Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76225 

Public Availability of Comments 

Written comments we receive become 

part of the administrative record 

associated with this action. Before 

including your address, phone number, 

email address, or other personal 

identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. All submissions from 

organizations or businesses, and from 

individuals identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses, will be 

made available for public disclosure in 

their entirety. 

Next Steps 

If we decide to issue a permit to an 

applicant listed in this notice, we will 

publish a notice in the Federal Register. 

Authority 

We publish this notice under section 

10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.). 

Nicole Rankin, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Regional Director, 

Ecological Services, Southeast Region. 

[FR Doc. 2023–24494 Filed 11–3–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2023–0101; 

FXES111607MRG01–234–FF07CAMM00] 

Marine Mammals; Incidental Take 

During Specified Activities; Proposed 

Incidental Harassment Authorization 

for Southcentral Alaska Stock of 

Northern Sea Otters in Cordova, 

Alaska; Draft Environmental 

Assessment 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of receipt of application; 

proposed incidental harassment 

authorization; draft environmental 

assessment; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, in response to a 

request under the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act of 1972, as amended, 

from the City of Cordova, Alaska, 

propose to authorize nonlethal 

incidental take by harassment of small 

numbers of the Southcentral Alaska 

stock of northern sea otters (Enhydra 

lutris kenyoni) for 1 year from the date 

of issuance of the incidental harassment 

authorization. The applicant has 

requested this authorization for take by 

harassment that may result from 

activities associated with pile driving 

and marine construction activities in 

Cordova, Alaska. We estimate that this 

project may result in the nonlethal 

incidental take by harassment of up to 

82 northern sea otters from the 

Southcentral stock. This proposed 

authorization, if finalized, will be for up 

to 30 takes of 5 northern sea otters by 

Level A harassment and 790 takes of 77 

northern sea otters by Level B 

harassment. No lethal take is requested, 

or expected, and no such take will be 

authorized. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

incidental harassment authorization and 

the accompanying draft environmental 

assessment must be received by 

December 6, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: 

Document availability: You may view 

this proposed incidental harassment 

authorization, the application package, 

supporting information, draft 

environmental assessment, and the list 

of references cited herein at https://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R7–ES–2023–0101. Alternatively, 

you may request these documents from 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Comment submission: You may 

submit comments on the proposed 

authorization by one of the following 

methods: 

• U.S. mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS–R7– 

ES–2023–0101, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, MS: PRB (JAO/3W), 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803. 

• Electronic submission: https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments to 

Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2023–0101. 

We will post all comments at https:// 

www.regulations.gov. You may request 

that we withhold personal identifying 

information from public review; 

however, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. See Request for 

Public Comments for more information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sierra Franks, by email at 

R7mmmregulatory@fws.gov or by 

telephone at 01–800–362–5148. U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, MS 341, 1011 

East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503. 

Individuals in the United States who are 

deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have 

a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, 

TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act of 1972 

(MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) 

authorizes the Secretary of the Interior 

(Secretary) to allow, upon request, the 

incidental, but not intentional, taking by 

harassment of small numbers of marine 

mammals in response to requests by 

U.S. citizens (as defined in title 50 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

in part 18, at 50 CFR 18.27(c)) engaged 

in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) in a specified 

geographic region during a period of not 

more than 1 year. The Secretary has 

delegated authority for implementation 

of the MMPA to the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (‘‘Service’’ or ‘‘we’’). 

According to the MMPA, the Service 

shall allow this incidental taking if we 

make findings that the total of such 

taking for the 1-year period: 

(1) is of small numbers of marine 

mammals of a species or stock; 

(2) will have a negligible impact on 

such species or stocks; and 

(3) will not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

these species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence use by Alaska Natives. 

If the requisite findings are made, we 

issue an authorization that sets forth the 

following, where applicable: 

(a) permissible methods of taking; 

(b) means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact on the 

species or stock and its habitat and the 

availability of the species or stock for 

subsistence uses; and 

(c) requirements for monitoring and 

reporting of such taking by harassment, 

including, in certain circumstances, 

requirements for the independent peer 

review of proposed monitoring plans or 

other research proposals. 

The term ‘‘take’’ means to harass, 

hunt, capture, or kill, or to attempt to 

harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine 

mammal. ‘‘Harassment’’ means any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which 

(i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild (the MMPA defines this as ‘‘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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
76226 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 

sheltering (the MMPA defines this as 

‘‘Level B harassment’’). 

The terms ‘‘negligible impact’’ and 

‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’ are 

defined in 50 CFR 18.27 (i.e., 

regulations governing small takes of 

marine mammals incidental to specified 

activities) as follows: ‘‘Negligible 

impact’’ is an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival. 

‘‘Unmitigable adverse impact’’ means 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. 

The term ‘‘small numbers’’ is also 

defined in 50 CFR 18.27. However, we 

do not rely on that definition here as it 

conflates ‘‘small numbers’’ with 

‘‘negligible impacts.’’ We recognize 

‘‘small numbers’’ and ‘‘negligible 

impacts’’ as two separate and distinct 

considerations when reviewing requests 

for incidental harassment authorizations 

(IHA) under the MMPA (see Natural 

Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Evans, 232 F. 

Supp. 2d 1003, 1025 (N.D. Cal. 2003)). 

Instead, for our small numbers 

determination, we estimate the likely 

number of takes of marine mammals 

and evaluate if that take is small relative 

to the size of the species or stock. 

The term ‘‘least practicable adverse 

impact’’ is not defined in the MMPA or 

its enacting regulations. For this IHA, 

we ensure the least practicable adverse 

impact by requiring mitigation measures 

that are effective in reducing the impact 

of project activities, but they are not so 

restrictive as to make project activities 

unduly burdensome or impossible to 

undertake and complete. 

If the requisite findings are made, we 

shall issue an IHA, which may set forth 

the following, where applicable: (i) 

permissible methods of taking; (ii) 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 subsistence uses by coastaldwelling Alaska Natives (if applicable); 

and (iii) requirements for monitoring 

and reporting take by harassment. 

Summary of Request 

On February 28, 2023, the City of 

Cordova (hereafter also known as ‘‘the 

City’’ or ‘‘the applicant’’) submitted a 

request to the Service for authorization 

to take by Level A and Level B 

harassment a small number of northern 

sea otters (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) 

(hereafter, ‘‘sea otters’’ or ‘‘otters’’ 

unless another species is specified) from 

the Southcentral Alaska stock. The 

Service sent requests for additional 

information on March 24, May 16, and 

May 30, 2023. We received updated 

versions of the request on April 27, May 

18, and June 8, 2023. The Service 

determined the June 8, 2023, 

application to be adequate and 

complete. The applicant expects take by 

harassment may occur during the 

construction of replacements and 

improvements to the harbor facilities in 

Cordova, Alaska. 

Description of Specified Activities and 

Specified Geographic Region 

The specified activity (hereafter, 

‘‘project’’) will include the installation 

and removal of piles and the installation 

of a bulkhead to rebuild the facilities of 

the South Harbor in Cordova, Alaska 

(figure 1) between September 2023 and 

June 2024. The City will remove 130 

existing 30-centimeter (cm) (12-inch 

(in)) diameter timber piles and 61 

existing 30-cm (12-in) diameter steel 

piles and will permanently install the 

following types of piles: 155 41-cm (16- 

in) diameter steel piles, 140 46-cm (18- 

in) diameter steel piles, 30 76-cm (30-in) 

diameter steel piles, and 140 steel 41-cm 

x 226-cm (16-in x 89-in) H piles. 

Construction will also include the 

installation and removal of 131 61-cm 

(24-in) diameter temporary steel piles. 

Components of the harbor that will be 

installed out of water include 

approximately 350 meters (m) (1,150 

feet (ft)) of bulkhead wall supported by 

H piles; main walk floats, end floats, 

and stall floats; 447 slips; pedestrian 

gangways; other float components 

including bull rail, floating fenders, 

mooring cleats, electricity connections, 

potable water service, fire suppression 

waterlines, lighting, wireless 

connections, and hand rails; and an 

uplands service area with parking lot 

expansion, greenspace, and stormwater 

treatment capabilities. Pile-driving 

activities will occur over 170 nonconsecutive days for approximately 434 

hours over 1 year from date of issuance 

of the IHA. If the IHA is issued after the 

applicant’s intended start date in 

September 2023, its schedule for 

conducting the specified activities may 

be adjusted accordingly. Pile 

installation will be done with a 

combination of impact, vibratory, and 

down-the-hole (DTH) drilling. 

Temporary piles will be removed with 

the vibratory hammer. Materials and 

equipment will be transported via 

barges, and workers will be transported 

to and from the barge work platform via 

skiff. 

Additional project details may be 

reviewed in the application materials 

available as described under ADDRESSES

or may also be requested as described 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76227 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Specified Geographic Region 

Sea Otter Biology 

There are three sea otter stocks in 

Alaska: Southeast Alaska stock, 

Southcentral Alaska stock, and the 

Southwest Alaska stock. Only the 

Southcentral Alaska stock is represented 

in the project area. Detailed information 

about the biology of this stock can be 

found in the most recent Southcentral 

Alaska stock assessment report (USFWS 

2023), which can be found at https://

www.regulations.gov/document/FWSR7-ES-2022-0155-0012 and was 

announced in the Federal Register at 88 

FR 53510, August 8, 2023. 

Sea otters may be distributed 

anywhere within the specified project 

area other than upland areas; however, 

they generally occur in shallow water 

near the shoreline. They are most 

commonly observed within the 40-m 

(131-ft) depth contour (USFWS 2023), 

although they can be found in areas 

with deeper water. Ocean depth is 

generally correlated with distance to 

shore, and sea otters typically remain 

within 1 to 2 kilometers (km) (0.62 to 

1.24 miles (mi)) of shore (Riedman and 

Estes 1990). They tend to be found 

closer to shore during storms, but 

venture farther out during good weather 

and calm seas (Lensink 1962, Kenyon 

1969). 

Sea otters are nonmigratory and 

generally do not disperse over long 

distances (Garshelis and Garshelis 

1984), usually remaining within a few 

kilometers of their established feeding 

grounds (Kenyon 1981). Breeding males 

stay for all or part of the year in a 

breeding territory covering up to 1 km 

(0.62 mi) of coastline, while adult 

females maintain home ranges of 

approximately 8 to 16 km (5 to 10 mi), 

which may include one or more male 

territories. Juveniles move greater 

distances between resting and foraging 

areas (Lensink 1962, Kenyon 1969, 

Riedman and Estes 1990, Tinker and 

Estes 1996). Although sea otters 

generally remain local to an area, they 

are capable of long-distance travel. Sea 

otters in Alaska have shown daily 

movement distances greater than 3 km 

(1.9 mi) at speeds up to 5.5 km per hour 

(hr) (km/hr; 3.4 mi/hr) (Garshelis and 

Garshelis 1984). 

Southcentral Alaska Sea Otter Stock 

The Southcentral Alaska sea otter 

stock occurs in the center of the sea 

otter range in Alaska and extends from 

Cape Yakataga in the east to Cook Inlet 

in the west, including Prince William 

Sound, the eastern Kenai Peninsula 

coast, and Kachemak Bay (USFWS 

2023). Between 2014 and 2019, aerial 

surveys were conducted in three regions 

of the Southcentral Alaska sea otter 

stock: (1) Eastern Cook Inlet, (2) Outer 

Kenai Peninsula, and (3) Prince William 

Sound by aerial transects flown at 91 m 

(298.56 ft) of altitude. The combined 

estimates of the three regions resulted in 

approximately 21,617 (SE = 2,190) sea 

otters and an average density of 1.96 sea 

otters per square kilometer (km2) for the 

Southcentral Alaska stock (Esslinger et 

al. 2021). In aerial sea otter abundance 

surveys of Prince William Sound, 

Weitzman and Esslinger (2015) found a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1EN06NO23.060</GPH>

Prince 

William 

Sound 

USGS, Bureau of larld Management, EPA, NPS, USDA, 

FIGURE I-SPECIFIED GEOGRAPHIC REGION OF THE PROJECT 
76228 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 

density of 21.15 sea otters/km2 in the 

Orca Inlet subregion. Multiple local 

sources of data (Greenwood 2022; 

Prince William Sound Science Center 

2022; Schinella 2022, 2023; Solstice 

Alaska Consulting Inc. 2022) indicate a 

higher density within the Cordova 

Harbor-approximately 20 sea otters at 

any given time within the 0.18 km2 area 

of the harbor, or a density of 111.11 sea 

otters/km2. We utilized both sources of 

data and applied the published density 

for areas outside the harbor and the 

local data for areas within the harbor. 

Potential Impacts of the Specified 

Activities on Marine Mammals 

Effects of Noise on Sea Otters 

We characterized ‘‘noise’’ as sound 

released into the environment from 

human activities that exceeds ambient 

levels or interferes with normal sound 

production or reception by sea otters. 

The terms ‘‘acoustic disturbance’’ or 

‘‘acoustic harassment’’ are disturbances 

or harassment events resulting from 

noise exposure. Potential effects of noise 

exposure are likely to depend on the 

distance of the sea otter from the sound 

source, the level and intensity of sound 

the sea otter receives, background noise 

levels, noise frequency, noise duration, 

and whether the noise is pulsed or 

continuous. The actual noise level 

perceived by individual sea otters will 

also depend on whether the sea otter is 

above or below water and atmospheric 

and environmental conditions. 

Temporary disturbance of sea otters or 

localized displacement reactions are the 

most likely effects to occur from noise 

exposure. 

Sea Otter Hearing 

Pile driving and marine construction 

activities will fall within the hearing 

range of sea otters. Controlled sound 

exposure trials on southern sea otters 

(Enhydra lutris nereis) indicate that sea 

otters can hear frequencies between 125 

hertz (Hz) and 38 kilohertz (kHz) with 

best sensitivity between 1.2 and 27 kHz 

(Ghoul and Reichmuth 2014). Aerial 

and underwater audiograms for a 

captive adult male southern sea otter in 

the presence of ambient noise suggest 

the sea otter’s hearing was less sensitive 

to high-frequency (greater than 22 kHz) 

and low-frequency (less than 2 kHz) 

sound than terrestrial mustelids but was 

similar to that of a California sea lion 

(Zalophus californianus). However, the 

sea otter was still able to hear lowfrequency sounds, and the detection 

thresholds for sounds between 0.125–1 

kHz were between 116–101 decibels 

(dB), respectively. Dominant 

frequencies of southern sea otter 

vocalizations are between 3 and 8 kHz, 

with some energy extending above 60 

kHz (McShane et al. 1995, Ghoul and 

Reichmuth 2012). 

Exposure to high levels of sound may 

cause changes in behavior, masking of 

communications, temporary or 

permanent changes in hearing 

sensitivity, discomfort, and injury to 

marine mammals. Unlike other marine 

mammals, sea otters do not rely on 

sound to orient themselves, locate prey, 

or communicate under water; therefore, 

masking of communications by 

anthropogenic sound is less of a concern 

than for other marine mammals. 

However, sea otters, especially mothers 

and pups, do use sound for 

communication in air (McShane et al. 

1995), and sea otters may monitor 

underwater sound to avoid predators 

(Davis et al. 1987). 

Exposure Thresholds 

Underwater Sounds 

Noise exposure criteria for identifying 

underwater noise levels capable of 

causing Level A harassment to marine 

mammal species, including sea otters, 

have been established using the same 

methods as those used by the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

(Southall et al. 2019). These criteria are 

based on estimated levels of sound 

exposure capable of causing a 

permanent shift in sensitivity of hearing 

(i.e., a permanent threshold shift (PTS) 

(NMFS 2018)). PTS occurs when noise 

exposure causes hairs within the inner 

ear system to die (Ketten 2012). 

Although the effects of PTS are, by 

definition, permanent, PTS does not 

equate to total hearing loss. 

Sound exposure thresholds 

incorporate two metrics of exposure: the 

peak level of instantaneous exposure 

likely to cause PTS and the cumulative 

sound exposure level (SELCUM) during a 

24-hour period. They also include 

weighting adjustments for the 

sensitivity of different species to varying 

frequencies. PTS-based injury criteria 

were developed from theoretical 

extrapolation of observations of 

temporary threshold shifts (TTS) 

detected in lab settings during sound 

exposure trials (Finneran 2015). 

Southall and colleagues (2019) predict 

PTS for sea otters, which are included 

in the ‘‘other marine carnivores’’ 

category, will occur at 232 dB peak or 

203 dB SELCUM (db SEL) for impulsive 

underwater sound and 219 dB SEL for 

nonimpulsive (continuous) underwater 

sound. 

Thresholds based on TTS have been 

used as a proxy for Level B harassment 

(i.e., 70 FR 1871, January 11, 2005; 71 

FR 3260, January 20, 2006; 73 FR 41318, 

July 18, 2008). Southall et al. (2007) 

derived TTS thresholds for pinnipeds 

based on 212 dB peak and 171 dB SEL. 

Exposures resulting in TTS in pinnipeds 

were found to range from 152 to 174 dB 

(183 to 206 dB SEL) (Kastak et al. 2005), 

with a persistent TTS, if not a PTS, after 

60 seconds of 184 dB SEL (Kastak et al. 

2008). Kastelein et al. (2012) found 

small but statistically significant TTSs 

at approximately 170 dB SEL (136 dB, 

60 minutes (min)) and 178 dB SEL (148 

dB, 15 min). Based on these findings, 

Southall et al. (2019) developed TTS 

thresholds for sea otters, which are 

included in the ‘‘other marine 

carnivores’’ category, of 188 dB SEL for 

impulsive sounds and 199 dB SEL for 

nonimpulsive sounds. 

The NMFS (2018) criteria do not 

identify thresholds for avoidance of 

Level B harassment. For pinnipeds 

(seals and sea lions), NMFS has adopted 

a 160-dB threshold for Level B 

harassment from exposure to impulsive 

noise and a 120-dB threshold for 

continuous noise (NMFS 1998, HESS 

1999, NMFS 2018). These thresholds 

were developed from observations of 

mysticete (baleen) whales responding to 

airgun operations (e.g., Malme et al. 

1983; Malme and Miles 1983; 

Richardson et al. 1986, 1995) and from 

equating Level B harassment with noise 

levels capable of causing TTS in lab 

settings. Southall et al. (2007, 2019) 

assessed behavioral response studies 

and found considerable variability 

among pinnipeds. The authors 

determined that exposures between 

approximately 90 to 140 dB generally do 

not appear to induce strong behavioral 

responses from pinnipeds in water. 

However, they found behavioral effects, 

including avoidance, become more 

likely in the range between 120 to 160 

dB, and most marine mammals showed 

some, albeit variable, responses to 

sound between 140 to 180 dB. Wood et 

al. (2012) adapted the approach 

identified in Southall et al. (2007) to 

develop a probabilistic scale for marine 

mammal taxa at which 10 percent, 50 

percent, and 90 percent of individuals 

exposed are assumed to produce a 

behavioral response. For many marine 

mammals, including pinnipeds, these 

response rates were set at sound 

pressure levels of 140, 160, and 180 dB, 

respectively. 

We have evaluated these thresholds 

and determined that the Level B 

threshold of 120 dB for nonimpulsive 

noise is not applicable to sea otters. The 

120-dB threshold is based on studies in 

which gray whales (Eschrichtius 

robustus) were exposed to experimental 

playbacks of industrial noise (Malme et 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76229 

al. 1983, Malme and Miles 1983). 

During these playback studies, southern 

sea otter responses to industrial noise 

were also monitored (Riedman 1983, 

1984). Gray whales exhibited avoidance 

to industrial noise at the 120-dB 

threshold; however, there was no 

evidence of disturbance reactions or 

avoidance in southern sea otters. Thus, 

given the different range of frequencies 

to which sea otters and gray whales are 

sensitive, the NMFS 120-dB threshold 

based on gray whale behavior is not 

appropriate for predicting sea otter 

behavioral responses, particularly for 

low-frequency sound. 

Based on the lack of sea otter 

disturbance response or any other 

reaction to the playback studies from 

the 1980s, as well as the absence of a 

clear pattern of disturbance or 

avoidance behaviors attributable to 

underwater sound levels up to about 

160 dB resulting from low-frequency 

broadband noise, we assume 120 dB is 

not an appropriate behavioral response 

threshold for sea otters exposed to 

continuous underwater noise. 

Based on the best available scientific 

information about sea otters, and closely 

related marine mammals when sea otter 

data are limited, the Service has set 160 

dB of received underwater sound as a 

threshold for Level B harassment by 

disturbance for sea otters for this 

proposed IHA. Exposure to unmitigated 

in-water noise levels between 125 Hz 

and 38 kHz that are greater than 160 dBfor both impulsive and nonimpulsive 

sound sources-will be considered by the 

Service as Level B harassment. 

Thresholds for Level A harassment 

(which entails the potential for injury) 

will be 232 dB peak or 203 dB SEL for 

impulsive sounds and 219 dB SEL for 

continuous sounds (table 1). 

Airborne Sounds 

The NMFS (2018) guidance neither 

addresses thresholds for preventing 

injury or disturbance from airborne 

noise, nor provides thresholds for 

avoidance of Level B harassment. 

Conveyance of underwater noise into 

the air is of little concern since the 

effects of pressure release and 

interference at the water’s surface 

reduce underwater noise transmission 

into the air. For activities that create 

both in-air and underwater sounds, we 

will estimate take based on parameters 

for underwater noise transmission. 

Considering sound energy travels more 

efficiently through water than through 

air, this estimation will also account for 

exposures to sea otters at the surface. 

Southall et al. (2019) have developed 

TTS and PTS thresholds for other 

marine carnivores, which include sea 

otters, for airborne impulsive and nonimpulsive sounds (table 1). For project 

activities that create only airborne 

sounds, such as pile driving on land, the 

sound levels are significantly below the 

TTS thresholds developed by Southall 

et al. 2019. NMFS has previously used 

‘‘a generalized acoustic threshold based 

on received level to estimate the onset 

of behavioral harassment’’ (April 10, 

2019, 84 FR 14314). NMFS predicts that 

all other pinniped species that are not 

harbor seals will be behaviorally 

harassed when exposed to airborne 

sounds above 100 dB re 20 micropascal 

(mPa) (84 FR 14314). Since otariid 

pinnipeds are the closest available 

physiological and anatomical proxy for 

sea otters, we used the NMFS criteria for 

pinniped harassment from exposure to 

airborne sound to estimate take by Level 

B harassment from pile driving on 

shore. 

TABLE 1—TEMPORARY THRESHOLD SHIFT (TTS) AND PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT (PTS) THRESHOLDS ESTABLISHED

BY SOUTHALL ET AL. (2019) THROUGH MODELING AND EXTRAPOLATION FOR ‘‘OTHER MARINE CARNIVORES,’’ WHICH

INCLUDE SEA OTTERS

[Values are weighted for other marine carnivores’ hearing thresholds and given in cumulative sound exposure level (SELCUM dB re (20 μPa) in 

air and SELCUM dB re (1 μPa) in water) for impulsive and nonimpulsive sounds and unweighted peak sound pressure level (SPL) in air (dB 

re 20 μPa) and water (dB 1μPa) (impulsive sounds only).] 

TTS PTS 

nonimpulsive impulsive nonimpulsive impulsive 

SELCUM SELCUM Peak SPL SELCUM SELCUM Peak SPL 

Air ............................................................................ 157 146 170 177 161 176 

Water ....................................................................... 199 188 226 219 203 232 

Evidence From Sea Otter Studies 

Sea otters may be more resistant to the 

effects of sound disturbance and human 

activities than other marine mammals. 

For example, observers have noted no 

changes from southern sea otters in 

regard to their presence, density, or 

behavior in response to underwater 

sounds from industrial noise recordings 

at 110 dB and a frequency range of 50 

Hz to 20 kHz and airguns, even at the 

closest distance of 0.5 nautical miles (<1 

km or 0.6 mi) (Riedman 1983). Southern 

sea otters did not respond noticeably to 

noise from a single 1,638 cubic 

centimeters (cm3) (100 cubic inches 

[in3]) airgun, and no sea otter 

disturbance reactions were evident 

when a 67,006 cm3 (4,089 in3) airgun 

array was as close as 0.9 km (0.6 mi) to 

sea otters (Riedman 1983, 1984). 

However, southern sea otters displayed 

slight reactions to airborne engine noise 

(Riedman 1983). Northern sea otters 

were observed to exhibit a limited 

response to a variety of airborne and 

underwater sounds, including a warble 

tone, sea otter pup calls, calls from 

killer whales (Orcinus orca) (which are 

predators to sea otters), air horns, and 

an underwater noise harassment system 

designed to drive marine mammals 

away from crude oil spills (Davis et al. 

1988). These sounds elicited reactions 

from northern sea otters, including 

startle responses and movement away 

from noise sources. However, these 

reactions were observed only when 

northern sea otters were within 100 to 

200 m (328 to 656 ft) of noise sources. 

Further, northern sea otters appeared to 

become habituated to the noises within 

2 hours or, at most, 3–4 days (Davis et 

al. 1988). 

Noise exposure may be influenced by 

the amount of time sea otters spend at 

the water’s surface. Noise at the water’s 

surface can be attenuated by turbulence 

from wind and waves more quickly 

compared to deeper water, reducing 

potential noise exposure (Greene and 

Richardson 1988, Richardson et al. 

1995). Additionally, turbulence at the 

water’s surface limits the transference of 

sound from water to air. A sea otter with 

its head above water will be exposed to 

only a small fraction of the sound 

energy traveling through the water 

beneath it. The average amount of time 

that sea otters spend above the water 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
76230 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 

each day while resting and grooming 

varies between males and females and 

across seasons (Esslinger et al. 2014, 

Zellmer et al. 2021). For example, 

female sea otters foraged for an average 

of 8.78 hours per day compared to male 

sea otters, which foraged for an average 

of 7.85 hours per day during the 

summer months (Esslinger et al. 2014). 

Male and female sea otters spend an 

average of 63 to 67 percent of their day 

at the surface resting and grooming 

during the summer months (Esslinger et 

al. 2014). Few studies have evaluated 

foraging times during the winter 

months. Garshelis et al. (1986) found 

that foraging times increased from 5.1 

hours per day to 16.6 hours per day in 

the winter; however, Gelatt et al. (2002) 

did not find a significant difference in 

seasonal foraging times. It is likely that 

seasonal variation is determined by 

seasonal differences in energetic 

demand and the quality and availability 

of prey sources (Esslinger et al. 2014). 

These findings suggest that the large 

portion of the day sea otters spend at the 

surface may help limit sea otters’ 

exposure during noise-generating 

operations. 

Sea otter sensitivity to industrial 

activities may be influenced by the 

overall level of human activity within 

the sea otter population’s range. In 

locations that lack frequent human 

activity, sea otters appear to have a 

lower threshold for disturbance. Sea 

otters in Alaska exhibited escape 

behaviors in response to the presence 

and approach of vessels (Udevitz et al. 

1995). Behaviors included diving or 

actively swimming away from a vessel, 

entering the water from haulouts, and 

disbanding groups with sea otters 

swimming in multiple different 

directions (Udevitz et al. 1995). Sea 

otters in Alaska were also observed to 

avoid areas with heavy boat traffic in 

the summer and return to these areas 

during seasons with less vessel traffic 

(Garshelis and Garshelis 1984). In Cook 

Inlet, sea otters drifting on a tide 

trajectory that would have taken them 

within 500 m (0.3 mi) of an active 

offshore drilling rig were observed to 

swim in order to avoid a close approach 

of the drilling rig despite near-ambient 

noise levels (BlueCrest 2013). 

Individual sea otters in Orca Inlet will 

likely show a range of responses to 

noise from pile-driving activities. Some 

sea otters will likely dive, show startle 

responses, change direction of travel, or 

prematurely surface. Sea otters reacting 

to pile-driving activities may divert time 

and attention from biologically 

important behaviors, such as feeding 

and nursing pups. Sea otter responses to 

disturbance can result in energetic costs, 

which increases the amount of prey 

required by sea otters (Barrett 2019). 

This increased prey consumption may 

impact sea otter prey availability and 

cause sea otters to spend more time 

foraging and less time resting (Barrett 

2019). Some sea otters may abandon the 

project area and return when the 

disturbance has ceased. Based on the 

observed movement patterns of sea 

otters (i.e., Lensink 1962; Kenyon 1969, 

1981; Garshelis and Garshelis 1984; 

Riedman and Estes 1990; Tinker and 

Estes 1996), we expect some individuals 

will respond to pile-driving activities by 

dispersing to nearby areas of suitable 

habitat; however, other sea otters, 

especially territorial adult males, are 

less likely to be displaced. 

Consequences of Disturbance 

The reactions of wildlife to 

disturbance can range from short-term 

behavioral changes to long-term impacts 

that affect survival and reproduction. 

When disturbed by noise, animals may 

respond behaviorally (e.g., escape 

response) or physiologically (e.g., 

increased heart rate, hormonal response) 

(Harms et al. 1997, Tempel and 

Gutie ́rrez 2003). Theoretically, the 

energy expense and associated 

physiological effects from repeated 

disturbance could ultimately lead to 

reduced survival and reproduction (Gill 

and Sutherland 2000, Frid and Dill 

2002). For example, South American sea 

lions (Otaria byronia) visited by tourists 

exhibited an increase in the state of 

alertness and a decrease in maternal 

attendance and resting time on land, 

thereby potentially reducing population 

size (Pavez et al. 2015). In another 

example, killer whales that lost feeding 

opportunities due to boat traffic faced a 

substantial (18 percent) estimated 

decrease in energy intake (Williams et 

al. 2006). In severe cases, such 

disturbance effects could have 

population-level consequences. For 

example, increased disturbance by 

tourism vessels has been associated 

with a decline in abundance of 

bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops spp.) 

(Bejder et al. 2006, Lusseau et al. 2006). 

However, these examples evaluated 

sources of disturbance that were longer 

term and more consistent than the 

temporary and intermittent nature of the 

specified project activities. 

These examples illustrate direct 

effects on survival and reproductive 

success, but disturbances can also have 

indirect effects. Response to noise 

disturbance is considered a nonlethal 

stimulus that is similar to an 

antipredator response (Frid and Dill 

2002). Sea otters are susceptible to 

predation, particularly from killer 

whales and eagles, and have a welldeveloped antipredator response to 

perceived threats. For example, the 

presence of a harbor seal (Phoca 

vitulina) did not appear to disturb 

southern sea otters, but they 

demonstrated a fear response in the 

presence of a California sea lion by 

actively looking above and beneath the 

water (Limbaugh 1961). 

Although an increase in vigilance or 

a flight response is nonlethal, a tradeoff 

occurs between risk avoidance and 

energy conservation. An animal’s 

reactions to noise disturbance may 

cause stress and direct an animal’s 

energy away from fitness-enhancing 

activities such as feeding and mating 

(Frid and Dill 2002, Goudie and Jones 

2004). For example, southern sea otters 

in areas with heavy recreational boat 

traffic demonstrated changes in 

behavioral time budgeting, showing 

decreased time resting and changes in 

haulout patterns and distribution 

(Benham 2006, Maldini et al. 2012). 

Chronic stress can also lead to 

weakened reflexes, lowered learning 

responses (Welch and Welch 1970, van 

Polanen Petel et al. 2006), compromised 

immune function, decreased body 

weight, and abnormal thyroid function 

(Selye 1979). 

Changes in behavior resulting from 

anthropogenic disturbance can include 

increased agonistic interactions between 

individuals or temporary or permanent 

abandonment of an area (Barton et al. 

1998). Additionally, the extent of 

previous exposure to humans (Holcomb 

et al. 2009), the type of disturbance 

(Andersen et al. 2012), and the age or 

sex of the individuals (Shaughnessy et 

al. 2008, Holcomb et al. 2009) may 

influence the type and extent of 

response in individual sea otters. 

Vessel Activities 

Vessel collisions with marine 

mammals can result in death or serious 

injury. Wounds resulting from vessel 

strike may include massive trauma, 

hemorrhaging, broken bones, or 

propeller lacerations (Knowlton and 

Kraus 2001). An animal may be harmed 

by a vessel when the vessel runs over 

the animal at the surface, the animal 

hits the bottom of a vessel while the 

animal is surfacing, or the animal is cut 

by a vessel’s propeller. 

Vessel strike has been documented as 

a cause of death across all three stocks 

of northern sea otters in Alaska. Since 

2002, the Service has conducted 1,433 

sea otter necropsies to determine cause 

of death, disease incidence, and the 

general health status of sea otters in 

Alaska. Vessel strike or blunt trauma 

was identified as a definitive or 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76231 

presumptive cause of death in 65 cases 

(4 percent) (USFWS 2020). In most of 

these cases, trauma was determined to 

be the ultimate cause of death; however, 

there was a contributing factor, such as 

disease or biotoxin exposure, which 

incapacitated the sea otter and made it 

more vulnerable to vessel strike 

(USFWS 2023). 

Vessel speed influences the likelihood 

of vessel strikes involving sea otters. 

The probability of death or serious 

injury to a marine mammal increases as 

vessel speed increases (Laist et al. 2001, 

Vanderlaan and Taggart 2007). Sea 

otters spend a considerable portion of 

their time at the water’s surface 

(Esslinger et al. 2014). They are 

typically visually aware of approaching 

vessels and can move away if a vessel 

is not traveling too quickly. Mitigation 

measures to be applied to vessel 

operations to prevent collisions or 

interactions are included below in the 

proposed authorization portion of this 

document under Avoidance and 

Minimization. 

Sea otters exhibit behavioral 

flexibility in response to vessels, and 

their responses may be influenced by 

the intensity and duration of the vessel’s 

activity. As noted above, sea otter 

populations in Alaska were observed to 

avoid areas with heavy vessel traffic but 

return to those same areas during 

seasons with less vessel traffic 

(Garshelis and Garshelis 1984). Sea 

otters have also shown signs of 

disturbance or escape behaviors in 

response to the presence and approach 

of survey vessels, including sea otters 

diving and/or actively swimming away 

from a vessel, sea otters on haulouts 

entering the water, and groups of sea 

otters disbanding and swimming in 

multiple different directions (Udevitz et 

al. 1995). 

Additionally, sea otter responses to 

vessels may be influenced by the sea 

otter’s previous experience with vessels. 

Groups of southern sea otters in two 

locations in California showed markedly 

different responses to kayakers 

approaching to within specific 

distances, suggesting a different level of 

tolerance between the groups 

(Gunvalson 2011). Benham (2006) found 

evidence that the sea otters exposed to 

high levels of recreational activity may 

have become more tolerant than 

individuals in less disturbed areas. Sea 

otters off the California coast showed 

only mild interest in vessels passing 

within hundreds of meters and 

appeared to have habituated to vessel 

traffic (Riedman 1983, Curland 1997). 

These findings indicate that sea otters 

may adjust their responses to vessel 

activities depending on the level of 

activity. Vessel activity during the 

project includes the transit of two barges 

for materials and construction, both of 

which will remain on site, mostly 

stationary, to support the work; 

additionally, a skiff will be used during 

the project for transporting workers 

short distances to support construction 

activities. Vessels will not be used 

extensively or over a long duration 

during the planned work; therefore, we 

do not anticipate that sea otters will 

experience changes in behavior 

indicative of tolerance or habituation. 

Effects on Sea Otter Habitat and Prey 

Physical and biological features of 

habitat essential to the conservation of 

sea otters include the benthic 

invertebrates that sea otters eat and the 

shallow rocky areas and kelp beds that 

provide cover from predators. Sea otter 

habitat in the project area includes 

coastal areas within the 40-m (131-ft) 

depth contour where high densities of 

sea otters have been detected. 

Industrial activities, such as pile 

driving, may generate in-water noise at 

levels that can temporarily displace sea 

otters from important habitat and 

impact sea otter prey species. The 

primary prey species for sea otters are 

sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus spp. 

and Mesocentrotus spp.), abalone 

(Haliotis spp.), clams (e.g., 

Clinocardium nuttallii, Leukoma 

staminea, and Saxidomus gigantea), 

mussels (Mytilus spp.), crabs (e.g., 

Metacarcinus magister, Pugettia spp., 

Telemessus cheiragonus, and Cancer 

spp.), and squid (Loligo spp.) (Tinker 

and Estes 1996, LaRoche et al. 2021). 

When preferred prey are scarce, sea 

otters will also eat kelp, slow-moving 

benthic fishes, sea cucumbers (e.g., 

Apostichopus californicus), egg cases of 

rays, turban snails (Tegula spp.), 

octopuses (e.g., Octopus spp.), barnacles 

(Balanus spp.), sea stars (e.g., 

Pycnopodia helianthoides), scallops 

(e.g., Patinopecten caurinus), rock 

oysters (Saccostrea spp.), worms (e.g., 

Eudistylia spp.), and chitons (e.g., 

Mopalia spp.) (Riedman and Estes 1990, 

Davis and Bodkin 2021). 

Several studies have addressed the 

effects of noise on invertebrates (Tidau 

and Briffa 2016, Carroll et al. 2017). 

Behavioral changes, such as an increase 

in lobster (Homarus americanus) 

feeding levels (Payne et al. 2007), an 

increase in avoidance behavior by wildcaught captive reef squid (Sepioteuthis 

australis) (Fewtrell and McCauley 

2012), and deeper digging by razor 

clams (Sinonovacula constricta) (Peng et 

al. 2016) have been observed following 

experimental exposures to sound. 

Physical changes have also been 

observed in response to increased sound 

levels, including changes in serum 

biochemistry and hepatopancreatic cells 

in lobsters (Payne et al. 2007) and longterm damage to the statocysts required 

for hearing in several cephalopod 

species (Andre ́ et al. 2011, Sole ́ et al. 

2013). De Soto et al. (2013) found 

impaired embryonic development in 

scallop (Pecten novaezelandiae) larvae 

when exposed to 160 dB. Christian et al. 

(2003) noted a reduction in the speed of 

egg development of bottom-dwelling 

crabs following exposure to noise; 

however, the sound level (221 dB at 2 

m or 6.6 ft) was far higher than the 

planned project activities will produce. 

Industrial noise can also impact larval 

settlement by masking the natural 

acoustic settlement cues for crustaceans 

and fish (Pine et al. 2012, Simpson et al. 

2016, Tidau and Briffa 2016). 

While these studies provide evidence 

of deleterious effects to invertebrates as 

a result of increased sound levels, 

Carroll et al. (2017) caution that there is 

a wide disparity between results 

obtained in field and laboratory settings. 

In experimental settings, changes were 

observed only when animals were 

housed in enclosed tanks, and many 

were exposed to prolonged bouts of 

continuous, pure tones. We would not 

expect similar results in open marine 

conditions. It is unlikely that noises 

generated by project activities will have 

any lasting effect on sea otter prey given 

the short-term duration of sounds 

produced by each component of the 

planned work. 

Noise-generating activities that 

interact with the seabed can produce 

vibrations, resulting in the disturbance 

of sediment and increased turbidity in 

the water. Although turbidity is likely to 

have little impact on sea otters and prey 

species (Todd et al. 2015), there may be 

some impacts from vibrations and 

increased sedimentation. For example, 

mussels (Mytilus edulis) exhibited 

changes in valve gape and oxygen 

demand, and hermit crabs (Pagurus 

bernhardus) exhibited limited 

behavioral changes in response to 

vibrations caused by pile driving 

(Roberts et al. 2016). Increased 

sedimentation is likely to reduce sea 

otter visibility, which may result in 

reduced foraging efficiency and a 

potential shift to less-preferred prey 

species. These outcomes may cause sea 

otters to spend more energy on foraging 

or processing the prey items; however, 

the impacts of a change in energy 

expenditure are not likely seen at the 

population level (Newsome et al. 2015). 

Additionally, the benthic invertebrates 

may be impacted by increased 

sedimentation, resulting in higher 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
76232 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 

abundances of opportunistic species 

that recover quickly from industrial 

activities that increase sedimentation 

(Kotta et al. 2009). Although sea otter 

foraging could be impacted by industrial 

activities that cause vibrations and 

increased sedimentation, it is more 

likely that sea otters would be 

temporarily displaced from the project 

area due to impacts from noise rather 

than vibrations and sedimentation. 

Potential Impacts of the Specified 

Activities on Subsistence Uses 

The planned specified activities will 

occur near marine subsistence harvest 

areas used by Alaska Natives from 

Cordova and the surrounding areas. 

Since 2013, there have been 914 sea 

otters harvested by hunters from the 

Cordova area, and most of those were 

taken prior to 2016. From 2018 through 

2022, 236 sea otters were harvested from 

the Cordova area. 

The planned project would occur 

within the Cordova city limits, where 

firearm use is prohibited. The area 

potentially affected by the planned 

project does not significantly overlap 

with current subsistence harvest areas. 

Construction activities will not preclude 

access to hunting areas or interfere in 

any way with individuals wishing to 

hunt. Despite no conflict with 

subsistence use being anticipated, the 

Service will notify potentially affected 

communities and stakeholders of the 

public comment period on this 

proposed IHA so they have an 

opportunity to share any questions, 

concerns, or potential conflicts 

regarding subsistence use in those areas. 

If any conflicts are identified in the 

future, the applicant will develop a plan 

of cooperation specifying the steps 

necessary to minimize any effects the 

project may have on subsistence 

harvest. 

Estimated Take 

Definitions of Incidental Take Under the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

Below we provide definitions of three 

potential types of take of sea otters. The 

Service does not anticipate and is not 

authorizing lethal take as a part of this 

proposed IHA; however, the definitions 

of these take types are provided for 

context and background: 

Lethal Take—Human activity may 

result in biologically significant impacts 

to sea otters. In the most serious 

interactions, human actions can result 

in mortality of sea otters. 

Level A Harassment—Human activity 

may result in the injury of sea otters. 

Level A harassment, for nonmilitary 

readiness activities, is defined as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance that 

has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild. 

Level B Harassment—Level B 

Harassment for nonmilitary readiness 

activities means any act of pursuit, 

torment, or annoyance that 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, feeding, 

or sheltering. Changes in behavior that 

disrupt biologically significant 

behaviors or activities for the affected 

animal are indicative of take by Level B 

harassment under the MMPA. 

The Service has identified the 

following sea otter behaviors as 

indicative of possible Level B 

harassment: 

• Swimming away at a fast pace on 

belly (i.e., porpoising); 

• Repeatedly raising the head 

vertically above the water to get a better 

view (spyhopping) while apparently 

agitated or while swimming away; 

• In the case of a pup, repeatedly 

spyhopping while hiding behind and 

holding onto its mother’s head; 

• Abandoning prey or feeding area; 

• Ceasing to nurse and/or rest 

(applies to dependent pups); 

• Ceasing to rest (applies to 

independent animals); 

• Ceasing to use movement corridors; 

• Ceasing mating behaviors; 

• Shifting/jostling/agitation in a raft 

so that the raft disperses; 

• Sudden diving of an entire raft; or 

• Flushing animals off a haulout. 

This list is not meant to encompass all 

possible behaviors; other behavioral 

responses may equate to take by Level 

B harassment. Relatively minor changes 

in behavior such as increased vigilance 

or a short-term change in direction of 

travel are not likely to disrupt 

biologically important behavioral 

patterns, and the Service does not view 

such minor changes in behavior as 

indicative of a take by Level B 

harassment. 

Calculating Take 

We assumed all animals exposed to 

underwater sound levels that meet the 

acoustic exposure criteria defined above 

in Exposure Thresholds will experience 

take by Level A or Level B harassment 

due to exposure to underwater noise. 

Likewise, we assumed that all animals 

exposed to airborne sound levels that 

meet the acoustic exposure criteria in 

Exposure Thresholds will experience 

take by Level B harassment due to 

exposure to in-air noise. Spatially 

explicit zones of ensonification were 

established around the planned 

construction location to estimate the 

number of otters that may be exposed to 

these sound levels. We determined the 

number of otters present in the 

ensonification zones using density 

information generated by Weitzman and 

Esslinger (2015), as well as local sources 

of data that indicated a higher density 

of sea otters within the harbor 

(Greenwood 2022; Prince William 

Sound Science Center 2022; Schinella 

2022, 2023; Solstice Alaska Consulting 

Inc. 2022). 

The project can be divided into five 

major components: DTH pile driving, 

vibratory pile driving, impact pile 

driving, skiff use to support 

construction, and pile driving on land. 

Each of these components will generate 

a different type of noise. Vibratory pile 

driving and the use of skiffs will 

produce nonimpulsive or continuous 

noise; impact pile driving will produce 

impulsive noise; and DTH pile driving 

is considered to produce both impulsive 

and continuous noise (NMFS 2020). 

The level of sound anticipated from 

each project component was established 

using recorded data from several 

sources listed in tables 2 through 7. We 

used the NMFS Technical Guidance and 

User Spreadsheet (NMFS 2018, 2020) to 

determine the distance at which sound 

levels would attenuate to Level A 

harassment thresholds, and empirical 

data from the proxy projects were used 

to determine the distance at which 

sound levels would attenuate to Level B 

harassment thresholds (table 1). The 

weighting factor adjustment included in 

the NMFS user spreadsheet accounts for 

sounds created in portions of an 

organism’s hearing range where they 

have less sensitivity. We used the 

weighting factor adjustment for otariid 

pinnipeds as they are the closest 

available physiological and anatomical 

proxy for sea otters. The spreadsheet 

also incorporates a transmission loss 

coefficient, which accounts for the 

reduction in sound level outward from 

a sound source. We used the NMFSrecommended transmission loss 

coefficient of 15 for coastal pile-driving 

activities to indicate practical spread 

(NMFS 2020) to determine the distance 

at which sound levels attenuate to 160 

dB re 1 mPa. Due to limited data of 

underwater sound pressure levels from 

DTH pile driving as well as differences 

in how PTS and TTS thresholds are 

calculated, the resultant Level A 

isopleths for DTH pile driving are larger 

than the Level B isopleths. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76233 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF SOUND LEVEL, TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, DISTANCE FROM SOUND SOURCE TO BELOW

LEVEL A HARASSMENT AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS, DAYS OF IMPACT, SEA OTTERS IN LEVEL A AND

LEVEL B HARASSMENT ENSONIFICATION AREA, AND TOTAL OTTERS EXPECTED TO BE HARASSED THROUGH BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE BY VIBRATORY PILE DRIVING

Pile size 

30 to 61-cm (12-in to 24- 

in) existing timber pile removal 

30 to 61-cm 

(12-in to 24- 

in) existing 

steel pile removal 

61-cm (24- 

inch) template installation 

61-cm (24- 

inch) template removal 

41-cm (16-in) 

permanent 

pile installation 

46-cm (18-in) 

permanent 

pile installation 

76-cm (30-in) permanent 

pile installation 

Total number of piles .......... 130 .................................... 61 ................ 61 ................ 61 ................ 155 .............. 70 ................ 30. 

Sound level ......................... 162 dB re 1 μPa at 10 m 

(RMS).

161 dB re 1 μPa at 10 m (RMS) 161.9 dB re 1 μPa at 10 m 

(RMS). 

Source ................................. NMFS 2023 ...................... NAVFACa 2013, 2015 Denes et al. 2016. 

Timing per pile .................... 10 minutes/pile ................. 10 minutes/ 

pile.

10 minutes/ 

pile.

10 minutes/ 

pile.

15 minutes/ 

pile.

20 minutes/ 

pile.

30 minutes/pile. 

Maximum number of piles 

per day.

25 ...................................... 25 ................ 6 .................. 10 ................ 10 ................ 10 ................ 6. 

Maximum number of days 

of activity.

6 ........................................ 3 .................. 11 ................ 7 .................. 16 ................ 7 .................. 5. 

Sea otter density ................. 111.11 sea otters/km2

Distance to below Level A 

harassment threshold.

0.9 meters ......................... 0.8 meters ... 0.4 meters ... 0.4 meters ... 0.5 meters ... 0.7 meters ... 0.7 meters. 

Level A area (km2) .............. 0.0000 ............................... 0.0000 ......... 0.0000 ......... 0.0000 ......... 0.0000 ......... 0.0000 ......... 0.0000. 

Potential sea otters affected 

by Level A sound per day.

0 ........................................ 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0. 

Potential sea otters affected 

by Level A sound per day 

(rounded).

0 ........................................ 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0. 

Total potential Level A harassment events.0 ........................................ 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0 .................. 0. 

Distance to below Level B 

harassment threshold.

14 meters .......................... 12 meters .... 12 meters .... 12 meters .... 12 meters .... 12 meters .... 13 meters. 

Level B area (km2) .............. 0.0003 ............................... 0.0002 ......... 0.0002 ......... 0.0002 ......... 0.0002 ......... 0.0002 ......... 0.0002. 

Potential sea otters affected 

by Level B sound per day.

0.0333 ............................... 0.0222 ......... 0.0222 ......... 0.0222 ......... 0.0222 ......... 0.0222 ......... 0.0222. 

Potential sea otters affected 

by Level B sound per day 

(rounded).

1 ........................................ 1 .................. 1 .................. 1 .................. 1 .................. 1 .................. 1. 

Total potential Level B harassment events.6 ........................................ 3 .................. 11 ................ 7 .................. 16 ................ 7 .................. 5. 

a Naval Facilities Engineering Command. 

TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF SOUND LEVEL, TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, DISTANCE FROM SOUND SOURCE TO BELOW

LEVEL A HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS, DAYS OF IMPACT, SEA OTTERS IN LEVEL A HARASSMENT ENSONIFICATION

AREA, AND TOTAL OTTERS EXPECTED TO BE TAKEN BY LEVEL A HARASSMENT BY IMPACT PILE DRIVING

Pile size 41-cm (16-in) permanent pile 

installation 

46-cm (18-in) permanent pile 

installation 

76-cm (30-in) permanent pile 

installation 

Total number of piles ............................. 73 .......................................................... 35 .......................................................... 20. 

Sound level ............................................ 168.3 dB (SEL)/181.1 dB (RMS)/192.8 

dB (peak) re 1 μPa at 10 m.

168.3 dB (SEL)/181.1 dB (RMS)/192.8 

dB (peak) re 1 μPa at 10 m.

177 dB (SEL)/190 dB (RMS)/210 dB 

(peak) re 1 μPa at 10 m. 

Source .................................................... Denes et al. 2016 NMFS 2023. 

Timing per pile ....................................... 20 minutes/pile; 240 strikes/pile ........... 20 minutes/pile; 240 strikes/pile ............ 20 minutes/pile; 360 strikes/pile. 

Maximum number piles per day ............ 6 ............................................................ 6 ............................................................ 6. 

Maximum number of days of activity ..... 13 .......................................................... 6 ............................................................ 4. 

Sea otter density .................................... 111.11 sea otters/km2

Distance to below Level A harassment 

threshold.

5.2 meters ............................................. 5.2 meters ............................................. 25.9 meters. 

Total Level A area (km2) ....................... 0.0001 ................................................... 0.0001 ................................................... 0.0021. 

Level A area (km2) after excluding 10-m 

shutdown zone (0.0003 km2).

0 ............................................................ 0 ............................................................ 0.0018. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level A 

sound per day.

0 ............................................................ 0 ............................................................ 0.2000. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level A 

sound per day (rounded).

0 ............................................................ 0 ............................................................ 1. 

Total potential Level A harassment 

events.

0 ............................................................ 0 ............................................................ 4. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
76234 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF SOUND LEVEL, TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, DISTANCE FROM SOUND SOURCE TO BELOW

LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS, DAYS OF IMPACT, SEA OTTERS IN LEVEL B ENSONIFICATION AREA, AND TOTAL

OTTERS EXPECTED TO BE TAKEN BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT BY IMPACT PILE DRIVING

Pile size 41-cm (16-in) permanent pile 

installation 

46-cm (18-in) permanent pile 

installation 

76-cm (30-in) permanent pile 

installation 

Total number of piles ............................. 73 .......................................................... 35 .......................................................... 20. 

Sound level ............................................ 168.3 dB (SEL)/181.1 dB (RMS)/192.8 

dB (peak) re 1 μPa at 10 m.

168.3 dB (SEL)/181.1 dB (RMS)/192.8 

dB (peak) re 1 μPa at 10 m.

177 dB (SEL)/190 dB (RMS)/210 dB 

(peak) re 1 μPa at 10 m. 

Source .................................................... Denes et al. 2016 NMFS 2023. 

Timing per pile ....................................... 20 minutes/pile; 240 strikes/pile ........... 20 minutes/pile; 240 strikes/pile ............ 20 minutes/pile; 360 strikes/pile. 

Maximum number piles per day ............ 6 ............................................................ 6 ............................................................ 6. 

Maximum number of days of activity ..... 13 .......................................................... 6 ............................................................ 4. 

Distance to below Level B harassment 

threshold a.

255 meters ............................................ 255 meters ............................................ 1,000 meters. 

Total Level B area (km2) ....................... 0.2038 ................................................... 0.2038 ................................................... 0.3137. 

Level B area (km2) within harbor ........... 0.18 ....................................................... 0.18 ....................................................... 0.18. 

Sea otter density inside harbor .............. 111.11 sea otters/km2

Potential sea otters affected by Level B 

sound per day within harbor.

19.9998 ................................................. 19.9998 ................................................. 19.9998. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level B 

sound per day within harbor (rounded).

20 .......................................................... 20 .......................................................... 20. 

Potential Level B harassment events 

within harbor.

260 ........................................................ 120 ........................................................ 80. 

Level B area (km2) outside harbor ........ 0.0238 ................................................... 0.0238 ................................................... 0.1337. 

Sea otter density outside harbor ........... 21.15 sea otters/km2

Potential sea otters affected by Level B 

sound per day outside harbor.

0.5034 ................................................... 0.5034 ................................................... 2.8278. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level B 

sound per day outside harbor (rounded).

1 ............................................................ 1 ............................................................ 3. 

Potential Level B harassment events 

outside harbor.

13 .......................................................... 6 ............................................................ 12. 

Total potential Level B harassment 

events.

273 ........................................................ 126 ........................................................ 92. 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF SOUND LEVEL, TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, DISTANCE FROM SOUND SOURCE TO BELOW

LEVEL A HARASSMENT AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS, DAYS OF IMPACT, SEA OTTERS IN LEVEL A AND

LEVEL B HARASSMENT ENSONIFICATION AREA, AND TOTAL OTTERS EXPECTED TO BE HARASSED THROUGH BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE BY DOWN-THE-HOLE PILE DRIVING

Pile size 

41-cm (16-in) 

permanent pile 

installation 

46-cm (18-in) 

permanent pile 

installation 

76-cm (30-in) permanent pile installation 

Total number of piles .......................................... 50 ............................................. 20 ............................................. 16. 

Sound level ......................................................... 159 dB (SEL)/167 dB (RMS) re 1 μPa at 10 m 164 dB (SEL)/174 dB (RMS) re 1 μPa at 10 m. 

Source ................................................................. Heyvaert and Reyff 2021 Reyff and Heyvaert 2019, Reyff 2020, Denes 

et al. 2019. 

Timing per pile .................................................... 75 minutes/pile ......................... 75 minutes/pile ......................... 75 minutes/pile. 

Maximum number piles per day ......................... 4 ............................................... 4 ............................................... 4. 

Maximum number of days of activity .................. 13 ............................................. 5 ............................................... 4. 

Sea otter density ................................................. 111.11 sea otters/km2

Distance to below Level A harassment threshold.35.2 meters .............................. 35.2 meters .............................. 67.1 meters. 

Total Level A area (km2) ..................................... 0.0039 ...................................... 0.0039 ...................................... 0.0141. 

Level A area (km2) after excluding 10-m shutdown zone (0.0003 km2).

0.0036 ...................................... 0.0036 ...................................... 0.0138. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level A sound 

per day.

0.4000 ...................................... 0.4000 ...................................... 1.5333. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level A sound 

per day (rounded).

1 ............................................... 1 ............................................... 2. 

Total potential Level A harassment events ........ 13 ............................................. 5 ............................................... 8. 

Distance to below Level B harassment threshold a.

29 meters ................................. 29 meters ................................. 86 meters. 

Level B area (km2) .............................................. 0 ............................................... 0 ............................................... 0.0091. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level B sound 

per day.

0 ............................................... 0 ............................................... 1.0111. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level B sound 

per day (rounded).

0 ............................................... 0 ............................................... 2. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76235 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF SOUND LEVEL, TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, DISTANCE FROM SOUND SOURCE TO BELOW

LEVEL A HARASSMENT AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS, DAYS OF IMPACT, SEA OTTERS IN LEVEL A AND

LEVEL B HARASSMENT ENSONIFICATION AREA, AND TOTAL OTTERS EXPECTED TO BE HARASSED THROUGH BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE BY DOWN-THE-HOLE PILE DRIVING—Continued 

Pile size 

41-cm (16-in) 

permanent pile 

installation 

46-cm (18-in) 

permanent pile 

installation 

76-cm (30-in) permanent pile installation 

Total potential Level B harassment events ........ 0 ............................................... 0 ............................................... 8. 

a Due to differences in how PTS and TTS thresholds are calculated, the Level A isopleths are larger than the Level B isopleths. 

TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF SOUND LEVEL, TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, DISTANCE FROM SOUND SOURCE TO BELOW

LEVEL A HARASSMENT AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS, DAYS OF IMPACT, SEA OTTERS IN LEVEL A AND

LEVEL B HARASSMENT ENSONIFICATION AREA, AND TOTAL OTTERS EXPECTED TO BE HARASSED THROUGH BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE BY USE OF A SKIFF

Sound source Worker transit skiff 

Sound level .......................................................................................................................... 182 dB (RMS) re 1 μPa at 0.9 m. 

Source .................................................................................................................................. Kipple and Gabriele 2007. 

Number of days of vessel use ............................................................................................. 170. 

Sea otter density .................................................................................................................. 111.11 sea otters/km2. 

Distance to below Level A harassment threshold ............................................................... 0 meters. 

Level A area (km2) ............................................................................................................... 0. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level A sound per day ..................................................... 0. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level A sound per day (rounded) .................................... 0. 

Total potential Level A harassment events ......................................................................... 0. 

Distance to below Level B harassment threshold ............................................................... 26.4 meters. 

Total Level B area (km2) ...................................................................................................... 0.007. 

Level B area after excluding 10-m shutdown zone (0.0003 km2) ....................................... 0.0067. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level B sound per day ..................................................... 0.7444. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level B sound per day (rounded) .................................... 1. 

Total potential Level B harassment events ......................................................................... 170. 

TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF SOUND LEVEL, TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, DISTANCE FROM SOUND SOURCE TO BELOW

LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS, DAYS OF IMPACT, SEA OTTERS IN LEVEL B HARASSMENT ENSONIFICATION

AREA, AND TOTAL OTTERS EXPECTED TO BE HARASSED THROUGH BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE BY IN-AIR SOUND

Sound source Vibratory pile driving on shore Impact pile driving on shore 

Sound level .............................................................................................................. 103.2 dB re 20 μPa at 15 m (RMS) ...... 101 dB 20 μPa at 15 m (RMS). 

Source ..................................................................................................................... Laughlin 2010 ......................................... Ghebreghzabiher 2017. 

Maximum number of days of activity ....................................................................... 45 ........................................................... 21. 

Sea otter density ..................................................................................................... 111.11 sea otters/km.2

Distance to below Level B harassment threshold ................................................... 22 meters ............................................... 17 meters. 

Total Level B area (km2) ......................................................................................... 0.0015 .................................................... 0.0009. 

Level B area after excluding 10-m shutdown zone (0.0003 km2) .......................... 0.0012 .................................................... 0.0006. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level B sound per day ......................................... 0.1333 .................................................... 0.0667. 

Potential sea otters affected by Level B sound per day (rounded) ........................ 1 ............................................................. 1. 

Total potential Level B harassment events ............................................................. 45 ........................................................... 21. 

Sound levels for all underwater sound 

sources are unweighted and given in dB 

re 1 mPa; sound levels for airborne 

sound sources are unweighted and 

given in dB re 20 mPa. Nonimpulsive 

sounds are in the form of mean 

maximum root mean square (RMS) 

sound pressure level (SPL) as it is more 

conservative than cumulative sound 

exposure level (SEL) or peak SPL for 

these activities. Impulsive sound 

sources are in the form of SEL for a 

single strike. 

To determine the number of sea otters 

that may experience in-water sounds 

>160 dB re 1mPa due to pile driving, we 

multiplied the area ensonified to >160 

dB re 1mPa outside Cordova Harbor by 

the density of animals (21.15 sea otters/ 

km2) derived from surveys conducted of 

Orca Inlet (Weitzman and Esslinger 

2015), whereas the area ensonified to 

>160 dB re 1mPa within Cordova Harbor 

was multiplied by the density derived 

from local knowledge (111.11 sea otters/ 

km2; Greenwood 2022; Prince William 

Sound Science Center 2022; Schinella 

2022, 2023; Solstice Alaska Consulting 

Inc. 2022). We applied the same 

methodology to determine the number 

of sea otters that may experience sounds 

capable of causing PTS. Similarly, to 

determine the number of sea otters that 

may experience airborne construction 

sounds >100 dB re 20 mPa due to pile 

driving, we multiplied the area 

ensonified to >100 dB re 20 mPa by the 

density of sea otters within the harbor 

(111.11 sea otters/km2; Greenwood 

2022; Prince William Sound Science 

Center 2022; Schinella 2022, 2023; 

Solstice Alaska Consulting Inc. 2022). 

The number of sea otters expected to be 

exposed to such sound levels can be 

found in tables 2 through 7. To calculate 

the underwater area ensonified for most 

types of pile-driving activity, we used 

pr2. Given the numerous harbor floats 

and the number of piles being removed 

and installed, it was not feasible to 

calculate the actual area of water 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
76236 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 

ensonified for most activities, so the 

area of a circle was used for a 

conservative estimate for pile driving 

activities where the ensonified area is 

entirely within the harbor. Likewise, to 

calculate the area ensonified by piledriving activities on shore, we used pr2. 

For the Level B underwater area 

ensonified by impact pile driving 76-cm 

(30-in) piles, we used ArcGIS Pro to 

map the zones and calculate the area of 

the water ensonified, since it is the 

largest zone and extends beyond the 

harbor. The applicant proposed a 

universal 10-m (33-ft) shutdown zone 

for all project activities so that area was 

subtracted from all calculated areas 

when estimating take. 

The area ensonified by the worker 

transit skiff was estimated by 

multiplying the vessel’s anticipated 

daily track length by twice the 160 dB 

radius plus pr2 to account for the 

rounded ends of the track line. It was 

estimated that the distance of each trip 

would be no more than 91.44 m (300 ft). 

We assumed that the different types of 

activities would occur sequentially and 

that the total number of days of work 

would equal the sum of the number of 

days required to complete each type of 

activity. While it is possible that on 

some days more than one type of 

activity will take place, which would 

reduce the number of days of exposure 

within a year, we cannot know this 

information in advance. As such, the 

estimated number of days and, 

therefore, exposures per year is the 

maximum possible for the planned 

work. Where the number of exposures 

expected per day was zero to three or 

more decimal places (i.e., <0.00X), the 

number of exposures per day was 

assumed to be zero. 

In order to minimize exposure of sea 

otters to sounds above Level A 

harassment thresholds, the applicant 

will implement shutdown zones ranging 

from 10 to 100 m (33 to 328 ft), based 

on the pile size and type of pile driving 

or construction activity, where 

operations will cease should a sea otter 

enter or approach the specified zone. 

Soft-start and zone clearance prior to 

startup will also limit the exposure of 

sea otters to sound levels that could 

cause PTS. However, the City of 

Cordova has requested, and the Service 

proposes to authorize, small numbers of 

take by Level A harassment during 

impact pile driving and DTH drilling. 

Critical Assumptions 

We estimate that 790 takes of 77 sea 

otters by Level B harassment and 30 

takes of 5 sea otters by Level A 

harassment may occur due to the City’s 

planned harbor construction activities. 

In order to conduct this analysis and 

estimate the potential amount of take by 

harassment, several critical assumptions 

were made. 

Level B harassment is equated herein 

with behavioral responses that indicate 

harassment or disturbance. There is 

likely a portion of animals that respond 

in ways that indicate some level of 

disturbance but do not experience 

significant biological consequences. 

We used the sea otter density for Orca 

Inlet from surveys and analyses 

conducted by Weitzman and Esslinger 

(2015) for areas ensonified outside 

Cordova Harbor. Methods and 

assumptions for these surveys can be 

found in the original publication. 

Multiple local sources (Greenwood 

2022; Prince William Sound Science 

Center 2022; Schinella 2022, 2023; 

Solstice Alaska Consulting Inc. 2022) 

indicated a higher density within the 

Cordova Harbor—approximately 20 sea 

otters at any given time within the 0.18 

km2 area of the harbor, or a density of 

111.11 sea otters/km2. We used this 

density to estimate take for areas 

ensonified within the harbor. 

We used sound source verification 

from recent pile-driving activities in a 

number of locations within and beyond 

Alaska to generate sound level estimates 

for construction activities. 

Environmental conditions in these 

locations, including water depth, 

substrate, and ambient sound levels, are 

similar to those in the project location, 

but not identical. Further, estimation of 

underwater ensonification zones were 

based on sound attenuation models 

using a practical spreading loss model; 

estimation of in-air ensonification zones 

were based on sound attenuation 

models using a spherical spreading loss 

model. These factors may lead to actual 

sound values differing slightly from 

those estimated here. 

Finally, the in-water pile-driving 

activities described here will also create 

in-air noise. Because sea otters spend 

over half of their day with their heads 

above water (Esslinger et al. 2014), they 

will be exposed to increased in-air noise 

from construction equipment. However, 

we have calculated Level B harassment 

with the assumption that an individual 

may be harassed only one time per 24- 

hour period, and underwater sound 

levels will be more disturbing and 

extend farther than in-air noise. Thus, 

while sea otters may be disturbed by 

noise both in air and underwater, we 

have relied on the more conservative 

underwater estimates. 

Sum of Harassment From All Sources 

The applicant plans to conduct pile 

driving and marine construction 

activities in Cordova, Alaska, over the 

course of a year from the date of 

issuance of the IHA. A summary of total 

estimated take during the project, by 

source, is provided in table 8. 

TABLE 8—TOTAL ESTIMATED TAKES BY SOURCE OF LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT OF SEA OTTERS

Source 

Number of 

days of 

activity 

Sea otters 

exposed per day 

to Level A 

harassment 

Total takes of 

sea otters by 

Level A 

harassment 

Sea otters 

exposed per day 

to Level B 

harassment 

Total takes of 

sea otters by 

Level B 

harassment 

Vibratory drilling: 

30-to-61-cm (12-in-to-24-in) existing timber pile removal ............. 6 0 0 1 6 

30-to-61-cm (12-in-to-24-in) existing steel pile removal ................ 3 0 0 1 3 

61-cm (24-in) template installation ................................................ 11 0 0 1 11 

61-cm (24-in) template removal ..................................................... 7 0 0 1 7 

41-cm (16-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 16 0 0 1 16 

46-cm (18-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 7 0 0 1 7 

76-cm (30-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 5 0 0 1 5 

Impact drilling: 

41-cm (16-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 13 0 0 21 273 

46-cm (18-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 6 0 0 21 126 

76-cm (30-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 4 1 4 23 92 

Down-the-hole drilling: 

41-cm (16-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 13 1 13 0 0 

46-cm (18-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 5 1 5 0 0 

76-cm (30-in) permanent pile installation ...................................... 4 2 8 2 8 

Skiff use: 

Worker transit skiff ......................................................................... 170 0 0 1 170 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76237 

TABLE 8—TOTAL ESTIMATED TAKES BY SOURCE OF LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT OF SEA OTTERS—Continued 

Source 

Number of 

days of 

activity 

Sea otters 

exposed per day 

to Level A 

harassment 

Total takes of 

sea otters by 

Level A 

harassment 

Sea otters 

exposed per day 

to Level B 

harassment 

Total takes of 

sea otters by 

Level B 

harassment 

In-air Sound: 

Vibratory pile driving on shore ....................................................... 45 0 0 1 45 

Impact pile driving on shore .......................................................... 21 0 0 1 21 

Totals ...................................................................................... 336 5 30 77 790 

Over the course of the project, we 

estimate 790 instances of take by Level 

B harassment of 77 northern sea otters 

from the Southcentral Alaska stock due 

to behavioral responses of TTS 

associated with noise exposure. 

Although multiple instances of Level B 

harassment of individual sea otters are 

possible, these events are unlikely to 

have significant consequences for the 

health, reproduction, or survival of 

affected animals, and therefore would 

not rise to the level of an injury or Level 

A harassment. 

The use of soft-start procedures, zone 

clearance prior to startup, and 

shutdown zones is likely to decrease 

both the number of sea otters exposed 

to sounds above Level A harassment 

thresholds and the exposure time of any 

sea otters venturing into a Level A 

harassment zone. This reduces the 

likelihood of losses of hearing 

sensitivity that might impact the health, 

reproduction, or survival of affected 

animals. Despite the implementation of 

mitigation measures, it is anticipated 

that some sea otters will experience 

Level A harassment via exposure to 

underwater sounds above threshold 

criteria during impact and DTH piledriving activities. Due to sea otters’ 

small body size and low profile in the 

water, as well as the relatively large size 

of the Level A harassment zone 

associated with these activities, we 

anticipate that sea otters will at times 

avoid detection before entering Level A 

harassment zones for those activities. 

We anticipate that protected species 

observers (PSOs) will be able to reliably 

detect and prevent take by Level A 

harassment of sea otters up to 10 m (33 

ft) away; conversely, we anticipate that 

at distances greater than 10 m, sea otters 

will at times avoid detection. 

Throughout the project, we estimate 30 

instances of take by Level A harassment 

of 5 sea otters. 

Determinations and Findings 

Sea otters exposed to sound from the 

specified activities are likely to respond 

with temporary behavioral modification 

or displacement. The specified activities 

could temporarily interrupt the feeding, 

resting, and movement of sea otters. 

Because activities will occur during a 

limited amount of time and in a 

localized region, the impacts associated 

with the project are likewise temporary 

and localized. The anticipated effects 

are short-term behavioral reactions and 

displacement of sea otters near active 

operations. 

Sea otters that encounter the specified 

activity may exert more energy than 

they would otherwise, due to temporary 

cessation of feeding, increased 

vigilance, and retreating from the 

project area. We expect that affected sea 

otters will tolerate this exertion without 

measurable effects on health or 

reproduction. Most of the anticipated 

takes will be due to short-term Level B 

harassment in the form of TTS, startle 

reactions, or temporary displacement. 

While mitigation measures incorporated 

into the applicant’s request will reduce 

occurrences of Level A harassment to 

the extent practicable, a small number 

of takes by Level A harassment would 

be authorized for impact and DTH piledriving activities, which have Level A 

harassment zone radii ranging in size 

from 5.2 to 67.1 m (17 to 220 ft). 

With the adoption of the mitigation 

measures incorporated in the 

applicant’s request and required by this 

proposed IHA, anticipated take was 

reduced. Those mitigation measures are 

further described below. 

Small Numbers 

To assess whether the authorized 

incidental taking would be limited to 

‘‘small numbers’’ of marine mammals, 

the Service uses a proportional 

approach that considers whether the 

estimated number of marine mammals 

to be subjected to incidental take is 

small relative to the population size of 

the species or stock. Here, predicted 

levels of take were determined based on 

the estimated density of sea otters in the 

project area and ensonification zones 

developed using empirical evidence 

from similar geographic areas. 

We estimate that the City’s specified 

activities in the specified geographic 

region will result in no more than 790 

takes of 77 sea otters by Level B 

harassment and 30 takes of 5 sea otters 

by Level A harassment during the 1-year 

period of this proposed IHA (see Sum of 

Harassment from All Sources). Take of 

82 animals is 0.4 percent of the best 

available estimate of the current 

Southcentral Alaska stock size of 21,617 

animals (Esslinger et al. 2021) ((82 ÷ 

21,617) × 100 ≈ 0.4) and represents a 

‘‘small number’’ of sea otters of that 

stock. 

Negligible Impact 

We propose a finding that any 

incidental take by harassment resulting 

from the specified activities cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

sea otter through effects on annual rates 

of recruitment or survival and will, 

therefore, have no more than a 

negligible impact on the Southcentral 

Alaska stock of northern sea otters. In 

making this finding, we considered the 

best available scientific information, 

including the biological and behavioral 

characteristics of the species, the most 

recent information on species 

distribution and abundance within the 

area of the specified activities, the 

current and expected future status of the 

stock (including existing and 

foreseeable human and natural 

stressors), the potential sources of 

disturbance caused by the project, and 

the potential responses of marine 

mammals to this disturbance. In 

addition, we reviewed applicantprovided materials, information in our 

files and datasets, published reference 

materials, and species experts. 

Sea otters are likely to respond to 

planned activities with temporary 

behavioral modification or temporary 

displacement. These reactions are not 

anticipated to have consequences for the 

long-term health, reproduction, or 

survival of affected animals. Most 

animals will respond to disturbance by 

moving away from the source, which 

may cause temporary interruption of 

foraging, resting, or other natural 

behaviors. Affected animals are 

expected to resume normal behaviors 

soon after exposure, with no lasting 

consequences. Each sea otter is 

estimated to be exposed to construction 

noise for between 3 and 170 days per 

year, resulting in repeated exposures. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
76238 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 

However, injuries (i.e., Level A 

harassment or PTS) due to chronic 

sound exposure are estimated to occur 

over a longer time scale (Southall et al. 

2019). The area that will experience 

noise greater than Level B thresholds 

due to pile driving is small (less than 

0.0141 km2), and an animal that may be 

disturbed could escape the noise by 

moving to nearby quiet areas. Further, 

sea otters spend over half of their time 

above the surface during the summer 

months (Esslinger et al. 2014), and 

likely no more than 70 percent of their 

time foraging during winter months 

(Gelatt et al. 2002); thus, their ears will 

not be exposed to continuous noise, and 

the amount of time it may take for 

permanent injury is considerably longer 

than that of mammals primarily under 

water. Some animals may exhibit some 

of the stronger responses typical of 

Level B harassment, such as fleeing, 

interruption of feeding, or flushing from 

a haulout. These responses could have 

temporary biological impacts for 

affected individuals, but are not 

anticipated to result in measurable 

changes in survival or reproduction. 

The total number of animals affected 

and severity of impact are not sufficient 

to change the current population 

dynamics at the stock scale. Although 

the specified activities may result in 

approximately 820 incidental takes of 

82 sea otters from the Southcentral 

Alaska stock, we do not expect this level 

of harassment to affect annual rates of 

recruitment or survival or result in 

adverse effects on the stock. 

Our proposed finding of negligible 

impact applies to incidental take 

associated with the specified activities 

as mitigated by the avoidance and 

minimization measures identified in the 

applicant’s mitigation and monitoring 

plan. These mitigation measures are 

designed to minimize interactions with 

and impacts to sea otters. These 

measures and the monitoring and 

reporting procedures are required for 

the validity of our finding and are a 

necessary component of the proposed 

IHA. For these reasons, we propose a 

finding that the specified project will 

have a negligible impact on the 

Southcentral Alaska stock of northern 

sea otters. 

Least Practicable Adverse Impacts 

We find that the mitigation measures 

required by this proposed IHA will 

affect the least practicable adverse 

impacts on the stocks from any 

incidental take likely to occur in 

association with the specified activities. 

In making this finding, we considered 

the biological characteristics of sea 

otters, the nature of the specified 

activities, the potential effects of the 

activities on sea otters, the documented 

impacts of similar activities on sea 

otters, and alternative mitigation 

measures. 

In evaluating what mitigation 

measures are appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses, we considered 

the manner and degree to which the 

successful implementation of the 

measures are expected to achieve this 

goal. We considered the nature of the 

potential adverse impact being 

mitigated (likelihood, scope, range), the 

likelihood that the measures will be 

effective if implemented, and the 

likelihood of effective implementation. 

We also considered the practicability of 

the measures for applicant 

implementation (e.g., cost, impact on 

operations). We assessed whether any 

additional practicable requirements 

could be implemented to further reduce 

effects, but did not identify any. 

To reduce the potential for 

disturbance from acoustic stimuli 

associated with the activities, the City of 

Cordova will implement mitigation 

measures, including the following: 

• Using a project design that 

incorporates the smallest diameter piles 

and footprint practicable while 

minimizing the overall number of piles 

and area; 

• Using a project design that does not 

include dredging or excavating below 

the high tide line; 

• Using a project design that does not 

include blasting; 

• Using pile driving equipment with 

muffler systems to reduce in-air noise 

generation; 

• Using a vibratory hammer equipped 

with a suppressor to reduce rattling; 

• Using dampeners to eliminate steelon-steel in-air noise; 

• Employing a sediment curtain 

during all DTH pile driving to contain 

drill spoils and to minimize turbidity; 

• Development of a marine mammal 

monitoring and mitigation plan; 

• Establishment of shutdown and 

monitoring zones; 

• Visual mitigation monitoring by 

designated protected species observers 

(PSO); 

• Site clearance before startup; 

• Soft-start procedures; and 

• Shutdown procedures. 

The Service has not identified any 

additional (i.e., not already incorporated 

into the applicant’s request) mitigation 

or monitoring measures that are 

practicable and would further reduce 

potential impacts to sea otters and their 

habitat. 

Impact on Subsistence Use 

The project will not preclude access 

to harvest areas or interfere with the 

availability of sea otters for harvest. 

Additionally, the construction activities 

take place within the Cordova Harbor, 

where firearm use is prohibited. We 

therefore propose a finding that the 

applicant’s anticipated harassment will 

not have an unmitigable adverse impact 

on the availability of any stock of 

northern sea otters for taking for 

subsistence uses. In making this finding, 

we considered the timing and location 

of the planned activities and the timing 

and location of subsistence harvest 

activities in the project area. 

Monitoring and Reporting 

The purposes of the monitoring 

requirements are to document and 

provide data for assessing the effects of 

specified activities on sea otters; to 

ensure that take is consistent with that 

anticipated in the small numbers, 

negligible impact, and subsistence use 

analyses; and to detect any 

unanticipated effects on the species. 

Monitoring plans include steps to 

document when and how sea otters are 

encountered and their numbers and 

behaviors during these encounters. This 

information allows the Service to 

measure encounter rates and trends and 

to estimate numbers of animals 

potentially affected. To the extent 

possible, monitors will record group 

size, age, sex, reaction, duration of 

interaction, and closest approach to the 

project activity. 

As proposed, monitoring activities 

will be summarized and reported in 

formal reports. The applicant must 

submit monthly reports for all months 

during which noise-generating work 

takes place as well as a final monitoring 

report that must submitted no later than 

90 days after the expiration of the IHA. 

We will require an approved plan for 

monitoring and reporting the effects of 

pile driving and marine construction 

activities on sea otters prior to issuance 

of an IHA. We will require approval of 

the monitoring results for continued 

operation under the IHA. 

We find that these proposed 

monitoring and reporting requirements 

to evaluate the potential impacts of 

planned activities will ensure that the 

effects of the activities remain 

consistent with the rest of the findings. 

Required Determinations 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

We have prepared a draft 

environmental assessment in 

accordance with the NEPA (42 U.S.C. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76239 

4321 et seq.). We have preliminarily 

concluded that authorizing the 

nonlethal, incidental, unintentional take 

by Level B harassment of up to 790 

takes of 77 sea otters and by Level A 

harassment of up to 30 takes of 5 sea 

otters from the Southcentral Alaska 

stock in the specified geographic region 

during the specified activities during 

the regulatory period would not 

significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment and, thus, 

preparation of an environmental impact 

statement for this proposed IHA is not 

required by section 102(2) of NEPA or 

its implementing regulations. We are 

accepting comments on the draft 

environmental assessment as specified 

above in DATES and ADDRESSES. 

Government-to-Government 

Consultation 

It is our responsibility to 

communicate and work directly on a 

Government-to-Government basis with 

federally recognized Alaska Native 

Tribes in developing programs for 

healthy ecosystems. We seek their full 

and meaningful participation in 

evaluating and addressing conservation 

concerns for protected species. It is our 

goal to remain sensitive to Alaska 

Native culture, and to make information 

available to Alaska Tribal organizations 

and communities. Our efforts are guided 

by the following policies and directives: 

(1) The Native American Policy of the 

Service (January 20, 2016); 

(2) The Alaska Native Relations Policy 

(currently in draft form); 

(3) Executive Order 13175 (January 9, 

2000); 

(4) Department of the Interior 

Secretary’s Orders 3206 (June 5, 1997), 

3225 (January 19, 2001), 3317 

(December 1, 2011), and 3342 (October 

21, 2016); 

(5) The Alaska Government-toGovernment Policy (a departmental 

memorandum issued January 18, 2001); 

and 

(6) The Department of the Interior’s 

policies on consultation with Alaska 

Native Tribes and organizations. 

We have evaluated possible effects of 

the specified activities on federally 

recognized Alaska Native Tribes and 

organizations. The Service has 

determined that, due to this project’s 

locations and activities, the Tribal 

organizations and communities near 

Cordova, Alaska, as well as relevant 

Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 

corporations, will not be impacted by 

this project. Regardless, we will be 

reaching out to them to inform them of 

the availability of this proposed IHA 

and offer them the opportunity to 

consult. 

We invite continued discussion, 

either about the project and its impacts 

or about our coordination and 

information exchange throughout the 

IHA process. 

Proposed Authorization 

We propose to authorize the nonlethal 

incidental take by Level A and Level B 

harassment of 820 takes of 82 sea otters 

from the Southcentral Alaska stock. 

Authorized take may be caused by pile 

driving and marine construction 

activities conducted by the City of 

Cordova in Cordova, Alaska, over the 

course of a year from the date of 

issuance of the IHA. We do not 

anticipate or authorize any lethal take to 

sea otters resulting from these activities. 

A. General Conditions for the Incidental 

Harassment Authorization (IHA) 

(1) Activities must be conducted in 

the manner described in the request 

from the City of Cordova for an IHA and 

in accordance with all applicable 

conditions and mitigation measures. 

The taking of sea otters whenever the 

required conditions, mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting measures are 

not fully implemented as required by 

the IHA is prohibited. Failure to follow 

the measures specified both in the 

request and within this proposed 

authorization may result in the 

modification, suspension, or revocation 

of the IHA. 

(2) If project activities cause 

unauthorized take (i.e., greater than 820 

takes of 82 of the Southcentral Alaska 

stock of northern sea otters, a form of 

take other than Level A or Level B 

harassment, or take of one or more sea 

otters through methods not described in 

the IHA), the City of Cordova must take 

the following actions: 

(i) cease its activities immediately (or 

reduce activities to the minimum level 

necessary to maintain safety); 

(ii) report the details of the incident 

to the Service within 48 hours; and 

(iii) suspend further activities until 

the Service has reviewed the 

circumstances and determined whether 

additional mitigation measures are 

necessary to avoid further unauthorized 

taking. 

(3) All operations managers, vehicle 

operators, and machine operators must 

receive a copy of this IHA and maintain 

access to it for reference at all times 

during project work. These personnel 

must understand, be fully aware of, and 

be capable of implementing the 

conditions of the IHA at all times during 

project work. 

(4) This IHA will apply to activities 

associated with the specified project as 

described in this document and in the 

City of Cordova’s request. Changes to 

the specified project without prior 

authorization may invalidate the IHA. 

(5) The City of Cordova’s request is 

approved and fully incorporated into 

this IHA unless exceptions are 

specifically noted herein. The request 

includes: 

(i) The City of Cordova’s original 

request for an IHA, dated February 28, 

2023; 

(ii) Revised requests, dated April 27, 

May 18, and June 8, 2023; 

(iii) Marine Mammal Mitigation and 

Monitoring Plan; and 

(iv) Google Earth package; 

(6) Operators will allow Service 

personnel or the Service’s designated 

representative to visit project worksites 

to monitor for impacts to sea otters and 

subsistence uses of sea otters at any time 

throughout project activities, so long as 

it is safe to do so. ‘‘Operators’’ are all 

personnel operating under the City of 

Cordova’s authority, including all 

contractors and subcontractors. 

B. Avoidance and Minimization 

(7) Construction activities must be 

conducted using equipment that 

generates the lowest practicable levels 

of underwater sound within the range of 

frequencies audible to sea otters. 

(8) During all pile-installation 

activities, regardless of predicted sound 

levels, a physical interaction shutdown 

zone of 10 m (33 ft) must be enforced. 

If a sea otter enters the shutdown zone, 

in-water activities must be delayed until 

either the animal has been visually 

observed outside the shutdown zone, or 

15 minutes have elapsed since the last 

observation time without redetection of 

the animal. 

(9) If the impact driver has been idled 

for more than 30 minutes, an initial set 

of three strikes from the impact driver 

must be delivered at reduced energy, 

followed by a 1-minute waiting period, 

before full powered proofing strikes. 

(10) In-water activity must be 

conducted in daylight. If environmental 

conditions prevent visual detection of 

sea otters within the shutdown zone, inwater activities must be stopped until 

visibility is regained. 

(11) All in-water work along the 

shoreline must be conducted during low 

tide when the site is dewatered to the 

maximum extent practicable. 

C. Mitigation Measures for Vessel 

Operations 

Vessel operators must take every 

precaution to avoid harassment of sea 

otters when a vessel is operating near 

these animals. The applicant must carry 

out the following measures: 

(12) Vessels must remain at least 500 

m (0.3 mi) from rafts of sea otters, unless 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
76240 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 

safety is a factor. Vessels must reduce 

speed and maintain a distance of 100 m 

(328 ft) from all sea otters, unless safety 

is a factor. 

(13) Vessels must not be operated in 

such a way as to separate members of 

a group of sea otters from other 

members of the group, and must avoid 

alongshore travel in shallow water (<20 

m (66 ft)) whenever practicable. 

(14) When weather conditions 

require, such as when visibility drops, 

vessels must adjust speed accordingly to 

avoid the likelihood of injury to sea 

otters. 

(15) Vessel operators must be 

provided written guidance for avoiding 

collisions and minimizing disturbances 

to sea otters. Guidance will include 

measures identified in paragraphs 

(C)(12) through (15) of this section. 

D. Monitoring 

(16) Operators shall work with 

protected species observers (PSO) to 

apply mitigation measures and shall 

recognize the authority of PSOs up to 

and including stopping work, except 

where doing so poses a significant safety 

risk to personnel. 

(17) Duties of the PSOs include 

watching for and identifying sea otters, 

recording observation details, 

documenting presence in any applicable 

monitoring zone, identifying and 

documenting potential harassment, and 

working with operators to implement all 

appropriate mitigation measures. 

(18) A sufficient number of PSOs will 

be available to meet the following 

criteria: 100 percent monitoring of 

exclusion zones during all daytime 

periods of underwater noise-generating 

work; a maximum of 4 consecutive 

hours on watch per PSO; a maximum of 

approximately 12 hours on watch per 

day per PSO. 

(19) All PSOs will complete a training 

course designed to familiarize 

individuals with monitoring and data 

collection procedures. A field crew 

leader with prior experience as a sea 

otter observer will supervise the PSO 

team. Initially, new or inexperienced 

PSOs will be paired with experienced 

PSOs so that the quality of marine 

mammal observations and data 

recording is kept consistent. Resumes 

for candidate PSOs will be made 

available for the Service to review. 

(20) Observers will be provided with 

reticule binoculars (7×50 or better), bigeye binoculars or spotting scopes (30×), 

inclinometers, and range finders. Field 

guides, instructional handbooks, maps, 

and a contact list will also be made 

available. 

(21) Observers will collect data using 

the following procedures: 

(i) All data will be recorded onto a 

field form or database. 

(ii) Global positioning system data, 

sea state, wind force, and weather will 

be collected at the beginning and end of 

a monitoring period, every hour in 

between, at the change of an observer, 

and upon sightings of sea otters. 

(iii) Observation records of sea otters 

will include date; time; the observer’s 

locations, heading, and speed (if 

moving); weather; visibility; number of 

animals; group size and composition 

(adults/juveniles); and the location of 

the animals (or distance and direction 

from the observer). 

(iv) Observation records will also 

include initial behaviors of the sea 

otters, descriptions of project activities 

and underwater sound levels being 

generated, the position of sea otters 

relative to applicable monitoring and 

mitigation zones, any mitigation 

measures applied, and any apparent 

reactions to the project activities before 

and after mitigation. 

(v) For all sea otters in or near a 

mitigation zone, observers will record 

the distance from the sound source to 

the sea otter upon initial observation, 

the duration of the encounter, and the 

distance at last observation in order to 

monitor cumulative sound exposures. 

(vi) Observers will note any instances 

of animals lingering close to or traveling 

with vessels for prolonged periods of 

time. 

(22) Monitoring of the shutdown zone 

must continue for 30 minutes following 

completion of pile installation. 

E. Measures To Reduce Impacts to 

Subsistence Users 

(23) Prior to conducting the work, the 

City of Cordova will take the following 

steps to reduce potential effects on 

subsistence harvest of sea otters: 

(i) Avoid work in areas of known sea 

otter subsistence harvest; 

(ii) If any concerns remain, develop a 

plan of cooperation in consultation with 

the Service and subsistence 

stakeholders to address these concerns. 

F. Reporting Requirements 

(24) The City of Cordova must notify 

the Service at least 48 hours prior to 

commencement of activities. 

(25) Monthly reports will be 

submitted to the Service’s Marine 

Mammal Management office (MMM) for 

all months during which noisegenerating work takes place. The 

monthly report will contain and 

summarize the following information: 

dates, times, weather, and sea 

conditions (including the Beaufort Scale 

sea state and wind force conditions) 

when sea otters were sighted; the 

number, location, distance from the 

sound source, and behavior of the sea 

otters; the associated project activities; 

and a description of the implementation 

and effectiveness of mitigation measures 

with a discussion of any specific 

behaviors the sea otters exhibited in 

response to mitigation. 

(26) A final report will be submitted 

to the Service’s MMM within 90 days 

after completion of work or expiration 

of the IHA. The report will include: 

(i) A summary of monitoring efforts 

(hours of monitoring, activities 

monitored, number of PSOs, and, if 

requested by the Service, the daily 

monitoring logs). 

(ii) A description of all project 

activities, along with any additional 

work yet to be done. Factors influencing 

visibility and detectability of marine 

mammals (e.g., sea state, number of 

observers, and fog and glare) will be 

discussed. 

(iii) A description of the factors 

affecting the presence and distribution 

of sea otters (e.g., weather, sea state, and 

project activities). An estimate will be 

included of the number of sea otters 

exposed to noise at received levels 

greater than or equal to 160 dB (based 

on visual observation). 

(iv) A description of changes in sea 

otter behavior resulting from project 

activities and any specific behaviors of 

interest. 

(v) A discussion of the mitigation 

measures implemented during project 

activities and their observed 

effectiveness for minimizing impacts to 

sea otters. Sea otter observation records 

will be provided to the Service in the 

form of electronic database or 

spreadsheet files. 

(27) Injured, dead, or distressed sea 

otters that are not associated with 

project activities (e.g., animals known to 

be from outside the project area, 

previously wounded animals, or 

carcasses with moderate to advanced 

decomposition or scavenger damage) 

must be reported to the Service within 

24 hours of the discovery to either the 

Service’s MMM (1–800–362–5148, 

business hours), the Alaska SeaLife 

Center in Seward (1–888–774–7325, 24 

hours a day), or both. Photographs, 

video, location information, or any other 

available documentation must be 

provided to the Service. 

(28) All reports shall be submitted by 

email to fw7_mmm_reports@fws.gov. 

(29) The City of Cordova must notify 

the Service upon project completion or 

end of the work season. 

Request for Public Comments 

If you wish to comment on this 

proposed authorization, the associated 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2023 / Notices 76241 

draft environmental assessment, or both 

documents, you may submit your 

comments by either of the methods 

described in ADDRESSES. Please identify 

whether you are commenting on the 

proposed authorization, draft 

environmental assessment, or both, 

make your comments as specific as 

possible, confine them to issues 

pertinent to the proposed authorization, 

and explain the reason for any changes 

you recommend. Where possible, your 

comments should reference the specific 

section or paragraph that you are 

addressing. The Service will consider 

all comments that are received before 

the close of the comment period (see 

DATES). The Service does not anticipate 

extending the public comment period 

beyond the 30 days required under 

section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA. 

Comments, including names and 

street addresses of respondents, will 

become part of the administrative record 

for this proposal. Before including your 

address, telephone number, email 

address, or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, be 

advised that your entire comment, 

including your personal identifying 

information, may be made publicly 

available at any time. While you can ask 

us in your comments to withhold from 

public review your personal identifying 

information, we cannot guarantee that 

we will be able to do so. 

Peter Fasbender, 

Assistant Regional Director Fisheries and 

Ecological Services, Alaska Region. 

[FR Doc. 2023–24428 Filed 11–3–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[Docket No. FWS–HQ–IA–2023–0207; 

FXIA16710900000–234–FF09A30000] 

Foreign Endangered Species; Receipt 

of Permit Applications 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of receipt of permit 

applications; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, invite the public to 

comment on applications to conduct 

certain activities with foreign species 

that are listed as endangered under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). With 

some exceptions, the ESA prohibits 

activities with listed species unless 

Federal authorization is issued that 

allows such activities. The ESA also 

requires that we invite public comment 

before issuing permits for any activity 

otherwise prohibited by the ESA with 

respect to any endangered species. 

DATES: We must receive comments by 

December 6, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: 

Obtaining Documents: The 

applications, application supporting 

materials, and any comments and other 

materials that we receive will be 

available for public inspection at 

https://www.regulations.gov in Docket 

No. FWS–HQ–IA–2023–0207. 

Submitting Comments: When 

submitting comments, please specify the 

name of the applicant and the permit 

number at the beginning of your 

comment. You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

• Internet: https://

www.regulations.gov. Search for and 

submit comments on Docket No. FWS– 

HQ–IA–2023–0207. 

• U.S. mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS–HQ– 

IA–2023–0207; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service Headquarters, MS: PRB/3W, 

5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 

22041–3803. 

For more information, see Public 

Comment Procedures under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brenda Tapia, by phone at 703–358– 

2185 or via email at DMAFR@fws.gov. 

Individuals in the United States who are 

deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have 

a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, 

TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Comment Procedures 

A. How do I comment on submitted 

applications? 

We invite the public and local, State, 

Tribal, and Federal agencies to comment 

on these applications. Before issuing 

any of the requested permits/, we will 

take into consideration any information 

that we receive during the public 

comment period. 

You may submit your comments and 

materials by one of the methods in 

ADDRESSES. We will not consider 

comments sent by email or to an address 

not in ADDRESSES. We will not consider 

or include in our administrative record 

comments we receive after the close of 

the comment period (see DATES). 

When submitting comments, please 

specify the name of the applicant and 

the permit number at the beginning of 

your comment. Provide sufficient 

information to allow us to authenticate 

any scientific or commercial data you 

include. The comments and 

recommendations that will be most 

useful and likely to influence agency 

decisions are: (1) Those supported by 

quantitative information or studies; and 

(2) those that include citations to, and 

analyses of, the applicable laws and 

regulations. 

B. May I review comments submitted by 

others? 

You may view and comment on 

others’ public comments at https://

www.regulations.gov unless our 

allowing so would violate the Privacy 

Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) or Freedom of 

Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). 

C. Who will see my comments? 

If you submit a comment at https://

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

comment, including any personal 

identifying information, will be posted 

on the website. If you submit a 

hardcopy comment that includes 

personal identifying information, such 

as your address, phone number, or 

email address, you may request at the 

top of your document that we withhold 

this information from public review. 

However, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. Moreover, all 

submissions from organizations or 

businesses, and from individuals 

identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses, will be 

made available for public disclosure in 

their entirety. 

II. Background 

To help us carry out our conservation 

responsibilities for affected species, and 

in consideration of section 10(c) of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), 

we invite public comments on permit 

applications before final action is taken. 

With some exceptions, the ESA 

prohibits certain activities with listed 

species unless Federal authorization is 

issued that allows such activities. 

Permits issued under section 10(a)(1)(A) 

of the ESA allow otherwise prohibited 

activities for scientific purposes or to 

enhance the propagation or survival of 

the affected species. Service regulations 

regarding prohibited activities with 

endangered species, captive-bred 

wildlife registrations, and permits for 

any activity otherwise prohibited by the 

ESA with respect to any endangered 

species are available in title 50 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations in part 17. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1