27548 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XG067 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to the Chevron 

Richmond Refinery Long Wharf 

Maintenance and Efficiency Project in 

San Francisco Bay, California 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental 

harassment authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

regulations implementing the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as 

amended, notification is hereby given 

that NMFS has issued an incidental 

harassment authorization (IHA) to 

Chevron to incidentally take, by Level A 

and/or Level B harassment, seven 

species of marine mammals during the 

Long Wharf Maintenance and Efficiency 

Project (WMEP) in San Francisco Bay, 

California. 

DATES: This Authorization is applicable 

from June 1, 2018 through May 31, 

2019. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob 

Pauline, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, (301) 427–8401. Electronic 

copies of the application and supporting 

documents, as well as a list of the 

references cited in this document, may 

be obtained online at: 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ 

incidental/construction.htm. In case of 

problems accessing these documents, 

please call the contact listed above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

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

the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated 

to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the 

incidental, but not intentional, taking of 

small numbers of marine mammals by 

U.S. citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specified geographical region if 

certain findings are made and either 

regulations are issued or, if the taking is 

limited to harassment, a notice of a 

proposed authorization is provided to 

the public for review. 

An authorization for incidental 

takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 

that the taking will have a negligible 

impact on the species or stock(s), will 

not have an unmitigable adverse impact 

on the availability of the species or 

stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 

relevant), and if the permissible 

methods of taking and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings are set 

forth. 

NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible 

impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact 

resulting from the specified activity that 

cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 

not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 

the species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival. 

The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’ 

means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or 

attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill 

any marine mammal. 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, the MMPA 

defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act of 

pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) 

has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has 

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

Summary of Request 

On February 1, 2018, NMFS received 

a request from Chevron for an IHA to 

take marine mammals incidental to pile 

driving and pile removal associated 

with the WMEP in San Francisco Bay, 

California. Chevron’s request is for take 

of seven species by Level A and Level 

B harassment. Neither Chevron nor 

NMFS expects serious injury or 

mortality to result from this activity 

and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. 

NMFS has issued an IHA to Chevron 

authorizing the take of seven species by 

Level A and Level B harassment. Pile 

driving and removal will take 28 days 

and will be timed to occur within the 

work windows developed for 

Endangered Species Act (ESA)—listed 

fish species (June 1 through November 

30). The IHA is effective from June 1, 

2018 through May 31, 2019. This IHA 

would cover one year of a larger project 

for which Chevron intends to request 

additional take authorizations for 

subsequent facets of the project. 

Description of Planned Activity 

Chevron’s Richmond Refinery Long 

Wharf (Long Wharf) located in San 

Francisco Bay, is the largest marine oil 

terminal in California. The Long Wharf 

has existed in its current location since 

the early 1900s (Figure 1–1 in 

Application). The existing configuration 

of these systems have limitations to 

accepting more modern, fuel efficient 

vessels with shorter parallel mid-body 

hulls and in some cases do not meet 

current Marine Oil Terminal 

Engineering and Maintenance Standards 

(MOTEMS). The purpose of the planned 

WMEP is to comply with current 

MOTEMS requirements and to improve 

safety and efficiency at the Long Wharf. 

The planned project will involve 

modifications at four berths (Berths 1, 2, 

3, and 4). Modifications to the Long 

Wharf include replacing gangways and 

cranes, adding new mooring hooks and 

standoff fenders, adding new dolphins 

and catwalks, and modifying the fire 

water system at Berths 1, 2, 3 and/or 4, 

as well as the seismic retrofit to the 

Berth 4 loading platform. The type and 

numbers of piles to be installed, as well 

as those that will be removed during the 

2018–2022 period are summarized in 

Table 1. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 27549 

The combined modifications to Berths 

1 to 4 would require the installation of 

141 new concrete piles to support new 

and replacement equipment and their 

associated structures. The Berth 4 

loading platform would add eight, 60- 

inch diameter steel piles as part of the 

seismic retrofit. The project would also 

add four clusters of 13 composite piles 

each (52 total) as markers and protection 

of the new batter (driven at an angle) 

piles on the east side of the Berth 4 

retrofit. The project would remove 106 

existing timber piles, three existing 

22-inch and two existing 24-inch 

concrete piles. A total of 12 temporary 

piles would also be installed and 

removed during the seismic retrofit of 

Berth 4. 

Note that the proposed IHA will only 

cover pile driving and removal that will 

occur during the 2018 work season, as 

provided in Table 2. 

TABLE 2—PILE DRIVING SUMMARY FOR 2018 WORK SEASON

Pile type Pile driver type Number of 

piles 

Number of 

driving days 

36-inch steel template pile ......................................................................... Vibratory .......................................... 8 2 

Concrete pile removal ................................................................................ Vibratory .......................................... 5 1 

24-inch concrete ........................................................................................ Impact .............................................. 8 8 

14-inch H pile installation (for temporary fenders) .................................... Vibratory/Impact * ............................ 36 12 

Timber pile removal ................................................................................... Vibratory .......................................... 53 5 

* A vibratory driver will be preferentially used for installation of the temporary H piles. In the event that the pile hits a buried obstruction and 

can no longer be advanced with a vibratory driver, and impact hammer may be used. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1EN13JN18.000</GPH>
27550 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

These actions could produce 

underwater sound at levels that could 

result in the injury or behavioral 

harassment of marine mammal species. 

A detailed description of Chevron’s 

planned project is provided in the 

Federal Register notice for the proposed 

IHA (83 FR 18802; April 30, 2018). 

Since that time, no changes have been 

made to the planned project activities. 

Therefore, a detailed description is not 

provided here. Please refer to that 

Federal Register notice for the 

description of the specific activity. 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of NMFS’s proposal to issue 

an IHA to Chevron was published in the 

Federal Register on April 30, 2018 (83 

FR 18802). That notice described, in 

detail, Chevron’s activity, the marine 

mammal species that may be affected by 

the activity, the anticipated effects on 

marine mammals and their habitat, 

proposed amount and manner of take, 

and proposed mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting measures. During the 30- 

day public comment period, NMFS 

received one comment letter from the 

Marine Mammal Commission 

(Commission); the Commission’s 

recommendations and our responses are 

provided here, and the comments have 

been posted online at: 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ 

incidental/construction.htm. 

Comment: The Commission 

commented that the method NMFS used 

to estimate the numbers of takes during 

the proposed activities, which summed 

fractions of takes for each species across 

project days, does not account for and 

negates the intent of NMFS’ 24-hour 

reset policy. The Commission also 

recommends that NMFS develop and 

share guidance on this issue. 

Response: NMFS will share the 

guidance with the Commission 

following the completion of internal 

review and looks forward to discussing 

the issue with them in the future. 

Comment: The Commission requested 

clarification of certain issues associated 

with NMFS’s notice that one-year 

renewals could be issued in certain 

limited circumstances and expressed 

concern that the process would bypass 

the public notice and comment 

requirements. The Commission also 

suggested that NMFS should discuss the 

possibility of renewals through a more 

general route, such as a rulemaking, 

instead of notice in a specific 

authorization. The Commission further 

recommended that if NMFS did not 

pursue a more general route, that the 

agency provide the Commission and the 

public with a legal analysis supporting 

our conclusion that this process is 

consistent with the requirements of 

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

Response: The process of issuing a 

renewal IHA does not bypass the public 

notice and comment requirements of the 

MMPA. The notice of the proposed IHA 

expressly notifies the public that under 

certain, limited conditions an applicant 

could seek a renewal IHA for an 

additional year. The notice describes the 

conditions under which such a renewal 

request could be considered and 

expressly seeks public comment in the 

event such a renewal is sought. 

Importantly, such renewals would be 

limited to where the activities are 

identical or nearly identical to those 

analyzed in the proposed IHA, 

monitoring does not indicate impacts 

that were not previously analyzed and 

authorized, and the mitigation and 

monitoring requirements remain the 

same, all of which allow the public to 

comment on the appropriateness and 

effects of a renewal at the same time the 

public provides comments on the initial 

IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the 

language for future proposed IHAs to 

clarify that all IHAs, including renewal 

IHAs, are valid for no more than one 

year and that the agency would consider 

only one renewal for a project at this 

time. In addition, notice of issuance or 

denial of a renewal IHA would be 

published in the Federal Register, as are 

all IHAs. Last, NMFS will publish on 

our website a description of the renewal 

process before any renewal is issued 

utilizing the new process. 

Comment: The Commission 

recommended that NMFS review more 

thoroughly both the applications prior 

to deeming them complete and its 

notices prior to submitting them for 

publication in the Federal Register and 

that NMFS better evaluate the proposed 

exclusion/shut-down zones that are to 

be implemented for each proposed 

incidental take authorization. 

Response: NMFS thanks the 

Commission for its recommendation. 

Comment: The Commission expressed 

concern about what they assert is the 

lack of adequate time to provide public 

comments as well as the abbreviated 

timeframes during which NMFS is able 

to address public comments. The 

Commission recommended that NMFS 

ensure that it publishes and finalizes 

proposed incidental harassment 

authorizations sufficiently before the 

planned start date of the proposed 

activities to ensure full consideration is 

given to all comments received. 

Response: NMFS provided the 

required 30-day notice for public 

comment, and has adequately 

considered all public comments 

received in making the necessary 

findings. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

Sections 3 and 4 of the application 

summarize available information 

regarding status and trends, distribution 

and habitat preferences, and behavior 

and life history, of the potentially 

affected species. Additional information 

regarding population trends and threats 

may be found in NMFS’s Stock 

Assessment Reports (SAR; 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/) and more 

general information about these species 

(e.g., physical and behavioral 

descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s 

website. We provided a description of 

the specified activity in our Federal 

Register notice announcing the 

proposed authorization (83 FR 18802; 

April 30, 2018). Please refer to that 

document; we provide only a summary 

table here (Table 3). 

TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT AREA

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

Strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) 

Family Eschrichtiidae 

Gray whale ........................... Eschrichtius robustus .......... Eastern North Pacific ........... -/-; (N) ...... 20,990 (0.05, 20,125, 2011) 624 132 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 27551 

TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT AREA—Continued 

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

Strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Family Balaenidae 

Family Delphinidae 

Bottlenose dolphin ............... Tursiops truncatus ............... California Coastal ................ -/-;(N) ........ 453 (0.06, 346, 2011) .......... 2.7 ≥2.0 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises) 

Harbor porpoise ................... Phocoena phocoena ............ San Francisco-Russian 

River Stock.

-/-;(N) ........ 9,886 (0.51, 6,625, 2011) .... 66 0 

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia 

Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) 

California sea lion ................ Zalophus californianus ......... Eastern U.S. stock ............... -/-;(N) ........ 296,750 (-, 153,337, 2011) .. 9,200 389 

Northern fur seal .................. Callorhinus ursinus .............. California stock .................... -/-;(N) ........ 14,050 (-, 7,524, 2013) ........ 451 1.8 

Family Phocidae (earless seals) 

Pacific harbor seal ............... Phoca vitulina ...................... California stock .................... -/-;(N) ........ 30,968 (-,27,348, 2012) ....... 1,641 43 

Northern elephant seal ........ Mirounga angustirostris ....... California Breeding stock .... -/-;(N) ........ 179,000 (-, 81,368, 2010) .... 4,882 8.8 

1Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the 

ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or 

which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically 

designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock 

abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For certain stocks of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals (often pups) ashore 

multiplied by some correction factor derived from knowledge of the species’ (or similar species’) life history to arrive at a best abundance estimate; therefore, there is 

no associated CV. In these cases, the minimum abundance may represent actual counts of all animals ashore. 3These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated 

mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 

Note that while humpback whales 

and Guadalupe fur seals have been 

observed in the Bay, their typical 

temporal and/or spatial occurrence is 

such that take is not expected to occur, 

and they are not discussed further 

beyond the explanation provided here. 

Humpback whales are rare, though 

well-publicized, visitors to the interior 

of San Francisco Bay. A humpback 

whale journeyed through the Bay and 

up the Sacramento River in 1985 and reentered the Bay in the fall of 1990, 

stranding on mudflats near Candlestick 

Park (Fimrite 2005). In May 2007, a 

humpback whale mother and calf spent 

just over two weeks in San Francisco 

Bay and the Sacramento River before 

finding their way back out to sea. 

Although it is possible that a humpback 

whale will enter the Bay and find its 

way into the project area during 

construction activities, their occurrence 

is unlikely. Guadalupe fur seals 

occasionally range into the waters of 

Northern California and the Pacific 

Northwest. The Farallon Islands (off 

central California) and Channel Islands 

(off southern California) are used as 

haulouts during these movements 

(Simon 2016). Juvenile Guadalupe fur 

seals occasionally strand in the vicinity 

of San Francisco, especially during El 

Nin ̃ o events. Most strandings along the 

California coast are animals younger 

than two years old, with evidence of 

malnutrition (NMFS 2017c). In the rare 

event that a Guadalupe fur seal is 

detected within the Level A or Level B 

harassment zones, work will cease until 

the animal has left the area. 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

We provided a description of the 

anticipated effects of the specified 

activity on marine mammals in our 

Federal Register notice announcing the 

proposed authorization (83 FR 18802; 

April 30, 2018). Please refer to that 

document for our detailed analysis; we 

provide only summary information 

here. 

The introduction of anthropogenic 

noise into the aquatic environment from 

pile driving and removal is the primary 

means by which marine mammals may 

be harassed from Chevron’s specified 

activity. The effects of pile driving noise 

on marine mammals are dependent on 

several factors, including, but not 

limited to, sound type (e.g., impulsive 

vs. non-impulsive), the species, age and 

sex class (e.g., adult male vs. mom with 

calf), duration of exposure, the distance 

between the pile and the animal, 

received levels, behavior at time of 

exposure, and previous history with 

exposure (Southall et al., 2007, Wartzok 

et al., 2004). Animals exposed to natural 

or anthropogenic sound may experience 

physical and behavioral effects, ranging 

in magnitude from none to severe 

(Southall et al., 2007). In general, 

exposure to pile driving noise has the 

potential to result in auditory threshold 

shifts (permanent threshold shift (PTS) 

and temporary threshold shift (TTS)) 

and behavioral reactions (e.g., 

avoidance, temporary cessation of 

foraging and vocalizing, changes in dive 

behavior). No new permanent impacts 

to habitats used by marine mammals 

would result from the project. Some 

short-term impacts to prey availability 

(e.g., fish) and minor impacts to the 

immediate substrate may occur as a 

result of increased turbidity from pile 

installation and removal but the effects 

are expected to be temporary and 

minimal. 

Estimated Take 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes 

authorized through this IHA, which will 

inform both NMFS’ consideration of 

small numbers and the negligible 

impact determination. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
27552 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

(i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has 

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

Authorized takes would primarily be 

by Level B harassment, as use of the 

acoustic source (i.e., pile driving) has 

the potential to result in disruption of 

behavioral patterns for individual 

marine mammals. There is also some 

potential for auditory injury (Level A 

harassment) to result, primarily for high 

frequency species and a single phocid 

species due to larger predicted auditory 

injury zones. Auditory injury is unlikely 

to occur for low-frequency, midfrequency species, or pinniped groups, 

with the exception of harbor seals. The 

mitigation and monitoring measures are 

expected to minimize the severity of 

such taking to the extent practicable. 

As described previously, no mortality 

is anticipated or authorized for this 

activity. Below we describe how the 

take is estimated. 

Described in the most basic way, we 

estimate take by considering: (1) 

Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS 

believes the best available science 

indicates marine mammals will be 

behaviorally harassed or incur some 

degree of permanent hearing 

impairment; (2) the area or volume of 

water that will be ensonified above 

these levels in a day; (3) the density or 

occurrence of marine mammals within 

these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the 

number of days of activities. Below, we 

describe these components in more 

detail and present the authorized take 

estimate. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

Using the best available science, 

NMFS has developed acoustic 

thresholds that identify the received 

level of underwater sound above which 

exposed marine mammals would be 

reasonably expected to be behaviorally 

harassed (equated to Level B 

harassment) or to incur PTS of some 

degree (equated to Level A harassment). 

Level B Harassment for non-explosive 

sources—Though significantly driven by 

received level, the onset of behavioral 

disturbance from anthropogenic noise 

exposure is also informed to varying 

degrees by other factors related to the 

source (e.g., frequency, predictability, 

duty cycle), the environment (e.g., 

bathymetry), and the receiving animals 

(hearing, motivation, experience, 

demography, behavioral context) and 

can be difficult to predict (Southall et 

al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2012). Based on 

what the available science indicates and 

the practical need to use a threshold 

based on a factor that is both predictable 

and measurable for most activities, 

NMFS uses a generalized acoustic 

threshold based on received level to 

estimate the onset of behavioral 

harassment. NMFS predicts that marine 

mammals are likely to be behaviorally 

harassed in a manner we consider Level 

B harassment when exposed to 

underwater anthropogenic noise above 

received levels of 120 decibel (dB) re 1 

micro pascal (mPa) root mean square 

(rms) for continuous (e.g. vibratory piledriving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 

mPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive 

(e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent 

(e.g., scientific sonar) sources. For in-air 

sounds, NMFS predicts that pinnipeds 

exposed above received levels of 100 dB 

re 20 mPa (rms) and harbor seals 

exposed above 90 dB re 20 mPa (rms) 

will be behaviorally harassed. 

Chevron’s planned activity includes 

the use of continuous (vibratory driving) 

and impulsive (impact driving) sources, 

and therefore the 120 and160 dB re 1 

mPa (rms) are applicable. 

Level A harassment for non-explosive 

sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance 

for Assessing the Effects of 

Anthropogenic Sound on Marine 

Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance, 

2016) identifies dual criteria to assess 

auditory injury (Level A harassment) to 

five different marine mammal groups 

(based on hearing sensitivity) as a result 

of exposure to noise from two different 

types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). The applicant’s planned 

activity includes the use of impulsive 

(impact driving) and non-impulsive 

(vibratory driving) sources. 

These thresholds are provided in 

Table 4. The references, analysis, and 

methodology used in the development 

of the thresholds are described in NMFS 

2016 Technical Guidance, which may 

be accessed at: http://

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/ 

guidelines.htm. 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 27553 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

Ensonified Area 

Here, we describe operational and 

environmental parameters of the activity 

that will feed into identifying the area 

ensonified above the acoustic 

thresholds. 

Pile driving will generate underwater 

noise that potentially could result in 

disturbance to marine mammals 

swimming by the project area. 

Transmission loss (TL) underwater is 

the decrease in acoustic intensity as an 

acoustic pressure wave propagates out 

from a source until the source becomes 

indistinguishable from ambient sound. 

TL parameters vary with frequency, 

temperature, sea conditions, current, 

source and receiver depth, water depth, 

water chemistry, and bottom 

composition and topography. A 

standard sound propagation model, the 

Practical Spreading Loss model, was 

used to estimate the range from pile 

driving activity to various expected 

SPLs at potential project structures. This 

model follows a geometric propagation 

loss based on the distance from the 

driven pile, resulting in a 4.5 dB 

reduction in level for each doubling of 

distance from the source. In this model, 

the SPL at some distance away from the 

source (e.g., driven pile) is governed by 

a measured source level, minus the TL 

of the energy as it dissipates with 

distance. The TL equation is: 

TL = 15log10(R1/R2) 

Where: 

TL is the transmission loss in dB, 

R1 is the distance of the modeled SPL from 

the driven pile, and 

R2 is the distance from the driven pile of the 

initial measurement. 

The degree to which underwater noise 

propagates away from a noise source is 

dependent on a variety of factors, most 

notably by the water bathymetry and 

presence or absence of reflective or 

absorptive conditions including the sea 

surface and sediment type. The TL 

model described above was used to 

calculate the expected noise 

propagation from both impact and 

vibratory pile driving, using 

representative source levels to estimate 

the zone of influence (ZOI) or area 

exceeding specified noise criteria. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1EN13JN18.001</GPH>
27554 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

Source Levels 

Sound source levels from the Chevron 

site were not available. Therefore, 

literature values published for projects 

similar to the Chevron project were used 

to estimate source levels that could 

potentially be produced. Results are 

shown in Table 5. 

Modifications at the four berths 

require the placement of new 24-inch 

diameter square concrete piles. 

Approximately one to two of these piles 

would be installed in one workday, 

using impact driving methods. Based on 

measured blow counts for 24-inch 

concrete piles driven at the Long Wharf 

Berth 4 in 2011, installation for each 

pile could require up to approximately 

300 blows and 1.5 second per blow 

average over a duration of 

approximately 20 minutes per pile, with 

40 minutes of pile driving time per day 

if two piles are installed. To estimate 

the noise effects of the 24-inch square 

concrete piles, the general values 

provided by Caltrans (2015a) are shown 

in Table 5. 

To estimate the noise effects of impact 

driving of 14-inch steel H piles, the 

values provided by Caltrans were also 

utilized. These source values are 208 dB 

peak, 187 rms, and 177 dB SEL (single 

strike). Based on these levels, impact 

driving of the 14-inch steel H piles is 

expected to produce underwater sound 

exceeded the Level B 160 dB RMS 

threshold over a distance of 631 meters. 

During construction, temporary 

fendering would be installed at Berth 2 

which will be supported by 36 steel 14- 

inch steel H piles. It is estimated that 

each pile could be driven in five (5) 

minutes. Two (2) to four (4) piles would 

be installed in any single workday for a 

total of approximately 12 days of 

installation. For the purposes of 

calculating the distance to Level A 

thresholds, four piles per day is 

assumed. The piles would be removed 

after the permanent fenders are in place. 

A vibratory hammer would be used to 

vibrate the piles to facilitate pulling 

them from the mud. The best match for 

estimated source levels is the Port of 

Anchorage pile driving test project. 

During vibratory pile driving associated 

with the Anchorage project, peak noise 

levels ranged from 165 to 175 dB, and 

the RMS ranged between 152 and 168 

dB, both measured at approximately 15 

meters (50 ft) (Caltrans 2015a). 

The source levels for vibratory 

installation of 36-inch temporary steel 

piles were from the Explosive Handling 

Wharf–2 (EHW–2) project located at the 

Naval Base Kitsap in Bangor, 

Washington as stated in Caltrans 

(2015a). During vibratory pile driving 

measured peak noise levels were 

approximately 180 dB, and the RMS 

was approximately 169 dB at a 10 meter 

(33ft) distance. These temporary piles 

would require a drive time per pile of 

approximately 10 minutes. Up to four 

(4) of these piles could be installed in 

any single workday for a total of 40 

minutes. 

The most applicable source values for 

wooden pile removal were derived from 

measurements taken at the Port 

Townsend dolphin pile removal in 

Washington. During vibratory pile 

extraction associated with this project, 

which occurred under similar 

circumstances, measured peak noise 

levels were approximately 164 dB, and 

the RMS was approximately 150 dB 

(WSDOT 2011). Applicable sound 

values for the removal of concrete piles 

could not be located, but they are 

expected to be similar to the levels 

produced by wooden piles described 

above, as they are similarly sized, nonmetallic, and will be removed using the 

same methods. 

During construction, 106 16-inch 

timber piles, and seven 18 to 24-inch 

square concrete piles would be 

removed. Up to twelve of these piles 

could be extracted in one workday. 

Extraction time needed for each pile 

may vary greatly, but could require 

approximately 400 seconds 

(approximately 7 minutes). 

TABLE 5—THE SOUND LEVELS (dB PEAK, dB RMS, AND dB SSEL) EXPECTED TO BE GENERATED BY EACH HAMMER AND

PILE TYPE

Type of pile Hammer type 

Estimated 

pressure 

level 

(dB peak) 

Estimated 

pressure 

level 

(dB RMS) 

Estimated 

single strike 

sound 

exposure level 

(dB SEL) 

24-inch sq. concrete ................................................................ Impact ..................................... 188 176 166 

14-inch Temporary steel H-pile ............................................... Impact ..................................... 208 1 187 177 

14-inch Temporary steel H-pile ............................................... Vibratory ................................. 180 2 168 ........................

36-inch Steel Pipe ................................................................... Vibratory ................................. 180 169 ........................

Wood and concrete pile extraction .......................................... Vibratory ................................. 164 3 150 ........................

1SL was based on an assumed 10–dB difference between the SELs-s and SPLrms SLs. The SPLrmsSL was not reported in Caltrans. 2 Measured at 14 m. 

3 Measured at 16 m. 

When NMFS Technical Guidance 

(2016) was published, in recognition of 

the fact that ensonified area/volume 

could be more technically challenging 

to predict because of the duration 

component in the new thresholds, 

NMFS developed a User Spreadsheet 

that includes tools to help predict a 

simple isopleth that can be used in 

conjunction with marine mammal 

density or occurrence to help predict 

takes. We note that because of some of 

the assumptions included in the 

methods used for these tools, we 

anticipate that isopleths produced are 

typically going to be overestimates of 

some degree, which will result in some 

degree of overestimate of Level A take. 

However, these tools offer the best way 

to predict appropriate isopleths when 

more sophisticated 3D modeling 

methods are not available, and NMFS 

continues to develop ways to 

quantitatively refine these tools, and 

will qualitatively address the output 

where appropriate. For stationary 

sources NMFS User Spreadsheet 

predicts the closest distance at which, if 

a marine mammal remained at that 

distance the whole duration of the 

activity, it would not incur PTS. Inputs 

used in the User Spreadsheet, and the 

resulting isopleths are reported below. 

Table 6 shows the inputs that were 

used in the User Spreadsheet to 

determine cumulative PTS Thresholds. 

Table 7 shows the Level A Isopleths as 

determined utilizing inputs from Table 

6. Level B isopleths for impact and 

vibratory driving and extraction are 

shown in Table 8. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 27555 

TABLE 6—INPUTS FOR USER SPREADSHEET

Spreadsheet tab used 

E.1: Impact pile driving (stationary source: 

impulsive, intermittent) 

E.1: Impact pile driving (stationary source: 

impulsive, intermittent) 

A: Stationary source: 

nonimpulsive, 

continuous 

A: Stationary source: 

nonimpulsive, 

continuous 

A: Stationary source: 

nonimpulsive, 

continuous 

Pile Type and Hammer Type ................... 24-inch sq. concrete 

piles.

14-inch Steel H-pile ... 14-inch Steel H-pile ... 36-in steel .................. Wood concrete pile 

extraction. 

Source Level ............................................. 166 (Single strike/shot 

SEL).

177 (Single strike/shot 

SEL).

168 RMS ................... 169 RMS ................... 150 RMS. 

Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) .......... 2 ................................. 2 ................................. 2.5 .............................. 2.5 .............................. 2.5. 

Number of strikes in 1 h OR number of 

strikes per pile.

300 ............................. 200 ............................. NA .............................. NA .............................. NA. 

Activity Duration (h) within 24-h period 

OR number of piles per day.

2 piles ........................ 4 piles ........................ 0.333 .......................... 0.6667 ........................ 1.333. 

Propagation (xLogR) ................................. 15 ............................... 15 ............................... 15 ............................... 15 ............................... 15. 

Distance of source level measurement 

(meters).

10 ............................... 10 ............................... 14 ............................... 10 ............................... 16. 

TABLE 7—RADIAL DISTANCES TO LEVEL A ISOPLETH DURING IMPACT AND VIBRATORY DRIVING

Project element requiring pile installation 

Distance in meters (feet) 

Low-frequency 

cetaceans 

Mid-frequency 

cetaceans 

Highfrequency 

cetaceans 

Phocid 

pinnipeds 

Otariid 

pinnipeds 

Impact Driving 

24-inch square concrete (1–2 per day) ............................... 52 (171) 2 (6) 62 (204) 28 (92) 2 (7) 

14-inch steel H pile (4 per day ............................................ 343 (1,124) 12 (40) 408 (1,339) 183 (602) 13 (44) 

Vibratory Driving/Extraction 

14-inch steel H pile (4 per day) ........................................... 13 (46) 1 (3) 20 (66) 8 (26) 1 (3) 

36-inch steel pipe pile (4 per day) ....................................... 18 (58) 2 (6) 26 (86) 11 (35) 1 (2) 

Wood and concrete pile extraction (12 per day) ................. 2 (5) <1 (3) 4 (13) 2 (6) <1 (3) 

TABLE 8—RADIAL DISTANCES TO LEVEL B ISOPLETHS DURING IMPACT AND VIBRATORY DRIVING

Pile type 

Distance to 

threshold in 

meters 

(feet) 

Impact Driving (160 dB threshold) 

24-inch square concrete .............................................................................................................................................................. 117 (382) 

14-inch steel H pile ...................................................................................................................................................................... 631 (2,070) 

Vibratory Driving/Extraction (120 dB threshold) 

14-inch steel H pile ...................................................................................................................................................................... 22,188 (72,795) 

36-inch steel pipe pile .................................................................................................................................................................. 18,478 (60,609) 

Wood and concrete pile extraction .............................................................................................................................................. 1,600 (5,249) 

Marine Mammal Occurrence 

In this section we provide the 

information about the presence, density, 

or group dynamics of marine mammals 

that will inform the take calculations. 

San Francisco Bay has five known 

harbor seal haulout sites that include 

Alcatraz Island, Castro Rocks, Yerba 

Buena Island, Newark Slough, and 

Mowry Slough. Yerba Buena Island, 

Alcatraz and Castro Rocks are within or 

near the areas within ensonified Level B 

zones. Castro Rocks is the largest harbor 

seal haulout site in the northern part of 

San Francisco Bay and is the second 

largest pupping site in the Bay (Green et 

al. 2002). The pupping season is from 

March to June in San Francisco Bay. 

During the molting season (typically 

June-July and coincides with the period 

when piles will be driven) as many as 

approximately 130 harbor seals on 

average have been observed using Castro 

Rocks as a haulout. Harbor seals are 

more likely to be hauled out in the late 

afternoon and evening, and are more 

likely to be in the water during the 

morning and early afternoon (Green et 

al. 2002). However, during the molting 

season, harbor seals spend more time 

hauled out and tend to enter the water 

later in the evening. During molting, 

harbor seals can stay onshore resting for 

an average of 12 hours per day during 

the molt compared to around 7 hours 

per day outside of the pupping/molting 

seasons (NPS 2014). Tidal stage is a 

major controlling factor of haulout usage 

at Castro Rocks with more seals present 

during low tides than high tide periods 

since it is completely underwater at 

high tide twice per day (Green et al. 

2002). Additionally, the number of seals 

hauled out at Castro Rocks also varies 

with the time of day, with 

proportionally more animals hauled out 

during the nighttime hours (Green et al. 

2002). Therefore, the number of harbor 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
27556 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

seals in the water around Castro Rocks 

will vary throughout the work period. 

However, it is likely that all seals 

hauled out at the site will be exposed to 

project related underwater noise at some 

point each day. The number of harbor 

seals located at Castro Rocks is based on 

the highest mean plus the standard error 

of harbor seals observed at Castro Rocks 

during recent annual surveys conducted 

by the National Park Service (NPS) 

(Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 

2017), resulting in a value of 176 seals. 

The same NPS survey determined that 

harbor seal population in the Central 

Bay at Alcatraz and Yerba Buena Island 

is approximately 167 seals (Codde, S. 

and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017). 

California sea lions haul out primarily 

on floating docks at Pier 39 in the 

Fisherman’s Wharf area of the San 

Francisco Marina, approximately 12.5 

kilometer (km) (7.8 miles (mi)) 

southwest of the project area. Based on 

counts done in 1997 and 1998, the 

number of California sea lions that haul 

out at Pier 39 fluctuates with the highest 

occurrences in August and the lowest in 

June. In addition to the Pier 39 haulout, 

California sea lions haul out on buoys 

and similar structures throughout the 

Bay. They are seen swimming off 

mainly the San Francisco and Marin 

shorelines within the Bay but may 

occasionally enter the project area to 

forage. Over the monitoring period for 

the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge RSRB, 

monitors sighted at least 90 California 

sea lions in the North Bay and at least 

57 in the Central Bay (Caltrans 2012). 

During monitoring for the San 

Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB) 

Project in the central Bay, 69 California 

sea lions were observed in the vicinity 

of the bridge over a 17-year period from 

2000–2017 (Caltrans 2018), and from 

these observations, an estimated density 

of 0.161 animals per square kilometer 

(km2) is derived (Caltrans 2018). 

A small but growing population of 

harbor porpoises utilizes San Francisco 

Bay. Harbor porpoises are typically 

spotted in the vicinity of Angel Island 

and the Golden Gate (6 and 12 km 

southwest respectively) with lesser 

numbers sighted in the vicinity of 

Alcatraz and around Treasure Island 

(Keener 2011). Porpoises but may utilize 

other areas in the Central Bay in low 

numbers, including the planned project 

area. However, harbor porpoise are 

naturally inclined to remain near the 

shoreline areas and downstream of large 

landmasses as they are constantly 

foraging. For this reason, the project 

area would present a less than likely 

area to observe harbor porpoise as they 

would either need to traverse the 

perimeter of the Bay to arrive there, or 

would have to swim through the open 

Bay. Both scenarios are possible, but 

would represent uncommon behavior. 

Based on monitoring conducted for the 

SFOBB project, between 2000–2017 an 

in-water density of 0.031 animals per 

km2 estimated by Caltrans for this 

species. However, porpoise occurrence 

increased significantly in 2017 resulting 

in a 2017 only density of 0.167 animals 

per km2 (Caltrans 2018). 

Small numbers of northern elephant 

seals haul out or strand on coastline 

within the Central Bay. Monitoring of 

marine mammals in the vicinity of the 

SFOBB has been ongoing for 15 years; 

from those data, Caltrans has produced 

an estimated at-sea density for northern 

elephant seal of 0.06 animal per km2

(Caltrans, 2015b). Most sightings of 

northern elephant seal in San Francisco 

Bay occur in spring or early summer, 

and are less likely to occur during the 

periods of in-water work for this project. 

As a result, densities during pile driving 

for the planned action would be much 

lower. 

The incidence of northern fur seal in 

San Francisco Bay depends largely on 

oceanic conditions, with animals more 

likely to strand during El Nin ̃ o events. 

The likelihood of El Nin ̃ o conditions 

occurring in 2018 is currently low, with 

La Nin ̃ a or neutral conditions expected 

to develop (NOAA, 2018). 

The range of the bottlenose dolphin 

has expanded northward along the 

Pacific Coast since the 1982–1983 El 

Nin ̃ o (Carretta et al. 2013, Wells and 

Baldridge 1990). They now occur as far 

north as the San Francisco Bay region 

and have been observed along the coast 

in Half Moon Bay, San Mateo, Ocean 

Beach in San Francisco, and Rodeo 

Beach in Marin County. Observations 

indicate that bottlenose dolphin 

occasionally enter San Francisco Bay, 

sometimes foraging for fish in Fort Point 

Cove, just east of the Golden Gate Bridge 

(Golden Gate Cetacean Research 2014). 

Transient individuals of this species 

occasionally enter San Francisco Bay, 

but observations indicate that they 

usually remain in proximity to the 

Golden Gate near the mouth of the Bay. 

Beginning in 2015, two individuals have 

been observed frequently in the vicinity 

of Oyster Point, located south of San 

Francisco (GGCR, 2018; Perlman, 2017). 

Bottlenose dolphins are being observed 

in San Francisco bay more frequently in 

recent years. Groups with an average 

size of five animals have been observed 

entering the Bay in the vicinity of Yerba 

Buena Island at a rate of once per week. 

They usually are observed over two 

week spans and then depart for an 

extended period of time (NMFS, 2017). 

Gray whales occasionally enter the 

Bay during their northward migration 

period, and are most often sighted in the 

Bay between February and May. Most 

venture only about 2 to 3 km (about 1– 

2 mi) past the Golden Gate, but gray 

whales have occasionally been sighted 

as far north as San Pablo Bay. Pile 

driving is not expected to occur during 

this time, and gray whales are not likely 

to be present at other times of year. 

Take Calculation and Estimation 

Here we describe how the information 

provided above is brought together to 

produce a quantitative take estimate. 

The following assumptions are made 

when estimating potential incidences of 

take: 

• All marine mammal individuals 

potentially available are assumed to be 

present within the relevant area, and 

thus incidentally taken; 

• An individual can only be taken 

once during a 24-h period; 

• Exposures to sound levels at or 

above the relevant thresholds equate to 

take, as defined by the MMPA. 

Limited density data is available for 

marine mammal species in San 

Francisco Bay. Estimates here are 

determined using data taken during 

marine mammal monitoring associated 

with RSRB retrofit project, the San 

Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge 

replacement project, and other marine 

mammal observations for San Francisco 

Bay. For Pacific harbor seal, data was 

also derived from recent annual surveys 

of haulouts in the Bay conducted by the 

National Park Service (Codde, S. and S. 

Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017). 

Pacific Harbor Seal 

As noted above, take estimates are 

based on the highest mean plus the 

standard error of harbor seals observed 

by NPS at Castro Rocks which equals 

176 animals (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 

2013, 2015, and 2017). Castro Rocks is 

inundated with water twice/day during 

the high tides. So during every work day 

(7 a.m. to 7 p.m.) the entire haulout will 

be in the water twice per day. Of these 

176 seals, the proportion that may enter 

the areas over which the Level B 

harassment thresholds may be exceeded 

are estimated as follows: 

• Impact driving of 24-inch concrete 

piles at all Berths: It is assumed that 10 

percent of the animals that enter the 

water from Castro Rocks will enter the 

small Level B zones associated with this 

pile type as shown in Figure 6–1 in the 

application. Thus, it is estimated that up 

to 17.6 individuals per day could be 

exposed (176/10 = 17.6) by entering the 

Level B harassment zone to the south of 

Castro Rocks; 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 27557 

• Impact driving of 14-inch steel H 

piles: Impact driving would only occur 

in the event that a pile encounters an 

obstruction such as an old timber pile 

beneath the mud line, which is unlikely 

to occur. These piles will be 

preferentially driven with a vibratory 

driver. Therefore, Level B take for this 

activity is based on installation using 

vibratory driver. Level A take is based 

on installation using impact driving. For 

the purposes of calculating Level A take, 

as a proportion of Level B take, it is 

assumed that approximately 25 percent 

of the 176 harbor seals using Castro 

Rocks could approach and be subject to 

Level B harassment due to the limited 

amount of time impact driving is 

expected to occur as well as the size and 

location of the Level B isopleth (Figure 

6–2 in application). Therefore, it is 

assumed that up to 44 individuals per 

day could be exposed when this activity 

is being conducted; 

• Vibratory driving and removal of 

the 36-inch steel pipe piles at Berth 4: 

Isopleths for this vibratory driving 

encompass Castro Rocks, therefore it is 

assumed that all of the estimated 176 

animals in the water, could be exposed 

when these piles are being driven at 

Berth 4; 

• Vibratory driving/extraction of the 

14-inch H piles at Berth 2: Isopleths for 

this vibratory driving encompass Castro 

Rocks, therefore is assumed that all of 

the 176 animals in the water could be 

exposed when this activity is being 

conducted at Berth 2; and 

• Vibratory removal of timber and 

concrete piles at Berths 1, 2 and 4: 

Isopleths for this vibratory removal 

encompass Castro Rocks, therefore it is 

assumed that all of the estimated 176 

animals in the water could be exposed 

during these activities. 

In order to account for other 

individuals that may be foraging in the 

more distant part of the Level B 

harassment zone, additional take of 

harbor seal has been estimated based on 

other harbor seal populations in the 

Central Bay. Using the same data set 

(Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 

2017) that was used for Castro Rocks, a 

population for the Central Bay of 167 

harbor seals was established based on 

other Central Bay haulouts at Alcatraz 

and Yerba Buena Island. The area of the 

Central Bay (bound by the Golden Gate, 

Richmond Bridge, SFOBB, and 

adjoining coastline) is approximately 

134 km2, resulting in a harbor seal 

density of 1.25 animals per km2. The 

population that hauls out at Castro 

Rocks is not included in this density 

estimate because of the proximity of the 

haulout site to the project and potential 

take of those harbor seals has been 

estimated separately using the methods 

described above. The estimated take 

based on the Central Bay density is 

added to the take estimated for the 

Castro Rocks population, as provided in 

Table 9 below. Also provided in Table 

9 is the estimated Level A take for 

impact driving of the steel 14-inch H 

piles, which has been estimated by 

taking Level B take and multiplying it 

by the ratio of the Level A zone area to 

the Level B zone area. Level A take is 

not requested for vibratory driving. 

TABLE 9—DAILY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ESTIMATE FOR PACIFIC HARBOR SEAL

Pile type Level B zone 

(km2) 

Level A 

zone, minus 

exclusion 

zone 

(km2) 

Estimated Level B take per day Estimated 

Level A take 

per day— 

total 

Central bay 1

(1.25 per km2) Project vicinity Harbor seal— total 

Vibratory Driving 

14-inch steel H pile .................................. 190.55 NA 238.39 176 414.39 NA 

36-inch steel pile ...................................... 176.44 NA 220.55 176 396.55 NA 

Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ................ 7.14 NA 8.92 176 184.92 NA 

Impact Driving 

14-inch steel H pile .................................. 1.36 0.10 * 1.7 * 44 45.7 3.36 

24-inch concrete pile ................................ 0.04 0 0.05 17.6 17.65 0 

* Only displayed to provide the calculation of Level A take. Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would cover any Level B take from occasional impact driving. 

For impact pile driving of the 14-inch 

steel H piles, the PTS Zone is large 

enough to warrant a smaller exclusion 

zone and the authorization of some 

Level A harassment for harbor seal so 

that pile driving can be completed on 

schedule. A 35 meter shutdown zone 

(smaller than the Level A Zone) for this 

species would be established, but 

individuals that place themselves in the 

Level A zone but outside of the shutdown zone may experience Level A 

harassment, if they reside in that area 

for a long enough duration. 

California Sea Lion 

The estimated California seal lion 

density of 0.16 animals per km2

previously described was used to 

calculate potential Level B exposures as 

shown in Table 10. 

TABLE 10—DAILY LEVEL B HARASSMENT EXPOSURE ESTIMATE FOR CALIFORNIA SEA LION

Pile type Level B zone 

(km2) 

Level B take 

estimate 

(based on 

Central Bay 

density of 0.16 

animals 

per km2 ) 

Vibratory Driving 

14-inch steel H pile .................................................................................................................................................. 190.55 30.48 

36-inch steel pile ...................................................................................................................................................... 176.44 28.23 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
27558 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

TABLE 10—DAILY LEVEL B HARASSMENT EXPOSURE ESTIMATE FOR CALIFORNIA SEA LION—Continued 

Pile type Level B zone 

(km2) 

Level B take 

estimate 

(based on 

Central Bay 

density of 0.16 

animals 

per km2 ) 

Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ................................................................................................................................ 7.14 1.14 

Impact Driving 

14-inch steel H pile .................................................................................................................................................. * NA * NA 

24-inch concrete pile ...............................................................................................................................................

0.04 ..........................................................................................................................................................................

0.01.

* Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would cover any Level B take from occasional impact driving. 

Harbor Porpoise 

Based on monitoring conducted for 

the SFOBB project described previously, 

an in-water density of 0.17 animals per 

km2 was estimated by Caltrans for this 

species (NMFS 2017b). Using this inwater density and the areas of potential 

harassment, take is estimated for harbor 

porpoise as provided in Table 11. Also 

provided in Table 11 is the estimated 

Level A take for impact driving, which 

has been estimated by taking Level B 

take and multiplying it by the ratio of 

the Level A zone area to the Level B 

zone area. A single harbor porpoise 

could be exposed to Level A harassment 

during impact driving or 14-inch steel 

H-piles as shown in Table 11. NMFS, 

however, conservatively proposes to 

authorize Level A take of four animals 

which is the average group size. 

TABLE 11—DAILY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ESTIMATE FOR PACIFIC HARBOR PORPOISE

Pile type Level B zone 

(km2) 

Level A zone, 

minus 

exclusion 

zone 

(km2) 

Level B 

estimate 

Central Bay 

in-water—0.17 

per km2

Estimated 

Level A take 

per day 

Vibratory Driving 

14-inch steel H pile .......................................................................................... 190.55 ........................ 32.39 NA 

36-inch steel pile .............................................................................................. 176.44 ........................ 29.99 NA 

Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ........................................................................ 7.14 ........................ 1.21 NA 

Impact Driving 

14-inch steel H pile .......................................................................................... 1.36 * 0.32 * 0.23 0.05 

24-inch concrete pile ....................................................................................... 0.04 0 0.01 0 

* Only displayed to provide the calculation of Level A take. Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would cover any Level B take from occasional impact driving. 

For impact pile driving of the 14-inch 

H piles, the Level A Zone is large 

enough to warrant the authorization of 

some Level A. A 250 meter shutdown 

zone for this species would be 

established, but individuals that place 

themselves in the Level A zone but 

outside of the shut-down zone may 

experience Level A harassment, if they 

reside in that area for a long enough 

duration. 

Northern Elephant Seal 

Monitoring of marine mammals in the 

vicinity of the SFOBB produced an 

estimated density for northern elephant 

seal of 0.06 animal per km2 (Caltrans, 

2015b). Most sightings of northern 

elephant seal in San Francisco Bay 

occur in spring or early summer, and are 

less likely to occur during the periods 

of in-water work for this project. As a 

result, densities during pile driving for 

the planned action would be much 

lower. It is possible that a lone northern 

elephant seal may enter the Level B 

harassment area once per day during 

pile driving, for a total of 28 takes. Level 

A harassment of this species is not 

expected to occur and is not authorized 

by NMFS. 

Northern Fur Seal 

As noted previously, the incidence of 

northern fur seal in San Francisco Bay 

depends largely on oceanic conditions, 

with animals more likely to strand 

during El Nin ̃o events. The likelihood of 

El Nin ̃ o conditions occurring in 2018 is 

currently low, with La Nin ̃ a or neutral 

conditions expected to develop (NOAA, 

2018). Given the low probability that fur 

seals would enter into the Bay and 

project area in 2018, Chevron has 

conservatively requested and NMFS has 

authorized10 fur seals takes by Level B 

harassment. Level A harassment of this 

species is not anticipated or authorized 

by NMFS. 

Bottlenose Dolphin 

When this species is present in San 

Francisco Bay, it is more typically found 

close to the Golden Gate. Recently, 

beginning in 2015, two individuals have 

been observed frequently in the vicinity 

of Oyster Point (GGCR, 2016; GGCR 

2017; Perlman, 2017). The average 

reported group size for bottlenose 

dolphins is five. Reports show that a 

group normally comes into San 

Francisco Bay near Yerba Buena Island 

once per week for approximately 2-week 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 27559 

stints and then leaves the Bay (NMFS, 

2017b). Chevron assumed groups of five 

individuals may enter San Francisco 

Bay and the ensonified area three times 

during separate two-week spans. 

Therefore, groups of 5 animals would 

potentially be exposed at a rate of once 

per week over six weeks, resulting in up 

to 30 Level B exposures. As such, NMFS 

authorizes the take by Level B 

harassment of 30 bottlenose dolphins. 

Although a small Level A zone for midfrequency cetaceans is estimated during 

impact driving, marine mammal 

monitoring of the shutdown would 

ensure that take by Level A harassment 

does not occur. 

Gray Whale 

Gray whales are the only whale 

species that travels far into San 

Francisco bay with any regularity. They 

occasionally enter the Bay during their 

northward migration period, and are 

most often sighted in the Bay between 

February and May. Most venture only 

about 2 to 3 km (about 1–2 mi) past the 

Golden Gate, but gray whales have 

occasionally been sighted as far north as 

San Pablo Bay. Pile driving is not 

anticipated to occur during the February 

through May timeframe and gray whales 

are not likely to be present at other 

times of year. In the very unlikely event 

that a gray whale or pair of gray whales 

makes its way close to the project area 

while pile driving activities are under 

way, Chevron has requested take by 

Level B harassment of up to two (2) gray 

whales per year. NMFS agrees and has 

authorized the take of 2 gray whales by 

Level B harassment. No Level A take is 

authorized. 

Tables 12 and 13 summarize the 

estimate of Level B and Level A 

harassment, respectively, for each 

species by pile driving activity for the 

2018 construction season. For harbor 

seals, sea lions, harbor porpoise and 

elephant seals, the Level B harassment 

estimates are based on the number of 

individuals assumed to be exposed per 

day, the number of days of pile driving 

expected based on an average 

installation rate. The Level A 

harassment estimates are derived from 

the Level B harassment estimates by 

taking the Level B harassment total and 

multiplying it by the fractional ratio of 

the area of the Level A zone to the Level 

B zone. 

TABLE 12—TOTAL ESTIMATED TAKE BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT BY SPECIES AND PILE TYPE

Pile type Pile driver type Number 

of piles 

Number 

of driving 

days 

Species 

Harbor 

seal 

CA sea 

lion 

Harbor 

porpoise 

Gray 

whale * 

N. elephant 

seal 

N. fur 

seal * 

Bottlenose 

dolphin * 

36-inch steel template 

pile **.

Vibratory ................ 8 2 793.1 56.46 59.98 NA 2 NA NA 

Concrete pile removal ........ Vibratory ............... 5 1 184.92 1.14 1.21 NA 1 NA NA 

24-inch concrete ................ Impact ................... 8 8 141.2 0.08 0.08 NA 8 NA NA 

14-inch H pile installation .. Impact/Vibratory .... 36 12 4,972.68 365.76 388.68 NA 12 NA NA 

Timber pile removal ........... Vibratory ............... 53 5 924.6 5.7 6.05 NA 5 NA NA 

Total Take by Species 

(2018).

............................... ................ ................ 7,017 429 456 2 28 10 30 

* Take is not calculated by activity type for these species, only a total is given. 

** Only the installation of the template piles will occur in 2018. Take associated with their removal will be requested in a subsequent IHA. 

*** These piles will be preferentially driven with a vibratory driver, which would have a larger Level B zone than installation with an impact driver. Thus, Level B take 

for this species is based on installation using vibratory driver, and not an impact driver. 

TABLE 13—AUTHORIZED TAKE BY LEVEL A HARASSMENT

Pile type Pile driver type Number of 

driving days Harbor seal Harbor porpoise 

36-inch steel template pile .............................. Vibratory ......................................................... 2 0 0 

Concrete pile removal ..................................... Vibratory ......................................................... 1 0 0 

24-inch concrete ............................................. Impact ............................................................. 8 0 0 

14-inch H pile installation ................................ Impact/Vibratory ............................................. 12 40 * 4 

Timber pile removal ........................................ Vibratory ......................................................... 5 0 0 

Total Take ................................................ ......................................................................... ........................ 40 4 

* Harbor porpoise takes were increased to 4 to account for average group size. 

Table 14 provides a summary of 

authorized Level A and Level B takes as 

well as the percentage of a stock 

authorized for take. 

TABLE 14—AUTHORIZED TAKE AND PERCENTAGE OF STOCK OR POPULATION

Species Stock Authorized 

Level A takes 

Authorized 

Level B takes 

Percent 

population 

Harbor seal ..................................................... California ........................................................ 40 6,977 22.6% 

California sea lion ........................................... Eastern U.S. ................................................... ........................ 429 <0.01 

Harbor porpoise .............................................. San Francisco—Russian River ...................... 4 451 4.5 

Northern elephant seal ................................... California Breeding ......................................... ........................ 28 <0.01 

Gray whale ...................................................... Eastern North Pacific ..................................... ........................ 2 <0.01 

Northern fur seal ............................................. California ........................................................ ........................ 10 <0.01 

Bottlenose Dolphin .......................................... California Coastal ........................................... ........................ 30 6.6 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
27560 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

Mitigation 

In order to issue an IHA under 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 

NMFS must set forth the permissible 

methods of taking pursuant to such 

activity, and other means of effecting 

the least practicable impact on such 

species or stock and its habitat, paying 

particular attention to rookeries, mating 

grounds, and areas of similar 

significance, and on the availability of 

such species or stock for taking for 

certain subsistence uses (latter not 

applicable for this action). NMFS 

regulations require applicants for 

incidental take authorizations to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting such activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, we carefully consider two 

primary factors: 

(1) The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 

expected to reduce impacts to marine 

mammals, marine mammal species or 

stocks, and their habitat. This considers 

the nature of the potential adverse 

impact being mitigated (likelihood, 

scope, range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned) the likelihood 

of effective implementation (probability 

implemented as planned); and 

(2) The practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost, 

impact on operations. 

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and 

Their Habitat 

The following measures would apply 

to Chevron’s mitigation requirements: 

• Seasonal Restriction—To minimize 

impacts to listed fish species, piledriving activities would occur between 

June 1 and November 30; 

• Daylight Construction Period— 

Work would occur only during daylight 

hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) when 

visual marine mammal monitoring can 

be conducted; 

• Establishment of Shutdown Zone— 

For all pile driving and removal 

activities, Chevron will establish a 

shutdown zone. The purpose of a 

shutdown zone is generally to define an 

area within which shutdown of activity 

would occur upon sighting of a marine 

mammal (or in anticipation of an animal 

entering the defined area). A shutdown 

zone will be established which will 

include all or a portion of the area 

where underwater SPLs are expected to 

reach or exceed the cumulative SEL 

thresholds for Level A harassment as 

provided in Table 7. The shutdown 

isopleths for pinnipeds (harbor seals, 

California sea lion, Northern elephant 

seal, northern fur seal) and midfrequency cetaceans (bottlenose 

dolphins) will be set at 15 meters during 

vibratory driving. A 30 meter shutdown 

zone during vibratory driving will be 

established for low-frequency cetaceans 

(gray whale) and high-frequency 

cetaceans (harbor porpoise). During 

impact driving the shutdown zones will 

be set at 250 meters for high-frequency 

cetaceans (harbor porpoise), 350 meters 

for low-frequency cetaceans (gray 

whales), and 35 meters for pinnipeds 

(harbor seal, California sea lion, 

Northern elephant seal, northern fur 

seal) and mid-frequency cetaceans 

(bottlenose dolphin); 

• 10-Meter Shutdown Zone—During 

the in-water operation of heavy 

machinery (e.g., barge movements), a 

10-m shutdown zone for all marine 

mammals will be implemented. If a 

marine mammal comes within 10 m, 

operations shall cease and vessels shall 

reduce speed to the minimum level 

required to maintain steerage and safe 

working conditions; 

• Establishment of Monitoring Zones 

for Level A and Level B—Chevron will 

establish and monitor Level A 

harassment zones during impact driving 

for harbor seal extending to 183 meters 

and harbor seals and extending to 408 

m for harbor porpoises. These are areas 

beyond the shutdown zone in which 

animals could be exposed to sound 

levels that could result in PTS. Chevron 

will also establish and monitor Level B 

harassment zones which are areas where 

SPLs are equal to or exceed the 160 dB 

rms threshold for impact driving and 

the 120 dB rms threshold during 

vibratory driving and extraction. 

Monitoring zones provide utility for 

observing by establishing monitoring 

protocols for areas adjacent to the 

shutdown zones. Monitoring zones 

enable observers to be aware of and 

communicate the presence of marine 

mammals in the project area outside the 

shutdown zone and thus prepare for a 

potential cease of activity should the 

animal enter the shutdown zone. The 

Level B zones are depicted in Table 11. 

As shown, the largest Level B zone is 

equal to 190.55 km2, making it 

impossible for Protected Species 

Observers (PSOs) to view the entire 

harassment area. Due to this, Level B 

exposures will be recorded and 

extrapolated based upon the number of 

observed take and the percentage of the 

Level B zone that was not visible; 

• Soft Start—The use of a soft-start 

procedure are believed to provide 

additional protection to marine 

mammals by providing warning and/or 

giving marine mammals a chance to 

leave the area prior to the hammer 

operating at full capacity. Chevron shall 

use soft start techniques when impact 

pile driving. Soft start requires 

contractors to provide an initial set of 

strikes at reduced energy, followed by a 

thirty-second waiting period, then two 

subsequent reduced energy strike sets; 

• Pile Caps/Cushions—Chevron will 

employ the use of pile caps or cushions 

as sound attenuation devices to reduce 

impacts from sound exposure during 

impact pile driving; 

• Pre-Activity Monitoring—Preactivity monitoring shall take place from 

30 minutes prior to initiation of pile 

driving activity and post-activity 

monitoring shall continue through 30 

minutes post-completion of pile driving 

activity. Pile driving may commence at 

the end of the 30-minute pre-activity 

monitoring period, provided observers 

have determined that the shutdown 

zone is clear of marine mammals, which 

includes delaying start of pile driving 

activities if a marine mammal is sighted 

in the zone, as described below; 

• If a marine mammal approaches or 

enters the shutdown zone during 

activities or pre-activity monitoring, all 

pile driving activities at that location 

shall be halted or delayed, respectively. 

If pile driving is halted or delayed due 

to the presence of a marine mammal, the 

activity may not resume or commence 

until either the animal has voluntarily 

left and been visually confirmed beyond 

the shutdown zone and 15 minutes have 

passed without re-detection of the 

animal. Pile driving activities include 

the time to install or remove a single 

pile or series of piles, as long as the time 

elapsed between uses of the pile driving 

equipment is no more than thirty 

minutes; and 

• Non-authorized Take Prohibited—If 

a species for which authorization has 

not been granted or a species for which 

authorization has been granted but the 

authorized takes are met, is observed 

approaching or within the monitoring 

zone, pile driving and removal activities 

must shut down immediately using 

delay and shut-down procedures. 

Activities must not resume until the 

animal has been confirmed to have left 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 27561 

the area or an observation time period 

of 15 minutes has elapsed. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s planned measures, as well as 

other measures considered by NMFS, 

NMFS has determined that the required 

mitigation measures provide the means 

effecting the least practicable impact on 

the affected species or stocks and their 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance. 

Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the 

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that will result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present in the action area. Effective 

reporting is critical both to compliance 

as well as ensuring that the most value 

is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density); 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) Action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life 

history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence 

of marine mammal species with the 

action; or (4) biological or behavioral 

context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or 

feeding areas); 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors; 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks; 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat); and 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Visual Monitoring 

The following visual monitoring 

measures are required as part of the 

issued IHA. 

• One day of biological monitoring 

would occur within one week before the 

project’s start date to establish baseline 

observations; 

• Monitoring distances, in accordance 

with the identified shutdown, Level A, 

and Level B zones, will be determined 

by using a range finder, scope, handheld global positioning system (GPS) 

device or landmarks with known 

distances from the monitoring positions; 

• Monitoring locations will be 

established at locations offering best 

views of the monitoring zone; 

• Monitoring will be continuous 

unless the contractor takes a break 

longer than 2 hours from active pile 

driving, in which case, monitoring will 

be required 30 minutes prior to 

restarting pile installation; 

• For in-water pile driving, under 

conditions of fog or poor visibility that 

might obscure the presence of a marine 

mammal within the shutdown zone, the 

pile in progress will be completed and 

then pile driving suspended until 

visibility conditions improve; 

• At least two PSOs will be actively 

scanning the monitoring zone during all 

pile driving activities; 

• Monitoring of pile driving shall be 

conducted by qualified PSOs (see 

below), who shall have no other 

assigned tasks during monitoring 

periods. Chevron shall adhere to the 

following conditions when selecting 

observers: 

(1) Independent PSOs shall be used 

(i.e., not construction personnel); 

(2) At least one PSO must have prior 

experience working as a marine 

mammal observer during construction 

activities; 

(3) Other PSOs may substitute 

education (degree in biological science 

or related field) or training for 

experience; and 

(4) Chevron shall submit PSO CVs for 

approval by NMFS; 

• Chevron will ensure that observers 

have the following additional 

qualifications: 

(1) Ability to conduct field 

observations and collect data according 

to assigned protocols; 

(2) Experience or training in the field 

identification of marine mammals, 

including the identification of 

behaviors; 

(3) Sufficient training, orientation, or 

experience with the construction 

operation to provide for personal safety 

during observations; 

(4) Writing skills sufficient to prepare 

a report of observations including but 

not limited to the number and species 

of marine mammals observed; dates and 

times when in-water construction 

activities were conducted; dates, times, 

and reason for implementation of 

mitigation (or why mitigation was not 

implemented when required); and 

marine mammal behavior; and 

(5) Ability to communicate orally, by 

radio or in person, with project 

personnel to provide real-time 

information on marine mammals 

observed in the area as necessary. 

A draft marine mammal monitoring 

report would be submitted to NMFS 

within 90 days after the completion of 

pile driving and removal activities. It 

will include an overall description of 

work completed, a narrative regarding 

marine mammal sightings, and 

associated marine mammal observation 

data sheets. Specifically, the report must 

include: 

• Date and time that monitored 

activity begins or ends; 

• Construction activities occurring 

during each observation period; 

• Deviation from initial proposal in 

pile numbers, pile types, average 

driving times, etc. 

• Weather parameters (e.g., percent 

cover, visibility); 

• Water conditions (e.g., sea state, 

tide state); 

• For each marine mammal sighting 

the following must be recorded: 

(1) Species, numbers, and, if possible, 

sex and age class of marine mammals; 

(2) Description of any observable 

marine mammal behavior patterns, 

including bearing and direction of travel 

and distance from pile driving activity; 

(3) Location and distance from pile 

driving activities to marine mammals 

and distance from the marine mammals 

to the observation point; and 

(4) Estimated amount of time that the 

animals remained in the Level B zone. 

• Description of implementation of 

mitigation measures within each 

monitoring period (e.g., shutdown or 

delay); 

• Other human activity in the area. 

• A summary of the following must 

be included in the report. 

(1) Total number of individuals of 

each species detected within the Level 

A and Level B Zones, and estimated 

take extrapolated across entire Level B 

zone; and 

(2) Daily average number of 

individuals of each species 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
27562 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

(differentiated by month as appropriate) 

detected within the Level B Zone, and 

estimated take extrapolated across entire 

Level B zone. 

If no comments are received from 

NMFS within 30 days, the draft final 

report will constitute the final report. If 

comments are received, a final report 

addressing NMFS comments must be 

submitted within 30 days after receipt of 

comments. 

In the unanticipated event that the 

specified activity clearly causes the take 

of a marine mammal in a manner 

prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such 

as an injury, serious injury or mortality, 

Chevron would immediately cease the 

specified activities and report the 

incident to the Chief of the Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, and the 

West Coast Regional Stranding 

Coordinator. The report would include 

the following information: 

• Description of the incident; 

• Environmental conditions (e.g., 

Beaufort sea state, visibility); 

• Description of all marine mammal 

observations in the 24 hours preceding 

the incident; 

• Species identification or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Fate of the animal(s); and 

• Photographs or video footage of the 

animal(s) (if equipment is available). 

Activities would not resume until 

NMFS is able to review the 

circumstances of the prohibited take. 

NMFS would work with Chevron to 

determine what is necessary to 

minimize the likelihood of further 

prohibited take and ensure MMPA 

compliance. Chevron would not be able 

to resume their activities until notified 

by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone. 

In the event that Chevron discovers an 

injured or dead marine mammal, and 

the lead PSO determines that the cause 

of the injury or death is unknown and 

the death is relatively recent (e.g., in 

less than a moderate state of 

decomposition as described in the next 

paragraph), Chevron would immediately 

report the incident to the Chief of the 

Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 

and the West Coast Regional Stranding 

Coordinator. The report would include 

the same information identified in the 

paragraph above. Activities would be 

able to continue while NMFS reviews 

the circumstances of the incident. 

NMFS would work with Chevron to 

determine whether modifications in the 

activities are appropriate. 

In the event that Chevron discovers an 

injured or dead marine mammal and the 

lead PSO determines that the injury or 

death is not associated with or related 

to the activities authorized in the IHA 

(e.g., previously wounded animal, 

carcass with moderate to advanced 

decomposition, or scavenger damage), 

Chevron would report the incident to 

the Chief of the Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, and the 

West Coast Regional Stranding 

Coordinator within 24 hours of the 

discovery. Chevron would provide 

photographs or video footage (if 

available) or other documentation of the 

stranded animal sighting to NMFS and 

the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. 

Hydroacoustic Monitoring 

Sound Source Verification (SSV) 

testing of would be conducted under 

this IHA. The purpose of the planned 

acoustic monitoring plan is to collect 

underwater sound-level information at 

both near and distant locations during 

vibratory pile extraction and installation 

and impact pile installation. The plan 

provides a protocol for hydroacoustic 

measurements during pile driving 

operations. Acoustic monitoring would 

be conducted on a minimum of two of 

each pile type. Since little data exist for 

source levels associated with 

installation of 24-inch square concrete 

piles (including data on single strike 

sound exposure level metrics) Chevron 

would conduct in-situ measurements 

during installation of eight piles. The 

SSV testing would be conducted by an 

acoustical firm with prior experience 

conducting SSV testing. Final results 

would be sent to NMFS. Findings may 

be used to establish Level A and Level 

B isopleths during impact and vibratory 

driving. Any alterations to the 

shutdown or harassment zones based on 

testing data must be approved by NMFS. 

The Hydroacoustic Monitoring Plan is 

contained on the following NMFS 

website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

incidental-take-authorizationsconstruction-activities. 

Negligible Impact Analysis and 

Determination 

NMFS has defined negligible impact 

as an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 

finding is based on the lack of likely 

adverse effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number 

of takes alone is not enough information 

on which to base an impact 

determination. In addition to 

considering estimates of the number of 

marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ 

through harassment, NMFS considers 

other factors, such as the likely nature 

of any responses (e.g., intensity, 

duration), the context of any responses 

(e.g., critical reproductive time or 

location, migration), as well as effects 

on habitat, and the likely effectiveness 

of the mitigation. We also assess the 

number, intensity, and context of 

estimated takes by evaluating this 

information relative to population 

status. Consistent with the 1989 

preamble for NMFS’s implementing 

regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 

1989), the impacts from other past and 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the environmental baseline 

(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status 

of the species, population size and 

growth rate where known, ongoing 

sources of human-caused mortality, or 

ambient noise levels). 

Pile driving and extraction associated 

with Chevron’s WMEP project as 

outlined previously have the potential 

to injure, disturb or displace marine 

mammals. Specifically, the specified 

activities may result in Level B 

harassment (behavioral disturbance) for 

seven marine mammal species 

authorized for take from underwater 

sound generated during pile driving 

operations. Level A harassment in the 

form of PTS may also occur to limited 

numbers of two species. No serious 

injuries or mortalities are anticipated to 

occur as a result of Chevron’s pile 

driving activities. 

A limited number of animals (40 

harbor seals and 4 harbor porpoises) 

could experience Level A harassment in 

the form of PTS if they stay within the 

Level A harassment zone during impact 

driving of 24-inch steel H-piles. 

Installation of these piles would occur 

over eight days and impact driving will 

not be the primary method of 

installation. The piles will mainly be 

installed using only vibratory driving. 

Impact driving will be used only if the 

vibrated pile encounters an obstruction 

such as an old sunken pile. It is unlikely 

that this would occur for all four piles 

projected to be installed each driving 

day. An assumption of four piles per 

day was used to calculate Level A zone 

sizes. If four piles did require impact 

installation on a single day it is unlikely 

that the same individual marine 

mammal would be within the relatively 

small Level A zone during the 

installation of every pile. In most 

instances impact driving will not be 

required at all. Furthermore, the degree 

of injury is expected to be mild and is 

not likely to affect the reproduction or 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 27563 

survival of the individual animals. It is 

expected that, if hearing impairments 

occurs, most likely the affected animal 

would lose a few dB in its hearing 

sensitivity, which in most cases is not 

likely to affect its survival and 

recruitment. 

The Level B takes that are anticipated 

and authorized are expected to be 

limited to short-term behavioral 

harassment. Marine mammals present 

near the action area and taken by Level 

B harassment would most likely show 

overt brief disturbance (e.g., startle 

reaction) and avoidance of the area from 

elevated noise level during pile driving. 

Repeated exposures of individuals to 

levels of sound that may cause Level B 

harassment are unlikely to significantly 

disrupt foraging behavior. Thus, even 

repeated Level B harassment of some 

small subset of the overall stock is 

unlikely to result in any significant 

realized decrease in fitness for the 

affected individuals, and thus would 

not result in any adverse impact to the 

stock as a whole. 

The project is not expected to have 

significant adverse effects on affected 

marine mammal habitat. The activities 

may cause fish to leave the area 

temporarily. This could impact marine 

mammals’ foraging opportunities in a 

limited portion of the foraging range; 

but, because of the short duration of the 

activities and the relatively small area of 

affected habitat, the impacts to marine 

mammal habitat are not expected to 

cause significant or long-term negative 

consequences. 

The likelihood that marine mammals 

will be detected by trained observers is 

high under the environmental 

conditions described for the project. The 

employment of the soft-start mitigation 

measure would also allow marine 

mammals in or near the shutdown and 

Level A zone zones to move away from 

the impact driving sound source. 

Therefore, the mitigation and 

monitoring measures are expected to 

reduce the potential for injury and 

reduce the amount and intensity of 

behavioral harassment. Furthermore, the 

pile driving activities analyzed here are 

similar to, or less impactful than, 

numerous construction activities 

conducted in similar locations which 

have taken place with no reported 

injuries or mortality to marine 

mammals, and no known long-term 

adverse consequences from behavioral 

harassment. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our determination that the impacts 

resulting from this activity are not 

expected to adversely affect the species 

or stock through effects on annual rates 

of recruitment or survival: 

• No mortality is anticipated or 

authorized; 

• Anticipated incidences of Level A 

harassment would be in the form of a 

small degree of PTS to a limited number 

of animals; 

• Anticipated incidents of Level B 

harassment consist of, at worst, 

temporary modifications in behavior; 

• The relatively short and 

intermittent duration of in-water 

construction activities; 

• The small percentage of the stock 

that may be affected by project activities 

(<22.8 percent for all stocks); and 

• Efficacy of mitigation measures is 

expected to minimize the likelihood and 

severity of the level of harassment. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

required monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS finds that the total 

marine mammal take from the planned 

activity will have a negligible impact on 

all affected marine mammal stocks or 

species. 

Small Numbers 

As noted above, only small numbers 

of incidental take may be authorized 

under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

for specified activities other than 

military readiness activities. The MMPA 

does not define small numbers and so, 

in practice, where estimated numbers 

are available, NMFS compares the 

number of individuals taken to the most 

appropriate estimation of abundance of 

the relevant species or stock in our 

determination of whether an 

authorization is limited to small 

numbers of marine mammals. 

Additionally, other qualitative factors 

may be considered in the analysis, such 

as the temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. 

Table 14 depicts the number of 

animals that could be exposed to Level 

A and Level B harassment from work 

associated with Chevron’s project. The 

analysis provided indicates that 

authorized takes account for no more 

than 22.6 percent of the populations of 

the stocks that could be affected. These 

are small numbers of marine mammals 

relative to the sizes of the affected 

stocks. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the planned (including the 

required mitigation and monitoring 

measures) and the anticipated take of 

marine mammals, NMFS finds that 

small numbers of marine mammals will 

be taken relative to the population size 

of the affected species or stocks. 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of the affected marine mammal stocks or 

species implicated by this action. 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

the total taking of affected species or 

stocks would not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

such species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence purposes. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 

NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 

216–6A, NMFS must review our 

proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an 

incidental harassment authorization) 

with respect to potential impacts on the 

human environment. 

This action is consistent with 

categories of activities identified in 

Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental 

harassment authorizations with no 

anticipated serious injury or mortality) 

of the Companion Manual for NOAA 

Administrative Order 216–6A, which do 

not individually or cumulatively have 

the potential for significant impacts on 

the quality of the human environment 

and for which we have not identified 

any extraordinary circumstances that 

would preclude this categorical 

exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has 

determined that the issuance of the IHA 

qualifies to be categorically excluded 

from further NEPA review. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal 

agency insure that any action it 

authorizes, funds, or carries out is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat. 

No incidental take of ESA-listed 

species is authorized or expected to 

result from this activity. Therefore, 

NMFS has determined that formal 

consultation under section 7 of the ESA 

is not required for this action. 

Authorization 

NMFS has issued an IHA to Chevron 

to take seven species of marine mammal 

incidental to pile driving and removal 

activities at Chevron’s Long Wharf from 

June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019 

provided the previously mentioned 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
27564 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

requirements are incorporated. 

Dated: June 7, 2018. 

Elaine T. Saiz, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected 

Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12629 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Air Force 

Notice of Availability of Software and 

Documentation for Licensing 

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, 

Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Availability of Mi-Std-1553B 

decoder software and documentation for 

licensing. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of 

Section 801 of Public Law 113–66 (2014 

National Defense Authorization Act) as 

extended by Section 818 of Public Law 

114–328; the Department of the Air 

Force announces the availability of MilStd-1553B decoder software and related 

documentation for decoding the 

interaction of bus controllers (BC) and 

remote terminals (RT) using field 

programmable gate array (FPGA) 

implementation technology. 

ADDRESSES: Licensing interests should 

be sent to: Air Force Research 

Laboratory, Sensors Directorate, AFRL/ 

RYO, 2241 Avionics, Wright-Patterson 

AFB, OH 45433; Facsimile: (937) 656– 

4676. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Air 

Force Research Laboratory, Sensors 

Directorate, AFRL/RYO, 2241 Avionics, 

Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433; 

Facsimile: (937) 656–4676. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MilStd-1553B decoder is written in the 

VHDL programming language and is 

vendor agnostic. This software is useful 

for implementation in technologies that 

need to passively collect, monitor or 

process existing Mil-Std-1553B bus 

interactions in real-time. 

Henry Williams, 

Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12716 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–10–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Air Force 

2018 Public Interface Control Working 

Group and Forum for the Navstar Gps 

Public Documents 

AGENCY: Global Positioning System 

Directorate (GPSD), Department of the 

Air Force. 

ACTION: Meeting notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice informs the public 

that the Global Positioning Systems 

(GPS) Directorate will host the 2018 

Public Interface Control Working Group 

and Open Public Forum on September 

12, 2018 for the following NAVSTAR 

GPS public documents: IS–GPS–200 

(Navigation User Interfaces), IS–GPS– 

705 (User Segment L5 Interfaces), IS– 

GPS–800 (User Segment L1C Interface), 

ICD–GPS–240 (NAVSTAR GPS Control 

Segment to User Support Community 

Interfaces), and ICD–GPS–870 

(NAVSTAR GPS Control Segment to 

User Support Community Interfaces). 

Additional logistical details can be 

found below. 

DATES: 0830–1600 PST, 12 September 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: TASC/Engility, 100 N 

Sepulveda Blvd., El Segundo, CA 90245, 

The Great Room; Dial In: 310–653–2663 

Meeting ID: 8337375 Password: 123456. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1Lt 

Michael Telcide (310–653–4191) or Mr. 

Daniel Godwin (310–653–3163); 

SMCGPER@us.af.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

purpose of this meeting is to update the 

public on GPS public document 

revisions and collect issues/comments 

for analysis and possible integration 

into future GPS public document 

revisions. All outstanding comments on 

the GPS public documents will be 

considered along with the comments 

received at this year’s open forum in the 

next revision cycle. The 2018 Interface 

Control Working Group and Open 

Forum are open to the general public. 

For those who would like to attend and 

participate, we request that you register 

no later than August 30, 2018. Please 

send the registration information to 

SMCGPER@us.af.mil, providing your 

name, organization, telephone number, 

email address, and country of 

citizenship. 

Comments will be collected, 

catalogued, and discussed as potential 

inclusions to the version following the 

current release. If accepted, these 

changes will be processed through the 

formal directorate change process for 

IS–GPS–200, IS–GPS–705, IS–GPS–800, 

ICD–GPS–240, and ICD–GPS–870. All 

comments must be submitted in a 

Comments Resolution Matrix. This form 

along with current versions of the 

documents and the official meeting 

notice are posted at: http://

www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/meetings/ 

2018/. 

Please submit comments to the SMC/ 

GPS Requirements (SMC/GPER) 

mailbox at SMCGPER@us.af.mil by 

August 24, 2018. Special topics may 

also be considered for the Public Open 

Forum. If you wish to present a special 

topic, please submit any materials to 

SMC/GPER no later than August 1, 

2018. For more information, please 

contact 1Lt Michael Telcide at 310–653– 

4191 or Mr. Daniel Godwin at 310–653– 

3640. 

Henry Williams, 

Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12715 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–10–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; FullService Community Schools Program 

AGENCY: Office of Innovation and 

Improvement, Department of Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Education 

(Department) is issuing a notice inviting 

applications for fiscal year (FY) 2018 for 

the Full-Service Community Schools 

(FSCS) program, Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 

84.215J. 

DATES: 

Applications Available: June 13, 2018. 

Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: 

June 28, 2018. 

Date of Pre-Application Webinar: June 

20, 2018. For information about the preapplication webinar, visit the FSCS 

website at: https://innovation.ed.gov/ 

what-we-do/parental-options/fullservice-community-schools-programfscs/applicant-info-and-eligibility/. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: July 13, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for 

obtaining and submitting an 

application, please refer to our Common 

Instructions for Applicants to 

Department of Education Discretionary 

Grant Programs, published in the 

Federal Register on February 12, 2018 

(83 FR 6003) and available at 

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/ 

pdf/2018-02558.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michelle Johnson Armstrong, U.S. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1