Notice2024-03251
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Lutak Dock Replacement Project, Haines, Alaska
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
February 16, 2024
Effective
June 1, 2024
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 Haines Borough to incidentally harass marine mammals during construction activities associated with a Lutak Dock Replacement project in Haines, Alaska.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 33 (Friday, February 16, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 33 (Friday, February 16, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12306-12318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-03251]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XD539]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Lutak Dock Replacement Project,
Haines, Alaska
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
[[Page 12307]]
amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an
incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to Haines Borough to
incidentally harass marine mammals during construction activities
associated with a Lutak Dock Replacement project in Haines, Alaska.
DATES: This authorization is effective from June 1, 2024, through May
31, 2025.
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/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities</a>. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call
the contact listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Cockrell, 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 July 10, 2023, NMFS received a request from Haines Borough for
an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving involving
impact, vibratory, and down-the-hole (DTH) drilling to replace the
Lutak Dock. Following NMFS' review of the application, Haines Borough
submitted a revised version on October 11, 2023. The application was
deemed adequate and complete on October 16, 2023.
Haines Borough's request was for take of six species of marine
mammals by Level B harassment and, for a subset of three of these
species, Level A harassment. Neither Haines Borough nor NMFS expect
serious injury or mortality to result from this activity and,
therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
Description of Activity
Haines Borough will encapsulate the existing Lutak Dock structure
with a new dock structure of similar design. In-water construction
activities associated with the project will include impact pile
driving, vibratory pile driving and removal, and DTH installation. Pile
removal will consist of 24 16-inch (in) steel pipe piles (41
centimeters (cm)) that make up the 4 mooring dolphins and 1 24-in (61-
cm) steel guide pile. A template frame will then be welded to 42 36-in
(91-cm) temporary piles that are capable of holding 10 permanent piles
in each section. The template frame will be used to position the 180
42-in (107-cm) permanent piles across the length of the dock. Up to 10
permanent piles will be set at a time, before moving the template to
the next position to install the next 10 permanent piles. A permanent
55.5-in (140-cm) sheet pile wall will be installed and attached to the
permanent piles to make up the new dock return walls. It is expected to
take up to 234 non-consecutive days to complete the pile driving and
removal activities.
A detailed description of the planned construction project is
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (88 FR
78310, November 15, 2023). Since that time, no changes have been made
to the planned 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 Haines Borough was
published in the Federal Register on November 15, 2023 (88 FR 78310).
That notice described, in detail, Haines Borough's activity, the marine
mammal species that may be affected by the activity, 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.
During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS did not receive any
public comments.
Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA
In table 7 of the proposed IHA Federal Register notice (88 FR
78310, November 15, 2023) Level A and Level B harassment zones for
impact installation of 42-in. piles were incorrect. These values have
been corrected in table 6 of this notice. Take estimates and mitigation
measures were considered using the correct source level and harassment
zones and thus remain unchanged in this notice.
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
[[Page 12308]]
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' Alaska SARs (Young et al., 2023). 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 \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\2\ abundance survey) \3\ SI \4\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Artiodactyla--Infraorder Cetacea--Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Humpback whale.................. Megaptera novaeangliae. Hawai[revaps]i......... -,-, N 11,278 (0.56, 7,265, 127 27.09
2020).
Mexico-North Pacific... T, D, Y N/A (N/A, N/A, 2006).. UND 0.57
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale.................... Orcinus orca........... Eastern North Pacific -, -, N 1,920 (N/A, 1,920, 19 1.3
Alaska Resident. 2019).
Eastern Northern -, -, N 302 (N/A, 302, 2018).. 2.2 0.2
Pacific Northern
Resident.
West Coast Transient... -, -, N 349 (N/A, 349, 2018).. 3.5 0.4
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise................. Phocoena phocoena...... Northern Southeast -, -, N 1,619 (0.26, 1,250, 13 5.6
Alaska Inland Waters. 2019).
Dall's Porpoise................. Phocoenoides dalli..... Alaska................. -, -, N UND (UND, UND, 2015).. UND 37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
Steller sea lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Eastern DPS \5\........ -, -, N 43,201 (N/A, 43,201, 2,592 112
2017).
Western DPS............ E, D, Y 52,932 (N/A, 52,932, 318 254
2019).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor Seal..................... Phoca vitulina......... Lynn Canal/Stephens -, -, N 13,388 (N/A, 11,867, 214 50
Passage. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy's Committee on Taxonomy
(<a href="https://www.marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/">https://www.marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/</a>; Committee on Taxonomy (2022)).
\2\ 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.
\3\ 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. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\4\ 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, vessel 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.
\5\ Distinct Population Segment (DPS).
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by the
Lutak Dock Replacement 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 78310, November 15, 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-dB
threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception
for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower
[[Page 12309]]
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.
Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from Haines Borough'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 78310, November 15, 2023) included a discussion of
the effects of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential
effects of underwater noise from Haines Borough's construction
activities on marine mammals and their habitat. That information and
analysis is incorporated by reference into this final IHA determination
and is not repeated here; please refer to the notice of proposed IHA
(88 FR 78310, November 15, 2023).
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through the final 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 construction equipment (i.e., 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, primarily for high frequency cetaceans and
phocids, because predicted auditory injury zones are larger and beyond
Haines Borough's capability to reasonably monitor. Auditory injury is
unlikely to occur for other species groups, based on the combination of
expected occurrence and monitoring capabilities relative to estimated
Level A harassment zone sizes. 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, Southall et al., 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
[[Page 12310]]
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 temporary threshold shift (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.
Haines Borough's activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory
pile driving) and impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, and
therefore the RMS SPL thresholds of 120- and 160-dB re 1 [mu]Pa are
applicable. DTH systems have both continuous and intermittent
(impulsive) components as discussed in the proposed IHA Federal
Register notice (88 FR 78310, November 15, 2023) in the Description of
Sound Sources section. When evaluating Level B harassment, NMFS
recommends treating DTH as a continuous source and applying the RMS SPL
thresholds of 120-dB re 1 [mu]Pa.
Level A harassment--NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0 of
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). The Haines
Borough's construction includes the use of impulsive (impact pile
driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving) sources. As
described above, DTH includes both impulsive and non-impulsive
characteristics. When evaluating Level A harassment, NMFS recommends
treating DTH as an impulsive source.
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.
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
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that are used in estimating the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, including source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
The sound field in the project area is the existing background
noise plus additional construction noise from the project. Marine
mammals are expected to be affected via sound generated by the primary
components of the project (i.e., impact pile driving, vibratory pile
driving and removal, DTH). The maximum (underwater) area ensonified
above the thresholds for behavioral harassment referenced above is
20.86 kilometers\2\ (12.96 miles\2\), and will consist of the entire
area of Lutak Inlet (see Figure 20 in the Haines Borough's
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 x Log<INF>10</INF> (R<INF>1</INF>/R<INF>2</INF>)
Where:
TL = transmission loss in dB
B = transmission loss coefficient
R<INF>1</INF> = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven
pile, and
R<INF>2</INF> = 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 (20xlog[range]). Cylindrical spreading occurs
in an environment in which sound propagation is bounded by the water
surface and sea bottom, resulting
[[Page 12311]]
in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for each doubling of distance
from the source (10xlog[range]). A practical spreading value of 15 is
often used under conditions, such as the project site, where water
increases with depth as the receiver moves away from the shoreline,
resulting in an expected propagation environment that will 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
the distances to the Level A harassment and the Level B harassment
sound thresholds for the methods and piles being used in this project,
the applicant and NMFS used acoustic monitoring data from other
locations to develop proxy source levels for the various pile types,
sizes and methods. The project includes vibratory, impact, and DTH pile
installation of steel pipe and sheet piles and vibratory removal of
steel pipe piles. Source levels for impact installation of 36-in steel
piles are used as a proxy for 42-in steel piles, as 36-in source levels
are higher than those available for 42-in piles. Using these higher
values is the more conservative approach for mitigation measures and
take estimate calculations. NMFS consulted multiple sources to
determine valid proxy source levels for the impact installation of
sheet piles, as indicated in table 4. This is the best available data
for sheet pile source levels and is based on 24-in sheet piles used for
a project in California. Source levels for each pile size and driving
method are presented in table 4.
Table 4--Proxy Sound Source Levels for Pile Sizes and Driving Methods
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proxy source level
--------------------------------------------------
Pile size Method dB RMS re dB SEL * re dB peak re Literature source
1[micro]Pa 1[micro]Pa\2\sec 1[micro]Pa
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in............................ Vibratory........... 161 N/A N/A Navy 2015.
24-in............................ Vibratory........... 161 N/A N/A Navy 2015.
36-in............................ Vibratory........... 166 N/A N/A Navy 2015.
42-in............................ Vibratory........... 170 N/A N/A Illingworth and Rodkin, 2019.
55.5-in sheet pile............... Vibratory........... 162 N/A N/A Molnar et al. 2020.
36-in............................ Impact.............. 192 184 211 Navy 2015.
42-in............................ Impact.............. 192 184 211 Navy 2015.
55.5-in sheet pile............... Impact.............. 190 180 205 Caltrans 2015.
42-in............................ DTH................. 174 164 194 NMFS 2022.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Sound exposure level (SEL)
The ensonified area associated with Level A harassment is more
technically challenging to predict due to the need to account for a
duration component. Therefore, NMFS developed an optional User
Spreadsheet tool to accompany the Technical Guidance that can be used
to relatively simply predict an isopleth distance for use in
conjunction with marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict
potential takes. We note that because of some of the assumptions
included in the methods underlying this optional tool, we anticipate
that the resulting isopleth estimates are typically going to be
overestimates of some degree, which may result in an overestimate of
potential take by Level A harassment. However, this optional tool
offers the best way to estimate isopleth distances when more
sophisticated modeling methods are not available or practical. For
stationary sources such as impact or vibratory pile driving and removal
and DTH, the optional User Spreadsheet tool predicts the distance at
which, if a marine mammal remained at that distance for the duration of
the activity, it will be expected to incur PTS. Inputs used in the
optional User Spreadsheet tool (table 5), and the resulting estimated
isopleths and the calculated Level B harassment isopleth (table 6), are
reported below. For source levels of each pile please refer to table 4.
Table 5--User Spreadsheet Input Parameters Used for Calculating Level A Harassment Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of Activity
Pile size and installation method Spreadsheet tab Weighting factor strikes per piles per duration
used adjustment (kHz) pile day (minutes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in vibratory removal.......... A.1 Vibratory pile 2.5 N/A 4 45
driving.
24-in vibratory removal.......... A.1 Vibratory pile 2.5 N/A 1 45
driving.
36-in vibratory installation A.1 Vibratory pile 2.5 N/A 4 15
(temporary). driving.
36-in vibratory removal A.1 Vibratory pile 2.5 N/A 4 15
(temporary). driving.
42-in vibratory installation..... A.1 Vibratory pile 2.5 N/A 4 45
driving.
55-in sheet pile vibratory A.1 Vibratory pile 2.5 N/A 6 30
installation. driving.
36-in impact installation E.1 Impact pile 2 900 4 N/A
(temporary). driving.
42-in impact installation........ E.1 Impact pile 2 1,500 4 N/A
driving.
55-in sheet pile impact E.1 Impact pile 2 900 6 N/A
installation. driving.
42-in DTH installation........... E.2 DTH systems.... 2 324,000 2 N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Calculated Level A and Level B Harassment Isopleths
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment zone (m) Level B
Activity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- harassment
LF-cetaceans MF-cetaceans HF-cetaceans Phocids Otariids zone (m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in vibratory removal................................. 14.2 1.3 21.8 8.6 0.6 5,412
[[Page 12312]]
24-in vibratory removal................................. 5.6 0.5 8.3 3.4 0.2
36-in vibratory installation (temporary)................ 14.7 1.3 21.8 8.9 0.6 11,659
36-in vibratory removal (temporary)..................... 14.7 1.3 21.8 8.9 0.6
42-in vibratory installation *.......................... 56.6 5.0 83.6 34.4 2.4 21,544
55-in sheet pile vibratory installation................. 16.6 1.5 24.5 10.1 0.7 6,310
36-in impact installation (temporary)................... 2,734.9 97.3 3,257.7 1,463.6 106.6 1,359
42-in impact installation............................... 3,844.5 136.7 4,579.4 2,057.4 149.8 1,359
55-in sheet pile impact installation.................... 1,939.4 69.0 2,310.1 1,037.9 75.6 1,000
42-in DTH installation.................................. 4,046.9 143.9 4,820.5 2,165.7 157.7 39,811
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Harassment zones updated from the proposed IHA.
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section NMFS provides information about the occurrence of
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information which
will inform the take calculations.
When available, peer-reviewed scientific publications were used to
estimate marine mammal abundance in the project area. Data from
monitoring reports from previous projects in Lutak and Skagway were
used. However, scientific surveys and resulting data, such as
population estimates, densities, and other quantitative information,
are lacking for some marine mammal populations and most areas of
southeast Alaska, including Lutak Inlet. Therefore, Haines Borough
additionally gathered qualitative information from discussions with
knowledgeable local people in the Haines area. Assumptions regarding
the size of expected groups of different species, and the frequency of
occurrence of those groups, were provided by Haines Borough on the
basis of the aforementioned information. NMFS has reviewed the
available information and concurs that these choices are reasonable.
Here we describe how the information provided is synthesized to
produce a quantitative estimate of the take that is reasonably likely
to occur and is authorized. Since reliable densities are not available,
the take numbers are based on the assumed maximum number of animals in
a group at a given time and the occurrence of those groups per day
multiplied by the duration of each activity. Tables for each species
are presented to show the calculation of take during the project. The
take calculation for this project is:
Incidental take estimate = number of individuals in a group x groups
per day x days of pile-related activity
Humpback Whale
Humpback whale presence in Lutak is irregular year-round. From mid-
May through September whales are assumed to occur in groups of two and
from October to April in groups of one. It is expected that in early
summer (mid-May through July) one group every 2 days may occur and at
all other times of the year one group every 10 days will occur in the
project area (Solstice AK, 2023; Happywhale, 2023). Therefore, using
the equation given above, the total number of Level B harassment takes
for humpback whales will be 26. Given that 2 percent of the humpback
whales in southeast Alaska are expected to be members of the Mexico
stock (Wade et al., 2016), 1 take is assumed to be from the Mexico
stock and 25 takes from the Hawaii stock.
The largest Level A harassment zone for humpback whales extends
4,050-m from the noise source (table 6). All construction work will be
shut down prior to a humpback whale entering the Level A harassment
zone specific to the in-water activity underway at the time. In
consideration of the infrequent occurrence of humpback whales in the
project area and shutdown requirements, no take by Level A harassment
is anticipated or authorized for humpback whales.
Killer Whale
Killer whales occur in the Lutak Inlet year round with higher
occurrences in the spring. Group sizes of 15 animals are expected with
1 group every 20 days from mid-March through May and 1 group every 30
days for the remainder of the year (Hart Crowser, Inc. and KPFF
Consulting Engineers 2016). There are three stocks of killer whales
that may be present in the project area, with the following proportions
of overall killer whale occurrence expected: Alaska Residents, 75
percent; West Coast Transients, 13 percent; and Northern Residents, 12
percent (section 6 of the IHA application). The applicant estimated
these occurrence proportions by determining the total number of animals
in all three stocks and dividing that number by the number of animals
in a given stock. Therefore, with 130 expected total takes by Level B
harassment, 103 takes are expected to be from the Alaska Resident
stock, 19 takes are expected from the West Coast Transient stock, and
16 takes are expected from the Northern Resident stock.
The largest Level A harassment zone for killer whales extends 150-m
from the noise source (table 6). Killer whales are generally
conspicuous and protected species observers (PSOs) are expected to
detect killer whales and implement a shutdown before the animals enter
the Level A harassment zone. Therefore, takes by Level A harassment are
not anticipated or authorized.
Harbor Porpoise
Harbor porpoise are present year round in the Lynn Canal and are
expected to be present in groups of two every 30 days at the project
site. Haines Borough requested a total of 29 takes of harbor porpoise
for the duration of the project. Of the 29 takes it is expected that 13
of those takes could be by Level A harassment, over 153 days of impact
installation of 36-in, 42-in, and 55-in sheet piles and DTH activities.
For construction activities that are of short duration and the take
estimate was below the expected group size, the expected group size
(e.g., two animals) was used as a proxy for take calculations for those
activities. The remaining 16 takes are expected to be by Level B
harassment.
Harbor porpoises are known to be an inconspicuous species and are
challenging for PSOs to sight, making any approach to a specific area
potentially difficult to detect. The largest Level A harassment zone
results from impact driving of 42-in piles, and extends 4,820.5-m from
the source for high frequency cetaceans (table 6). The IHA requires a
distance of 200-m as a shutdown zone, given the difficulty of observing
harbor porpoise at greater
[[Page 12313]]
distances (see Mitigation section). Therefore, some take by Level A
harassment is expected.
Dall's Porpoise
Groups of 4 Dall's porpoise are expected to occur once every 30
days during the project (Dahlheim et al., 2009), resulting in an
estimate of 31 takes by Level B harassment. Although no Dall's porpoise
were observed during recent monitoring of other projects in the area,
tour boat operators occasionally observe Dall's porpoise in Taiya Inlet
(SolsticeAK, 2023). Therefore, the applicant has requested
authorization of take as described above. NMFS concurs with this
request and authorizes the take.
The largest Level A harassment zone for Dall's porpoise extends
4,820.5-m from the source during DTH installation of 42-in piles (table
6). Although Haines Borough will implement a significantly smaller
shutdown zone (i.e., 200-m), given the low likelihood of occurrence of
Dall's porpoises in the area take by Level A harassment is not
anticipated and is not authorized.
Steller Sea Lion
Steller sea lions are frequently observed in the project area.
Group sizes vary during seasonal fish runs in the area. Groups of 40
animals per day are expected from mid-March through May when animals
frequent the project site, including the Taiya point haulout. At other
times of the year groups of two animals per day are expected in the
project area.
During the impact installation of 36-in and 42-in piles and the DTH
installation of 42-in piles, groups of 2 sea lions per day are expected
to occur within the respective Level A harassment zones over 146 days
associated with these activities. On this basis, NMFS authorizes 292
takes of Steller sea lions by Level A harassment. Given that 1.4
percent of Steller sea lions are members of the ESA listed western DPS
in the project area, 4 of the 292 takes by Level A harassment will
likely be western DPS individuals. The largest Level A harassment zone
for Steller sea lions is 150-m (table 6) but it may be difficult for
PSOs to view Steller sea lions at the outer edges of the zone and
therefore some take by Level A harassment is expected.
Larger harassment zones associated with Level B harassment will
encompass the Taiya point haulout. It is expected that groups of 40
Steller sea lions per day over 75 days of vibratory installation of all
pile types, impact installation of 36-in and 42-in piles, and DTH
installation of 42-in piles which will equate to 3,000 takes by Level B
harassment. At other times of the year when the Taiya point haulout is
not used, group size will be two sea lions per day. During this period
the applicant will complete work over 151 days for vibratory
installation of all pile types, impact installation of 36-in and 42-in
piles, and DTH installation of 42-in piles which will equate to 302
takes by Level B harassment.
Harbor Seal
Harbor seals are common in the project area year round. The
applicant and NMFS expect groups of 100 animals from March through May
when animals are more frequent feeding at the mouth of the Chilkoot
River. At other times of the year, groups of five animals are expected
in the project area (SolsticeAK 2023).
During impact installation of 36-in, 42-in, and 55-in sheet piles
and DTH installation of 42-in piles it is expected that one group of
five harbor seals every 10 days will occur. Over 153 days of activity,
79 total takes by Level A harassment may occur. For construction
activities that are of short duration and the take estimate was below
the expected group size, the expected group size (e.g., five animals)
was used as a proxy for take calculations for those activities. The
largest Level A harassment zone results from impact driving of 42-in
piles extends 2,057 m from the source for phocids (table 6). The IHA
requires a 200-m shutdown zone, given the difficulty of observing
harbor seals at greater distances (see Mitigation section). Therefore,
take by Level A harassment is expected.
Similar to Steller sea lions the larger Level B harassment zones
will encompass the mouth of the Chilkoot River where larger
aggregations of harbor seals are known to occur. It is expected that
groups of harbor seals of 100 every 10 days over 75 days of vibratory
installation of all pile types, impact installation of all pile types,
and DTH installation of 42-in piles, which will equate to 750 takes by
Level B harassment. During other times of the year the applicant
expects groups of five animals every 10 days over a 151 day period for
vibratory installation of all pile types, impact installation of 36-in
and 42-in piles, and DTH installation of 42-in piles. This will result
in 827 takes by Level B harassment.
Table 7--Estimated Take by Level A and Level B Harassment, by Species and Stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock Take as a
Common name Stock abundance \a\ Level A Level B Total take percentage
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback Whale............................ Mexico...................... Unknown 0 1 1 N/A
Hawaii...................... 11,278 0 25 25 0.2
Killer Whale.............................. Alaska Resident............. 1,920 0 103 103 5.4
West Coast Transients....... 349 0 19 19 5.4
Eastern North Pacific 302 0 16 16 5.3
Northern Residents.
Harbor Porpoise........................... Northern Southeast Alaska... 1,619 13 16 29 1.8
Dall's Porpoise........................... Alaska...................... UKN 0 31 31 N/A
Steller sea lion.......................... Western DPS................. 52,932 4 33 37 <0.1
Eastern DPS................. 43,201 288 2,319 2,607 6.0
Harbor Seal............................... Lynn Canal/Stephens Passage. 13,388 79 827 906 6.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Stock or DPS size is best estimate of population size (Nbest) according to NMFS 2022 Final Stock Assessment Reports.
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. NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological)
[[Page 12314]]
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.
The following measures will apply to Haines Borough's mitigation
requirements:
Implementation of Shutdown Zones--For all pile driving/removal
activities, Haines Borough will implement shutdowns within designated
zones. 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).
Implementation of shutdowns will be used to avoid or minimize
incidental Level A harassment takes from vibratory, impact, and DTH
pile removal and installation (table 8). For all pile driving/removal
activities, a minimum 10-m shutdown zone must be established. NMFS has
recommended shutdown zones of 200-m for high-frequency cetaceans and
phocids, despite significantly larger estimated Level A harassment
zones, in order to prescribe implementation of a zone that may be
reasonably observed under typical conditions for these cryptic species.
It is reasonable to expect that these species will be difficult to
detect from distances further than 200-m by PSOs (table 8). All other
shutdown zones for pile driving and removal activities are based on the
Level A harassment zones and therefore vary by pile size and marine
mammal hearing group (table 6). The placement of PSOs during all pile
driving activities (described in detail in the Monitoring and Reporting
section) will ensure the full extent of shutdown zones are visible to
PSOs.
Table 8--Shutdown Zones During Pile Installation and Removal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shutdown zones (m)
Minutes or strikes Piles per ----------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Pile size per pile day LF MF HF
cetaceans cetaceans cetaceans Phocids Otariids
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Removal............... 16-in.............. 45 min............. 4 15 10 30 10 10
----------------------------------------------------------------
24-in.............. 45 min............. 1 10
----------------------------------------------------------------
36-in (temporary).. 15 min............. 4 15 10 30 10 10
Vibratory Installation.......... 36-in (temporary).. 15 min............. 4 15 10 30 10 10
42-in.............. 45 min............. 4 60 10 85 35 10
55-in sheet pile... 30 min............. 6 20 10 25 10 10
Impact Installation............. 36-in (temporary).. 900 strikes........ 4 2,735 110 200 200 110
42-in.............. 1,500 strikes...... 4 3,845 150 150
55-in sheet pile... 900 strikes........ 6 1,940 70 80
DTH drilling.................... 42-in.............. 300 min/324,000 2 4,050 145 160
strikes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishment of Monitoring Zones--Haines Borough has identified
monitoring zones correlated with the larger of the Level B harassment
or Level A harassment zones. Monitoring zones provide utility for
observing by establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to
the shutdown zones. In some cases the calculated monitoring zones are
smaller than the Level A shutdown zones as presented in table 8. This
is due to the project area being bounded by land to 7,000-m on the
western most shore of the inlet and 5,820-m on the eastern shore.
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 cessation of activity should the
animal enter the shutdown zone. PSOs will monitor the entire visible
area to maintain the best sense of where animals are moving relative to
the zone boundaries defined in tables 8 and 9. Placement of PSOs on the
shorelines around Lutak Inlet allow PSOs to observe marine mammals
within and near the inlet. The applicant may also voluntarily place a
PSO on a skiff in Taiya Inlet if safe conditions allow for such
activity.
Table 9--Marine Mammal Monitoring Zone
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitoring
Activity zone (m)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory removal of 16-in and 24-in piles.............. 5,425
Vibratory installation and removal of 36-in temporary 7,000
piles..................................................
Vibratory installation of 42-in piles................... 7,000
Vibratory installation of 55-in sheet piles............. 6,310
Impact installation of 36-in temporary piles............ * 1,360
Impact installation of 42-in piles...................... * 1,360
Impact installation of 55-in sheet piles................ 1,000
DTH installation of 42-in piles......................... 7,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Where Level A shutdown zones are larger than the Level B harassment
zones.
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
[[Page 12315]]
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 and removal
activities.
Pre-Activity Monitoring--Prior to the start of daily in-water
construction activity, or whenever a break in pile driving/removal 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
considered 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
monitoring zone has been observed for 30-minutes and marine mammals are
not present within the zone, soft-start procedures can commence and
work can continue even if visibility becomes impaired within the
monitoring zone. When a marine mammal permitted for take by Level B
harassment is present in the Level B harassment zone, activities may
begin. No work may begin unless the entire shutdown zone is visible to
the PSOs. If work ceases for more than 30-minutes, the pre-activity
monitoring of both the monitoring zone and shutdown zone will commence.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's measures, NMFS has
determined that the mitigation measures provide the means of 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;
<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
Monitoring shall be conducted by NMFS-approved observers in
accordance with the monitoring plan (appendix C of the IHA application)
and section 5 of the IHA. 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/removal activities. In addition, observers
shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of
distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in
concert with distance from piles being driven or removed. Pile driving/
removal 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.
A minimum of one PSO will be on duty during all barge movements and
other in-water construction activities and a minimum of three PSOs
during all pile driving activities. Locations from which PSOs will be
able to monitor for marine mammals are readily available from publicly
accessible shore side areas at the project site, Lutak Road at a beach
across from Takshanuk Mountain trail, and along the shoreline just
south of Tanani Point along Lutak Road. PSOs will monitor for marine
mammals entering the harassment zones.
PSOs will scan the waters using binoculars and will use a handheld
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 via a radio. Haines Borough will adhere to the following
observer qualifications:
(i) PSOs must be independent of the activity contractor (for
example, employed by a subcontractor) and have no other assigned tasks
during monitoring periods;
(ii) One PSO will be designated as the lead PSO or monitoring
coordinator and that 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; and
(iv) Haines Borough must submit observer Curriculum Vitaes for
approval by NMFS.
Additional recommended observer qualifications include:
[[Page 12316]]
<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 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
<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.
Reporting
A draft marine mammal monitoring report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities. It will include an overall description of work completed, a
narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and associated 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 driving) and for each pile or
total number of strikes for each pile (impact driving);
<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;
<bullet> Upon observation of a marine mammal, the following
information: Name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) and PSO location and
activity at time of sighting; time of sighting; identification of the
animal(s) (e.g., genus/species, lowest possible taxonomic level, or
unidentified), PSO confidence in identification, and the composition of
the group if there is a mix of species; distance and bearing of each
marine mammal observed relative to the pile being driven for each
sighting (if pile driving was occurring at time of sighting); estimated
number of animals (min/max/best estimate); estimated number of animals
by cohort (adults, juveniles, neonates, group composition, etc.);
animal's closest point of approach and estimated time spent within the
harassment zone; and 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, by species; and
<bullet> Detailed information about any implementation of any
mitigation triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a description of
specific actions that ensued, and resulting changes in behavior of the
animal(s), if any.
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.
Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
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, Haines
Borough will immediately cease the specified activities and report the
incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Alaska
Regional Stranding Coordinator. The report will include the following
information:
<bullet> Description of the incident;
<bullet> Environmental conditions (e.g., Beaufort sea state,
visibility);
<bullet> Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
<bullet> Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
<bullet> Fate of the animal(s); and
<bullet> 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 Haines
Borough to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of
further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Haines Borough will
not be able to resume their activities until notified by NMFS.
In the event that Haines Borough 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), Haines Borough will immediately report the incident to the
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the NMFS Alaska Stranding
Hotline and/or by email to the Alaska 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 Haines Borough
to determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
In the event that Haines Borough 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), Haines Borough will report the
incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the NMFS
Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the Alaska Regional
Stranding Coordinator, within 24 hours of the discovery. Haines Borough
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 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
[[Page 12317]]
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, the majority of our analysis applies to all
the species listed in table 7, given that many of the anticipated
effects of this project on different marine mammal stocks are expected
to be relatively 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, they are described independently in the analysis below.
Pile driving and removal activities associated with the 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 A harassment and Level B harassment from underwater
sounds generated from pile driving and removal. Potential takes could
occur if individuals of these species are present in zones ensonified
above the thresholds for Level A or Level B harassment identified above
when these activities are underway.
Take by Level A and Level B harassment will be due to potential
behavioral disturbance, TTS, and PTS. No serious injury or mortality is
anticipated or authorized given the nature of the activity and measures
designed to minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals. Take
by Level A harassment is only anticipated for harbor porpoise, Steller
sea lions, and harbor seal. Take by Level A harassment of the ESA-
listed western DPS of Steller sea lions is expected to be a very small
portion of the overall DPS (<0.1 percent). Impacts to affected
individuals of the western DPS are not expected to result in
population-level impacts. The potential for harassment is minimized
through the construction method (i.e., use of direct pull removal or
vibratory methods to the extent practical) and the implementation of
the planned mitigation measures (see Mitigation section).
In addition to the expected effects resulting from Level B
harassment, we anticipate that harbor porpoises, Steller sea lions, and
harbor seals may sustain some limited Level A harassment in the form of
auditory injury. However, animals in these locations that experience
PTS will 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 will lose
a few decibels in its hearing sensitivity, 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 will 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 mammals' habitat. The project activities
will not modify existing marine mammal habitat for a significant amount
of time. The activities may cause some fish or invertebrates to leave
the area of disturbance, thus temporarily impacting marine mammals'
foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range; but,
because of the short duration of the activities, the relatively small
area of the habitat that may be affected, and the availability of
nearby habitat of similar or higher value, the impacts to marine mammal
habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative
consequences. The haulout location at Taiya Point will be affected by
the project for foraging Steller sea lions and occasionally harbor
seals. Currently, the Taiya Point haulout location is not known to be a
pupping location for Steller sea lions or harbor seals but are
important areas throughout the year. Steller sea lions and to a lesser
extent harbor seals at this haulout will likely result in repeated
exposure of the same animals. Repeated exposures of individuals to this
pile driving activity could cause Level A and Level B harassment but
are unlikely to considerably disrupt foraging behavior or result in
significant decrease in fitness, reproduction, or survival for the
affected individuals.
In summary and as described above, the following factors 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> Any Level A harassment exposures (i.e., to harbor seals,
harbor porpoise, and Steller sea lions, only) are anticipated to result
in slight PTS (i.e., of a few decibels), within the lower frequencies
associated with pile driving;
<bullet> The anticipated incidents of Level B harassment would
consist of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior that will not
result in fitness impacts to individuals;
<bullet> The ensonifed areas from the project 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 or any other areas of known biological
importance; with the exception of the haulout location at Taiya Point;
and
<bullet> The mitigation measures are expected to reduce 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
activity 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.
[[Page 12318]]
Table 7 demonstrates the number of animals that could be exposed to
the received noise levels that could cause harassment for the work in
Lutak Inlet. Our analysis shows that less than 6.8 percent of each
affected stock could be taken by harassment. The numbers of animals to
be taken for these stocks will 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 activity (including
the 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
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must find that the specified
activity will not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' on the
subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal species or stocks by
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined ``unmitigable adverse impact'' in 50
CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity: (1)
That is likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level
insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by (i) causing the
marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas, (ii) directly
displacing subsistence users; or (iii) placing physical barriers
between the marine mammals and the subsistence hunters; and (2) that
cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to increase the
availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs to be met.
In the Haines area sea lions and harbor seals are available for
subsistence harvest under the MMPA. Limited subsistence harvests of
marine mammals near the community of Haines has occurred in the past,
with the most recent recorded/documented harvests of marine mammals in
Haines in 2012 and in nearby Klukwan in 2014. The activity will take
place in Lutak Inlet, and no activities overlap with current
subsistence hunting areas; therefore, there are no relevant subsistence
uses of marine mammals adversely impacted by this action. The project
is not likely to adversely impact the availability of any marine mammal
species or stocks that are commonly used for subsistence purposes or to
impact subsistence harvest of marine mammals in the region.
Based on the description of the specified activity, the measures
described to minimize adverse effects on the availability of marine
mammals for subsistence purposes, and the mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS has determined that there will not be an unmitigable
adverse impact on subsistence uses from Haines Borough's activities.
Endangered Species Act
There are two marine mammal species (Mexico DPS humpback whale and
western DPS Steller sea lion) that NMFS is authorizing take in the
project area that are listed as threatened and endangered under the
ESA. The NMFS Alaska Regional Office issued a Biological Opinion under
section 7 of the ESA, on the issuance of an IHA to Haines Borough under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the NMFS Permits and Conservation
Division. The Biological Opinion concluded that the action is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of western DPS Steller sea
lions, and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify Mexico DPS
humpback whale and western DPS Steller sea lion critical habitats.
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 evaluate our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an IHA)
and alternatives 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 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 this IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from
further NEPA review.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to Haines Borough for the potential
harassment of small numbers of six marine mammal species incidental to
the Lutak Dock replacement project in Haines, AK, that includes the
previously explained mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements.
Dated: February 12, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-03251 Filed 2-15-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on February 16, 2024.
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.