include:
Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
Experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of
observations including but not limited to the number and species of
marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates and times when in-water construction
activities were suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from
construction sound of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown
zone; and marine mammal behavior; and
Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
Observers will be required to use approved data forms (see data
collection forms in the applicant's Marine Mammal Mitigation and
Monitoring Plan). Among other pieces of information, Carnival will
record detailed information about any implementation of shutdowns,
including the distance of animals to the
[[Page 64845]]
pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting
behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, Carnival will attempt to
distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the
number of incidences of take. We require that, at a minimum, the
following information be collected on the sighting forms:
Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from
pile driving activity, and if possible, the correlation to SPLs;
Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
Description of implementation of mitigation measures
(e.g., shutdown or delay);
Locations of all marine mammal observations; and
Other human activity in the area.
A draft report will be submitted to NMFS within 90 days of the
completion of marine mammal monitoring, or 60 days prior to the
requested date of issuance of any future IHA for projects at the same
location, whichever comes first. The report will include marine mammal
observations pre-activity, during-activity, and post-activity during
pile driving days (and associated PSO data sheets/raw sightings data),
and will also provide descriptions of any behavioral responses to
construction activities by marine mammals and a complete description of
all mitigation shutdowns and the results of those actions and an
extrapolated total take estimate based on the number of marine mammals
observed during the course of construction. A final report must be
submitted within 30 days following resolution of comments on the draft
report.
In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA
(if issued), such as an injury, serious injury or mortality, Carnival
will immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident
to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinator. The report will include the following information:
Description of the incident;
Environmental conditions (e.g., Beaufort sea state,
visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
Activities will not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS will work with Carnival to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Carnival will not be able
to resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
In the event that Carnival discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (e.g., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph),
Carnival will immediately report the incident to the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the NMFS West Coast Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the West
Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator. The report will include the same
information identified in the paragraph above. Activities will be able
to continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS
will work with Carnival to determine whether modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
In the event that Carnival discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), Carnival will report the incident
to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the NMFS West Coast Stranding Hotline
and/or by email to the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator,
within 24 hours of the discovery. Carnival will provide photographs,
video footage (if available), or other documentation of the stranded
animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
Pile driving activities associated with the Port of Long Beach
Cruise Terminal Improvement Project, as outlined previously, have the
potential to disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically, the
specified activities may result in take, in the form of Level B
harassment (behavioral disturbance) or Level A harassment (auditory
injury), incidental to underwater sounds generated from pile driving.
Potential takes could occur if individuals are present in the
ensonified zone when pile driving occurs. Level A harassment is only
anticipated for harbor seals.
No serious injury or mortality is anticipated given the nature of
the activities and measures designed to minimize the possibility of
injury to marine mammals. The potential for these outcomes is minimized
through the construction method and the implementation of the planned
mitigation measures. Specifically, vibratory and impact hammers will be
the primary methods of installation.
[[Page 64846]]
Piles will first be installed using vibratory pile driving. Vibratory
pile driving produces lower SPLs than impact pile driving. The rise
time of the sound produced by vibratory pile driving is slower,
reducing the probability and severity of injury. Impact pile driving
produces short, sharp pulses with higher peak levels and much sharper
rise time to reach those peaks. When impact pile driving is used,
implementation of soft start and shutdown zones significantly reduces
any possibility of injury. Given sufficient ``notice'' through use of
soft starts (for impact driving), marine mammals are expected to move
away from a sound source that is annoying prior to it becoming
potentially injurious. Carnival will use up to seven PSOs stationed
strategically to increase detectability of marine mammals, enabling a
high rate of success in implementation of shutdowns to avoid injury for
most species.
Carnival's planned activities are localized and of relatively short
duration (a maximum of 26 days of pile driving for 49 piles). The
project area is also very limited in scope spatially, as all work is
concentrated on a single pier. Localized and short-term noise exposures
produced by project activities may cause short-term behavioral
modifications in pinnipeds and mid-frequency cetaceans. Moreover, the
planned mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to further
reduce the likelihood of injury, as it is unlikely an animal would
remain in close proximity to the sound source, as well as reduce
behavioral disturbances.
Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the
basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other
similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as
increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased
foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff
2006; HDR, Inc. 2012; Lerma 2014; ABR 2016). Most likely, individuals
will simply move away from the sound source and be temporarily
displaced from the areas of pile driving, although even this reaction
has been observed primarily only in association with impact pile
driving. The pile driving activities analyzed here are similar to, or
less impactful than, numerous other construction activities conducted
in Southern California, which have taken place with no known long-term
adverse consequences from behavioral harassment. Level B harassment
will be reduced to the level of least practicable adverse impact
through use of mitigation measures described herein and, if sound
produced by project activities is sufficiently disturbing, animals are
likely to simply avoid the area while the activity is occurring. While
vibratory pile driving associated with the planned project may produce
sounds above ambient at greater distances from the project site, thus
intruding on some habitat, the project site itself is located in an
industrialized port, the majority of the ensonified area is within in
the POLB, and sounds produced by the planned activities are anticipated
to quickly become indistinguishable from other background noise in port
as they attenuate to near ambient SPLs moving away from the project
site. Therefore, we expect that animals annoyed by project sound would
simply avoid the area and use more-preferred habitats.
In addition to the expected effects resulting from authorized Level
B harassment, we anticipate that a small number of harbor seals may
sustain some limited Level A harassment in the form of auditory injury.
However, animals that experience PTS would likely only receive slight
PTS, i.e. minor degradation of hearing capabilities within regions of
hearing that align most completely with the energy produced by pile
driving (i.e., the low-frequency region below 2 kHz), not severe
hearing impairment or impairment in the regions of greatest hearing
sensitivity. If hearing impairment occurs, it is most likely that the
affected animal's threshold would increase by a few dBs, which in most
cases is not likely to meaningfully affect its ability to forage and
communicate with conspecifics. As described above, we expect that
marine mammals will be likely to move away from a sound source that
represents an aversive stimulus, especially at levels that would be
expected to result in PTS, given sufficient notice through use of soft
start.
The project also is not expected to have significant adverse
effects on affected marine mammal habitat. The planned project
activities will not modify existing marine mammal habitat for a
significant amount of time. The activities may cause some fish to leave
the area of disturbance, thus temporarily impacting marine mammal
foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range.
However, because of the short duration of the activities, the
relatively small area of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts
to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-
term negative consequences.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No mortality is anticipated or authorized.
The Level A harassment exposures (harbor seals only) are
anticipated to result only in slight PTS, within the lower frequencies
associated with pile driving;
The anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist
of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior that will not result
in fitness impacts to individuals;
The specified activity and ensonification area is very
small relative to the overall habitat ranges of all species and does
not include habitat areas of special significance (BIAs or ESA-
designated critical habitat); and
The presumed efficacy of the planned mitigation measures
in reducing the effects of the specified activity to the level of least
practicable adverse impact.
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 monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the planned
activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal
species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to
small numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative
factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or
spatial scale of the activities.
Table 7 demonstrates the number of animals that could be exposed to
received noise levels that could cause Level B harassment and Level A
harassment (harbor seals only) for Carnival's planned activities in the
project area site relative to the total stock abundance. Our analysis
shows that less than one-third of each affected stock could be taken by
harassment (Table 7). The numbers of animals authorized to be taken for
these stocks
[[Page 64847]]
would be considered small relative to the relevant stock's abundances
even if each estimated taking occurred to a new individual--an
extremely unlikely scenario.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity
(including the planned mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of
marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the
affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks will not
have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species
or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must review our action with respect to environmental consequences
on the human environment. This action is consistent with categories of
activities identified in Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental
harassments authorizations with no anticipated serious injury or
mortality) of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-
6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for
significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for
which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would
preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined
that the issuance of the IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded
from further NEPA review.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat.
No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that
formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this
action.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to Carnival for the incidental take of
marine mammals due to in-water construction work associated with the
Port of Long Beach Cruise Terminal Improvement Project in Port of Long
Beach, California from November 19, 2019 to November 18, 2020, provided
the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Dated: November 19, 2019.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-25425 Filed 11-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P