Notice2024-10145
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Sitka Seaplane Base Construction
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
May 9, 2024
Effective
July 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 two consecutive incidental harassment authorizations (IHAs) to City and Borough of Sitka (CBS) to incidentally harass marine mammals during construction activities associated with the CBS' Sitka Seaplane Base project, in Sitka, Alaska.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 91 (Thursday, May 9, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 91 (Thursday, May 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39591-39604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-10145]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XD743]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Sitka Seaplane Base Construction
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of two incidental harassment authorizations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued two consecutive incidental harassment
authorizations (IHAs) to City and Borough of Sitka (CBS) to
incidentally harass marine mammals during construction activities
associated with the CBS' Sitka Seaplane Base project, in Sitka, Alaska.
DATES: The authorizations are effective from July 1, 2024 through June
30, 2025 and July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026.
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-city-and-borough-sitkas-seaplane-base-construction-activities">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-city-and-borough-sitkas-seaplane-base-construction-activities</a>. In case of problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed below.
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 September 1, 2023, NMFS received a request from CBS for two IHAs
to take marine mammals incidental to the Sitka seaplane base
construction project in Sitka, Alaska, over the course of 2 years.
Following NMFS' review of the application and a revised version, CBS
submitted a final version on November 15, 2023. The application was
deemed adequate and complete on December 1, 2023. The notice of
proposed IHAs published for public comment on January 11, 2024 (89 FR
1884). For both IHAs, CBS's request is for take of seven species of
marine mammals by Level B harassment and, for a subset of three of
these species, Level A harassment. Neither CBS nor
[[Page 39592]]
NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to result from this activity
and, therefore, IHAs are appropriate.
Description of Activity
CBS plans to replace the existing seaplane base in the Sitka
Channel in Sitka, Alaska. The purpose of this project is to construct a
new seaplane base, which would address existing capacity, safety, and
condition deficiencies for critical seaplane operations, and for all
seaplanes to transit the Sitka Chanel more safely. The planned location
of the new seaplane base in the Sitka Channel is located on the
northern shore of Japonski Island in the Sitka Sound. Over the course
of 2 years spanning July 2024-June 2025 and July 2025-June 2026, CBS
would use a variety of methods, including vibratory and impact pile
driving, and down-the-hole (DTH) drilling to install and remove piles.
Phase I would involve the installation and removal of temporary
piles, and the installation of permanent piles. During Phase I, 10 16-
inch (in, 0.4 meter (m)) and 16 24-in (0.6 m) permanent steel piles
would be installed. The installation and removal of 12 temporary 16-in
(0.4 m) steel pipe piles would be completed to support permanent pile
installation. Vibratory hammers, impact hammers, and DTH drilling would
be used for the installation and removal of the piles (table 1). The
installation and removal of temporary piles would be conducted using
impact and vibratory hammers. All permanent piles would be initially
installed with a vibratory hammer. After vibratory driving, piles would
be socketed into the bedrock with DTH drilling equipment. Finally,
piles would be driven the final few inches of embedment with an impact
hammer.
Phase II similarly would involve the installation and removal of
temporary piles, and the installation of permanent piles. During Phase
II six 24-in (0.6 m) steel piles would be installed. The installation
and removal of six temporary 16-in (0.4 m) steel pipe piles would be
completed to support the permanent pile installation. As in Phase I,
vibratory hammers, impact hammers, and DTH drilling would be used for
the installation and removal of the piles (table 2). The installation
and removal of temporary piles would be conducted using impact and
vibratory hammers. All permanent piles would be initially installed
with a vibratory hammer. After vibratory driving, piles would be
socketed into the bedrock with DTH drilling equipment. Finally, piles
would be driven the final few inches of embedment with an impact
hammer.
A further detailed description of the planned construction project
is provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHAs (89 FR
1884, January 11, 2024). 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 specified activity. Mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures are described in detail later in this document
(please see Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting).
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue two consecutive IHAs to CBS was
published in the Federal Register on January 11, 2024 (89 FR 1884).
That notice described, in detail, CBS' activity, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated
effects on marine mammals. During that 30-day public comment period, no
comments were received.
Changes From the Proposed IHAs for Final IHAs
Changes were made between publication of the notice of proposed
IHAs and this notice of final IHAs. Changes have been made to correct
typographical errors and inconsistences in the high frequency shutdown
zones in both the Phase I and Phase II IHAs to reflect the correct
shutdown zones included in the proposed Federal Register 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 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. Alaska Marine Mammal SARs. All values presented in table 1
are the most recent available final SAR at the time of publication of
NMFS' proposed IHAs 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>.
[[Page 39593]]
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\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Humpback Whale.................. Megaptera novaeangliae. Hawai[revaps]i......... -,-,N 11,278 (0.56, 7,265, 127 27
2020).
Mexico-North Pacific... T,D,Y N/A (N/A, N/A, 2006).. UND 0.6
Minke Whale..................... Balaenoptera Alaska................. -,-,N N/A (N/A, N/A, 2018).. ......... 0
acutorostrata.
Family Eschrichtiidae:
Gray Whale...................... Eschrichtius robustus.. Eastern North Pacific.. -,-,N 26,960 (0.05, 25,849, 801 131
2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale.................... Orca orcinus........... Northern Resident...... -,-,N 302 (N/A, 302, 2018).. 2.2 0.2
Alaska Resident........ -,-,N 1,920 (N/A, 1,920, 19 1.3
2019).
Gulf of Alaska/Aleutian -,-,N 587 (N/A, 587, 2012).. 5.9 0.8
Islands/Bering Sea
Transient.
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. 2019).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
Steller sea lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Western Stock.......... E,D,Y 52,932 (N/A, 52,932, 318 254
2019).
Eastern Stock.......... -,-,N 43,201 (N/A, 43,201, 2,592 112
2017).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal..................... Phoca vituline Sitka/Chatham.......... -,-,N 13,289 (N/A, 11,883, 356 77
richardii. 2015).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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 SARs 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.
As indicated above, all 7 species (with 12 managed stocks) in table
1 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree
that take is reasonably likely to occur. All species that could
potentially occur in the action area are included in table 8 of the IHA
application. While northern fur seal, Pacific white-sided dolphin,
Dall's porpoise, North Pacific right whale, sperm whale, fin whale, and
Cuvier's beaked whale have been documented in or near Sitka Sound and
Sitka Channel, 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. These species are all
considered to be rare (no sightings in recent years) or very rare (no
local knowledge of sightings within the project vicinity) within Sitka
Sound or near the action area. The take of these species has not been
requested nor is authorized and these species are not considered
further in this document. Additionally, the Northern Sea Otter may be
found in Sitka Sound. However, the Northern Sea Otter are managed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are not considered further in
this document.
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by CBS'
construction project, were provided in the Federal Register notice for
the proposed IHAs (89 FR 1884, January 11, 2024). Since that time, we
are not aware of any changes in the status of these species and stocks;
therefore, detailed descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to
the Federal Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer
to the NMFS website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>) for
generalized species descriptions.
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
[[Page 39594]]
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 7 Hz to 35 kilohertz (kHz).
(baleen whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
(dolphins, toothed whales,
beaked whales, bottlenose
whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
(true porpoises, Kogia, river
dolphins, Cephalorhynchid,
Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L.
australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
(underwater) (true seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
(underwater) (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 et al.,
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 CBS' pile driving activities
have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals
in the vicinity of the project area. The notice of the proposed IHAs
(89 FR 1884, January 11, 2024) included a discussion of the effects of
anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential effects of
under noise from CBS' pile driving activities on marine mammals and
their habitat. Please refer to the notice of the proposed IHAs (89 FR
1884, January 11, 2024) for that information and analysis, which is not
repeated here.
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through the IHAs, which will inform 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
vibratory or impact pile driving and DTH drilling 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 harbor porpoise, harbor seals and
Steller sea lions. Harbor porpoise have larger predicted auditory
injury zones and due to their small size, they could enter the Level A
harassment zone and remain undetected for sufficient duration to incur
auditory injury. While Steller sea lion do not have large Level A
harassment zones, they are frequently sighted in the project area and
therefor have some potential for auditory injury. Additionally harbor
seals have larger Level A harassment zones and are common in the action
area, and therefore have potential for auditory injury. Auditory injury
is unlikely to occur for all other species, based on the unlikelihood
of the species in the action area and the smaller Level A harassment
zones. 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
[[Page 39595]]
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 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.
CBS's planned activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory
hammer and DTH drilling) and impulsive (DTH drilling and impact pile
driving) sources, and therefore the RMS SPL thresholds of 120 and 160
dB re 1 [mu]Pa are 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). CBS's
planned activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile driving and
DTH drilling) and non-impulsive (vibratory hammer and DTH drilling)
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.
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, and DTH).
In order to calculate distances to the Level A harassment and Level
B harassment thresholds for the methods and piles being used in this
project, NMFS used acoustic monitoring data from other locations to
develop source levels for the various pile types, sizes and methods
(table 4). This analysis uses practical spreading loss, a standard
assumption regarding sound propagation for similar environments, to
estimate transmission of sound through water. For this analysis, the
transmission loss factor of 15 (4.5 dB per doubling of distance) is
used. A weighting adjustment factor of 2.5 or 2, a standard default
value for vibratory pile driving and removal or impact driving and DTH
respectively, were used to calculate Level A harassment areas.
NMFS recommends treating DTH systems as both impulsive and
continuous, non-impulsive sound source types simultaneously. Thus,
impulsive thresholds are used to evaluate Level A harassment, and
continuous thresholds are used to evaluate Level B harassment. With
regards to DTH mono-hammers, NMFS recommends proxy levels for Level A
harassment based on available data regarding DTH systems of similar
sized piles and holes (Denes et al., 2019; Guan and Miner, 2020; Reyff
and Heyvaert, 2019; Reyff, 2020; Heyvaert and Reyff, 2021).
[[Page 39596]]
Table 4--Estimates Underwater Proxy Source Level for Pile Installation and Removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Method and pile type Sound source at 10 meters Source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Hammer dB rms
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 in.............................. 161 NAVFAC 2015.
24 in.............................. 161 NAVFAC 2015.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH Drill dB rms dB SEL dB peak
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 in.............................. 167 146 172 Heyvaert and Reyff 2021,
Guan and Miner 2020.
24 in.............................. 167 159 184 Heyvaert and Reyff 2021.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Hammer dB rms dB SEL dB peak
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 in.............................. 185 175 200 Caltrans 2020.
24 in.............................. 190 177 203 Caltrans 2015.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Harassment Zones
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 * log<INF>10</INF> (R<INF>1</INF>/R<INF>2</INF>),
Where:
TL = transmission loss in dB
B = transmission loss coefficient; for practical spreading equals 15
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.
The recommended TL coefficient for most nearshore environments is
the practical spreading value of 15. This value results in an expected
propagation environment that would lie between spherical and
cylindrical spreading loss conditions, which is the most appropriate
assumption for CBS's planned underwater activities. The Level B
harassment zones and approximate amount of area ensonified for the
underwater activities are shown in table 5.
Level A Harassment Zones
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 pile installation or removal, 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
would be expected to incur PTS. The isopleths generated by the User
Spreadsheet used the same TL coefficient as the Level B harassment zone
calculations (i.e., the practical spreading value of 15). Inputs used
in the User Spreadsheet (e.g., number of piles per day, duration and/or
strikes per pile) are presented in tables 1 and 2. The maximum RMS SPL,
sound exposure level (SEL), and resulting isopleths are reported in
tables 4 and 5.
Table 5--Level A and Level B Harassment Isopleths for Pile Driving Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A isopleth (m)
Activity ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level B
LF MF HF Phocids Otariids isopleth (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Pile Removal/Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16- in temp install........ 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
16-in temp removal......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
16-in perm install......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
24-in perm install......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
Phase II:
16- in temp install........ 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
16-in temp removal......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
24-in perm install......... 6.8 0.6 10.1 4.2 0.3 5,411.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16-in perm install......... 59 2.1 70.3 31.6 2.3 \1\ 8,500
24-in perm install......... 568.9 20.2 677.6 304.4 22.2 \1\ 8,500
Phase II:
24-in perm install......... 568.9 20.2 677.6 304.4 22.2 \1\ 8,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 39597]]
Impact Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16-in temp install......... 231 8.2 275 123 9 464.2
16-in perm install......... 231 8.2 275 123 9 464.2
24-in perm install......... 313 11.1 373 168 12.2 1,000
Phase II:
16-in temp install......... 231 8.2 275 123 9 464.2
24-in perm install......... 313 11.1 373 168 12.2 1,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The calculated Level B harassment zone is 13,594 m. However, the farthest distance that sound will transmit
from the source is 8,500 m before transmission is stopped by landmasses.
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide information about the occurrence of
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information which
will inform the take calculations.
Daily occurrence probability of each marine mammal species in the
action area is based on consultation with previous monitoring reports,
local researchers and marine professionals. Occurrence probability
estimates are based on conservative density approximations for each
species and factor in historic data of occurrence, seasonality, and
group size in Sitka Sound and Sitka Channel. A summary of species
occurrence is shown in table 6. To accurately describe species
occurrence near the action area, marine mammals were described as
either common (species sighted consistently during all monitoring
efforts in the project vicinity, assume one to two groups per day),
frequent (species sighted with some consistency during most monitoring
efforts in the project vicinity, assume one group per week), or
infrequent (species sighted occasionally during a few monitoring
efforts in the project vicinity, assume one group per 2 weeks).
Table 6--Estimated Occurrence of Group Sightings of Marine Mammal Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average group
Species Frequency size Expected occurrence
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale...................... Frequent............... 3.4 1 group/week.
Minke whale \1\..................... Infrequent............. 3.5 1 group/2 weeks.
Gray whale.......................... Infrequent............. 3.5 1 group/2 weeks.
Killer whale........................ Frequent............... 6.6 1 group/week.
Harbor porpoise..................... Infrequent............. 5.0 1 group/2 weeks.
Harbor seal \2\..................... Common................. 2.1 1-2 groups/day.
Steller sea lion \2\................ Common................. 2.0 1-2 groups/day.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Minke whale considered rare in Sitka Channel, but to be conservative they are treated as infrequent for take
estimation as there is a small likelihood they could be in the area during the activity.
\2\ Likelihood of one group/day in the Level A harassment zone and likelihood of two groups/day in the level B
harassment zone.
Take Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is synthesized
to produce a quantitative estimate of the take that is reasonably
likely to occur and authorized.
For the total underwater take estimate, the daily occurrence
probability for a species was multiplied by the estimated group size
and by the number of days of each type of pile driving activity. Group
size is based on the best available published research for these
species and their presence in the action area.
Estimated take = Group size x Groups per day x Days of pile driving
activity
Take by Level A harassment is anticipated for Steller sea lions and
harbor seals. Although Steller sea lion Level A harassment zones are
small, as previously discussed they are known to spend extended periods
of time within the breakwaters in Sitka sound and in the project area.
Harbor seals are also common in the project area and although their
Level A harassment zones are farther from the project area, CBS has
requested a maximum shutdown zone of 125 m for harbor seals and
therefor there is likelihood for take by Level A harassment of harbor
seals. Take by Level A harassment is also requested for harbor
porpoise. We require a maximum shutdown zone for high frequency species
of 300 m in this case and therefor there is likelihood for some take by
Level A harassment. Even though they are not as common within the
breakwaters, their Level A harassment zone extends beyond the
breakwaters and they are elusive in nature. The take by Level A
harassment for both pinniped species are based on a lower daily
occurrence rate based on the frequency of sightings within the smaller
Level A harassment zone of the breakwaters (table 6).
Additionally, for species that are large and/or infrequent (gray
whale, minke whale, humpback whale, and harbor porpoise) in Sitka Sound
and are unlikely to be within the breakwaters where the action will
take place, take by Level B harassment is only anticipated to occur
incidental to vibratory and DTH methods, given the larger Level B
harassment zones which will extend beyond the breakwaters. Anticipated
take by Level A harassment for harbor seal and harbor porpoise would
likely occur only incidental to impact pile driving and DTH drilling,
and anticipated take of Steller sea lion by Level A harassment would
likely occur only incidental to DTH drilling, due to
[[Page 39598]]
the larger Level A harassment zones for these activities. See table 5.
Table 7--Take of Marine Mammals by Level A and Level B Harassment and Percent of Stock To Be Taken
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase 1 Phase 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Stock Percent of Percent of
Level A Level B stock Level A Level B stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale \1\......................... Hawai[revaps]i............... 0 11 0.1 0 4 * 0
Mexico-North Pacific \2\..... 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gray Whale................................. Eastern North Pacific........ 0 6 0 0 * 4 0
Minke Whale................................ Alaska....................... 0 6 NA 0 * 4 NA
Killer whale............................... West Coast Transients........ 0 3 0.9 0 1 0.3
Gulf, Aleutian, Bering 0 6 0.9 0 2 0.3
Transient.
Northern Resident............ 0 3 0.9 0 1 0.3
Alaska Resident.............. 0 18 0.9 0 6 0.3
Harbor porpoise............................ Northern Southeast Alaska.... * 5 8 0.9 * 5 * 5 0.7
Harbor seal................................ Sitka/Chatham Alaska......... 48 130 1.3 13 38 0.4
Steller sea lion........................... Eastern US................... 16 121 0.3 6 35 0.1
Western US................... 0 3 0 0 * 2 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Take estimates are weighted based on calculated percentages of population for each distinct stock, assuming animals present would follow same
probability of presence in project area. Humpback whale probability by stock based on Southeast Alaska estimates from NMFS 2021 (98 percent Hawaii
distinct population segment (DPS); 2 percent Mexico DPS).
\2\ ESA listed Mexico humpback whales take calculation resulted in less than 0.5 takes, therefore no takes are anticipated or authorized.
* Where calculated take was less than the average group size, the take was rounded up to a group size as that is likely what would be encountered.
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. 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, as
well as subsistence uses. 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.
Mitigation Measures
For each IHA, CBS must follow mitigation measures as specified
below:
<bullet> Ensure that construction supervisors and crews, the
monitoring team, and relevant CBS staff are trained prior to the start
of all pile driving and DTH drilling 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. The
Holder 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 and removal 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 and
removal and DTH drilling activities will ensure that the entire
shutdown zone is visible during pile installation;
<bullet> Monitoring must take place from 30 minutes prior to
initiation of pile driving or DTH drilling activity (i.e., pre-
clearance monitoring) through 30 minutes post-completion of pile
driving or DTH drilling 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 10 are clear of marine mammals. Pile
driving and DTH drilling may commence following 30 minutes of
observation when the determination is made that the shutdown zones are
clear of marine mammals;
<bullet> CBS 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 10, pile driving and DTH drilling
must 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 11) or 15 minutes have passed
without re-detection of the animal.
As planned by the applicant, in water activities will take place
only between civil dawn and civil dusk when PSOs can effectively
monitor for the presence of marine mammals; during conditions with a
Beaufort sea state of four or less. Pile driving and DTH drilling may
continue for up to 30 minutes after sunset during evening civil
twilight, as necessary to secure a pile for safety prior to
demobilization during this time.
[[Page 39599]]
The length of the post-activity monitoring period may be reduced if
darkness precludes visibility of the shutdown and monitoring zones.
Shutdown Zones
CBS will establish shutdown zones for all pile driving and DTH
drilling 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 isopleth for each pile size/type and driving method where
applicable, as shown in table 10.
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 serves 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 10 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,
construction activities including in-water work will continue and the
animal's presence within the estimated harassment zone will be
documented.
CBS would 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 CBS 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 8--Shutdown and Monitoring Zones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A isopleth (m)
Activity ----------------------------------------------------------------- Level B
LF MF HF \2\ Phocids \1\ Otariids isopleth (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Pile Removal/Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16- in temp install........ 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
16-in temp removal......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
16-in perm install......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
24-in perm install......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
Phase II:
16- in temp install........ 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
16-in temp removal......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
24-in perm install......... 10 10 20 10 10 5,415
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16-in perm install......... 60 10 75 35 10 8,500
24-in perm install......... 570 30 300 125 30 8,500
Phase II:
24-in perm install......... 570 30 300 125 30 8,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I:
16-in temp install......... 235 10 275 125 10 465
16-in perm install......... 235 10 275 125 10 465
24-in perm install......... 315 20 300 125 20 1,000
Phase II:
16-in temp install......... 235 10 275 125 10 465
24-in perm install......... 315 20 300 125 20 1,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Maximum shutdown for phocids is reduced to 125 m as they are a common species within the breakwaters of
Sitka Sound.
\2\ Maximum shutdown for high frequency species is reduced to 300 m, given the difficulty observing harbor
porpoise at greater distances.
Protected Species Observers
The placement of PSOs during all construction activities (described
in the Monitoring and Reporting section) would 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.
[[Page 39600]]
PSOs would monitor the full shutdown zones and the remaining Level
A harassment 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.
Pre-Activity Monitoring
Prior to the start of daily in-water construction activity, or
whenever a break in pile driving or DTH drilling of 30 minutes or
longer occurs, PSOs would observe the shutdown and monitoring zones for
a period of 30 minutes. The shutdown zone would 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 zones
listed in table 10, pile driving activity would be delayed or halted.
If work ceases for more than 30 minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of
the shutdown zones would commence. A determination that the shutdown
zone is clear must be made during a period of good visibility (i.e.,
the entire shutdown zone and surrounding waters must be visible to the
naked eye).
Soft-Start Procedures
Soft-start procedures 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 would be required to provide an
initial set of three strikes from the hammer at reduced energy,
followed by a 30-second waiting period, then two subsequent reduced-
energy strike sets. Soft-start would 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.
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
Marine mammal monitoring must be conducted in accordance with the
conditions in this section and the IHA. Marine mammal monitoring during
pile driving activities would be conducted by PSOs meeting NMFS'
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 would 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 would be designated. The lead
observer would be required to have prior experience working as a marine
mammal observer during construction.
PSOs should have the following additional qualifications:
[cir] Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
[cir] Experience or training in the field identification of marine
mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
[cir] Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
[cir] 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
[cir] 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> CBS must employ up to five PSOs depending on the size of
the monitoring and shutdown zones. A minimum of two PSOs (including the
lead PSO) must be assigned to the active pile driving location to
monitor the shutdown zones and as much of the Level B harassment zones
as possible.
<bullet> CBS must establish monitoring locations with the best
views of monitoring zones as described in the IHA and Monitoring Plan
posted on our website.
<bullet> Up to four monitors will be used at a time depending on
the size of the monitoring area. PSOs would be deployed in strategic
locations around the area of potential effects at all times during in-
water pile driving and removal. PSOs will be positioned at
[[Page 39601]]
locations that provide full views of the monitoring zones and the Level
A harassment Shutdown Zones. All PSOs would 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.
<bullet> Up to four PSOs will be stationed at the following
locations: the project site, Sandy Beach Day use site, O'Connell
lightering float, and Whale Park.
Monitoring would be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30
minutes after all in water construction activities. In addition, PSOs
would record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of
distance from activity, and would 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.
CBS shall conduct briefings between construction supervisors and
crews, PSOs, CBS staff prior to the start of all pile driving
activities and when new personnel join the work. These briefings would
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 for each IHA, 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, vibratory, or DTH drilling)
and the total equipment duration for vibratory removal 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:
<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; and
<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.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
reports will constitute the final reports. 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 event that personnel involved in the construction activities
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the IHA-holder must
immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to
the Office of Protected Resources (OPR)
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#82d2d0accbd6d2accfedecebf6edf0ebece5d0e7f2edf0f6f1c2ecede3e3ace5edf4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="adfdff83e4f9fd83e0c2c3c4d9c2dfc4c3caffc8ddc2dfd9deedc3c2cccc83cac2db">[email protected]</span></a>), NMFS and to the Alaska Regional
Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. If the death or injury was
clearly caused by the specified activity, CBS 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 IHA-
holder 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
[[Page 39602]]
human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analysis applies to all
species listed in table 3, given that the anticipated effects of this
activity on these different marine mammal stocks are expected to be
similar. There is little information about the nature or severity of
the impacts, or the size, status, or structure of any of these species
or stocks that would lead to a different analysis for this activity. In
addition, because both the number and nature of the estimated takes
anticipated to occur are identical in Phase I and II, the analysis
below applies to both of the IHAs.
Pile driving and DTH drilling 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 B harassment and, for some
species, Level A harassment from underwater sounds generated by pile
driving and DTH drilling. 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, no take by Level A harassment is anticipated for
killer whales, humpback whales, gray whales, or minke whales due to the
application of planned mitigation measures, such as shutdown zones that
encompass the Level A harassment zones for the species, the rarity of
the species near the action area, and the small Level A harassment
zones (for killer whales only). 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 three species (harbor
porpoise, Steller sea lion, and harbor seal) as the Level A harassment
isopleths exceed the size of the shutdown zones for specific
construction scenarios, the Level A harassment zones are large, and/or
the species is frequent near the action area. Therefore, there is the
possibility that an animal could enter a Level A harassment zone and
remain within that zone for a duration long enough to incur PTS. Level
A harassment of these species is therefore authorized. 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 such as 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 take authorized by Level A harassment is
very low for the marine mammal stocks and 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.
The Level A harassment zones identified in table 7 are based upon
an animal exposed to pile driving or DTH drilling of several piles per
day (six piles per day for vibratory removal and installation, four
piles per day of impact driving, and two piles per day of DTH
drilling). Given the short duration to impact drive or vibratory
install or remove, or use DTH drilling, 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 patterns 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.
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 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. The intensity and duration of take by Level A and
Level B harassment would be minimized through use of mitigation
measures described herein. Further, the amount of take authorized is
extremely small when compared to stock abundance.
Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving, pile
removals, and DTH drilling in Sitka Channel and the surrounding Sitka
Sound 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, pile removal, and DTH drilling are temporary activities and
effects would cease when equipment is not operating, any harassment
occurring would be temporary. Additionally, many of the species present
in the region would only be present temporarily based on seasonal
patterns or during transit between other habitats. These species would
be exposed to even smaller periods of noise-generating activity,
further decreasing the impacts.
Nearly all inland waters of southeast Alaska, including Sitka
Sound, are included in the southeast Alaska humpback whale feeding
Biologically Important Area (BIA) (Wild et al., 2023), though humpback
whale distribution in southeast Alaska varies by season and waterway
(Dahlheim et al., 2009). Humpback whales could be present within Sitka
Sound year round, however the action area is within the breakwaters
where humpback whales are not commonly found and therefore, the BIA is
not expected to be affected. Therefore, the planned project is not
expected to have significant adverse effects on the foraging of
humpback whales.
Sitka Sound is also within a gray whale migratory corridor BIA
(Wild et al., 2023). Construction is expected to occur while the BIA is
active during the southbound migration (November to January) and
northbound migration (March to May). The Sound is also a Gray whale
feeding BIA. Construction is expected to overlap with the feeding BIA
(March to June). However, as noted for humpback whales, project
activities will only overlap seasonally in the gray whale migratory and
feeding BIAs, and the overall 2 year project (Phase I and Phase II) is
expected to occur over just 40 in-water workdays, further reducing the
temporal overlap with the BIAs.
[[Page 39603]]
Additionally, the area of the feeding BIA in which impacts of the
planned project may occur is small relative to both the overall area of
the BIA and the overall area of suitable gray whale habitat outside of
this BIA. The area of Sitka Sound affected by this project is also
small relative to the rest of the Sound, such that it allows animals
within the migratory corridor to still utilize Sitka Sound without
necessarily being disturbed by the construction. Specifically, all
Level A harassment isopleths for gray whale are within the breakwaters
where gray whales are not expected. Therefore, take of gray whales
using the feeding and migratory BIAs is not expected to impact feeding
or migratory behavior and, therefore, would not impact reproduction or
survivorship.
As noted previously, since January 1, 2019, elevated gray whale
strandings have occurred along the west coast of North America from
Mexico through Alaska. The event has been declared an unusual mortality
event (UME), though a cause has not yet been determined. While six
takes by Level B harassment in phase I and four takes by Level B
harassment in phase II of gray whale are authorized for each year this
is an extremely small portion of the stock (<1 percent), and CBS will
be required to implement a shutdown zone that includes the entire Level
A harassment zone for low-frequency cetaceans such as gray whales.
The same regions are also a part of the Western DPS Steller sea
lion ESA critical habitat. While Steller sea lions are common in the
project area, there are no essential physical and biological habitat
features, such as haulouts or rookeries, within the project area. The
nearest haulout is approximately 25 kilometers away from the project
area. Therefore, the project is not expected to have significant
adverse effects on the critical habitat of Western DPS Steller sea
lions. No areas of specific biological importance (e.g., ESA critical
habitat, other BIAs, or other areas) for any other species are known to
co-occur with the project area.
In addition, it is unlikely that minor noise effects in a small,
localized area of habitat would have any effect on each stock's ability
to recover. 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
would have only minor, short-term effects on individuals. The specified
activities are not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival
and would 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> Level A harassment would be very small amounts and of low
degree;
<bullet> Level A harassment takes of only harbor porpoise, Steller
sea lions and harbor seals;
<bullet> For all species, the Sitka Sound and channel are a very
small and peripheral part of their range;
<bullet> Anticipated takes by Level B harassment are 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 or vibratory 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, and would not
adversely affect ESA-designated critical habitat for any species or any
areas of known biological importance;
<bullet> The lack of anticipated significant or long-term negative
effects to marine mammal habitat; and
<bullet> CBS 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, specific to
each of the 2 consecutive years of planned activity, would 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.
The amount of take NMFS authorized, for each of the 2 consecutive
years of the activity, is below one third of the estimated stock
abundance for all species (in fact, take of individuals is less than 2
percent of the abundance of the affected stocks, see table 9). This is
likely a conservative estimate because we assume all takes are of
different individual animals, which is likely not the case. Some
individuals may return multiple times in a day, but PSOs would count
them as separate takes if they cannot be individually identified.
There is no current or historical estimate of the Alaska minke
whale stock, but there are known to be over 1,000 minke whales in the
Gulf of Alaska (Muto et al., 2018), so the 10 takes by Level B
harassment over the 2 years of the project duration is small relative
to estimated survey abundance, even if each take occurred to a new
individual. Additionally, the range of the Alaska stock of minke whales
is extensive, stretching from the Canadian Pacific coast to the Chukchi
Sea, and CBS's project would only impact a small portion of this range.
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, for each of the two IHAs,
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
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must find that the specified
activity will not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact''
[[Page 39604]]
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.
Sitka Channel and other nearby areas are within the traditional
territory of the Sheet[revaps]k[aacute] Kgw[aacute]an. Alaska natives
have traditionally harvested marine mammals in Sitka, however today a
majority of the subsistence harvest is of species other than marine
mammals. Alaska Department Fish and Game reported that in 2013, around
11 percent of Sitka households used subsistence-caught marine mammals
(ADF&G, 2023), however this is the most recent data available and there
has not been a survey since.
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 impact subsistence harvest of marine mammals in
the region because:
<bullet> There is no recent recorded subsistence harvest of marine
mammals in the area;
<bullet> Construction activities are temporary and localized
primarily within Sitka Channel;
<bullet> Construction will not take place during the herring
spawning season when subsistence species are more active;
<bullet> Mitigation measures will be implemented to minimize
disturbance of marine mammals in the action area; and
<bullet> The project will not result in significant changes to
availability of subsistence resources.
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, specific to each of the 2
consecutive years of planned activity, there will not be an unmitigable
adverse impact on subsistence uses from CBS's activities.
Endangered Species Act
There are two marine mammals (western DPS Steller sea lion and
Mexico- North Pacific DPS humpback whale) with the potential to occur
in the project area that are listed as endangered or threatened under
the ESA. The NMFS Alaska Regional Office issued a Biological Opinion
under section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of two IHAs to CBS under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the NMFS OPR. The Biological
Opinion concluded that this action is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of either DPS. In addition, the action authorized
no take of the Mexico- North Pacific DPS humpback whale and is not
likely to adversely affect any critical habitat.
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 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 these IHAs qualifies to be categorically excluded from
further NEPA review.
Authorization
NMFS has issued two consecutive IHAs to CBS for conducting Seaplane
Base construction in Sitka, Alaska, starting in July 2024 for Phase I
and July 2025 for Phase II, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.
The issued IHAs can be found at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-city-and-borough-sitkas-seaplane-base-construction-activities">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-city-and-borough-sitkas-seaplane-base-construction-activities</a>.
Dated: May 6, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-10145 Filed 5-8-24; 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 May 9, 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.