Notice2023-24980
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Coast Guard Construction in Astoria, Oregon
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
November 14, 2023
Effective
November 6, 2023
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to the United States Coast Guard (USCG) to incidentally harass marine mammals during pile driving activities associated with East Tongue Point (ETP) construction project in Astoria, Oregon.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77985-77996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-24980]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XD502]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Coast Guard Construction in
Astoria, Oregon
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
the United States Coast Guard (USCG) to incidentally harass marine
mammals during pile driving activities associated with East Tongue
Point (ETP) construction project in Astoria, Oregon.
DATES: The Authorization is effective from November 6, 2023 through
November 5, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the application and supporting
documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document,
may be obtained online at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-united-states-coast-guards-construction-astoria-oregon">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-united-states-coast-guards-construction-astoria-oregon</a>. In case of problems accessing these documents, please
call the contact listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jenna Harlacher, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
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 proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed IHA is 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 April 22, 2022, NMFS received a request from the USCG for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving activity associated
with the ETP construction in Astoria, Oregon. Following NMFS' review of
the application, we received a revised version of the application on
June 27, 2022. After finalizing construction details, the USCG
submitted another revised version on May 26, 2023, followed by a final
revised version on July 24, 2023, which was deemed adequate and
complete on August 1, 2023. The proposed IHA was published for public
comment on September 27, 2023. USCG's request is for take of harbor
seal, California sea lion, Steller sea lion and harbor porpoise by
Level B harassment and, for harbor seal and harbor porpoise, Level A
harassment. Neither USCG nor NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to
result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
[[Page 77986]]
appropriate. There are no changes from the proposed IHA to the final
IHA.
Description of Activity
Overview
The USCG requested an IHA to homeport multiple new Fast Response
Cutters (FRC) to support USCG District 13 at ETP in Astoria, OR. This
three-phased project entails both onshore and in-water construction
activities to remove old piles, construct and improve facilities
necessary for the long-term support of the FRC's and USCG mission.
Phase 1 includes pile removal and demolition, dredging and shoreline
rock improvements, phase 2 includes all pile driving and in water
construction, and phase 3 includes all overwater and upland
construction.
The purpose of the project is to improve and construct waterside
and landslide facilities that will meet homeporting requirements of the
FRCs. This includes the availability of logistics and support amenities
for personnel, the ability of the new FRC docks/floats to accommodate
the FRCs with all necessary operations on the boat while it is
stationary at the dock, and the ability of the facility to provide for
a long-term USCG presence for the economic life of its assets.
Facilities at ETP are aged, outdated, and will require improvements to
meet homeporting requirements.
Of the stages of this project, the only part that may result in
Level A and Level B harassment, and further analyzed in this notice is
the in-water construction activities associated with impact pile
driving (Phase 2). The USCG proposes installation of 30-inch (in) and
36-in steel pipe piles for their new facilities with an estimated 52
total days of impact pile driving. Pile driving will only occur within
the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) approved in-water
working window, however the proposed IHA will have a 1-year period of
effectiveness
A detailed description of the planned construction project is
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (88 FR
66393, September 27, 2023). Since that time, no changes have been made
to the planned construction activities. Therefore, a detailed
description is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register
notice for the description of the specific activity.
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to USCG was published in
the Federal Register on September 17, 2023 (88 FR 66393). That notice
described, in detail, USCG's activities, the marine mammal species that
may be affected by the activities, and the anticipated effects on
marine mammals. In that notice, we requested public input on the
request for authorization described therein, our analyses, the proposed
authorization, and any other aspect of the notice of proposed IHA, and
requested that interested persons submit relevant information,
suggestions, and comments. This proposed notice was available for a 30-
day public comment period. NMFS received no public comments.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history of the potentially affected species. NMFS
fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader to
these descriptions, instead of reprinting the information. Additional
information regarding population trends and threats may be found in
NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>) and
more general information about these species (e.g., physical and
behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS' website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>).
Table 1 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
authorized for this activity and summarizes information related to the
population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological removal (PBR),
where known. 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
serious injury or 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 or
stocks 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 and Alaska SARs. All values presented in table 1 are
the most recent available at the time of publication and are available
online at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>.
Table 1--Species Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor Porpoise................. Phocoena phocoena...... Northern Oregon/ -,-,N 21,487 (0.44, 15,123, 151 >=3.0
Washington Coast. 2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California Sea Lion............. Zalophus californianus. US..................... -,-,N 257,606 (N/A, 233,515, 14,011 >321
2014).
Steller Sea Lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Eastern................ -,-,N 43,201................ 2,592 112
(N/A, 43,201, 2017)...
[[Page 77987]]
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor Seal..................... Phoca vitulina......... Oregon/Washington Coast -,-,N UNK................... UND 10.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports/">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports/</a>. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g.,
commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV
associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
As indicated above, all four species in table 2 temporally and
spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that take is
reasonably likely to occur. While killer whales (Orcinus orca),
humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae), and gray whales (Eschrichtius
robustus) have been sighted off the Oregon coast, the USCG's project is
located 23 kilometers (km) into the mouth of the Columbia River.
Therefor the temporal and/or spatial occurrence of these species is
such that take is not expected to occur, and they are not discussed
further beyond the explanation provided here and in the USCG's
application.
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by the
USCG's construction 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 (88 FR 66393, September 27, 2023). 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
that Federal Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer
to NMFS' website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>) for
generalized species accounts.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Not all marine mammal species have equal
hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and
Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al.
(2007, 2019) recommended that marine mammals be divided into hearing
groups based on directly measured (behavioral or auditory evoked
potential techniques) or estimated hearing ranges (behavioral response
data, anatomical modeling, etc.). Note that no direct measurements of
hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e.,
low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with
the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the
lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower
bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing
groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in table 2.
Table 2--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
(dolphins, toothed whales, beaked
whales, bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
(true seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
(sea lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from USCG's construction activities
have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals
in the vicinity of the project area. The notice of proposed IHA (88 FR
66393, September 27, 2023) included a discussion of the effects of
anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential effects of
underwater noise from the USCG's pile
[[Page 77988]]
driving activities on marine mammals and their habitat. That
information and analysis is incorporated by reference into this notice
and is not repeated here; please refer to the notice of the proposed
IHA (88 FR 66393, September 27, 2023).
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through the IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration
of ``small numbers,'' and the negligible impact determinations.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would primarily be by Level B harassment, as use
of the acoustic source (i.e., impact pile driving) has the potential to
result in disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine
mammals. There is also some potential for auditory injury (Level A
harassment) to result. The mitigation and monitoring measures are
expected to minimize the severity of the taking to the extent
practicable. As described previously, no serious injury or mortality is
anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the
take numbers are estimated.
For acoustic impacts, 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) the number of days of activities. We note
that while these factors can contribute to a basic calculation to
provide an initial prediction of potential 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 estimates.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends the use of 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 permanent threshold shift (PTS) of some
degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment--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 or exposure context (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty
cycle, duration of the exposure, signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the
source), the environment (e.g., bathymetry, other noises in the area,
predators in the area), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography, life stage, depth) and can be difficult to
predict (e.g., Southall et al., 2007, 2021, Ellison et al., 2012).
Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to
use a threshold based on a metric that is both predictable and
measurable for most activities, NMFS typically uses a generalized
acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of
behavioral harassment. NMFS generally predicts that marine mammals are
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner considered to be Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above root-
mean-squared pressure received levels (RMS SPL) of 120 dB (referenced
to 1 micropascal (re 1 [mu]Pa)) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile
driving, drilling) and above RMS SPL 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa for non-
explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g.,
scientific sonar) sources. Generally speaking, Level B harassment take
estimates based on these behavioral harassment thresholds are expected
to include any likely takes by TTS as, in most cases, the likelihood of
TTS occurs at distances from the source less than those at which
behavioral harassment is likely. TTS of a sufficient degree can
manifest as behavioral harassment, as reduced hearing sensitivity and
the potential reduced opportunities to detect important signals
(conspecific communication, predators, prey) may result in changes in
behavior patterns that would not otherwise occur.
USCG's planned activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile
driving) sources, and therefore the RMS SPL threshold of 160 dB re 1
[mu]Pa is applicable.
Level A harassment--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). USCG's
planned activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile driving)
sources.
These thresholds are provided in the table 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:
<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance</a>.
Table 3--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset acoustic thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans........... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans........... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater)..... Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
[[Page 77989]]
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater).... Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for
calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level
thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE)
has a reference value of 1[micro]Pa\2\s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American
National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as
incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript
``flat'' is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the
generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates
the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds)
and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could
be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible,
it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
exceeded.
Ensonified Area
Underwater sound propagation modeling was completed by USCG using
dBSea, a software developed by Marshall Day Acoustics for the modeling
of underwater sound propagation in a variety of environments. The model
was built by importing bathymetry data and placing noise sources in the
environment. Each source can consist of equipment chosen from either
the standard or the user-defined databases. Noise mitigation methods
may also be included. The user has control over the seabed and water
properties including sound speed profile, temperature, salinity, and
current. Noise levels were calculated to the extent of the bathymetry
area. To examine results in more detail, levels may be plotted in cross
sections, or a detailed spectrum may be extracted at any point in the
calculation area. Levels were calculated in third octave bands from
12.5 (hertz) Hz to 20 kHz. Please refer to Acoustic Assessment included
in USCG's application for additional details on the modeling principles
and assumptions.
The representative acoustic modeling scenarios were derived from
descriptions of the expected construction activities through
consultations between the USCG project design and engineering teams.
The scenarios modeled were ones where potential underwater noise
impacts of marine species were anticipated and included impact pile
driving associated with pier installation. All modeling scenarios occur
at a representative location. This location was selected so that the
effects of sound propagation at the range of water column depths
occurring within the project area could be evaluated.
The USCG opted to perform their own acoustic modeling for the Level
A and Level B harassment isopleths as they had site specific
information to input into the model, which may assist in providing more
accurate results than, for example, use of NMFS' User Spreadsheet tool,
which is a relatively simple tool that cannot incorporate site-specific
environmental information. The modeling used by USCG takes into account
bathymetry, geo-acoustic properties of sub-bottom sediments, and sound
speed profile. NMFS has reviewed USCG's modeling and determined that it
is acceptable for use here.
A summary of construction and operational scenarios included in the
underwater acoustic modeling analysis is provided in the Acoustic
Assessment and summarized in table 5 below. The pile diameters selected
for the impact pile driving modeling scenarios were based on maximum
project design considerations approximated by USCG. The Level A and
Level B harassment isopleths for the planned activities are shown in
table 4 and 5.
Table 4--Source Levels for Impact Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile size Peak SPLs (dB) RMS SPLs (dB) SELss (dB) Source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36-in pile..................... 208 190 180 Caltrans 2020.
30-in pile..................... 210 190 177 Caltrans 2020.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5--Level A and Level B Harassment Isopleths for Impact Pile Driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment zones (m) Level B
Activity --------------------------------------------------------- harassment zone
HF cetaceans Phocid pinnipeds Otariid pinnipeds (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36-in pile.......................... 287 197 0 602
30-in pile.......................... 213 130 0 602
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation
In this section we provide information about the occurrence of
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information which
will inform the take calculations and describe how the information
provided is synthesized to produce a quantitative estimate of the take
that is reasonably likely to occur and authorized. The USCG used marine
mammal species densities from the Pacific Navy Marine Species Density
Database to estimate take for marine mammals. This database
incorporates
[[Page 77990]]
analyzed literature and research for marine mammal density estimates
per season for regions throughout the U.S. and the USCG based their
take estimates on regionally available population density estimates and
site-specific knowledge. Although this database provides densities for
all species present in the action area, the densities are based on
offshore abundance and not directly relevant to occurrence within in
the Columbia River. Following careful review of the analysis presented
by the USCG in its application, including marine mammal occurrence
data, NMFS has determined that different information inputs than those
selected by the USCG represent the best available scientific
information for marine mammal abundance in the action area. These
selections are discussed in greater detail below.
Steller Sea Lion, California Sea Lion and Harbor Seal
For Steller sea lions, California sea lions, and harbor seals, the
numbers of individuals were referenced from Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife's (WDFW) surveys from 2000-2014 at the South Jetty
for the months of in water work (November through February) and
averaged to get an estimated daily count (table 6). While animals were
surveyed at the prominent haul out site along the South Jetty, since
the ETP site is close to the mouth of the river and the South Jetty, we
assumed each of these estimates represents a good proxy for the total
number of individuals that could be present in the project vicinity. We
derived potential take estimates from the average abundance recorded
over the specified period.
Table 6--Pinniped Counts From the South Jetty From 2000-2014
[WDFW 2014]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller sea lion Steller sea lion California sea California sea Harbor seal Harbor seal
(monthly) (daily) lion (monthly) lion (daily) (monthly) (daily)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November.............................. 1663 55 1214 40 0 0
December.............................. 1112 36 725 23 57 2
January............................... 249 8 10 0.3 0 0
February.............................. 259 9 28 1 1 0.04
Average (all months).................. 821 27 494 16 15 0.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To calculate the total estimated takes, we multiplied the estimated
days of activity by the associated average daily pinniped counts
(monthly count/days of the month and averaged across all months) for
each species (table 7).
Table 7--Estimated Take of Steller Sea Lions, California Sea Lions, and Harbor Seals
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller sea California sea
Days of Steller sea lion California sea lion Harbor seal Harbor seal
Pile type and method activity lion average calculated lion average calculated average count calculate take
count take count take
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36-in Steel Pile Impact Installation.... 52 27 1,404 16 832 0.5 26
30-in Steel Pile Impact Installation....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is some potential for take by Level A harassment of harbor
seals due to the largest zone being approximately 200 m and because of
the cryptic nature and assumed lower detectability of harbor seals at
this distance. Based on the relative proportion of the area expected to
be ensonified above the Level A harassment threshold for phocid
pinnipeds from impact pile driving (approximately 0.36 square
kilometers (km\2\)) to the area ensonified above the Level B harassment
threshold (1.1 km\2\ for impact pile driving), we estimated that of the
total number of harbor seals that may be located within the greater
Level B harassment zone, approximately 33 percent would approach the
pile driving activities closer and enter the smaller Level A harassment
zone (197 m). Thus, we assume that 33 percent of the total estimated
takes of harbor seals (26 individuals; see table 7) would be by Level A
harassment. Therefore, we are proposing to authorize 9 takes of harbor
seals by Level A harassment and 17 takes by Level B harassment (table
8).
The Level A harassment zone for otariid pinnipeds is 0 m. The USCG
would be required to enforce a minimum shutdown zone of 10 m for these
species. At that close range, the USCG would be able to detect
California sea lions and Steller sea lions and implement the required
shutdown measures before any sea lions could enter the Level A
harassment zone. Therefore, no takes of California sea lions or Steller
sea lions by Level A harassment are requested or authorized.
Harbor Porpoise
Harbor porpoises are regularly observed in the coastal waters near
the mouth of the Columbia River and are known to occur year-round,
although this project occurs farther upstream in the Columbia River.
Their nearshore abundance peaks with anchovy presence, which is
generally June through October. However, there was one recorded
sighting of a harbor porpoise in the project area east of the jetties
in the September-November timeframe (OBIS-SEAMAP 2019). During
monitoring for pile driving at the Columbia River Jetty System which is
at the mouth of the Columbia River approximately 23 km from the USCG's
planned action area, over the course of a 5 day monitoring period,
observers detected five harbor porpoises (Grette Associates 2016).
Additionally we reviewed monitoring reports from four recent projects
in the nearby area (Army Corps of Engineers King Pile Markers and Sand
Island Pile Dike Test Piles, and Phase 1 and 2 of the City of Astoria
Bridge Replacement which can be found at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities#active-authorizations">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities#active-authorizations</a>).
Only one project with
[[Page 77991]]
activities occurring over 15 days had eight sightings of harbor
porpoise at Sand Island Dike.
Given that, there is some potential for harbor porpoise to be
present near the project area, and based on the previously mentioned
monitoring reports sighting data, we calculated that harbor porpoise
could enter the Level B harassment zone every other day of pile driving
(or 0.5/day). To calculate the total estimated takes by Level B
harassment, we multiplied the estimated days of activity by the
associated daily harbor porpoise rate (table 8).
There is also some potential for take by Level A harassment of
harbor porpoise due to the largest zone being approximately 300 m and
because of the cryptic nature and assumed lower detectability of harbor
porpoise at this distance. The USCG anticipates that 12 harbor
porpoises during impact driving could be taken by Level A harassment.
Take by Level A harassment for harbor porpoise was calculated in the
same way it was for harbor seals. In total, we are proposing to
authorize take of 26 harbor porpoises (table 8).
Table 8--Take of Marine Mammals by Level A and Level B Harassment by Species, Stock and Percent of Take by Stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Species Stock Take by Level Take by Level authorized Stock Percent of
A harassment B harassment take abundance stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor Porpoise........................... Northern Oregon/Washington 12 14 26 21,487 0.1
Coast.
California sea lion....................... U.S......................... 0 832 832 257,606 0.3
Steller sea lion.......................... Eastern..................... 0 1,404 1,404 43,201 3.2
Harbor seal............................... Oregon/Washington Coast..... 9 17 26 24,732 0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the 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 the
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, NMFS
considers 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, and impact on
operations.
Time Restrictions
The USCG has proposed in its description of the project that pile
driving would occur only during daylight hours (no sooner than 30
minutes after sunrise through no later than 30 minutes before sunset),
when visual monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted. In addition,
ODFW requires all in-water construction be limited to the months of
November through February to minimize impacts to ESA listed fish
species.
Mitigation Measures
USCG must follow mitigation measures as specified below:
<bullet> Ensure that construction supervisors and crews, the
monitoring team, and relevant USCG staff are trained prior to the start
of all pile driving activity, so that responsibilities, communication
procedures, monitoring protocols, and operational procedures are
clearly understood. New personnel joining during the project must be
trained prior to commencing work;
<bullet> Employ Protected Species Observers (PSOs) and establish
monitoring locations as described in the application and the IHA. USCG
must monitor the project area to the maximum extent possible based on
the required number of PSOs, required monitoring locations, and
environmental conditions. For all pile driving, at least one PSO must
be used. The PSO will be stationed as close to the activity as
possible;
<bullet> The placement of the PSOs during all pile driving activity
will ensure that the entire shutdown zone, see table 9, is visible
during pile driving activities. Should environmental conditions
deteriorate such that marine mammals within the entire shutdown zone
will not be visible (e.g., fog, heavy rain), pile driving and removal
must be delayed until the PSO is confident marine mammals within the
shutdown zone could be detected;
<bullet> Monitoring must take place from 30 minutes prior to
initiation of pile driving activity (i.e., pre-clearance monitoring)
through 30 minutes post-completion of pile driving activity;
<bullet> Pre-start clearance monitoring must be conducted during
periods of visibility sufficient for the lead PSO to determine that the
shutdown zones indicated in table 9 are clear of marine mammals. Pile
driving may commence following 30 minutes of observation when the
determination is made that the shutdown zones are clear of marine
mammals;
<bullet> USCG must use soft start techniques when impact pile
driving. Soft start requires contractors to provide an initial set of
three strikes at reduced energy, followed by a 30 second waiting
period, then two subsequent reduced-energy strike sets. A soft start
must 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; and
<bullet> If a marine mammal is observed entering or within the
shutdown zones indicated in table 9, pile driving must
[[Page 77992]]
be delayed or halted. If pile driving is delayed or halted due to the
presence of a marine mammal, the activity may not commence or resume
until either the animal has voluntarily exited and been visually
confirmed beyond the shutdown zone (table 9) or 15 minutes have passed
without re-detection of the animal.
Shutdown Zones
USCG will establish shutdown zones for all pile driving activities.
The purpose of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within
which shutdown of the activity would occur upon sighting of a marine
mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area).
Shutdown zones would be based upon the Level A harassment zone for each
pile size/type where applicable, as shown in table 9.
For in-water heavy machinery activities other than pile driving, if
a marine mammal comes within 10 m, work will stop and vessels will
reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and
safe working conditions. A 10 m shutdown zone would also serve to
protect marine mammals from physical interactions with project vessels
during pile driving and other construction activities, such as barge
positioning or drilling. If an activity is delayed or halted due to the
presence of a marine mammal, the activity may not commence or resume
until either the animal has voluntarily exited and been visually
confirmed beyond the shutdown zone indicated in table 9 or 15 minutes
have passed without re-detection of the animal. Construction activities
must be halted upon observation of a species for which incidental take
is not authorized or a species for which incidental take has been
authorized but the authorized number of takes has been met entering or
within the harassment zone.
All marine mammals will be monitored in the Level B harassment
zones and throughout the area as far as visual monitoring can take
place. If a marine mammal enters the Level B harassment zone, in-water
activities will continue and the animal's presence within the estimated
harassment zone will be documented.
USCG will also establish shutdown zones for all marine mammals for
which take has not been authorized or for which incidental take has
been authorized but the authorized number of takes has been met. These
zones are equivalent to the Level B harassment zones for each activity.
If a marine mammal species not covered under this IHA enters the
shutdown zone, all in-water activities will cease until the animal
leaves the zone or has not been observed for at least 15 minutes, and
NMFS will be notified about species and precautions taken. Pile driving
will proceed if the non-IHA species is observed to leave the Level B
harassment zone or if 15 minutes have passed since the last
observation.
If shutdown and/or clearance procedures would result in an imminent
safety concern, as determined by USCG or its designated officials, the
in-water activity will be allowed to continue until the safety concern
has been addressed, and the animal will be continuously monitored.
Table 9--Shutdown Zones and Monitoring Zones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum shutdown zone (m)
Activity --------------------------------------------------------- Harassment zone
HF cetaceans Phocid Otariid (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36-in Impact Installation........... 300 50 10 610
30-in Impact Installation........... 220 50 10 610
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protected Species Observers
The placement of PSOs during all construction activities (described
in the Monitoring and Reporting section) will ensure that the entire
shutdown zone is visible. Should environmental conditions deteriorate
such that the entire shutdown zone would not be visible (e.g., fog,
heavy rain), pile driving would be delayed until the PSO is confident
marine mammals within the shutdown zone could be detected.
PSOs will monitor the full shutdown zones and the Level B
harassment zones to the extent practicable. 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
areas outside the shutdown zones and thus prepare for a potential
cessation of activity should the animal enter the shutdown zone.
Based on our evaluation of USCG's planned measures, as well as
other measures considered by NMFS, 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 while
conducting the activities. 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:
<bullet> Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
<bullet> 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 activity; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
<bullet> Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
[[Page 77993]]
<bullet> How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
<bullet> Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and,
<bullet> Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Visual Monitoring
Marine mammal monitoring must be conducted in accordance with the
conditions in this section and the IHA. Marine mammal monitoring during
pile driving activities will be conducted by PSOs meeting the following
requirements:
<bullet> PSOs must be independent of the activity contractor (for
example, employed by a subcontractor) and have no other assigned tasks
during monitoring periods;
<bullet> At least one PSO will have prior experience performing the
duties of a PSO during construction activity pursuant to a NMFS-issued
incidental take authorization;
<bullet> Other PSOs may substitute education (degree in biological
science or related field) or training for experience; and
<bullet> Where a team of three or more PSOs is required, a lead
observer or monitoring coordinator will be designated. The lead
observer will be required to have prior experience working as a marine
mammal observer during construction.
PSOs must have the following additional qualifications:
<bullet> Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
<bullet> Experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
<bullet> Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
<bullet> 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, times and reason for implementation
of mitigation (or why mitigation was not implemented when required);
and marine mammal behavior; and
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> USCG must employ three PSOs during all pile driving
activities depending on the size of the monitoring and shutdown zones.
A minimum of one PSO must be assigned to monitor waters surrounding the
active pile driving location.
<bullet> USCG must establish the following monitoring locations
with the best views of monitoring zones as described below, in the IHA,
and USCG's application.
<bullet> PSOs would be deployed in strategic locations around the
harassment zone at all times during in-water pile driving. PSOs will be
positioned at locations that provide full views of the impact hammering
monitoring zones and the shutdown zones. PSOs will be stationed on the
staging barges, on shore at the project site, and at the entrance to
the commercial dock area at ETP. All PSOs will have access to high-
quality binoculars, range finders to monitor distances, and a compass
to record bearing to animals as well as radios or cells phones for
maintaining contact with work crews.
Monitoring will be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30
minutes after all in water construction activities. In addition, PSOs
will record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of
distance from activity, and will document any behavioral reactions in
concert with distance from piles being driven or removed. Pile driving
activities include the time to install or remove a single pile or
series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile
driving equipment is no more than 30 minutes.
USCG shall conduct briefings between construction supervisors and
crews, PSOs, USCG staff prior to the start of all pile driving
activities and when new personnel join the work. These briefings will
explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal
monitoring protocol, and operational procedures.
Reporting
A draft marine mammal monitoring report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities, or 60 days prior to a requested date of issuance from any
future IHAs for projects at the same location, whichever comes first.
The report will include an overall description of work completed, a
narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and associated PSO data
sheets. Specifically, the report must include:
<bullet> Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal
monitoring;
<bullet> Construction activities occurring during each daily
observation period, including the number and type of piles driven or
removed and by what method (i.e., impact) and the total number of
strikes for each pile;
<bullet> PSO locations during marine mammal monitoring;
<bullet> Environmental conditions during monitoring periods (at
beginning and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change
significantly), including Beaufort sea state and any other relevant
weather conditions including cloud cover, fog, sun glare, and overall
visibility to the horizon, and estimated observable distance;
Upon observation of a marine mammal, the following information:
<bullet> Name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) and PSO location and
activity at the time of sighting;
<bullet> Time of sighting;
<bullet> Identification of the animal(s) (e.g., genus/species,
lowest possible taxonomic level, or unidentifiable), PSO confidence in
identification, and the composition of the group if there is a mix of
species;
<bullet> Distance and bearing of each marine mammal observed
relative to the pile being driven for each sightings (if pile driving
was occurring at time of sighting);
<bullet> Estimated number of animals (min/max/best estimate);
<bullet> Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, juveniles,
neonates, group composition, sex class, etc.);
<bullet> Animal's closest point of approach and estimated time
spent within the harassment zone;
<bullet> Description of any marine mammal behavioral observations
(e.g., observed behaviors such as feeding or traveling), including an
assessment of behavioral responses thought to have resulted from the
activity (e.g., no response or changes in behavioral state such as
ceasing feeding, changing direction, flushing, or breaching);
<bullet> Number of marine mammals detected within the harassment
zones and shutdown zones; by species;
<bullet> Detailed information about any implementation of any
mitigation triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a description of
specific actions that ensured, and resulting changes in behavior of the
animal(s), if any; and
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
final report will constitute the final report. If comments are
received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted
within 30 days after receipt of comments.
[[Page 77994]]
Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
In the event that personnel involved in the construction activities
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the USCG must immediately
cease the specified activities and report the incident to the Office of
Protected Resources (OPR) (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e2b2b0ccabb6b2ccaf8d8c8b968d908b8c85b087928d909691a28c8d8383cc858d94"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="88d8daa6c1dcd8a6c5e7e6e1fce7fae1e6efdaedf8e7fafcfbc8e6e7e9e9a6efe7fe">[email protected]</span></a>), NMFS and
to the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible.
If the death or injury was clearly caused by the specified activity,
USCG must immediately cease the specified activities until NMFS is able
to review the circumstances of the incident and determine what, if any,
additional measures are appropriate to ensure compliance with the terms
of the IHA. The USCG must not resume their activities until notified by
NMFS. The report must include the following information:
<bullet> Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
<bullet> Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
<bullet> Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if
the animal is dead);
<bullet> Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
<bullet> If available, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s); and
<bullet> General circumstances under which the animal was
discovered.
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 impacts or responses (e.g., intensity, duration),
the context of any impacts or responses (e.g., critical reproductive
time or location, foraging impacts affecting energetics), 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 baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of
the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing
sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, our analysis applies to all species listed in
table 1 for which take could occur, given that NMFS expects the
anticipated effects of the planned pile driving on different marine
mammal stocks to be similar in nature. Where there are meaningful
differences between species or stocks, or groups of species, in
anticipated individual responses to activities, impact of expected take
on the population due to differences in population status, or impacts
on habitat, NMFS has identified species-specific factors to inform the
analysis.
Pile driving activities associated with the USCG construction
project have the potential to disturb or displace marine mammals.
Specifically, the project activities may result in take, in the form of
Level A and Level B harassment, from underwater sounds generated from
pile driving. Potential takes could occur if individuals are present in
the ensonified zone when these activities are underway.
No serious injury or mortality would be expected, even in the
absence of required mitigation measures, given the nature of the
activities. Further, limited take by Level A harassment is authorized
for two species, but the potential for harassment would be minimized
through the construction method and the implementation of the planned
mitigation measures (see Mitigation section).
Take by Level A harassment is authorized for harbor seals and
harbor porpoise to account for the possibility that an animal could
enter a Level A harassment zone prior to detection, and remain within
that zone for a duration long enough to incur PTS before being observed
and the USCG shutting down pile driving activity. Any take by Level A
harassment is expected to arise from, at most, a small degree of PTS,
i.e., minor degradation of hearing capabilities within regions of
hearing that align most completely with the energy produced by impact
pile driving (i.e. the low-frequency region below 2 kHz), not severe
hearing impairment or impairment within the ranges of greatest hearing
sensitivity. Animals would need to be exposed to higher levels and/or
longer duration than are expected to occur here in order to incur any
more than a small degree of PTS.
Further, the amount of authorized take by Level A harassment is
very low for both marine mammal species. If hearing impairment occurs,
it is most likely that the affected animal would lose only a few
decibels in its hearing sensitivity. Due to the small degree
anticipated, any PTS potential incurred would not be expected to affect
the reproductive success or survival of any individuals, much less
result in adverse impacts on the species or stock.
Additionally, some subset of the individuals that are behaviorally
harassed could also simultaneously incur some small degree of TTS for a
short duration of time. However, since the hearing sensitivity of
individuals that incur TTS is expected to recover completely within
minutes to hours, it is unlikely that the brief hearing impairment
would affect the individual's long-term ability to forage and
communicate with conspecifics, and would therefore not likely impact
reproduction or survival of any individual marine mammal, let alone
adversely affect rates of recruitment or survival of the species or
stock.
The Level A harassment zones identified in table 5 are based upon
an animal's exposure to pile driving of up to three steel piles per
day. Given the short duration to impact drive each pile and break
between pile installations (to reset equipment and move piles into
place), an animal would have to remain within the area estimated to be
ensonified above the Level A harassment threshold for multiple hours.
This is highly unlikely given marine mammal movement in the area. If an
animal was exposed to accumulated sound energy, the resulting PTS would
likely be small (e.g., PTS onset) at lower frequencies where pile
driving energy is concentrated, and unlikely to result in impacts to
individual fitness, reproduction, or survival.
The nature of the pile driving project precludes the likelihood of
serious injury or mortality. For all species and stocks, take would
occur within a limited, confined area (adjacent to the project site) of
the stock's range. Level A and Level B harassment will be reduced to
the level of least practicable adverse impact through use of mitigation
measures described herein. Further, the amount of take authorized is
small when compared to stock abundance.
[[Page 77995]]
Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving in the
Columbia River are expected to be mild, short term, and temporary.
Marine mammals within the Level B harassment zones may not show any
visual cues they are disturbed by activities or they could become
alert, avoid the area, leave the area, or display other mild responses
that are not observable, such as changes in vocalization patterns.
Given that pile driving would occur for only a portion of the project's
duration, any harassment occurring would be temporary. Additionally,
many of the species present in region would only be present temporarily
based on seasonal patterns or during transit between other habitats.
These temporarily present species would be exposed to even smaller
periods of noise-generating activity, further decreasing the impacts.
For all species, there are no known BIA near the project area that
would be impacted by USCG's planned activities. While California sea
lions and harbor seals are the species most likely to occur within the
immediate project area the nearest haul out for both species is
approximately 3 miles (4.8 km) away. There are three known haul out
sites for both species near the project area including Tongue Point
Sands, Taylor Sands, and Green Island/Sanborn Slough, the closest being
Tongue Point Sands 3 miles (4.8 km) from the project area.
Additionally, there is a Steller sea lion haul out in the Columbia
River; it is approximately 15 miles (24.1 km) away from the project
site at the south jetty off the western shoreline of Fort Stevens State
Park. None of these haul outs are in the immediate project vicinity.
In addition, it is unlikely that minor noise effects in a small,
localized area of habitat would have any effect on each stock's
continued survival. In combination, we believe that these factors, as
well as the available body of evidence from other similar activities,
demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified activities will
have only minor, short-term effects on individuals. The specified
activities are not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival
and will therefore not result in population-level impacts.
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 any of the species or stocks
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
<bullet> No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or
authorized;
<bullet> Authorized Level A harassment would be very small amounts
and of low degree;
<bullet> For all species, the mouth of the Columbia River is a very
small and peripheral part of their range;
<bullet> The intensity of anticipated takes by Level B harassment
is relatively low for all stocks. Level B harassment would be primarily
in the form of behavioral disturbance, resulting in avoidance of the
project areas around where impact pile driving is occurring, with some
low-level TTS that may limit the detection of acoustic cues for
relatively brief amounts of time in relatively confined footprints of
the activities;
<bullet> Effects on species that serve as prey for marine mammals
from the activities are expected to be short-term and, therefore, any
associated impacts on marine mammal feeding are not expected to result
in significant or long-term consequences for individuals, or to accrue
to adverse impacts on their populations;
<bullet> The ensonified areas are very small relative to the
overall habitat ranges of all species and stocks;
<bullet> The lack of anticipated significant or long-term negative
effects to marine mammal habitat; and
<bullet> USCG would implement mitigation measures including soft
starts and shutdown zones to minimize the numbers of marine mammals
exposed to injurious levels of sound, and to ensure that take by Level
A harassment is, at most, a small degree of PTS.
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
activities will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal
species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted previously, only take of small numbers of marine mammals
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. When the predicted number of
individuals to be taken is fewer than one-third of the species or stock
abundance, the take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally,
other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as
the temporal or spatial scale of the activities. For all species, the
authorized take is below one third of the population for all marine
mammal stocks (Table 8).
Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity
(including the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated
take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals
would 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 would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for
endangered or threatened species.
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.
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 (i.e., the issuance of an IHA) with respect
to potential impacts on the human environment. This action is
consistent with categories of activities identified in Categorical
Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of
the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A, which do not individually or
cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the
[[Page 77996]]
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.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, NMFS issued an IHA to USCG for
conducting impact pile driving associated with the ETP project in
Astoria, Oregon, provided the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. The final IHA
can be found at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-united-states-coast-guards-construction-astoria-oregon">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-united-states-coast-guards-construction-astoria-oregon</a>.
Dated: November 7, 2023.
Shannon Bettridge,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-24980 Filed 11-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on November 14, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.