[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 48 (Wednesday, March 12, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13991-14003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05244]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XD070
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Coast Guard Station Monterey
Waterfront Repairs in Monterey, California
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from the United States Coast
Guard (USCG) for an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take
marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to conducting its Station
Monterey waterfront repair in Monterey, California. Pursuant to the
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its
proposal to issue an IHA to USCG to incidentally take, by Level B
Harassment only, marine mammals during the specified activity.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than April
11, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to Jolie
Harrison, Supervisor, Incidental Take Program, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox
address for providing email comments is [email protected]. Comments
sent via email, including all attachments, must not exceed a 25-
megabyte file size. NMFS is not responsible for comments sent to
addresses other than those provided here.
[[Page 13992]]
Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted to http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm without change. All Personal Identifying Information
(for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the
commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential
Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
An electronic copy of the application may be obtained by writing to
the address specified above, telephoning the contact listed below (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or visiting the Internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. The following associated
documents are also available at the same internet address:
Environmental Assessment and marine mammal monitoring plan. Documents
cited in this notice may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular
business hours, at the aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is
provided to the public for review.
An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings
are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103
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.''
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, 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].
Summary of Request
On June 27, 2013, NMFS received an application from USCG for the
taking of marine mammals incidental to its Station Monterey waterfront
repairs project. NMFS determined that the application was adequate and
complete.
The USCG proposes to conduct its Station Monterey waterfront
repairs work in Monterey, California. The proposed activity would occur
between June 15 and October 15, 2014. The following specific aspects of
the proposed activities are likely to result in the take of marine
mammals: in-water pile removal and impact and vibratory pile driving.
Take, by Level B Harassment only, of individuals of five species is
anticipated to result from the specified activity.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
The USCG proposes to improve and maintain the structural integrity
of the patrol boat pier (Pier) and potable waterline at USCG Station
Monterey (Station) through the replacement of Pier piles and the water
line.
The Station's area of responsibility extends 50 miles offshore for
approximately 120 nautical miles of coastline, from Point A[ntilde]o
Nuevo south to the Monterey-San Luis Obispo County line, encompassing
5,000 square miles. The Station's missions include maritime homeland
security, search and rescue, maritime law enforcement, and public
affairs. The Station works jointly with other agencies governing the
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. The vessels that are used to
support the Station's missions are 21 to 25 foot rigid-hull inflatable
boats, a 41 foot utility boat, a 47 foot motor life boat, and an 87
foot patrol boat. In addition, a NOAA boat also uses the Pier.
Dates and Duration
The project is proposed for construction in June 2014. The proposed
pile extraction and driving activities would occur between June 15 and
October 15.
Under the Proposed Action, the repairs will require a maximum of 60
work days for completion. A work day is limited to a period beginning 2
hours after sunrise and ending 2 hours before sunset. The duration of
the repairs, lasting approximately 60 work days, includes the time for
removal of existing timber piles, new pile installations, and under-
deck and above-deck repairs described below.
It is assumed that two piles per day would be both extracted and
installed. Pile driving activities would therefore occur for an
estimated maximum of 10 days of the total construction time. It is
assumed that driving time would be about 20 to 25 minutes per pile
(vibratory or impact). It is assumed that vibratory extraction of the
existing piles would take about 10 minutes per pile. This would result
in--at most--60 to 70 minutes of pile driving per day; or 8.5 to 10
hours of underwater and airborne noise generation from pile driving
over the course of the project construction.
Specified Geographic Region
The Monterey Peninsula is 85 miles south of San Francisco,
California, on the southern end of Monterey Bay. The Station is located
at 100 Lighthouse Avenue in the City and County of Monterey, California
(see Figure 1-1 in the IHA application).
The Pier is on the eastern portion of the Station's waterfront
facility, along a jetty that extends approximately 1,300 feet east into
Monterey Harbor. The Pier and floating docks are on the southern side
of the Jetty. A paved access road runs approximately 800 feet along the
Jetty. The Pier access road is accessible to the general public;
however, the USCG facilities are secured by fencing. The eastern end of
the Jetty is not accessible to the public. This area is inhabited
throughout most of the year by seabirds, which use the Jetty for
nesting during spring and summer; and by California sea lions, which
use the Jetty as a haul-out site. Pacific harbor seals also use rocky
outcroppings and waters within the larger Monterey Bay area for haul-
out and foraging, respectively.
Detailed Description of Activities
The Pier was constructed in 1934, of timber and steel material, and
is supported by 64 piles. In 1995, 47 of the original timber piles were
replaced with 14 inch steel pipe piles, and the remaining 17 piles were
covered polyvinyl chloride (PVC) wraps to extend their service life.
These 17 timber piles are bearing piles that have exceeded their
service life due to marine borers (i.e., marine organisms, such as
mollusks, that feed on wood particles) and exposure to the marine
[[Page 13993]]
environment, and are therefore in need of replacement. The Pier deck
and floating docks require repairs due to deterioration that has
occurred from exposure to the marine environment and regular use of
these facilities.
A galvanized steel pipe runs under the Pier and provides potable
water to the Pier's floating docks. Exposure to the marine environment
over time has resulted in severe corrosion of the water line,
warranting its replacement.
The USCG proposes to remove and replace 17 timber piles that
structurally support the Pier; replace the existing potable water line;
and improve associated structures to maintain the structural integrity
of the Pier and potable water line.
The proposed construction would involve removing the existing
timber deck, timber stringers, steel pile caps, steel support beams,
and hardware to access the 17 timber piles that need to be replaced.
The timber piles, which are approximately 14 to 16 inches in diameter
and are covered with PVC wraps, would be removed through use of a
vibratory extractor.
Each timber pile would then be replaced with a steel pipe pile that
would be up to 18 inches in diameter, have \1/2\ inch-thick walls, and
be positioned and installed in the footprint of the extracted timber
pile. The new steel pipe piles would not be filled with concrete. Other
material and hardware removed to conduct the pile replacement would be
replaced with in-kind materials. Best management practices would be
employed during demolition and construction activities to prevent
debris from falling into the water.
Due to dense substrate at the project site, a majority of the steel
pipe pile installation may require impact pile driving; however, pile
driving would be conducted with a vibratory hammer to the extent
feasible, with an impact hammer used for proofing the piles. Pre-
drilling would be permitted and would be discontinued when the pile tip
is approximately 5 feet above the required pile tip elevation. If the
steel pipe pile cannot be driven 30 feet below the mudline with an
impact hammer due to the substrate or Jetty armor, the pile would be
posted onto the armor stone using 36 inch-diameter concrete pedestals
and dowels anchored into the armor stone. Concrete slurry would be used
to cement stone within 5 feet of posted steel pipe piles to further
secure the piles.
A sound attenuation system (i.e., bubble curtain) would be used
during impact hammer pile driving. The bubble curtain creates an
underwater wall of air around the pile to dissipate in-water sound
waves.
Pile extraction and driving equipment would be located on a barge
positioned in a manner that would not impede access to the floating
docks; would be at a point along the Pier access road that does not
disrupt Pier access; and that is secured from pedestrian movements.
Pile extraction and driving equipment would not be located on the
existing Pier.
Several proposed ancillary repairs to the Pier deck and floating
dock are associated with this project. Specifically, under-deck repairs
would restore bearings at pedestals and sea walls with non-shrink grout
pads, and replace underwater pile struts. Above-deck repairs would
include removing abandoned mooring hardware, replacing missing sections
of curb, and replacing isolated deck planks that have deteriorated.
Repairs to the floating dock would include repairing tie rods,
repairing concrete spall, relocating and securing gangway wear
plate(s), replacing cleats, replacing missing rubstrips, and replacing
underwater pile struts.
Repairs to the potable water line would involve in-kind replacement
of approximately 175 feet of 3 inch-diameter galvanized piping. The
existing water line is on the outboard beam of the Pier, and is mounted
by hangers. The new water line would be supported every 4 feet in the
same alignment as the existing configuration. Three top side water
standpipes would be replaced as part of the water line replacement. All
work for replacement of the potable water line would occur above Mean
High Water.
The primary sources of underwater noise would be from the
extraction of old piles and driving new steel pipe piles to support the
Pier. The options for installing these piles include driving the piles
the full length with an impact hammer (either diesel or hydraulic); or
vibrating in the piles, with limited impact driving to proof the
bearing of the piles; or partially installing the piles with an impact
hammer and casting a cement footing at the interface of the jetty. At
this time USGS has not decided what method will be used, so an analysis
of both pile driving methods was conducted. Support piles would be
between 14 and 18 inches in diameter. The analysis assumed the larger
18 inch size for the noise projections. Impact pile driving produces
impulse noise, while vibratory pile extraction and driving produces
non-impulse noise.
A review of underwater sound measurements for similar projects was
undertaken to estimate the near-source sound levels for vibratory and
impact pile driving. Sounds from similar-sized steel shell piles have
been measured in water for several projects.
Vibratory Pile Installation Sound Generation
A review of available acoustic data for pile driving indicates that
the recent Test Pile Program at Naval Base Kitsap at Bangor,
Washington, provides the most extensive set of data. The project
involved the installation of test piles of 24-, 36- and 48-inches in
diameter using a vibratory driver. Most of the installed piles were 36
inches in diameter, and only one pile was 24-inch diameter. This Test
Pile Program provided the average sound level based on the root mean
squared (RMS) levels using a 10-second time constant. Most other data
reported are based on maximum RMS values using a 1- to 10-second time
constant (e.g., Caltrans Fish Guidance Manual 2009).
For 36-inch diameter piles driven by the Navy, the average RMS
level for all pile driving events was 159 dB RMS at 33 feet or 10
meters. There was a considerable range in the RMS levels measured
across a pile driving event, where the highest average RMS level was
169 dB RMS.
The range of vibratory sound levels at 33 feet or 10 meters
reported by Caltrans is 155 dB for 12-inch diameter piles to 175 dB RMS
for 36-inch diameter piles (based on maximum 1-second RMS levels). All
of these piles were driven in relatively shallow water.
Noting that the piles to be used for this project will be smaller
than those driven by the Navy for their Test Pile Program at Bangor,
Washington, a near-source level of 168 dB RMS at 33 feet (10 meters)
level was used to characterize the sound that would be produced from
vibratory pile installation.
Impact Pile Driving Sound Generation
A review of existing data indicates that measurements conducted for
the USCG Tongue Point Pier Repairs in the Columbia River are most
representative. This project was located on the Columbia River near
Astoria, Oregon. The purpose of the project was to repair the existing
Tongue Point pier. The project included installation of 24-inch-
diameter steel pipe piles to replace existing woodpiles, along with
reconstruction of a concrete deck.
Data measured at the Tongue Point Pier Repair included similar
types of pile driving on an existing pier in deep water. Although the
length of the installed piles was similar to those proposed for this
project, the diameters
[[Page 13994]]
were larger than proposed for this project. The difference in pile size
should not result in much, if any, difference in the expected noise
levels from pile driving.
Average sound levels measured at Tongue Point include peak
pressures of 189 to 207 dB, RMS sound pressure levels of 178 to 189 dB,
and SEL levels of 160 to 175 dB per strike at 33 feet (10 meters).
Sound levels associated with vibratory installation of the piles were
not measured on this project. The ambient levels measured in between
pile driving ranged from a RMS level of 115 to 125 dB. Due to the
difference in pile sizes, use of the Tongue Point data would likely
overestimate sound levels expected at the proposed USCG Station
Monterey project. Based on the Tongue Point sound measurements,
unattenuated near-source impact pile driving levels applicable to this
project are 208 dB peak, 195 RMS and 175 dB SEL. Note, a substantially
higher RMS level of 195 dB was assumed rather than 189 dB that was
measured for Tongue Point. Typically, there is an approximately 10 to
15 dB difference in peak and RMS sound pressure levels. Assuming the
higher peak pressure of 208 dB, an RMS level of 195 dB would typically
occur. To provide a conservative estimate, the higher RMS sound
pressure level was assumed for this assessment.
Airborne Noise
Based on airborne noise levels measured during the Navy Test Pile
Project in Bangor, Washington (NAVFAC 2012), the greatest unweighted
maximum noise level (Lmax) was measured at 102 dB re 20
[mu]Pa, and the average Lmax 97 dB re [mu]Pa at 50 feet (15
m) from the source. For impact pile driving, the greatest
Lmax was 112 dB re 20 [mu]Pa and the average Lmax
103 dB re 20 [mu]Pa at 50 feet (15 m) from the source.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
The marine mammal species under NMFS jurisdiction most likely to
occur in the proposed construction area include Pacific harbor seal
(Phoca vitulina richardsi), California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), killer whale
(Orcinus orca), and gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus). The southern
sea otter (Enhydra lutris) is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and is not considered further in this proposed IHA notice. A
summary of marine mammal species under NMFS jurisdiction and their
abundance and ESA-status are listed in Table 1.
General information on the marine mammal species found in
California waters can be found in Caretta et al. (2013), which is
available at the following URL: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/po2012.pdf. Refer to that document for information on these species.
Specific information concerning these species in the vicinity of the
proposed action area is provided below.
Table 1--List of Marine Mammal Species Under NMFS Jurisdiction That Occur in the Vicinity of the USCG Station
Monterey Waterfront Repair Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common name Scientific name Stock ESA status Abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion............ Zalophus U.S............... Not listed............. 296,750
californianus.
Harbor seal.................... Phoca vitulina California........ Not listed............. 30,196
richardsi.
Harbor porpoise................ Phocoena phocoena. Monterey Bay...... Not listed............. 1,492
Killer whale................... Orcinus orca...... Eastern North Not listed............. 240
Pacific offshore.
West coast Not listed............. 354
transient.
Gray whale..................... Eschrichtius Eastern North Not listed............. 19,126
robustus. Pacific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California Sea Lion
Monterey Bay California sea lions are part of the U.S. stock, which
begins at the U.S./Mexico border and extends northward into Canada. The
U.S. stock was estimated at 296,750 in the 2012 Stock Assessment Report
(SAR) and may be at carrying capacity, although more data are needed to
verify that determination (Carretta et al. 2013). Because different age
and sex classes are not all ashore at any given time, the population
assessment is based on an estimate of the number of births and number
of pups in relation to the known population. The current population
estimate is derived from visual surveys, conducted in 2007, of the
different age and sex classes observed ashore at the primary rookeries
and haul-out sites in southern and central California, coupled with an
assessment done in 2008 of the number of pups born in the southern
California rookeries (Carretta et al. 2013). California sea lions are
present year-round in Monterey Bay, with generally lower numbers during
the summer months when some individuals return to southern California
to breed.
California sea lions do not avoid areas with heavy or frequent
human activity, but rather may approach certain areas to investigate.
This species typically does not flush from a buoy or haulout if
approached.
California sea lions are not listed under the ESA.
Harbor Seal
Harbor seals are members of the true seal family (Phocidae). For
management purposes, differences in mean pupping date (Temte 1986),
movement patterns (Jeffries 1985; Brown 1988), pollutant loads
(Calambokidis et al. 1985), and fishery interactions have led to the
recognition of three separate harbor seal stocks along the west coast
of the continental U.S. (Boveng 1988). The three distinct stocks are:
(1) Inland waters of Washington State (including Hood Canal, Puget
Sound, Georgia Basin and the Strait of Juan de Fuca out to Cape
Flattery), (2) outer coast of Oregon and Washington, and (3) California
(Carretta et al. 2011). Harbor seals found in the vicinity of the
proposed action area belong to the California stock.
Pacific harbor seals display year-round site fidelity, though they
have been known to swim several hundred miles to find food or suitable
breeding habitat. Although generally solitary in the water, harbor
seals come ashore at haul-outs that are used for resting,
thermoregulation, birthing, and nursing pups. Haul-out sites are
relatively consistent from year to year (Kopec and Harvey 1995), and
females have been recorded returning to their own natal haul-out when
breeding (Green et al. 2006). In the vicinity of the proposed action
area, Pacific harbor seals are not known to regularly use the Jetty as
a haul-out site, but may use beaches or other relatively low-gradient
areas to haul-out in the project area, and in areas north such as
beaches along Cannery Row.
Pacific harbor seals are present year-round in Monterey Bay and
would be expected in the project area, though in much lower numbers
than California sea
[[Page 13995]]
lions (Lowry 2012). There are no known pupping sites in the vicinity of
the project area, so Pacific harbor seal pups are not expected to be
present during pile driving.
Harbor seals are not listed under the ESA.
Harbor Porpoise
The harbor porpoise is a member of the Phocoenidae family. In the
eastern North Pacific, harbor porpoise are found in coastal and inland
waters from Point Conception, California to Alaska and along at least
the eastern Aleutian chain and eastern Bering Sea (Leatherwood et al.
1988). Along the west coast of the United States, harbor porpoise
appear to have much less extensive home range and movement when
compared to the same species in the east coast (Calambokidis and Barlow
1991). Recent genetic analyses of harbor porpoise population structure
along the eastern North Pacific indicate that there is small scale
subdivision within the U.S. portion of this range (Chivers et al.
2002). They are typically found in waters less than 80 m deep within
bays, estuaries, and harbors. They generally occur in groups of two to
five individuals, and are considered to be shy, nonsocial animals.
For management purposes, harbor porpoise found in Monterey Bay is
treated as a separate stock (Monterey Bay stock). Harbor porpoises may
be present year-round in Monterey Bay, but in relatively low numbers.
Harbor porpoises are found in shallow sandy bottom regions of the
Monterey Bay shelf (Monterey Bay Whale Watch 2012) often within 300 m
of shore (Sekiguchi 1995). They tend to be more abundant in areas north
of Monterey Bay (Barlow 1988).
Harbor porpoises are not listed under the ESA.
Killer Whale
The West coast transient and the eastern North Pacific offshore
stocks of killer whale may be found near the project site.
Nevertheless, killer whales are relatively uncommon, migratory
inhabitants of Monterey Bay. It would be extremely rare that killer
whales would venture into shallow waters close to the project area,
particularly within the harbor to the south of the jetty. They have
been included here because in June 2011, four killer whales were
sighted in the harbor by local fishermen (NBC Bay Area 201), though the
article reported that an occurrence such as this, so close to shore,
was extremely rare.
None of these two killer whale stock is listed under the ESA.
Gray Whale
During the winter and spring, the entire Eastern North Pacific
stock of gray whale population migrates along the coast, generally
within 3 km of the Monterey Bay coastline, traveling to their summer
feeding grounds in the Bering Sea and to their winter breeding grounds
in Baja California. It is expected that gray whales would very rarely
venture into the shallow waters of the project area, particularly into
Monterey Harbor south of the jetty.
The Eastern North Pacific stock of gray whale is not listed under
the ESA.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that the
types of stressors associated with the specified activity (in-water
pile driving and pile removal) have been observed to impact marine
mammals. This discussion may also include reactions that we consider to
rise to the level of a take and those that we do not consider to rise
to the level of a take (for example, with acoustics, we may include a
discussion of studies that showed animals not reacting at all to sound
or exhibiting barely measurable avoidance). This section is intended as
a background of potential effects and does not consider either the
specific manner in which this activity will be carried out or the
mitigation that will be implemented, and how either of those will shape
the anticipated impacts from this specific activity. The ``Estimated
Take by Incidental Harassment'' section later in this document will
include a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are
expected to be taken by this activity. The ``Negligible Impact
Analysis'' section will include the analysis of how this specific
activity will impact marine mammals and will consider the content of
this section, the ``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment'' section,
the ``Proposed Mitigation'' section, and the ``Anticipated Effects on
Marine Mammal Habitat'' section to draw conclusions regarding the
likely impacts of this activity on the reproductive success or
survivorship of individuals and from that on the affected marine mammal
populations or stocks.
Acoustic Impacts
When considering the influence of various kinds of sound on the
marine environment, it is necessary to understand that different kinds
of marine life are sensitive to different frequencies of sound. Based
on available behavioral data, audiograms have been derived using
auditory evoked potentials, anatomical modeling, and other data,
Southall et al. (2007) designate ``functional hearing groups'' for
marine mammals and estimate the lower and upper frequencies of
functional hearing of the groups. The functional groups and the
associated frequencies are indicated below (though animals are less
sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of their functional range and
most sensitive to sounds of frequencies within a smaller range
somewhere in the middle of their functional hearing range):
Low frequency cetaceans (13 species of mysticetes):
functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 Hz and
22 kHz (however, a study by Au et al. (2006) of humpback whale songs
indicate that the range may extend to at least 24 kHz);
Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 species of dolphins, six
species of larger toothed whales, and 19 species of beaked and
bottlenose whales): functional hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;
High frequency cetaceans (eight species of true porpoises,
six species of river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, and four species
of cephalorhynchids): functional hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 200 Hz and 180 kHz; and
Pinnipeds in Water: functional hearing is estimated to
occur between approximately 75 Hz and 75 kHz, with the greatest
sensitivity between approximately 700 Hz and 20 kHz.
As mentioned previously in this document, five marine mammal
species (three cetacean and two pinniped species) are likely to occur
in the proposed seismic survey area. Of the three cetacean species
likely to occur in USCG's proposed project area, the gray whale is
classified as a low-frequency cetacean, the killer whale is classified
as a mid-frequency cetacean, and harbor porpoise is classified as a
high-frequency cetacean (Southall et al. 2007). A species functional
hearing group is a consideration when we analyze the effects of
exposure to sound on marine mammals.
USCG and NMFS determined that in-water pile removal and pile
driving during the Station Monterey waterfront repair project has the
potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammal species
and stocks in the vicinity of the proposed activity.
Marine mammals exposed to high intensity sound repeatedly or for
prolonged periods can experience hearing threshold shift (TS), which is
the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain
[[Page 13996]]
frequency ranges (Kastak et al. 1999; Schlundt et al. 2000; Finneran et
al. 2002; 2005). TS can be permanent (PTS), in which case the loss of
hearing sensitivity is unrecoverable, or temporary (TTS), in which case
the animal's hearing threshold will recover over time (Southall et al.
2007). Since marine mammals depend on acoustic cues for vital
biological functions, such as orientation, communication, finding prey,
and avoiding predators, hearing impairment could result in the reduced
ability of marine mammals to detect or interpret important sounds.
Repeated noise exposure that leads to TTS could cause PTS.
Experiments on a bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncates) and beluga
whale (Delphinapterus leucas) showed that exposure to a single watergun
impulse at a received level of 207 kPa (or 30 psi) peak-to-peak (p-p),
which is equivalent to 228 dB (p-p) re 1 [mu]Pa, resulted in a 7 and 6
dB TTS in the beluga whale at 0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively. Thresholds
returned to within 2 dB of the pre-exposure level within 4 minutes of
the exposure (Finneran et al. 2002). No TTS was observed in the
bottlenose dolphin. Although the source level of pile driving from one
hammer strike is expected to be much lower than the single watergun
impulse cited here, animals being exposed for a prolonged period to
repeated hammer strikes could receive more noise exposure in terms of
SEL than from the single watergun impulse (estimated at 188 dB re 1
[mu]Pa\2\-s) in the aforementioned experiment (Finneran et al. 2002).
Chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-intensity, noise
could cause masking at particular frequencies for marine mammals that
utilize sound for vital biological functions (Clark et al. 2009).
Masking can interfere with detection of acoustic signals such as
communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds
important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain circumstances,
marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment are being
severely masked could also be impaired.
Masking occurs at the frequency band which the animals utilize.
Therefore, since noise generated from in-water vibratory pile driving
and removal is mostly concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have
less effect on high frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes
(toothed whales). However, lower frequency man-made noises are more
likely to affect detection of communication calls and other potentially
important natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. It may also
affect communication signals when they occur near the noise band and
thus reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al.
2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al. 2004; Holt
et al. 2009).
Unlike TS, masking can potentially impact the species at
population, community, or even ecosystem levels, as well as individual
levels. Masking affects both senders and receivers of the signals and
could have long-term chronic effects on marine mammal species and
populations. Recent science suggests that low frequency ambient sound
levels have increased by as much as 20 dB (more than 3 times in terms
of SPL) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of
these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand 2009). All
anthropogenic noise sources, such as those from vessels traffic and
pile driving and removal, contribute to the elevated ambient noise
levels, thus intensify masking.
Nevertheless, the sum of noise from the proposed USCG Station
Monterey waterfront repair construction activities is confined in an
area that is largely bounded by jetty and landmass, therefore, the
noise generated is not expected to contribute to increased ocean
ambient noise. Due to shallow water depths near the jetty, underwater
sound propagation for low-frequency sound (which is the major noise
source from pile driving) is expected to be poor.
Finally, exposure of marine mammals to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al. 1995), such as: Changing
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities,
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping), avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located, and/or flight responses (e.g.,
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
The biological significance of many of these behavioral
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral
modification could be expected to be biologically significant if the
change affects growth, survival, and reproduction. Some of these
significant behavioral modifications include:
Drastic change in diving/surfacing patterns (such as those
thought to be causing beaked whale stranding due to exposure to
military mid-frequency tactical sonar);
Habitat abandonment due to loss of desirable acoustic
environment; and
Cease feeding or social interaction.
The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise
depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and
their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography), and is also difficult to predict (Southall et
al. 2007).
The proposed project area is not a prime habitat for marine
mammals, nor is it considered an area frequented by marine mammals.
Therefore, behavioral disturbances that could result from anthropogenic
noise associated with USCG waterfront repair activities are expected to
affect only a small number of marine mammals on an infrequent basis.
Visual Disturbance
The activities of workers in the project area may also cause
behavioral reactions of marine mammals, such as pinnipeds flushing from
the jetty or pier, or moving farther from the disturbance to forage.
The jetty is partially accessible for public use and experiences
moderate to heavy foot traffic from fishermen and tourists along the
western portion of the jetty. The California sea lions use the fenced-
off eastern portion of the jetty and the area beneath the pier as haul-
out sites and appear to be well habituated to human activity, often
tolerating humans at a distance of just a few feet beyond the fences or
dock areas that separate humans from the hauled-out animals.
Observations made by Harvey and Hoover (2009) during previous
repairs of the pier indicated very little disturbance of marine
mammals, particularly on the eastern portion of the jetty. They
concluded that the animals did not seem to be behaviorally modified by
the presence of the construction activities. The only potential
disturbance seemed to occur during diving operations, which may have
startled some individuals. The presence of workers is likely to affect
only animals within close proximity to the workers and is not expected
to affect animals on the jetty outside of the work area. The presence
of workers would not result in population level impacts or affect the
long-term fitness of the species.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
No permanent impacts to habitat are proposed to or would occur as a
result of the proposed project. The USCG's proposed Station Monterey
waterfront repair activity would not increase the pier's existing
footprint, and no new
[[Page 13997]]
structures would be installed that would result in the loss of
additional habitat. Therefore, no restoration of the habitat would be
necessary. A temporary, small-scale loss of foraging habitat may occur
for marine mammals if marine mammals leave the area during pile
extraction and driving activities.
Acoustic energy created during pile replacement work would have the
potential to disturb fish within the vicinity of the pile replacement
work. As a result, the affected area could temporarily lose foraging
value to marine mammals. During pile driving, high noise levels may
exclude fish from the vicinity of pile driving. Hastings and Popper
(2005) identified several studies that suggest fish will relocate to
avoid areas of damaging noise energy. The acoustic frequency and
intensity ranges that have been shown to negatively impact fish (FHWG
2008) and an analysis of potential noise output of the proposed
project, indicate that the distance from underwater pile driving at
which noise has the potential to cause temporary hearing loss in fish
over a distance of approximately 42 meters from pile driving activity,
or approximately 0.003 km\2\ inside the harbor south of the jetty.
Therefore, if fish leave the area of disturbance, pinniped foraging
habitat may have temporarily decreased foraging value when piles are
driven using impact hammering.
The duration of fish avoidance of this area after pile driving
stops is unknown. However, the affected area represents an extremely
small portion of the total area within foraging range of marine mammals
that may be present in the project area.
Monterey Bay is classified as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under
the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, as
amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act. The EFH provisions of the
Sustainable Fisheries Act are designed to protect fisheries habitat
from being lost due to disturbance and degradation. The act requires
implementation of measures to conserve and enhance EFH. The Monterey
Bay is classified as an EFH for 118 species of commercially important
fish, 30 of which have potential to occur within the project area. Some
of these species are likely prey to pinnipeds and occasionally southern
sea otters. In addition to EFH designations, portions of the Monterey
Bay are designated as a Habitat Area of Particular Concern (HAPC) for
various fish species within the Pacific Groundfish, Pacific Coast
Salmon, Highly Migratory Species, and Coastal Pelagic Fisheries
management plans. These HAPC areas include kelp forest and rocky reef
habitats, both of which occur in and adjacent to the Project Area.
Given the short daily duration of increased underwater and airborne
noise levels associated with the project, the relatively small areas
being affected, and the impact avoidance and minimization measures, the
proposed project is not likely to have a permanent, adverse effect on
EFH. Therefore, the project is not likely to have a long term adverse
effect on marine mammal foraging habitat.
Because of the short duration and relative small area of the
habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammals and the
food sources that they utilize are not expected to cause significant or
long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or their
populations.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible
methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of
effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and
areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species
or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (where relevant).
For the proposed USCG Station Monterey waterfront repair
activities, USCG worked with NMFS and proposed the following mitigation
measures to minimize the potential impacts to marine mammals in the
project vicinity. The primary purpose of these mitigation measures is
to detect marine mammals within or about to enter designated exclusion
zones corresponding to NMFS current injury thresholds and to initiate
immediate shutdown or power down of the piling hammer, making it very
unlikely potential injury or TTS to marine mammals would occur, and to
reduce Level B behavioral of marine mammals would be reduced to the
lowest level practicable.
Use of Noise Attenuation Devices
Noise attenuation systems (i.e., bubble curtains) will be used
during all impact pile driving to interrupt the acoustic pressure and
reduce the impact on marine mammals. By reducing underwater sound
pressure levels at the source, bubble curtains would reduce the area
over which both Level A and B harassment would occur, thereby
potentially reducing the numbers of marine mammals affected.
With the bubble curtain system in place, the exclusion zone within
which marine mammal injury could occur is eliminated.
Time Restriction
Work would occur only during daylight hours when visual monitoring
of marine mammals can be implemented.
Establishment of Level B Harassment Zones of Influence
Before the commencement of in-water pile driving activities, USCG
shall establish Level B behavioral harassment zones of influence (ZOIs)
where received underwater sound pressure levels (SPLs) are higher than
160 dB (rms) and 120 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa for impulse noise sources
(impact pile driving) and non-impulses noise sources (vibratory pile
driving and mechanic dismantling), respectively. The modeled maximum
isopleths for ZOIs are listed in Table 2.
Table 2--Modeled Level B Harassment Zones of Influence for Various Pile Driving Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance to 120 dB re 1 Distance to 160 dB re 1
Pile driving activities [mu]Pa (rms) (m) [mu]Pa (rms) (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile driving........................................ 2,400 NA
Impact pile driving (with bubble curtain)..................... NA 465
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once the underwater acoustic measurements are conducted during
initial test pile driving, USCG shall adjust the size of the ZOIs, and
monitor these zones as described under the Proposed Monitoring section
below.
NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSOs) shall conduct
initial survey of the exclusion zones to ensure that no marine mammals
are seen within the zones before impact pile driving of a pile segment
begins. If
[[Page 13998]]
marine mammals are found within the exclusion zone, impact pile driving
of the segment would be delayed until they move out of the area. If a
marine mammal is seen above water and then dives below, the contractor
would wait 15 minutes for pinnipeds and harbor porpoise and 30 minutes
for gray and killer whales. If no marine mammals are seen by the
observer in that time it can be assumed that the animal has moved
beyond the exclusion zone. This 15-minute criterion is based on
scientific evidence that harbor seals in San Francisco Bay dive for a
mean time of 0.50 minutes to 3.33 minutes (Harvey and Torok, 1994), and
the mean diving duration for harbor porpoises ranges from 44 to 103
seconds (Westgate et al., 1995).
Soft Start
A ``soft-start'' technique is intended to allow marine mammals to
vacate the area before the pile driver reaches full power. For
vibratory hammers, the contractor will initiate the driving for 15
seconds at reduced energy, followed by a 1 minute waiting period when
there has been downtime of 30 minutes or more. This procedure shall be
repeated two additional times before continuous driving is started.
This procedure would also apply to vibratory pile extraction.
For impact driving, an initial set of three strikes would be made
by the hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a 1 minute waiting
period, then two subsequent three-strike sets before initiating
continuous driving.
Shutdown Measures
Although no marine mammal exclusion zone exists due to the
implementation of noise attenuation devices (i.e., bubble curtain),
USCG shall discontinue pile driving or pile removal activities if a
marine mammal within the ZOI appears disturbed by the work activity.
Work may not resume until the animal leaves the ZOI, or 30 minutes have
passed before the disturbed animal is last sighted.
Mitigation Conclusions
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and
their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included
consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:
The manner in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals
The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned
The practicability of the measure for applicant
implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS should be able to
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of
the general goals listed below:
(1.) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).
(2.) A reduction in the numbers of marine mammals (total number or
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to received
levels of pile driving and pile removal or other activities expected to
result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing harassment takes only).
(3.) A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed
to received levels of pile driving and pile removal, or other
activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal
may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes only).
(4.) A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number
or number at biologically important time or location) to received
levels of pile driving, or other activities expected to result in the
take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to a, above, or to
reducing the severity of harassment takes only).
(5.) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas,
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance
of habitat during a biologically important time.
(6.) For monitoring directly related to mitigation--an increase in
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more
effective implementation of the mitigation.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA 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 ITAs
must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary
monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the
species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area.
USCG submitted a marine mammal monitoring plan as part of the IHA
application. It can be found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. The plan may be modified or supplemented based on
comments or new information received from the public during the public
comment period.
Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or
more of the following general goals:
(1.) An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals,
both within the mitigation zone (thus allowing for more effective
implementation of the mitigation) and in general to generate more data
to contribute to the analyses mentioned below;
(2.) An increase in our understanding of how many marine mammals
are likely to be exposed to levels of pile driving that we associate
with specific adverse effects, such as behavioral harassment, TTS, or
PTS;
(3.) An increase in our understanding of how marine mammals respond
to stimuli expected to result in take and how anticipated adverse
effects on individuals (in different ways and to varying degrees) may
impact the population, species, or stock (specifically through effects
on annual rates of recruitment or survival) through any of the
following methods:
[ssquf] Behavioral observations in the presence of stimuli compared
to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to
accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other
pertinent information);
[ssquf] Physiological measurements in the presence of stimuli
compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to
accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other
pertinent information);
[ssquf] Distribution and/or abundance comparisons in times or areas
with
[[Page 13999]]
concentrated stimuli versus times or areas without stimuli;
(4.) An increased knowledge of the affected species; and
(5.) An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of
certain mitigation and monitoring measures.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
USCG shall employee NMFS-approved PSOs to conduct marine mammal
monitoring for its Station Monterey waterfront repair project.
Before the start of the waterfront repair work, baseline biological
monitoring shall be conducted to survey the potential Level A and B
harassment zones on 2 separate days within 1 week before the first day
of construction. Biological information collected during baseline
monitoring will be used for comparison with results of monitoring
during pile driving and removal activities.
Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall be
conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power).
Marine mammal visual monitoring shall be conducted from the best
vantage point available, including the USCG pier, jetty, adjacent docks
within the harbor, to maintain an excellent view of the exclusion zone
and adjacent areas during the survey period. Monitors would be equipped
with radios or cell phones for maintaining contact with work crews.
Vessel-based visual marine mammal monitoring within the 120 dB and
160 dB ZOIs shall be conducted during 10% of the vibratory pile driving
and removal and impact pile driving activities, respectively.
Data collection during marine mammal monitoring will consist of a
count of all marine mammals by species, a description of behavior (if
possible), location, direction of movement, type of construction that
is occurring, time that pile replacement work begins and ends, any
acoustic or visual disturbance, and time of the observation.
Environmental conditions such as weather, visibility, temperature, tide
level, current and sea state would also be recorded.
Reporting Measures
USCG would be required to submit weekly monitoring reports that
summarize the monitoring results, construction activities and
environmental conditions to NMFS.
A final report would be submitted to NMFS within 90 days after
completion of the proposed project.
In addition, NMFS would require USCG to notify NMFS' Office of
Protected Resources and NMFS' Stranding Network within 48 hours of
sighting an injured or dead marine mammal in the vicinity of the
construction site. USCG shall provide NMFS with the species or
description of the animal(s), the condition of the animal(s) (including
carcass condition if the animal is dead), location, time of first
discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and photo or video (if
available).
In the event that an injured or dead marine mammal is found by USCG
that is not in the vicinity of the Station Monterey construction site,
USCG would report the same information as listed above as soon as
operationally feasible to NMFS.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, 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].
As discussed above, in-water pile driving (vibratory and impact)
and pile removal generate loud noises that could potentially harass
marine mammals in the vicinity of the USCG's proposed Station Monterey
waterfront repair.
Currently NMFS uses 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa at
the received levels for the onset of Level B harassment for non-impulse
(vibratory pile driving and removal) and impulse sources (impact pile
driving) underwater, respectively. For airborne noises, NMFS uses 90 dB
re 20 [mu]Pa and 100 dB re 20 [mu]Pa at the received levels for the
onset of Level B harassment for harbor seal and all pinnipeds except
harbor seal, respectively. Table 3 summarizes the current NMFS marine
mammal take criteria.
Table 3--Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria for Non-Explosive Sound
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Criterion Criterion definition Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Underwater Noise
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Harassment (Injury). Permanent Threshold 180 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
Shift (PTS) (Any (cetaceans)/190 dB
level above that re 1 [mu]Pa
which is known to (pinnipeds) root
cause TTS). mean square (rms).
Level B Harassment.......... Behavioral 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
Disruption (for (rms).
impulse noises).
Level B Harassment.......... Behavioral 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
Disruption (for non- (rms).
impulse noise).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airborne Noise
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Harassment.......... Behavioral 90 dB re 20 [mu]Pa.
Disruption (for
harbor seal).
Level B Harassment.......... Behavioral 100 dB re 20 [mu]Pa.
Disruption (for
pinnipeds other
than harbor seal).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The take calculations presented here relied on the best data
currently available for marine mammal populations at the jetty and in
the nearby waters of Monterey Bay. The population data used are
discussed in each species take calculation subsection below. The
formula below was developed for calculating take due to pile driving
and is applied to each group-specific noise impact threshold. The
formula is founded on the following assumptions:
All piles to be installed would have a noise disturbance
distance equal to the pile that causes the greatest noise disturbance
(i.e., the piling furthest from shore, in this case the farthest east
pile along the jetty).
It is estimated that an average of two or three piles will
be installed and removed per day. The best estimate of the number of
days during which pile driving would occur is 10 days, and this was
used in all modeling calculations.
[[Page 14000]]
Mitigation (e.g., a noise attenuation system such as a
bubble curtain) would be used during impact pile driving.
An individual animal can only be taken once per method of
installation during a 24 hour period.
The calculation for marine mammal take uses the following formula:
Take Estimate = (n x ZOI) x 10 days of activity
Where:
n (number of animals per unit area) = The density estimate used for
each species. The unit of area is km\2\.
ZOI (zone of influence) = the area encompassed by all locations
where the sound pressure levels equal or exceed the threshold being
evaluated.
Multiplying n x ZOI produces an estimate of the abundance of animals
that could be present in the area of exposure per day. The final
take estimate must be a whole number; therefore, values are rounded
up to the next whole number.
The ZOI impact is the estimated range of noise impact for a given
threshold. Because the work will be conducted near the jetty,
underwater noise is not expected to spread spherically from the source.
Underwater noise contours were therefore modeled using SoundPlan. The
contours were then imported to ArcGIS to calculate the area within the
contours and determine the AOI for each threshold. The ZOI for
vibratory pile driving encompasses the area out to the 120 dB isopleth
(Level B threshold), while the ZOI for impact driving encompasses the
area out to the 160 dB isopleth (Level B threshold). It is assumed that
an underwater noise attenuation system, such as a bubble curtain with
an estimated 10 dB attenuation, would be used as a mitigation measure.
However, the actual attenuation that will be achieved in the field is
unknown and would likely vary with each installation.
Airborne noise would spread spherically from the source; therefore,
the ZOI for airborne impacts was calculated as the area within a circle
(Area = pi x radius\2\).
Although 10 days of total in-water work are proposed, pile
extraction or driving would only occur periodically in that time, as
described in earlier in this document. An average work day (beginning 2
hours after sunrise and ending 2 hours before sunset) is approximately
8 to 9 hours, depending on the month. Although it is anticipated that
only 30 to 70 minutes would be spent pile driving per day, to take into
account deviations from the estimated times for pile installation and
extraction--and to account for the additional use of the impact pile
driver in case of failure of the vibratory hammer to reach the desired
embedment depth--the potential impacts were modeled as if the entire
day could be spent pile driving.
The exposure assessment methodology estimates the number of
individuals that would be exposed, because of pile extraction and
driving activities, to noise levels that exceed established NMFS
thresholds. Results of the acoustic impact exposure assessments should
be regarded as conservative estimates that are strongly influenced by
limited biological data. Although the numbers generated from the pile
driving exposure calculations provide estimates of marine mammal
exposures for consideration by NMFS, the short duration and limited
extent of the repairs would limit actual exposures.
Based on the modeling results presented above, it is estimated that
up to 2,095 Level B harassment takes of various species due to
underwater and airborne noise from impact pile driving operations, and
up to 2,760 Level B harassment takes of various species from vibratory
pile driving and removal due to underwater and airborne noise. A
summary of the take estimates is provided in Table 4.
Table 4--Summary of Potential Marine Mammal Takes and Percentage of Stocks Affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of
Estimated Estimated take Abundance of stock
density by level B stock potentially Population trend
harassment affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion.......... At-sea: 8.62 4,231 396,750 1.06 Stable.
per km\2\;
Haul-out: 250.
Harbor seal.................. 0.965 pre km\2\ 70 30,196 0.20 Stable.
Harbor porpoise.............. 0.05 pre km\2\. 4 1,492 0.27 Stable.
Killer whale (Eastern North Rare........... 6 240 2.50 Stable.
Pacific offshore).
Killer whale (west coast Rare........... 6 354 1.70 Stable.
transient).
Gray whale................... Rare........... 6 19,126 0.03 Stable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis and Preliminary Determinations
Negligible Impact
Negligible impact is ``an impact resulting from the specified
activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably
likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival'' (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of Level B harassment 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 behavioral harassment,
NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any
responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any
responses (critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as
well as the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes,
the number of estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.
The USCG's proposed Station Monterey waterfront repair project
would conduct pile driving and pile removal activities. Elevated
underwater noises are expected to be generated as a result of pile
driving and pile removal. However, USCG would use noise attenuation
devices (i.e., bubble curtain) during the impact pile driving, thus
eliminating potential for injury (PTS) and TTS. For vibratory pile
driving and pile removal, noise levels are not expected to reach to the
level that may cause TTS, injury (PTS included), or mortality to marine
mammals. Therefore, NMFS does not expect that any animals would
experience Level A (including injury) harassment or Level B harassment
in the form of TTS from being exposed to in-water pile driving and pile
removal associated with USCG construction project.
In addition, the USCG's proposed activities are localized and of
short duration. The entire project area is limited to the USCG's
Station Monterey pier and jetty. The entire waterfront repair project
would replace 17 timber piles with relative small 14-inch steel
[[Page 14001]]
pipe piles. The entire duration for pile driving is expected to be
fewer than 10 days, assuming driving two piles per day. The duration
for driving each pile would be about 20 to 25 minutes (vibratory or
impact). These low intensity, localized, and short-term noise exposures
may cause brief startle reactions or short-term behavioral modification
by the animals. These reactions and behavioral changes are expected to
subside quickly when the exposures cease. Additionally, no important
feeding and/or reproductive areas for marine mammals are known to be
near the proposed action area. Therefore, the take resulting from the
proposed Station Monterey waterfront repair project is not reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
marine mammal species or stocks through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival. 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
proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds
that the total marine mammal take from USCG Station Monterey waterfront
repair will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal
species or stocks.
Small Number
Based on analyses provided above, it is estimated that
approximately 4,231 California sea lions, 70 Pacific harbor seals, 4
harbor porpoises, 6 Eastern North Pacific offshore or West coast
transient killer whales (or a combination of both stocks), and 6 gray
whales could be exposed to received noise levels that could cause Level
B behavioral harassment from the proposed construction work at the USCG
Station Monterey. These numbers represent approximately 0.03%-2.5% of
the stocks and populations of these species that could be affected by
Level B behavioral harassment.
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 mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the populations of the affected species or
stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of
affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No species listed under the ESA are expected to be affected by
these activities. Therefore, NMFS has determined that a section 7
consultation under the ESA is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In July 2013, the USCG prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment
for Waterfront Repairs at United States Coast Guard Station Monterey,
Monterey, California (draft EA). This draft EA has been posted on NMFS'
Web site http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. NMFS will
review the draft EA and decide either to adopt it or prepare its own
NEPA document before making a determination on the issuance of an IHA,
which will be completed prior to the issuance or denial of this
proposed IHA.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to USCG for conducting waterfront repair at its Station
Monterey, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated. The proposed IHA language is
provided next.
This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording
contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if
issued).
(1.) This Authorization is valid from July 15, 2014, through July
14, 2015.
(2.) This Authorization is valid only for activities associated
with waterfront repair project at the USCG's Monterey Station in
Monterey, California.
(3.) (A) The species authorized for incidental harassment takings,
Level B harassment only, are: Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina
richardsi), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), harbor
porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), transient and offshore killer whales
(Orcinus orca), and gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus).
(B) The authorization for taking by harassment is limited to the
following acoustic sources and from the following activities:
Impact and vibratory pile driving;
Pile removal; and
Work associated with above piling activities.
(C) The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under
this Authorization must be reported within 24 hours of the taking to
the West Coast Regional Administrator (562) 980-4000, National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Chief of the Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at (301) 427-8401, or
his designee (301-427-8401).
(4.) The holder of this Authorization must notify the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at
least 48 hours prior to the start of activities identified in 3(b)
(unless constrained by the date of issuance of this Authorization in
which case notification shall be made as soon as possible).
(5.) Prohibitions
(A) The taking, by incidental harassment only, is limited to the
species listed under condition (3.)(A) above and by the numbers listed
in Table 4. The taking by Level A harassment, injury or death of these
species or the taking by harassment, injury or death of any other
species of marine mammal is prohibited and may result in the
modification, suspension, or revocation of this Authorization.
(B) The taking of any marine mammal is prohibited whenever the
required protected species observers (PSOs), required by condition
7(a), are not present in conformance with condition 7(a) of this
Authorization.
(6.) Mitigation
(A) Use of Noise Attenuation Devices
Pile driving energy attenuator (such as air bubble curtain system)
shall be used for all impact pile driving.
(B) Time Restriction
In-water construction work shall occur only during daylight hours
when visual monitoring of marine mammals can be implemented.
(C) Establishment of Level B Harassment Zones of Influence
(i) Before the commencement of in-water pile driving activities,
USCG shall establish Level B behavioral harassment zones of influence
(ZOIs) where received underwater sound pressure levels (SPLs) are
higher than 160 dB (rms) and 120 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa for impulse noise
sources (impact pile driving) and non-impulses noise sources (vibratory
pile driving and mechanic dismantling), respectively. The modeled
isopleths for ZOIs are listed in Table 5.
[[Page 14002]]
Table 5--Modeled Level B Harassment Zones of Influence for Various Pile Driving Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance to 120 dB re 1 Distance to 160 dB re 1
Pile driving activities [mu]Pa (rms) (m) [mu]Pa (rms) (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile driving........................................ 2,400 NA
Impact pile driving (with bubble curtain)..................... NA 465
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Once the underwater acoustic measurements are conducted during
initial test pile driving, USCG shall adjust the size of the ZOIs, and
monitor these zones as described under the Proposed Monitoring section
below.
(D) Monitoring for marine mammal presence shall take place 30
minutes before and 30 minutes after pile driving.
(E) Soft Start
(i) For vibratory hammers, the contractor shall initiate the
driving for 15 seconds at reduced energy, followed by a 1 minute
waiting period when there has been downtime of 30 minutes or more. This
procedure shall be repeated two additional times before continuous
driving is started. This procedure shall also apply to vibratory pile
extraction.
(ii) For impact driving, an initial set of three strikes would be
made by the hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a 1 minute waiting
period, then two subsequent three-strike sets before initiating
continuous driving.
(f) Shutdown Measures
Although no marine mammal exclusion zone exists due to the
implementation of noise attenuation devices (i.e., bubble curtain),
USCG shall discontinue pile driving or pile removal activities if a
marine mammal within the ZOI appears disturbed by the work activity.
Work may resume until the animal leaves the ZOI, or 30 minutes have
passed before the disturbed animal is last sighted.
(7.) Monitoring:
(A) Protected Species Observers
USCG shall employee NMFS-approved protected species observers
(PSOs) to conduct marine mammal monitoring for its Station Monterey
waterfront repair project.
(B) Baseline Biological Monitoring
(i) Baseline biological monitoring shall be conducted to survey the
potential Level A and B harassment zones on 2 separate days within 1
week before the first day of construction.
(ii) Biological information collected during baseline monitoring
will be used for comparison with results of monitoring during pile
driving and removal activities.
(C) Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall
be conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42
power).
(D) Marine mammal visual monitoring shall be conducted from the
best vantage point available, including the USCG pier, jetty, adjacent
docks within the harbor, to maintain an excellent view of the exclusion
zone and adjacent areas during the survey period. Monitors would be
equipped with radios or cell phones for maintaining contact with work
crews.
(E) Vessel-based visual marine mammal monitoring within the 120 dB
and 160 dB ZOIs shall be conducted during 10% of the vibratory pile
driving and removal and impact pile driving activities, respectively.
(F) Data collection during marine mammal monitoring shall consist
of a count of all marine mammals by species, a description of behavior
(if possible), location, direction of movement, type of construction
that is occurring, time that pile replacement work begins and ends, any
acoustic or visual disturbance, and time of the observation.
Environmental conditions such as weather, visibility, temperature, tide
level, current and sea state would also be recorded.
(8.) Reporting:
(A) USCG shall submit weekly monitoring reports that summarize the
monitoring results, construction activities and environmental
conditions to NMFS.
(B) USCG shall provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within
90 days of the conclusion of the construction work. This report shall
detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during
monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have
been harassed.
(C) If comments are received from the NMFS West Coast Regional
Administrator or NMFS Office of Protected Resources on the draft
report, a final report shall be submitted to NMFS within 30 days
thereafter. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft report
will be considered to be the final report.
(D) In the unanticipated event that the construction activities
clearly cause the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by
this Authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury or
mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement),
USCG shall immediately cease all operations and immediately report the
incident to the Supervisor of Incidental Take Program, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators. The report must include the
following information:
(i) Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
(ii) description of the incident;
(iii) status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the
incident;
(iv) environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility, and water depth);
(v) description of marine mammal observations in the 24 hours
preceding the incident;
(vi) species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
(vii) the fate of the animal(s); and
(viii) photographs or video footage of the animal (if equipment is
available).
Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS shall work with WSF to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. USCG may not resume their
activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.
(E) In the event that USCG discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph),
USCG will immediately report the incident to the Supervisor of the
Incidental Take Program, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinators. The report must include the same information identified
above. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of
the incident. NMFS will work with WSF to determine whether
modifications in the activities are appropriate.
(F) In the event that USCG discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA
[[Page 14003]]
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), USCG shall report the incident to
the Supervisor of the Incidental Take Program, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast
Regional Stranding Coordinators, within 24 hours of the discovery. WSF
shall provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine
Mammal Stranding Network. USCG can continue its operations under such a
case.
(9.) This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if
the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if the
authorized taking is having more than a negligible impact on the
species or stock of affected marine mammals, or if there is an
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or
stocks for subsistence uses.
(10.) A copy of this Authorization must be in the possession of
each contractor who performs the waterfront repair work at USCG Station
Monterey.
Request for Public Comments
NMFS requests comment on our analysis, the draft authorization, and
any other aspect of the Notice of Proposed IHA for USCG. Please include
with your comments any supporting data or literature citations to help
inform our final decision on USCG request for an MMPA authorization.
Dated: March 5, 2014.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-05244 Filed 3-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P