[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12411-12426]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04368]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XA810]


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Berth III New Mooring Dolphins 
Project in Ketchikan, Alaska

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 NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to 
the City of Ketchikan, Alaska (COK) to incidentally harass, by Level A 
and B harassment, marine mammals during construction activities 
associated with the Berth III New Mooring Dolphins Project in 
Ketchikan, AK.

DATES: This Authorization is effective for a period of one year, from 
October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Pauline, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application 
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in 
this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act. 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 the species or stocks for 
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as 
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, 
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth.
    The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above 
are included in the relevant sections below.

Summary of Request

    On May 14, 2020, NMFS received a request from COK for an IHA to 
take marine mammals incidental to construction activities associated 
with the Berth III Mooring Dolphin Project in Ketchikan, Alaska. After 
several revisions, the application was deemed adequate and complete on 
September 22, 2021. COK's request is for take of nine species of marine 
mammals by harassment, including Level A harassment of three of these 
species. Neither COK nor NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to 
result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.

Description of the Specified Activity

    COK plans to make improvements to Berth III, in order to 
accommodate a new fleet of large cruise ships (i.e. Bliss class) and to 
meet the needs of the growing cruise ship industry and its vessels in 
Southeast Alaska. Expansion activities include vibratory pile removal, 
vibratory pile driving, impact pile driving and down-the-hole (DTH) 
pile installation. Underwater sound generated by these in-water 
activities may result in harassment including Level B harassment and 
Level A harassment of marine mammal species. In-water work is scheduled 
to occur over approximately 120 days between October 1, 2021 and March 
13, 2022 although the IHA would be effective until September 30, 2022.
    The proposed project would install three new mooring dolphins (MD) 
with one at the north end of Berth III (MD#2) and two at the south end 
(MD#3 & MD#4) as shown in Figure 2 in COK's IHA application (available 
online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-
protection/

[[Page 12412]]

incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities). A total of 20 
piles will be installed. Eight of the piles are temporary template 
piles and would be removed as shown in Table 1. Pile driving will be 
conducted from an anchored barge, utilizing vibratory and impact 
hammers to install and remove piles and DTH pile installation to 
position rock sockets and tension anchors. Rock socketing is a process 
where a pile is driven by conventional vibratory and impact hammers 
until reaching solid bedrock. If at that point the pile cannot support 
the needed load, a hole can be drilled into the rock with a DTH system 
to allow the pile to be anchored up to 10 or more feet into the solid 
rock. Tension anchoring involves creating an anchor hole that is 
smaller in diameter than the pile. The holes extend 10 to 20 feet or 
more below the bottom of the pile. A steel bar or other anchoring 
structure (e.g., rebar frame) is then grouted or cemented in place from 
the bottom of the anchor hole and extending up to the top of the pile. 
Attaching the anchor bar or frame to the pile then helps anchor the 
pile in place to support the required project loads.

                                   Table 1--Project Pile Types and Quantities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Location                              Item                    Size and type             Qty
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MD#2.....................................  Dolphin and Fender Piles...  48-inch (1.22 m) steel pipe            6
                                                                         piles.
                                           Temporary Template Piles...  30-inch (0.76 m) steel pipe            8
                                                                         piles.
MD#3.....................................  Dolphin Piles..............  36-inch (0.9 m) steel pipe             3
                                                                         piles.
MD#4.....................................  Dolphin Piles..............  36-inch (0.9 m) steel pipe             3
                                                                         piles.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A detailed description of the planned Berth III New Mooring 
Dolphins Project is provided in the Federal Register notice for the 
proposed IHA (85 FR 71612; November 10, 2020). Since that time, no 
changes have been made to the planned activities. Therefore, a detailed 
description is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register 
notice for the description of the specific activity.
    Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in 
detail later in this document (please see Mitigation and Monitoring and 
Reporting sections).

Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to COK was published in 
the Federal Register on November 12, 2020 (85 FR 71612). That notice 
described, in detail, COK's 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 
Commission's letter for full details regarding their recommendations 
and rationale. The letter is available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-berth-iii-new-mooring-dolphins-project-ketchikan-alaska. A summary of the 
Commission's recommendations as well as NMFS' responses is below.
    Comment 1: The Commission inquired about the methodology used to 
extrapolate the source level for DTH installation of 48-inch piles and 
recommended that NMFS publish a revised authorization for public 
comment that fully describes its extrapolation method before issuing 
any final authorization to COK.
    Response: The extrapolation technique and software packages 
employed by NMFS and described below are commonly used and widely 
accepted by the scientific community. In summary, NMFS ran regressions 
in the R programming language (version 3.5.1) using the R Commander 
Graphical User Interface. Data were average source levels from 
recordings of single piles and available covariates (e.g., water depth, 
pile depth, hole size, distance of sound source measurement) where NMFS 
had access to published and unpublished DTH monitoring data. The 
Generalized Linear Model routine in R Commander was used to assess the 
fit of linear and non-linear multiple regression models of the data. 
Model assumptions were assessed graphically and mathematically and the 
best fit of models that fit statistical assumptions and retained 
statistically significant covariates was chosen mathematically. The 
best fit model was used to calculate the source level for the 
extrapolated hole size. The calculated source level was then rounded to 
the next highest integer decibel for use in this action. NMFS does not 
concur that the notice of proposed authorization needs to be re-
published given that a re-published notice would utilize the same 
extrapolation methodology and arrive at the same source level for DTH 
installation of 48-inch piles.
    Comment 2: The Commission recommended that NMFS use a repetition 
rate of 13 strikes/second and the proxy source level of 146 dB re 1 
[micro]Pa2-sec at 10 m from Guan and Miner (2020) to re-estimate the 
Level A harassment and shutdown zones for DTH pile installation of 12-
inch piles.
    Response: NMFS did utilize a proxy source level of 146 dB re 1 
[micro]Pa2-sec for DTH pile installation of 12-inch piles. NMFS does 
not agree with the recommendation to use a strike rate of 13 strikes 
per second as strike rates can be highly variable. While it appears 
that strike rates may decrease as hole sizes become smaller, there is 
no specific strike rate data available for 12-inch piles. Therefore, 
NMFS used a strike rate across all DTH activities of 10 strikes per 
second.
    Comment 3: The Commission recommended that NMFS require COK to 
conduct sound source and sound propagation measurements of DTH pile 
installation.
    Response: NMFS agrees that there would be value in conducting sound 
source testing on some of the piles for which DTH installation data is 
not available. However, the City of Ketchikan has not budgeted for 
sound source verification and propagation measurements and a 
requirement of this nature would not be practicable. Therefore, NMFS 
does not concur with the Commission's recommendation.
    Comment 4: The Commission recommended that NMFS employ alternate 
methodologies to estimate take of harbor seals. They recommended either 
basing take estimates on survey data from a local haulout location or 
on observations made during a COK-sponsored rock blasting project (84 
FR 36891; July 30, 2019).
    Response: There are a number of ways to estimate take in the 
absence of density data. NMFS based take on observed harbor seal group 
size near the project area. This methodology has previously been 
employed by NMFS at other locations in Ketchikan (84 FR 36891; July 30, 
2019 and 85 FR 673; January 7, 2020). Applying the available haulout 
data would likely overestimate take since it assumed that all 83 seals 
at the haulout would be taken during each day of construction. NMFS did 
use the data from the COK-sponsored rock blasting project but 
interpreted the results differently than the Commission. Given that 
harbor seals are known to

[[Page 12413]]

follow fishing vessels into the marina, COK and NMFS assumed that more 
seals would be found in or near the harbor, while the Commission 
assumed that the animals would be evenly distributed across the entire 
12.5-km Level B harassment zone. Since NMFS believes seal 
concentrations are likely to be greater near the harbor, we do not 
concur with the Commission's recommendation.
    Comment 5: The Commission recommended that NMFS revise condition 
6(b)(ix) in the final authorization to require COK to report the number 
of individuals of each species detected within the Level A and B 
harassment zones, and estimates of number of marine mammals taken by 
Level A and B harassment, by species. The Commission recommended NMFS 
include requirements that COK include in its monitoring report (1) the 
estimated percentages of the Level A and B harassment zones that were 
not visible, (2) an extrapolation of the estimated takes by Level A and 
B harassment based on the number of observed exposures within the Level 
A and B harassment zones and the percentages of the Level A and B 
harassment zones that were not visible (i.e., extrapolated takes) 
consistent with other authorizations, and (3) the total number of Level 
A and B harassment takes based on both the observed and extrapolated 
takes for each species.
    Response: We do not fully concur with the Commission's 
recommendation and do not adopt it as stated. NMFS agrees with the 
recommendation to require COK to report the number of individuals of 
each species detected within the harassment zones and has included this 
requirement in both the proposed and final authorizations. (See 
condition 6(b)(ix).) NMFS does not agree with the recommendation to 
require COK to report estimates of the numbers of marine mammals taken 
by Level B harassment. The Commission does not explain why it believes 
this requirement is necessary, nor does it provide recommendations for 
methods of generating such estimates in a manner that would lead to 
credible results. NMFS does agree COK should report the estimated 
percentage(s) of the Level B harassment zones that were not visible, 
and has included this requirement in both the proposed and final 
authorizations. (See condition 6(b)(iii).) These pieces of 
information--numbers of individuals of each species detected within the 
harassment zones and the estimated percentage(s) of the harassment 
zones that were not visible--may be used to glean an approximate 
understanding of whether COK may have exceeded the amount of take 
authorized. Although the Commission does not explain its reasoning for 
offering these recommendations, NMFS recognizes the basic need to 
understand whether an IHA-holder may have exceeded its authorized take. 
The need to accomplish this basic function of reporting does not 
require that NMFS require applicants to use methods we do not have 
confidence in to generate estimates of ``total take'' that cannot be 
considered reliable.
    Comment 6: The Commission recommended that NMFS include in the 
final authorization an additional table that specifies the extents of 
the Level A harassment zones that exceed the shut-down zones, 
particularly for HF cetaceans and phocids.
    Response: The table described by the Commission has been used very 
infrequently and only in situations with there are limited pile types, 
pile sizes, and/or pile installation methods employed. Such a table 
would be cumbersome and unwieldy in this instance given the numerous 
pile types, pile sizes and pile installation methods planned for use in 
which different Level A harassment isopleths are dependent on either 
varying duration or strike rate for both impact and DTH installation. 
The information that the Commission desires is readily available in 
Table 7 and Table 10.
    Comment 7: The Commission recommended that NMFS reinforce that COK 
must keep a running tally of the total Level A and B harassment takes, 
both observed and extrapolated, for each species consistent with 
condition 4(g) of the final authorization.
    Response: The IHA indicates the number of takes authorized for each 
species. We agree that COK must ensure they do not exceed authorized 
takes, but do not concur with the Commission's repeated recommendations 
regarding the need for NMFS to oversee IHA-holders' compliance with 
issued IHAs, including the use of a ``running tally'' of takes. 
Regardless of the Commission's substitution of the word ``reinforce'' 
for the word ``ensure,'' as compared with its prior recommendations for 
other actions, compliance with the terms of an issued IHA remains the 
responsibility of the IHA-holder.
    Comment 8: The Commission recommended that NMFS refrain from 
issuing a renewal for any authorization unless it is consistent with 
the procedural requirements specified in section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of 
the MMPA.
    Response: In prior responses to comments about IHA Renewals (e.g., 
84 FR 52464; October 02, 2019 and 85 FR 53342, August 28, 2020), NMFS 
has explained how the Renewal process, as implemented, is consistent 
with the statutory requirements contained in section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA, provides additional efficiencies beyond the use of 
abbreviated notices, and, further, promotes NMFS' goals of improving 
conservation of marine mammals and increasing efficiency in the MMPA 
compliance process. Therefore, we intend to continue implementing the 
Renewal process.

Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA

    NMFS increased authorized take of harbor porpoise from 40 to 80 and 
authorized take of minke whale from 2 to 8 based on informal comments 
from the Commission. Authorized take of humpback whales was also 
increased from 68 to 119 due to the daily occurrence of a single 
humpback whale in Tongass Narrows after the notice of proposed IHA (85 
FR 71612; November 12, 2020) had published in the Federal Register. 
These changes are described in detail in the Estimated Take section. 
The source level for DTH installation of 12-inch anchors was reduced 
from 166.2 dB to 162 dB based on data from Guan and Miner (2020) where 
18-inch piles were measured. Anchor holes for COK will be 12-inch. 
Therefore, it is more accurate to use the 18-inch SL as the proxy sound 
source level for 12-inch anchors compared to 30-, 36- and 48-inch piles 
from Reyff & Heyvaert (2019), Reyff (2020), and Denes et al. (2019) 
which were used to derive 166.2 dB SL value. Therefore, the Level B 
harassment isopleth for DTH installation of 12-inch anchors was reduced 
from 12,023 m to 6,310 m. In the Monitoring and Reporting section, NMFS 
has added language stating that PSOs must work in rotating shifts of 4 
hours and individual PSOs must not perform duties for more than 12 
hours in a 24-hour period. New language has also been added requiring 
PSOs to use elevated platforms at observation points to the extent 
practicable.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information 
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and 
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species. 
Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be 
found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about these species

[[Page 12414]]

(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's 
website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
    Table 2 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and 
authorized for this action, and summarizes information related to the 
population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and 
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological removal (PBR), 
where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2020). 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. Alaska SARs (Muto et al. 2020). All values presented in 
Table 2 are the most recent available at the time of publication and 
are available in the 2019 SARs (Muto et al., 2020) and draft 2020 SARs 
(available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).

                                              Table 2--Marine Mammals That Could Occur in the Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                             Stock abundance Nbest
                                                                                         ESA/MMPA status;   (CV, Nmin, most recent             Annual M/
             Common name                  Scientific name             MMPA stock          strategic (Y/N)    abundance survey) \2\     PBR       SI \3\
                                                                                                \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae
    Gray Whale......................  Eschrichtius robustus..  Eastern North Pacific..  -, -, N             26,960 (0.05, 25,849,         801        139
                                                                                                             2016).
Family Balaenidae
    Humpback whale..................  Megaptera novaeangliae.  Central North Pacific..  -, -,Y              10,103 (0.3; 7,891;            83         25
                                                                                                             2006).
    Minke whale.....................  Balaenoptera             Alaska.................  -, -, N             N.A...................       N.A.          0
                                       acutorostrata.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae
    Killer whale....................  Orcinus orca...........  Alaska Resident........  -, -, N             2,347 (N.A.; 2,347;            24          1
                                                                                                             2012).
                                                               West Coast Transient...  -, -, N             243 (N.A, 243, 2009)..        2.4          0
                                                               Northern Resident......  -, -, N             302 (N.A.; 302, 2018).        2.2        0.2
                                                               Gulf of Alaska,          -, -, N             587 (N.A.; 587; 2012..       5.87          1
                                                                Aleutian Islands, and
                                                                Bering Sea Transient.
    Pacific white-sided dolphin.....  Lagenorhynchus           North Pacific..........  -, -, N             26,880 (N.A.; N.A.;          N.A.          0
                                       obliquidens.                                                          1990).
Family Phocoenidae
    Harbor porpoise.................  Phocoena phocoena......  Southeast Alaska.......  -, -, Y             1,354 (0.10; 896;            8.95         34
                                                                                                             2012).
    Dall's porpoise.................  Phocoenoides dalli.....  Alaska.................  -, -, N             83,400 (0.097; N.A.;         N.A.         38
                                                                                                             1991.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
 sea lions)
    Steller sea lion................  Eumetopias jubatus.....  Eastern U.S............  -, -, N             43,201 (N.A.; 43,201;       2,592        112
                                                                                                             2017).
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
    Harbor seal.....................  Phoca vitulina           Clarence Strait........  -, -, N             27,659 (N.A.; 24,854;         746         40
                                       richardii.                                                            2015).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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, CV is not applicable (N.A.).
\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.

    As indicated above, all nine species (with 12 managed stocks) in 
Table 2 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the 
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur, and we are authorizing 
it.
    A detailed description of the of the species likely to be affected 
by the 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 (85 FR 
71612); 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.

Marine Mammal Hearing

    Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals 
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious 
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to 
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine 
mammals

[[Page 12415]]

are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine mammal 
species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; 
Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, 
Southall et al., (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided into 
functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated 
hearing ranges based on available behavioral response data, audiograms 
derived using auditory evoked potential techniques, anatomical 
modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements of hearing 
ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e., low-
frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described generalized 
hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized 
hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) 
threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception 
for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was 
deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall 
et al., (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing groups and their 
associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 3.

                  Table 3--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
                              [NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Hearing group                 Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen         7 Hz to 35 kHz.
 whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins,      150 Hz to 160 kHz.
 toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose
 whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true          275 Hz to 160 kHz.
 porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
 cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger &
 L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true     50 Hz to 86 kHz.
 seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea     60 Hz to 39 kHz.
 lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
  composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
  species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
  hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
  composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
  cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).

    The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et 
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have 
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing 
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range 
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 
2013).
    For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency 
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information. 
Nine mammal species (seven cetacean and two pinniped (one otariid and 
one phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the 
planned survey activities. Of the cetacean species that may be present, 
three are classified as low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete 
species), two are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all 
delphinid and ziphiid species and the sperm whale), and two are 
classified as high-frequency cetaceans (i.e., porpoise spp.).

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    The effects of underwater noise from pile removal activities have 
the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals in 
the vicinity of the survey area. The notice of proposed IHA (85 FR 
71602; November 10, 2020) included a discussion of the effects of 
anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential effects of 
underwater noise from WSDOT's vibratory pile removal on marine mammals 
and their habitat. That information and analysis is incorporated by 
reference into this final IHA determination and is not repeated here; 
please refer to the notice of proposed IHA (85 FR 71602; November 10, 
2020).

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 primarily be by Level B harassment, as use 
of the acoustic sources (i.e., vibratory or impact pile driving or DTH 
pile installation) has the potential to result in disruption of 
behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals. There is also some 
potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment) to result, primarily 
for high frequency cetacean species and phocid pinnipeds. Auditory 
injury is unlikely to occur in low-frequency and mid-frequency cetacean 
species and otariid pinnipeds. The planned mitigation and monitoring 
measures are expected to minimize the severity of the taking to the 
extent practicable.
    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

    NMFS recommends the use of acoustic thresholds that identify the 
received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals 
would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to 
Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A 
harassment).

[[Page 12416]]

    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 (e.g., 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 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for continuous (e.g., 
vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) 
for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent 
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
    COK's planned activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory 
pile driving, DTH pile installation) and impulsive (impact pile 
driving), sources, and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) 
criteria are 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) (Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual 
criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five 
different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a 
result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources 
(impulsive or non-impulsive). COK's planned activity includes the use 
of impulsive (impact pile driving, DTH pile installation) and non-
impulsive (vibratory pile driving/removal, DTH pile installation) 
sources.
    These thresholds are provided in Table 4. 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.

 Table 4--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      PTS onset acoustic thresholds *
                                             (received level)
          Hearing group          ---------------------------------------
                                       Impulsive         Non-impulsive
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans....  Cell 1: Lpk,flat:   Cell 2: LE,LF,24h:
                                   219 dB;             199 dB.
                                   LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans....  Cell 3: Lpk,flat:   Cell 4: LE,MF,24h:
                                   230 dB;             198 dB.
                                   LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans...  Cell 5: Lpk,flat:   Cell 6: LE,HF,24h:
                                   202 dB;             173 dB.
                                   LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW)             Cell 7: Lpk,flat:   Cell 8: LE,PW,24h:
 (Underwater).                     218 dB;             201 dB.
                                   LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW)            Cell 9: Lpk,flat:   Cell 10:
 (Underwater).                     232 dB;             LE,OW,24h: 219
                                   LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.  dB.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever
  results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-
  impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure
  level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds
  should also be considered. Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a
  reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level
  (LE) has a reference value of 1[micro]Pa\2\s. In this Table,
  thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards
  Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is
  defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the
  intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ``flat'' is
  being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted
  or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript
  associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates
  the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and
  HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended
  accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level
  thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying
  exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is
  valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which
  these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.

Ensonified Area

    Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the 
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the 
acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss 
coefficient.
    The sound field in the project area is the existing background 
noise plus additional construction noise from the planned project. 
Marine mammals are expected to be affected via sound generated by the 
primary components of the project (i.e., vibratory pile driving, 
vibratory pile removal, impact pile driving, and DTH pile 
installation).
    Vibratory hammers produce constant sound when operating, and 
produce vibrations that liquefy the sediment surrounding the pile, 
allowing it to penetrate to the required seating depth. An impact 
hammer would then generally be used to place the pile at its intended 
depth through rock or harder substrates. An impact hammer is a steel 
device that works like a piston, producing a series of independent 
strikes to drive the pile. Impact hammering typically generates the 
loudest noise associated with pile installation. The actual durations 
of each installation method vary depending on the type of pile, size of 
the pile, and substrate characteristics (e.g. bedrock).
    In order to calculate distances to the Level A harassment and Level 
B harassment sound thresholds for piles of various sizes being used in 
this project, NMFS used acoustic monitoring data from other locations 
to inform selection of representative source levels (see Table 5).
    Sound source levels for vibratory installation of 30-inch steel 
piles were obtained by Denes et al. (2016) during the installation of 
30-inch steel pipe piles at the Ketchikan Ferry Terminal. Vibratory 
removal of 30-inch piles is expected to be quieter than installation, 
so this value is used as a proxy. Sound levels for vibratory 
installation of 48-inch steel piles were obtained by Austin et al. 
(2016) during the installation of test piles at the Port of Anchorage. 
The applicant elected to conservatively employ sound source levels for 
the 48-inch piles as a proxy to calculate harassment isopleths for 36-
inch piles.
    Sound levels for impact installation of 30-inch steel piles were 
taken from Denes et al. (2016) during the installation of piles at the 
Ketchikan Ferry Terminal. Sound levels for impact installation of 48-
inch steel piles were obtained by Austin et al. (2016) during the 
installation of test piles at the Port of Anchorage. Overall median 
levels were not reported for peak and single strike SEL values. 
Therefore, the highest values reported for peak and single strike SEL 
were used. The highest levels reported were a peak of 213.2 dB re: 1 
[mu]Pa at 14 m and a single strike SEL of 186.7 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa2-sec on 
pile IP5 at

[[Page 12417]]

11 m (Austin et al. 2016). Sound source levels for 48-inch piles are 
used as a proxy to calculate harassment isopleths for 36-inch piles.
    DTH pile installation includes drilling (non-impulsive sound) and 
hammering (impulsive sound) to penetrate rocky substrates (Denes et al. 
2016; Denes et al. 2019; Reyff and Heyvaert 2019). DTH pile 
installation was initially thought be a primarily non-impulsive noise 
source. However, Denes et al.(2019) concluded from their study in 
Virginia that DTH should be characterized as impulsive based on a >3 dB 
difference in sound pressure level in a 0.035-second window (Southall 
et al. 2007) compared to a 1-second window. Therefore, DTH pile 
installation is treated as both an impulsive and non-impulsive noise 
source. In order to evaluate Level A harassment, DTH pile installation 
activities are evaluated according to the impulsive criteria and the 
User Spreadsheet may be employed. Level B harassment isopleths are 
determined by applying non-impulsive criteria and using the 120 dB 
threshold which is also used for vibratory driving. This approach 
ensures that the largest ranges to effect for both Level A and Level B 
harassment are accounted for in the take estimation process.
    The source level employed to derive Level B harassment isopleths 
for DTH pile installation (socketing) of all pile sizes was derived 
from the Denes et al. (2016) study at Kodiak, Alaska. The reported 
median source value for drilling was determined to be 166.2 dB RMS.
    For DTH anchoring of 12-inch holes, COK used a sound source level 
from 18-inch piles from Guan and Miner (2020) as a proxy (146 dB SEL) 
for Level A harassment calculations. For DTH installation of 30 and 36-
inch sockets, source levels from 42-inch holes from Reyff & Heyvaert 
(2019), Reyff (2020), and Denes et al. (2019) were employed.

   Table 5--Estimates of Mean Underwater Sound Levels Generated During Vibratory Pile Removal, Vibratory Pile
                        Installation, Impact Pile Installation, and DTH Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Sound source level at 10 meters
         Method and pile type          ------------------------------------------------     Literature source
                                            SPL rms          SPLPK           SSSEL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Vibratory Hammer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-inch steel piles...................           161.9  ..............  ..............  Denes et al. 2016.
36-and 48-inch steel piles............           168.2  ..............  ..............  Austin et al. 2016.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Impact Hammer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-inch diameters.....................             195           208.5           180.7  Denes et al. 2016.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36- and 48-inch \1\...................           198.6       213.2 \2\       186.7 \3\  Austin et al. 2016.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              DTH Pile Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH Sockets (48-inch) \4\.............           166.2  ..............             168  Extrapolated from DTH
                                                                                         SSV studies listed
                                                                                         below; Denes et al.
                                                                                         (2016).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH Sockets (30-, 36-inch) \4\........           166.2             194             164  Reyff & Heyvaert (2019);
                                                                                         Reyff (2020); Denes et
                                                                                         al. (2016, Denes et al.
                                                                                         2019).
DTH Anchors (12-inch) \5\.............             162             172             146  Guan and Miner (2020).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sound source levels for 48-inch piles are used as a proxy to calculate harassment isopleths for 36-inch
  piles.
\2\ Represents maximum value measured at 14 m.
\3\ Represents maximum value measured at 11 m.
\4\ DTH drilling source levels for 24-inch piles from Denes et al. (2016) was used as a proxy for 30-inch to 48-
  inch piles. SL was revised to 166.2 dB from 166 dB utilized in notice of proposed IHA to more accurately
  reflect averaged results of DTH installation of 30-, 36- and 48-inch piles from Reyff & Heyvaert (2019); Reyff
  (2020); Denes et al. (2019).
\5\ The pile/hole size from Guan and Miner (2020) measured 18-inches and anchor holes for COK will be 12-inches.
  Therefore, it is more accurate to use the 18-inch SL as the proxy sound source level for 12-inch anchors.
SS SEL = single strike sound exposure level; dB peak = peak sound level; rms = root mean square.

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, which may result in some degree of 
overestimate of Level A harassment take. 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 impact 
driving, vibratory driving and DTH pile installation example from 
project, NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the distance at which, if a 
marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the 
activity, it would incur PTS.
    Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet (Table 6) and the resulting 
isopleths are reported below (Table 7). Level A harassment thresholds 
for impulsive sound sources (impact pile driving, DTH pile 
installation) are defined for both SELcum and Peak SPL, with the 
threshold that results in the largest modeled isopleth for each marine 
mammal hearing group used to establish the effective Level A harassment 
isopleth. Note that the peak SPL for DTH installation of 48-inch piles 
is unknown as no sound source verification testing has been conducted

[[Page 12418]]

on piles of that size. The single strike SEL was extrapolated using 
data points measured for smaller piles during DTH installation. In this 
project, Level A harassment isopleths based on SELcum were always 
larger than those based on Peak SPL.

                                   Table 6--Parameters of Pile Driving and Drilling Activity Used in User Spreadsheet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Vibratory  pile                                                                   DTH sockets
                                    driver        Vibratory  pile                      Impact  pile   ----------------------------------
                                (installation/        driver         Impact  pile     driver  (36 and                                    DTH anchor  (12-
        Equipment type          removal of 30-   (installation of  driver  (30-inch    48-inch steel                                        inch steel
                                  inch steel      36 and 48-inch     steel piles)         piles)        30-, 36-in \1\       48-in          piles) \2\
                                    piles)         steel piles)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Level.................  161.9 RMS.......  168.2 RMS.......  180.7 SS SEL....  186.7 SS SEL....  164 SS SEL/194   168 SS SEL.....  146 SS SEL/172
                                                                                                        SPLpk.                            SPLpk.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighting Factor Adjustment    2.5.............  2.5.............  2...............  2...............                  2                 2.
 (kHz).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Activity duration (time)   (a) Up to 6 hrs   (a) Up to 6 hrs   (a) 1-10 minutes  (a) 1-10 minutes  (a) Up to 3 hrs  (a) Up to 2 hrs  (a) Up to 6 hrs
 within 24 hours.               OR >6-8 hrs(c)    OR >6-8 hrs (c)   (b) Up to 500     (b) Up to 500     OR >3-6 hrs.     OR >2-3 hrs OR   OR >6-8 hrs.
                                1.                1.                strikes (c) 1.    strikes (c) 1.                     >3-4 hrs.
(b) Number of strikes per      ................  ................  (a) >10-20        (a) >10-20        (b) 10 strike/   (b) 10 strike/   (b) 10 strikes/
 pile (impact) OR number of                                         minutes.          minutes.          sec.             sec.             sec.
 strikes per second (DTH).                                         (b) 501-1,000     (b) 501-1,000
                                                                    strikes (c) 1.    strikes (c) 1.
(c) Number of piles per day..  ................  ................  (a) >20-30        (a) >20-30        (c) 1..........  (c) 1..........  (c) 1.
                                                                    minutes (b)       minutes (b)
                                                                    1,001-1,500       1,001-1,500
                                                                    strikes (c) 1.    strikes (c) 1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Propagation (xLogR)..........  15..............  15..............  15..............  15..............                 15                 15.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance of source level       10..............  10..............  10..............  11..............                 10                 10.
 measurement (meters).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ DTH drilling source levels for 42-inch piles from Reyff and Heyvaert (2019), (Reyff 2020), and Denes et al. (2019) were used as a proxy for 30- and
  36-inch piles.
\2\ DTH drilling source levels for 18-inch piles from Guan and Miner (2020) were used as a proxy for 12-inch piles.


     Table 7--Calculated Distances to Level A Harassment Isopleths (m) During Vibratory Pile Installation/Removal, Impact Installation and DTH Pile
                                                           Installation for Each Hearing Group
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           PTS onset isopleth (m)
                                                                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Source                                Daily duration                              Cetaceans                           Pinnipeds
                                                                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Low-frequency   Mid-frequency   High-frequency    Phocid    Otariid
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-inch Vibratory (Installation or Removal)...  Up to 6 hours....................            25.9             2.3             38.3       15.7        1.1
                                                7 to 8 hours.....................            31.4             2.8             46.4       19.1        1.3
36- and 48-inch Vibratory.....................  Up to 6 hours....................            68.1               6            100.7       41.4        2.9
                                                7 to 8 hours.....................            82.5             7.3              122       50.1        3.5
Down-the-Hole Socket (30-, 36-inch)...........  Up to 3 hours....................         1,225.6            43.6          1,459.9      655.9       47.8
                                                4 to 6 hours.....................         1,945.5            69.3          2,317.4    1,041.2       75.8
Down-the-Hole Socket (48-inch)................  Up to 2..........................         1,728.3            61.5          2,058.7      924.9       67.3
                                                >2 to 3 hours....................         2,264.8            80.5          2,697.7      1,212       88.2
                                                >3 to 4 hours....................         2,743.6            97.6            3,268    1,468.2      106.9
Down the Hole Anchor (12-inch)................  Up to 6 hours....................           122.8             4.4            146.2       65.7        4.8
                                                7 to 8 hours.....................           148.7             5.3            177.1       79.6        5.8
30-inch Diesel Impact.........................  Up to 500 strikes (1-10 minutes).             442            15.7            526.4      236.5       17.2
                                                501-1,000 strikes (11-20 minutes)           701.6              25            835.7      375.4       27.3
                                                1,001-1,500 strikes (21-30                  919.3            32.7            1,095        492       35.8
                                                 minutes).
36- and 48-inch Diesel Impact.................  Up to 500 strikes (1-10 minutes).         1,221.2            43.4          1,454.6      653.5       47.9
                                                501-1,000 strikes (11-20 minutes)         1,938.5            68.9            2,309    1,037.4       75.5

[[Page 12419]]

 
                                                1,001-1,500 strikes (21-30                2,540.1            90.3          3,025.7    1,359.4         99
                                                 minutes).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Level B Harassment Zones

    Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an 
acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary 
with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and 
receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition 
and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is:

TL = B * Log10 (R1/R2),

Where

TL = transmission loss in dB
B = transmission loss coefficient; for practical spreading equals 15
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial measurement

    The recommended TL coefficient for most nearshore environments is 
the, practical spreading value of 15. This value results in an expected 
propagation environment that would lie between spherical and 
cylindrical spreading loss conditions, which is the most appropriate 
assumption for COK's planned activity.
    Using the practical spreading model, COK determined underwater 
noise would fall below the behavioral effects threshold of 120 dB rms 
for marine mammals at a maximum radial distance of 16,343 m for 
vibratory pile driving of 36 and 48-inch diameter piles. Other 
activities, including rock anchoring and impact pile driving, have 
smaller Level B harassment zones. All Level B harassment isopleths are 
reported in Table 8 below. It should be noted that based on the 
geography of Tongass Narrows and the surrounding islands, sound will 
not reach the full distance of the Level B harassment isopleth. The 
largest Level B Harassment isopleth will be truncated by land masses at 
approximately 12,500 m to the southeast and approximately 3,590 m 
northwest of the project area. Constraining land masses include 
Revillagigedo Island, Gravina Island, Pennock Island and Spire Island.

            Table 8--Calculated Level B Harassment Isopleths
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Behavioral
                                                            disturbance
                         Source                            isopleth  (m)
                                                              120 dB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-inch Vibratory (Installation or Removal).............           6,213
36- and 48-inch Vibratory...............................          16,343
DTH installation \1\ (Socket)...........................          12,023
DTH installation (anchor) \2\...........................           6,310
30-inch Diesel Impact...................................           2,154
36- and 48-inch Diesel Impact...........................           3,744
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SL of 166.2 dB was used for socket installation instead of 166 as
  used in notice of proposed IHA.
\2\ SL of 162 dB (Guan and Miner 2020) was used for 12-inch anchor
  installation.

Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation

    In this section we provide the information about the presence, 
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take 
calculations. Note that there is no density data for any of the species 
near the Berth III mooring dolphin project area, therefore the take 
estimate is informed by qualitative data.
    The number of marine mammals that may be exposed to harassment 
thresholds is calculated by estimating the likelihood of a marine 
mammal being present within a harassment zone during the associated 
activities. Estimated marine mammal abundance is determined by 
reviewing local and regional reports, surveys, permits and observations 
of abundance and frequency near the planned project action. For 
example, for species that are common with the potential to occur daily, 
the take calculations are based on the group size multiplied by the 
projected number of days of underwater noise activities. For species 
that are less common, take estimates are based on group size multiplied 
by the frequency (e.g. weekly, monthly). The estimated number of takes 
are based upon reasonable ranges from the best information currently 
available for these species near the project area.
    Authorization of Level A harassment takes was requested by COK for 
harbor seal, harbor porpoise, and Dall's porpoise. Harbor seals are 
habituated to fishing vessels and may follow vessels that enter the 
marina. Dall's and harbor porpoises' small size and speed make it 
possible that these animals could occur within the Level A harassment 
zones and potentially incur injury prior to detection.
Humpback Whale
    Humpback whales occur frequently in Tongass Narrows and the 
adjacent Clarence Strait during summer and fall months to feed, but are 
less common during winter and spring. The average group size during the 
fall surveys was two whales according to Dalheim et al. (2009). Local 
reports of humpback whale group size in Tongass Narrows are similar, 
with the typical size being between 1 and 3. During the spring months, 
humpback whales tend to congregate in areas outside of the Ketchikan 
area, such as Lynn Canal and Fredrick Sound. Therefore, it is assumed 
that the occurrence of humpback whales in the project area is two 
individuals twice per week throughout the project. A group size of two 
was also assumed in the Biological Opinion provided to the US Army Corp 
of Engineers (USACE) for the Alaska Department of Transportation & 
Public Ferries (ADOT&PF) Berth improvement project in Tongass Narrows 
(NMFS 2019).
    In the notice of proposed IHA (85 FR 71612; November 12, 2020) NMFS 
estimated that up to 2 individuals could be exposed to underwater noise 
twice a week during the 17 weeks of the project's in-water work, for a 
total of 68 incidents of take from the Central North Pacific stock. 
Wade et al. (2016) determined that 6.1 percent of all humpback whales 
in Southeast Alaska and northern British Columbia were members of the 
Mexico DPS, while all others are assumed to be members of the Hawaii 
DPS. Therefore, NMFS had proposed to authorize 68 incidents of take by 
Level B harassment from the Central North Pacific Stock with 64

[[Page 12420]]

instances from the Hawaii DPS and four instances from the endangered 
Mexico DPS. However, NMFS has increased authorized take by Level B 
harassment due to the daily presence of a single humpback whale close 
to Ketchikan during the month of November (USA Today, December 1, 
2020). NMFS assumed that one whale would be present in the project area 
daily throughout the duration of the project. Based on the recent 
occurrence information, we estimate that one humpback whale will be 
within the Level B harassment zone daily for 17 weeks.
    Therefore:

(7 x 17) = 119 exposures of Central North Pacific stock humpback whales 
to Level B harassment

    As described above, an estimated 6.1 percent of humpback whales in 
Southeast Alaska are from the Mexico DPS (Wade et al. 2016). Therefore, 
of the 119 animals potentially exposed to Level B harassment due to 
Berth III pile driving activities, 6.1 percent or 7 of these 119 
exposures would be ESA-listed Mexico DPS humpback whales, and the 
remaining 112 would most likely from the non-listed Hawaii DPS.
    Take by Level A harassment is not expected for humpback whales 
because of the expected effectiveness of the monitoring and mitigation 
measures. While calculated Level A harassment zones are up to 2,800 m, 
multiple protected species observers (PSOs) will monitoring Tongass 
Narrows which is < less than 600 m in width and represents a much 
smaller effective Level A harassment zone. Humpbacks are usually 
readily visible, therefore, shutdown measures can be implemented prior 
to any humpback whales incurring PTS within Level A harassment zones.
Steller Sea Lion
    Steller sea lion abundance in the Tongass Narrows area is not well 
known and no systematic studies of Steller sea lions have been 
conducted in or near the Tongass Narrows area. However, sea lions are 
known to occur in the Tongass Narrows area throughout the year with 
peak numbers March through September (ADOT 2019). Sea lions may be 
present during salmon and herring runs and are known to visit 
hatcheries and fish processing facilities in the vicinity.
    Group sizes are generally 6 to 10 individuals (Freitag 2017) but 
have been reported to reach 80 animals (Freitag 2017). COK assumed one 
large group of 10 individuals could be present each day in the project 
vicinity based on HDR (2019) and Freitag (2017) (as cited in 83 FR 
22009; May 11, 2018). NMFS agrees that this daily estimate is 
appropriate and therefore has authorized up to 1,200 takes by Level B 
harassment.
    Take by Level A harassment is not expected for Steller sea lions 
because of the relatively small Level A harassment zones for otariids 
(Table 7) and the expected effectiveness of the monitoring and 
mitigation measures discussed below.
Harbor Seal
    Harbor seal densities in the Tongass Narrows area are not well 
known. No systematic studies of harbor seals have been conducted in or 
near Tongass Narrows. Seals are known to occur year-round with little 
seasonal variation in abundance (Freitag 2017) and local experts 
estimate that there are about 1 to 3 harbor seals in Tongass Narrows 
every day, in addition to those that congregate near the seafood 
processing plants and fish hatcheries. COK conducted pinnacle rock 
blasting in December 2019 and January 2020 near the vicinity of the 
planned project and recorded a total of 21 harbor seal sightings of 24 
individuals over 76.2 hours of pre- and post-blast monitoring 
(Sitkiewicz 2020). Harbor seals were observed in groups ranging from 1-
3 animals throughout the 0.70-mile (1.12-kilometer) observation zone. 
Based on this knowledge, COK assumed an average group size in Tongass 
Narrows of three individuals. They anticipated that three groups of 
three harbor seals per group could be exposed to project-related 
underwater noise each day for 120 days of in-water work. Given that 
harbor seals are known to follow fishing vessels into the marina and 
may be difficult to detect, COK assumed that one group of three seals 
could be taken by Level A harassment daily, resulting in 360 Level A 
harassment takes. NMFS agreed with these assumptions and, therefore, 
has authorized 720 takes by Level B harassment and 360 takes by Level A 
harassment.
Dall's Porpoise
    The mean group size of Dall's porpoise in Southeast Alaska is 
estimated at approximately three individuals (Dahlheim et al., 2009; 
Jefferson et al., 2019). However, in the Ketchikan vicinity, Dall's 
porpoises are reported to typically occur in groups of 10-15 animals, 
with an estimated maximum group size of 20 animals (Freitag 2017, as 
cited in 83 FR 22009, May 11, 2018). Overall, sightings of Dall's 
porpoise are infrequent near Ketchikan, but they could be present on 
any given day during the construction period.
    COK assumed that a maximum group size of 20 Dall's porpoise could 
occur in the project area each month. NMFS concurs with this assessment 
and has authorized 80 takes of Dall's porpoise over the anticipated 
four-month project duration.
    Given the large size of the Level A harassment zone associated with 
impact pile driving for high-frequency cetaceans, it is possible Dall's 
porpoises may enter the Level A harassment zone undetected. Therefore, 
NMFS has authorized a total of 60 takes of Dall's porpoise by Level B 
harassment and 20 takes by Level A harassment over the course of the 
project.
Harbor Porpoise
    Harbor porpoises are non-migratory; therefore, occurrence estimates 
are not dependent on season. Freitag (2017 as cited in 83 FR 37473; 
August 1, 2018) observed harbor porpoises in Tongass Narrows zero to 
one time per month. Harbor porpoises observed in the project vicinity 
typically occur in groups of one to five animals with an estimated 
maximum group size of eight animals (83 FR 37473, August 1, 2018, 
Solstice 2018). Based on this previous information from the Ketchikan 
Berth IV Expansion project and the AKDOT Tongass Narrows project, COK 
estimated that two groups of five harbor porpoise may enter the Tongass 
Narrows twice per month. NMFS agrees with this estimate and, therefore, 
has authorized 80 takes of harbor porpoise during the duration of the 
project.
    Given that harbor porpoises are stealthy, having no visible blow 
and a low profile in the water making the species difficult for 
monitors to detect (Dahlheim et al. 2015), COK requested that a total 
of 20 takes of harbor porpoises by Level A harassment be authorized. 
Therefore, NMFS has authorized 20 takes of harbor porpoise by Level A 
harassment and 60 takes by Level B harassment. The number of proposed 
takes in the proposed IHA (40) was incorrect due to a mathematical 
error.
Killer Whale
    Typical pod sizes observed within the project vicinity range from 1 
to 10 animals. COK assumed that the frequency of killer whales passing 
through the action area is estimated to be once per month and also 
conservatively assumed a pod size of 10.
    Therefore, NMFS has authorized 40 takes of killer whales by Level B 
harassment.

[[Page 12421]]

    Take by Level A harassment is not expected for killer whales 
because of the small Level A harassment zones for mid-frequency 
cetaceans and the expected effectiveness of the monitoring and 
mitigation measures discussed below.
Gray Whale
    Gray whales have not been reported within the Tongass Narrows; 
however, their presence cannot be entirely discounted. Since the 
largest Level B harassment zone extends beyond Tongass Narrows, COK 
assumed that up to two gray whales may be taken per month. Therefore, 
NMFS has authorized up to 8 takes of gray whale by Level B harassment.
    Due to the unlikely occurrence of gray whales and the ability to 
shut down pile driving activities prior to a whale entering the Level A 
harassment zone, no Level A harassment takes of gray whales were 
requested or are authorized.
Minke Whale
    There are no known occurrences of minke whales within the project 
area although they may be present in Tongass Narrows and Clarence 
Strait year-round. Their abundance throughout Southeast Alaska is low. 
However, minke whales are distributed throughout a wide variety of 
habitats and could occur near the project area. Minke whales are 
generally sighted as individuals (Dahlheim et al. 2009).
    NMFS had proposed to authorize two minke whale takes by Level B 
harassment in the proposed IHA. However, based on an informal comment 
from the Commission, NMFS has increased to eight the authorized take of 
minke whales (two takes per month) since they are at least if not more 
likely to occur in Tongass Narrows compared to gray whales, which have 
never been observed in Tongass Narrows. No Level A harassment takes of 
minke whales are anticipated due to the very limited occurrence of 
minke whales and the ability to shut down pile driving activities prior 
to a whale entering the Level A harassment zone.

Pacific White-Sided Dolphin

    Pacific white-sided dolphins have not been reported within the 
Tongass Narrows; however, the dolphin is within its range and thus its 
presence cannot be discounted. Pacific white-sided dolphin group sizes 
generally range from between 20 and 164 animals. For the purposes of 
this assessment, COK assumed one group of 30 dolphins may be present 
within the Level B harassment zone every tenth day, or about every 
other week, similar to what was estimated for a prior IHA (84 FR 36891; 
July 30, 2019). Therefore, NMFS has authorized 360 takes of Pacific 
white-sided dolphin by Level B harassment.
    No Level A takes are expected due to the relatively small size of 
Level A harassment zone for mid-frequency cetaceans which can be 
readily monitored.
    Table 9 below summarizes the authorized take for all the species 
described above as a percentage of stock abundance.

           Table 9--Authorized Take by Level A and B Harassment and as a Percentage of Stock Abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Stock        Percent of
                     Species                      Level B  takes  Level A  takes     abundance         stock
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale \1\..............................             119             N/A          10,103            1.18
Steller sea lion eDPS...........................           1,200             N/A          43,201            2.78
Harbor seal.....................................             720             360          27,659            3.90
Dall's porpoise.................................              60              20          83,400            0.09
Harbor porpoise.................................              60              20           1,354            5.90
Killer whale \2\
    AK resident.................................              40             N/A           2,347            1.70
    West coast transient........................  ..............  ..............             243           16.46
    Northern resident...........................  ..............  ..............             302           13.25
    Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian Islands, and Bering  ..............  ..............             587            6.81
     Sea transient..............................
Gray whale......................................               8             N/A          26,960            0.03
Pacific white-sided Dolphin.....................             360             N/A          26,880            1.34
Minke whale.....................................               8             N/A             N/A             N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Assumes that 6.1 percent of humpback whales exposed are members of the Mexico DPS (Wade et al. 2016).
  Distribution of take by ESA status is 112 Level B takes for Hawaii DPS and 7 Level B take for Mexico DPS.
\2\ These percentages assume all takes come from the same killer whale stock, thus the percentage should be
  adjusted down if multiple stocks are actually affected.

Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to the 
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on 
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to 
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on 
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain 
subsistence uses. NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental 
take authorizations to include information about the availability and 
feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and 
manner of conducting the activity or other means of effecting the least 
practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and 
their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and 
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, 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, as 
well as subsistence uses. This considers the nature of the potential 
adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further 
considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if 
implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if 
implemented as planned), the likelihood of effective implementation 
(probability implemented as planned), and;
    (2) The practicability of the measures for applicant 
implementation, which

[[Page 12422]]

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.
    The following mitigation measures are required for this IHA:
    <bullet> For in-water heavy machinery work 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. This type of work could include 
the following activities: (1) Movement of the barge to the pile 
location; or (2) positioning of the pile on the substrate via a crane 
(i.e., stabbing the pile);
    <bullet> Briefings must be conducted between construction 
supervisors and crews and the marine mammal monitoring team prior to 
the start of all pile driving activity and when new personnel join the 
work, to explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine 
mammal monitoring protocol, and operational procedures;
    <bullet> For those marine mammals for which take has not been 
authorized, in-water pile installation and removal will shut down 
immediately if such species are observed within or entering the Level A 
or Level B harassment zone; and
    <bullet> If take reaches the authorized limit for an authorized 
species, pile installation and removal will be stopped as these species 
approach the Level A or Level B harassment zone to avoid additional 
take.
    <bullet> COK is required to implement all mitigation measures 
described in the biological opinion (issued on DATE).
    The following mitigation measures would apply to COK's in-water 
construction activities.
    <bullet> Establishment of Shutdown Zones--COK will establish 
shutdown zones for all pile driving and removal activities. The purpose 
of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within which shutdown 
of the activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in 
anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). Shutdown zones 
will vary based on the activity type and marine mammal hearing group 
(Table 10). Due to sediment characteristics and variation in pile 
sizes, COK does not know how much time will be required for vibratory 
driving/removal and DTH installation at each pile or how many strikes 
will be required for impact installation. Given this uncertainty, COK 
will utilize a tiered system to identify and monitor appropriate 
shutdown zones based on activity duration or the number of strikes 
required for pile installation or removal. During vibratory driving/
removal and DTH pile installation, the shutdown zone size will 
initially be set at the lowest tier, which represents the least amount 
of active installation/removal time. Shutdown zones will be expanded to 
the next largest zone after Tier 1 time period has elapsed. For those 
activities with three specified tiers (i.e., impact driving, DTH 
socketing), the shutdown zone will be expanded to the largest isopleths 
identified in Tier 3 if the activity extends beyond the Tier 2 active 
time period. During impact driving, the shutdown zones associated with 
0-500 strikes will be monitored until 500 strikes have occurred. The 
shutdown zones will increase to the next tier between 501-1,000 
strikes. After 1,000 strikes the shutdown zones will subsequently be 
increased to the largest zone sizes.
    <bullet> If a marine mammal is entering or is observed within an 
established shutdown zone, pile driving must be halted or delayed. Pile 
driving may not commence or resume until either the animal has 
voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone 
or 15 minutes have passed without subsequent detections of small 
cetaceans and pinnipeds; or 30 minutes have passed without subsequent 
detections of large cetaceans.
    <bullet> The placement of PSOs during all pile driving and removal 
activities (described in detail in the Monitoring and Reporting 
section) will ensure that the entire shutdown zone is visible during 
pile installation. Should environmental conditions deteriorate such 
that marine mammals within the entire shutdown zone would not be 
visible (e.g., fog, heavy rain), pile driving and removal must be 
delayed until the PSO is confident marine mammals within the shutdown 
zone could be detected.
    <bullet> PSOs--COK will employ PSOs who will be able to fully 
monitor Level A harassment zones. Placement of PSOs will allow 
observation of marine mammals within the large segments of the Level B 
harassment zones. However, due to the large size of some of the Level B 
harassment zones (Table 8), PSOs will not be able to effectively 
observe the entire zone.
    <bullet> Pre-activity Monitoring--Prior to the start of daily in-
water construction activity, or whenever a break in pile driving/
removal of 30 minutes or longer occurs, PSOs will observe the shutdown 
and monitoring zones for a period of 30 minutes. The shutdown zone will 
be considered cleared when a marine mammal has not been observed within 
the zone for that 30-minute period. If a marine mammal is observed 
within the shutdown zone, a soft-start cannot proceed until the animal 
has left the zone or has not been observed for 15 minutes. When a 
marine mammal for which take is authorized is present in the harassment 
zone, activities may begin. If work ceases for more than 30 minutes, 
the pre-activity monitoring of the shutdown zones will commence.
    <bullet> Soft Start--Soft-start procedures are believed to provide 
additional protection to marine mammals by providing warning and/or 
giving marine mammals a chance to leave the area prior to the hammer 
operating at full capacity. For impact pile driving, COK will be 
required to provide an initial set of three strikes from the hammer at 
reduced energy, followed by a thirty-second waiting period. This 
procedure will be conducted three times before impact pile driving 
begins. Soft start will 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.
    <bullet> Scheduling--Pile driving or removal activities must occur 
during daylight hours. If poor environmental conditions restrict 
visibility of the shutdown zones (e.g., from excessive wind or fog, 
high Beaufort state), pile installation may not be initiated. Work that 
has begun with a fully cleared Level B harassment zone may continue 
during inclement weather (e.g., fog, heavy rain) or periods of limited 
visibility.

[[Page 12423]]



                                        Table 10--Shutdown and Monitoring Zones for Each Driving/Removal Activity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               High
                                                                                             frequency        Phocid          Otariid
                                                           Low frequency   Mid frequency   shutdown area     pinniped        pinniped         Level B
                        Pile size                            cetacean        cetacean       (m) (harbor    shutdown area   shutdown area    harassment
                                                           shutdown area   shutdown area     porpoise,      (m) (harbor    (m) (steller      zone (m)
                                                                (m)             (m)           dall's           seal)         sea lion)
                                                                                           porpoise) \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Pile Driving/Removal:
                                                                                                         --------------------------------
30-inch piles up to 8 hrs...............................              40              10              50                10                         6,300
36- and 48-inch piles up to 8 hrs.......................              90              10              50                10                    \1\ 12,500
                                                                                                         --------------------------------
Impact Pile Driving:
30-inch piles up to 500 strikes.........................             500              40              50              10              40           2,200
30-inch piles 501 to 1,000 strikes......................             700
30-inch piles 1,001 to 1,500 strikes....................           1,000
36- and 48-inch piles up to 500 strikes.................           1,300              50              50              10              50           3,800
36- and 48-inch piles 501 to 1,000 strikes..............           2,000              70                                              80
36- and 48-inch piles 1,001 to 1,500 strikes............           2,600              90                                             100
DTH Socket:
30-, 36-inch piles up to 3 hrs..........................           1,300              50              50              10              50          12,500
30-, 36-inch piles 3 hrs--6 hrs.........................           2,000              70
48-inch piles up to 2 hours.............................           1,750              65                                              70
48-inch piles >2 to 3 hrs...............................           2,300              85                                             100
48-inch piles >3 to 4 hours.............................           2,750             100                                             110
DTH Anchor:
                                                                                                         --------------------------------
12-inch hole up to 8 hours..............................             150              10              50                10                         6,350
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Represents largest Level B Harassment isopleth. Note that isopleth is truncated by land masses at 12,500 meters.

    To minimize impacts to marine mammals and their prey vibratory 
installation will be used as the primary methods of pile installation. 
Impact driving will be minimized and used only as needed to seat the 
pile in its final position or to penetrate material that is too dense 
for a vibratory hammer.
    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's planned measures, as 
well as other measures considered by NMFS, we have determined that the 
required 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 
planned 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

    Monitoring must be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30 
minutes after pile driving and removal activities. In addition, 
observers shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, 
regardless of distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral 
reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven or removed. 
Marine mammal monitoring during pile driving and removal must be 
conducted by NMFS-approved PSOs in a manner consistent with the 
following:
    <bullet> Independent PSOs (i.e., not construction personnel) who 
have no other assigned tasks during monitoring periods must be used;
    <bullet> At least one PSO must have prior experience performing the 
duties of a PSO during construction activity pursuant to a NMFS-issued 
incidental take authorization;
    <bullet> Other PSOs may substitute education (degree in biological 
science or related field) or training for experience;
    <bullet> Where a team of two or more PSOs are required, a lead 
observer or monitoring coordinator must be designated. The lead 
observer must have prior experience working as a marine mammal observer 
during construction;
    <bullet> COK must submit PSO Curriculum Vitae for approval by NMFS 
prior to the onset of pile driving;

[[Page 12424]]

    <bullet> PSOs must work in rotating shifts of 4 hours and 
individual PSOs must not perform duties for more than 12 hours in a 24-
hour period; and
    <bullet> PSOs must use elevated platforms at observation points to 
the extent practicable.
    PSOs should have the following additional qualifications:
    <bullet> Ability to conduct field observations and collect data 
according to assigned protocols;
    <bullet> Experience or training in the field identification of 
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
    <bullet> Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations;
    <bullet> Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of 
observations including but not limited to the number and species of 
marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction 
activities were conducted; dates, times, and reason for implementation 
of mitigation (or why mitigation was not implemented when required); 
and marine mammal behavior; and
    <bullet> Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with 
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals 
observed in the area as necessary.
    A minimum of three onshore observers will be stationed along 
Tongass Narrows at locations that provide optimal visual coverage for 
shutdown and monitoring zones. To maximize the visual coverage of 
shutdown and monitoring zones, observers will use elevated platforms at 
observation points to the extent practicable. Observers will be in 
contact with each other via two-way radio and with a cellular phone 
used as back-up communications. The primary purpose of this observer is 
to implement the shutdown zones and monitor the Level B harassment 
zones. PSOs must be positioned in order to focus on monitoring these 
zones. PSOs would scan the waters using binoculars, and/or spotting 
scopes, and would use a handheld global positioning system (GPS) or 
range-finder device to verify the distance to each sighting from the 
project site.
    Monitoring will be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30 
minutes after pile driving/removal activities. In addition, observers 
shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of 
distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in 
concert with distance from piles being driven or removed. Pile driving 
activities include the time to install or remove a single pile or 
series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile 
driving equipment is no more than 30 minutes.

Reporting

    A draft marine mammal monitoring report would be submitted to NMFS 
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal 
activities, or 60 days prior to a requested date of issuance of any 
future IHAs for projects at the same location, whichever comes first. 
It will include an overall description of work completed, a narrative 
regarding marine mammal sightings, and associated marine mammal 
observation data sheets. Specifically, the report must include:
    <bullet> Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal 
monitoring;
    <bullet> Construction activities occurring during each daily 
observation period, including how many and what type of piles were 
driven or removed and by what method (i.e., impact or vibratory);
    <bullet> Weather parameters and water conditions during each 
monitoring period (e.g., wind speed, percent cover, visibility, sea 
state) and estimated observable distance (if less than the harassment 
zone distance).
    <bullet> The number of marine mammals observed, by species, 
relative to the pile location and if pile driving or removal was 
occurring at time of sighting;
    <bullet> Age and sex class, if possible, of all marine mammals 
observed;
    <bullet> PSO locations during marine mammal monitoring;
    <bullet> Distances and bearings of each marine mammal observed to 
the pile being driven or removed for each sighting (if pile driving or 
removal was occurring at time of sighting);
    <bullet> Description of any marine mammal behavior patterns during 
observation, including direction of travel and estimated time spent 
within the Level A and Level B harassment zones while the source was 
active;
    <bullet> Number of individuals of each species (differentiated by 
month as appropriate) detected within the harassment zones,;
    <bullet> Detailed information about any implementation of any 
mitigation triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a description of 
specific actions that ensued, and resulting behavior of the animal, if 
any;
    <bullet> Description of attempts to distinguish between the number 
of individual animals taken and the number of incidences of take, such 
as ability to track groups or individuals; and
    <bullet> Submit all PSO datasheets and/or raw sighting data (in a 
separate file from the Final Report referenced immediately above).
    If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft 
final report will constitute the final report. If comments are 
received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted 
within 30 days after receipt of comments.

Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals

    In the event that personnel involved in the construction activities 
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the IHA-holder shall report 
the incident to the Office of Protected Resources (OPR) (301-427-8401), 
NMFS and to the Alaska regional stranding coordinator (907-586-7209) as 
soon as feasible. If the death or injury was clearly caused by the 
specified activity, the IHA-holder must immediately cease the specified 
activities until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the 
incident and determine what, if any, additional measures are 
appropriate to ensure compliance with the terms of the IHA. The IHA-
holder must not resume their activities until notified by NMFS.
    The report must include the following information:
    <bullet> Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first 
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
    <bullet> Species identification (if known) or description of the 
animal(s) involved;
    <bullet> Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if 
the animal is dead);
    <bullet> Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
    <bullet> If available, photographs or video footage of the 
animal(s); and
    <bullet> General circumstances under which the animal was 
discovered.

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the 
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not 
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough 
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to 
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be 
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the 
likely nature

[[Page 12425]]

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).
    Vibratory pile removal, vibratory pile driving, impact pile 
driving, and DTH pile installation have the potential to disturb or 
displace marine mammals. Specifically, these planned project activities 
may result in take, in the form of Level A harassment and Level B 
harassment. Potential takes could occur if individuals are present in 
the ensonified zone when these activities are underway. No mortality is 
anticipated given the nature of the activity and measures designed to 
minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals.
    The Level A harassment zones identified in Table 7 are based upon 
an animal exposed to vibratory pile driving, impact pile driving, and 
DTH pile installation for periods of time ranging from 30 minutes for 
impact driving, up to 8 hours for vibratory driving, up to 6 hours for 
DTH socketing and 8 hours for DTH anchoring. Exposures of this length 
are unlikely for vibratory driving/removal and DTH pile installation 
scenarios given marine mammal movement throughout the area. Even during 
impact driving scenarios, an animal exposed to the accumulated sound 
energy would likely experience only limited PTS at the lower 
frequencies where pile driving energy is concentrated.
    Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving at the 
project site, if any, are expected to be mild and temporary. Given that 
the installation of 12 permanent piles and eight temporary piles would 
occur over 4 months, any harassment would be temporary and 
intermittent. Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B 
harassment, on the basis of reports in the literature as well as 
monitoring from other similar activities, will likely be limited to 
reactions such as increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, 
or decreased foraging (if such activity were occurring) (Southall et 
al. 2007, ABR 2016). Most likely, individuals will simply move away 
from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the areas of 
pile driving. These reactions and behavioral changes are expected to 
subside quickly when the exposures cease.
    The potential for harassment is minimized through the 
implementation of the required mitigation measures. During all impact 
driving, implementation of soft start procedures and monitoring of 
established shutdown zones shall be required, significantly reducing 
any possibility of injury. Given sufficient notice through use of soft 
start (for impact driving), marine mammals are expected to move away 
from an irritating sound source prior to it becoming potentially 
injurious. To reduce the severity of in-water noise, vibratory pile 
driving will be the primary installation method for the project and 
impact hammers will only be used to seat pile tips into fractured 
bedrock ahead of the hammering operations or if material is encountered 
that is too dense to penetrate with a vibratory hammer.
    The planned project is located within an active marine commercial 
and industrial area with no known pinniped haulouts or rookeries near 
the project area. While construction of mooring dolphins at Berth III 
would have some permanent removal of habitat available to marine 
mammals, the area lost is relatively small and not of particular 
importance to any marine mammals.
    Any impacts on prey that would occur during in-water construction 
would have at most short-terms effects on foraging of individual marine 
mammals, and likely no effect on the populations of marine mammals as a 
whole. Therefore, effects on marine mammal prey during the construction 
are expected to be minimal and, therefore, are unlikely to cause 
substantial effects on marine mammals at the individual or population 
level.
    In addition, it is unlikely that minor noise effects in a small, 
localized area of habitat would have any effect on the stocks' ability 
to recover. In combination, we believe that these factors, as well as 
the available body of evidence from other similar activities, 
demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified activities will 
have only minor, short-term effects on individuals. The specified 
activities are not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival 
and will therefore not result in population-level impacts.
    For all species except humpback whales, there are no known BIAs 
near the project zone that would be impacted by COK's planned 
activities. For humpback whales, the whole of Southeast Alaska is a 
seasonal BIA from spring through late fall (Ferguson et al., 2015). 
However, Tongass Narrows and Clarence Strait are not important portions 
of this habitat due to development and human presence. Tongass Narrows 
is also a small passageway and represents a very small portion of the 
total available habitat for humpback whales. Finally, there is no ESA-
designated critical habitat for humpback whales.
    In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily 
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity 
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
    <bullet> No mortality is anticipated or authorized;
    <bullet> Authorized Level A harassment would be limited and of low 
degree;
    <bullet> Mitigation measures such as employing vibratory driving to 
the maximum extent practicable, soft-starts, and shut downs will be 
implemented;
    <bullet> Impacts to marine mammal habitat are anticipated to be 
minimal;
    <bullet> The project area is located in an industrialized and 
commercial marina;
    <bullet> The project area does not include any rookeries, or known 
areas or features of special significance for foraging or reproduction; 
and
    <bullet> The anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist 
of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into 
consideration the implementation of the required monitoring and 
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from 
the planned activity will have a negligible impact on all affected 
marine mammal species or stocks.

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. When the predicted number of 
individuals to be

[[Page 12426]]

taken is fewer than one third of the species or stock abundance, the 
take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally, other 
qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the 
temporal or spatial scale of the activities.
    The number of instances of take for each species or stock 
authorized to be taken as a result of this project is included in Table 
9. Our analysis shows that less than one-third of the best available 
population abundance estimate of each species or stock could be taken 
by harassment. The number of animals authorized to be taken for each 
authorized stock would be considered small relative to the relevant 
stock's abundances even if each estimated taking occurred to a new 
individual, which is an unlikely scenario.
    The west coast transient stock of killer whales represents the 
highest percentage of a single stock (<17 percent) that is authorized 
take. This take percentage also assumes that all authorized killer 
whale takes would be from this stock, which is highly unlikely given 
the expansive range of the stock.
    A lack of an accepted stock abundance value for the Alaska stock of 
minke whale did not allow for the calculation of an expected percentage 
of the population that would be affected. The most relevant estimate of 
partial stock abundance is 1,232 minke whales in coastal waters of the 
Alaska Peninsula and Aleutian Islands (Zerbini et al., 2006). Given 
that two takes by Level B harassment are authorized for the stock, 
comparison to the best estimate of stock abundance shows less than 0.2 
percent of the stock is expected to be impacted.
    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

    In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must find that the specified 
activity will not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' on the 
subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal species or stocks by 
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined ``unmitigable adverse impact'' in 50 
CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity: (1) 
That is likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level 
insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by: (i) Causing 
the marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas; (ii) Directly 
displacing subsistence users; or (iii) Placing physical barriers 
between the marine mammals and the subsistence hunters; and (2) That 
cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to increase the 
availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs to be met.
    Alaska Native hunters in the Ketchikan vicinity do not 
traditionally harvest cetaceans (Muto et al. 2020). Harbor seals are 
the most commonly targeted marine mammal that is hunted by Alaska 
Native subsistence hunters within the Ketchikan area. In 2012 an 
estimated 595 harbor seals were taken for subsistence uses, with 22 of 
those occurring in Ketchikan (Wolfe et al. 2012). This is the most 
recent data available. The harbor seal harvest per capita in both 
communities was low, at 0.02 for Ketchikan. ADF&G subsistence data for 
Southeast Alaska shows that from 1992 through 2008, plus 2012, from 
zero to 19 Steller sea lions were taken by Alaska Native hunters per 
year with typical harvest years ranging from zero to five animals 
(Wolfe et al. 2013) In 2012, it is estimated nine sea lions were taken 
in all of Southeast Alaska and only from Hoonah and Sitka. There are no 
known haulout locations in the project area. Both the harbor seal and 
the Steller sea lion may be temporarily displaced from the action area. 
However, neither the local population nor any individual pinnipeds are 
likely to be adversely impacted by the planned action beyond noise-
induced harassment or slight injury. The planned project is anticipated 
to have no long-term impact on Steller sea lion or harbor seal 
populations, or their habitat no long term impacts on the availability 
of marine mammals for subsistence uses is anticipated.
    Based on the description of the specified activity, the measures 
described to minimize adverse effects on the availability of marine 
mammals for subsistence purposes, and the required mitigation and 
monitoring measures, NMFS has determined that there will not be an 
unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence uses from COK's planned 
activities.

National Environmental Policy Act

    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, 
NMFS must review our action (i.e., the issuance of an 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

    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 Office of Protected Resources consults internally whenever we 
propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species, in this 
case with the NMFS Alaska Regional Office.
    There is one marine mammal species (Mexico DPS humpback whale) with 
confirmed occurrence in the project area that is listed as endangered 
under the ESA. The NMFS Alaska Regional Office Protected Resources 
Division issued a Biological Opinion under section 7 of the ESA, on the 
issuance of an IHA to the City of Ketchikan under section 101(a)(5)(D) 
of the MMPA by the NMFS Permits and Conservation Division. The 
Biological Opinion concluded that the issuance of an IHA to COK is not 
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of Mexico DPS humpback 
whales or adversely modify critical habitat because none exists in the 
area.

Authorization

    NMFS has issued an IHA to the City of Ketchikan for in-water 
construction activities associated with the Berth III Expansion Project 
in Ketchikan, Alaska between October 1, 2021 and September 30, 2022, 
provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: February 26, 2021.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-04368 Filed 3-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P