[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30421-30429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13940]
[[Page 30421]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XG205
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Mukilteo Multimodal Project--
Season 3
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 a request from the Washington Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) Ferries Division (WSF) for an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) that would cover a subset of the take
authorized in an IHA previously issued to WSDOT to incidentally take
marine mammals, by Level B harassment only, during construction
activities associated with the Mukilteo Multimodal Project, Puget
Sound, Washington. During planning of season 2 of the project (for
which NMFS issued an IHA) it was assumed that the project would be
completed within the year timeframe; however, that was not
accomplished. Therefore, WSDOT is requesting, and NMFS is proposing to
issue, an IHA authorizing incidental take for the remaining work which
was already analyzed in an 2017 IHA issued to WSDOT on August 3, 2017
(herein after referred to as the 2017 IHA) (September 21, 2017).
However, some changes have occurred during this year's evaluation of
the project. Source levels and harassment distances have been adjusted
based on recent acoustic measurements and amount of time pile driving
expected to occur each day. In addition, WSDOT has requested take for
three species not included in the 2017 IHA (minke whales (Balaenoptera
acutorostrata), bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus), and long-
beaked common dolphins (Delphinus delphis bairdii)) based on recent
marine mammal monitoring. The proposed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures remain the same as prescribed in the 2017 IHA with
slight modifications (e.g., shut down zones distance changes) as
described below.
NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an IHA to
incidentally take marine mammals during the completion of Phase 2 of
the Mukilteo Multimodal Project. NMFS will consider public comments
prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested
MMPA authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final
notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than July 30,
2018.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should be sent to
1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments
should be sent to [email protected].
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the
end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including
all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. Attachments
to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or
Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111 without change. All personal
identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jaclyn Daly, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8438. Electronic copies of the original
application and supporting documents (including NMFS FR notices of the
original proposed and final authorizations), as well as a list of the
references cited in this document, may be obtained online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111. In case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed above.
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 (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon
request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers
of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity
(other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region
if certain findings are made and either regulations are 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. The MMPA states that the term ``take'' means to harass, hunt,
capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine
mammal.
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).
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
incidental harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts
on the human environment.
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental harassment authorizations with
no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for
NOAA Administrative Order 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 preliminarily determined that the
issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded
from further NEPA review.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice
prior to concluding our NEPA process
[[Page 30422]]
or making a final decision on the IHA request.
Summary of Request
On April 7, 2016, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an
IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of marine mammal
species incidental to construction associated with Phase 2 of the
Mukilteo Multimodal Project in Mukilteo, Washington, between August 1,
2017, and July 31, 2018. NMFS issued the requested IHA on August 3,
2017, which covered Phase 2 of the project in its entirety and expires
on July 31, 2018 (82 FR 44164; September 21, 2017). On January 9, 2018,
we received a request from WSDOT for a subsequent authorization to take
marine mammals incidental to the project because they realized all of
the Phase 2 work would not be able to be completed under the existing
IHA. A final version of the application, which we deemed adequate and
complete, was submitted on March 1, 2018.
Description of the Proposed Activity and Anticipated Impacts
WSDOT operates and maintains 19 ferry terminals and one maintenance
facility, all of which are located in Puget Sound or the San Juan
Islands (Georgia Basin) (Figure 1-1 in WSDOT's application). The
Mukilteo Multimodal Project is a multi-year construction project
designed to improve the operations and facilities serving the mainland
terminus of the Mukilteo-Clinton ferry route in Washington State. The
2017 IHA covered the installation of 661 piles of various sizes over an
estimated 175 days of pile driving and removal (Table 1). WSDOT did not
complete all the work, and now requests that this proposed IHA cover
take incidental to the installation of the remaining piles (Table 1).
The 2017 IHA authorized Level A and B harassment of two species of
marine mammals and Level B harassment of seven species of marine
mammals (Table 2). WSDOT requests authorization to harass these same
species and an additional three species based on recent marine mammal
monitoring near the project area (Table 2).
To support public review and comment on the IHA that NMFS is
proposing to issue here, we refer to the documents related to the
previously issued IHA and discuss any new or changed information here.
The previous documents include the Federal Register notice of the
proposed IHA (82 FR 29713; May 10, 2017), Federal Register notice of
issuance of the 2017 IHA (82 FR 44164, September 21, 2017), and all
associated references and documents. We also refer the reader to
WSDOT's previous and current applications and monitoring reports which
can be found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111.
Detailed Description of the Action--A detailed description of the
proposed vibratory and impact pile driving and removal activities at
the Mukilteo Terminal is found in the aforementioned documents. The
location, timing, and nature of the pile driving operations, including
the type and size of piles and the methods of pile driving, are
identical to those described in the previous notices, except that only
a subset of the type and number of piles are proposed to be driven. In
total, 116 piles would be installed with a vibratory hammer. Sixty five
of those piles would also be proofed with an impact hammer on the same
day vibratory pile driving would occur. Sixty five of the installed 24-
in piles (some of which may be proofed with the impact hammer) would be
temporary and would also be removed. WSDOT anticipates piles equal to
or less than 36'' would be installed at a rate of 3 per day for a total
of 38 days. An additional two days is needed to install the 78-in piles
and 120-in piles. Sixty five of those piles would be removed at a rate
of five per day for a total of 22 days. In total, up to 63 days of pile
driving and removal may occur. WSDOT anticipates pile driving could
occur over a seven month in-water work window (July 15-February 15).
Table 1--Description of Work Planned, Analyzed, and Completed Under the 2017 IHA and Remaining Work Planned for 2018-2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Season 2 Season 3
Method Pile size (in) planned (2017 Season 2 planned (2018 Number of days Comment
IHA) completed IHA)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Driving............ 12 139 134 0 0 Fewer needed, complete.
24 69 4 65 22 Up to 69 temporary.
24 48 0 26 9 Fewer needed, permanent.
30 40 25 16 5 Permanent.
36 6 0 6 2 Permanent.
78 2 0 2 1 Permanent.
120 1 0 1 2 Permanent.
sheet 90 0 0 0 Design change, not needed.
Vibratory Removal............ 24 69 4 65 22 Temporary.
30 9 0 0 0 Delayed.
sheet 90 0 0 0 Design change, not needed.
Impact Driving............... 24 69 4 65 \1\ 22 Proofed for load-bearing.
30 30 25 0 0 Fewer needed, complete.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Impact hammering would be conducted on same day as vibratory pile driving so these are not additional days.
Description of Marine Mammals--A description of the marine mammals
in the area of the activities is found in the previously cited
documents, which remains applicable to this IHA as well. In addition,
we include information here on three additional species which have been
recently reported in Puget Sound and which WSDOT now requests take. We
include a summary table here for all species and stocks for which take
is requested.
[[Page 30423]]
Table 2--Species and Stocks Expected To Occur in Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae:
Gray whale...................... Eschrichtius robustus.. Eastern North Pacific.. N 20,990 (0.05, 20,125, 624 132
2014).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Humpback whale.................. Megaptera novaeangliae. California/Oregon/ Y 1,918 (0.03, 1,876, 11.0 9.2
Washington. 2017).
Minke whale *................... Balaenoptera California/Oregon/ N 636 (0.72, 369, 2016). 3.5 1.3
acutorostrata. Washington.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale.................... Orcinus orca........... Eastern North Pacific Y 76 (n/a, 76, 2017) \4\ 0 0.14
Southern Resident.
West coast transient... N unk (unk, 243 2013)... 2.4 0
Bottlenose dolphin *............ Tursiops truncatus..... California coastal..... N 453 (0.06, 346, 2016). 2.7 >=2
Long-beaked common dolphin *.... Delphinus delphis California............. N 101,305 (0.49, 68,432, 657 35.4
bairdii. 2016).
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise................. Phocoena phocoena...... Washington inland N 11,233 (0.37, 8,308, 66 7.2
waters. 2016).
Dall's porpoise................. Phocoenoides dalli..... California/Oregon/ N 25,750 (0.45, 17,954, 172 0.3
Washington. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California sea lion............. Zalophus californianus. U.S.................... N 296,750 (n/a, 153,337, 9,200 389
2014).
Steller sea lion................ Eumetopias jubatus..... Eastern U.S............ N 52,139 (n/a, 41,638, 2,498 108
2015).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal..................... Phoca vitulina......... Washington northern N 11,036 (0.15, 1999)... 1,641 43
inland waters.
Elephant seal................... Mirounga angustirostris California breeding.... N 179,000 (n/a, 81,368, 2,882 8.8
2014).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
stock abundance.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g.,
commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV
associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\4\ SRWK population abundance as of December 31, 2017 according to the Center for Whale Research.
\5\ Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are greater than 8 years old, but this is the best available information for use here.
* Indicates species added.
For species analyzed in the 2017 IHA, NMFS has reviewed recent
draft Stock Assessment Reports (SARs), information on relevant Unusual
Mortality Events, and recent scientific literature, and determined that
no new information affects our original analysis of impacts or previous
determinations except what is provided below. Since issuing the 2017
IHA, NMFS published draft SARs (82 FR 60181; 19 December 2017) and the
annual census for Southern Resident killer whales concluded. Stock
information is updated for two species that have the potential to occur
in the activity area: Humpback whale and Southern Resident killer
whale. Total annual mortality and serious injury for humpback whales
increased from 6.5 to 9.2 and Southern Resident killer whale abundance
decreased from 78 to 76 individuals (the most recent SAR information,
i.e., the draft 2017 SAR for this stock, includes an abundance estimate
of 83; however, we use the December 31, 2017, Center for Whale Research
population estimate here). These proposed changes in the draft 2017
SARs do not affect our estimated take numbers or negligible impact and
small numbers determinations, and therefore these changes do not affect
our analysis. The potential presence of the three additional species
(described below) during pile driving is very low; however, we are
proposing to authorize take due to WSDOT's request and evidence there
is a possibility they may be in the action area, albeit rarely.
Minke whale--The California-Oregon-Washington (CA-OR-WA) stock of
minke whale may be found near the project site; however, this species
is not common in Puget Sound. From 2013 through 2016, year-round
systematic aerial surveys were conducted to better estimate marine
mammal density. No minke whales were observed during these surveys
within Puget Sound and on only two occasions in September 2014 were
minke whales (n=2) observed in nearby Strait of Juan de Fuca (Smultea
et al. 2017). For the years 2010 to 2016, in the August to February
timeframe scheduled for this project, The Whale Museum reported a total
of six sightings days for minke whale in the Mukilteo project area
(TWM, 2017). During 51 days of monitoring from
[[Page 30424]]
September 2017 to February 2018 under the 2017 IHA, zero minke whales
were observed (WSDOT, 2018).
Bottlenose dolphin--Bottlenose dolphins tend to inhabit warmer
temperate and tropical waters and are not usually found in the colder
waters of Puget Sound. However, bottlenose dolphins have been observed
in Puget Sound as occasional visitors from both the offshore CA-OR-WA
stock and California coastal stock since 1998 (CRC 2017a). More
recently a group of dolphins observed in 2017 were positively
identified as part of the CA coastal stock (CRC, 2017a, 2018). The more
recent sightings in Puget Sound of several animals suggest a possible
significant expansion of their range if they remain in the area. Such
long distance travel outside their traditional range (>800 miles) may
be due to long term changes in climate and shorter term fluctuations in
coastal water conditions, such as those during El Ni[ntilde]o events
(CRC, 2017a). From September 2017 to February 2018, WSF conducted
marine mammal monitoring during Year Two of the Mukilteo Multimodal
Project. During 51 days of monitoring from September 2017 to February
2018 under the 2017 IHA, zero bottlenose dolphins were observed (WSDOT,
2018).
Long-beaked common dolphin--Long-beaked common dolphins from the
California stock could be present near the project area. The earliest
documented sighting of long-beaked common dolphins in Puget Sound was
July 2003. In June 2011, two long-beaked common dolphins were sighted
in South Puget Sound. Sightings continued in 2012, and in 2016-17. Four
to twelve sightings were reported regularly, with confirmed sightings
of up to 30 individuals. Four to six dolphins have remained in Puget
Sound since June 2016 and four animals with distinct markings have been
seen multiple times and in every season of the year as of October 2017
(CRC 2017b). During 51 days of monitoring from September 2017 to
February 2018 under the 2017 IHA, zero long-beaked common dolphins were
observed (WSDOT, 2018).
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals--A description of the potential
effects of the specified activities on marine mammals and their habitat
is found in these previous documents, which remains applicable to this
IHA. There is no new information on potential effects and we anticipate
the effects evaluated last year are germane to the three additional
species (minke whale, bottlenose dolphin, and long-beaked common
dolphin) authorized to be taken this year.
Harassment Zones--We updated three source levels (24-in vibratory
pile driving and removal and 24-in impact driving) for use in
calculating Level A harassment isopleths. The 2017 IHA reflected a 24-
in vibratory pile driving source level of 162 decibels (dB) root mean
square (rms) based on measurements at Friday Harbor; however, we
believe that measurements of vibratory driving of 24-in piles at
Manette Bridge support a higher source level of 166 dB rms (Loughlin,
2010). We propose to carry over that source level to estimate noise
levels generated by vibratory removal of the same size pile. New
analysis of measurements made at the Coupeville Terminal also supports
increasing the sound exposure level (single-strike; SEL) during 24-in
impact pile driving from 174 dB SEL to 178 dB SEL (WSDOT, 2017). To
estimate distances to the Level B harassment isopleth for vibratory
driving 24-36-in piles, we applied new acoustic measurement data
(Loughlin, 2017). For this proposed IHA, we also modified the method
used to estimate Level A harassment zones. The 2017 IHA analysis used a
more sophisticated modeling technique, described in detail in our 2017
Notice of Proposed IHA (citation). It is not warranted to replicate
that complicated process for this action. Therefore, we used the NMFS
User Spreadsheet tool to estimate Level A harassment distances. This
approach is more conservative than the previous modeling effort because
it considers a single frequency weighting factor adjustment (WFA) in
lieu of considering the full frequency spectrum. Using a single
frequency WFA is likely to over-predict Level A harassment distances as
described in NMFS (2016), resulting in larger Level A harassment
distances. The inputs used in the spreadsheet and resulting Level A
harassment distances are presented in Table 3 and 4, respectively.
Table 4 also contains the distances estimated to the Level B harassment
zones from each type of work. Table 5 provides the corresponding Level
B harassment areas, as well as the Level A harassment areas for those
species for which we propose to authorize take by Level A harassment.
Table 3--Inputs Into NMFS User Spreadsheet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Input parameter Vibratory pile driving Impact pile driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighting Factor Adjustment \1\..... 2.5 kHz..................... 2 kHz.
Source Level (SL)................... See Table 4................. See Table 4 (SEL value).
Duration............................ 3 hours (24-36'' piles)..... n/a.
2 hours (78'' piles)........
1 hour (120'' pile).........
Strikes per pile.................... n/a......................... 300.
Piles per day....................... n/a......................... 3.
Transmission loss coefficient....... 15.......................... 15.
Distance from SL measurement........ 10 m........................ 10 m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In instances where full auditory weighting functions associated with the SELcum metric cannot be applied,
NMFS has recommended the default, single frequency weighting factor adjustments (WFAs) provided here. As
described in Appendix D of NMFS' Technical Guidance (NMFS, 2016), the intent of the WFA is to broadly account
for auditory weighting functions below the 95 frequency contour percentile. Use of single frequency WFA is
likely to over-predict Level A harassment distances.
Table 4--Level A Harassment Distances Considering Pile Driving Duration per 24 Hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A (meters)
Method Pile Size Source Level (dB) ------------------------------------------------------- Level B
LF \1\ MF \1\ HF \1\ PH \1\ OT \1\ (m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory.................... 24 166 rms \2\................................. 30.6 2.7 45.3 18.6 1.3 \6\ 8000
30 174 rms \3\................................. 104.5 9.3 154.5 63.5 4.5 \6\ 8000
[[Page 30425]]
36 177 rms \3\................................. 165.6 14.7 244.9 100.7 7.1 \7\ 8700
78 180 rms \4\................................. 200.3 17.8 296.2 121.8 8.5 \8\
20,000
120 180 rms \4\................................. 126.2 11.2 186.6 76.7 5.4 .........
Impact....................... 24 178 SEL (single strike)/193 rms \5\......... 432.1 15.4 514.7 231.2 16.8 1,585
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The abbreviatation mean: LF = low frequency cetacean, MF = mid-frequency cetacean, HF = high-frequency cetacean, PH = phocid, OT = otariid.
\2\ We assume vibratory removal and vibratory driving the same size pile would result in equal sound levels. Source level for 24'' piles is based on
direct measurements during the Manette Bridge project (Loughlin, 2010a).
\3\Source levels for 30-in and 36-in piles is based on direct measurements during the Port Townsend Project (Loughlin, 2010b).
\4\ WSDOT does not have noise data for 78 and 120-in piles; therefore, we used data from Caltrans (2015).
\5\ Single strike SEL and rms values for impact driving 24-in piles is based on direct measurements during pile driving using a bubble curtain (i.e.,
source levels are attenuated) at the Coupeville Terminal (WSDOT, 2017).
\6\ Measurements during 30'' vibratory pile driving at Mukilteo in 2017 indicate pile driving was not detected at range of 7.9 km (Laughlin, 2017a).
This equates to 66 km\2\.
\7\ At the Coleman Terminal, vibratory installation of two 36'' piles driven simultaneously was not detectable at 8.69 km (5.4 miles) (Laughlin 2017b).
This equates to 69 km\2\.
\8\ The calculated Level B zone using a practical spreading loss model is 85,770 m; however, land is reached at a maximum of 20,000 m (Lowell Point on
Camano Island). This equates to 107 km\2\.
Table 5--Corresponding Harassment Threshold Ensonified Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A (km\2\) \1\
Method Pile size ------------------------------------------------ Level B
HF PH OT (km\2\) \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory....................... 24 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 66
30 <0.01 <0.01 .............. 66
36 0.06 0.06 .............. 69
78 0.01 0.01 .............. 107
120 0.01 0.01 .............. ..............
Impact.......................... 24 0.4 0.4 .............. 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Level A harassment areas are provided for species hearing groups for which Level A take is proposed.
\2\ Level B harassment areas are germane to all species.
Estimated Take--A description of the methods used to estimate take
anticipated to occur from the project is found in the project's
aforementioned documents. The methods of estimating take are identical
to those used in the previous IHA, including the use of the Navy 2015
marine mammal densities for inland Washington or most recent pinniped
counts. We also updated harbor porpoise and Dall's porpoise density
based on new information (Smultea et al., 2017 and Navy 2015,
respectively). Because bottlenose dolphin and long-beaked common
dolphin densities do not exist for this area, we used available data to
estimate a sighting rate. Table 6 includes marine mammal count or
density information used in the estimated take calculations.
Table 6--Marine Mammal Counts and Densities Used To Estimate Take
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density (ind/
km\2\) Count
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal................................ .............. 30/day \1\.
CSL........................................ .............. 14/day \2\.
N. elephant seal........................... .............. 1/30 days \3\.
Killer whale--transient.................... .............. 0.3/day \4\.
SSL........................................ \5\ 0.0368. ...................................................
Gray whale................................. \5\ 0.00051. ...................................................
Humpback whale............................. \5\ 0.00007. ...................................................
Dall's porpoise............................ \5\ 0.039. ...................................................
Harbor porpoise............................ \6\ 0.75. ...................................................
Minke whale................................ \5\ 0.002. ...................................................
Bottlenose dolphin......................... .............. 1 group of 7/30 days \7\.
Long-beaked common dolphin................. .............. 1 group of 7/30 days \7\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ During 51 days of marine mammal monitoring at the Mukilteo Terminal during 2017-2018 construction (conducted
under WSDOT's previous IHA), 1,525 harbor seals were observed for a an average of 30 seals per day.
\2\ During 51 days of marine mammal monitoring at the Mukilteo Terminal during 2017-2018 construction (conducted
under WSDOT's previous IHA), 707 California sea lions were observed for a an average of 14 sea lions per day.
\3\ WSDOT estimates 1 Northern elephant seal may occur in the action area once per month.
\4\ During 51 days of marine mammal monitoring at the Mukilteo Terminal during 2017-2018 construction (conducted
under WSDOT's previous IHA), 16 transient killer whales observed for an average of 0.3 killer whales per day.
\5\ These densities were derived for the Navy's Northwest Testing and Training Range Inland Waters (Navy, 2015).
[[Page 30426]]
\6\ Density based on East Whidbey stratum, Table 17 in Smultea (2017).
\7\ Average group size and sihting frequency based on CRC, 2017.
The rationale for the amount of take requested and proposed is as
follows: For all estimates, we consider 76 days over seven months of
pile driving. For density based estimates, the equation used is density
x area x number of pile driving days summed across all piles types
(Table 7) Because 24-in and 30-in piles have the same Level B
harassment zone, we grouped these together. We also combined 78-in and
120-piles as they also have the same Level B harassment zone.
For harbor porpoise, we calculated take using the density
identified in Table 6; however, this greatly exceeded expected take
based on previous marine mammal monitoring efforts around the terminal
(e.g., WSDOT, 2018); therefore, we applied a 10 percent correction
factor. For 24-in and 30-in piles: 0.75 x 66 km2 x 61 days (vibratory
installation and removal) equals 3020 animals. For 36-in piles: 0.75 x
69 km2 x 2 days equals 104 animals. For 78-in and 120-in piles: 0.75 x
107km2 x 2 days = 161 animals. In total, we calculate 3,285 harbor
porpoise could be taken. However, marine mammal monitoring conducted
under the 2017 IHA yielded only 85 harbor porpoise sightings of which
28 were taken by harassment. Therefore, we are proposing to authorize
10 percent of the calculate take for a total of 329 harbor porpoise. We
also calculated Level A takes of harbor porpoise for the four days
vibratory driving 36-in through 120-in piles would occur and the 30
days of impact hammering 24-inch piles because vibratory driving 24-in
piles does not produce a Level A harassment zone greater than the shut
down zone and is very close to the pile (18.6 m). The resulting Level A
harassment take is 12 harbor porpoise. We repeated this approach for
Dall's porpoise and the Level B harassment take estimate approach for
minke whales, humpback whales, gray whales, and Steller sea lions. We
are not proposing Level A harassment take of the latter three species.
For estimates considering counts, we considered the following. Over
51 days of marine mammal monitoring during the 2017/18 Mukilteo
project, 1,525 harbor seals were observed. During active pile driving,
499 Level B takes and 15 Level A takes (or 3 percent of authorized
Level B takes of harbor seals) were recorded, approximately 34 percent
of the number of animals observed. To be conservative, it is assumed
that up to 75 percent of the seals observed may be taken under this
IHA, or 21 seals per day x 76 days = 1,596. We are allocating five
percent of that amount to Level A take which is slightly greater than
the three percent documented under the 2017 IHA. Therefore, we propose
to authorize 80 Level A harassment takes and 1516 Level B harassment
takes for a total of 1,596 harbor seal takes. California sea lion takes
considered 14 animals x 76 days for a total of 1,064 Level B harassment
takes. We are not proposing to authorize Level A harassment because the
Level A harassment zones are very small based on one to three hours of
pile driving and no California sea lions were taken by Level A
harassment under the 2017 IHA. Northern elephant seals are rare but we
are proposing to authorize take, by Level B harassment only, of 7
individuals (one per month). Up to 23 positively identified transient
killer whales may be taken (0.3 animals x 76 days; see mitigation on
killer whale identification) while only 5 gray whales and 6 humpback
whales (see Endangered Species Act section) are proposed to be taken.
See Table 7 for all proposed take numbers, by species, and the
respective amount of the population that take represents.
Table 7--Requested Take Amount, per Species, Relative to Population Size
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Level B Total take % Population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal..................................... 80 1,516 1,596 14.5
CSL............................................. 0 1,064 1,064 0.4
N. elephant seal................................ 0 7 7 >0.01
Killer whale--transient......................... 0 23 23 9.5
SSL............................................. 0 161 161 0.2
Gray whale...................................... 0 5 5 0.02
Humpback whale.................................. 0 6 6 0.3
Dall's porpoise................................. 4 7 12 0.05
Harbor porpoise................................. 12 329 341 3.04
Minke whale..................................... 0 7 8 1.3
Bottlenose dolphin.............................. 0 49 49 10.8
Long-beaked common dolphin...................... 0 49 49 0.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Proposed Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting
Measures--A description of proposed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures is found in the previous documents, which are nearly
identical in this proposed IHA. In summary, mitigation includes use of
an unconfined bubble curtain (with operational standards set by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) and soft start techniques during impact
pile driving in greater than 2 ft of water, minimum 10 m shut down
zone, and species-dependent shut down zones as described in Table 8.
Some of these shut down zones fully encompass the Level A harassment
zone; however, for species where we propose Level A take, this might
not always be the case.
Table 8--Shut-Down Zones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A (meters)
Method Pile size -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level B (m)
LF MF HF PH OT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory............................... 24 35 10 50 20 10 8,000
[[Page 30427]]
30 105 10 150 60 .............. 8,000
36 170 20 200 .............. .............. 8,690
78 205 .............. .............. .............. .............. 20,000
120 130 .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Impact.................................. 24 435 .............. .............. .............. 20 1,585
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitoring requirements would be similar to the 2017 IHA
requirements (see an updated Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan available at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111). The number and location of
Protected Species Observers (PSOs) is dependent upon activity and
weather conditions and are as follows:
(i) Three land-based PSOs during impact driving of 24-in piles;
(ii) four land-based and one ferry-based PSOs during 24-, 30-, 36-
in steel vibratory driving/removal;
(iii) five land-based and one ferry-based PSOs during 78- and 120-
in steel vibratory driving/removal; and
(iv) two ferry-based PSOs in addition to land-based PSOs when
weather conditions are poor.
In April, 2018, WSDOT submitted a monitoring report for
construction that had been completed under the 2017 IHA. WSDOT complied
with all mitigation, monitoring, and reporting protocols. Recorded
takes were below the number authorized for the corresponding amount of
work. The monitoring report can be viewed on NMFS's website at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111.
WSDOT will conduct acoustic monitoring during impact pile driving
of 24-in piles per the acoustic monitoring plan submitted for the
previous IHA. WSDOT will also conduct acoustic monitoring during
vibratory driving 78-in and 120-in piles. Both the impact and vibratory
acoustic monitoring plans are available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111.
Preliminary Determinations
WSDOT proposes to conduct a subset of activities identical to those
covered in the previous 2017 IHA. We have included take for three new
species noting these are precautionary as these species are not common
in the action area and these species were not observed during the
project during previous construction. We also believe the potential
behavioral reactions and effects on the cetacean species previously
analyzed is applicable to these species, if not to some lesser extent
due to lower probability of occurrence.
When issuing the 2017 IHA, NMFS found Phase 2 of the Mukilteo
Multimodal Project, in its entirety, would have a negligible impact to
species or stocks' rates of recruitment and survival and the amount of
taking would be small relative to the population size of such species
or stock (less than 15 percent). As described above, the number of
estimated takes of the same stocks are less than takes authorized in
the 2017 IHA and the anticipated impacts from the project are similar
to those previously analyzed. The amount of take for the additional
three species is also small (less than 11 percent of each stock). The
proposed IHA includes identical required mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures (albeit some minor modification to harassment and
shutdown distances) as the 2017 IHA. In conclusion, there is no new
information suggesting that our analysis or findings should change.
Based on the information contained here and in the referenced
documents, NMFS has preliminarily determined the following: (1) The
required mitigation measures will effect the least practicable impact
on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat; (2) the
authorized takes will have a negligible impact on the affected marine
mammal species or stocks; (3) the authorized takes represent small
numbers of marine mammals relative to the affected stock abundances;
and (4) WSDOT's activities will not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on taking for subsistence purposes as no relevant subsistence uses of
marine mammals are implicated by this action.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally, in this case with the West Coast Region
Protected Resources Division Office, whenever we propose to authorize
take for endangered or threatened species. NMFS is proposing to
authorize take of humpback whales from the Central American and Mexico
DPSs, which are listed under the ESA.
The effects of this proposed Federal action were adequately
analyzed in NMFS' Biological Opinion for the Mukilteo Multimodal
Project, Snohomish, Washington, dated August 1, 2017, which concluded
that issuance of an IHA would not jeopardize the continued existence of
any endangered or threatened species or destroy or adversely modify any
designated critical habitat. NMFS West Coast Region has confirmed the
Incidental Take Statement issued in 2017 is applicable for the proposed
IHA. That ITS authorizes the take of six humpback whales.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, we are proposing
to issue an IHA to WSDOT to conduct the specified activities at the
Mukilteo Ferry Terminal from September 1, 2018, through August 31,
2019, provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
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 September 1, 2018, through
August 31, 2019.
2. This Authorization is valid only for activities associated with
Phase 2 of the Mukilteo Multimodal Project, Puget Sound, Washington.
3. General Conditions.
(a) A copy of this IHA must be in the possession of WSDOT, its
designees, and work crew personnel operating under the authority of
this IHA.
(b) The species authorized for taking are found in Table 7.
[[Page 30428]]
(c) The taking, by Level A and B harassment only, is limited to the
species listed in condition 3(b). See Table 7 for numbers of take
authorized.
(d) The taking by serious injury or death of any of the species
listed in condition 3(b) of the Authorization or any taking of any
other species of marine mammal is prohibited and may result in the
modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
(e) WSDOT shall conduct briefings between construction supervisors
and crews, marine mammal monitoring team, acoustical monitoring team,
and WSDOT staff prior to the start of all pile driving, and when new
personnel join the work, in order to explain responsibilities,
communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and
operational procedures.
4. Mitigation.
(a) In-water construction work shall occur only during daylight
hours during the established in-water work window (July 15 through
February 15).
(b) For in-water heavy machinery activities other than pile
driving, if a marine mammal comes within 10 m, operations shall cease
and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum level required to
maintain steerage and safe working conditions.
(c) Pre-activity monitoring shall take place from 30 minutes prior
to initiation of pile driving activity and post-activity monitoring
shall continue through 30 minutes post-completion of pile driving
activity. Pile driving may commence at the end of the 30-minute pre-
activity monitoring period, provided observers have determined that the
shutdown zone is clear of marine mammals, which includes delaying start
of pile driving activities if a marine mammal is sighted in the zones
identified in Table 8.
(d) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone
during activities or pre-activity monitoring, all pile driving
activities at that location shall be halted or delayed, respectively.
If pile driving is halted or delayed due to the presence of a marine
mammal, the activity may not resume or commence until either the animal
has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown
zone and 15 minutes have passed without re-detection of the animal.
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 thirty minutes.
(e) WSDOT shall use soft start techniques when impact pile driving.
Soft start requires contractors to provide an initial set of strikes at
reduced energy, followed by a thirty-second waiting period, then two
subsequent reduced energy strike sets. Soft start shall 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 thirty
minutes or longer.
(f) WSDOT shall use a bubble curtain during impact driving of 24-in
piles in greater than 2 feet of water. Should acoustic measurements
identify that average source levels exceed those estimated for this
activity (173 dB SEL, 193 dB rms), WSDOT shall contact NMFS Office of
Protected Resources within 48 hours to determine if adjustments to
harassment zones are warranted.
(g) For all pile activities, the number and location of Protected
Species Observers (PSOs) is dependent upon activity and weather
conditions and are as follows:
(i) three land-based PSOs during impact driving of 24-in piles;
(ii) four land-based and one ferry-based PSOs during 24-, 30-, 36-
inch steel vibratory driving/removal;
(iii) five land-based and one ferry-based PSOs during 78- and 120-
inch steel vibratory driving/removal; and
(iv) two ferry-based PSOs in addition to land-based PSOs when
weather conditions are poor.
(h) Southern Resident Killer Whales (SRKW)
(i) If a killer whale approaches the monitoring zone during pile
driving or removal, and it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or a
transient killer whale, it shall be assumed to be a SRKW and WSDOT
shall implement the shutdown measure identified in 4(k).
(ii) If a SRKW enters the monitoring zone undetected, WSDOT shall
contact the Offices of Protected Resources within 24 hours to determine
if additional monitoring is necessary to avoid future incidences.
(iii) Coordination with Local Marine Mammal Research Network--Prior
to the start of pile driving, WSDOT will contact the Orca Network and/
or Center for Whale Research to get real-time information on the
presence or absence of whales before starting any pile driving. WSDOT
will also monitor the Orca Network site for visual and acoustic
detections.
(k) If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or a
species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized
takes are met, is observed approaching or within the Level B harassment
zone for the pile size and method used (Table 8), pile driving and
removal activities must shut down immediately using delay and shut-down
procedures. Activities must not resume until the animal has been
confirmed to have left the area or the observation time period, as
indicated in 4(d) above, has elapsed.
5. Monitoring.
(a) Monitoring of pile driving shall be conducted by qualified PSOs
(see below), who shall have no other assigned tasks during monitoring
periods. WSDOT shall adhere to the following conditions when selecting
observers:
(iv) Independent PSOs shall be used (i.e., not construction
personnel).
(ii) At least one PSO must have prior experience working as a
marine mammal observer during construction activities.
(iii) Other PSOs may substitute education (degree in biological
science or related field) or training for experience.
(iv) Where a team of three or more PSOs are required, a lead
observer or monitoring coordinator shall be designated. The lead
observer must have prior experience working as a marine mammal observer
during construction.
(v) WSDOT shall submit PSO CVs for approval by NMFS prior to the
onset of pile driving.
(vi) WSDOT shall ensure that observers have the following
additional qualifications:
(vii) Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols.
(viii) Experience or training in the field identification of marine
mammals, including the identification of behaviors.
(ix) Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations.
(x) 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.
(xi) 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.
(b) WSDOT shall conduct acoustic monitoring per their impact and
vibratory monitoring plans. Acoustic monitoring shall be conducted
early at the onset of pile work.
6. Reporting.
(a) WSDOT shall provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within
90 days of the conclusion of the construction
[[Page 30429]]
work or within 90 days of the expiration of the IHA, whichever comes
first. 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.
(b) If comments are received from 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.
(c) 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, WSDOT shall immediately cease all operations and immediately
report the incident to the 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, 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) 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 WSDOT to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. WSDOT may not resume their
activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.
(d) In the event that WSDOT 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),
WSDOT will immediately report the incident to the 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 WSDOT to determine whether modifications
in the activities are appropriate.
(e) In the event that WSDOT discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), WSDOT shall report the incident to
the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional
Stranding Coordinators, within 24 hours of the discovery. WSDOT shall
provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine
Mammal Stranding Network. WSDOT can continue its operations under such
a case.
7. This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if
the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if
NMFS determines the authorized taking is having more than a negligible
impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and
any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA for the remaining work
associated with the Mukilteo Multimodal Project. We also request
comment on the potential for renewal of this proposed IHA as described
in the paragraph below. Please include with your comments any
supporting data or literature citations to help inform our final
decision on the request for MMPA authorization.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a second one-year IHA
without additional notice when (1) another year of identical or nearly
identical activities as described in the Specified Activities section
is planned or (2) the activities would not be completed by the time the
IHA expires and a second IHA would allow for completion of the
activities beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section,
provided all of the following conditions are met:
(a) A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days prior
to expiration of the current IHA.
(b) The request for renewal must include the following:
(i) An explanation that the activities to be conducted beyond the
initial dates either are identical to the previously analyzed
activities or include changes so minor (e.g., reduction in pile size)
that the changes do not affect the previous analyses, take estimates,
or mitigation and monitoring requirements; and
(ii) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the
required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the
monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not
previously analyzed or authorized.
(c) Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the
affected species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS
determines that there are no more than minor changes in the activities,
the mitigation and monitoring measures remain the same and appropriate,
and the original findings remain valid.
Dated: June 25, 2018.
Elaine T. Saiz,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-13940 Filed 6-27-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P