30406 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XF870 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to the Service Pier 

Extension Project on Naval Base 

Kitsap Bangor, Washington 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental 

harassment authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

regulations implementing the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as 

amended, notification is hereby given 

that NMFS has issued an incidental 

harassment authorization (IHA) to the 

United States Department of the Navy 

(Navy) to incidentally harass, by Level 

A and Level B harassment, marine 

mammals during construction activities 

associated with the Service Pier 

Extension (SPE) project at Naval Base 

Kitsap Bangor, Washington. 

DATES: This Authorization is effective 

from July 16, 2019 through July 15, 

2020. 

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 August 9, 2017, NMFS received a 

request from the Navy for an IHA to take 

marine mammals incidental to pile 

driving and removal associated with 

planned construction of the SPE on 

Naval Base Kitsap Bangor, Washington. 

The application was deemed adequate 

and complete by NMFS on November 

15, 2017. 

The Navy’s request is for take by 

Level B harassment of four marine 

mammal species and Level A and Level 

B harassment of one species. Neither the 

Navy nor NMFS expect serious injury or 

immortality to result from this activity 

and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. 

Description of Planned Activity 

Overview 

The Navy is planning to extend the 

service pier to provide additional 

berthing capacity and improve 

associated facilities for existing 

homeported and visiting submarines at 

Naval Base Kitsap Bangor. The project 

includes impact and vibratory pile 

driving and vibratory pile removal. 

Sounds resulting from pile driving and 

removal may result in the incidental 

take of marine mammals by Level A and 

Level B harassment in the form of 

auditory injury or behavioral 

harassment. Naval Base Kitsap Bangor is 

located on Hood Canal approximately 

20 miles (32 kilometers) west of Seattle, 

Washington. The in-water construction 

period for the planned action will occur 

over 12 months. The issued IHA would 

be effective from July 16, 2019 through 

July 15, 2020 and cover two in-water 

work windows. A detailed description 

of the planned SPE project is provided 

in the Federal Register notice for the 

proposed IHA (83 FR 10689; March 12, 

2018). Since that time, no changes have 

been made to the planned pile driving 

and removal 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 the Navy was published in 

the Federal Register on March 12, 2018 

(83 FR 10689). That notice described, in 

detail, the Navy’s activity, the marine 

mammal species that may be affected by 

the activity, and the anticipated effects 

on marine mammals. During the 30-day 

public comment period, NMFS received 

comments from the Marine Mammal 

Commission, Whale and Dolphin 

Conservation (WDC), and private 

citizens. 

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’s 24-hour 

reset policy. The Commission 

understands that NMFS has developed 

rounding criteria and recommends that 

it be shared with the Commission. 

Response: NMFS will share the 

rounding criteria 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 renewal process, as 

proposed, 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. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 30407 

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 supports 

NMFS’s use of the updated permanent 

threshold shift (PTS) thresholds and 

associated weighting functions that are 

used to estimate the Level A harassment 

zones. However, it feels there are some 

shortcomings that need to be addressed 

regarding the methodology for 

determining the extent of the Level A 

harassment zones based on the 

associated PTS cumulative sound 

exposure level (SELcum) thresholds for 

the various types of sound sources, 

including stationary sound sources. The 

Commission does not question the Level 

A harassment thresholds themselves, 

but rather the manner in which the PTS 

SELcum thresholds are currently 

implemented. The Level A and B 

harassment zones do not make sense 

biologically or acoustically due to 

NMFS’s unrealistic assumption that the 

animals remain stationary throughout 

the entire day of the activity. The 

Commission believes that it would be 

prudent for NMFS to consult with 

scientists and acousticians to determine 

the appropriate accumulation time that 

action proponents should use to 

determine the extent of the Level A 

harassment zones based on the 

associated PTS SELcum thresholds in 

such situations. 

Response: During the 2016 Technical 

Guidance’s recent review, in accordance 

with E.O. 13795, NMFS received 

comments from multiple Federal 

agencies, including the Commission, 

recommending the establishment a 

working group to investigate more 

realistic means of approximating the 

accumulation period associated with 

sound exposure beyond the default 24- 

h accumulation period. Based on these 

comments, NMFS will be convening a 

working group to re-evaluate 

implementation of the default 24-h 

accumulation period and investigate 

means for deriving more realistic 

accumulation periods. 

Comment: The Commission 

recommended that NMFS encourage the 

Navy to reduce the sizes of its shutdown 

zones to ensure both that pinnipeds are 

sufficiently protected from Level A 

harassment and that the activities can be 

completed in an appropriate manner 

and within an appropriate timeframe. 

Response: NMFS consulted with the 

Navy who concurred that a reduction in 

zone sizes were appropriate. Additional 

details may be found in the Mitigation 

section of this notice. 

Comment: The WDC recommended 

that lead observers should be familiar 

with, or adequately trained on, the 

differences in appearance between 

southern resident and transient killer 

whales and be able to immediately 

report the presence of southern resident 

orcas should they enter or approach 

Hood Canal. 

Response: The Navy reports that 

qualified monitors would be familiar 

with differences in appearance between 

resident and transient killer whales. 

Comment: The WDC recommended 

that the Navy install a hydroacoustic 

system to detect the presence of marine 

mammals at or near the entrance to 

Hood Canal, in order to monitor for 

southern resident killer whales, which 

tend to be more vocally active than 

transient killer whales. 

Response: NMFS does not believe that 

a hydroacoustic system is necessary 

since southern resident killer whales 

have not occurred in Hood Canal. 

Additionally, due to the use of Orca 

network, marine mammal monitoring 

measures, and the high amount of 

attention that Southern resident killer 

whale movements receive, NMFS is 

confident that the Navy will be able to 

detect southern resident killer whale 

presence near the Hood Canal Bridge. 

Comment: A comment from the 

public stated that there is not enough 

scientific data available on hearing 

impairment in marine mammals 

resulting from the proposed activities to 

make any type of determination. They 

also felt that there is a lack of scientific 

understanding of the potential effects of 

the project on the species in the 

surrounding area and that too many 

assumptions were made by NMFS in the 

analysis. 

Response: The Potential Impacts 

section of the notice of proposed IHA 

(83 FR 10689; March 12, 2018) 

described numerous studies that have 

examined the effects of underwater 

sound on marine mammal, as well as 

those in the Technical Guidance that 

was directly used to assess noiseinduced hearing loss. While not all 

marine mammal species have been 

subject to studies examining hearing 

and impacts of noise on hearing, enough 

data has been collected to identify 

specific marine mammal hearing groups 

as not all marine mammals have equal 

hearing capabilities or susceptibility to 

noise-induced hearing loss. Current 

hearing data (collected via direct 

behavioral and electrophysiological 

measurements) and predictions (based 

on inner ear morphology, modeling, 

behavior, vocalizations, or taxonomy) 

allow for individual species to be placed 

in specific hearing groups and develop 

composite audiograms for each hearing 

group. From composite audiograms, 

weighting functions associated with 

each hearing group, along with data on 

noise-induced hearing loss (i.e., acoustic 

thresholds), can be applied to predict 

the exposures at which animals could 

suffer permanent hearing impairment. 

NMFS uses the best available science 

to make determinations on the potential 

impacts of underwater noise on marine 

mammals. When specific data on a 

given topic or variable is not available, 

NMFS must make assumptions in order 

to conduct an analysis. In many 

instances, such assumptions are based 

on scenarios or conditions that existed 

at locations where NMFS had 

previously issued incidental take 

authorizations. 

Comment: A private citizen comment 

noted NMFS fails to specify the use of 

a hydraulic or an electrical hammer 

during pile driving, and that the 

determination, or meaningful 

‘‘assumptions,’’ of how significantly 

marine mammals will be affected by 

frequency and amplitude cannot be 

successful if the variation between the 

two hammering techniques is not taken 

into account. NMFS also did not define 

or have set criteria for the term 

problematic geotechnical conditions. 

Response: NMFS is unaware of any 

data indicating a difference in frequency 

and/or amplitude between hydraulic 

and electric hammers during pile 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
30408 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 

driving. Problematic geotechnical 

conditions refers to any situation in 

which the use of a vibratory driver is 

insufficient to drive a pile to its required 

depth. 

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 (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ 

species/mammals/). 

Table 1 lists all species with expected 

potential for occurrence in Hood Canal 

and summarizes information related to 

the population or stock, including 

regulatory status under the MMPA and 

ESA and potential biological removal 

(PBR), where known. An expected 

potential was defined as species with 

any regular occurrence in Hood Canal 

since 1995. Note that while not 

observed on a consistent basis, west 

coast transient killer whales have been 

recorded intermittently in Hood Canal 

with the most recent sightings occurring 

in 2016 as described below. They have 

also been recorded remaining in the area 

for extended periods. As such, they 

have been listed as one of the species for 

which authorized take has been 

requested. For taxonomy, we follow 

Committee on Taxonomy (2017). PBR is 

defined by the MMPA as the maximum 

number of animals, not including 

natural mortalities, that may be removed 

from a marine mammal stock while 

allowing that stock to reach or maintain 

its optimum sustainable population (as 

described in NMFS’s SARs). While no 

mortality is anticipated or authorized 

here, PBR and annual serious injury and 

mortality from anthropogenic sources 

are included here as gross indicators of 

the status of the species and other 

threats. 

Marine mammal abundance estimates 

presented in this document represent 

the total number of individuals that 

make up a given stock or the total 

number estimated within a particular 

study or survey area. All managed 

stocks in this region are assessed in 

NMFS’s U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal 

SARs (Carretta et al., 2016) or Alaska 

Marine Mammal SARs (Muto et al., 

2016). All values presented in Table 1 

are the most recent available at the time 

of publication and are available in the 

2016 SARs (Carretta et al., 2016, Muto 

et al., 2016) (available online at: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/ 

species.htm). 

TABLE 1—SPECIES AUTHORIZED FOR TAKE

Species 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 Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Family Delphinidae 

Killer whale ................................ Orcinus orca ............................. West coast transient ................. -; N 243 (n/a; 243, 2009) 4 ..... 2.4 0 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises) 

Harbor porpoise ......................... Phocoena phocoena vomerina Washington inland waters ........ -; N 11,233 (0.37; 8,308; 

2015).

66 ≥7.2 

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia 

Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) 

California sea lion ...................... Zalophus californianus .............. U.S. ........................................... -; N 296,750 (n/a; 153,337; 

2011).

9,200 389 

Steller sea lion ........................... Eumetopias jubatus 

monteriensis.

Eastern U.S. ............................. -; N 41,638 (n/a; 41,638; 

2015).

2,498 108 

Family Phocidae (earless seals) 

Harbor seal ................................ Phoca vitulina richardii .............. Hood Canal ............................... -; N 1,088 (0.15; unk; 1999) 4 unk 0.2 

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. 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. 4Abundance estimates for these stocks are greater than eight years old and are therefore not considered current. PBR is considered undetermined for these 

stocks, as there is no current minimum abundance estimate for use in calculation. We nevertheless present the most recent abundance estimates, as these represent 

the best available information for use in this document. 

A detailed description of the of the 

species likely to be affected by the SPE 

project, including brief introductions to 

the species and relevant stocks as well 

as available information regarding 

population trends and threats, and 

information regarding local occurrence, 

were provided in the Federal Register 

notice for the proposed IHA (83 FR 

10689; March 12, 2018); since that time, 

we are not aware of any changes in the 

status of these species and stocks; 

therefore, detailed descriptions are not 

provided here. Please refer to that 

Federal Register notice for these 

descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS’ 

website (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ 

species/mammals/) for generalized 

species accounts. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 30409 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

The effects of underwater noise from 

pile driving and removal activities for 

the SPE project have the potential to 

result in behavioral harassment of 

marine mammals in the vicinity of the 

action area. The Federal Register notice 

for the proposed IHA (83 FR 10689; 

March 12, 2018) included a discussion 

of the effects of anthropogenic noise on 

marine mammals. The project would 

not result in permanent impacts to 

habitats used directly by marine 

mammals, such as haulout sites, but 

may have potential short-term impacts 

to food sources such as forage fish and 

minor impacts to the immediate 

substrate during installation and 

removal of piles during the SPE project. 

These potential effects are discussed in 

detail in the Federal Register notice for 

the proposed IHA (83 FR 10689; March 

12, 2018) therefore that information is 

not repeated here; please refer to that 

Federal Register notice for that 

information. 

Estimated Take 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes 

authorization through this IHA, which 

informs both NMFS’ consideration of 

whether the number of takes is ‘‘small’’ 

and the negligible impact 

determination. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which 

(i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

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

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

Authorized takes would primarily be 

by Level B harassment, as 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 for the harbor seal, 

due to larger predicted auditory injury 

zones and regular presence around the 

waterfront area. Auditory injury is 

unlikely to occur for mid-frequency 

cetaceans, high frequency cetaceans or 

otariid species due to small predicted 

zones. The planned mitigation and 

monitoring measures are expected to 

minimize the severity of such taking to 

the extent practicable. 

As described previously, no serious 

injury or 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 

NMFS uses 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—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., 2011). 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 

affected in a manner we consider Level 

B harassment when exposed to 

underwater anthropogenic noise above 

received levels of 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) 

for continuous (e.g. vibratory piledriving) and above 160 dB re 1 mPa 

(rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., 

impact pile driving). 

Level A harassment—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 non-impulsive). 

The Navy’s planned activity includes 

the use of impulsive (impact pile 

driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory 

pile driving and extraction) sources. 

These thresholds were developed by 

compiling and synthesizing the best 

available science and soliciting input 

multiple times from both the public and 

peer reviewers to inform the final 

product, and are provided in Table 2. 

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. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
30410 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 

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 the noise criteria. 

Source Levels 

For the analyses that follow, the TL 

model described above was used to 

calculate the expected noise 

propagation from pile driving, using an 

appropriate representative source level 

from Table 3 to estimate the area 

exceeding the noise criteria. The source 

levels were derived from the Navy’s 

document titled Proxy source sound 

levels and potential bubble curtain 

attenuation for acoustic modeling of 

nearshore marine pile driving at Navy 

installations in Puget Sound (Navy 

2015). In that document the Navy 

reviewed relevant data available for 

various types and sizes of piles typically 

used for pile driving and recommend 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1EN28JN18.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 30411 

proxy source values for Navy 

installations in Puget Sound. This 

document may be found as Appendix B 

in the Navy’s application. 

TABLE 3—UNDERWATER NOISE SOURCE LEVELS MODELED FOR IMPACT AND VIBRATORY PILE DRIVING

Pile type 

Installation 

method 

Pile diameter RMS 

(dB re 1 μPa) 

Peak 

(dB re 1 μPa) 

SEL (dB re 1 

μPa 2 sec) 

Timber ....................................................................................... Vibratory 15–18 in (38–45 

cm).

155 1 N/A N/A 

Concrete .................................................................................... Impact ... 18 in (45 cm) .... 170 184 159 

Steel .......................................................................................... Impact ... 24 in (60 cm) .... 193 210 181 

36 (90 cm) ........ 194 211 181 

Vibratory 24 (60 cm) ........ 161 N/A N/A 

36 (90 cm) ........ 166 N/A N/A 

1. Navy opted to use conservative value of 155 dB for project 

Key: cm = centimeter; dB re 1 μPa = decibels referenced at 1 micropascal; N/A = not applicable; RMS = root mean square; SEL = sound exposure level. 

For vibratory pile driving distances to 

the PTS thresholds, the TL model 

described above incorporated the 

auditory weighting functions for each 

hearing group using a single frequency 

as described in the NMFS Optional 

Spreadsheet (NMFS, 2016b). 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, we developed a 

User Spreadsheet that includes tools to 

help predict a simple isopleth that can 

be used in conjunction with marine 

mammal density or occurrence to help 

predict takes. We note that because of 

some of the assumptions included in the 

methods used for these tools, we 

anticipate that isopleths produced are 

typically going to be overestimates of 

some degree, which may result in some 

degree of overestimate of Level A take. 

However, these tools offer the best way 

to predict appropriate isopleths when 

more sophisticated 3D modeling 

methods are not available. NMFS 

continues to develop ways to 

quantitatively refine these tools, and 

will qualitatively address the output 

where appropriate. For stationary 

sources, including pile driving, NMFS 

User Spreadsheet predicts the closest 

distance at which a marine mammal, if 

it remained beyond that distance the 

whole duration of the activity, would 

not incur PTS. 

For impact pile driving distances to 

the cumulative PTS thresholds for 36- 

inch (90 cm) and 24-inch (60 cm) steel 

and concrete pile, the TL model 

described above incorporated frequency 

weighting adjustments by applying the 

auditory weighting function over the 

entire 1-second SEL spectral data sets 

from impact pile driving. The Navy 

believes, and NMFS concurs, that this 

methodology provides a closer estimate 

than applying the weighting function at 

a single frequency as suggested in the 

NMFS Spreadsheet. The NMFS 

Spreadsheet is considered to be a 

conservative method that typically 

results in higher estimates of the PTS 

onset distance from the pile driving 

activity. The Navy analysis focused on 

the data provided from the Naval Kitsap 

Bangor Test Pile Program (steel piles) 

and the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard 

Intermediate Maintenance Facility Pier 

6 Fender Pile Replacement Project 

(concrete piles) (Grebner et al., 2016). 

This analysis is described in more detail 

in the Appendix in the application. 

An unconfined bubble curtain will be 

used during impact driving of steel 

piles, since the project is located in an 

area without high currents. While 

bubble curtain performance is variable, 

data from the Bangor Naval Base Test 

Pile Program indicated an average peak 

SPL reduction of 8 dB to 10 dB at 10 

meters was achieved for impact driving 

of 36- and 48-inch steel pipes (Navy 

2015). However, for the SPE project, a 

reduction of 8 dB was utilized as shown 

in Table 4. 

TABLE 4—INPUTS FOR DETERMINING DISTANCES TO CUMULATIVE PTS THRESHOLDS

36′′ Steel impact 24′′ Steel impact 18′′ Concrete 

impact 

24′′ Steel 

vibratory 

36′′ Steel 

vibratory Timber 

INPUTS 

Spreadsheet Tab Used (E.1–2) Impact pile 

driving.

(E.1–2) Impact pile 

driving.

(E.1–2) Impact 

pile driving.

(A.1) Vibratory 

pile driving.

(A.1) Vibratory 

pile driving.

(A.1) Vibratory 

pile driving. 

Source Level (Single 

Strike/shot SEL).

173 dB (assumes 8 

dB attenuation) *.

173 dB (assumes 8 

dB attenuation) *.

159 dB.

Source Level (RMS 

SPL).

............................... ............................... ............................. 161 dB .............. 166 dB .............. 155 

Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) **.Weighting override 

(Grebner et al. 

2016).

Weighting override 

(Grebner et al. 

2016).

Weighting override (Grebner et 

al. 2016).

2.5 .................... 2.5 .................... 2.5 

Number of strikes per 

day.

1600 ...................... 1600 ...................... 1600.

Number of piles per 

day within 24-h period.

2 ............................ 1 ............................ 3.

Duration of sound Production (minutes)................................ ............................... ............................. 300 ................... 300 ................... 300 

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


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
30412 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 

TABLE 4—INPUTS FOR DETERMINING DISTANCES TO CUMULATIVE PTS THRESHOLDS—Continued 

36′′ Steel impact 24′′ Steel impact 18′′ Concrete 

impact 

24′′ Steel 

vibratory 

36′′ Steel 

vibratory Timber 

Distance of source 

level measurement 

(meters).

10 .......................... 10 .......................... 10 ........................ 10 ..................... 10 ..................... 10 

* 8 dB reduction from use of unconfined bubble curtain during steel pipe impact driving. 

** For impact driving, the TL model described above incorporated frequency weighting adjustments by applying the auditory weighting function 

over the entire 1-second SEL spectral data sets. 

TABLE 5—CALCULATED RADIAL DISTANCES (METERS) TO UNDERWATER MARINE MAMMAL IMPACT PILE DRIVING NOISE

THRESHOLDS–SELCUM ISOPLETHS 1

Source type 

Level A isopleths—impact driving 2

Mid-frequency 

cetaceans 

Highfrequency 

cetaceans 

Phocid 

pinnipeds 

Otariid 

pinnipeds 

18-in concrete 3 ................................................................................................ 2 74 19 1 

24-in steel 4 ...................................................................................................... 5 253 34 2 

36-in steel 4 ...................................................................................................... 14 740 217 12 

Notes: 

1 Calculations based on SELCUM threshold criteria shown in Table 4. 

Calculated values were rounded up the nearest meter. 

2 Representative spectra were used to calculate the distances to the injury (PTS onset) thresholds for each functional hearing group for 24-inch 

and 36-inchsteel pile and 24-inch (60 cm) concrete pile. Distances for 18-inch (45 cm) concrete piles assumed to be the same as 24-inch (60 

cm) concrete piles. 3 No bubble curtain planned for concrete pile. 

4Bubble curtain will be used for 24-inch (60 cm) and 36-inch (90 cm) steel piles, and calculations include 8 dB attenuation 

TABLE 6—CALCULATED RADIAL DISTANCES (METERS) TO LEVEL A UNDERWATER MARINE MAMMAL VIBRATORY PILE

DRIVING NOISE ISOPLETHS

Source type 

Level A isopleths—vibratory driving 1

Mid-frequency 

cetaceans 

Highfrequency 

cetaceans 

Phocid 

pinnipeds 

Otariid 

pinnipeds 

15–18-in timber ................................................................................................ <1 12 5 <1 

24-in steel ........................................................................................................ 2 30 12 1 

36-in steel ........................................................................................................ 4 64 26 1.8 

Notes: 

1 Distances to the injury (PTS onset) thresholds calculated using National Marine Fisheries Service calculator with default Weighting Factor Adjustment of 2.5 (NMFS, 2016b). 

Calculated values were rounded up the nearest meter. 

Tables 5 and 6 show the radial 

distances to impact and vibratory Level 

A isopleths. Based on the dual criteria 

provided in the NMFS Spreadsheet, the 

cumulative SEL was selected over peak 

threshold to calculate injury thresholds 

because the ensonified distances were 

larger. 

Using the same source level and 

transmission loss inputs discussed 

above the Level B isopleths were 

calculated for impact and vibratory 

driving (Table 7). Note that these 

attenuation distances are based on 

sound characteristics in open water. The 

actual attenuation distances are 

constrained by numerous land features 

and islands; these actual distances are 

reflected in the ensonified areas given 

below. 

TABLE 7—LEVEL B IMPACT AND VIBRATORY PILE DRIVING EXPOSURE DISTANCES AND ENSONIFIED AREAS

Pile type Attenuation 

distance Area * 

Impact (160 dB) 

18-in concrete ......................................................................................................................................................... 46 m 6.64 m2. 

24-in steel ............................................................................................................................................................... 464 m 0.62 km2. 

36-in steel ............................................................................................................................................................... 541 m 0.78 km2. 

Vibratory (120 dB) 

15–18-in timber ...................................................................................................................................................... 2.2 km 6.8 km2. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 30413 

TABLE 7—LEVEL B IMPACT AND VIBRATORY PILE DRIVING EXPOSURE DISTANCES AND ENSONIFIED AREAS—Continued 

Pile type Attenuation 

distance Area * 

24-in steel ............................................................................................................................................................... 5.4 km 26.1 km2. 

36-in steel ............................................................................................................................................................... 11.7 km 49.6 km2. 

* Areas were adjusted wherever land masses are encountered prior to reaching the full extent of the radius around the driven pile. 

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. 

Transient killer whales are rare in 

Hood Canal and there are few data to 

describe transient killer whale 

abundance within Hood Canal. There 

have been anecdotal accounts of the 

whales in Hood Canal for decades. 

There was a report from one day in 

April 2016 and eight days in May 2016 

of whales in Dabob Bay in Hood Canal 

(Orca Network, 2016). It is not known if 

these sightings were all of the same 

group of transient killer whales. 

However, the temporally discontinuous 

data suggest a high degree of variability 

in the habitat use and localized relative 

abundances of transient killer whales in 

Hood Canal. Given that whales were 

observed on eight days, in May 2016, 

NMFS will assume that whales could be 

observed on up to 8 days during the SPE 

project. The most commonly observed 

group size in Puget Sound from 2004 to 

2010 was 6 whales (Navy 2017). 

Harbor porpoises may be present in 

Puget Sound year-round typically in 

groups of one to five individuals and are 

regularly detected in Hood Canal. Aerial 

surveys conducted throughout 2013 to 

2015 in Puget Sound indicated density 

in Puget Sound was 0.91 individuals/ 

km2) (95% CI=0.72–1.10, all seasons 

pooled) and density in Hood Canal was 

0.47/km2 (95% CI=0.29–0.75, all 

seasons pooled) (Jefferson et al., 2016). 

However, after reviewing the most 

recent data the Navy has estimated that 

harbor porpoise density in Hood Canal 

is 0.44 animals/km2 (Smultea et al., 

2017). Mean group size of harbor 

porpoises in Puget Sound in the 2013– 

2015 surveys was 1.7 in Hood Canal. 

Steller sea lions are routinely seen 

hauled out on submarines at Naval Base 

Kitsap. The Navy relied on monitoring 

data from 2012 to 2016 to determine the 

average of the maximum count of 

hauled out Steller sea lions for each 

month in the in-water work window 

(Appendix A). The average of the 

monthly maximum counts during the 

in-water work window was 3.14. 

California sea lions can occur at Naval 

Base Kitsap Bangor in any month, 

although numbers are low from June 

through August (Appendix A in the 

application). 

California sea lions peak abundance 

occurs between October and May 

(NMFS, 1997; Jeffries et al., 2000) but 

animals can occur at Naval Base Kitsap 

Bangor in any month. The Navy relied 

on monitoring data from 2012 to 2016 

to determine the average of the 

maximum count of hauled out 

California sea lions for each month 

(Appendix A). The Navy determined 

abundance of California sea lions based 

on the average monthly maximum 

counts during the in-water work 

window (Appendix A), respectively, for 

an average maximum count of 48.85 

animals. 

Boat-based surveys and monitoring 

indicate that harbor seals regularly 

swim in the waters at Naval Base Kitsap 

Bangor (Appendix A in Application). 

Hauled-out adults, mother/pup pairs, 

and neonates have been documented 

occasionally, but quantitative data are 

limited. Incidental surveys in August 

and September 2016 recorded as many 

as 28 harbor seals hauled out under 

Marginal Wharf or swimming in 

adjacent waters. Additional animals 

were likely present at other locations 

during the same time of the surveys. To 

be conservative, the Navy estimated that 

an additional 7 animals were present 

based on typical sightings at the other 

piers at Bangor. Therefore, the Navy and 

NMFS assume that up to 35 seals could 

occur near the SPE project area on any 

given day. 

Take Calculation and Estimation 

Here we describe how the information 

provided above is brought together to 

produce a quantitative take estimate. 

To quantitatively assess exposure of 

marine mammals to noise levels from 

pile driving over the NMFS threshold 

guidance, one of three methods was 

used depending on the species spatial 

and temporal occurrence. For species 

with rare or infrequent occurrence 

during the in-water work window, the 

likelihood of occurrence was reviewed 

based on the information in Chapter 3 

of the application and the potential 

maximum duration of work days and 

total work days. Only one species was 

in this category, transient killer whale, 

and it had the potential to linger for 

multiple days based on historical 

information. The calculation was: 

(1) Exposure estimate = Probable 

abundance during construction × 

Probable duration 

Where: 

Probable abundance = maximum expected 

group size 

Probable duration = probable duration of 

animal(s) presence at construction sites 

during in-water work window 

For species that regularly occur in 

Puget Sound, but for which local 

abundance data are not available, 

marine mammal density estimates were 

used when available to determine the 

number of animals potentially exposed 

in a ZOI on any one day of pile driving 

or extraction. Only harbor porpoise was 

in this category. 

The equation for this species with 

only a density estimate and no sitespecific abundance was: 

(2) Exposure estimate = N × ZOI × 

maximum days of pile driving 

Where: 

N = density estimate used for each species 

ZOI = Zone of Influence; the area where 

noise exceeds the noise threshold value 

For species with site-specific surveys 

available, exposures were estimated by: 

(3) Exposure estimate = Abundance × 

maximum days of pile driving 

Where: 

Abundance = average monthly maximum 

over the time period when pile driving 

will occur for sea lions, and estimated 

total abundance for harbor seals 

All three pinniped species were in 

this category. Average monthly 

maximum counts of Steller sea lions 

and California sea lions (see Appendix 

A for abundance data of these species) 

were averaged over the in-water work 

window. The maximum number of 

animals observed during the month(s) 

with the highest number of animals 

present on a survey day was used in the 

analysis. For harbor seals, an abundance 

estimate for the Bangor waterfront was 

used. 

The following assumptions were used 

to calculate potential exposures to 

impact and vibratory pile driving noise 

for each threshold. 

• For formulas (2) and (3), each 

species will be assumed to be present in 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
30414 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 

the project area each day during 

construction. The timeframe for takings 

would be one potential take (Level B 

harassment exposure) per individual, 

per 24 hours. 

• The pile type, size, and installation 

method that produce the largest ZOI 

were used to estimate exposure of 

marine mammals to noise impacts. 

Vibratory installation of 36-inch (90 cm) 

steel piles created the largest ZOI, so the 

exposure analysis calculates marine 

mammal exposures based on 36-inch 

steel piles for the 125 days when steel 

piles would be installed. For the 

estimated 35 days when concrete fender 

piles would be installed, impact driving 

was the only installation method and 

only 18-inch piles were proposed, so the 

exposure analysis calculated marine 

mammal exposures based on impact 

driving 18-inch concrete piles. 

• All pilings will have an underwater 

noise disturbance distance equal to the 

pile that causes the greatest noise 

disturbance (i.e., the piling farthest from 

shore) installed with the method that 

has the largest ZOI. If vibratory pile 

driving would occur, the largest ZOI 

will be produced by vibratory driving. 

In this case, the ZOI for an impact 

hammer will be encompassed by the 

larger ZOI from the vibratory driver. 

Vibratory driving was assumed to occur 

on all 125 days of steel pile driving, but 

not the 35 days of concrete fender pile 

installation. 

• Days of pile driving were 

conservatively based on a relatively 

slow daily production rate, but actual 

daily production rates may be higher, 

resulting in fewer actual pile driving 

days. The pile driving days are used 

solely to assess the number of days 

during which pile driving could occur 

if production was delayed due to 

equipment failure, safety, etc. In a real 

construction situation, pile driving 

production rates would be maximized 

when possible. 

Transient Killer Whale 

Using the first calculation described 

in the above section, exposures to 

underwater pile driving were calculated 

using the average group size times the 

8 days transient killer whales would be 

anticipated in the Hood Canal during 

pile driving activities. The Navy 

assumed that the average pod size was 

six individuals. 

Using this rationale, 48 potential 

Level B exposures of transient killer 

whales from vibratory pile driving are 

estimated (six animals times 8 days of 

exposure). Based on this analysis, the 

Navy requested and NMFS has 

authorized 48 Level B incidental takes 

for behavioral harassment. Concrete and 

steel ZOIs from impact driving will be 

fully monitorable (maximum distances 

to behavioral thresholds of 46 m and 

541 m, respectively, and maximum 

distance to injury thresholds is 14 m), 

so no killer whale behavioral or injury 

takes are expected from impact driving. 

Harbor Porpoise 

Applying formula (2) to the animal 

density (0.44 animals/km2), the largest 

ZOI for Level B exposure (49.6 km2) and 

the estimated days of steel pile driving 

(125), the Navy requested and NMFS 

has authorized 2,728 Level B incidental 

takes of harbor porpoises. The 49.6 km2

ZOI excludes the area behind the PSB 

because harbor porpoise have never 

been observed within the barrier. Harbor 

porpoise can be visually detected to a 

distance of about 200 m by experienced 

observers in conditions up to Beaufort 2 

(Navy 2017). Therefore, the concrete 

ZOIs will be fully monitorable 

(maximum distance of 46 m), so no 

takes were calculated for the estimated 

35 days of concrete fender pile 

installation. 

Steller Sea Lion 

Formula (3) as described in the 

previous section was used with sitespecific abundance data to calculate 

potential exposures of Steller sea lions 

during steel pile driving for the SPE 

project. Animals could be exposed 

when traveling, resting, and foraging. 

Because a Level A injury shut-down 

zone will be implemented, Level A 

harassment is not expected to occur. 

The Navy conservatively assumes that 

any Steller sea lion that hauls out at 

Bangor could swim into the behavioral 

harassment zone each day during pile 

driving because this zone extends across 

Hood Canal and up to 11.7 km from the 

driven pile. The Navy estimated 3.14 

animals could be exposed to harassment 

per day. These values provide a worst 

case assumption that on all 125 days of 

pile driving, all animals would be in the 

water each day during pile driving. 

Applying formula (3) to this abundance 

and the 125 steel pile driving days, the 

Navy requested and NMFS authorized 

the take of up to 393 Steller sea lions. 

If project work occurs during months 

when Steller sea lions are less likely to 

be present, actual exposures would be 

less. Additionally, if daily pile driving 

duration is short, exposure would be 

expected to be less because some 

animals would remain hauled out for 

the duration of pile driving. With a 

shutdown zone of 15 meters, Level B 

take is also anticipated to occur during 

35 days of concrete fender pile 

installation. NMFS assumed that 3.14 

animals would be exposed per day in 

the small Level B zone associated with 

impact driving of concrete piles 

resulting in 110 takes. Any exposure of 

Steller sea lions to pile driving noise 

will be minimized to short-term 

behavioral harassment. Therefore, 

NMFS has authorized the Level B take 

of 503 Steller sea lions. 

California Sea Lion 

Formula (3) was used with sitespecific abundance data to calculate 

potential exposures of California sea 

lions during pile driving for the SPE 

project. Because a Level A injury shutdown zone will be implemented, no 

exposure to Level A noise levels will 

occur at any location. Based on sitespecific data regarding the average 

maximum counts, the Navy assumes 

that 48.85 exposures per day could 

occur over 125 planned steel pile 

driving days resulting in 6,106 

exposures. With a shutdown zone of 15 

meters, Level B take is also anticipated 

to occur during 35 days of concrete 

fender pile installation. NMFS assumed 

that 48.85 animals would be exposed 

per day in the small Level B zone 

associated with impact driving of 

concrete piles resulting in 1,710 takes. 

Any exposure of Steller sea lions to pile 

driving noise will be minimized to 

short-term behavioral harassment. 

Therefore, NMFS has authorized 7,816 

Level B takes. 

Harbor Seal 

The Navy calculated up to 35 harbor 

seals may be present per day during 

summer and early fall months. Exposure 

of harbor seals to pile driving noise will 

be primarily in the form of short-term 

behavioral harassment (Level B) during 

steel and concrete pile driving. Formula 

(3) was used with site-specific 

abundance data to calculate potential 

exposures of harbor seals due to pile 

driving for the SPE. 

The Navy assumes that any harbor 

seal that hauls out at Bangor could swim 

into the behavioral harassment zone 

each day during impact pile driving. 

The largest ZOI for behavioral 

disturbance (Level B) would be 11.7 km 

for vibratory driving and extraction of 

36-inch steel piles. Applying formula (3) 

to the abundance of this species (35 

individuals) and the 125 pile driving 

days, results in 4,375 takes Level B 

takes. With a shutdown zone of 35 

meters Level B take is also anticipated 

to occur during 35 days of concrete 

fender pile installation. NMFS assumed 

that 35 animals would be exposed per 

day in the small Level B zone associated 

with impact driving of concrete piles 

resulting in 1,225 takes. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 30415 

The largest ZOI for Level A injury will 

be 217 m for impact driving (with 

bubble curtain) of 36-inch steel piles. A 

monitors’ ability to observe the entire 

217 m injury zone may be difficult 

because construction barges and the 

current Service Pier structure and 

associated mooring floats and vessels 

will interfere with a monitors’ ability to 

observe the entire injury zone. Some 

individuals could enter, and remain in, 

the injury zone undetected by monitors, 

resulting in potential PTS. It is assumed 

that one of the 35 individuals present on 

the Bangor waterfront would enter, and 

remain in, the injury zone without being 

detected by marine mammal monitors 

each day during steel impact driving. 

Therefore, with 125 steel pile driving 

days and one individual per day being 

exposed to Level A noise levels, 125 

Level A takes of harbor seals are 

authorized by NMFS. With a shutdown 

zone of 35 meters Level B take is also 

anticipated to occur during 35 days of 

concrete fender pile installation. NMFS 

assumed that 35 animals would be 

exposed per day in the small Level B 

zone associated with impact driving of 

concrete piles resulting in an additional 

1,225 Level B takes. Therefore, NMFS 

has authorized 5,600 Level B takes 

It should be noted that Level A takes 

of harbor seals would likely be multiple 

exposures of the same individuals, 

rather than single exposures of unique 

individuals. This request overestimates 

the likely Level A exposures because: 

(1) Seals are unlikely to remain in the 

Level A zone underwater long enough to 

accumulate sufficient exposure to noise 

resulting in PTS, and (2) the estimate 

assumes that new seals are in the Level 

A ZOI every day during pile driving. No 

Level A takes are requested for vibratory 

pile driving because the maximum 

harbor seal injury zone is 26 m and is 

within a practicable shutdown distance. 

It is important to note that the estimate 

of potential Level A harassment of 

harbor seals is expected to be an 

overestimate, since the planned project 

is not expected to occur near Marginal 

Wharf—the location where most harbor 

seal activity occurs. 

Table 8 provides a summary of 

authorized Level A and Level B takes as 

well as the percentage of a stock or 

population authorized for take. 

TABLE 8—AUTHORIZED TAKE AND PERCENTAGE OF STOCK OR POPULATION

Species 

Authorized take 

% population 

Level A Level B 

Killer whale .................................................................................................................................. 0 48 19.7 

Harbor porpoise ........................................................................................................................... 0 2,728 24.3 

Steller sea lion ............................................................................................................................. 0 503 1.2 

California sea lion ........................................................................................................................ 0 7,816 2.6 

Harbor seal .................................................................................................................................. 125 5,600 n/a 

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, and, in the case 

of a military readiness activity, 

personnel safety, practicality of 

implementation, and impact on the 

effectiveness of the military readiness 

activity. 

In addition to the specific measures 

described later in this section, the Navy 

would conduct briefings between 

construction supervisors and crews, 

marine mammal monitoring team, and 

Navy staff prior to the start of all pile 

driving activity, and when new 

personnel join the work, in order to 

explain responsibilities, communication 

procedures, marine mammal monitoring 

protocol, and operational procedures. 

Use of Vibratory Installation—The 

Navy will employ vibratory installation 

to the greatest extent possible when 

driving steel piles to minimize high 

sound pressure levels associated with 

impact pile driving. Impact driving of 

steel piles will only occur when 

required by geotechnical conditions or 

to ‘‘proof’’ load-bearing piles driven by 

vibratory methods. 

Timing Restrictions—To minimize the 

number of fish exposed to underwater 

noise and other construction 

disturbance, in-water work will occur 

during the in-water work window 

previously described when ESA-listed 

salmonids are least likely to be present 

(USACE, 2015), July 16–January 15. 

All in-water construction activities 

will occur during daylight hours 

(sunrise to sunset) except from July 16 

to September 15, when impact pile 

driving will only occur starting 2 hours 

after sunrise and ending 2 hours before 

sunset, to protect foraging marbled 

murrelets during the nesting season 

(April 15–September 23). Sunrise and 

sunset are to be determined based on 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration data, which can be 

found at http://www.srrb.noaa.gov/ 

highlights/sunrise/sunrise.html. 

Use of Bubble Curtain—A bubble 

curtain will be employed during impact 

installation or proofing of steel piles 

where water depths are greater than 0.67 

m (2 ft). A noise attenuation device is 

not required during vibratory pile 

driving. If a bubble curtain or similar 

measure is used, it will distribute air 

bubbles around 100 percent of the piling 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
30416 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 

perimeter for the full depth of the water 

column. Any other attenuation measure 

must provide 100 percent coverage in 

the water column for the full depth of 

the pile. The lowest bubble ring shall be 

in contact with the mudline for the full 

circumference of the ring. The weights 

attached to the bottom ring shall ensure 

100 percent mudline contact. No parts 

of the ring or other objects shall prevent 

full mudline contact. 

A performance test of the bubble 

curtain shall be conducted prior to 

initial use for impact pile driving. The 

performance test shall confirm the 

calculated pressures and flow rates at 

each manifold ring. The contractor shall 

also train personnel in the proper 

balancing of air flow to the bubblers. 

The contractor shall submit an 

inspection/performance report to the 

Navy for approval within 72 hours 

following the performance test. 

Corrections to the noise attenuation 

device to meet the performance stands 

shall occur prior to use for impact 

driving. 

Soft-Start—The use of a soft start 

procedure is believed to provide 

additional protection to marine 

mammals by warning or providing a 

chance to leave the area prior to the 

hammer operating at full capacity, and 

typically involves a requirement to 

initiate sound from the hammer at 

reduced energy followed by a 30 second 

waiting period, then two subsequent 

reduced energy strike sets. (The reduced 

energy of an individual hammer cannot 

be quantified because it varies by 

individual drivers. Also, the number of 

strikes will vary at reduced energy 

because raising the hammer at less than 

full power and then releasing it results 

in the hammer ‘‘bouncing’’ as it strikes 

the pile, resulting in multiple ‘‘strikes.’’) 

A soft-start procedure will be used for 

impact pile driving at the beginning of 

each day’s in-water pile driving or any 

time impact pile driving has ceased for 

more than 30 minutes. 

Establishment of Shutdown Zones 

and Disturbance Zones—For all impact 

and vibratory pile driving of steel piles, 

shutdown and disturbance zones will be 

established and monitored. The Navy 

will focus observations within 1,000 m 

for all species during these activities but 

will record all observations. During 

impact driving of concrete piles the 

Navy will focus on monitoring within 

100 m but will record all observations. 

The Navy will monitor and record 

marine mammal observations within 

zones and extrapolate these values 

across the entirety of the Level B zone 

as part of the final monitoring report. To 

the extent possible, the Navy will record 

and report on any marine mammal 

occurrences, including behavioral 

disturbances, beyond 1,000 m for steel 

pile installation and 100 m for concrete 

pile installation. 

The shutdown zones are based on the 

distances from the source predicted for 

each threshold level. Although different 

functional hearing groups of cetaceans 

and pinnipeds were evaluated, the 

threshold levels used to develop the 

disturbance zones were selected to be 

conservative for cetaceans (and 

therefore at the lowest levels); as such, 

the disturbance zones for cetaceans 

were based on the high frequency 

threshold (harbor porpoise). The 

shutdown zones are based on the 

maximum calculated Level A radius for 

pinnipeds and cetaceans during 

installation of 36-inch steel and 

concrete piles with impact techniques, 

as well as during vibratory pile 

installation and removal. These actions 

serve to protect marine mammals, allow 

for practical implementation of the 

Navy’s marine mammal monitoring plan 

and reduce the risk of a take. The 

shutdown zone during any non-pile 

driving activity will always be a 

minimum of 10 m (33 ft) to prevent 

injury from physical interaction of 

marine mammals with construction 

equipment. Note that in the notice of 

proposed IHA (83 FR 10689: March 12, 

2018), the Navy had requested and 

NMFS proposed larger shutdown zones 

than those authorized as depicted 

below. The shutdown zones were 

reduced to more closely align with the 

Level A isopleths shown in Tables 5 and 

6. Reducing zone size should minimize 

shutdown occurrences caused by entry 

of animals into Level A zones. Excessive 

shutdowns caused by the originally 

proposed zones could negatively affect 

SPE project schedule without 

decreasing the risk of auditory injury to 

marine mammals. 

During all pile driving, the shutdown, 

Level A, and Level B zones as shown in 

Tables 9, 10, and 11 will be monitored 

out to the greatest extent possible with 

a focus on monitoring within 1,000 m 

for steel pile and 100 m for concrete pile 

installation. 

For steel pile impact pile driving, 

monitors would initiate shutdown when 

harbor seals approach or enter the zone. 

However, because of the size of the zone 

and the inherent difficulty in 

monitoring harbor seals, a highly mobile 

species, it may not be practical, which 

is why Level A take is requested. 

The isopleths delineating shutdown, 

Level A, and Level B zones during 

impact driving of all steel piles are 

shown in Table 10. Note that the Level 

A isopleth is larger than the Level B 

isopleth for harbor porpoises. 

TABLE 9—SHUTDOWN, LEVEL A, AND LEVEL B ISOPLETHS DURING IMPACT DRIVING OF STEEL PILES

Marine mammal group 

Level B 

isopleth 

(meters) 

Level A 

isopleth 

(meters) 

Shutdown 

zone 

(meters) 

Cetaceans .................................................................................................................................... 541 740 750 

Harbor Seal .................................................................................................................................. 541 217 220 

Sea Lions ..................................................................................................................................... 541 12 15 

The isopleths for the shutdown, Level 

A, and Level B zones during vibratory 

driving of all steel piles are shown in 

Table 11. 

TABLE 10—SHUTDOWN, LEVEL A, LEVEL B ISOPLETHS DURING VIBRATORY DRIVING OF STEEL PILES

Marine mammal group 

Level B 

isopleth 

(meters) 

Level A 

isopleth 

(meters) 

Shutdown 

zone 

(meters) 

Cetaceans .................................................................................................................................... 11,700 64 100 

Harbor Seal .................................................................................................................................. 11,700 26 30 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 30417 

TABLE 10—SHUTDOWN, LEVEL A, LEVEL B ISOPLETHS DURING VIBRATORY DRIVING OF STEEL PILES—Continued 

Marine mammal group 

Level B 

isopleth 

(meters) 

Level A 

isopleth 

(meters) 

Shutdown 

zone 

(meters) 

Sea Lions ..................................................................................................................................... 11,700 12 15 

The shutdown, Level A, and Level B 

isopleths for implementation during 

impact driving of concrete piles are 

shown in Table 11. Given that the 

shutdown zone for all authorized 

species is larger than the Level A and 

Level B isopleths there should be no 

take recorded during concrete pile 

driving. 

TABLE 11—SHUTDOWN, LEVEL A, AND LEVEL B ISOPLETHS DURING IMPACT DRIVING OF CONCRETE PILES

Marine mammal group 

Level B 

isopleth 

(meters) 

Level A 

isopleth 

(meters) 

Shutdown 

zone 

(meters) 

Cetaceans .................................................................................................................................... 46 74 100 

Harbor Seal .................................................................................................................................. 46 19 35 

Sea Lions ..................................................................................................................................... 46 1 15 

Note that the radii of the disturbance 

zones may be adjusted if in-situ acoustic 

monitoring is conducted by the Navy to 

establish actual distances to the 

thresholds for a specific pile type and 

installation method. However, any 

planned acoustical monitoring plan 

must be pre-approved by NMFS. The 

results of any acoustic monitoring plan 

must be reviewed and approved by 

NMFS before the radii of any 

disturbance zones may be revised. 

The mitigation measures described 

above should reduce marine mammals’ 

potential exposure to underwater noise 

levels which could result in injury or 

behavioral harassment. Based on our 

evaluation of the applicant’s planned 

measures, as well as other measures 

considered by NMFS, NMFS has 

determined that the planned 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 planned action area. 

Effective reporting is critical both to 

compliance as well as ensuring that the 

most value is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• 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 

Marine mammal monitoring will 

include the following requirements. 

Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs) 

will be positioned at the best practicable 

vantage points, taking into 

consideration security, safety, and space 

limitations. During pile driving, one 

MMO will be stationed in a vessel, and 

at least four will be stationed on the 

pier, along the shore, or on the pile 

driving barge to maximize observation 

coverage. Each MMO location will have 

a minimum of one dedicated MMO (not 

including boat operators). There will be 

be 3–5 MMOs working depending on 

the location, site accessibility and line 

of sight for adequate coverage. 

Additional standards required for visual 

monitoring include: 

(a) Independent observers (i.e., not 

construction personal) are required; 

(b) At least one observer must have 

prior experience working as an observer; 

(c) Other observers may substitute 

education (undergraduate degree in 

biological science or related field) or 

training for experience; 

(d) Where a team of three or more 

observers are required, one observer 

should be designated as lead observer or 

monitoring coordinator. The lead 

observer must have prior experience 

working as an observer; and 

Monitoring will be conducted by 

qualified observers, who will monitor 

for marine mammals and implement 

shutdown/delay procedures when 

applicable by calling for the shutdown 

to the hammer operator. Qualified 

observers are trained biologists, with the 

following minimum qualifications: 

(a) Visual acuity in both eyes 

(correction is permissible) sufficient for 

discernment of moving targets at the 

water’s surface with ability to estimate 

target size and distance; use of 

binoculars may be necessary to correctly 

identify the target; 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
30418 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 

(b) Advanced education in biological 

science or related field (undergraduate 

degree or higher required); 

(c) Experience and ability to conduct 

field observations and collect data 

according to assigned protocols (this 

may include academic experience); 

(d) Experience or training in the field 

identification of marine mammals, 

including the identification of 

behaviors; 

(e) Sufficient training, orientation, or 

experience with the construction 

operation to provide for personal safety 

during observations; 

(f) 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 and 

times when in-water construction 

activities were suspended to avoid 

potential incidental injury from 

construction sound of marine mammals 

observed within a defined shutdown 

zone; and marine mammal behavior; 

and 

(g) 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. 

MMOs will survey the disturbance 

zone 15 minutes prior to initiation of 

pile driving through 30 minutes after 

completion of pile driving to ensure 

there are no marine mammals present. 

A determination that the shutdown zone 

is clear must be made during a period 

of good visibility (i.e., the entire 

shutdown zone and surrounding waters 

must be visible to the naked eye). 

Marine Mammal Observation Record 

forms (Appendix A of the application) 

will be used to document observations. 

Survey boats engaged in marine 

mammal monitoring will maintain 

speeds equal to or less than 10 knots. 

MMOs will use binoculars and the 

naked eye to search continuously for 

marine mammals and will have a means 

to communicate with each other to 

discuss relevant marine mammal 

information (e.g., animal sighted but 

submerged with direction of last 

sighting). MMOs will have the ability to 

correctly measure or estimate the 

animals distance to the pile driving 

equipment such that records of any 

takes are accurate relevant to the pile 

size and type. 

Shutdown shall occur if a species for 

which authorization has not been 

granted or for which the authorized 

numbers of takes have been met. The 

Navy shall then contact NMFS within 

24 hours. 

If marine mammal(s) are present 

within or approaching a shutdown zone 

prior to pile driving, the start of these 

activities will be delayed until the 

animal(s) have left the zone voluntarily 

and have been visually confirmed 

beyond the shutdown zone, or 15 

minutes has elapsed without redetection of the animal. 

If animal is observed within or 

entering the Level B zone during pile 

driving, a take would be recorded, 

behaviors documented. However, that 

pile segment would be completed 

without cessation, unless the animal 

approaches or enters the shutdown 

Zone, at which point all pile driving 

activities will be halted. The MMOs 

shall immediately radio to alert the 

monitoring coordinator/construction 

contractor. This action will require an 

immediate ‘‘all-stop’’ on pile operations. 

Once a shutdown has been initiated, 

pile driving will be delayed until the 

animal has voluntarily left the 

Shutdown Zone and has been visually 

confirmed beyond the Shutdown Zone, 

or 15 minutes have passed without redetection of the animal (i.e., the zone is 

deemed clear of marine mammals). 

All marine mammals observed within 

the disturbance zones during pile 

driving activities will be recorded by 

MMOs. These animals will be 

documented as Level A or Level B takes 

as appropriate. Additionally, all 

shutdowns shall be recorded. For 

vibratory driving activities, this data 

will be extrapolated across the full 

extent of the Level B ensonified zone 

(i.e. 11.7 km radii) to provide total 

estimated take numbers. 

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 information as described in the 

Marine Mammal Monitoring Report 

(Appendix D of the application). 

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: (1) 

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; 

(2) an injured or dead animal is 

discovered and cause of death is known; 

or (3) an injured or dead animal is 

discovered and cause of death is not 

related to the authorized activities, the 

Navy will follow the protocols 

described in the Section 3 of Marine 

Mammal Monitoring Report (Appendix 

D of the application). Additionally, the 

Navy will report any pinniped hauled 

out at unusual sites (e.g., in work boats) 

to the local stranding network and to 

NMFS, and follow any procedures or 

measures stipulated by the stranding 

network. 

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 the Navy SPE 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 five 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 one species. Level A 

harassment was conservatively 

authorized for harbor seals since seals 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 30419 

can occur in high numbers near the 

project area, can be difficult to spot, and 

MMO’s ability to observe the entire 217 

m injury zone may be slightly impaired 

because of construction barges and 

vessels. Potential takes could occur if 

marine mammals are present in the 

Level A or Level B ensonified zones 

when pile driving and removal occurs. 

No serious injury or mortality is 

anticipated given the nature of the 

activities and measures designed to 

minimize the possibility of injury to 

marine mammals. The potential for 

injury is minimized through the 

construction method and the 

implementation of the planned 

mitigation measures. Specifically, 

vibratory driving will be the primary 

method of installation. This driving 

method decreases the potential for 

injury due to relatively low source 

levels and lack of potentially injurious 

source characteristics. Only piles that 

cannot be driven to their desired depths 

using the vibratory hammer will be 

impact driven for the remainder of their 

required driving depth. Noise 

attenuating devices (i.e., bubble curtain) 

will be used during impact hammer 

operations for steel piles. During impact 

driving, implementation of soft start and 

shutdown zones significantly reduces 

any possibility of injury. Given 

sufficient ‘‘notice’’ through use of soft 

start (for impact driving), marine 

mammals are expected to move away 

from a sound source that is annoying 

prior to it becoming potentially 

injurious. Given the number of MMOs 

that will be employed, observers should 

have a relatively clear view of the 

shutdown zones, although under 

limited circumstances the presence of 

barges and vessels may impair 

observation of small portions of 

shutdown zones. This will enable a high 

rate of success in implementation of 

shutdowns to avoid injury. 

The Navy’s planned activities are 

highly localized. Only a relatively small 

portion of Hood Canal may be affected. 

The project is not expected to have 

significant adverse effects on marine 

mammal habitat. No important feeding 

and/or reproductive areas for marine 

mammals are known to be near the 

project area. Impacts to salmonid and 

forage fish populations, including ESAlisted species, will be minimized by 

adhering to the designated in-water 

work period. Project-related activities 

may cause some fish to leave the area 

of disturbance, thus temporarily 

impacting marine mammals’ foraging 

opportunities in a limited portion of the 

foraging range, but because of the 

relatively small area of the habitat range 

utilized by each species that may be 

affected, the impacts to marine mammal 

habitat are not expected to cause 

significant or long-term negative 

consequences. 

Exposures to elevated sound levels 

produced during pile driving activities 

may cause behavioral responses by an 

animal, but they are expected to be mild 

and temporary. Effects on individuals 

that are taken by Level B harassment, on 

the basis of reports in the literature as 

well as monitoring from other similar 

activities, will likely be limited to 

reactions such as increased swimming 

speeds, increased surfacing time, or 

decreased foraging (if such activity were 

occurring) (e.g.,Thorson and Reyff, 

2006; Lerma, 2014). Most likely, 

individuals will simply move away 

from the sound source and be 

temporarily displaced from the areas of 

pile driving, although even this reaction 

has been observed primarily only in 

association with impact pile driving. 

These reactions and behavioral changes 

are expected to subside quickly when 

the exposures cease. The pile driving 

activities analyzed here are similar to, or 

less impactful than, numerous 

construction activities conducted in 

other similar locations including Hood 

Canal, which have taken place with no 

reported injuries or mortality to marine 

mammals, and no known long-term 

adverse consequences from behavioral 

harassment. Repeated exposures of 

individuals to levels of sound that may 

cause Level B harassment are unlikely 

to result in permanent hearing 

impairment or to significantly disrupt 

foraging behavior. Level B harassment 

will be reduced through use of 

mitigation measures described herein. 

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 stocks through effects on annual rates 

of recruitment or survival: 

• No mortality or serious injury is 

anticipated or authorized; 

• The area of potential impacts is 

highly localized; 

• No adverse impacts to marine 

mammal habitat; 

• The absence of any significant 

habitat within the project area, 

including rookeries, or known areas or 

features of special significance for 

foraging or reproduction; 

• Anticipated incidences of Level A 

harassment would be in the form of a 

small degree of PTS to a limited number 

of animals from one species; 

• Anticipated incidents of Level B 

harassment consist of, at worst, 

temporary modifications in behavior; 

• The anticipated efficacy of the 

required mitigation measures in 

reducing the effects of the specified 

activity. 

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 

planned monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS finds that the total 

marine mammal take from the planned 

activity will have a negligible impact on 

all affected marine mammal species or 

stocks. 

Small Numbers 

As noted above, only small numbers 

of incidental take may be authorized 

under 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 8 depicts the number of animals 

that could be exposed to Level A and 

Level B harassment from work 

associated with the SPE project. With 

the exception of harbor seals, the 

analysis provided indicates that 

authorized takes account for no more 

than 24.3 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 

species and population stocks under 

consideration. 

For the affected stock of harbor seals, 

no valid abundance estimate is 

available. The most recent abundance 

estimates for harbor seals in Washington 

inland waters are from 1999, and it is 

generally believed that harbor seal 

populations have increased significantly 

during the intervening years (e.g., 

Mapes, 2013). However, we anticipate 

that takes estimated to occur for harbor 

seals are likely to occur only within 

some portion of the relevant 

populations, rather than to animals from 

the stock as a whole. For example, takes 

anticipated to occur at NBK Bangor 

would be expected to accrue to the same 

individual seals that routinely occur on 

haulouts at these locations, rather than 

occurring to new seals on each 

construction day. In summary, harbor 

seals taken as a result of the specified 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
30420 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Notices 

activities are expected to comprise only 

a limited portion of individuals 

comprising the overall relevant stock 

abundance. Therefore, we find that 

small numbers of marine mammals will 

be taken relative to the population size 

of the Hood Canal stock of harbor seal. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the planned activity (including 

the planned 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 CE 

B4 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 and signed a 

Categorical Exclusion memo in June 

2018. 

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 planned for authorization 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 the Navy 

for the potential harassment of small 

numbers of five marine mammal species 

incidental to the Service Pier Extension 

project at Naval Base Kitsap Bangor 

provided the previously mentioned 

mitigation, monitoring and reporting 

requirements are incorporated. 

Dated: June 22, 2018. 

Elaine T. Saiz, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected 

Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13870 Filed 6–27–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Science and Technology for America’s 

Oceans: A Decadal Vision 

AGENCY: Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Research (OAR), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Department of Commerce (DOC). 

ACTION: Notice of public comments. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Research on behalf of the 

National Science and Technology 

Council; Committee on Environment; 

Subcommittee on Ocean Science and 

Technology (SOST) is requesting input 

on the content of a report, Science and 

Technology for America’s Oceans: A 

Decadal Vision. The SOST is chartered 

under the National Science and 

Technology Council to advise and assist 

on national issues related to ocean 

science and technology. The SOST 

contributes to the goals for Federal 

ocean science and technology, including 

identifying priorities and developing 

coordinated interagency strategies. 

Science and Technology for America’s 

Oceans: A Decadal Vision identifies 

pressing research needs and areas of 

opportunity within the ocean S&T 

enterprise for the coming decade, 2018– 

2028. The aim of this document is not 

to prescribe policies but to provide 

guidance for U.S. Federal agencies and 

non-federal sectors to align their 

resources and areas of expertise, and 

further build the scientific and 

technological foundation that will 

improve our knowledge and 

stewardship of the ocean, address issues 

of national and global importance, and 

inform decision-making for the coming 

decade. This notice solicits relevant 

public input on the draft report. The 

public input provided in response to 

this notice will inform SOST as they 

develop the final report. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before August 27, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by email to oceandecadalvision@

OSTP.eop.gov. Please include ‘‘Science 

and Technology for America’s Oceans’’ 

in the subject line of the message. 

Instructions: The report is available 

for download at: http://www.noaa.gov/ 

stories/advancing-vision-of-science-andtechnology-for-americas-oceans. 

Response to this Notice of Public 

Comments is voluntary. Clearly indicate 

which section and page number, if 

applicable, submitted comments pertain 

to. All submissions must be in English. 

Please clearly label submissions as 

‘‘Science and Technology for America’s 

Oceans: A Decadal Vision.’’ When the 

final report is issued, relevant 

comments and the commenters’ names, 

along with the authors’ responses, may 

become part of the public record and be 

made available to view online. NOAA 

therefore requests that no business 

proprietary information, copyrighted 

information, or personally identifiable 

information be submitted in response to 

this Notice of Public Comments. Please 

note that the U.S. Government will not 

pay for response preparation, or for the 

use of any information contained in the 

response. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stacy Aguilera-Peterson, Office of 

Science and Technology Policy, (202) 

456–6066, or Stacy.E.AguileraPeterson@ostp.eop.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The report 

describes: 

• Five high-priority goals to advance 

ocean science and technology (S&T) in 

the coming decade; 

• S&T objectives, identified as key 

areas to advance the U.S. Ocean S&T 

enterprise; 

• Specific research and development 

(R&D) priorities to achieve each 

objective; and 

• Areas of immediate ocean research 

opportunities and cross-cutting topics 

relevant to each of the five goals. 

Dated: June 22, 2018. 

David Holst, 

Chief Financial/Administrative Officer, Office 

of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13926 Filed 6–27–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–KA–P 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1