Notice2026-00284
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Yakutat Small Boat Harbor Replacement Project in Yakutat, 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
January 9, 2026
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
Notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the City & Borough of Yakutat, Alaska (CBY) to incidentally harass marine mammals during construction activities associated with the Yakutat Small Boat Harbor Replacement Project in Yakutat, Alaska.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 6 (Friday, January 9, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 6 (Friday, January 9, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 972-985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-00284]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XF397]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Yakutat Small Boat Harbor
Replacement Project in Yakutat, Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an
incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the City & Borough of
Yakutat, Alaska (CBY) to incidentally harass marine mammals during
construction activities associated with the Yakutat Small Boat Harbor
Replacement Project in Yakutat, Alaska.
DATES: This authorization is effective for 1 year from the date of
notification by the IHA-holder, not to exceed 1 year from the date of
issuance (January 6, 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-borough-yakutat-alaskas-yakutat-small-boat-harbor">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-city-borough-yakutat-alaskas-yakutat-small-boat-harbor</a>. In case of problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Pauline, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) Background and Determinations
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Among the exceptions is section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
(16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) which directs the Secretary of Commerce (as
delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking by harassment 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 the public has an opportunity to comment on the proposed IHA.
Specifically, NMFS will issue an IHA if it 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 such species or stocks for taking for certain
subsistence uses (referred to here as ``mitigation''). NMFS must also
prescribe requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of
such takings. The definitions of key terms, such as ``take,''
``harassment,'' and ``negligible impact,'' can be found in the MMPA and
the NMFS' implementing regulations (see 16 U.S.C. 1362; 50 CFR
216.103).
Summary of Request
On September 30, 2025, a notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA
to CBY for take of marine mammals incidental to the Yakutat Small Boat
Harbor Replacement Project Seward Cruise Ship Passenger Dock and
Terminal Facility published in the Federal Register (90 FR 46812).
Following NMFS' review of the application and subsequent discussions
between NMFS and CBY, the application was deemed adequate and complete
on September 16, 2025.
CBY's request is for take of nine species of marine mammals by
Level B harassment only, and for a subset of these species, Level A
harassment. Neither CBY nor NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to
result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
Description of the Specified Activity
CBY is replacing the existing Yakutat Small Boat Harbor (YSBH)
infrastructure which has been in use for approximately 60 years. The
replacement project will improve accessibility, public safety, and
continue to provide the current level of public service and vessel
mooring in Yakutat, Alaska. The existing gangway, headwalk, mainwalk,
finger, and seaplane floats will be removed. The existing approach dock
will be extended. New modular floats will be installed following
completion of the approach dock extension. Temporary and permanent
piles will secure the floats during and after installation.
In-water pile driving would occur on approximately 54 non-
consecutive days over the course of 1 year. The planned activities that
have the potential to take marine mammals, by Level A and Level B
harassment, include vibratory removal of current steel and timber
piles, vibratory installation and removal of temporary steel pipe
piles, vibratory and impact installation of permanent steel pipe piles,
and down-the-hole drilling (DTH) of rock sockets.
A detailed description of the planned construction project is
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (90 FR
46812, September 30, 2025). 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
NMFS published a notice of its proposal to issue an IHA to CBY in
the Federal Register on September 30, 2025 (90 FR 46812). That notice
described, in detail, CBY's specified activities, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activities, and the anticipated
effects on marine mammals. In that notice, we requested public input on
the request for authorization described therein, our analyses, the
proposed authorization, and any other aspect of the notice of the
proposed IHA, and requested that interested persons submit relevant
information, suggestions, and comments.
No comments were received during the 30-day public comment period.
Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA
Since the publication of the proposed IHA (90 FR 46812, September
30, 2025), NMFS has revised one of the assumptions made about
construction processes and has corrected several minor errors and
omissions.
Scientific papers by Miner (2020) and Heyvaert and Reyff (2021)
were cited in the proposed IHA but were not included in the formal list
of References. These items have since been added. A new reference above
to Denes et al. (2016) has also been added to the list of References.
The updated reference list may be found at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-city-borough-yakutat-alaskas-yakutat-small-boat-harbor">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-city-borough-yakutat-alaskas-yakutat-small-boat-harbor</a>.
[[Page 973]]
Several of the source level (SL) references shown in table 4 in
this notice (table 5 in the proposed IHA) have been updated.
Additionally, the SL for existing 16-inch (in) steel piles has been
corrected to 163 dB RMS in this notice as it was erroneously listed as
160 dB RMS in the proposed notice. Note that 163 dB RMS was used to
calculate associated isopleths in table 6 of the proposed notice.
Therefore, there are no changes to isopleths derived from the non-
impulsive, continuous removal of 16-in steel piles shown in table 6 of
this notice.
NMFS has revised our assumptions related to the strike rate used to
estimate harassment isopleths for DTH installation of 24-in steel
piles. In the notice for the proposed IHA, we used 10 Hertz (Hz).
However, upon receipt of updated information that a rate of 13 Hz is
more appropriate for 24-in piles, we revised the rate to 13 Hz. This
information is included in a new table 5 for this notice which contains
all of the inputs applied to the User Spreadsheets used to calculate
Level A harassment isopleths. Increasing the repetition rate to 13 Hz
for DTH installation of 24-in piles resulted in an increase in auditory
injury (AUD INJ) isopleth distances for all hearing groups. This is
shown in table 6 in this notice. Shutdown zones for the DTH
installation of 24-in piles described in table 9 of this notice have
also been revised to reflect the larger Level A harassment isopleths.
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 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 (M/SI) 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. Marine Mammal SARs. All values presented in table 1 are the
most recent available at the time of publication (including from the
draft 2024 SARs) 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 \1\ With Estimated Take From the Specified Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Eschrichtiidae:
Gray whale...................... Eschrichtius robustus.. E North Pacific........ -,-,N 26,960 (0.05, 25,849, 801 131
2016).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Humpback whale.................. Megaptera novaeangliae. Hawai[revaps]i \5\..... -,-,N 11,278 (0.56, 7,265, 127 27.09
2020).
Mex-North Pacific \6\.. T, D, Y 918 (N/A, N/A, 2006).. UND 0.57
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Beluga whale.................... Delphinapterus leucas.. Cook Inlet............. E, D, Y 331(0.076 311, 2022) 0 0
\10\.
Killer whale.................... Orcinus orca........... E North Pacific Alaska -,-,N 1,920, (N/A, 1,920, 19 1.3
Resident. 2019) \7\.
ENP Gulf of Alaska, -,-,N 587 (N/A, 587, 2012).. 5.9 0.8
Aleutian Islands, and
Bering Sea Transient
stock.
West Coast Transient... -,-,N 349 (N/A, 349, 2018).. 3.5 0.4
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise................. Phocoena phocoena...... Yakutat/SE AK Offshore. -,-,N N/A (N/A, N/A, 1997).. \11\ UND 22.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order--Carnivora--Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California sea lion............. Zalophus californianus. U.S.................... -,-,N 257,606 (N/A, 233,515, 14,011 >321
2014).
Northern fur seal............... Callorhinus ursinus.... Eastern Pacific........ -,D,Y 626,618 (0.2, 530,376, 11,403 373
2019).
[[Page 974]]
Steller sea lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Eastern................ -,-,N 36,308 (N/A, 36,308, 2,178 93.2
2022) \8\.
Western................ E, D, Y 49,837 (N/A, 49,837, 299 267
2022) \9\.
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal..................... Phoca vitulina......... Prince William Sound... -,-,N 44,756 (N/A, 41,776, 1,253 413
2015).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/">https://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-region">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region</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, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV
associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\5\ The best available abundance estimate for this stock is not considered representative of the entire stock as surveys were limited to a small portion
of the stock's range. Based upon this estimate and the Nmin, the PBR value is likely negatively biased for the entire stock.
\6\ Abundance estimates are based upon data collected more than 8 years ago and, therefore, current estimates are considered unknown. SAR in 2022
following North Pacific humpback whale stock structure changes.
\7\ Abundance estimates are based upon data collected more than 8 years ago and, therefore, current estimates are considered unknown.
\8\ Nest is best estimate of counts, which have not been corrected for animals at sea during abundance surveys. Estimates provided are for the U.S.
only.
\9\ Nest is best estimate of counts, which have not been corrected for animals at sea during abundance surveys. Estimates provided are for the U.S.
only. The overall Nmin is 73,211 and overall PBR is 439.
\10\ The Yakutat Bay beluga whales are a subset of the Cook Inlet beluga whale stock which are genetically and geographically separated and have been
defined as a small and resident group.
\11\ Undetermined.
As indicated above, all 9 species (with 13 managed stocks) in table
1 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree
that take is reasonably likely to occur.
In addition to what is included in sections 3 and 4 of the IHA
application, and NMFS' website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>), further detail informing the regional occurrence for select
species of particularly or unique vulnerability (i.e., information
regarding ESA listed or MMPA depleted species, information regarding
current Unusual Mortality Events (UME) and known important habitat
areas such as Biologically Important Areas (BIAs)) (Van Parijs, 2015)
were provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (90
FR 46812, September 30, 2025). 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.
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.). Generalized hearing ranges were
chosen based on the ~65 decibel (dB) threshold from composite
audiograms, previous analyses in NMFS (2018), and/or data from Southall
et al. (2007) and Southall et al. (2019). We note that the names of two
hearing groups and the generalized hearing ranges of all marine mammal
hearing groups have been recently updated (NMFS, 2024) as reflected
below in table 2.
Table 2--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2024]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 36 kHz.
whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
(dolphins, toothed whales, beaked
whales, bottlenose whales).
Very High-frequency (VHF) cetaceans 200 Hz to 165 kHz.
(true porpoises, Kogia, river
dolphins, Cephalorhynchid,
Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L.
australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) 40 Hz to 90 kHz.
(true seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) 60 Hz to 68 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 may not be as broad. Generalized hearing range
chosen based on approximately 65 dB threshold from composite
audiogram, previous analysis in NMFS (2018), and/or data from Southall
et al. (2007) and Southall et al. (2019). Additionally, animals are
able to detect very loud sounds above and below that ``generalized''
hearing range.
[[Page 975]]
For more details concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2024) for a review of available information.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from CBY'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 (90 FR
46812, September 30, 2025) included a discussion of the effects of
anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential effects of
underwater noise from CBY's construction activity on marine mammals and
their habitat. That information and analysis is referenced in this
final IHA determination and is not repeated here; please refer to the
Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA (90 FR 46812, September 30,
2025).
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through the IHA, which will inform NMFS' consideration of
``small numbers,'' the negligible impact determinations, and impacts on
subsistence uses.
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 pile driving and DTH has the potential to result in disruption of
behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals. There is also some
potential for AUD INJ (Level A harassment) to result, primarily for
very high frequency species and/or phocids because predicted AUD INJ
zones are larger than for high-frequency species and/or otariids.
However, the planned mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to
minimize the severity of the taking to the extent practicable.
For acoustic impacts, generally speaking, we estimate take by
considering: (1) acoustic criteria above which NMFS believes there is
some reasonable potential for marine mammals to be behaviorally
harassed or incur some degree of AUD INJ; (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 authorized
take estimates.
Acoustic Criteria
NMFS recommends the use of acoustic criteria 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 AUD INJ of some degree (equated to
Level A harassment). We note that the criteria for AUD INJ, as well as
the names of two hearing groups, have been recently updated (NMFS,
2024) as reflected below in the Level A harassment section.
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 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, estimates of take
by Level B harassment 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.
CBY's planned activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory
pile driving and DTH) and impulsive (DTH 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' Updated Technical Guidance for Assessing
the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version
3.0) (Updated Technical Guidance, 2024) identifies dual criteria to
assess AUD INJ (Level A harassment) to five different underwater marine
mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to
noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive).
CBY's planned activity includes the use of impulsive (DTH and impact
pile driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving and DTH)
sources.
The 2024 Updated Technical Guidance criteria include both updated
thresholds and updated weighting functions for each hearing group. The
thresholds are provided in table 3 below. The references, analysis, and
methodology used in the development of the criteria are described in
NMFS' 2024 Updated Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at:
<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance-other-acoustic-tools">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance-other-acoustic-tools</a>.
[[Page 976]]
Table 3--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Auditory Injury
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AUD INJ onset acoustic thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans........... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 222 dB; Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 197 dB.
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; Cell 4: LE,HF,24h: 201 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 193 dB.
Very High-Frequency (VHF) Cetaceans.... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; Cell 6: LE,VHF,24h: 181 dB.
LE,VHF,24h: 159 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater)..... Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 223 dB; Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 195 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 183 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater).... Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 199 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 185 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric criteria for impulsive sounds: Use whichever criteria results in the larger isopleth for
calculating AUD INJ onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure
level criteria associated with impulsive sounds, the PK SPL criteria are recommended for consideration for non-
impulsive sources.
Note: Peak sound pressure level (Lp,0-pk) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and weighted cumulative sound
exposure level (LE,p) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa\2\s. In this table, criteria are abbreviated to be
more reflective of International Organization for Standardization standards (ISO 2017). The subscript ``flat''
is being included to indicate peak sound pressure are flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized
hearing range of marine mammals underwater (i.e., 7 Hz to 165 kHz). The subscript associated with cumulative
sound exposure level criteria indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, HF, and
VHF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The weighted
cumulative sound exposure level criteria 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 criteria 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 planned project.
Marine mammals are expected to be affected via sound generated by the
primary components of the project (i.e., pile driving and removal, and
DTH).
The project includes vibratory pile installation and removal,
impact pile driving, and DTH. Source levels for these activities are
based on reviews of measurements of the same or similar types and
dimensions of piles available in the literature. Source levels for each
pile size are presented in table 4. Source levels for vibratory
installation and removal of piles of the same diameter are assumed to
be the same.
Table 4--Estimates of Mean Underwater Sound Levels Generated During In-Water Vibratory and Impact Pile
Installation and Vibratory Pile Removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proxy sound source levels at 10m (dB
re 1 [mu]Pa or dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-sec)
----------------------------------------
Source Source type RMS source Sound Peak source Reference
level (SPL exposure level (SPL
RMS) level (SEL) RMS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing steel piles (16'' steel Non-impulsive, 163 ........... ............ Naval Base Kitsap
pipe) \1\. continuous Bangor Test Pile
removal. (Navy (2012)) and
EHW-2 (Navy
(2013)), Gustavus
(Miner, 2020).
Existing timber piles (12'' Non-impulsive, 162.0 ........... ............ Caltrans 2020.
timber). continuous
removal.
Trestle template piles (24'' Non-impulsive, 163.0 ........... ............ Naval Base Kitsap
steel pipe or equivalent). continuous Bangor Test Pile
installation & (Navy (2012)) and
removal. EHW-2 (Navy
(2013)), Gustavus
(Miner, 2020).
Trestle piles (12.75'' steel Non-impulsive, 160.0 ........... ............ Caltrans 2020.
pipe). continuous
installation.
Impulsive 177.0 167.0 192.0 Caltrans 2015,
installation. 2020.
Float piles (24'' steel pipe)... Non-impulsive, 163.0 ........... ............ Naval Base Kitsap
continuous Bangor Test Pile
installation. (Navy (2012)) and
EHW-2 (Navy
(2013)), Gustavus
(Miner, 2020).
Impulsive 190 177 203 Caltrans 2015.
Installation.
DTH Drilling...... 167.0 159.0 184.0 Heyvaert & Reyff
2021.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: peak = peak sound level; rms = root mean square; SEL = sound exposure level.
\1\ NMFS applied data from vibratory driving of 24-in piles to smaller 16-in piles in this analysis due to
concerns about data quality of measurements of smaller piles.
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 Log10 (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
Absent site-specific acoustical monitoring with differing measured
TL, a practical spreading value of 15 is used as the TL coefficient in
the above formula. Site-specific TL data for Shipyard Cove where the
YSBH is located are not available; therefore, the default coefficient
of 15 is used to determine the distances to the Level A harassment and
Level B harassment thresholds.
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 2024 Updated Technical Guidance that
can be used to relatively simply predict an isopleth distance for use
in
[[Page 977]]
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 driving, 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 auditory injury. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet (e.g.,
number of piles per day, duration and/or strikes per pile) are found in
tables 4 and 5. The resulting estimated isopleths are reported in table
6.
Table 5--NMFS User Spreadsheet Inputs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance Duration of
associated Strike rate Weighting Number of Duration Number of sound
Pile size and type Spreadsheet tab with sound Trans- mission (avg. factor piles per single pile strikes per production
used pressure loss constant strikes per adjustment day (minutes) pile in a day
level (m) second) (kHz) (seconds)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing steel piles (16'' A.1. Vibratory 10 15 ........... 2.5 15 15 ........... 13,500
steel pipe). pile driving.
Existing timber piles (12'' A.1. Vibratory 10 15 ........... 2.5 15 15 ........... 13,500
timber). pile driving.
Trestle template piles...... A.1. Vibratory 10 15 ........... 2.5 4 20 ........... 4,800
(24'' steel pipe or pile driving.
equivalent).
Trestle piles (12.75'' steel A.1. Vibratory 10 15 ........... 2.5 4 20 ........... 4,800
pipe). pile driving.
E.1. Impact 10 15 ........... 2 4 ........... 500 ...........
pile driving.
Float piles (24'' steel A.1. Vibratory 10 15 ........... 2.5 5 20 ........... 6,000
pipe). pile driving.
E.1. Impact 10 15 ........... 2 5 ........... 1,000 ...........
pile driving.
E.2: DTH 10 15 13 2 2 180 ........... 21,600
Drilling.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Predicted Level A and Level B Harassment Isopleths
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AUD INJ Isopleths(m)/area (km\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------ Disturbance
(VHF) Very Isopleth
Source Source type (LF) Low (HF) High high Phocid Otariid (m)/area
frequency frequency frequency pinnipeds pinnipeds (km\2\)
cetaceans cetaceans cetaceans (PW) (OW)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile Removal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing steel piles (16'' steel pipe)....... Non-impulsive, continuous 30.3 11.6 24.7 39 13.1 7,356.4
removal. 0.0437 0.0345 0.0312 0.0436 0.0354 4.4207
Existing timber piles (12'' timber).......... Non-impulsive, continuous 26.0 10.0 21.2 33.4 11.2 6,309.6
removal. 0.0396 0.0312 0.0396 0.0436 0.0354 4.4207
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Temporary Piles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trestle template piles (24'' steel pipe or Non-impulsive, continuous 15.2 5.8 12.4 19.5 6.6 7,356.4
equivalent). installation & removal. 0.0354 0.0312 0.0396 0.0354 0.0312 4.4207
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Pile Installation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trestle piles (12.75'' steel pipe)........... Non-impulsive, continuous 9.6 3.7 7.8 12.3 4.2 4,641.6
installation. 0.0312 0.0312 0.0312 0.0354 0.0312 4.4207
Impulsive installation.......... 135.5 17.3 209.6 120.3 44.9 135.9
0.1019 0.0354 0.1495 0.0968 0.0464 0.1019
Float piles (24'' steel pipe)................ Non-impulsive, continuous 17.6 6.8 14.4 22.7 7.6 7,356.4
installation. 0.0354 0.0312 0.0354 0.0396 0.0312 4.4207
Impulsive Installation.......... 1,158.3 147.8 1,792.4 1,028.9 383.5 1,000
1.1225 0.1100 2.6634 0.9918 0.2436 0.9446
DTH Drilling.................... 1,071.7 136.7 1,658.5 952.21 354.9 13,593.6
1.0798 0.1010 2.3357 0.8803 0.2325 4.4207\1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Even though the isopleth is larger than other isopleths, the associated area is equivalent to areas of several other isopleths due clipping of the
ensonified area by landforms.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Estimate
In this section we provide information about the occurrence of
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information which
will inform the take calculations.
CBY calculated occurrence estimates based on literature and
communication with locals in the Yakutat area, notably a local charter
boat operator. They then multiplied that occurrence by estimated days,
weeks, or months of work. After reviewing their occurrence estimates,
NMFS believed some of the estimates to be inconsistent with the cited
literature and local observations. Following careful review of the
analysis and literature presented by CBY in its application, including
marine mammal occurrence data and estimates, NMFS
[[Page 978]]
has determined that the occurrence estimates for some species represent
the best available scientific information for marine mammal abundance
in the action area. The following paragraphs explain how the local
abundance of authorized species was determined (table 7). Table 8
depicts the authorized take by stock, harassment type, and as a
percentage of stock abundance.
Humpback Whale
Dalheim et al. (2019) reported an average group size between 1.2
and 2 humpback whales while the Yakutat Charter Boat Company reports
group sizes ranging up to 10 individuals, but typically an average of 3
whales per group. It was assumed that there would be three whales per
group with one group sighting per day over 54 days. Approximately 97.6
percent likely originate from the Hawaii stock while 2.4 percent are
from the Mexico Distinct Population Segment (DPS) (Wade 2021). No take
by Level A harassment is expected due to the large shutdown zone and
easy observability of animals from this species.
Gray Whale
The local boat charter company reports gray whales are occasionally
seen travelling in groups of three. It was assumed that there would be
one whale spotted every three days. No take by Level A is expected due
to the large shutdown zone and easy observability of animals from this
species.
Killer Whale
Killer whale group sizes in Southeast Alaska vary by ecotype and by
season (Dalheim et al. 2009). Resident killer whales had group sizes of
15.6-70 in the spring, 25-45 in the summer, and 15-36 in the fall; and
transient killer whales had group sizes of 1-14-5.6 in the spring,
4.25-14.5 in the summer, and 1-16.33 in the fall. The local charter
boat reports the whales are intermittently spotted about once a month,
traveling in groups of up to 10 individuals. Therefore, it is assumed
that there will be a single group of 10 animals spotted once per month.
For the purpose of estimating the percentage of each stock taken, it is
assumed that all takes would accrue to each stock.
No take by Level A harassment is proposed or authorized due to the
small AUD INJ zone and high visibility of this species.
Harbor Porpoise
An average group size of two has been reported by Zerbini et al.
(2022) while NMFS has indicated that group sizes can be as large as 10
(NMFS 2025). Dalheim et al. (2009) reported a mean group size of 1.2-
2.7. For estimated authorized take it was assumed that there would be
three animals per group with a single group observed per day for 54
days of in-water driving. Take by Level A harassment is not proposed or
authorized since the Level A harassment zone is larger than the Level B
harassment zone during impact driving and DTH. The apportioning of
Level A and Level B harassment takes is described below.
Beluga Whale
Observation of beluga whales in the project area is uncommon. This
is not surprising given the small number of animals (<20) in this small
resident population and relatively large habitat area. Lucey et al.
(2015) reported two sightings of beluga whales in Yakutat Bay off
Khantaak Island, within approximately 5 miles of the project site. The
sightings occurred in March 2003 and June 2008. Lucey et al. (2015)
also compiled 76 beluga sightings from 1938 to 2013 within Yakutat Bay.
The average group size was reported to be 6 to 10 individuals per
sighting. Sightings of belugas from 1976 to 2000 in the Yakutat area
from various sources were compiled in Laidre et al. (2000). Sightings
in the 1990s tended to be groups of 1 to 11 individuals. The core
habitat area for this small resident population is Disenchantment Bay,
approximately 50 kilometers (km) to the northwest. Given the rarity of
this group, NMFS considers it reasonably likely that groups of up to 10
belugas may occur within the project area up to 2 times over the course
of the project. No take by Level A harassment is proposed or authorized
due to the small AUD INJ zone.
Steller Sea Lion
A marine mammal monitoring report from the Ocean Cape Seafoods Dock
Fender Repairs project in Monti Bay reported a single occurrence of an
unidentified otariid, presumably a Steller sea lion, during 1 week in
October 2016 (Bacon et al., 2016). The local boat charter reported a
single animal camped out at the YSBH harbor, but no other information
about regular occurrences was available. Steller sea lions are also
known to congregate around fishing boats in harbors and marinas. Since
the YSBH houses a number of commercial fishing vessels, it was
conservatively assumed that six animals could be observed per day over
54 days of in-water work. No take by Level A harassment is proposed or
authorized due to the small AUD INJ zone.
California Sea Lion
California sea lion sightings in Southeast and Southcentral Alaska
are relatively rare but do occur on occasion (Woodford 2020). There are
no records of California sea lions in the Global Biodiversity
Information Facility (GBIF) in the project area (GBIF 2024). A marine
mammal monitoring report from the Ocean Cape Seafoods Dock Fender
Repairs project in Monti Bay reported one occurrence of a single
unidentified otariid during 1 week in Oct 2016 (Bacon et al. 2016). CBY
conservatively proposed, and NMFS concurs, that there could be a single
sighting per week over the 24-week project timeline. No take by Level A
harassment is proposed or authorized due to the small AUD INJ zone.
Northern Fur Seal
Northern fur seals are uncommon in the project area as there are no
definitive observations on record. A marine mammal monitoring report
from the Ocean Cape Seafoods Dock Fender Repairs project in Monti Bay
reported one occurrence of a single unidentified otariid, which may
have been a fur seal, during 1 week in October 2016 (Bacon et al.,
2016). CBY conservatively proposed, and NMFS concurs that a single
animal could be observed during each month of the proposed project. No
take by Level A harassment is proposed or authorized due to the small
AUD INJ zone.
Harbor Seal
The local charter boat reports that harbor seals are not typically
observed entering Shipyard Cove, but are regularly recorded in Yakutat
Bay and associated fjords of Disenchantment Bay, where they use glacial
ice for critical life stages like pupping and molting. Records of
harbor seals in the GBIF show 30 occurrences reported by the public and
agencies within and immediately offshore of Yakutat Bay in the past 20
years (GBIF 2024). It is conservatively assumed that three harbor seals
would be observed per day over 54 in-water workdays. Take by Level A
harassment is authorized because the Level A harassment zone is larger
than the Level B harassment zone for impact driving and DTH activities.
The apportioning of Level A and Level B harassment takes is described
below.
Total exposure estimates were calculated by multiplying the number
of days of work (54 days total; 22 days of vibratory-only activities,
and 32 days of vibratory, impact, and DTH activities) by the occurrence
estimates for each species, and total exposures were then
[[Page 979]]
divided into estimates of take by Level A and Level B harassment. For
days with impact and DTH activities, there is potential for take by
Level A harassment for very high-frequency cetaceans (harbor porpoises)
and phocid pinnipeds (harbor seals) due to the larger Level A
harassment zones associated with animals in these hearing groups. In
some instances, the largest zones for some species are greater than the
shutdown zones due to the cryptic nature and assumed lower
detectability of some species and the sensitivity of these species'
hearing thresholds. CBY calculated estimated take by Level A harassment
for these species by calculating the ratio of the area of the Level A
harassment zones to the area of the maximum Level B harassment zone.
This ratio was multiplied by the exposure estimate for days with impact
driving and DTH activities to get the estimated take by Level A
harassment. Take by Level B harassment was then calculated by
subtracting the calculated take by Level A harassment from the total
exposure estimate. This was only necessary for harbor porpoises and
harbor seals as they are the only species for which the Level A
harassment zones exceeded the Level B harassment zone. Calculations are
presented below.
Harbor Porpoise
3 animals/day x 22 days vibratory driving = 66 exposures
3 animals/day x 32 days vibratory/impact/DTH = 96 exposures
Ratio of Maximum Level A harassment area (2.663)/Maximum Level B
harassment area (4.4207) = 0.60
Level A harassment estimate = 0.60 * 96 animals = 58 takes by Level A
harassment
Level B harassment estimate = 66 + 96-58 = 104 takes by Level B
harassment
Harbor Seal
3 animals/day x 22 days vibratory driving = 66 exposures
3 animals/day x 32 days vibratory/impact/DTH = 96 exposures
Ratio of Maximum Level A harassment area (0.991)/Maximum Level B
harassment area (4.4207) = 0.22
Level A harassment estimate = 0.22 * 96 animals = 22 takes by Level A
harassment
Level B harassment estimate = 66 + 96-22 = 140 takes by Level B
harassment
Table 7--Species Occurrence and Total Exposure Estimates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Abundance estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale.................... 3 whales/group x 1 group/day x 54
days = 162 split between 2 stocks.
Gray whale........................ 1 whale every 3 days =18.
Killer whale...................... 10 whales/group x 1 group/every
month (7) = 70 split between 3
stocks.
Harbor porpoise................... 3/group x 1 group/day x 54 days in-
water driving = 162 animals split
between Level A and Level B
harassment takes.
Beluga whale...................... 10/group x 2 groups over project
duration = 20.
Steller Sea lion.................. 6/day x 54 days vibratory = 324.
California sea lion............... 1/week x 24 weeks = 24.
Northern fur seal................. 1 animal/month x 7 months = 7.
Harbor seal....................... 3/day x 54 days = 162 animals split
between Level A and Level B
harassment takes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 8--Authorized Take by Stock, Harassment Type, and as a Percentage of Stock Abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Level B
Species Stock Stock abundance harassment harassment Percentage
take take
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale............... Hawai[revaps]i.. 11,278......... 0 158 1.4
Mex-North \1\ N/A (918)...... 0 4 0.4
Pacific/ Mexico
DPS.
Gray whales.................. ENP............. 29,260......... 0 18 0.06
Killer whales................ ENP Alaska 1,920.......... 0 70 3.6
Resident.
ENP Gulf of 302............ 0 23.1
Alaska,
Aleutian
Islands, and
Bering Sea
Transient.
West Coast 349............ 0 20.0
Transient.
Harbor porpoises............. Yakutat/ UNK (11,146)... 58 94 1.5
Southeast
Alaska Offshore
Waters stock).
Beluga whales................ Cook Inlet stock 331............ 0 20 6.04
Steller sea lions............ Eastern DPS..... 36,308......... 0 297 0.8
Western DPS \2\. 49,837......... 0 27 0.05
California sea lions......... U.S. stock...... 257,606........ 0 24 <0.01
Northern fur seals........... Eastern Pacific. 62,6618........ 0 7 <0.01
Harbor seals................. Prince William 44,756......... 22 140 0.4
Sound.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For MMPA take apportionment and ESA section 7 consultation purposes, 2.4 percent are designated to the
Mexico-North Pacific stock, and the remaining are designated to the Hawai'i stock (Wade 2021).
\2\ Approximately 8.2 percent of SSLs in this area are from the WDPS (NMFS 2020).
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
[[Page 980]]
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 mitigation requirements described below were proposed by CBY in
its adequate and complete application or are the result of subsequent
coordination between NMFS and CBY. CBY has agreed that all of the
mitigation measures are practicable. NMFS has fully reviewed the
specified activities and the mitigation measures to determine if the
mitigation measures would result in the least practicable adverse
impact on marine mammals and their habitat, as required by the MMPA,
and has determined the measures are appropriate. NMFS describes these
below and has included them in the issued IHA.
CBY must ensure that construction supervisors and crews, the
monitoring team, and relevant CBY staff are trained prior to the start
of all pile driving and DTH 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.
Pre- and Post-Activity Monitoring
<bullet> Monitoring must take place from 30 minutes prior to
initiation of pile driving and DTH activity (i.e., pre-clearance
monitoring) through 30 minutes post-completion of pile driving and DTH
activity; and,
<bullet> Pre-start clearance monitoring must be conducted during
periods of visibility sufficient for the lead protected species
observer (PSO) to determine that the shutdown zones indicated in table
9 are clear of marine mammals. Pile driving and DTH may commence
following 30 minutes of observation when the determination is made that
the shutdown zones are clear of marine mammals.
Soft Start
CBY 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.
Shutdown Zones
CBY would establish shutdown zones for all pile driving activities.
The purpose of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within
which shut down of the activity would occur upon sighting of a marine
mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area).
If a marine mammal is observed entering or within the shutdown
zones indicated in table 9, pile driving and DTH must be delayed or
halted. For in-water heavy machinery activities other than pile
driving, if a marine mammal comes within 10 m, work must stop and
vessels must reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain
steerage and safe working conditions. A 10-m shutdown zone would also
serve to protect marine mammals from physical interactions with project
vessels during pile driving and other construction activities, such as
barge positioning or drilling. If an activity is delayed or halted due
to the presence of a marine mammal, the activity may not commence or
resume until either the animal has voluntarily exited and been visually
confirmed beyond the shutdown zone indicated in table 9, or 15 minutes
have passed without re-detection of the animal. Construction activities
must be halted upon observation of a species for which incidental take
is not authorized or a species for which incidental take has been
authorized but the authorized number of takes has been met entering or
within the harassment zone.
All marine mammals would be monitored to the extent possible based
on PSO locations. If a marine mammal enters the Level B harassment
zone, in-water activities would continue and the animal's presence
within the estimated harassment zone would be documented.
CBY 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. If a
marine mammal species for which take is not authorized by this IHA
enters the shutdown zone, all in-water activities would cease until the
animal leaves the zone or has not been observed for at least 15
minutes. Pile driving would 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 CBY or its designated officials, the
in-water activity would be allowed to continue until the safety concern
has been addressed, and the animal would be continuously monitored.
Table 9--Shutdown Zones and Level B Harassment Zones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shutdown zones--authorized species (m) Monitoring
------------------------------------------------------------ zone (m)
Pile size/type Construction method -------------
LF HF VHF PW OW Level B
harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile Removal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing steel piles (16'' round steel)...... Non-impulsive, continuous 40 40 40 40 40 7,360
removal.
Existing timber piles (12'' timber).......... Non-impulsive, continuous 30 10 30 40 20 6,310
removal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 981]]
Temporary Piles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Template piles (24'' steel pipe or Non-impulsive, continuous 20 10 20 20 10 7,360
equivalent). installation & removal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Pile Installation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trestle piles (12.75'' steel pipe)........... Non-impulsive, continuous 10 10 10 20 10 4,650
installation.
Impulsive installation......... 140 20 210 130 50 140
Float piles (24'' steel pipe)................ Non-impulsive, continuous 20 10 20 30 10 7,360
installation.
Impulsive installation......... 1,160 150 200 200 400 1,000
DTH Drilling................... 1,160 150 200 200 400 \1\ 13,600
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This isopleth is considerably larger than other isopleths but is clipped by landforms.
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 lead PSO is
confident marine mammals within the shutdown zone could be detected.
CBY must employ PSOs and establish monitoring locations as
described in the marine mammal monitoring plan and the IHA. PSOs would
monitor the full shutdown zones and the Level B harassment zones to the
extent practicable. Monitoring zones provide utility for observing by
establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown
zones. Monitoring zones enable observers to be aware of and communicate
the presence of marine mammals in the project areas outside the
shutdown zones and thus prepare for a potential cessation of activity
should the animal enter the shutdown zone.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's planned 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.
The monitoring and reporting requirements described in the
following were proposed by CBY in its adequate and complete application
and/or are the result of subsequent coordination between NMFS and CBY.
CBY has agreed to the requirements. NMFS describes these below as
requirements and has included them in the issued IHA.
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 and DTH activities must be conducted by PSOs meeting the
following requirements:
<bullet> PSOs must be independent of the activity contractor (for
example, employed by a subcontractor) and have no other assigned tasks
during monitoring periods;
<bullet> At least one PSO must 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 relevant experience (including
Alaska Native traditional knowledge), education (degree in biological
science or related field), or training for prior experience performing
the duties of a PSO during construction activity pursuant to a NMFS-
issued incidental take authorization or Letter of Concurrence (LOC);
<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 performing the
duties of a PSO during construction activities pursuant to a
[[Page 982]]
NMFS-issued incidental take authorization; and
<bullet> PSOs must be approved by NMFS prior to beginning any
activities subject to this IHA.
PSOs must have the following additional qualifications:
<bullet> Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
<bullet> Experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
<bullet> Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
<bullet> Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of
observations including but not limited to the number and species of
marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates, times and reason for implementation
of mitigation (or why mitigation was not implemented when required);
and marine mammal behavior; and,
<bullet> Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
CBY must assign a minimum of two PSOs to monitor during pile
driving and DTH. They must be stationed where they have an unobstructed
view of the work being conducted and unobstructed view of all the water
within the Shutdown Zones and as much of the Level B harassment zone as
possible. Optimal observation locations will be selected based on
visibility and the type of work occurring. 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.
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.
CBY shall conduct briefings between construction supervisors and
crews, PSOs, and CBY staff prior to the start of all pile driving
activities and when new personnel join the work. These briefings must
explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal
monitoring protocol, and operational procedures.
Reporting
A draft marine mammal monitoring report would be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities, or 60 days prior to a requested date of issuance from any
future IHAs for projects at the same location, whichever comes first.
The report would include an overall description of work completed, a
narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and associated electronic
PSO data sheets. Specifically, the report must include:
<bullet> Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal
monitoring;
<bullet> Construction activities occurring during each daily
observation period, including the number and type of piles driven or
removed and by what method (i.e., impact) and the total 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: (1) Name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) and PSO location
and activity at the time of sighting; (2) Time of sighting; (3)
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; (4)
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); (5) Estimated number of animals (min/max/best
estimate); (6) Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults,
juveniles, neonates, group composition, sex class, etc.); (7) Animal's
closest point of approach and estimated time spent within the
harassment zone; (8) 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
final report would 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 event that personnel involved in the construction activities
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, CBY must immediately cease
the specified activities and report the incident to the Office of
Protected Resources (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8ededca0c7dadea0c3e1e0e7fae1fce7e0e9dcebfee1fcfafdcee0e1efefa0e9e1f8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="99c9cbb7d0cdc9b7d4f6f7f0edf6ebf0f7fecbfce9f6ebedead9f7f6f8f8b7fef6ef">[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, CBY 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. CBY 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
[[Page 983]]
adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e.,
population-level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is
not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In
addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that
might be ``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors,
such as the likely nature of any impacts or responses (e.g., intensity,
duration), the context of any impacts or responses (e.g., critical
reproductive time or location, foraging impacts affecting energetics),
as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the
mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338, September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the baseline (e.g., as reflected in the
regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate where
known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise
levels).
To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analysis applies to all
the species listed in table 1, 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.
Pile driving and DTH activities associated with the CBY project
have the potential to disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically,
the project activities may result in take, in the form of Level A and
Level B harassment, from underwater and in-air sounds generated from
pile driving and removal. Potential takes could occur if individuals
are present in the ensonified zone when these activities are underway.
Takes by Level B harassment would be due to potential behavioral
disturbance and TTS. Takes by Level A harassment would be due to
auditory injury. No serious injury or mortality is expected or
authorized, even in the absence of required mitigation measures, given
the nature of the activities. The potential for harassment would be
further minimized through the construction method and the
implementation of the planned mitigation measures.
Take by Level A harassment is authorized for harbor porpoises and
harbor seals to account for the possibility that an animal could enter
a Level A harassment zone and remain within that zone for a duration
long enough to incur auditory injury before being observed by PSOs.
Given the relatively short duration expected to drive each pile, and
breaks 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 an extended
period. This is highly unlikely given the mobile nature of marine
mammals in the area. Any take by Level A harassment is expected to
arise from, at most, a small degree of auditory injury, i.e., minor
degradation (likely only a few dB) of hearing capabilities within
regions of hearing that align most completely with the energy produced
by vibratory and impact pile driving (i.e., the low-frequency region
below 2 kHz). Severe hearing impairment or impairment within the ranges
of greatest hearing sensitivity are unlikely. Animals would need to be
exposed to higher levels and/or longer duration than are anticipated.
Due to the small degree anticipated, any auditory injury incurred would
not be expected to affect the reproductive success or survival of any
individual, much less result in adverse impacts on the species or
stock.
Additionally, some subset of the individuals that are behaviorally
harassed could also simultaneously incur some small degree of TTS for a
short duration of time. However, since the hearing sensitivity of
individuals that incur TTS is expected to recover completely within
minutes to hours, it is unlikely that the brief hearing impairment
would affect the individual's long-term ability to forage and
communicate with conspecifics, and would therefore not likely impact
reproduction or survival of any individual marine mammal, let alone
adversely affect rates of recruitment or survival of the species or
stock.
Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving and DTH in
the ensonified area 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 the planned 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 and DTH would occur intermittently
and for only a portion of the project's duration, any harassment would
be temporary.
Any impacts on marine mammal prey that would occur during CBY's
planned activity would have, at most, short-term effects on foraging of
individual marine mammals and, likely, no effect on the populations of
marine mammals as a whole. Indirect effects on marine mammal prey
during the construction are expected to be minor, and these effects are
unlikely to cause substantial effects on marine mammals at the
individual level, with no expected effect on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.
For all species and stocks, take would occur within a limited,
confined space (i.e., in-water ensonified area adjacent to the project
site) of the stock's range. While pinniped species are most likely to
occur within the immediate project area, the nearest officially
documented haulouts are outside of the ensonified area and located some
distance from the project area. There are no Steller sea lion haulouts
in the project area. The closest haulouts are between 8 km (harbor
seal) and 48 km (Steller sea lion) km from the project area.
There is a migratory BIA for the gray whale that includes the
months of January, March, April, May, November and December. In-water
construction operations would occur during the March through May period
when whales are migrating; however, the project area is inside Yakutat
Bay, a relatively sheltered area with only one entrance and exit point,
and gray whales are not expected to spend significant time nearby.
There is also a Yakutat Bay Beluga whale Small and Resident Population
BIA that is active year-round. The core area for this population,
however, is Disenchantment Bay located approximately 50 km from the
project site. Movement of whales near Yakutat would likely occur
infrequently and the amount of time spent in the project area is
expected to be low.
In addition, it is unlikely that minor noise effects in a small,
localized area of habitat would have any effect on the reproduction or
survival of any individuals, much less the stocks' annual rates of
recruitment or survival. In combination, we believe that these factors,
as well as the available body of evidence from other similar
activities, demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified
activities 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
[[Page 984]]
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> Take by Level A harassment (AUD INJ) is authorized for two
species due to associated large Level A harassment zones but the amount
of take would be limited and of a low degree;
<bullet> For all species and stocks, Yakutat Bay is a small and
peripheral part of their range;
<bullet> The intensity of anticipated take by Level B harassment is
relatively low for all stocks. Level B harassment would be primarily in
the form of behavioral disturbance, resulting in avoidance of the
project areas around where impact driving and DTH is occurring, with
some low-level TTS that may limit the detection of acoustic cues for
relatively brief periods;
<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 small relative to the overall
habitat ranges of all species and stocks; and,
<bullet> The lack of anticipated significant or long-term negative
effects to marine mammal habitat.
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 planned 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 section 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 (86 FR 5322,
January 19, 2021). Additionally, other qualitative factors may be
considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of
the activities.
Another circumstance in which NMFS considers it appropriate to make
a small numbers finding is in the case of a species or stock that may
potentially be taken but is either rarely encountered or only expected
to be taken on rare occasions. In that circumstance, one or two assumed
encounters with a group of animals (meaning a group that is traveling
together or aggregated, and thus exposed to a stressor at the same
approximate time) should reasonably be considered small numbers,
regardless of consideration of the proportion of the stock (if known),
as rare encounters resulting in take of one or two groups should be
considered small relative to the range and distribution of any stock.
While the percentage of stock taken for the Cook Inlet beluga whale
stock is below one third, the Yakutat portion of the Cook Inlet beluga
whale stock is considered to be resident in the waters around Yakutat,
particularly in Disenchantment Bay, and consists of fewer than 20
individuals. It is possible that all or a subset of these whales will
visit the project site during the construction period during their
regular movements in the area. NMFS considers it reasonably likely that
Yakutat belugas may occur up to two times during the project. Based on
the rarity of encounters with this group expected, this represents
small numbers for this stock.
For all other stocks, except for the ENP Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian
Islands, and Bering Sea transient and West Coast transient stocks of
killer whale, the authorized number of takes is less than one-third of
the best available population abundance estimate (table 9). The numbers
of animals authorized to be taken from these stocks would be considered
small relative to the relevant stocks' abundances, even if each
estimated taking occurred to a new individual--an extremely unlikely
scenario. The estimated take of the two killer whale stocks assumes
that all takes would be accrued by a single stock. This is highly
unlikely for animals with extended habitat ranges throughout coastal
Alaska down to California.
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 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'' 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.
Harbor seals and sea lions have traditionally been taken as part of
subsistence harvests in Yakutat. Because of the high hunting pressure
harbor seals may avoid areas like Monti Bay and Yakutat Roads where
they are easily visible and readily accessible to hunters, although
they are still expected to be common within the range of construction
impacts. The small boat harbor is the primary access point for
subsistence users to the traditional seal hunting grounds in
Disenchantment Bay and some temporary disruptions to mooring
availability during construction would occur, but replacement of the
harbor to provide safe marine access into the future would be
beneficial to subsistence users in the long term.
The planned 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. Some minor, short-term harassment of Steller sea
lions and harbor seals could occur, potentially including displacement
from Yakutat Bay and into the surrounding habitat. Displacement is
expected to be short-term and temporary, and limited to the immediate
project area. Therefore, any effects on subsistence harvest activities
in the project areas are expected to be minimal and would not have an
adverse impact on overall harvest.
Based on the description of the specified activity, the measures
described to minimize adverse effects on the availability of marine
mammals
[[Page 985]]
for subsistence purposes, and the required mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS has determined that there will not be an unmitigable
adverse impact on subsistence uses from CBY's planned.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
requires that each Federal agency ensures that any action it
authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result
in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical
habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of incidental take
authorizations, NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to
authorize take for ESA-listed species, in this case with the Alaska
Regional Office.
The NMFS Alaska Regional Office Protected Resources Division issued
a Biological Opinion on December 19, 2025 under section 7 of the ESA,
on the issuance of an IHA to CBY under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
by the NMFS Permits and Conservation Division. The Biological Opinion
concluded that this action is not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of western DPS Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus), Mexico
DPS humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), or Western North Pacific
DPS humpback whale and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify
western DPS Steller sea lion, Mexico DPS humpback whale or Western
North Pacific DPS humpback whale 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 review our proposed 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 the IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further
NEPA review.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to CBY for the potential harassment of small
numbers of 9 marine mammal species incidental to the Yakutat Small Boat
Harbor Replacement Project in Yakutat, Alaska, that includes the
previously explained mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements.
Dated: January 7, 2026.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2026-00284 Filed 1-8-26; 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 January 9, 2026.
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.