Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 37473 

SMAST, to increase assigned pound 

value of the 2017 RSA DAS from 3,552 

lb (1,611 kg) to 4,074 lb (1,848 kg), 

commensurate with the Framework 10 

possession limit increase already 

implemented in the fishery. The 

adjusted total weight limit of each 

project under this higher DAS valuation 

would be 1,222,200 lb (554,381 kg) for 

Cornell and 814,800 lb (369,587 kg) for 

SMAST. Investigators from Cornell and 

SMAST have stated there is less 

incentive for industry to buy RSA DAS 

now that the possession limits in the 

fishery have increased through the 

Framework 10 measures. The requested 

weight adjustment to RSA DAS would 

help maintain the relative value of the 

Monkfish RSA Program, and potentially 

attract and maintain participants from 

the fishing industry. 

The revised EFPs would not alter the 

previously approved exemptions, and 

all participating vessels and allocated 

RSA DAS would remain the same. The 

only revision would be the maximum 

total weight that may be landed under 

each project. This adjustment would be 

consistent with changes implemented in 

the monkfish fishery under Framework 

10, and the minimal additional effort 

that may occur within the RSA program 

is negligible and within the scope of the 

analysis originally conducted. The 

proposed adjustment does not change 

any of the determinations made during 

the review and approval of the original 

2017 Monkfish RSA EFPs. These EFPs 

are scheduled to expire April 30, 2019. 

Because the RSA program is a unique 

entitlement within the monkfish fishery, 

we are soliciting public input on the 

increase in per RSA DAS weight 

requested by the participating research 

institutions. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: July 27, 2018. 

Jennifer M. Wallace, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16437 Filed 7–31–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XG106 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to the Ketchikan 

Berth IV Expansion Project 

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 

Ketchikan Dock Company (KDC) to 

incidentally harass, by Level A and B 

harassment, marine mammals during 

construction activities associated with 

the Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion 

project in Ketchikan, AK. 

DATES: This Authorization is applicable 

from October 1, 2018 through August 

31, 2019. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jonathan Molineaux, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

Electronic copies of the application and 

supporting documents, as well as a list 

of the references cited in this document, 

may be obtained online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-constructionactivities. In case of problems accessing 

these documents, please call the contact 

listed above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

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

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

the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated 

to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the 

incidental, but not intentional, taking of 

small numbers of marine mammals by 

U.S. citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specified geographical region if 

certain findings are made and either 

regulations are issued or, if the taking is 

limited to harassment, a notice of a 

proposed authorization is provided to 

the public for review. 

An authorization for incidental 

takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 

that the taking will have a negligible 

impact on the species or stock(s), will 

not have an unmitigable adverse impact 

on the availability of the species or 

stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 

relevant), and if the permissible 

methods of taking and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings are set 

forth. 

NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible 

impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact 

resulting from the specified activity that 

cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 

not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 

the species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival. 

The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’ 

means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or 

attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill 

any marine mammal. 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, the MMPA 

defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act of 

pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) 

has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

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

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

Summary of Request 

On February 13, 2018, NMFS received 

a request from the KDC for an IHA to 

take marine mammals incidental to 

construction activities associated with 

the Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion 

Project. The IHA application was 

determined adequate and complete on 

March 28, 2018. The KDC’s request is 

for take of eight species of marine 

mammals by Level B harassment and 

Level A harassment of a small number 

of harbor porpoises and harbor seals. 

Neither the KDC nor NMFS expect 

serious injury or mortality to result from 

this activity and, therefore, an IHA is 

appropriate. 

Description of Activity 

The KDC will expand Berth IV, its 

dock adjacent to downtown Ketchikan, 

Alaska, located in East Tongass 

Narrows, in order to accommodate a 

new fleet of large cruise ships that are 

expected to reach Alaska in the summer 

of 2019. 

The expansion will include the 

removal of some existing piles and 

structures and the installation of new 

piles and structures. All pile driving 

and removal will take place at the 

existing dock facility and is expected to 

occur over the course of 29 days (not 

necessarily consecutive). The project 

will occur in marine waters that support 

several marine mammal species. The 

pile driving, pile removal, and drilling 

activities associated with the project 

may result in behavioral harassment 

(Level B harassment and small numbers 

of Level A harassment) of marine 

mammal species. 

The purpose of this project is to 

reconfigure Berth IV so that it can 

accommodate larger cruise ships. This 

project is needed because the existing 

Berth IV cannot support the modern 

fleet of larger cruise ships. Once the 

project is constructed Berth IV will be 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
37474 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 

able to accommodate these large cruise 

ships. 

Construction activities associated 

with impact pile driving, vibratory pile 

driving/removal, and drilling are 

expected to take three to four months 

beginning in Fall 2018. The project is 

likely to begin in October of 2018 and 

complete in January of 2019, depending 

on the start date, construction could 

extend into March of 2019. Regardless 

of start date, construction will occur 

within a four-month (maximum) work 

window. The total number of days for 

pile removal, pile installation and 

drilling is expected to occur over 29 

days (not necessarily consecutive days). 

The total construction duration 

accounts for the time required to 

mobilize materials and resources and 

construct the project. The duration also 

accounts for potential delays in material 

deliveries, equipment maintenance, 

inclement weather, and shutdowns that 

may occur to prevent impacts to marine 

mammals. Please see Table 1 below for 

the specific amount of time required to 

install and remove piles. 

TABLE—1 PILE DRIVING CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY

Description 

Project component 

Existing pile 

removal 

Temporary pile 

installation 

Temporary pile 

removal 

Permanent pile 

installation 

Permanent pile 

installation 

Max installation/ 

removal per day 

Pile Diameter and Type ............. 24, 30, and 36- 

inch steel.

30-inch steel .... 30-inch steel .... 30-inch steel .... 48-inch steel ....

# of Piles .................................... 2, 6, and 4 respectively; 12 

total.

16 ..................... 16 ..................... 1 ....................... 17 .....................

Vibratory Pile Driving 

Max # of Piles Vibrated Per Day 4 ....................... 4 ....................... 4 ....................... 1 ....................... 2 ....................... 4 temporary or 

2 permanent. 

Vibratory Time Per Pile .............. 15 minutes ....... 30 minutes ....... 10 minutes ....... 1 hour .............. 1 hour ..............

Vibratory Time per day .............. 1 hour .............. 2 hours ............. 40 minutes ....... 1 hour .............. 2 hours ............. 2 hours. 

Vibratory Time Total ................... 3 hours ............. 8 hours ............. 2 hours 40 minutes.1 hour .............. 17 hours ...........

Impact Pile Driving 

Max # of Piles Impacted Per 

Day.

0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 3 ....................... 3. 

# of Strikes Per Pile ................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 50 strikes ......... 150 strikes. 

Impact Time Per Pile ................. 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 5 minutes .........

Impact Time per Day ................. 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 15 minutes ....... 15 minutes. 

Impact Time Total ...................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 1 hour 25 minutes.

Socketing Pile Installation (Drilling) 

Max # of Piles Socketed per 

Day.

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

Socket Time Per Pile ................. 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 3 hours ............. 0 .......................

Socket Time per Day ................. 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 3 hours ............. 0 ....................... 3 hours. 

Socket Time Total ...................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 3 hours ............. 0 .......................

Anchor Drilling 

Max # of Piles drilled per Day ... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 3 ....................... 0 ....................... 3. 

Drilling Time Per Pile ................. 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 2.5 hours .......... 0 .......................

Drilling Time per Day ................. 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 7.5 hours .......... 0 ....................... 7.5 hours. 

Anchor Time Total ...................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 0 ....................... 42.5 hours ........ 0 .......................

A detailed description of the planned 

activities is provided in the proposed 

IHA for this action found in the 

following Federal Register notice (83 FR 

22009, May 11, 2018). Since that time, 

the only alteration that has been made 

to the planned activities is the activity 

duration for impact piling of the 48-inch 

piles. The number of strikes per pile 

will be no more than 50 strikes per pile 

(See Table 1). As a result of this change 

in duration, the Level A zone for the 

activity and take numbers were also 

modified. In addition, take will now be 

authorized for anchor drilling. The new 

Level A zones for impact piling of 48- 

inch piles, the modeled zones for 

anchor drilling, and the revised take 

numbers are presented and discussed 

further in the Estimated Take Section. 

Due to only slight changes in the 

activity duration for impact piling, a 

detailed description of the action is not 

provided here. Please refer to the 

Federal Register notice (83 FR 22009, 

May 11, 2018) for the proposed IHA for 

the description of the specific activity. 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of NMFS’s proposal to issue 

an IHA was published in the Federal 

Register on May 11, 2018 (83 FR 22009). 

During the 30-day public comment 

period, the Marine Mammal 

Commission (Commission) submitted a 

letter on April 2, 2018. The Commission 

recommended that NMFS issue the IHA, 

subject to inclusion of the mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting measures. 

Comment 1: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS review more 

thoroughly both the applications prior 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 37475 

to deeming them complete and its 

notices prior to submitting them for 

publication in the Federal Register. For 

example, the Commission stated that 

NMFS incorrectly assumed a pile casing 

would inhibit sound transmission 

during drilling of 30-in anchors into 

bedrock, which underestimated the 

numbers of Level B harassment takes for 

harbor seals and Steller sea lions. 

Response: NMFS thanks the 

Commission for pointing out the errors 

in the Federal Register notice for the 

proposed authorization. NMFS has 

addressed those errors in this notice of 

issuance of the authorization. NMFS 

makes every effort to read notices 

thoroughly prior to publication and will 

continue this effort to publish the best 

possible product for public comment. In 

addition, NMFS notes that recent 

drilling techniques which have not been 

authorized in the past require further 

review due to the novelty of such 

actions. Due to this, NMFS continues to 

welcome suggestions from the 

Commission on how to approach new 

drilling techniques until acoustic 

monitoring data is available for such 

actions. 

Comment 2: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS refrain from 

implementing its proposed renewal 

process and instead use abbreviated 

Federal Register notices and reference 

existing documents to streamline the 

incidental harassment authorization 

process. The Commission also suggested 

that NMFS should discuss the 

possibility of renewals through a more 

general route, such as a rulemaking, 

instead of notice in a specific 

authorization. The Commission further 

recommended that if NMFS did not 

pursue a more general route, that the 

agency provide the Commission and the 

public with a legal analysis supporting 

our conclusion that this process is 

consistent with the requirements of 

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

Response: The process of issuing a 

renewal IHA does not bypass the public 

notice and comment requirements of the 

MMPA. The notice of the proposed IHA 

expressly notifies the public that under 

certain, limited conditions an applicant 

could seek a renewal IHA for an 

additional year. The notice describes the 

conditions under which such a renewal 

request could be considered and 

expressly seeks public comment in the 

event such a renewal is sought. 

Additional reference to this solicitation 

of public comment has recently been 

added at the beginning of FR notices 

that consider renewals. NMFS 

appreciates the streamlining achieved 

by the use of abbreviated FR notices and 

intends to continue using them for 

proposed IHAs that include minor 

changes from previously issued IHAs, 

but which do not satisfy the renewal 

requirements. We believe our proposed 

method for issuing renewals meets 

statutory requirements and maximizes 

efficiency. Importantly, such renewals 

would be limited to circumstances 

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 

they are for all IHAs. Last, NMFS will 

publish on our website a description of 

the renewal process before any renewal 

is issued utilizing the new process. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

A detailed description of the of the 

species likely to be affected by the 

construction 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 22009, May 11, 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 (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/ 

population-assessments/marinemammals) for generalized species 

accounts. All species that could 

potentially occur in the planned survey 

area are included in Table 2. 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT AREA DURING THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITY

Common name Scientific name MMPA Stock 

ESA/MMPA 

status; 

Strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock 

abundance 

Nbest, 

(CV, Nmin, 

most recent 

abundance 

survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) 

Family Balaenidae 

Humpback whale ................. Megaptera novaeangliae ..... Central North 

Pacific.

E, D,Y 10,103 (0.3; 

7,890; 

2006).

83 21 

Minke whale ......................... Balaenoptera acutorostrata Alaska ........... -, N N.A. .............. N.A. N.A. 

Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Family Delphinidae 

Killer whale ........................... Orcinus orca ........................ Alaska Resident.-, N 2,347 (N.A.; 

2,347; 

2012) 4.

23.4 1 

West Coast 

Transient 

-, N 243 (N.A, 

243, 2009) 4.

2.4 1 

Northern 

Resident 

-, N 290 (N.A; 

290; 2014) 6.

1.96 0 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
37476 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT AREA DURING THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITY—Continued 

Common name Scientific name MMPA Stock 

ESA/MMPA 

status; 

Strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock 

abundance 

Nbest, 

(CV, Nmin, 

most recent 

abundance 

survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Pacific white-sided dolphin .. Lagenorhynchus obliquidens North Pacific -/-; N 26,880 (N.A.; 

N.A.; 1990).

N.A. 0 

Family Phocoenidae 

Harbor porpoise ................... Phocoena phocoena ........... Southeast 

Alaska.

-, Y 975 (0.10; 

896; 2012) 5.

8.9 5 34 5

Dall’s porpoise ..................... Phocoenoides dalli .............. Alaska ........... -, N 83,400 .......... N.A. 38 

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia 

Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) 

Steller sea lion ..................... Eumatopia jubatus .............. Eastern U.S. -,-, N 41,638 (N/A; 

41,638; 

2015).

2,498 108 

Family Phocidae (earless seals) 

Harbor seal .......................... Phoca vitulina richardii ........ Clarence 

Strait.

-, N 31,634 (N.A.; 

29,093; 

2011).

1,222 41 

1ESA 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 (N/A). 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). 4 N is based on counts of individual animals identified from photo-identification catalogs. 

5 In the SAR for harbor porpoise (NMFS 2017), NMFS identified population estimates and PBR for porpoises within inland Southeast Alaska 

waters (these abundance estimates have not been corrected for g(0); therefore, they are likely conservative). The calculated PBR is considered 

unreliable for the entire stock because it is based on estimates from surveys of only a portion (the inside waters of Southeast Alaska) of the 

range of this stock as currently designated. The Annual M/SI is for the entire stock, including coastal waters. 6Abundance estimates obtained from Towers et al., 2015. 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

The effects of underwater noise from 

pile driving/removal and drilling 

activities for the Ketchikan Berth IV 

Expansion project have the potential to 

result in Level A and Level B 

harassment of marine mammals in the 

vicinity of the action area. The Federal 

Register notice for the proposed IHA (83 

FR 22009, May 11, 2018) included a 

discussion of the effects of 

anthropogenic noise on marine 

mammals and their habitat in the action 

area, therefore that information is not 

repeated here; please refer to the 

Federal Register notice (83 FR 22009, 

May 11, 2018) for that information. 

Estimated Take 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes for 

authorization through this IHA, which 

will inform both NMFS’s consideration 

of ‘‘small numbers’’ and the negligible 

impact determination. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which 

(i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

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

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

Authorized takes would primarily be 

by Level B harassment, as use of impact 

pile driving, vibratory pile driving/ 

removal, and drilling has the potential 

to result in disruption of behavioral 

patterns for individual marine 

mammals. There is also some potential 

for auditory injury (Level A harassment) 

to result, primarily for harbor seals and 

harbor porpoises due to larger predicted 

auditory injury zones. Auditory injury is 

unlikely to occur for other species. The 

mitigation and monitoring measures are 

expected to minimize the severity of 

such taking to the extent practicable. 

As described previously, no mortality 

or serious injury 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 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) the number of days of activities. 

Below, we describe these components in 

more detail and present the take 

estimate. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

Using the best available science, 

NMFS has developed acoustic 

thresholds that identify the received 

level of underwater sound above which 

exposed marine mammals would be 

reasonably expected to be behaviorally 

harassed or experience TTS (equated to 

Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 37477 

some degree (equated to Level A 

harassment). 

Level B Harassment for non-explosive 

sources—Though significantly driven by 

received level, the onset of behavioral 

disturbance from anthropogenic noise 

exposure is also informed to varying 

degrees by other factors related to the 

source (e.g., frequency, predictability, 

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

bathymetry), and the receiving animals 

(hearing, motivation, experience, 

demography, behavioral context) and 

can be difficult to predict (Southall et 

al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2011). Based on 

what the available science indicates and 

the practical need to use a threshold 

based on a factor that is both predictable 

and measurable for most activities, 

NMFS uses a generalized acoustic 

threshold based on received level to 

estimate the onset of behavioral 

harassment. NMFS predicts that marine 

mammals are likely to be behaviorally 

harassed in a manner we consider Level 

B harassment when exposed to 

underwater anthropogenic noise above 

received levels of 120 dB re 1 mPa rms 

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

mPa rms for non-explosive impulsive 

(e.g., impact pile driving) or intermittent 

(e.g., scientific sonar) sources. 

KDC’s construction activity includes 

the use of continuous (vibratory pile 

driving and drilling) and impulsive 

(impact pile driving) sources, and 

therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 mPa 

rms thresholds for Level B behavioral 

harassment are applicable. 

Level A harassment for non-explosive 

sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance 

for Assessing the Effects of 

Anthropogenic Sound on Marine 

Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance, 

2016) identifies dual criteria to assess 

auditory injury (Level A harassment) to 

five different marine mammal groups 

(based on hearing sensitivity) as a result 

of exposure to noise from two different 

types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). KDC’s activity includes the 

use of impulsive (impact pile driving) 

and non-impulsive (vibratory pile 

driving and drilling) sources. 

These thresholds are provided in the 

table below. 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. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICESEN01AU18.009</GPH>
37478 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 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. 

Reference sound levels used by KDC 

for all vibratory and impact piling 

activities were derived from source level 

data from construction projects at the 

Port of Anchorage (Austin et al., 2016) 

and Ketchikan Ferry Terminal (Denes et 

al., 2016). To determine the ensonfied 

areas for both the Level A and Level B 

zones for vibratory piling of 48-inch/36- 

inch steel piles and 30-inch/24-inch 

steel piles, KDC used Sound Pressure 

Levels (SPLs) of 168.2 dB re 1 mPa rms 

and 161.9 dB re 1 mPa rms respectively. 

These were derived from vibratory pile 

driving data (of the same pile sizes) 

during the Port of Anchorage test pile 

project (Austin et al., 2016, Tables 9 and 

16) and the Ketchikan Ferry Terminal 

(Denes et al., 2016, Table 72). 

For impact pile driving, KDC used 

both SPLs and Sound Exposure Levels 

(SEL) derived from SSV studies 

conducted on 48-inch steel piles during 

the Port of Anchorage test pile project. 

To determine Level A ensonified zones 

from impact piling, KDC utilized an SEL 

of 186.7 dB. When determining Level A 

zones, SELs are more accurate than 

SPLs, as they incorporate the pulse 

duration explicitly rather than assuming 

a proxy pulse duration and they provide 

a more refined estimation of impacts. 

However, to determine the Level B zone 

for impact piling, an SPL of 198.6 dB re 

1 mPa rms was used. In addition, for 

drilling (socket and anchor pile 

installation), KDC used a reference 

sound level of 167.7 dB re 1 mPa rms 

from SSV studies conducted during 

drilling activities at the Kodiak Ferry 

Terminal to calculate both the Level A 

and Level B ensonified zones for the 

Berth IV Expansion project. More 

information on the source levels used 

are presented in Table 4 below. 

TABLE 4—PROJECT SOURCE LEVELS

Activity Source level at 10 

meters (dB) 

Vibratory Pile Driving/Removal 

24-inch steel removal (2 piles) (∼1 hour on 1 day) 1 .................................................................................................................. 161.9 SPL 2

30-inch steel removal (6 piles) (∼1 hour per day on 2 days) ..................................................................................................... 161.9 SPL 2

36-inch steel removal (4 piles) (∼1 hour on 1 day) .................................................................................................................... 168.2 SPL 2

30-inch steel temporary installation (16 piles) (∼2 hours per day on 4 days) ........................................................................... 161.9 SPL 2

30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (∼2 hours on 1 day) ............................................................................................. 161.9 SPL 2

48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (∼2 hours per day on 9 days) .......................................................................... 168.2 SPL 2

Impact Pile Driving 

48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (∼15 minutes per day on 6 days) ..................................................................... 186.7 SEL/198.6 

SPL 3

Socketing Installation (Drilling) 

30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (∼3 hours on 1 day) ............................................................................................. 167.7 SPL 4

Anchoring Installation (Drilling) 

30-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (∼2.5 hours per day) ........................................................................................ 167.7 SPL 4

1This project will only remove two 24-inch diameter steel piles total for a maximum of 30 minutes of removal in one day. However, because a 

maximum of 4 piles could be removed each day, we used 1 hour (the time it would take to remove four piles) of removal time instead of 30 minutes to calculate the distance threshold. 2The 36-inch and 48-inch diameter pile source levels are proxy from median measured source levels from pile driving of 48-inch piles for the 

Port of Anchorage test pile project (Austin et al. 2016, Tables 9 and 16). The 24-inch and 30-inch diameter source levels are proxy from median 

measured sources levels from pile driving of 30-inch diameter piles to construct the Ketchikan Ferry Terminal (Denes et al. 2016, Table 72). 3Sound pressure level root-mean-square (SPL rms) values were used to calculate distance to Level B harassment isopleths for impact pile 

driving. The source level of 186.7 SEL is the median measured from the Port of Anchorage test pile project for 48-inch piles (Austin et al. 2016, 

Table 9). We calculated the distances to Level A thresholds assuming 50 strikes per pile at 3 piles per day. 4The 30-inch diameter socketing and anchor source levels are derived from rom mean measured source levels from drilling of 24-inch diameter piles to construct the Kodiak Ferry Terminal (Denes et al. 2016, Table 72). The mean was chosen as a proxy due to it being more conservative than the median source level. 

Level B Zones 

The practical spreading model was 

used by KDC to generate the Level B 

harassment zones for all piling and 

drilling activities. Practical Spreading, a 

form of transmission loss, is described 

in full detail below. 

Pile driving and drilling generates 

underwater noise that can potentially 

result in disturbance to marine 

mammals in the project area. 

Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease 

in acoustic intensity as an acoustic 

pressure wave propagates out from a 

source. TL parameters vary with 

frequency, temperature, sea conditions, 

current, source and receiver depth, 

water depth, water chemistry, and 

bottom composition and topography. 

The general formula for underwater TL 

is: 

TL = B * log10(R1/R2), 

Where: 

R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL 

from the driven pile, and 

R2 = the distance from the driven pile 

of the initial measurement. 

This formula neglects loss due to 

scattering and absorption, which is 

assumed to be zero here. The degree to 

which underwater sound propagates 

away from a sound source is dependent 

on a variety of factors, most notably the 

water bathymetry and presence or 

absence of reflective or absorptive 

conditions including in-water structures 

and sediments. Spherical spreading 

occurs in a perfectly unobstructed (freefield) environment not limited by depth 

or water surface, resulting in a 6 dB 

reduction in sound level for each 

doubling of distance from the source 

(20*log[range]). Cylindrical spreading 

occurs in an environment in which 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 37479 

1These distances represent calculated distances 

based on the practical spreading model; however, 

landforms will block sound transmission at closer 

distances. The farthest distance that sound will 

transmit from the source is 13,755 m before 

transmission is stopped by Annette Island. 

sound propagation is bounded by the 

water surface and sea bottom, resulting 

in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for 

each doubling of distance from the 

source (10*log[range]). A practical 

spreading value of 15 is often used 

under conditions where water increases 

with depth as the receiver moves away 

from the shoreline, resulting in an 

expected propagation environment that 

would lie between spherical and 

cylindrical spreading loss conditions. 

Utilizing the practical spreading loss 

model, KDC determined underwater 

noise will fall below the behavioral 

effects threshold of 120 dB rms for 

marine mammals at a max radial 

distance of 16,343 meters and 15,136 

meters for vibratory piling and drilling, 

respectively.1 With these radial 

distances, and due to the occurrence of 

landforms (See Figure 5 of IHA 

Application), the largest Level B zone 

calculated for vibratory piling and 

drilling equaled 10.3 km2. For 

calculating the Level B zone for impact 

driving, the practical spreading loss 

model was used with a behavioral 

threshold of 160 dB rms. The maximum 

radial distance of the Level B ensonified 

zone for impact piling equaled 3,744 

meters. At this radial distance, the 

entire Level B zone for impact piling 

equaled 4.9 km2. Table 5 below 

provides all Level B radial distances and 

their corresponding areas for each 

activity during KDC’s Berth IV 

Expansion project. 

TABLE 5—LEVEL B ZONES CALCULATED USING THE PRACTICAL SPREADING MODEL

Source Level B zones 

(meters) 

Level B zone 

(square 

kilometers) 

Vibratory Pile Driving 

24-inch steel removal (2 piles) (∼1 hour on 1 day 3) ...................................................................................... 6,215 5.9 

30-inch steel removal (6 piles) (∼1 hour per day on 2 days) .......................................................................... 6,215 5.9 

36-inch steel removal (4 piles) (∼1 hour on 1 day) ......................................................................................... *16,343 10.3 

30-inch steel temporary installation (16 piles) (∼2 hours per day on 4 days) ................................................ 6,215 5.9 

30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (∼2 hours on 1 day) .................................................................. 6,215 5.9 

48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (∼2 hours per day on 9 days) ............................................... *16,343 10.3 

Impact Pile Driving 

48-inch steel (17 piles) (∼15 minutes per day on 6 days) .............................................................................. 3,745 4.9 

Socketing Pile Installation (Drilling) 

30-inch steel (1 pile) (∼3 hours on 1 day) ....................................................................................................... *15,136 10.3 

* These distances represent calculated distances based on the practical spreading model; however, landforms will block sound transmission at 

closer distances. The farthest distance that sound will transmit from the source is 13,755 m before transmission is stopped by Annette Island. 

Level A Zones 

When NMFS’s 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 will result in some degree of 

overestimate of Level A take. However, 

these tools offer the best way to predict 

appropriate isopleths when more 

sophisticated 3D modeling methods are 

not available, and NMFS continues to 

develop ways to quantitatively refine 

these tools, and will qualitatively 

address the output where appropriate. 

For stationary sources (i.e., pile driving 

and drilling), NMFS’s User Spreadsheet 

predicts the closest distance at which, if 

a marine mammal remained at that 

distance the whole duration of the 

activity, it would not incur PTS. Inputs 

used in the User Spreadsheet, and the 

resulting Level A isopleths are reported 

below. 

TABLE 6—NMFS’S OPTIONAL USER SPREADSHEET INPUTS

User spreadsheet input 

Equipment type Socket drill Anchor drill 

Vibratory pile 

driver 

(removal of 30- 

inch and 24- 

inch steel piles) 

Vibratory pile 

driver 

(installation of 

30-inch steel 

piles) 

Vibratory pile 

driver 

(installation of 

36-inch steel 

piles) 

Vibratory pile 

driver 

(installation of 

48-inch steel 

piles) 

Impact pile 

driver 

Spreadsheet 

Tab Used.

Non-impulsive, 

continuous.

Non-impulsive, 

continuous.

Non-impulsive, 

continuous.

Non-impulsive, 

continuous.

Non-impulsive, 

continuous.

Non-impulsive, 

continuous.

Impulsive, 

Non-continuous 

Source Level ..... 167.7 SPL ....... 167.7 SPL ....... 161.9 SPL ....... 161.9 SPL ....... 168.2 SPL ....... 168.2 SPL ....... 186.7 SEL 

Weighting Factor 

Adjustment 

(kHz).

2 ...................... 2 ...................... 2.5 ................... 2.5 ................... 2.5 ................... 2.5 ................... 2 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
37480 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 

TABLE 6—NMFS’S OPTIONAL USER SPREADSHEET INPUTS—Continued 

User spreadsheet input 

Equipment type Socket drill Anchor drill 

Vibratory pile 

driver 

(removal of 30- 

inch and 24- 

inch steel piles) 

Vibratory pile 

driver 

(installation of 

30-inch steel 

piles) 

Vibratory pile 

driver 

(installation of 

36-inch steel 

piles) 

Vibratory pile 

driver 

(installation of 

48-inch steel 

piles) 

Impact pile 

driver 

(a) Activity duration within 24 

hours.

(b) Number of 

strikes per pile.

(c) Number of 

piles per day.

(a) 3 ................. (a) 7.5 .............. (a) 1 ................. (a) 2 ................. (a) 1 ................. (a) 2 ................. (b) 150 

(c) 3 

Propagation 

(xLogR).

15 .................... 15 .................... 15 .................... 15 .................... 15 .................... 15 .................... 15 

Distance of 

source level 

measurement 

(meters) +.

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

TABLE 7—NMFS OPTIONAL USER SPREADSHEET OUTPUTS

User spreadsheet output 

Source type Low-frequency 

cetaceans 

Mid-frequency 

cetaceans 

Highfrequency 

cetaceans 

Phocid 

pinnipeds 

Otariid 

pinnipeds 

PTS Isopleth (meters) 

Socket Drilling ...................................................................... 40 2.3 35 21.4 1.6 

Anchor Drilling ...................................................................... 73.6 4.1 64.5 39.4 2.9 

Vibratory Pile Driver (Removal of 30-inch and 24-inch 

steel piles) ........................................................................ 7.8 0.7 11.6 4.8 0.3 

Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 30-inch steel piles) ..... 12.4 1.1 18.4 7.6 0.5 

Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 36-inch steel piles) ..... 20.6 1.8 30.5 12.5 0.9 

Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 48-inch steel piles) ..... 32.7 2.9 48.4 19.9 1.4 

Impact Pile Driver ................................................................ 497.5 17.7 592.6 266.2 19.4 

Daily ensonified area (km 2) 

Socket Drilling ...................................................................... 0.003 0.000008 0.002 0.00078 0.000004 

Anchor Drilling ...................................................................... 0.02 0.00005 0.01 0.005 0.00003 

Vibratory Pile Driver (Removal of 30-inch and 24-inch 

steel piles) ........................................................................ 0.0001 0.0000008 0.0002 0.00004 0.0000001 

Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 30-inch steel piles) ..... 0.0002 0.000002 0.0005 0.00009 0.0000004 

Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 36-inch steel piles) ..... 0.001 0.00001 0.003 0.0005 0.000003 

Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 48-inch steel piles) ..... 0.003 0.00003 0.007 0.001 0.000006 

Impact Pile Driver ................................................................ 0.8 0.001 1.1 0.22 0.0019 

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. 

Potential exposures to impact pile 

driving, vibratory pile driving/removal 

and drilling noises for each acoustic 

threshold were estimated using group 

size estimates and local observational 

data. As previously stated, Level B take 

as well as small numbers of Level A take 

will be considered for this action. Level 

B and Level A take are calculated 

differently for some species based on 

monthly and daily sightings data based 

on Freitag (2017) and average group 

sizes within the action area. Below gives 

a description of estimated habitat use 

and group sizes for the eight species of 

marine mammals known to occur 

within the action area. 

Humpback Whale 

Humpback whales frequent the action 

area and could be encountered during 

any given day of dock construction. In 

the project vicinity, humpback whales 

typically occur in groups of 1–2 

animals, with an estimated maximum 

group size of four animals. Humpback 

whales can pass through the action area 

0–3 times a month (Freitag 2017). 

Minke Whale 

Minke whales are rare in the action 

area, but they could be encountered 

during any given day of dock 

construction. These whales are usually 

sighted individually or in small groups 

of 2–3, but there are reports of loose 

aggregations of hundreds of animals 

(NMFS 2018). Freitag (2017) estimates 

that a group of three whales may occur 

near or within the action over the fourmonth period. 

Killer Whales 

Killer whales pass through the action 

area and could be encountered during 

any given day of dock construction. In 

the project vicinity, typical killer whale 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 37481 

pod size varies from between 1–2 and 

7–10 individuals, with an estimated 

maximum group size of 10 animals. 

Killer whales are estimated to pass 

through the action area one time a 

month (Freitag 2017). 

Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 

Pacific white-sided dolphins are rare 

in the action area, but they could be 

encountered during any given day of 

dock construction (Freitag 2017). 

Pacific-white sided dolphins have been 

observed in Alaska waters in groups 

ranging from 20 to 164 animals (Muto et 

al 2016a). 

Dall’s Porpoise 

Dall’s porpoises are seen infrequently 

in the action area (Freitag 2017), but 

they could be encountered during any 

given day of dock construction. In the 

project vicinity, Dall’s porpoises 

typically occur in groups of 10–15 

animals, with an estimated maximum 

group size of 20 animals. Dall’s 

porpoises have been observed passing 

through the action area 0–1 times a 

month (Freitag 2017). 

Harbor Porpoise 

Harbor porpoises are seen 

infrequently in the action area, but they 

could be encountered during any given 

day of dock construction. In the project 

vicinity, harbor porpoises typically 

occur in groups of one to five animals, 

with an estimated maximum group size 

of eight animals. Harbor porpoises have 

been observed passing through the 

action area 0–1 times a month (Freitag 

2017). 

Harbor Seals 

Harbor seals are common in the action 

area and are expected to be encountered 

in low numbers during dock 

construction. In the action area harbor 

seals typically occur in groups of one to 

three animals, with an estimated 

maximum group size of three animals. 

Harbor seals can occur every day of the 

month in the project area (Freitag 2017). 

Steller Sea Lions 

Steller sea lions are common in the 

action area and are expected to be 

encountered in low numbers during 

dock construction. In the project 

vicinity Steller sea lions typically occur 

in groups of 1–10 animals (Freitag 

2017), with an estimated maximum 

group size of 80 animals (HDR 2003). 

Steller sea lions can occur every day of 

the month in the project area (Freitag 

2017). 

Take Calculation and Estimation 

Here we describe how the information 

provided above is brought together to 

produce a quantitative take estimate. 

Table 8 below shows take as a 

percentage of population for each of the 

species. 

Humpback Whale 

Based on observational and group 

data it is estimated that a group of 2 

humpback whales may occur within the 

Level B harassment zone three times 

each month over the four-month 

construction window during active pile 

driving (2 animals in a group × 3 groups 

each month × 4 months = 24 animals). 

Therefore, NMFS authorizes 24 Level B 

takes of humpback whales. 

Minke Whale 

Based on local sighting information 

(Freitag 2017), it is estimated that a 

group of three whales may occur within 

the Level B harassment zone once over 

the four-month construction window 

during active pile driving (three animals 

in a group × one group in four months 

= 3 animals). Therefore, NMFS 

authorizes three Level B takes of minke 

whale. 

Killer Whales 

Based on observational and group 

data it is estimated that a group of 10 

killer whales may occur within the 

Level B harassment zone one time each 

month over the four-month construction 

window during active pile driving (10 

animals in a group × 1 group each 

month × 4 months = 40 animals). 

Therefore, NMFS authorizes 40 Level B 

takes of killer whales. (To clarify, this 

request is for 40 takes from all stocks 

combined, not 40 takes from each 

stock). 

Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 

Based on observational and group 

data it is estimated that a group of 92 

(median between 20 and 164) Pacificwhite sided dolphins may occur within 

the Level B harassment zone once over 

the four-month construction window 

during active pile driving (92 animals in 

a group × one group in four months = 

92 animals). Therefore, NMFS 

authorizes 92 Level B takes of Pacific 

white-sided dolphins. 

Dall’s Porpoise 

Based on observational and group 

data it is estimated that a group of 15 

Dall’s porpoises may occur within the 

Level B harassment zone one time each 

month over the four-month construction 

window during active pile driving (15 

animals in a group × one group each 

month × four months = 60 animals). 

Therefore, NMFS authorizes 60 Level B 

takes of Dall’s porpoise. 

Harbor Porpoise 

Based on observational and group 

data it is conservatively estimated that 

a group of 5 harbor porpoise may occur 

within the Level B harassment zone one 

time each month over the four-month 

construction window during active pile 

driving (five animals in a group × one 

group each month × four months = 20 

animals). In addition, NMFS authorizes 

Level A take for two groups of harbor 

porpoises to safeguard against the 

possibility of PSOs not being able detect 

a group of harbor porpoises within their 

largest corresponding shutdown (see 

table 9). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 20 

Level B takes and 10 Level A takes of 

harbor porpoises. 

Harbor Seals 

Based on observational and group 

data it is conservatively estimated that 

two groups of three harbor seals may 

occur within the Level B harassment 

zone every day that pile driving may 

occur, and pile driving is estimated to 

occur on 29 days during the four-month 

long construction duration (three 

animals in a group × two groups per day 

× 29 days = 174 animals). In addition, 

NMFS authorizes Level A take for six 

groups of harbor seals to safeguard 

against the possibility of PSOs not being 

able detect a group of harbor seals 

within their largest corresponding 

shutdown zone (see Table 9). Therefore, 

NMFS authorizes 174 Level B takes and 

18 Level A takes of harbor seals. 

Steller Sea Lions 

Based on observational and group 

data it is estimated that a group of 10 

Steller sea lions may occur within the 

Level B harassment zone every day that 

pile driving may occur, and pile driving 

is estimated to occur on 29 days during 

the 4-month long construction duration 

(10 animals in a group × 20 days = 290 

animals). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 

290 Level B takes of Steller sea lions. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
37482 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 

TABLE 8—TAKE ESTIMATES AS A PERCENTAGE OF STOCK ABUNDANCE

Species Stock 

(NEST) a Level A Level B Percent of stock 

Humpback Whale ............................................ Hawaii DPS (11,398) b ................................... 0 b 22 0.20 

Mexico DPS (3,264) b ..................................... 2 0.03 

Minke Whale ................................................... Alaska (N/A) ................................................... 0 3 N/A 

Killer Whale ..................................................... Alaska Resident (2,347) ................................. 0 40 1.70 

Northern Resident (261) ................................ 15.33 

West Coast Transient (243) ........................... d 16.46 

Pacific White-Sided Dolphin ........................... North Pacific (26,880) .................................... 0 92 0.34 

Dall’s Porpoise ................................................ Alaska (83,400) .............................................. 0 60 0.07 

Harbor Porpoise .............................................. Southeast Alaska (975) c ................................ 10 20 3.07 

Harbor Seal ..................................................... Clarence Strait (31,634) ................................. 18 174 0.61 

Steller Sea Lion .............................................. Eastern U.S. (49,497) .................................... 0 290 0.59 

aStock estimate from Muto, M. M. et al. 2016. Appendix 2. Stock Summary Table (last revised 12.30.16). NOAA–TM–AFSC–355Muto,M.M., et 

al. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/ak_2016_sars_appendix_2.pdf unless otherwise noted. b Under the MMPA humpback whales are considered a single stock (Central North Pacific); however, we have divided them here to account for 

DPSs listed under the ESA. Based on calculations in Wade et al. 2016, 93.9 percent of the humpback whales in Southeast Alaska are expected 

to be from the Hawaii DPS and 61 percent are expected to be from the Mexico DPS. c In the SAR for harbor porpoise (NMFS 2017), NMFS identified population estimates and PBR for porpoises within inland Southeast Alaska 

waters (these abundance estimates have not been corrected for g(0); therefore, they are likely conservative. dThese percentages assume all 40 takes come from each individual stock, thus the percentage should be inflated if multiple stocks are actually impacted. 

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. 

The following mitigation measures are 

in the IHA: 

Timing Restrictions 

All work shall be conducted during 

daylight hours. If poor environmental 

conditions restrict visibility full 

visibility of the shutdown zone, pile 

installation would be delayed. 

Sound Attenuation 

To minimize noise during vibratory 

and impact pile driving, pile caps (pile 

softening material) shall be used. KDC 

shall use high-density polyethylene 

(HDPE) or ultra-high-molecular- weight 

polyethylene (UHMW) softening 

material on all templates to eliminate 

steel on steel noise generation. 

Shutdown Zone for in-water Heavy 

Machinery Work 

For in-water heavy machinery work 

(using, e.g., standard barges, tug boats, 

barge-mounted excavators, or clamshell 

equipment used to place or remove 

material), a minimum 10 meter 

shutdown zone shall be implemented. If 

a marine mammal comes within 10 

meters of such operations, operations 

shall cease and vessels shall reduce 

speed to the minimum level required to 

maintain steerage and safe working 

conditions. This type of work could 

include (but is not limited to) the 

following activities: (1) Movement of the 

barge to the pile location; (2) positioning 

of the pile on the substrate via a crane 

(i.e., stabbing the pile); or (3) removal of 

the pile from the water column/ 

substrate via a crane (i.e., deadpull). 

Additional Shutdown Zones 

For all pile driving/removal and 

drilling activities, KDC shall establish a 

shutdown zone for a marine mammal 

species that is greater than its 

corresponding Level A zone. The 

purpose of a shutdown zone is generally 

to define an area within which 

shutdown of the activity would occur 

upon sighting of a marine mammal (or 

in anticipation of an animal entering the 

defined area). The shutdown zones for 

each of the pile driving and drilling 

activities are listed below in Table 9. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 37483 

TABLE 9—SHUTDOWN ZONES

Source 

Shutdown zones (meters) 

Low-frequency 

cetaceans 

(humpback 

whale, 

minke whale) 

Mid-frequency 

cetaceans 

(killer whale, 

pacific-white 

sided dolphin) 

Highfrequency 

cetaceans 

(dall’s 

porpoise, 

harbor 

porpoise) 

Phocid 

(harbor seal) 

Otariid 

(sea lion) 

In-Water Construction Activities* 

In Water Heavy Construction (i.e., Barge movements, pile 

positioning, deadpulling, and sound attenuation) ............ 10 10 10 10 10 

Vibratory Pile Driving 

24-inch steel removal (2 piles) (∼1 hour on 1 day) ............. 25 25 25 25 25 

30-inch steel removal (6 piles) (∼1 hour per day on 2 

days) ................................................................................. 25 25 25 25 25 

36-inch steel removal (4 piles) (∼1 hour on 1 day) ............. 25 25 50 25 25 

30-inch steel temporary installation (16 piles) (∼2 hours 

per day on 4 days) ........................................................... 25 25 25 25 25 

30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (∼2 hours on 1 

day) ................................................................................... 25 25 25 25 25 

48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (∼2 hours 

per day on 9 days) ........................................................... 50 25 50 25 25 

Impact Pile Driving 

48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (∼15 minutes per day on 6 days) ................................................... 500 25 600 270 25 

Socketing Pile Installation (Drilling) 

30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (3 hours per 

day on 1 day) ................................................................... 50 25 50 25 25 

Anchor Pile Installation (Drilling) 

30-inch steel permanent installation (7.5 hours per day) .... 80 25 80 50 25 

Monitoring Zones 

KDC shall establish and observe a 

monitoring zone. The monitoring zones 

for this project are areas where SPLs are 

equal to or exceed 120 dB rms (for 

vibratory pile driving and drilling) and 

160 dB rms (for impact driving). These 

areas are equal to Level B harassment 

zones and are presented in Table 10 

below. These zones provide utility for 

monitoring conducted for mitigation 

purposes (i.e., shutdown zone 

monitoring) by establishing monitoring 

protocols for areas adjacent to the 

shutdown zones. Monitoring of 

disturbance zones enables observers to 

be aware of and communicate the 

presence of marine mammals in the 

project area, but outside the shutdown 

zone, and thus prepare for potential 

shutdowns of activity. However, the 

primary purpose of disturbance zone 

monitoring is for documenting instances 

of Level B harassment; disturbance zone 

monitoring is discussed in detail later 

(see Monitoring and Reporting). 

TABLE 10—MONITORING ZONES

Source 

Level B 

zones 

(meters) 

Level B 

zone 

(square 

kilometers) 

Vibratory Pile Driving 

24-inch steel removal (2 piles) (∼1 hour on 1 day) ................................................................................................. 6,215 5.9 

30-inch steel removal (6 piles) (∼1 hour per day on 2 days) .................................................................................. 6,215 5.9 

36-inch steel removal (4 piles) (∼1 hour on 1 day) ................................................................................................. 13,755 10.3 

30-inch steel temporary installation (16 piles) (∼2 hours per day on 4 days) ........................................................ 6,215 5.9 

30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (∼2 hours on 1 day) .......................................................................... 6,215 5.9 

48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (∼2 hours per day on 9 days) ....................................................... 13,755 10.3 

Impact Pile Driving 

48-inch steel (17 piles) (∼15 minutes per day on 6 days) ...................................................................................... 3,745 4.9 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
37484 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 

TABLE 10—MONITORING ZONES—Continued 

Source 

Level B 

zones 

(meters) 

Level B 

zone 

(square 

kilometers) 

Socketing Pile Installation (Drilling) 

30-inch steel (1 pile) (∼3 hours on 1 day) ............................................................................................................... 13,755 10.3 

Anchor Pile Installation (Drilling) 

30-inch steel (17 piles) (∼7.5 hours on 1 day) ........................................................................................................ 13,755 10.3 

Non-Authorized Take Prohibited 

If a species enters or approaches the 

Level B zone and that species is either 

not authorized for take or its authorized 

takes are met, pile driving, pile removal, 

and drilling 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 an observation time 

period of 15 minutes has elapsed. 

Soft Start 

The use of a soft-start procedure are 

believed to provide additional 

protection to marine mammals by 

providing warning and/or giving marine 

mammals a chance to leave the area 

prior to the impact hammer operating at 

full capacity. For impact pile driving, 

contractors shall be required to provide 

an initial set of strikes from the hammer 

at 40 percent energy, each strike 

followed by no less than a 30-second 

waiting period. This procedure shall be 

conducted a total of three times before 

impact pile driving begins. Soft Start is 

not required during vibratory pile 

driving/removal or drilling activities. 

Pre-Activity Monitoring 

Prior to the start of daily in-water 

construction activity, or whenever a 

break in pile driving or drilling of 30 

minutes or longer occurs, the observer 

shall observe the shutdown and 

monitoring zones for a period of 30 

minutes. The shutdown zone shall be 

cleared when a marine mammal has not 

been observed within the zone for that 

30-minute period. If a marine mammal 

is observed within the shutdown zone, 

a soft-start cannot proceed until the 

animal has left the zone or has not been 

observed for 15 minutes. If the 

Monitoring zone has been observed for 

30 minutes and non-permitted species 

are not present within the zone, soft 

start procedures can commence and 

work can continue even if visibility 

becomes impaired within the 

Monitoring zone. When a marine 

mammal permitted for Level B take is 

present in the Monitoring zone, pile 

driving, pile removal, and drilling 

activities may begin and Level B take 

shall be recorded. As stated above, if the 

entire Level B zone is not visible at the 

start of construction, piling or drilling 

activities can begin. As shown, the 

largest Level B zone is equal to 78.9 

km2, making it impossible for the PSOs 

to view the entire harassment area. Due 

to this, Level B exposures shall be 

recorded and extrapolated based upon 

the number of observed take and the 

percentage of the Level B zone that was 

not visible. If work ceases for more than 

30 minutes, the pre-activity monitoring 

of both the Monitoring zone and 

shutdown zone shall commence. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s measures, as well as other 

measures considered by NMFS, NMFS 

has determined that the 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 shall result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present in the action area. Effective 

reporting is critical both to compliance 

as well as ensuring that the most value 

is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density). 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) Action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

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

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

of marine mammal species with the 

action; or (4) biological or behavioral 

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

feeding areas). 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors. 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks. 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat). 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Visual Monitoring 

Monitoring would be conducted 30 

minutes before, during, and 30 minutes 

after all pile driving/removal and 

drilling activities. In addition, observers 

shall record all incidents of marine 

mammal occurrence, regardless of 

distance from activity, and shall 

document any behavioral reactions in 

concert with distance from piles being 

driven, removed, or pile holes being 

drilled. Pile driving and drilling 

activities include the time to install, 

remove, or drill a hole for 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. 

Monitoring shall be conducted by 

NMFS approved Protected Species 

Observers (PSOs). The number of PSOs 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 37485 

shall vary from two to four, depending 

on the type of pile driving/drilling and 

size of pile, which determines the size 

of the harassment zones. Two landbased PSOs shall monitor during all 

impact pile driving activity, three landbased PSOs shall monitor during 

vibratory pile driving/removal of of 24 

and 30-inch piles, and four land-based 

PSOs shall monitor during vibratory 

pile driving/removal of 36-inch and 48- 

inch diameter piles and during all 

socket and anchor drilling. 

One PSO shall be stationed at Berth 

IV and shall be able to view across 

Tongass Narrows south and west to 

Gravina Island. The second and third 

PSOs shall be located in increments 

along the road systems at locations that 

provide the best vantage points for 

viewing Tongass Narrows west and east 

of Berth IV. These locations shall vary 

depending on type of pile driving. The 

fourth PSO shall be located on the road 

system near Mountain Point and shall 

be able to view Tongass Narrows to the 

northwest and Revillagigedo Channel to 

the southeast. 

PSOs shall scan the waters using 

binoculars, and/or spotting scopes, and 

shall use a handheld GPS or rangefinder device to verify the distance to 

each sighting from the project site. All 

PSOs shall be trained in marine 

mammal identification and behaviors 

and are required to have no other 

project-related tasks while conducting 

monitoring. In addition, monitoring 

shall be conducted by qualified 

observers, who shall be placed at the 

best vantage point(s) practicable to 

monitor for marine mammals and 

implement shutdown/delay procedures 

when applicable by calling for the 

shutdown to the hammer operator. 

Qualified observers are trained and/or 

experienced professionals, with the 

following minimum qualifications: 

• At least one PSO must have prior 

experience working as a marine 

mammal observer during construction 

activities; 

• Independent observers (i.e., not 

construction personnel); 

• Other PSOs may substitute 

education (degree in biological science 

or related field) or training for 

experience; 

• 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; 

• KDC shall submit PSO CVs for 

approval by NMFS; KDC shall ensure 

that observers have the following 

additional qualifications: 

• 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; 

• Ability to conduct field 

observations and collect data according 

to assigned protocols; 

• Experience or training in the field 

identification of marine mammals, 

including the identification of 

behaviors; 

• Sufficient training, orientation, or 

experience with the construction 

operation to provide for personal safety 

during observations; 

• 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; 

• 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; and 

• Sufficient training, orientation, or 

experience with the construction 

operations to provide for personal safety 

during observations. 

KDC shall submit a draft report to 

NMFS not later than 90 days following 

the end of construction activities. KDC 

shall provide a final report within 30 

days following resolution of NMFS’ 

comments on the draft report. Reports 

shall contain, at minimum, the 

following: 

• Date and time that monitored 

activity begins and ends for each day 

conducted (monitoring period); 

• Construction activities occurring 

during each daily observation period, 

including how many and what type of 

piles driven; 

• Deviation from initial proposal in 

pile numbers, pile types, average 

driving times, etc.; 

• Weather parameters in each 

monitoring period (e.g., wind speed, 

percent cloud cover, visibility); 

• Water conditions in each 

monitoring period (e.g., sea state, tide 

state); 

• For each marine mammal sighting: 

• Species, numbers, and, if possible, 

sex and age class of marine mammals; 

• Description of any observable 

marine mammal behavior patterns, 

including bearing and direction of travel 

and distance from pile driving activity; 

• Location and distance from pile 

driving activities to marine mammals 

and distance from the marine mammals 

to the observation point; 

• Estimated amount of time that the 

animals remained in the Level B zone; 

• Description of implementation of 

mitigation measures within each 

monitoring period (e.g., shutdown or 

delay); 

• Other human activity in the area 

within each monitoring period; and 

• A summary of the following: 

• Total number of individuals of each 

species detected within the Level B 

Zone, and estimated as taken if 

correction factor appropriate; 

• Total number of individuals of each 

species detected within the Level A 

Zone and the average amount of time 

that they remained in that zone; and 

• Daily average number of 

individuals of each species 

(differentiated by month as appropriate) 

detected within the Level B Zone, and 

estimated as taken, if appropriate. 

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). 

As stated in the mitigation section, 

shutdown zones, greater than Level A 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
37486 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 

harassment zones, shall be 

implemented. Level A take is only 

authorized as a precautionary measure 

for two species (harbor seals and harbor 

porpoises) in case PSOs are unable to 

detect them within their larger 

shutdown zones while impact piling 48- 

inch steel piles. 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. 

To minimize noise during vibratory 

and impact pile driving, KDC shall use 

pile caps (pile softening material). Much 

of the noise generated during pile 

installation comes from contact between 

the pile being driven and the steel 

template used to hold the pile in place. 

The contractor shall use high-density 

polyethylene (HDPE) or ultra-highmolecular-weight polyethylene 

(UHMW) softening material on all 

templates to eliminate steel on steel 

noise generation. 

During all impact driving, 

implementation of soft start procedures 

and monitoring of established shutdown 

zones shall be required, significantly 

reducing any possibility of injury. Given 

sufficient notice through use of soft start 

(for impact driving), marine mammals 

are expected to move away from an 

irritating sound source prior to it 

becoming potentially injurious. In 

addition, PSOs shall be stationed within 

the action area whenever pile driving 

and drilling operations are underway. 

Depending on the activity, KDC shall 

employ the use of two to four PSOs to 

ensure all monitoring and shutdown 

zones are properly observed. 

Although the expansion of Berth IV’s 

facilities would have some permanent 

removal of habitat available to marine 

mammals, the area lost would 

negligible. Most of the project footprint 

would be within previously disturbed 

areas adjacent to existing Berth IV 

structures and within an active marine 

commercial and industrial area. There 

are no known pinniped haulouts near 

the action area. 

In addition, impacts to marine 

mammal prey species are expected to be 

minor and temporary. Overall, the area 

impacted by the project is very small 

compared to the available habitat 

around Ketchikan. The most likely 

impact to prey will be temporary 

behavioral avoidance of the immediate 

area. During pile driving and drilling, it 

is expected that fish and marine 

mammals would temporarily move to 

nearby locations and return to the area 

following cessation of in-water 

construction activities. Therefore, 

indirect effects on marine mammal prey 

during the construction are not expected 

to be substantial. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our determination that the impacts 

resulting from this activity are not 

expected to adversely affect the species 

or stock through effects on annual rates 

of recruitment or survival: 

• Mortality is neither anticipated nor 

authorized for the project; 

• The impacts to marine mammal 

habitat that are anticipated are minimal; 

• The action area is located in an 

industrial and commercial marina; 

• The project area does not include 

any rookeries, or known areas or 

features of special significance for 

foraging or reproduction in the project 

area; 

• The anticipated incidents of Level B 

harassment consist of, at worst, 

temporary modifications in behavior; 

and 

• The required mitigation measures 

(i.e. shutdown zones and pile caps) are 

anticipated to be effective in reducing 

the impacts 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 

monitoring and mitigation measures, 

NMFS finds that the total marine 

mammal take from the 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. 

Take of eight of the ten marine 

mammal stocks authorized for take is 

approximately three percent or less of 

the stock abundance. For northern 

resident and west coast transient killer 

whales, we acknowledge that 15.33 

percent and 16.46 percent of the stocks 

are to be taken by Level B harassment, 

respectively. However, since three 

stocks of killer whales could occur in 

the action area, the 40 total killer whale 

takes are likely split among the three 

stocks. Nonetheless, since NMFS does 

not have a good way to predict exactly 

how take will be split, NMFS analyzed 

at the most conservative scenario, which 

is that all 40 takes could potentially 

occur to each of the three stocks. This 

is a highly unlikely scenario to occur 

and the percentages of each stock taken 

are predicted to be significantly lower 

than values presented in Table 8 for 

killer whales. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the activity (including the 

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. 

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. To ensure 

ESA compliance for the issuance of 

IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this 

case with NMFS’ Alaska Regional 

Office, whenever we propose to 

authorize take for endangered or 

threatened species. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 1, 2018 / Notices 37487 

NMFS’s Alaska Region issued a 

Biological Opinion on July 26, 2018 to 

NMFS’s Office of Protected Resources 

which concluded that the Ketchikan 

Berth IV Expansion project is not likely 

to jeopardize the continued existence of 

Mexico DPS humpback whales or 

adversely modify critical habitat 

because none exists within the action 

area. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

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

NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 

216–6A, NMFS must review our action 

(i.e., the issuance of an incidental 

harassment authorization) with respect 

to potential impacts on the human 

environment. This action is consistent 

with categories of activities identified in 

Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental 

harassment authorizations with no 

anticipated serious injury or mortality) 

of the Companion Manual for NOAA 

Administrative Order 216–6A, which do 

not individually or cumulatively have 

the potential for significant impacts on 

the quality of the human environment 

and for which we have not identified 

any extraordinary circumstances that 

would preclude this categorical 

exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has 

determined that the issuance of the IHA 

qualifies to be categorically excluded 

from further NEPA review. 

Authorization 

As a result of these determinations, 

we have issued an IHA to ADOT&PF for 

conducting the described construction 

activities related to city dock and ferry 

terminal improvements from June 1, 

2019 through May 31, 2020 provided 

the previously described mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting requirements 

are incorporated. 

Dated: July 27, 2018. 

Elaine T. Saiz, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected 

Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16473 Filed 7–31–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

United States Patent and Trademark 

Office 

[Docket No. PTO–P–2018–0046] 

Patent Public Advisory Committee 

Public Hearing on the Proposed Patent 

Fee Schedule 

AGENCY: United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public hearing. 

SUMMARY: Under Section 10 of the 

America Invents Act (AIA), the United 

States Patent and Trademark Office 

(USPTO) may set or adjust by rule any 

patent or trademark fee established, 

authorized, or charged, respectively. 

The USPTO currently is planning to 

propose to set or adjust patent fees 

pursuant to its Section 10 fee setting 

authority. As part of the rulemaking 

process to set or adjust patent fees, the 

Patent Public Advisory Committee 

(PPAC) is required under Section 10 of 

the AIA to hold a public hearing about 

any proposed patent fees, and the 

USPTO is required to assist PPAC in 

carrying out that hearing. To that end, 

the USPTO will make its proposed 

patent fees available as set forth in the 

Supplementary Information section of 

this Notice before any PPAC hearing 

and will help the PPAC to notify the 

public about the hearing. Accordingly, 

this document announces the dates and 

logistics for the PPAC public hearing 

regarding USPTO proposed patent fees. 

Interested members of the public are 

invited to testify at the hearing and/or 

submit written comments about the 

proposed patent fees and the questions 

posed on PPAC’s website about the 

proposed fees. 

DATES: Public hearing: September 6, 

2018. 

Comments: For those wishing to 

submit written comments on the fee 

proposal that will be published by 

August 29, 2018, the deadline for 

receipt of those written comments is 

September 13, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Public hearing: The PPAC 

will hold a public hearing on September 

6, 2018 beginning at 9:00 a.m., Eastern 

Standard Time (EST), and ending at 

11:00 a.m., EST, at the USPTO, Madison 

Auditorium North, Concourse Level, 

Madison Building, 600 Dulany Street, 

Alexandria, Virginia 22314. 

Written comments may be submitted 

by email addressed to fee.setting@

uspto.gov or by postal mail to United 

States Patent and Trademark Office, 

Mail Stop CFO, P.O. Box 1450, 

Alexandria, VA 22313–1450, ATTN: 

Brendan Hourigan. 

Although comments may be 

submitted by postal mail, the USPTO 

prefers to receive comments via email. 

Written comments should be identified 

in the subject line of the email or postal 

mailing as ‘‘Fee Setting.’’ 

Because comments will be made 

available for public inspection, 

information that is not desired to be 

made public, such as an address or 

telephone number, should not be 

included in the comments. 

Web cast: The public hearing will be 

available via Web cast. Information 

about the Web cast will be posted on the 

USPTO’s internet website 

(www.uspto.gov/about-us/performanceand-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting) 

before the public hearing. 

Transcripts: Transcript of the hearing 

will be available on the USPTO internet 

website (www.uspto.gov/about-us/ 

performance-and-planning/fee-settingand-adjusting) shortly after the hearing. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brendan Hourigan, Office of the Chief 

Financial Officer, by phone (571) 272– 

8966, or by email at brendan.hourigan@

uspto.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective 

September 16, 2011, with the passage of 

the AIA, the USPTO is authorized under 

Section 10 of the AIA to set or adjust by 

rule all patent and trademark fees 

established, authorized, or charged 

under Title 35 of the United States Code 

and the Trademark Act of 1946, 

respectively. Patent and trademark fees 

set or adjusted by rule under Section 10 

of the AIA may only recover the 

aggregate estimated costs to the Office 

for processing, activities, services, and 

materials relating to patents and 

trademarks, respectively, including 

administrative costs of the Office with 

respect to each as the case may be. 

Congress set forth the process for the 

USPTO to follow in setting or adjusting 

patent and trademark fees by rule under 

Section 10 of the AIA, including 

additional procedural steps in the 

rulemaking proceeding for the issuance 

of regulations under this section. In 

particular, Congress requires the 

relevant advisory committee to hold a 

public hearing about the USPTO fee 

proposals after receiving them from the 

agency. Congress likewise requires the 

relevant advisory committee to prepare 

a written report on the proposed fees 

and the USPTO to consider the relevant 

advisory committee’s report before 

finally setting or adjusting the fees. 

Presently, the USPTO is planning to 

exercise its fee setting authority to set or 

adjust patent fees. As part of the 

rulemaking proceeding for the issuance 

of regulations under Section 10, the 

USPTO will publish a proposed patent 

fee schedule and related supplementary 

information for public viewing no later 

than August 29, 2018, on the USPTO 

internet website (address: 

www.uspto.gov/about-us/performanceand-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting). 

In turn, the PPAC will hold a public 

hearing about the proposed patent fee 

schedule on the date indicated herein. 

The USPTO will assist the PPAC in 

holding the hearing by providing 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES