[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30421-30429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13940]



[[Page 30421]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XG205


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Mukilteo Multimodal Project--
Season 3

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

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request 
for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the Washington Department of 
Transportation (WSDOT) Ferries Division (WSF) for an incidental 
harassment authorization (IHA) that would cover a subset of the take 
authorized in an IHA previously issued to WSDOT to incidentally take 
marine mammals, by Level B harassment only, during construction 
activities associated with the Mukilteo Multimodal Project, Puget 
Sound, Washington. During planning of season 2 of the project (for 
which NMFS issued an IHA) it was assumed that the project would be 
completed within the year timeframe; however, that was not 
accomplished. Therefore, WSDOT is requesting, and NMFS is proposing to 
issue, an IHA authorizing incidental take for the remaining work which 
was already analyzed in an 2017 IHA issued to WSDOT on August 3, 2017 
(herein after referred to as the 2017 IHA) (September 21, 2017). 
However, some changes have occurred during this year's evaluation of 
the project. Source levels and harassment distances have been adjusted 
based on recent acoustic measurements and amount of time pile driving 
expected to occur each day. In addition, WSDOT has requested take for 
three species not included in the 2017 IHA (minke whales (Balaenoptera 
acutorostrata), bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus), and long-
beaked common dolphins (Delphinus delphis bairdii)) based on recent 
marine mammal monitoring. The proposed mitigation, monitoring, and 
reporting measures remain the same as prescribed in the 2017 IHA with 
slight modifications (e.g., shut down zones distance changes) as 
described below.
    NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an IHA to 
incidentally take marine mammals during the completion of Phase 2 of 
the Mukilteo Multimodal Project. NMFS will consider public comments 
prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested 
MMPA authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final 
notice of our decision.

DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than July 30, 
2018.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, 
National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should be sent to 
1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments 
should be sent to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#db928f8bf5bfbab7a29bb5b4babaf5bcb4ad"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="773e23275913161b0e371918161659101801">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any 
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the 
end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including 
all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. Attachments 
to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or 
Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the 
public record and will generally be posted online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111 without change. All personal 
identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by 
the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential 
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jaclyn Daly, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8438. Electronic copies of the original 
application and supporting documents (including NMFS FR notices of the 
original proposed and final authorizations), as well as a list of the 
references cited in this document, may be obtained online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111. 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).

National Environmental Policy Act

    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, 
NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an 
incidental harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts 
on the human environment.
    This action is consistent with categories of activities identified 
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental harassment authorizations with 
no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for 
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or 
cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality 
of the human environment and for which we have not identified any 
extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical 
exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the 
issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded 
from further NEPA review.
    We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice 
prior to concluding our NEPA process

[[Page 30422]]

or making a final decision on the IHA request.

Summary of Request

    On April 7, 2016, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an 
IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of marine mammal 
species incidental to construction associated with Phase 2 of the 
Mukilteo Multimodal Project in Mukilteo, Washington, between August 1, 
2017, and July 31, 2018. NMFS issued the requested IHA on August 3, 
2017, which covered Phase 2 of the project in its entirety and expires 
on July 31, 2018 (82 FR 44164; September 21, 2017). On January 9, 2018, 
we received a request from WSDOT for a subsequent authorization to take 
marine mammals incidental to the project because they realized all of 
the Phase 2 work would not be able to be completed under the existing 
IHA. A final version of the application, which we deemed adequate and 
complete, was submitted on March 1, 2018.

Description of the Proposed Activity and Anticipated Impacts

    WSDOT operates and maintains 19 ferry terminals and one maintenance 
facility, all of which are located in Puget Sound or the San Juan 
Islands (Georgia Basin) (Figure 1-1 in WSDOT's application). The 
Mukilteo Multimodal Project is a multi-year construction project 
designed to improve the operations and facilities serving the mainland 
terminus of the Mukilteo-Clinton ferry route in Washington State. The 
2017 IHA covered the installation of 661 piles of various sizes over an 
estimated 175 days of pile driving and removal (Table 1). WSDOT did not 
complete all the work, and now requests that this proposed IHA cover 
take incidental to the installation of the remaining piles (Table 1). 
The 2017 IHA authorized Level A and B harassment of two species of 
marine mammals and Level B harassment of seven species of marine 
mammals (Table 2). WSDOT requests authorization to harass these same 
species and an additional three species based on recent marine mammal 
monitoring near the project area (Table 2).
    To support public review and comment on the IHA that NMFS is 
proposing to issue here, we refer to the documents related to the 
previously issued IHA and discuss any new or changed information here. 
The previous documents include the Federal Register notice of the 
proposed IHA (82 FR 29713; May 10, 2017), Federal Register notice of 
issuance of the 2017 IHA (82 FR 44164, September 21, 2017), and all 
associated references and documents. We also refer the reader to 
WSDOT's previous and current applications and monitoring reports which 
can be found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111.
    Detailed Description of the Action--A detailed description of the 
proposed vibratory and impact pile driving and removal activities at 
the Mukilteo Terminal is found in the aforementioned documents. The 
location, timing, and nature of the pile driving operations, including 
the type and size of piles and the methods of pile driving, are 
identical to those described in the previous notices, except that only 
a subset of the type and number of piles are proposed to be driven. In 
total, 116 piles would be installed with a vibratory hammer. Sixty five 
of those piles would also be proofed with an impact hammer on the same 
day vibratory pile driving would occur. Sixty five of the installed 24-
in piles (some of which may be proofed with the impact hammer) would be 
temporary and would also be removed. WSDOT anticipates piles equal to 
or less than 36'' would be installed at a rate of 3 per day for a total 
of 38 days. An additional two days is needed to install the 78-in piles 
and 120-in piles. Sixty five of those piles would be removed at a rate 
of five per day for a total of 22 days. In total, up to 63 days of pile 
driving and removal may occur. WSDOT anticipates pile driving could 
occur over a seven month in-water work window (July 15-February 15).

                Table 1--Description of Work Planned, Analyzed, and Completed Under the 2017 IHA and Remaining Work Planned for 2018-2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Season 2                        Season 3
            Method             Pile size (in)   planned (2017     Season 2      planned (2018  Number of days                   Comment
                                                    IHA)          completed         IHA)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Driving............              12             139             134               0               0  Fewer needed, complete.
                                           24              69               4              65              22  Up to 69 temporary.
                                           24              48               0              26               9  Fewer needed, permanent.
                                           30              40              25              16               5  Permanent.
                                           36               6               0               6               2  Permanent.
                                           78               2               0               2               1  Permanent.
                                          120               1               0               1               2  Permanent.
                                        sheet              90               0               0               0  Design change, not needed.
Vibratory Removal............              24              69               4              65              22  Temporary.
                                           30               9               0               0               0  Delayed.
                                        sheet              90               0               0               0  Design change, not needed.
Impact Driving...............              24              69               4              65          \1\ 22  Proofed for load-bearing.
                                           30              30              25               0               0  Fewer needed, complete.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Impact hammering would be conducted on same day as vibratory pile driving so these are not additional days.

    Description of Marine Mammals--A description of the marine mammals 
in the area of the activities is found in the previously cited 
documents, which remains applicable to this IHA as well. In addition, 
we include information here on three additional species which have been 
recently reported in Puget Sound and which WSDOT now requests take. We 
include a summary table here for all species and stocks for which take 
is requested.

[[Page 30423]]



                                              Table 2--Species and Stocks Expected To Occur in Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         ESA/MMPA status;    Stock abundance (CV,
             Common name                  Scientific name               Stock             strategic (Y/N)      Nmin, most recent       PBR     Annual M/
                                                                                                \1\          abundance survey) \2\               SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae:
    Gray whale......................  Eschrichtius robustus..  Eastern North Pacific..  N                   20,990 (0.05, 20,125,         624        132
                                                                                                             2014).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
    Humpback whale..................  Megaptera novaeangliae.  California/Oregon/       Y                   1,918 (0.03, 1,876,          11.0        9.2
                                                                Washington.                                  2017).
    Minke whale *...................  Balaenoptera             California/Oregon/       N                   636 (0.72, 369, 2016).        3.5        1.3
                                       acutorostrata.           Washington.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
    Killer whale....................  Orcinus orca...........  Eastern North Pacific    Y                   76 (n/a, 76, 2017) \4\          0       0.14
                                                                Southern Resident.
                                                               West coast transient...  N                   unk (unk, 243 2013)...        2.4          0
    Bottlenose dolphin *............  Tursiops truncatus.....  California coastal.....  N                   453 (0.06, 346, 2016).        2.7        >=2
    Long-beaked common dolphin *....  Delphinus delphis        California.............  N                   101,305 (0.49, 68,432,        657       35.4
                                       bairdii.                                                              2016).
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
    Harbor porpoise.................  Phocoena phocoena......  Washington inland        N                   11,233 (0.37, 8,308,           66        7.2
                                                                waters.                                      2016).
    Dall's porpoise.................  Phocoenoides dalli.....  California/Oregon/       N                   25,750 (0.45, 17,954,         172        0.3
                                                                Washington.                                  2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
 sea lions):
    California sea lion.............  Zalophus californianus.  U.S....................  N                   296,750 (n/a, 153,337,      9,200        389
                                                                                                             2014).
    Steller sea lion................  Eumetopias jubatus.....  Eastern U.S............  N                   52,139 (n/a, 41,638,        2,498        108
                                                                                                             2015).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
    Harbor seal.....................  Phoca vitulina.........  Washington northern      N                   11,036 (0.15, 1999)...      1,641         43
                                                                inland waters.
    Elephant seal...................  Mirounga angustirostris  California breeding....  N                   179,000 (n/a, 81,368,       2,882        8.8
                                                                                                             2014).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
  under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
  exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
  under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
  stock abundance.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g.,
  commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV
  associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\4\ SRWK population abundance as of December 31, 2017 according to the Center for Whale Research.
\5\ Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are greater than 8 years old, but this is the best available information for use here.
* Indicates species added.

    For species analyzed in the 2017 IHA, NMFS has reviewed recent 
draft Stock Assessment Reports (SARs), information on relevant Unusual 
Mortality Events, and recent scientific literature, and determined that 
no new information affects our original analysis of impacts or previous 
determinations except what is provided below. Since issuing the 2017 
IHA, NMFS published draft SARs (82 FR 60181; 19 December 2017) and the 
annual census for Southern Resident killer whales concluded. Stock 
information is updated for two species that have the potential to occur 
in the activity area: Humpback whale and Southern Resident killer 
whale. Total annual mortality and serious injury for humpback whales 
increased from 6.5 to 9.2 and Southern Resident killer whale abundance 
decreased from 78 to 76 individuals (the most recent SAR information, 
i.e., the draft 2017 SAR for this stock, includes an abundance estimate 
of 83; however, we use the December 31, 2017, Center for Whale Research 
population estimate here). These proposed changes in the draft 2017 
SARs do not affect our estimated take numbers or negligible impact and 
small numbers determinations, and therefore these changes do not affect 
our analysis. The potential presence of the three additional species 
(described below) during pile driving is very low; however, we are 
proposing to authorize take due to WSDOT's request and evidence there 
is a possibility they may be in the action area, albeit rarely.
    Minke whale--The California-Oregon-Washington (CA-OR-WA) stock of 
minke whale may be found near the project site; however, this species 
is not common in Puget Sound. From 2013 through 2016, year-round 
systematic aerial surveys were conducted to better estimate marine 
mammal density. No minke whales were observed during these surveys 
within Puget Sound and on only two occasions in September 2014 were 
minke whales (n=2) observed in nearby Strait of Juan de Fuca (Smultea 
et al. 2017). For the years 2010 to 2016, in the August to February 
timeframe scheduled for this project, The Whale Museum reported a total 
of six sightings days for minke whale in the Mukilteo project area 
(TWM, 2017). During 51 days of monitoring from

[[Page 30424]]

September 2017 to February 2018 under the 2017 IHA, zero minke whales 
were observed (WSDOT, 2018).
    Bottlenose dolphin--Bottlenose dolphins tend to inhabit warmer 
temperate and tropical waters and are not usually found in the colder 
waters of Puget Sound. However, bottlenose dolphins have been observed 
in Puget Sound as occasional visitors from both the offshore CA-OR-WA 
stock and California coastal stock since 1998 (CRC 2017a). More 
recently a group of dolphins observed in 2017 were positively 
identified as part of the CA coastal stock (CRC, 2017a, 2018). The more 
recent sightings in Puget Sound of several animals suggest a possible 
significant expansion of their range if they remain in the area. Such 
long distance travel outside their traditional range (>800 miles) may 
be due to long term changes in climate and shorter term fluctuations in 
coastal water conditions, such as those during El Ni[ntilde]o events 
(CRC, 2017a). From September 2017 to February 2018, WSF conducted 
marine mammal monitoring during Year Two of the Mukilteo Multimodal 
Project. During 51 days of monitoring from September 2017 to February 
2018 under the 2017 IHA, zero bottlenose dolphins were observed (WSDOT, 
2018).
    Long-beaked common dolphin--Long-beaked common dolphins from the 
California stock could be present near the project area. The earliest 
documented sighting of long-beaked common dolphins in Puget Sound was 
July 2003. In June 2011, two long-beaked common dolphins were sighted 
in South Puget Sound. Sightings continued in 2012, and in 2016-17. Four 
to twelve sightings were reported regularly, with confirmed sightings 
of up to 30 individuals. Four to six dolphins have remained in Puget 
Sound since June 2016 and four animals with distinct markings have been 
seen multiple times and in every season of the year as of October 2017 
(CRC 2017b). During 51 days of monitoring from September 2017 to 
February 2018 under the 2017 IHA, zero long-beaked common dolphins were 
observed (WSDOT, 2018).
    Potential Effects on Marine Mammals--A description of the potential 
effects of the specified activities on marine mammals and their habitat 
is found in these previous documents, which remains applicable to this 
IHA. There is no new information on potential effects and we anticipate 
the effects evaluated last year are germane to the three additional 
species (minke whale, bottlenose dolphin, and long-beaked common 
dolphin) authorized to be taken this year.
    Harassment Zones--We updated three source levels (24-in vibratory 
pile driving and removal and 24-in impact driving) for use in 
calculating Level A harassment isopleths. The 2017 IHA reflected a 24-
in vibratory pile driving source level of 162 decibels (dB) root mean 
square (rms) based on measurements at Friday Harbor; however, we 
believe that measurements of vibratory driving of 24-in piles at 
Manette Bridge support a higher source level of 166 dB rms (Loughlin, 
2010). We propose to carry over that source level to estimate noise 
levels generated by vibratory removal of the same size pile. New 
analysis of measurements made at the Coupeville Terminal also supports 
increasing the sound exposure level (single-strike; SEL) during 24-in 
impact pile driving from 174 dB SEL to 178 dB SEL (WSDOT, 2017). To 
estimate distances to the Level B harassment isopleth for vibratory 
driving 24-36-in piles, we applied new acoustic measurement data 
(Loughlin, 2017). For this proposed IHA, we also modified the method 
used to estimate Level A harassment zones. The 2017 IHA analysis used a 
more sophisticated modeling technique, described in detail in our 2017 
Notice of Proposed IHA (citation). It is not warranted to replicate 
that complicated process for this action. Therefore, we used the NMFS 
User Spreadsheet tool to estimate Level A harassment distances. This 
approach is more conservative than the previous modeling effort because 
it considers a single frequency weighting factor adjustment (WFA) in 
lieu of considering the full frequency spectrum. Using a single 
frequency WFA is likely to over-predict Level A harassment distances as 
described in NMFS (2016), resulting in larger Level A harassment 
distances. The inputs used in the spreadsheet and resulting Level A 
harassment distances are presented in Table 3 and 4, respectively. 
Table 4 also contains the distances estimated to the Level B harassment 
zones from each type of work. Table 5 provides the corresponding Level 
B harassment areas, as well as the Level A harassment areas for those 
species for which we propose to authorize take by Level A harassment.

                                   Table 3--Inputs Into NMFS User Spreadsheet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Input parameter               Vibratory pile driving                  Impact pile driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighting Factor Adjustment \1\.....  2.5 kHz.....................  2 kHz.
Source Level (SL)...................  See Table 4.................  See Table 4 (SEL value).
Duration............................  3 hours (24-36'' piles).....  n/a.
                                      2 hours (78'' piles)........
                                      1 hour (120'' pile).........
Strikes per pile....................  n/a.........................  300.
Piles per day.......................  n/a.........................  3.
Transmission loss coefficient.......  15..........................  15.
Distance from SL measurement........  10 m........................  10 m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In instances where full auditory weighting functions associated with the SELcum metric cannot be applied,
  NMFS has recommended the default, single frequency weighting factor adjustments (WFAs) provided here. As
  described in Appendix D of NMFS' Technical Guidance (NMFS, 2016), the intent of the WFA is to broadly account
  for auditory weighting functions below the 95 frequency contour percentile. Use of single frequency WFA is
  likely to over-predict Level A harassment distances.


                                  Table 4--Level A Harassment Distances Considering Pile Driving Duration per 24 Hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Level A (meters)
            Method             Pile Size                Source Level (dB)              -------------------------------------------------------  Level B
                                                                                          LF \1\     MF \1\     HF \1\     PH \1\     OT \1\      (m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory....................         24  166 rms \2\.................................       30.6        2.7       45.3       18.6        1.3   \6\ 8000
                                      30  174 rms \3\.................................      104.5        9.3      154.5       63.5        4.5   \6\ 8000

[[Page 30425]]

 
                                      36  177 rms \3\.................................      165.6       14.7      244.9      100.7        7.1   \7\ 8700
                                      78  180 rms \4\.................................      200.3       17.8      296.2      121.8        8.5        \8\
                                                                                                                                                  20,000
                                     120  180 rms \4\.................................      126.2       11.2      186.6       76.7        5.4  .........
Impact.......................         24  178 SEL (single strike)/193 rms \5\.........      432.1       15.4      514.7      231.2       16.8      1,585
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The abbreviatation mean: LF = low frequency cetacean, MF = mid-frequency cetacean, HF = high-frequency cetacean, PH = phocid, OT = otariid.
\2\ We assume vibratory removal and vibratory driving the same size pile would result in equal sound levels. Source level for 24'' piles is based on
  direct measurements during the Manette Bridge project (Loughlin, 2010a).
\3\Source levels for 30-in and 36-in piles is based on direct measurements during the Port Townsend Project (Loughlin, 2010b).
\4\ WSDOT does not have noise data for 78 and 120-in piles; therefore, we used data from Caltrans (2015).
\5\ Single strike SEL and rms values for impact driving 24-in piles is based on direct measurements during pile driving using a bubble curtain (i.e.,
  source levels are attenuated) at the Coupeville Terminal (WSDOT, 2017).
\6\ Measurements during 30'' vibratory pile driving at Mukilteo in 2017 indicate pile driving was not detected at range of 7.9 km (Laughlin, 2017a).
  This equates to 66 km\2\.
\7\ At the Coleman Terminal, vibratory installation of two 36'' piles driven simultaneously was not detectable at 8.69 km (5.4 miles) (Laughlin 2017b).
  This equates to 69 km\2\.
\8\ The calculated Level B zone using a practical spreading loss model is 85,770 m; however, land is reached at a maximum of 20,000 m (Lowell Point on
  Camano Island). This equates to 107 km\2\.


                          Table 5--Corresponding Harassment Threshold Ensonified Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Level A  (km\2\) \1\
             Method                  Pile size   ------------------------------------------------     Level B
                                                        HF              PH              OT          (km\2\) \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory.......................              24           <0.01           <0.01           <0.01              66
                                              30           <0.01           <0.01  ..............              66
                                              36            0.06            0.06  ..............              69
                                              78            0.01            0.01  ..............             107
                                             120            0.01            0.01  ..............  ..............
Impact..........................              24             0.4             0.4  ..............               4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Level A harassment areas are provided for species hearing groups for which Level A take is proposed.
\2\ Level B harassment areas are germane to all species.

    Estimated Take--A description of the methods used to estimate take 
anticipated to occur from the project is found in the project's 
aforementioned documents. The methods of estimating take are identical 
to those used in the previous IHA, including the use of the Navy 2015 
marine mammal densities for inland Washington or most recent pinniped 
counts. We also updated harbor porpoise and Dall's porpoise density 
based on new information (Smultea et al., 2017 and Navy 2015, 
respectively). Because bottlenose dolphin and long-beaked common 
dolphin densities do not exist for this area, we used available data to 
estimate a sighting rate. Table 6 includes marine mammal count or 
density information used in the estimated take calculations.

                        Table 6--Marine Mammal Counts and Densities Used To Estimate Take
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Density (ind/
                                                 km\2\)                             Count
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal................................  ..............  30/day \1\.
CSL........................................  ..............  14/day \2\.
N. elephant seal...........................  ..............  1/30 days \3\.
Killer whale--transient....................  ..............  0.3/day \4\.
SSL........................................     \5\ 0.0368.  ...................................................
Gray whale.................................    \5\ 0.00051.  ...................................................
Humpback whale.............................    \5\ 0.00007.  ...................................................
Dall's porpoise............................      \5\ 0.039.  ...................................................
Harbor porpoise............................       \6\ 0.75.  ...................................................
Minke whale................................      \5\ 0.002.  ...................................................
Bottlenose dolphin.........................  ..............  1 group of 7/30 days \7\.
Long-beaked common dolphin.................  ..............  1 group of 7/30 days \7\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ During 51 days of marine mammal monitoring at the Mukilteo Terminal during 2017-2018 construction (conducted
  under WSDOT's previous IHA), 1,525 harbor seals were observed for a an average of 30 seals per day.
\2\ During 51 days of marine mammal monitoring at the Mukilteo Terminal during 2017-2018 construction (conducted
  under WSDOT's previous IHA), 707 California sea lions were observed for a an average of 14 sea lions per day.
\3\ WSDOT estimates 1 Northern elephant seal may occur in the action area once per month.
\4\ During 51 days of marine mammal monitoring at the Mukilteo Terminal during 2017-2018 construction (conducted
  under WSDOT's previous IHA), 16 transient killer whales observed for an average of 0.3 killer whales per day.
\5\ These densities were derived for the Navy's Northwest Testing and Training Range Inland Waters (Navy, 2015).

[[Page 30426]]

 
\6\ Density based on East Whidbey stratum, Table 17 in Smultea (2017).
\7\ Average group size and sihting frequency based on CRC, 2017.

    The rationale for the amount of take requested and proposed is as 
follows: For all estimates, we consider 76 days over seven months of 
pile driving. For density based estimates, the equation used is density 
x area x number of pile driving days summed across all piles types 
(Table 7) Because 24-in and 30-in piles have the same Level B 
harassment zone, we grouped these together. We also combined 78-in and 
120-piles as they also have the same Level B harassment zone.
    For harbor porpoise, we calculated take using the density 
identified in Table 6; however, this greatly exceeded expected take 
based on previous marine mammal monitoring efforts around the terminal 
(e.g., WSDOT, 2018); therefore, we applied a 10 percent correction 
factor. For 24-in and 30-in piles: 0.75 x 66 km2 x 61 days (vibratory 
installation and removal) equals 3020 animals. For 36-in piles: 0.75 x 
69 km2 x 2 days equals 104 animals. For 78-in and 120-in piles: 0.75 x 
107km2 x 2 days = 161 animals. In total, we calculate 3,285 harbor 
porpoise could be taken. However, marine mammal monitoring conducted 
under the 2017 IHA yielded only 85 harbor porpoise sightings of which 
28 were taken by harassment. Therefore, we are proposing to authorize 
10 percent of the calculate take for a total of 329 harbor porpoise. We 
also calculated Level A takes of harbor porpoise for the four days 
vibratory driving 36-in through 120-in piles would occur and the 30 
days of impact hammering 24-inch piles because vibratory driving 24-in 
piles does not produce a Level A harassment zone greater than the shut 
down zone and is very close to the pile (18.6 m). The resulting Level A 
harassment take is 12 harbor porpoise. We repeated this approach for 
Dall's porpoise and the Level B harassment take estimate approach for 
minke whales, humpback whales, gray whales, and Steller sea lions. We 
are not proposing Level A harassment take of the latter three species.
    For estimates considering counts, we considered the following. Over 
51 days of marine mammal monitoring during the 2017/18 Mukilteo 
project, 1,525 harbor seals were observed. During active pile driving, 
499 Level B takes and 15 Level A takes (or 3 percent of authorized 
Level B takes of harbor seals) were recorded, approximately 34 percent 
of the number of animals observed. To be conservative, it is assumed 
that up to 75 percent of the seals observed may be taken under this 
IHA, or 21 seals per day x 76 days = 1,596. We are allocating five 
percent of that amount to Level A take which is slightly greater than 
the three percent documented under the 2017 IHA. Therefore, we propose 
to authorize 80 Level A harassment takes and 1516 Level B harassment 
takes for a total of 1,596 harbor seal takes. California sea lion takes 
considered 14 animals x 76 days for a total of 1,064 Level B harassment 
takes. We are not proposing to authorize Level A harassment because the 
Level A harassment zones are very small based on one to three hours of 
pile driving and no California sea lions were taken by Level A 
harassment under the 2017 IHA. Northern elephant seals are rare but we 
are proposing to authorize take, by Level B harassment only, of 7 
individuals (one per month). Up to 23 positively identified transient 
killer whales may be taken (0.3 animals x 76 days; see mitigation on 
killer whale identification) while only 5 gray whales and 6 humpback 
whales (see Endangered Species Act section) are proposed to be taken. 
See Table 7 for all proposed take numbers, by species, and the 
respective amount of the population that take represents.

                    Table 7--Requested Take Amount, per Species, Relative to Population Size
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Level A         Level B       Total take     % Population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal.....................................              80           1,516           1,596            14.5
CSL.............................................               0           1,064           1,064             0.4
N. elephant seal................................               0               7               7           >0.01
Killer whale--transient.........................               0              23              23             9.5
SSL.............................................               0             161             161             0.2
Gray whale......................................               0               5               5            0.02
Humpback whale..................................               0               6               6             0.3
Dall's porpoise.................................               4               7              12            0.05
Harbor porpoise.................................              12             329             341            3.04
Minke whale.....................................               0               7               8             1.3
Bottlenose dolphin..............................               0              49              49            10.8
Long-beaked common dolphin......................               0              49              49            0.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Description of Proposed Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting 
Measures--A description of proposed mitigation, monitoring, and 
reporting measures is found in the previous documents, which are nearly 
identical in this proposed IHA. In summary, mitigation includes use of 
an unconfined bubble curtain (with operational standards set by the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) and soft start techniques during impact 
pile driving in greater than 2 ft of water, minimum 10 m shut down 
zone, and species-dependent shut down zones as described in Table 8. 
Some of these shut down zones fully encompass the Level A harassment 
zone; however, for species where we propose Level A take, this might 
not always be the case.

                                                                Table 8--Shut-Down Zones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         Level A (meters)
                 Method                      Pile size   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------  Level B  (m)
                                                                LF              MF              HF              PH              OT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory...............................              24              35              10              50              20              10           8,000

[[Page 30427]]

 
                                                      30             105              10             150              60  ..............           8,000
                                                      36             170              20             200  ..............  ..............           8,690
                                                      78             205  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          20,000
                                                     120             130  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Impact..................................              24             435  ..............  ..............  ..............              20           1,585
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Monitoring requirements would be similar to the 2017 IHA 
requirements (see an updated Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan available at 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111). The number and location of 
Protected Species Observers (PSOs) is dependent upon activity and 
weather conditions and are as follows:
    (i) Three land-based PSOs during impact driving of 24-in piles;
    (ii) four land-based and one ferry-based PSOs during 24-, 30-, 36-
in steel vibratory driving/removal;
    (iii) five land-based and one ferry-based PSOs during 78- and 120-
in steel vibratory driving/removal; and
    (iv) two ferry-based PSOs in addition to land-based PSOs when 
weather conditions are poor.
    In April, 2018, WSDOT submitted a monitoring report for 
construction that had been completed under the 2017 IHA. WSDOT complied 
with all mitigation, monitoring, and reporting protocols. Recorded 
takes were below the number authorized for the corresponding amount of 
work. The monitoring report can be viewed on NMFS's website at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111.
    WSDOT will conduct acoustic monitoring during impact pile driving 
of 24-in piles per the acoustic monitoring plan submitted for the 
previous IHA. WSDOT will also conduct acoustic monitoring during 
vibratory driving 78-in and 120-in piles. Both the impact and vibratory 
acoustic monitoring plans are available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111.

Preliminary Determinations

    WSDOT proposes to conduct a subset of activities identical to those 
covered in the previous 2017 IHA. We have included take for three new 
species noting these are precautionary as these species are not common 
in the action area and these species were not observed during the 
project during previous construction. We also believe the potential 
behavioral reactions and effects on the cetacean species previously 
analyzed is applicable to these species, if not to some lesser extent 
due to lower probability of occurrence.
    When issuing the 2017 IHA, NMFS found Phase 2 of the Mukilteo 
Multimodal Project, in its entirety, would have a negligible impact to 
species or stocks' rates of recruitment and survival and the amount of 
taking would be small relative to the population size of such species 
or stock (less than 15 percent). As described above, the number of 
estimated takes of the same stocks are less than takes authorized in 
the 2017 IHA and the anticipated impacts from the project are similar 
to those previously analyzed. The amount of take for the additional 
three species is also small (less than 11 percent of each stock). The 
proposed IHA includes identical required mitigation, monitoring, and 
reporting measures (albeit some minor modification to harassment and 
shutdown distances) as the 2017 IHA. In conclusion, there is no new 
information suggesting that our analysis or findings should change.
    Based on the information contained here and in the referenced 
documents, NMFS has preliminarily determined the following: (1) The 
required mitigation measures will effect the least practicable impact 
on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat; (2) the 
authorized takes will have a negligible impact on the affected marine 
mammal species or stocks; (3) the authorized takes represent small 
numbers of marine mammals relative to the affected stock abundances; 
and (4) WSDOT's activities will not have an unmitigable adverse impact 
on taking for subsistence purposes as no relevant subsistence uses of 
marine mammals are implicated by this action.

Endangered Species Act

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any 
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize 
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or 
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated 
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, 
NMFS consults internally, in this case with the West Coast Region 
Protected Resources Division Office, whenever we propose to authorize 
take for endangered or threatened species. NMFS is proposing to 
authorize take of humpback whales from the Central American and Mexico 
DPSs, which are listed under the ESA.
    The effects of this proposed Federal action were adequately 
analyzed in NMFS' Biological Opinion for the Mukilteo Multimodal 
Project, Snohomish, Washington, dated August 1, 2017, which concluded 
that issuance of an IHA would not jeopardize the continued existence of 
any endangered or threatened species or destroy or adversely modify any 
designated critical habitat. NMFS West Coast Region has confirmed the 
Incidental Take Statement issued in 2017 is applicable for the proposed 
IHA. That ITS authorizes the take of six humpback whales.

Proposed Authorization

    As a result of these preliminary determinations, we are proposing 
to issue an IHA to WSDOT to conduct the specified activities at the 
Mukilteo Ferry Terminal from September 1, 2018, through August 31, 
2019, provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and 
reporting requirements are incorporated.
    This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording 
contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if 
issued).
    1. This Authorization is valid from September 1, 2018, through 
August 31, 2019.
    2. This Authorization is valid only for activities associated with 
Phase 2 of the Mukilteo Multimodal Project, Puget Sound, Washington.
    3. General Conditions.
    (a) A copy of this IHA must be in the possession of WSDOT, its 
designees, and work crew personnel operating under the authority of 
this IHA.
    (b) The species authorized for taking are found in Table 7.

[[Page 30428]]

    (c) The taking, by Level A and B harassment only, is limited to the 
species listed in condition 3(b). See Table 7 for numbers of take 
authorized.
    (d) The taking by serious injury or death of any of the species 
listed in condition 3(b) of the Authorization or any taking of any 
other species of marine mammal is prohibited and may result in the 
modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
    (e) WSDOT shall conduct briefings between construction supervisors 
and crews, marine mammal monitoring team, acoustical monitoring team, 
and WSDOT staff prior to the start of all pile driving, and when new 
personnel join the work, in order to explain responsibilities, 
communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and 
operational procedures.
    4. Mitigation.
    (a) In-water construction work shall occur only during daylight 
hours during the established in-water work window (July 15 through 
February 15).
    (b) For in-water heavy machinery activities other than pile 
driving, if a marine mammal comes within 10 m, operations shall cease 
and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum level required to 
maintain steerage and safe working conditions.
    (c) Pre-activity monitoring shall take place from 30 minutes prior 
to initiation of pile driving activity and post-activity monitoring 
shall continue through 30 minutes post-completion of pile driving 
activity. Pile driving may commence at the end of the 30-minute pre-
activity monitoring period, provided observers have determined that the 
shutdown zone is clear of marine mammals, which includes delaying start 
of pile driving activities if a marine mammal is sighted in the zones 
identified in Table 8.
    (d) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone 
during activities or pre-activity monitoring, all pile driving 
activities at that location shall be halted or delayed, respectively. 
If pile driving is halted or delayed due to the presence of a marine 
mammal, the activity may not resume or commence until either the animal 
has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown 
zone and 15 minutes have passed without re-detection of the animal. 
Pile driving activities include the time to install or remove a single 
pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of 
the pile driving equipment is no more than thirty minutes.
    (e) WSDOT shall use soft start techniques when impact pile driving. 
Soft start requires contractors to provide an initial set of strikes at 
reduced energy, followed by a thirty-second waiting period, then two 
subsequent reduced energy strike sets. Soft start shall be implemented 
at the start of each day's impact pile driving and at any time 
following cessation of impact pile driving for a period of thirty 
minutes or longer.
    (f) WSDOT shall use a bubble curtain during impact driving of 24-in 
piles in greater than 2 feet of water. Should acoustic measurements 
identify that average source levels exceed those estimated for this 
activity (173 dB SEL, 193 dB rms), WSDOT shall contact NMFS Office of 
Protected Resources within 48 hours to determine if adjustments to 
harassment zones are warranted.
    (g) For all pile activities, the number and location of Protected 
Species Observers (PSOs) is dependent upon activity and weather 
conditions and are as follows:
    (i) three land-based PSOs during impact driving of 24-in piles;
    (ii) four land-based and one ferry-based PSOs during 24-, 30-, 36-
inch steel vibratory driving/removal;
    (iii) five land-based and one ferry-based PSOs during 78- and 120-
inch steel vibratory driving/removal; and
    (iv) two ferry-based PSOs in addition to land-based PSOs when 
weather conditions are poor.
    (h) Southern Resident Killer Whales (SRKW)
    (i) If a killer whale approaches the monitoring zone during pile 
driving or removal, and it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or a 
transient killer whale, it shall be assumed to be a SRKW and WSDOT 
shall implement the shutdown measure identified in 4(k).
    (ii) If a SRKW enters the monitoring zone undetected, WSDOT shall 
contact the Offices of Protected Resources within 24 hours to determine 
if additional monitoring is necessary to avoid future incidences.
    (iii) Coordination with Local Marine Mammal Research Network--Prior 
to the start of pile driving, WSDOT will contact the Orca Network and/
or Center for Whale Research to get real-time information on the 
presence or absence of whales before starting any pile driving. WSDOT 
will also monitor the Orca Network site for visual and acoustic 
detections.
    (k) If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or a 
species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized 
takes are met, is observed approaching or within the Level B harassment 
zone for the pile size and method used (Table 8), pile driving and 
removal activities must shut down immediately using delay and shut-down 
procedures. Activities must not resume until the animal has been 
confirmed to have left the area or the observation time period, as 
indicated in 4(d) above, has elapsed.
    5. Monitoring.
    (a) Monitoring of pile driving shall be conducted by qualified PSOs 
(see below), who shall have no other assigned tasks during monitoring 
periods. WSDOT shall adhere to the following conditions when selecting 
observers:
    (iv) Independent PSOs shall be used (i.e., not construction 
personnel).
    (ii) At least one PSO must have prior experience working as a 
marine mammal observer during construction activities.
    (iii) Other PSOs may substitute education (degree in biological 
science or related field) or training for experience.
    (iv) Where a team of three or more PSOs are required, a lead 
observer or monitoring coordinator shall be designated. The lead 
observer must have prior experience working as a marine mammal observer 
during construction.
    (v) WSDOT shall submit PSO CVs for approval by NMFS prior to the 
onset of pile driving.
    (vi) WSDOT shall ensure that observers have the following 
additional qualifications:
    (vii) Ability to conduct field observations and collect data 
according to assigned protocols.
    (viii) Experience or training in the field identification of marine 
mammals, including the identification of behaviors.
    (ix) Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations.
    (x) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations 
including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals 
observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were 
conducted; dates, times, and reason for implementation of mitigation 
(or why mitigation was not implemented when required); and marine 
mammal behavior.
    (xi) 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.
    (b) WSDOT shall conduct acoustic monitoring per their impact and 
vibratory monitoring plans. Acoustic monitoring shall be conducted 
early at the onset of pile work.
    6. Reporting.
    (a) WSDOT shall provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within 
90 days of the conclusion of the construction

[[Page 30429]]

work or within 90 days of the expiration of the IHA, whichever comes 
first. This report shall detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the 
data recorded during monitoring, and estimate the number of marine 
mammals that may have been harassed.
    (b) If comments are received from NMFS Office of Protected 
Resources on the draft report, a final report shall be submitted to 
NMFS within 30 days thereafter. If no comments are received from NMFS, 
the draft report will be considered to be the final report.
    (c) In the unanticipated event that the construction activities 
clearly cause the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by 
this Authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or 
mortality, WSDOT shall immediately cease all operations and immediately 
report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the 
West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators. The report must include the 
following information:
    (i) Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
    (ii) Description of the incident;
    (iii) Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the 
incident;
    (iv) Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, sea 
state, cloud cover, visibility, and water depth);
    (v) Description of marine mammal observations in the 24 hours 
preceding the incident;
    (vi) Species identification or description of the animal(s) 
involved;
    (vii) Fate of the animal(s); and
    (viii) Photographs or video footage of the animal (if equipment is 
available).
    Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the 
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS shall work with WSDOT to 
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further 
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. WSDOT may not resume their 
activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.
    (d) In the event that WSDOT discovers an injured or dead marine 
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or 
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than 
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph), 
WSDOT will immediately report the incident to the Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators. 
The report must include the same information identified above. 
Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the 
incident. NMFS will work with WSDOT to determine whether modifications 
in the activities are appropriate.
    (e) In the event that WSDOT discovers an injured or dead marine 
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not 
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA 
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced 
decomposition, or scavenger damage), WSDOT shall report the incident to 
the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional 
Stranding Coordinators, within 24 hours of the discovery. WSDOT shall 
provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other 
documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine 
Mammal Stranding Network. WSDOT can continue its operations under such 
a case.
    7. This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if 
the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if 
NMFS determines the authorized taking is having more than a negligible 
impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals.

Request for Public Comments

    We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and 
any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA for the remaining work 
associated with the Mukilteo Multimodal Project. We also request 
comment on the potential for renewal of this proposed IHA as described 
in the paragraph below. Please include with your comments any 
supporting data or literature citations to help inform our final 
decision on the request for MMPA authorization.
    On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a second one-year IHA 
without additional notice when (1) another year of identical or nearly 
identical activities as described in the Specified Activities section 
is planned or (2) the activities would not be completed by the time the 
IHA expires and a second IHA would allow for completion of the 
activities beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section, 
provided all of the following conditions are met:
    (a) A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days prior 
to expiration of the current IHA.
    (b) The request for renewal must include the following:
    (i) An explanation that the activities to be conducted beyond the 
initial dates either are identical to the previously analyzed 
activities or include changes so minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) 
that the changes do not affect the previous analyses, take estimates, 
or mitigation and monitoring requirements; and
    (ii) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the 
required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the 
monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not 
previously analyzed or authorized.
    (c) Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the 
affected species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS 
determines that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, 
the mitigation and monitoring measures remain the same and appropriate, 
and the original findings remain valid.

    Dated: June 25, 2018.
Elaine T. Saiz,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-13940 Filed 6-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>