[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 241 (Monday, December 17, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64531-64541]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27199]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XG454


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to US 101/Chehalis River Bridge-Scour 
Repair in Washington State

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine 
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given 
that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to 
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to take small 
numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to US 101/Chehalis 
River Bridge-Scour Repair in Washington State.

DATES: This authorization is valid from July 15, 2019, through February 
15, 2020.

[[Page 64532]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob Pauline, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application 
and supporting documents may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. In case of problems 
accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain 
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to 
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of 
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a 
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified 
geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations 
are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a 
proposed incidental take authorization may be provided to the public 
for review.
    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or 
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses 
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods 
of taking and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying 
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar 
significance, and on the availability of such species or stocks for 
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as 
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, 
monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.
    The National Defense Authorization Act (Pub. L. 108-136) removed 
the small numbers and specified geographical region limitations 
indicated above and amended the definition of harassment as it applies 
to a military readiness activity

Summary of Request

    On July 26, 2018, NMFS received a request from WSDOT for an IHA to 
take marine mammals incidental to US 101/Chehalis River Bridge-Scour 
Repair in the State of Washington. WSDOT's request was for take of 
small numbers of harbor seal (Phoca vitulina); California sea lion 
(Zalophus californianus); Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus); gray 
whale (Eschrichtius robustus); and harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) 
by Level B harassment only. This authorization is valid from July 15, 
2019, through February 15, 2020. Neither WSDOT nor NMFS expects serious 
injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA 
is appropriate.

Description of the Activity

Overview

    WSDOT plans to conduct in-water construction work as part of the US 
101/Chehalis River Bridge-Scour Repair Project in Washington State 
between July 15, 2019 and February 15, 2020. Vibratory pile driving 
will be required to remove and install timber piles, steel sheets and 
steel H-piles. Sound in the water from vibratory driving may result in 
behavioral harassment. NMFS previously issued an IHA to WSDOT to 
incidentally take five species of marine mammal by Level B harassment 
on October 18, 2017 (82 FR 50628; November 1, 2017). That IHA is valid 
from July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. However, WSDOT has made minor 
changes to the project plan and delayed the work by one year. 
Therefore, WSDOT has requested that NMFS re-issue the IHA with the 
dates changed to accommodate the analyzed work with minor modifications 
to the number of piles driven and removed as well as the number of 
animals authorized for take. No work was conducted or is planned to 
occur under the original IHA. The purpose of the US 101/Chehalis River 
Bridge-Scour Repair Project is to make the bridge foundation stable and 
protect the foundation from further scour. Bridge scour is the removal 
of sediment such as sand and gravel from around bridge abutments or 
piles. Scour, caused by swiftly moving water, can scoop out scour 
holes, compromising the integrity of a structure. WSDOT plans to remove 
debris from the scour area, fill the scour void under Pier 14 with 
cement (to protect the pilings from marine borers), fill the scour 
hole, and protect the pier with scour resistant material.
    Note that WSDOT has made revisions to the number and types of piles 
that would be installed and removed under the proposed 2019 IHA. The 
first change is the removal of 44 timber piles (some of which may be 
treated with creosote) from the immediate vicinity of the scour repair 
project. Additionally, 18 sheet piles will be temporarily installed 
adjacent to Pier 14, instead of the 44 sheet piles originally proposed. 
A detailed description of the planned WSDOT project is provided in the 
Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (83 FR 53033; October 19, 
2018). Since that time, no changes have been made to the planned WSDOT 
construction activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not 
provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the 
description of the specific activity.

Dates and Duration

    Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water 
work timing restrictions to protect Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed 
salmonids, planned WSDOT in-water construction is limited each year to 
July 15 through February 15. For this project, in-water construction is 
planned to take place between July 15, 2019 and September 30, 2019. The 
IHA is effective from July 15, 2019 to February 15, 2020. The estimated 
number of piles and maximum time period for pile installation and 
removal is 37 hours over 6 days as shown in Table 1.

                                             Table 1--Pile Removal Mitigation and Scour Repair Pile Summary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                           Duration (11-
              Method                      Pile type          Number of      Minutes per    Total minutes     Duration      Piles per day     hour work
                                                               piles           pile                           (hours)                          days)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Removal.................  14-inch diameter                  44              30            1320              22              22               2
                                     timber.
Vibratory Driving.................  Sheet...............              18              30             540               9               9               2
Vibratory Driving.................  H pile..............               6              30             180               3               6               1
Vibratory Removal.................  H pile..............               6              30             180               3               6               1
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.........................  ....................  ..............  ..............            2220              37  ..............             6.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 64533]]

Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to WSDOT was published 
in the Federal Register on October 19, 2018 (83 FR 53033). That notice 
described, in detail, WSDOT's planned activity, the marine mammal 
species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated 
effects on marine mammals. During the 30-day public comment period, 
NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission). 
Please see the letter, available online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities, for full details of the 
Commission's recommendations. The Commission recommended that NMFS 
issue the IHA, subject to inclusion of the proposed mitigation, 
monitoring, and reporting measures.
    Comment 1: The Commission expressed concern that the renewal 
process proposed in the Federal Register notice is inconsistent with 
the statutory requirements. The Commission recommended that NMFS 
refrain from implementing its proposed renewal process and instead use 
abbreviated Federal Register notices and reference existing documents 
to streamline the incidental harassment authorization process. The 
Commission further recommended that if NMFS did not pursue a more 
general route, NMFS should provide the Commission and the public with a 
legal analysis supporting its conclusion that the process is consistent 
with the requirements under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA.
    Response 1: The notice of the proposed IHA expressly notifies the 
public that under certain, limited conditions an applicant could seek a 
renewal IHA for an additional year. The notice describes the conditions 
under which such a renewal request could be considered and expressly 
seeks public comment in the event such a renewal is sought. Additional 
reference to this solicitation of public comment has recently been 
added at the beginning of Federal Register notices that consider 
renewals. NMFS appreciates the streamlining achieved by the use of 
abbreviated Federal Register notices and intends to continue using them 
for proposed IHAs that include minor changes from previously issued 
IHAs, but which do not satisfy the renewal requirements. However, we 
believe our proposed method for issuing renewals meets statutory 
requirements and maximizes efficiency. Importantly, such renewals would 
be limited to where the activities are identical or nearly identical to 
those analyzed in the proposed IHA, monitoring does not indicate 
impacts that were not previously analyzed and authorized, and the 
mitigation and monitoring requirements remain the same, all of which 
allow the public to comment on the appropriateness and effects of a 
renewal at the same time the public provides comments on the initial 
IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the language for future proposed IHAs 
to clarify that all IHAs, including renewal IHAs, are valid for no more 
than one year and that the agency would consider only one renewal for a 
project at this time. In addition, notice of issuance or denial of a 
renewal IHA would be published in the Federal Register, as are all 
IHAs. Last, NMFS will publish on our website a description of the 
renewal process before any renewal is issued utilizing the new process.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by 
WSDOT's project, including brief introductions to the species and 
relevant stocks as well as available information regarding population 
trends and threats, and information regarding local occurrence, were 
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (83 FR 
53033; October 19, 2018); since that time, we are not aware of any 
changes in the status of these species and stocks; therefore, detailed 
descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to that Federal 
Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS' 
website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for generalized 
species accounts.
    Table 2 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in 
the project location and summarizes information related to the 
population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA 
and potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we 
follow Committee on Taxonomy (2017). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the 
maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may 
be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to 
reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in 
NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR 
and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are 
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and 
other threats.
    Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document 
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or 
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. 
NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total 
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that 
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend 
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in 
NMFS's U.S. 2017 SARs (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and draft U.S. 2018 
SARS (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports). All values presented in 
Table 2 are the most recent available at the time of publication.

                                         Table 2--Marine Mammals With Potential Presence Within the 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
                                                                                                             2011).
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
    Harbor porpoise.................  Phocoena phocoena......  Northern Oregon/         N                   21,487 (0.44, 15,123,         151      >=3.0
                                                                Washington Coast.                            2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 64534]]

 
                                                         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
                                                                                                             2011).
    Steller sea lion................  Eumetopias jubatus.....  Eastern U.S............  N                   41,638 (n/a, 41,638,        2,498        108
                                                                                                             2015) \4\.
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
    Harbor seal.....................  Phoca vitulina.........  Oregon/Washington Coast  N                   Unk \5\...............      undet       10.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments assessments. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases a CV is not applicable For certain stocks
  of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals (often pups) ashore multiplied by some correction factor derived from
  knowledge of the species' (or similar species') life history to arrive at a best abundance estimate; therefore, there is no associated CV.
\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\ Best estimate of pup and non-pup counts, which have not been corrected to account for animals at sea during abundance surveys.
\5\ Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are 8 years old, but this is the best available information for use here.

    All species that could potentially occur in the survey areas are 
included in Table 2.

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    The effects of underwater noise from vibratory pile driving and 
removal activities for the planned River Bridge-Scour repair project 
have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals 
in the vicinity of the action area. The Federal Register notice for the 
proposed IHA (83 FR 53033; October 19, 2018) included a discussion of 
the effects of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and their habitat, 
therefore that information is not repeated here; please refer to the 
Federal Register notice (83 FR 53033; October 19, 2018) for that 
information.

Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes 
authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration 
of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact determination.
    Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these 
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent 
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of 
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a 
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal 
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, 
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
    Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form 
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals 
resulting from exposure to vibratory driving. Based on the nature of 
the activity and the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation 
measures (i.e., shutdown, establishment and monitoring of harassment 
zones) discussed in detail below in the Mitigation section), Level A 
harassment is neither anticipated nor authorized.
    As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized 
for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
    Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic 
thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science 
indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some 
degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water 
that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or 
occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) 
and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic 
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial 
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively 
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous 
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the 
factors considered here in more detail and present the authorized take 
estimate.

Acoustic Thresholds

    Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic 
thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above 
which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be 
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur 
permanent threshold shift (PTS) (equated to Level A harassment).
    Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources--Though significantly 
driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from 
anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by 
other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability, 
duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving 
animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral 
context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007, 
Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what the available science indicates 
and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is 
both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a 
generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the 
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are 
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B 
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above 
received levels of 120 decibel (dB) re 1 micro pascal ([mu]Pa) root 
means square (rms) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile-driving, 
drilling) sources such as those used here.

[[Page 64535]]

    WSDOT's planned activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory 
driving and removal and, therefore, the 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) is 
applicable.
    Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical 
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine 
Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (NMFS, 2018) identifies dual criteria to 
assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine 
mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to 
noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). 
WSDOT's planned activity includes the use non-impulsive (vibratory 
driving) sources.
    These thresholds are provided in Table 3 below. The references, 
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are 
described in NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17DE18.053

Ensonified Area

    Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the 
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the 
acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss 
coefficient.
    Reference sound source levels used by WSDOT vibratory piling 
driving and removal activities were derived from several sources. WSDOT 
utilized in-water measurements generated by the Greenbusch Group (2018) 
from the WDOT Seattle Pier 62 project (83 FR 39709) to establish proxy 
sound source levels for vibratory removal of 14-inch timber piles. The 
results determined unweighted rms ranging from 140 dB to 169 dB. WSDOT 
used the 75th percentile of these values (161 dB rms measured at 10 
meters) as a proxy for vibratory removal of 14-inch timber piles at the 
Chehalis River Bridge.

[[Page 64536]]

However, NMFS reviewed the report by the Greenbusch Group (2018) and 
determined that the findings were derived by pooling together all steel 
pile and timber pile at various distance measurements data together. 
The data was not normalized to the standard 10 m distance. NMFS 
analyzed source measurements at different distances for all 63 
individual timber piles that were removed and normalized the values to 
10 m. The results showed that the median is 152 dB SPLrms. This value 
was used as the source level for vibratory removal of 14-inch timber 
piles.
    The planned project includes vibratory driving of 18 sheet piles as 
well as vibratory driving and removal of six steel H piles. Based on 
in-water measurements at the Elliot Bay Seawall Project, vibratory pile 
driving of steel sheet piles generated a source level of 165 dB rms 
measured at 10 m (Greenbush Group 2015). According to CalTrans (2015), 
150 dB rms at 10 m is a typical source level for vibratory driving and 
removal of steel H piles.

Level B Harassment Zones

    The practical spreading model was used by WSDOT to establish the 
Level B harassment zones for all vibratory pile installation and 
removal activities. Practical spreading is described in full detail 
below.
    Pile driving generates underwater noise that can potentially result 
in disturbance to marine mammals in the project area. Transmission loss 
(TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an acoustic pressure wave 
propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary with frequency, 
temperature, sea conditions, current, source and receiver depth, water 
depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition and topography. The 
general formula for underwater TL is:

TL = B * log10 (R1/R2),

Where:

R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial measurement.

    This formula neglects loss due to scattering and absorption, which 
is assumed to be zero here. The degree to which underwater sound 
propagates away from a sound source is dependent on a variety of 
factors, most notably the water bathymetry and presence or absence of 
reflective or absorptive conditions including in-water structures and 
sediments. Spherical spreading occurs in a perfectly unobstructed 
(free-field) environment not limited by depth or water surface, 
resulting in a 6 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of 
distance from the source (20 * log[range]). Cylindrical spreading 
occurs in an environment in which sound propagation is bounded by the 
water surface and sea bottom, resulting in a reduction of 3 dB in sound 
level for each doubling of distance from the source (10 * log[range]). 
A practical spreading value of 15 is often used under conditions where 
water increases with depth as the receiver moves away from the 
shoreline, resulting in an expected propagation environment that would 
lie between spherical and cylindrical spreading loss conditions.
    Utilizing the practical spreading loss model, WSDOT determined the 
distance and area where the noise will fall below the behavioral 
effects threshold of 120 dB rms. The distances and areas are shown in 
Table 4. Note that the ensonified area is based on a GIS analysis of 
the area accounting for structures and landmasses which would block 
underwater sound transmission.

               Table 4--Level B Harassment Ensonified Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Level B
                                            harassment
                Pile type                  zone isopleth   Area (km \2\)
                                             (meters)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch timber vibratory removal........           1,359            0.93
Steel sheet vibratory driving...........          10,000            2.04
Steel H-pile vibratory driving and                 1,000            0.67
 removal................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Level A Harassment Zones

    When the NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in 
recognition of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more 
technically challenging to predict because of the duration component in 
the new thresholds, we developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools 
to help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with 
marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that 
because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for 
these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going 
to be overestimates of some degree. However, these tools offer the best 
way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D 
modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways 
to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address 
the output where appropriate. For stationary sources such as vibratory 
driving, NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the closest distance at which, 
if a marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the 
activity, it would not incur PTS. User Spreadsheet inputs are shown in 
Table 5 and outputs are shown in Table 6. Note that since no Level A 
harassment take is authorized, the areas of the Level A harassment 
zones were not calculated.

                                  Table 5--Parameters of Pile Driving Activity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            14-inch timber               Sheet                    H-Pile
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             USER SPREADSHEET INPUT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spreadsheet Tab Used.................  A.1) Vibratory driving.  A.1) Vibratory driving.  A.1) Vibratory driving.
Source Level (rms SPL)...............  152....................  165....................  150.
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz)....  2.5....................  2.5....................  2.5.
Number of piles in 24-h period.......  22.....................  9......................  6.
Duration to drive a single pile        30.....................  30.....................  30.
 (minutes).
Propagation (xLogR)..................  15.....................  15.....................  15.

[[Page 64537]]

 
Distance of source level measurement   10.....................  10.....................  10.
 (meters).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                   Table 6--Level A Harassment Zone Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               PTS Isopleth (meters)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       High-
           Source type             Low-frequency   Mid-frequency     frequency        Phocid          Otariid
                                     cetaceans       cetaceans       cetaceans       pinnipeds       pinnipeds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             USER SPREADSHEET OUTPUT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch timber..................             8.5             0.8            12.5             5.2             0.4
Sheet pile......................            34.4               3            50.9            20.9             1.5
H-pile..........................             2.6             0.2             3.9             1.6             0.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marine Mammal Occurrence

    In this section we provide the information about the presence, 
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take 
calculations.
    There is little abundance or density data available for marine 
mammal species that are likely to occur within Grays Harbor and which 
could potentially be found in the Chehalis River near the project site. 
In most cases, WSDOT relied on density data from the U.S. Navy Marine 
Species Density Database (NMSDD) (U.S. Navy 2015). NMFS concurs that 
this, and the exceptions described below, represent the best available 
data for use here.

Harbor Seal

    While the NMSDD (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of harbor 
seals in the waters offshore of Grays Harbor as 0.279 animals per 
square kilometer, WSDOT relied on a study which identified 44 harbor 
seal haul-outs in Grays Harbor and provided very rough estimates of the 
number of seals at each site. Twenty-seven haul-outs had less than 100 
animals; 16 haul-outs had 100-500 animals; and 2 haul outs were 
reported to support over 500 animals (Jeffries et al. 2000). These data 
likely represent the best estimate of harbor seal numbers in Grays 
Harbor. Using median numbers of each haul-out estimate range resulted 
in an estimated 7,150 harbor seals in Grays Harbor. The area of the 
estuary during mean higher high water (243 km\2\) was used to derive a 
density estimate of 29.4 harbor seals per square kilometer.

California Sea Lion

    Only 10 California sea lion strandings have been documented between 
2006 and 2015 (NMFS 2016c), and no haul-outs have been identified. 
Therefore, it is expected that the density of California sea lions in 
Grays Harbor is low. The NMSDD (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density 
of California sea lions in the waters offshore of Grays Harbor as 
ranging from 0.020 to 0.033 animals per square kilometer in summer and 
fall. The higher estimate is used as a surrogate for Grays Harbor.

Steller Sea Lion

    According to the NMFS National Stranding Database, there were four 
confirmed Steller sea lion strandings in Grays Harbor between 2006 and 
2015 (NMFS 2016c) and no haul-outs have been identified in Grays 
Harbor. The NMSDD (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of Steller sea 
lions in the waters offshore of Grays Harbor as 0.0145 animals per 
square kilometer. This estimate is used as a surrogate for Grays 
Harbor.

Gray Whale

    Between 1998 and 2010, gray whale numbers peaked in spring and fall 
in a study area that included waters inside Grays Harbor and coastal 
waters along the south Washington coast (Calambokidis, et al. 2012). 
However, no density estimates are available for Grays Harbor. The NMSDD 
(U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of gray whales in nearshore 
waters near Grays Harbor as 0.00045 animal per square kilometer in 
summer and fall. This density is used for Grays Harbor.

Harbor Porpoise

    The NMSDD (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of harbor 
porpoises in the waters offshore of Grays Harbor as a range between 
0.69 and 1.67 animals per square kilometer. According to Evenson et al. 
(2016), the maximum harbor porpoise density in the Strait of Juan de 
Fuca (approximately 105 miles north of Grays Harbor) in 2014 was 0.768 
animals per square kilometer. The higher density estimate for waters 
offshore of Grays Harbor (1.67) is used to estimate take.

Take Calculation and Estimation

    Here we describe how the information provided above is brought 
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
    No Level A harassment take is likely because of the small injury 
zones and relatively low average animal density in the area. Since the 
largest Level A harassment distance is only 50.9 m from the source for 
high-frequency cetaceans (harbor porpoise), NMFS considers that WSDOT 
can effectively monitor such small zones to implement shutdown measures 
and avoid Level A harassment takes. Therefore, no Level A harassment 
take of marine mammal is authorized.
    NMFS used an estimated harbor seal density of 29.4 animals/km\2\ in 
the US 101/Chehalis River Bridge-Scour Repair Project area to estimate 
the following number of Level B harassment exposures that may occur:
<bullet> 14-inch timber pile removal: 29.4. animals/km\2\ * 0.93 km\2\ 
* 2 days = 54.68
<bullet> Sheet pile installation: 29.4 animals/km\2\ * 2.04 km\2\ * 2 
days = 119.95
<bullet> H-pile installation and removal: 29.4 animals/km\2\ * 0.67 
km\2\ * 2 days = 39.39
    Based on the sum of the equations above, NMFS authorizes 214 takes 
of harbor seals by Level B harassment.
    NMFS inserted the California sea lion density of 0.033 animals/
km\2\ into the same equation used above for harbor seals to estimate 
Level B harassment exposures. Based on the sum of the equations, an 
estimated 0.24 California sea lions would be taken by Level B 
harassment. Due to this low value, NMFS conservatively authorizes the 
take of two California sea lions each day of in-water activities, 
resulting in 12 takes by Level B harassment.

[[Page 64538]]

    NMFS estimated take of Steller sea lions by inserting a density of 
0.0145 animals/km\2\ into the same equation used above for harbor seals 
resulting in 0.10 takes of sea lions. Given the low value, NMFS 
conservatively authorizes the take of two Steller sea lions during each 
day of in-water activities, resulting in 12 takes by Level B 
harassment.
    NMFS used the same equation that was used for harbor seals to 
estimate take for gray whales by inserting a density value of 0.00045 
animals/km\2\. Since this resulted in a value less than one, NMFS 
authorizes Level B harassment take of two gray whales per day based on 
average group size.
    For the proposed IHA, a density value of 1.67 animal/km\2\ for 
harbor porpoises was plugged into the harbor seal equation to arrive at 
an estimated 2 harbor porpoise takes per day for a total of 12.
    Table 7 shows total number of authorized Level B harassment takes 
and take as a percentage of population for each of the species.

       Table 7--Take Estimates as a Percentage of Stock Abundance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Authorized
                 Species                   take by Level   % population
                                           B harassment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal.............................             214             1.9
California sea lion.....................              12           <0.01
Steller sea lion........................              12           <0.01
Gray whale..............................               2           <0.01
Harbor porpoise.........................              12           <0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mitigation Measures

    In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to 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 (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS 
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to 
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic 
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such 
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 
216.104(a)(11)).
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and 
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we 
carefully consider two primary factors:
    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful 
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to 
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. 
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being 
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the 
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented 
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as 
planned) the likelihood of effective implementation (probability 
implemented as planned), and;
    (2) the practicability of the measures for applicant 
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on 
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, 
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the 
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

    Temporal and Seasonal Restrictions--Timing restrictions would be 
used to avoid in-water work when ESA-listed salmonids are most likely 
to be present. The combined work window for in-water work for the U.S. 
101/Chehalis River Bridge-Scour Project is July 15 through February 15. 
Furthermore, work may only occur during daylight hours, when visual 
monitoring of marine mammals can be effectively conducted.
    Establishment of Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving activities, 
WSDOT will establish a shutdown zone. The purpose of a shutdown zone is 
generally to define an area within which shutdown of activity would 
occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal 
entering the defined area). In this case, shutdown zones are intended 
to contain areas in which sound pressure levels (SPLs) equal or exceed 
acoustic injury criteria for authorized species. If a marine mammal is 
observed at or within the shutdown zone, work must shut down (stop 
work) until the individual has been observed outside of the zone, or 
has not been observed for at least 15 minutes for all marine mammals. A 
determination that the shutdown zone is clear must be made during a 
period of good visibility (i.e., the entire shutdown zone and 
surrounding waters must be visible to the naked eye). If a marine 
mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone during activities or pre-
activity monitoring, all pile driving and removal activities at that 
location must be halted or delayed, respectively. If pile driving or 
removal 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 
or 15 minutes have passed without re-detection of the animal. Pile 
driving and removal activities include the time to install or remove a 
single pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between 
uses of the pile driving equipment is no more than thirty minutes. 
Shutdown zone sizes are shown in Table 8. Note that NMFS has increased 
the shutdown zone described in the Federal Register notice for proposed 
IHA for high-frequency cetaceans from 50 m to 55 m as well as the 
shutdown zone for phocid pinnipeds from 20 m to 25 m during sheet pile 
installation. In this notice of issuance, NMFS has elected to round up 
to these higher values instead of rounding down as was done in the 
proposed notice.

[[Page 64539]]



      Table 8--Shutdown Zones for Various Pile Driving Activities and Marine Mammal Hearing Groups (Meters)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       High-
                   Source type                     Low-frequency     frequency        Phocid          Otariid
                                                     cetaceans       cetaceans       pinnipeds       pinnipeds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch timber removal..........................              10              15              10              10
Sheet pile installation.........................              35              55              25              10
H-pile installation and removal.................              10              10              10              10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For in-water heavy machinery activities other than pile driving, if 
a marine mammal comes within 10 m, operations must cease and vessels 
must reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage 
and safe working conditions. WSDOT must also implement shutdown 
measures if the cumulative total number of individuals observed within 
the Level B harassment monitoring zones for any particular species 
reaches the number authorized under the IHA and if such marine mammals 
are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching 
the Level B Harassment/Monitoring Zone during in-water construction 
activities.
    Establishment of Level B Harassment/Monitoring Zones--WSDOT must 
identify and establish Level B harassment zones which are areas where 
SPLs equal or exceed 120 dB rms. Observation of monitoring zones 
enables observers to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine 
mammals in the project area and outside the shutdown zone and thus 
prepare for potential shutdowns of activity. Monitoring zones are also 
used to document instances of Level B harassment. Monitoring zone 
isopleths are shown in Table 4.
    Pre-Activity Monitoring--Prior to the start of daily in-water 
construction activity, or whenever a break in pile driving of 30 
minutes or longer occurs, the observer shall observe the shutdown and 
monitoring zones for a period of 30 minutes. The shutdown zone shall be 
cleared when a marine mammal has not been observed within the zone for 
that 30-minute period. When a marine mammal permitted for Level B 
harassment take is present in the Level B harassment zone, piling 
activities may begin and Level B harassment take shall be recorded. As 
stated above, if the entire Level B harassment zone is not visible at 
the start of construction, piling driving activities can begin. If work 
ceases for more than 30 minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of both 
the Level B harassment and shutdown zone shall commence.
    Non-Authorized Take Prohibited--If a species enters or approaches 
the Level B harassment zone and that species is not authorized for take 
or a species for which authorization has been granted but the 
authorized takes have been met, pile driving and removal activities 
must shut down immediately. Activities must not resume until the animal 
has been confirmed to have left the area or an observation time period 
of 15 minutes has elapsed.
    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's mitigation measures, 
NMFS has determined that the required mitigation measures provide the 
means effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or 
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, 
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance

Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, requirements pertaining to 
the monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for 
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the 
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased 
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on 
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the 
action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well 
as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required 
monitoring.
    Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should 
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
    <bullet> Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area 
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, 
density);
    <bullet> Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure 
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or 
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment 
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) 
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence 
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or 
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
    <bullet> Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or 
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), 
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
    <bullet> How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) 
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) 
populations, species, or stocks;
    <bullet> Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey 
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of 
marine mammal habitat); and
    <bullet> Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Visual Monitoring

    WSDOT shall employ NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSOs) 
to conduct marine mammal monitoring for its US 101/Chehalis River 
Bridge-Scour Repair Project. The purposes of marine mammal monitoring 
are to implement mitigation measures and learn more about impacts to 
marine mammals from WSDOT's construction activities. The PSOs will 
observe and collect data on marine mammals in and around the project 
area for 30 minutes before, during, and for 30 minutes after all pile 
removal and pile installation work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the 
following requirements:
    1. Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are 
required;
    2. At least one observer must have prior experience working as an 
observer;
    3. Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree 
in biological science or related field) or training for experience;
    4. Where a team of three or more observers are required, one 
observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring 
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an 
observer; and
    5. NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs;
    WSDOT must ensure that observers have the following additional 
qualifications:

[[Page 64540]]

    1. Ability to conduct field observations and collect data according 
to assigned protocols;
    2. Experience or training in the field identification of marine 
mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
    3. Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations;
    4. Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations 
including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals 
observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were 
conducted; dates, times, and reason for implementation of mitigation 
(or why mitigation was not implemented when required); and marine 
mammal behavior; and
    5. 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.
    Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall be 
conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power). 
Due to the different sizes of monitoring zones from different pile 
types, separate zones and monitoring protocols corresponding to each 
specific pile type will be established.
    For vibratory pile driving of sheet piles, a total of four land-
based PSOs will monitor the shutdown and Level B harassment zones. For 
vibratory pile driving and pile removal of H piles and timber piles, a 
total of three land-based PSOs will monitor the shutdown and Level B 
harassment zones.

Reporting Measures

    WSDOT is required to submit a draft monitoring report within 90 
days after completion of the construction work or the expiration of the 
IHA, whichever comes earlier. This report will detail the monitoring 
protocol, summarize the data recorded during monitoring, and estimate 
the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed. NMFS will 
have an opportunity to provide comments on the report, and if NMFS has 
comments, WSDOT will address the comments and submit a final report to 
NMFS within 30 days. Reports shall contain, at minimum, the following:
    <bullet> Date and time that monitored activity begins and ends for 
each day conducted (monitoring period);
    <bullet> Construction activities occurring during each daily 
observation period, including how many and what type of piles driven;
    <bullet> Deviation from initial proposal in pile numbers, pile 
types, average driving times, etc.
    <bullet> Weather parameters in each monitoring period (e.g., wind 
speed, percent cloud cover, visibility);
    <bullet> Water conditions in each monitoring period (e.g., sea 
state, tide state);
    <bullet> For each marine mammal sighting:
    [cir] Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of 
marine mammals;
    [cir] Description of any observable marine mammal behavior 
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from 
pile driving activity;
    [cir] Location and distance from pile driving activities to marine 
mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point; 
and
    [cir] Estimated amount of time that the animals remained in the 
Level B harassment zone;
    <bullet> Description of implementation of mitigation measures 
within each monitoring period (e.g., shutdown or delay);
    <bullet> Other human activity in the area within each monitoring 
period; and
    <bullet> A summary of the following:
    [cir] Total number of individuals of each species detected within 
the Level B harassment zone;
    [cir] Total number of individuals of each species detected within 
the shutdown zone and the average amount of time that they remained in 
that zone; and
    [cir] Daily average number of individuals of each species 
(differentiated by month as appropriate) detected within the Level B 
harassment zone.

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the 
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not 
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough 
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to 
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be 
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the 
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context 
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, 
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness 
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of 
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population 
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing 
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other 
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this 
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as 
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and 
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or 
ambient noise levels).
    NMFS has identified key qualitative and quantitative factors which 
may be employed to assess the level of analysis necessary to conclude 
whether potential impacts associated with a specified activity should 
be considered negligible. These include (but are not limited to) the 
type and magnitude of taking, the amount and importance of the 
available habitat for the species or stock that is affected, the 
duration of the anticipated effect to the species or stock, and the 
status of the species or stock. When an evaluation of key factors shows 
that the anticipated impacts of the specified activity would clearly 
result in no greater than a negligible impact on all affected species 
or stocks, additional evaluation is not required. In this case, the 
following factors are in place for all affected species or stocks:
    <bullet> No takes by Level A harassment are anticipated or 
authorized;
    <bullet> Takes by Level B harassment constitute less than 5 percent 
of the best available abundance estimates for all stocks;
    <bullet> Take would not occur in places and/or times where take 
would be more likely to accrue to impacts on reproduction or survival, 
such as within ESA-designated or proposed critical habitat, 
biologically important areas (BIA), or other habitats critical to 
recruitment or survival (e.g., rookery);
    <bullet> Take would occur over a short timeframe (less than 30 days 
of active pile driving required during the IHA effective period);
    <bullet> Take would occur over < 25 percent of species/stock range; 
and
    <bullet> Stock is not known to be declining or suffering from known 
contributors to decline (e.g., unusual mortality event (UME), oil spill 
effects).
    Based on these factors, and taking into consideration the 
implementation of the prescribed monitoring and mitigation measures, 
NMFS finds that the total take from the planned activity will have a 
negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.

[[Page 64541]]

Small Numbers

    As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be 
authorized under Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for 
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA 
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated 
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to 
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or 
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to 
small numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative 
factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or 
spatial scale of the activities.
    NMFS has estimated that take for all species authorized is less 
than two percent of their respective stock abundance (Table 7). Based 
on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity (including the 
required mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take 
of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will 
be taken relative to the population size of the affected species or 
stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

    There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine 
mammal stocks or species 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.

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 determined that the issuance of the 
IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected 
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that 
formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this 
action.

Authorization

    NMFS has issued an IHA to WSDOT for the incidental take of marine 
mammals due to in-water construction work associated with the US 101/
Chehalis River Bridge-Scour Repair Project for a period of one year, 
provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: December 11, 2018.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-27199 Filed 12-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P