Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36773 

Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical 

order under Arachnids: 

■ a. Spider, ivory ornamental tiger; 

■ b. Spider, ornate tiger; 

■ c. Spider, Pedersen’s tiger; 

■ d. Spider, Smith’s tiger; and 

■ e. Spider, Sri Lanka ornamental tiger. 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened 

wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

Common name Scientific name Where listed Status Listing citations and 

applicable rules 

*******

ARACHNIDS

* * * * * * * 

Spider, ivory ornamental tiger .......... Poecilotheria subfusca ........ Wherever found ................... E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register 

page where the document begins], 7/31/2018. 

*******

Spider, ornate tiger .......................... Poecilotheria ornata ............. Wherever found ................... E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register 

page where the document begins], 7/31/2018. 

Spider, Pedersen’s tiger ................... Poecilotheria vittata ............. Wherever found ................... E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register 

page where the document begins], 7/31/2018. 

Spider, Smith’s tiger ......................... Poecilotheria smithi ............. Wherever found ................... E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register 

page where the document begins], 7/31/2018. 

*******

Spider, Sri Lanka ornamental tiger .. Poecilotheria fasciata .......... Wherever found ................... E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register 

page where the document begins], 7/31/2018. 

*******

* * * * * 

Dated: May 29, 2018. 

James W. Kurth, 

Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Exercising the Authority of the 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16359 Filed 7–30–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 217 

[Docket No. 170908887–8622–02] 

RIN 0648–BH24 

Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 

Incidental to U.S. Navy Pier 

Construction Activities at Naval 

Submarine Base New London 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Upon application from the 

U.S. Navy (Navy), NMFS is issuing 

regulations under the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act for the taking of marine 

mammals incidental to the pier 

construction activities conducted at the 

Naval Submarine Base New London in 

Groton, Connecticut, over the course of 

five years (2020–2025). These 

regulations allow NMFS to issue a Letter 

of Authorization (LOA) for the 

incidental take of marine mammals 

during the specified construction 

activities carried out during the rule’s 

period of effectiveness, set forth the 

permissible methods of taking, set forth 

other means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact on marine 

mammal species or stocks and their 

habitat, and set forth requirements 

pertaining to the monitoring and 

reporting of the incidental take. 

DATES: Effective March 1, 2020 through 

February 28, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: To obtain an electronic 

copy of the Navy’s LOA application or 

other referenced documents, visit the 

internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ 

permits/incidental/construction.htm. In 

case of problems accessing these 

documents, please call the contact listed 

below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shane Guan, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS; phone: (301) 427– 

8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Regulatory 

Action 

This final rule establishes a 

framework under the authority of the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) to allow 

for the authorization of take of marine 

mammals incidental to the Navy’s 

construction activities related to marine 

structure maintenance and pile 

replacement at a facility in Groton, 

Connecticut. 

We received an application from the 

Navy requesting five-year regulations 

and authorization to take multiple 

species of marine mammals. Take 

would occur by Level A and Level B 

harassment incidental to impact and 

vibratory pile driving. Please see 

‘‘Background’’ below for definitions of 

harassment. 

Legal Authority for the Proposed Action 

Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA (16 

U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A)) directs the 

Secretary of Commerce 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 for up to five years 

if, after notice and public comment, the 

agency makes certain findings and 

issues regulations that set forth 

permissible methods of taking pursuant 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36774 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

to that activity and other means of 

effecting the ‘‘least practicable adverse 

impact’’ on the affected species or 

stocks and their habitat (see the 

discussion below in the ‘‘Proposed 

Mitigation’’ section), as well as 

monitoring and reporting requirements. 

Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA and 

the implementing regulations at 50 CFR 

part 216, subpart I, provide the legal 

basis for issuing this proposed rule 

containing five-year regulations, and for 

any subsequent letters of authorization 

(LOAs). As directed by this legal 

authority, this final rule contains 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

requirements. 

Summary of Major Provisions Within 

the Final Rule 

Following is a summary of the major 

provisions of this final rule regarding 

Navy construction activities. These 

measures include: 

• Required monitoring of the 

construction areas to detect the presence 

of marine mammals before beginning 

construction activities. 

• Shutdown of construction activities 

under certain circumstances to avoid 

injury of marine mammals. 

• Soft start for impact pile driving to 

allow marine mammals the opportunity 

to leave the area prior to beginning 

impact pile driving at full power. 

Background 

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

Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 

as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et 

seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce 

(Secretary) to allow, upon request, the 

incidental, but not intentional taking of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) if certain findings 

are made and regulations are issued or, 

if the taking is limited to harassment, 

notice of a proposed authorization is 

provided to the public for review. 

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 taking 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 March 22, 2017, NMFS received 

an application from the Navy requesting 

authorization to incidentally take harbor 

and gray seals, by Level A and Level B 

harassment, incidental to noise 

exposure resulting from conducting pier 

construction activities at the Navy 

Submarine Base New London in Groton, 

Connecticut, from October 2018 to 

March 2022. These regulations would be 

valid for a period of five years. On 

August 31, 2017, NMFS deemed the 

application adequate and complete. On 

May 23, 2018, the Navy requested that 

the rule be valid between March 1, 

2020, and February 28, 2025, due to 

construction schedule changes. 

The use of sound sources such as 

those described in the application (e.g., 

piledriving) may result in the take of 

marine mammals through disruption of 

behavioral patterns or may cause 

auditory injury of marine mammals. 

Therefore, incidental take authorization 

under the MMPA is warranted. 

Description of the Specified Activity 

Overview 

The Navy is planning to demolish 

Pier 32 and Pier 10 and construct a new 

Pier 32 at Naval Submarine Base New 

London (SUBASE), Groton, Connecticut. 

Recent Global Shore Infrastructure 

Plans and Regional Shore Infrastructure 

Plans identified a requirement for 11 

adequate submarine berths at SUBASE. 

There are currently six adequate berths 

available via Piers 6, 17, and 31, leaving 

a shortfall of five adequate berths. The 

remaining submarine berthing piers (8, 

10, 12, 32, and 33) are classified as 

inadequate because of their narrow 

width and short length compared to 

current SSN (hull classification) 

berthing design standards (Unified 

Facilities Criteria 4–152–01, Design 

Standards for Piers and Wharves). 

The Proposed Action is to demolish 

Pier 32 and Pier 10, and replace them 

with a new Pier 32 that meets all current 

Navy SSN pier standards to 

accommodate Virginia Class 

submarines. The Proposed Action 

includes: 

• Construction of a new, larger Pier 

32 to be located approximately 150 feet 

(ft) north of the current location. 

• Upgrade of the quaywall, north of 

Pier 32, may be required to 

accommodate a crane weight test area. 

• Demolition of existing Pier 32 and 

Pier 10. 

• Dredging of the sediment mounds 

beneath the existing Pier 32 

(approximately 9,400 cubic yards [cy]) 

and the existing Pier 10 (approximately 

10,000 cy) to a depth of 36 ft below 

mean lower low water (¥36 ft MLLW) 

plus 2 ft of over dredge (additional 

dredge depth that allows for varying 

degrees of accuracy of different types of 

dredging equipment). Any remaining 

timber piles beneath the existing piers 

would be pulled with a strap. 

• Dredging of the berthing areas 

alongside the proposed new Pier 32 

(approximately 74,000 sq ft) to a depth 

of ¥38 feet MLLW plus 2 feet of over 

dredge. 

• Dredging of two additional areas 

(approximately 10,200 cy and 31,100 cy) 

in the Thames River navigation channel 

to a depth of ¥36 ft MLLW plus 2 ft of 

over dredge. 

Two species of marine mammals are 

expected to potentially be present in the 

Thames River near SUBASE: Harbor 

seal (Phoca vitulina) and gray seal 

(Halichoeris grypus). Harbor seals and 

gray seals are more likely to occur at 

SUBASE from September to May. 

Dates and Duration 

Pile installation for the new Pier 32 

and pile removal associated with the 

demolition of the existing Piers 32 and 

10 is expected to take a total of 

approximately 3.5 years. Construction 

and demolition activities are expected 

to begin no earlier than March 2020 and 

proceed to completion in February 

2025. 

In-water activities expected to result 

in incidental takes of marine mammals 

would occur during approximately 35 

non-consecutive months of the project 

beginning in March 2020. The estimated 

duration of pile installation and 

removal, including duration of the 

vibratory and impact hammer activities, 

is provided in Table 1 below for each 

year of construction and demolition. 

Also included in the Table are the 

durations for wood piles and steel 

fender piles to be pulled by a crane 

using a sling or strap attached to the 

pile. The durations of proposed pile 

driving/removal activities are primarily 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36775 

derived from information provided by 

Naval Facilities Engineering Command 

(NAVFAC) Mid-Atlantic Public Works 

Department, Facilities Engineering and 

Acquisition Department (FEAD) Design 

Manager and the record of pile driving 

activities documented during the 

construction of SUBASE Pier 31 

(American Bridge 2010–2011). The 

proposed new Pier 32 would be 

comparable to Pier 31 in design and 

location and would have similar subsurface geological conditions along this 

reach of the Thames River. 

Specified Geographical Region 

SUBASE is located in the towns of 

Groton and Ledyard in New London 

County, Connecticut. SUBASE occupies 

approximately 687 acres along the east 

bank of the Thames River, 6 mi north of 

the river’s mouth at Long Island Sound 

(Figure 1–1 in LOA application). The 

Thames River is the easternmost of 

Connecticut’s three major rivers and is 

formed by the confluence of the 

Shetucket and Yantic rivers in Norwich, 

from which it flows south for 12 mi to 

New London Harbor. The Thames River 

discharges freshwater and sediment 

from the interior of eastern Connecticut 

into Long Island Sound. It is the main 

drainage of the Thames River Major 

Drainage Basin, which encompasses 

approximately 3,900 square mi of 

eastern Connecticut and central 

Massachusetts (USACE 2015). The 

lower Thames River and New London 

Harbor sustains a variety of military, 

commercial, and recreational vessel 

usage. New London Harbor provides 

protection to a number of these. 

Detailed Description of Specified 

Activity 

1. Construction of New Pier 32 

Pile driving would most likely be 

conducted using a barge and crane. 

However, the contractor may choose to 

use a temporary pile-supported work 

trestle that would be constructed by 

driving approximately 60 steel 14-inch 

diameter H-piles. 

Structural support piles for Pier 32 

would consist of approximately 120 

concrete-filled steel pipe piles 

measuring 36 inches in diameter. The 

piles would be driven between 40 ft 

below the mudline near the shore and 

150 ft below the mudline at the end of 

the pier. Fender piles would also be 

installed and would consist of 

approximately 194 fiberglass-reinforced 

plastic piles measuring 16 inches in 

diameter. 

Special construction features would 

include drilling rock sockets into 

bedrock in an estimated 60 places to 

hold the piles. A rotary drill using a 

rock core barrel and rock muck bucket 

would be used inside of the steel pipe 

piles to drill a minimum of 2 ft down 

into bedrock to create the rock socket 

that would be filled with concrete. 

Sediment would be lifted out and redeposited within 10 ft of the pipe pile 

during rock socket drilling. Underwater 

noise from the rock drill as it is operated 

inside a steel pipe would be much less 

than that produced by vibratory and 

impact pile driving of the steel pipes 

(Martin et al. 2012). 

Impact and vibratory hammers would 

be used for installing piles where rock 

sockets are not required. Based on 

previous construction projects at 

SUBASE, it is estimated that an average 

of one 36-inch pile per week (with 

driving on multiple days) and two 

plastic piles per day would be installed. 

The per-pile drive time for each pile 

type and method will vary based on 

environmental conditions (including 

substrate) where each pile is driven. 

Impact or vibratory pile driving may 

result in harassment of marine 

mammals. 

Construction of Pier 32 may also 

require upgrade of the quaywall north of 

Pier 32 to provide the reinforcement 

needed to support a crane weight test 

area. Because there is potential that a 

work trestle would be used and the 

requirement for the upgrade will not be 

determined until final design, the pile 

driving is included in the analyzed 

activities. The quaywall upgrade would 

include up to approximately eighteen 

30-inch diameter concrete-filled steel 

pipe piles that would be installed into 

rock sockets driven into bedrock 

adjacent and parallel to the existing 

steel sheet pile wall. Pile caps and a 

concrete deck would be installed above 

the piles. A fender system composed of 

approximately nine 16-inch diameter 

plastic piles would also be installed into 

rock sockets approximately 2 ft in front 

of the new deck. 

2. Demolition and Removal of Pier 32 

and Pier 10 

When the new Pier 32 is operational, 

the existing Pier 32 would be 

demolished using a floating crane and a 

series of barges. Pier 10 would be 

demolished after the demolition of 

existing Pier 32. The concrete decks of 

the piers would be cut into pieces and 

placed on the barges. Demolition debris 

would be sorted and removed by barge 

and recycled to the maximum extent 

practicable. Any residual waste would 

be disposed of offsite in accordance 

with applicable federal, state, and local 

regulations. Once the decks are 

removed, the steel H piles and pipe 

piles that support the existing pier 

would be pulled using a vibratory 

extraction method (hammer). The 

vibratory hammer would be attached to 

the pile head with a clamp. Once 

attached, vibration would be applied to 

the pile that would liquefy the adjacent 

sediment allowing the pile to be 

removed. 

Demolition of existing Pier 32 would 

include the removal by vibratory driverextractor (hammer) of approximately 60 

steel piles from the temporary work 

trestle, 120 concrete-encased steel Hpiles, and 70 steel H-piles. Fifty-six 

wood piles would be pulled with a 

sling. Demolition of Pier 10 would 

include the removal by vibratory 

hammer of 24 concrete-encased, steel Hpiles and 166 cast-in-place, reinforced 

concrete piles. Eighty-four steel fender 

piles and 41 wood piles would be 

pulled with a sling. A total of 440 piles 

would be removed by vibratory hammer 

for both piers and the work trestle. 

3. Dredging of Pier Areas and 

Navigation Channel 

The Proposed Action would also 

include dredging of approximately 

60,000 cy of sediment in two areas of 

the Thames River navigation channel 

near Pier 32, the berthing areas 

alongside the new Pier 32, and 

underneath existing Pier 32 and Pier 10 

after demolition. All dredging for the 

Proposed Action would support safe 

maneuvering for entry and departure of 

submarines at the proposed new Pier 32 

and existing Piers 8, 12, 17, and 31. The 

proposed design dredge depth in all 

areas to be dredged is ¥36 ft relative to 

MLLW plus 2 ft of over dredge. 

Dredging would be conducted in two 

phases. Dredging of the new Pier 32 area 

and the northern portion of the channel 

dredge areas would be conducted in the 

first construction year. The footprints of 

the demolished Pier 32 and Pier 10 and 

the southern portions of the channel 

dredge areas would be dredged after 

demolition of the existing piers in the 

fourth year of construction. Dredging 

would occur only during the period 

between October 1 and January 31 to 

avoid potential impacts on shellfish and 

fisheries resources in the area. Each 

dredging and disposal phase would take 

approximately 2 weeks to complete. 

After the demolition of Pier 32, any 

remnant timber piles present 

underneath existing Pier 32 would be 

pulled with a strap. The sediment 

mound that has formed beneath the pier 

would be dredged (approximately 9,400 

cy) to the design depth. Dredging would 

also be required immediately west of 

Piers 31 and 32 (approximately 10,200 

cy) and along the eastern edge 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36776 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

(approximately 31,100 cy) of the 

navigation channel to achieve the 

required minimum depths to maneuver 

the submarines. Once the existing Pier 

10 and any remnant timber piles are 

removed, the sediment mound beneath 

the old pier would be dredged 

(approximately 10,000 cy). 

Since dredging and disposal activities 

would be slow moving and conspicuous 

to marine mammals, they pose 

negligible risks of physical injury. An 

environmental bucket would be used for 

dredging to minimize turbidity 

compared with the turbidity generated 

by hydraulic dredging. Noise emitted by 

dredging equipment is broadband, with 

most energy below 1 kilohertz (kHz), 

and would be similar to that generated 

by vessels and maritime industrial 

activities that regularly operate within 

the action area (Clarke et al. 2002; Todd 

et al. 2015). Due to the low noise output 

and slow and steady transiting nature of 

the dredging activity, NMFS does not 

consider it would result to the level of 

harassment under the MMPA. 

Therefore, dredging is not considered 

further in this document. 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FOR THE NAVY SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON

Activity Pile No. Pile type Method Piles/day 

Total 

driving 

days 

Strike number 

(impact) or 

duration(s) per pile 

Duration 

Year 1 

Pier 32 construction ..... 60 14′′ steel H-pile temp. work 

trestle.

Impact .................................... 4 15 1,000 strikes ......... 3 weeks. 

60 36′′ x 100′ concrete-filled 

steel pipe piles.

Vibratory hammer & rock 

socket drilling.

0.5 120 1,200 seconds ...... 6 months. 

20 36′′ x 180′ concrete-filled 

steel piles.

Vibratory hammer .................. 0.2 100 1,800 seconds ...... 5 months. 

20 36′′ x 180′ concrete-filled 

steel piles.

Impact hammer to last 20–40 

ft.

2.5 8 1,000 strikes ......... 2 weeks. 

Quaywall upgrade ........ 18 30′′ x 100′ concrete-filled 

steel pipe piles.

Rock socket drilling ............... 0.5 36 15,000 seconds .... Concurrent with 

Pier 32. 

9 16′′ fiberglass reinforced plastic piles.Rock socket drilling ............... 0.5 18 7,500 seconds..

Year 2 

Pier 32 construction ..... 40 36′′ x 180′ concrete-filled 

steel piles.

Vibratory hammer .................. 0.2 200 1,800 seconds ...... 10 months. 

40 36′′ x 180′ concrete-filled 

steel piles.

Impact hammer to drive last 

20–40 ft.

2.5 16 1,000 strikes ......... 3.5 weeks. 

Year 3 

Pier 32 construction ..... 194 16′′ fiberglass reinforced plastic piles.Vibratory hammer .................. 2 97 1,200 seconds ...... 5 months. 

64 16′′ fiberglass reinforced plastic piles.Impact hammer to drive last 

20–40 ft.

2.5 26 1,000 strikes ......... 1.5 months. 

Year 4 

Pier 32 demolition ........ 60 14′′ steel H-piles temp. work 

trestle.

Vibratory hammer (removal) .. 5 14 1,200 seconds ...... 3 weeks. 

24 33′′ concrete-encased steel H 

piles.

Vibratory hammer (removal) .. 2 12 1,200 seconds ...... 3.5 months. 

96 24′′ concrete-encased steel H 

piles.

Vibratory hammer (removal) .. 2 48 1,200 seconds..

70 14′′ steel H piles .................... Vibratory hammer (removal) .. 5 14 1,200 seconds..

Pier 10 demolition ........ 24 24′′ concrete-encased steel H 

piles.

Vibratory hammer (removal) .. 9.5 2.5 1,200 seconds ...... 0.5 month. 

166 24′′ cast-in-place reinforced 

concrete piles.

Vibratory hammer (removal) .. 9.5 17.5 1,200 seconds ...... 0.5 month. 

Prescribed mitigation, monitoring, 

and reporting measures are described in 

detail later in this document (please see 

‘‘Mitigation’’ and ‘‘Monitoring and 

Reporting’’). 

Comments and Responses 

NMFS published a proposed rule in 

the Federal Register on April 13, 2018 

(83 FR 16027). During the 30-day public 

comment period on the proposed rule, 

NMFS received comments from the 

Marine Mammal Commission 

(Commission). We did not receive other 

comments. 

Comment 1: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS require the 

Navy to conduct sound source 

verification (SSV) and the size of Level 

B harassment zone measurements for 

certain piles that data are lacking and 

where the zones are not based on 

modeling. These acoustic measurements 

include: 

• Vibratory and impact installation of 

at least five 16-in fiberglass-reinforced 

plastic piles—measurements for source 

levels; 

• Rock socket drilling of at least three 

30-in and three 16-in piles— 

measurements for source levels and the 

extent of the Level B harassment zones; 

• Vibratory installation of at least 

three 36-in steel piles—measurements 

for the extent of the Level B harassment 

zone; and 

• Vibratory removal of at least three 

24-in concrete and three 33-in concrete 

piles—measurements for source levels 

and the extent of the Level B harassment 

zones. 

Response: NMFS discussed these 

recommendation with the Navy and the 

Navy agreed to conduct SSVs on the 

piles for which source level data are not 

already available. SSV measurements to 

be conducted are: 

• Vibratory and impact installation of 

at least 5 16-in fiberglass reinforced 

plastic piles, and 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36777 

• Rock socket drilling of at least 3 30- 

in and 3 16-in piles. 

However, the Navy did not agree to 

conduct acoustic measurements to the 

extent of the Level B harassment zones. 

The Navy indicated that conducting 

hydroacoustic monitoring to the extent 

of the Level B harassment zones is not 

a common requirement based on the 

five most recent active IHAs, including 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) 

Tampa Harbor Big Bend Channel 

expansion project, the City of Astoria’s 

waterfront bridge replacement project, 

the Navy’s Bravo wharf recapitalization 

project, and U.S. Coast Guard’s (USCG) 

Monterey waterfront repair project. 

Instead, the Navy offered to conduct 

hydroacoustic measurements at several 

points between 10 and 500 m from the 

source and extrapolate the distance of 

the Level B harassment zone. 

While being able to determine the 

extent of Level B harassment zones is 

critical to accurately assess the potential 

impacts to marine mammals, these 

zones can be determined by means other 

than direct measurements 

recommended by the Commission. 

Therefore, NMFS considers the Navy’s 

proposal of extrapolating the Level B 

harassment zone using near- and farfield measurement data a valid 

approach. 

Therefore, in the final rule, NMFS 

requires the Navy to conduct SSVs on 

the piles listed above and to conduct 

measurements on several locations 

between 10 and 500 m from the source 

to determine the Level B harassment 

zones for those zones that were not 

based on modeling. 

These requirements are included in 

the final rule. 

Comment 2: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS require the 

Navy to include certain metrics in the 

hydroacoustic monitoring report for 

measurements being conducted. These 

metrics include: 

• Root-mean-square sound pressure 

levels (SPLrms), 1-sec sound exposure 

levels (SELs), duration of recordings 

used to derive SELs, cumulative SEL 

(SELcum) based on the number of piles 

and driving duration for each scenario, 

and SEL source spectra for vibratory 

pile driving/removal source level 

measurements; 

• Peak SPLs (SPLpeak), SPLrms, 

integration time/pulse duration for 

SPLrms, single-strike SPLs (SPLs-s), 

SELcum based on the number of piles 

and driving duration for each scenario, 

and SELs-s spectra for impact pile 

driving source level measurements; 

• The measured (or extrapolated, if 

not reached) distances at which the 

SPLrms decays to 120 dB re 1 mPa or to 

ambient, whichever is higher, and 

integration time/pulse duration for 

SPLrms for verification of the extent to 

the Level B harassment zones; 

• All sound levels via medians, 

means, minimums, and maximums and 

linear average (i.e., averaging the sound 

intensity/pressure before converting to 

dB); and 

• Sediment type, water depth, 

hydrophone depth, etc. 

Response: NMFS discussed this with 

the Navy and the Navy agreed to report 

these metrics in the acoustic monitoring 

report. These requirements are included 

in the final rule. 

Comment 3: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS revise its draft 

rounding criteria and share it with the 

Commission. 

Response: NMFS appreciates the 

Commission’s ongoing concern in this 

matter. Calculating predicted takes is 

not an exact science and there are 

arguments for taking different 

mathematical approaches in different 

situations, and for making qualitative 

adjustments in other situations. We 

believe, however, that the methodology 

used for take calculation in this LOA 

remains appropriate and is not at odds 

with the 24-hour reset policy the 

Commission references. We look 

forward to continued discussion with 

the Commission on this matter and will 

share the rounding guidance as soon as 

is appropriate. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of the Specified Activities 

Sections 3 and 4 of the application 

summarize available information 

regarding status and trends, distribution 

and habitat preferences, and behavior 

and life history, of the potentially 

affected species. Additional information 

regarding population trends and threats 

may be found in NMFS’s Stock 

Assessment Reports (SAR; 

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

general information about these species 

(e.g., physical and behavioral 

descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s 

website (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/seals-sea-lions). 

Table 2 lists all species with expected 

potential for occurrence in location and 

summarizes information related to the 

population or stock, including 

regulatory status under the MMPA and 

ESA and potential biological removal 

(PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we 

follow Committee on Taxonomy (2017). 

PBR is defined by the MMPA as the 

maximum number of animals, not 

including natural mortalities, that may 

be removed from a marine mammal 

stock while allowing that stock to reach 

or maintain its optimum sustainable 

population (as described in NMFS’s 

SARs). While no mortality is anticipated 

or authorized here, PBR and annual 

serious injury and mortality from 

anthropogenic sources are included here 

as gross indicators of the status of the 

species and other threats. 

Marine mammal abundance estimates 

presented in this document represent 

the total number of individuals that 

make up a given stock or the total 

number estimated within a particular 

study or survey area. NMFS’s stock 

abundance estimates for most species 

represent the total estimate of 

individuals within the geographic area, 

if known, that comprises that stock. For 

some species, this geographic area may 

extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed 

stocks in this region are assessed in 

NMFS’s U.S. Atlantic SARs (Waring et 

al., 2017). All values presented in Table 

2 are the most recent available at the 

time of publication and are available in 

the draft 2017 SARs (Hayes et al., 2017). 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY OCCUR WITHIN NAVY SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON AREA

Common name Scientific name Stock ESA/MMPA 

status 

Stock abundance best/ 

minimum 

population 

Occurrence in 

study area 

Order Carnivora 

Suborder Pinnipedia 

Family Phocidae (true seals): 

Gray seal ........................ Halichoerus grypus ............... Western North Atlantic .......... ......................... 505,000 * ............................... Thames River. 

Harbor seal .................... Phoca vitulina ........................ Western North Atlantic .......... ......................... 75,834 (0.15)/66,884 ............. Thames River.

* There are an estimated 27,131 seals in U.S. waters; however, gray seals form one population not distinguished on the basis of the U.S./Canada boundary 

(Waring et al., 2017). 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36778 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

All species that could potentially 

occur in the proposed survey areas are 

included in table 2. As described below, 

all two species (with two managed 

stocks) temporally and spatially cooccur with the activity to the degree that 

take is reasonably likely to occur, and 

we have proposed authorizing it. 

Marine Mammal Hearing 

Hearing is the most important sensory 

modality for marine mammals 

underwater, and exposure to 

anthropogenic sound can have 

deleterious effects. To appropriately 

assess the potential effects of exposure 

to sound, it is necessary to understand 

the frequency ranges marine mammals 

are able to hear. Current data indicate 

that not all marine mammal species 

have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., 

Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and 

Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). 

To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) 

recommended that marine mammals be 

divided into functional hearing groups 

based on directly measured or estimated 

hearing ranges on the basis of available 

behavioral response data, audiograms 

derived using auditory evoked potential 

techniques, anatomical modeling, and 

other data. Note that no direct 

measurements of hearing ability have 

been successfully completed for 

mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency 

cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2016) 

described generalized hearing ranges for 

these marine mammal hearing groups. 

Generalized hearing ranges were chosen 

based on the approximately 65 dB 

threshold from the normalized 

composite audiograms, with the 

exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower 

bound was deemed to be biologically 

implausible and the lower bound from 

Southall et al. (2007) retained. The 

functional groups and the associated 

frequencies are indicated below (note 

that these frequency ranges correspond 

to the range for the composite group, 

with the entire range not necessarily 

reflecting the capabilities of every 

species within that group): 

• Low-frequency cetaceans 

(mysticetes): Generalized hearing is 

estimated to occur between 

approximately 7 Hz and 35 kHz; 

• Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger 

toothed whales, beaked whales, and 

most delphinids): Generalized hearing is 

estimated to occur between 

approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz; 

• High-frequency cetaceans 

(porpoises, river dolphins, and members 

of the genera Kogia and 

Cephalorhynchus; including two 

members of the genus Lagenorhynchus, 

on the basis of recent echolocation data 

and genetic data): Generalized hearing is 

estimated to occur between 

approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz. 

• Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true 

seals): Generalized hearing is estimated 

to occur between approximately 50 Hz 

to 86 kHz; 

• Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae (eared 

seals): Generalized hearing is estimated 

to occur between 60 Hz and 39 kHz. 

The pinniped functional hearing 

group was modified from Southall et al. 

(2007) on the basis of data indicating 

that phocid species have consistently 

demonstrated an extended frequency 

range of hearing compared to otariids, 

especially in the higher frequency range 

(Hemila ̈ et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 

2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013). 

For more detail concerning these 

groups and associated frequency ranges, 

please see NMFS (2016) for a review of 

available information. Two marine 

mammal species (both phocid species) 

have the reasonable potential to cooccur with the proposed survey 

activities. Please refer to Table 2. 

Potential Impacts to Marine Mammals 

The Navy’s Submarine Base New 

London pier construction using in-water 

pile driving and pile removal could 

adversely affect marine mammal species 

and stocks by exposing them to elevated 

noise levels in the vicinity of the 

activity area. 

Exposure to high intensity sound for 

a sufficient duration may result in 

auditory effects such as a noise-induced 

threshold shift (TS)—an increase in the 

auditory threshold after exposure to 

noise (Finneran et al., 2005). Factors 

that influence the amount of threshold 

shift include the amplitude, duration, 

frequency content, temporal pattern, 

and energy distribution of noise 

exposure. The magnitude of hearing 

threshold shift normally decreases over 

time following cessation of the noise 

exposure. The amount of TS just after 

exposure is the initial TS. If the TS 

eventually returns to zero (i.e., the 

threshold returns to the pre-exposure 

value), it is a temporary threshold shift 

(TTS) (Southall et al., 2007). 

Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of 

hearing)—When animals exhibit 

reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds 

must be louder for an animal to detect 

them) following exposure to an intense 

sound or sound for long duration, it is 

referred to as a noise-induced TS. An 

animal can experience TTS or 

permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS 

can last from minutes or hours to days 

(i.e., there is complete recovery), can 

occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e., 

an animal might only have a temporary 

loss of hearing sensitivity between the 

frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can 

be of varying amounts (for example, an 

animal’s hearing sensitivity might be 

reduced initially by only 6 dB or 

reduced by 30 dB). PTS is permanent, 

but some recovery is possible. PTS can 

also occur in a specific frequency range 

and amount as mentioned above for 

TTS. 

For marine mammals, published data 

are limited to the captive bottlenose 

dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and 

Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran, 

2015). For pinnipeds in water, data are 

limited to measurements of TTS in 

harbor seals, an elephant seal, and 

California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 

2005; Kastelein et al., 2012b). 

Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a 

harbor porpoise after exposing it to 

airgun noise with a received sound 

pressure level (SPL) at 200.2 dB (peakto-peak) re: 1 micropascal (mPa), which 

corresponds to a sound exposure level 

of 164.5 dB re: 1 mPa2 s after integrating 

exposure. Because the airgun noise is a 

broadband impulse, one cannot directly 

determine the equivalent of root mean 

square (rms) SPL from the reported 

peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a 

conservative conversion factor of 16 dB 

for broadband signals from seismic 

surveys (McCauley, et al., 2000) to 

correct for the difference between peakto-peak levels reported in Lucke et al. 

(2009) and rms SPLs, the rms SPL for 

TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 

1 mPa, and the received levels associated 

with PTS (Level A harassment) would 

be higher. Therefore, based on these 

studies, NMFS recognizes that TTS of 

harbor porpoises is lower than other 

cetacean species empirically tested 

(Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et 

al., 2002; Kastelein and Jennings, 2012). 

Marine mammal hearing plays a 

critical role in communication with 

conspecifics, and interpretation of 

environmental cues for purposes such 

as predator avoidance and prey capture. 

Depending on the degree (elevation of 

threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery 

time), and frequency range of TTS, and 

the context in which it is experienced, 

TTS can have effects on marine 

mammals ranging from discountable to 

serious (similar to those discussed in 

auditory masking, below). For example, 

a marine mammal may be able to readily 

compensate for a brief, relatively small 

amount of TTS in a non-critical 

frequency range that occurs during a 

time where ambient noise is lower and 

there are not as many competing sounds 

present. Alternatively, a larger amount 

and longer duration of TTS sustained 

during time when communication is 

critical for successful mother/calf 

interactions could have more serious 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36779 

impacts. Also, depending on the degree 

and frequency range, the effects of PTS 

on an animal could range in severity, 

although it is considered generally more 

serious because it is a permanent 

condition. Of note, reduced hearing 

sensitivity as a simple function of aging 

has been observed in marine mammals, 

as well as humans and other taxa 

(Southall et al., 2007), so one can infer 

that strategies exist for coping with this 

condition to some degree, though likely 

not without cost. 

In addition, chronic exposure to 

excessive, though not high-intensity, 

noise could cause masking at particular 

frequencies for marine mammals, which 

utilize sound for vital biological 

functions (Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic 

masking is when other noises such as 

from human sources interfere with 

animal detection of acoustic signals 

such as communication calls, 

echolocation sounds, and 

environmental sounds important to 

marine mammals. Therefore, under 

certain circumstances, marine mammals 

whose acoustical sensors or 

environment are being severely masked 

could also be impaired from maximizing 

their performance fitness in survival 

and reproduction. 

Masking occurs at the frequency band 

that the animals utilize. Therefore, since 

noise generated from vibratory pile 

driving is mostly concentrated at low 

frequency ranges, it may have less effect 

on high frequency echolocation sounds 

by odontocetes (toothed whales). 

However, lower frequency man-made 

noises are more likely to affect detection 

of communication calls and other 

potentially important natural sounds 

such as surf and prey noise. It may also 

affect communication signals when they 

occur near the noise band and thus 

reduce the communication space of 

animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and 

cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote 

et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009). 

Unlike TS, masking, which can occur 

over large temporal and spatial scales, 

can potentially affect the species at 

population, community, or even 

ecosystem levels, as well as individual 

levels. Masking affects both senders and 

receivers of the signals and could have 

long-term chronic effects on marine 

mammal species and populations. 

Recent science suggests that low 

frequency ambient sound levels have 

increased by as much as 20 dB (more 

than three times in terms of sound 

pressure level) in the world’s ocean 

from pre-industrial periods, and most of 

these increases are from distant 

shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). For the 

Navy’s Submarine Base New London 

pier construction, noises from vibratory 

pile driving and pile removal contribute 

to the elevated ambient noise levels in 

the project area, thus increasing 

potential for or severity of masking. 

Baseline ambient noise levels in the 

vicinity of project area are high due to 

ongoing shipping, construction and 

other activities in the Thames River. 

Finally, marine mammals’ exposure to 

certain sounds could lead to behavioral 

disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), 

such as: Changing durations of surfacing 

and dives, number of blows per 

surfacing, or moving direction and/or 

speed; reduced/increased vocal 

activities; changing/cessation of certain 

behavioral activities (such as socializing 

or feeding); visible startle response or 

aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke 

slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of 

areas where noise sources are located; 

and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds 

flushing into water from haulouts or 

rookeries). 

The onset of behavioral disturbance 

from anthropogenic noise depends on 

both external factors (characteristics of 

noise sources and their paths) and the 

receiving animals (hearing, motivation, 

experience, demography) and is also 

difficult to predict (Southall et al., 

2007). Currently NMFS uses a received 

level of 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) to predict 

the onset of behavioral harassment from 

impulse noises (such as impact pile 

driving), and 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for 

continuous noises (such as vibratory 

pile driving). For the Navy’s Submarine 

Base New London pier construction, 

both 160- and 120-dB levels are 

considered for effects analysis because 

the Navy plans to use both impact pile 

driving and vibratory pile driving and 

pile removal. 

The biological significance of many of 

these behavioral disturbances is difficult 

to predict, especially if the detected 

disturbances appear minor. However, 

the consequences of behavioral 

modification could be biologically 

significant if the change affects growth, 

survival, and/or reproduction, which 

depends on the severity, duration, and 

context of the effects. 

Potential Effects on Marine Mammal 

Habitat 

The primary potential impacts to 

marine mammal habitat are associated 

with elevated sound levels produced by 

vibratory pile removal and pile driving 

in the area. However, other potential 

impacts to the surrounding habitat from 

physical disturbance are also possible. 

With regard to fish as a prey source 

for cetaceans and pinnipeds, fish are 

known to hear and react to sounds and 

to use sound to communicate (Tavolga 

et al., 1981) and possibly avoid 

predators (Wilson and Dill, 2002). 

Experiments have shown that fish can 

sense both the strength and direction of 

sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors 

determining whether a fish can sense a 

sound signal, and potentially react to it, 

are the frequency of the signal and the 

strength of the signal in relation to the 

natural background noise level. 

The level of sound at which a fish 

will react or alter its behavior is usually 

well above the detection level. Fish 

have been found to react to sounds 

when the sound level increased to about 

20 dB above the detection level of 120 

dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response 

threshold can depend on the time of 

year and the fish’s physiological 

condition (Engas et al., 1993). In 

general, fish react more strongly to 

pulses of sound (such as noise from 

impact pile driving) rather than 

continuous signals (such as noise from 

vibratory pile driving) (Blaxter et al., 

1981), and a quicker alarm response is 

elicited when the sound signal intensity 

rises rapidly compared to sound rising 

more slowly to the same level. 

During in-water pile driving only a 

small fraction of the available habitat 

would be ensonified at any given time. 

Disturbance to fish species would be 

short-term and fish would return to 

their pre-disturbance behavior once the 

pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the 

proposed construction would have 

little, if any, impact on marine 

mammals’ prey availability in the area 

where construction work is planned. 

Disposal of dredged material in the 

confined aquatic disposal (CAD) cell 

would have a direct impact to the 

benthos as a result of burial and 

suffocation. Most, if not all, sessile 

marine invertebrates are not expected to 

survive burial. Some motile marine 

organisms would be buried and unable 

to survive, while others such as 

burrowing specialists, may survive. 

Survival rates would depend primarily 

on burial depth. From 2010 through 

2012, biannual benthic sampling of the 

CAD cell area was conducted to assess 

the timeframe for recovery of benthic 

populations of the CAD cells, in 

accordance with Water Quality 

Certificate conditions for the 2010 

waterfront maintenance dredging 

project at the submarine base. The 

sampling results of the CAD cell were 

compared to sampling results of an 

undisturbed reference site located 

upriver. The degree of similarity of 

population and community structures 

was assessed. The results of the three 

year survey program indicated that a 

progressive recovery to a stable benthic 

population was occurring at the CAD 

cell. As demonstrated by the biannual 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36780 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

benthic survey, benthic assemblages are 

anticipated to recover within three to 

five years after the completion of the 

project, and disposal impacts would not 

be significant (CardnoTEC 2015). 

Project activities would temporarily 

disturb benthic and water column 

habitats and change bottom topography 

to a minor degree, but effects on prey 

availability and foraging conditions for 

marine mammals would be temporary 

and limited to the immediate area of 

pier demolition/construction, dredging, 

and disposal. The new surfaces of piles 

and exposed concrete on the new pier 

would likely result in establishment of 

fouling communities on the new 

structures, and may attract fish and 

benthic organisms, resulting in small 

scale shifts in prey distribution. 

There are no known haul outs within 

the vicinity of the Proposed Action. 

The project activities would not 

permanently modify existing marine 

mammal habitat. The activities may kill 

some fish and cause other fish to leave 

the area temporarily, thus impacting 

marine mammals’ foraging 

opportunities in a limited portion of the 

foraging range; but, because of the short 

duration of the activities and the 

relatively small area of the habitat that 

may be affected, the impacts to marine 

mammal habitat are not expected to 

cause significant or long-term negative 

consequences. Therefore, given the 

consideration of potential impacts to 

marine mammal prey species and their 

physical environment, the Navy’s 

proposed construction activity at the 

submarine base would not adversely 

affect marine mammal habitat. 

Estimated Take 

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). 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Authorized takes would be by Level A 

and Level B harassments, in the form of 

mild permanent hearing threshold shift 

(Level A) and disruption of behavioral 

patterns (Level B) for individual marine 

mammals resulting from exposure to 

noise generated from impact pile 

driving and vibratory pile driving and 

removal. Based on the nature of the 

activity and the anticipated 

effectiveness of the mitigation measures 

(e.g., shutdown measures—discussed in 

detail below in Mitigation section), 

serious injury or mortality is neither 

anticipated nor authorized. 

As described previously, no mortality 

is anticipated or authorized for this 

activity. Below we describe how the 

take is estimated. 

Described in the most basic way, we 

estimate take by considering: (1) 

Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS 

believes the best available science 

indicates marine mammals will be 

behaviorally harassed or incur some 

degree of permanent hearing 

impairment; (2) the area or volume of 

water that will be ensonified above 

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

occurrence of marine mammals within 

these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the 

number of days of activities. Below, we 

describe these components in more 

detail and present the take estimate. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

Using the best available science, 

NMFS has developed acoustic 

thresholds that identify the received 

level of underwater sound above which 

exposed marine mammals would be 

reasonably expected to be behaviorally 

harassed (equated to Level B 

harassment) or to incur PTS of some 

degree (equated to Level A harassment). 

Level B Harassment for non-explosive 

sources—Though significantly driven by 

received level, the onset of behavioral 

disturbance from anthropogenic noise 

exposure is also informed to varying 

degrees by other factors related to the 

source (e.g., frequency, predictability, 

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

bathymetry), and the receiving animals 

(hearing, motivation, experience, 

demography, behavioral context) and 

can be difficult to predict (Southall et 

al., 2007, Ellison et al., 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., seismic airguns) or intermittent 

(e.g., scientific sonar) sources. 

Applicant’s proposed activity 

includes the use of continuous 

(vibratory pile driving and removal) and 

impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, 

and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 

mPa (rms) levels 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). Applicant’s proposed 

activity includes the use of nonimpulsive (vibratory pile driving and 

pile removal) sources. 

These thresholds were developed by 

compiling and synthesizing the best 

available science and soliciting input 

multiple times from both the public and 

peer reviewers to inform the final 

product, and are provided in 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. 

TABLE 3—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA FOR NON-EXPLOSIVE SOUND UNDERWATER

Hearing group 

PTS onset thresholds Behavioral thresholds 

Impulsive Non-impulsive Impulsive Non-impulsive 

Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans Lpk,flat: 219 dB .............................

LE,LF,24h: 183 dB .........................

LE,LF,24h: 199 dB ......................... Lrms,flat: 160 dB Lrms,flat: 120 dB 

Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans Lpk,flat: 230 dB .............................

LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ........................

LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.

High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans Lpk,flat: 202 dB .............................

LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ........................

LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36781 

TABLE 3—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA FOR NON-EXPLOSIVE SOUND UNDERWATER—Continued 

Hearing group 

PTS onset thresholds Behavioral thresholds 

Impulsive Non-impulsive Impulsive Non-impulsive 

Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) ...............

(Underwater) ...............................

Lpk,flat: 218 dB .............................

LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ........................

LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.

Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) ...............

(Underwater) ...............................

Lpk,flat: 232 dB .............................

LE,OW,24h: 203 dB .......................

LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.

* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should 

also be considered. 

Note:Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s. 

In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure 

is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being 

included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated 

with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF 

cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level 

thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for 

action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded. 

Ensonified Area 

Here, we describe operational and 

environmental parameters of the activity 

that will feed into identifying the area 

ensonified above the acoustic 

thresholds. 

Source Levels 

The project includes impact pile 

driving and vibratory pile driving and 

removal of various piles. Source levels 

of pile driving and removal activities are 

based on reviews of measurements of 

the same or similar types and 

dimensions of piles available in the 

literature (Caltrans, 2015; Martin et al., 

2012; Dazey et al., 2012; WSDOT, 2007, 

2012; NAVFAC Southwest, 2014). Based 

on this review, the following source 

levels are assumed for the underwater 

noise produced by construction 

activities: 

• Impact driving of 14-inch steel Hpiles for the temporary trestle is 

assumed to generate a peak SPL of 208 

dB re 1mPa, and a root-mean-squared 

(rms) SPL of 187 dB re 1 mPa, based on 

adding 10 dB to a single-strike SEL of 

177 dB re 1 mPa2-sec at 10 m (33 ft) 

reported by Caltrans (2015). This 

assumption is based on differences 

between SEL and rms values of other 

piles reported by Caltrans (2015). 

• Impact driving of 36-inch steel piles 

would be assumed to generate an 

instantaneous peak SPL of 209 dB, an 

rms SPL of 198 dB, and a SEL of 183 

dB at the 10 m (33 ft) distance, based on 

the weighted average of similar pile 

driving at the Bangor Naval Base, Naval 

Base Point Loma, Washington State 

Department of Transportation (WSDOT) 

Anacortes Ferry Terminal, and WSDOT 

Mukilteo Ferry Terminal. 

• Vibratory driving of 36-inch steel 

piles would be assumed to generate a 

168 dB SPLrms and a 168 dB SEL at 10 

m (33 ft), based on the weighted average 

of similar pile driving measured at 

Bangor Naval Base, Naval Base Point 

Loma, and WSDOT Anacortes Ferry 

Terminal. 

• Impact driving of the 16-inch 

plastic piles, for which no data specific 

to that size and composition are 

available, are assumed to be similar to 

available data on 13-inch plastic piles: 

166 dB peak SPL and 153 dB rms SPL. 

No SEL measurements were made, but 

the SEL at 10 m (33 ft) can be assumed 

to be 9 dB less than the rms value (based 

on differences of rms and SEL values of 

in-water impact pile-driving data of 

other piles summarized by Caltrans 

2015), which would put the SEL value 

for the plastic piles at 144 dB. For 

vibratory pile driving of the same plastic 

piles, the SPL rms of impact driving is 

used as a proxy due to lack of 

measurement. 

• Vibratory removal of 14-inch steel 

H-piles is conservatively assumed to 

have rms and SEL values of 158 dB 

based on a relatively large set of 

measurements from the vibratory 

installation of 14-inch H-piles. 

• Drilling the rock sockets is assumed 

to be an intermittent, non-impulsive, 

broadband noise source, similar to 

vibratory pile driving, but using a rotary 

drill inside a pipe or casing, which is 

expected to reduce sound levels below 

those of typical pile driving (Martin et 

al. 2012). Measurements made during a 

pile drilling project in 1–5 m (3–16 ft) 

depths at Santa Rosa Island, CA, by 

Dazey et al. (2012) appear to provide 

reasonable proxy source levels for the 

proposed activities. Dazey et al. (2012) 

reported average rms source levels 

ranging from 151 to 157 dB re 1mPa, 

normalized to a distance of 1 m (3 ft) 

from the pile, during activities that 

included casing removal and 

installation as well as drilling, with an 

average of 154 dB re 1mPa during 62 

days that spanned all related drilling 

activities during a single season. 

• Since no source level data are 

available for vibratory extraction of 

concrete or concrete encased 24-inch 

and 33-inch steel H-piles, conservative 

proxy source levels were based on the 

summary values reported for vibratory 

driving of 24-inch steel sheet piles by 

Caltrans (2015). There are two reasons 

for using 24-in steel sheet pile driving 

source level as a proxy: (1) In general, 

pile extraction generates less noise in 

comparison to pile driving, and (2) 

piling of concrete or concrete encased 

piles generated less noise in comparison 

to steel piles. Since there are no source 

levels available for extraction of the 24- 

in concrete or concrete encased piles 

and 33-in steel H-piles, we defer to the 

pile driving source level of 24-in steel 

sheet pile reported by Caltrans (2015). 

The Caltrans (2015) typical source level 

of 160 dB rms and SEL was used for 

vibratory removal of 24-inch concrete 

piles and 24-inch concrete encased steel 

H-piles, whereas the loudest source 

level of 165 dB rms and SEL was used 

for vibratory removal of 33-inch 

concrete encased steel piles. 

A summary of source levels from 

different pile driving and pile removal 

activities is provided in Table 4. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36782 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF IN-WATER PILE DRIVING SOURCE LEVELS

[At 10 m from source] 

Method Pile type/size SPLpk

(dB re 1 μ Pa) 

SPLrms

(dB re 1 μ Pa) 

SEL 

(dB re 1 μ Pa2-s) 

Impact driving ............................................... 14-in steel H pile .......................................... 208 187 177 

Impact driving ............................................... 36-in concrete-filled steel pile ...................... 209 198 183 

Vibratory driving ............................................ 30- and 36-in concrete-filled steel pipe pile; 

16-in fiberglass plastic pile.

NA 168 168 

Impact driving ............................................... 16-in fiberglass plastic pile ........................... 166 153 144 

Vibratory driving ............................................ 16-in fiberglass plastic pile ........................... NA 153 153

Rock socket drilling ....................................... 30-in steel pile & 16-in plastic pile ............... NA 154 154 

Vibratory removal .......................................... 14-in steel H pile .......................................... NA 158 158 

Vibratory removal .......................................... 24-in concrete-encased steel H pile ............ NA 160 160 

Vibratory removal .......................................... 33-in concrete-encased steel H pile ............ NA 165 165 

These source levels are used to 

compute the Level A injury zones and 

to estimate the Level B harassment 

zones. For Level A harassment zones, 

since the peak source levels for both 

pile driving methods are below the 

injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were 

used to do the calculations using the 

NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016). 

Estimating Injury Zones 

When NMFS’ Technical Guidance 

(2016) was published, in recognition of 

the fact that ensonified area/volume 

could be more technically challenging 

to predict because of the duration 

component in the new thresholds, we 

developed a User Spreadsheet that 

includes tools to help predict a simple 

isopleth that can be used in conjunction 

with marine mammal density or 

occurrence to help predict takes. We 

note that because of some of the 

assumptions included in the methods 

used for these tools, we anticipate that 

isopleths produced are typically going 

to be overestimates of some degree, 

which 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 cumulative SEL (LE), distances to 

marine mammal injury thresholds were 

estimated using NMFS’ Optional User 

Spreadsheet based on the noise 

exposure guidance. For impact pile 

driving, the single strike SEL/pulse 

equivalent was used, and for vibratory 

pile driving, the rms SPL source level 

was used. Per the NMFS Spreadsheet, 

default Weighting Factor Adjustments 

(WFA) were used for calculating PTS 

from both vibratory and impact pile 

driving, using 2.5 kHz and 2.0 KHz, 

respectively. These WFAs are 

acknowledged by NMFS as 

conservative. A transmission loss 

coefficient of 15 is used with reported 

source levels measured at 10 m. 

Estimating Behavioral Harassment 

Zones 

Isopleths to Level B behavioral zones 

are based on rms SPL (SPLrms) that are 

specific for non-impulse (vibratory pile 

driving) sources. Distances to marine 

mammal behavior thresholds were 

calculated using practical spreading. 

In addition, based on the number of 

piers and high density of pilings along 

the shoreline, the Navy concluded that 

underwater sound transmission through 

these structures would be impeded 

similar to the interruption of sound 

transmission by natural projections of 

the shoreline. Using this assumption, 

the resulting Level B behavioral 

harassment zone for marine mammal 

disturbance for most project activities 

would be limited to the middle reaches 

of the Thames River, extending no 

farther south than the Amtrak Bridge, 3 

miles (4,642 m) upstream from the 

mouth of the river. 

A summary of the measured and 

modeled harassment zones is provided 

in Table 5. In modeling transmission 

loss from the project area, the 

conventional assumption would be 

made that acoustic propagation from the 

source is impeded by natural and 

manmade features that extend into the 

water, resulting in acoustic shadows 

behind such features. While not solid 

structures, given the density of 

structural pilings under the many pilesupported piers located south of Piers 

32 and 10, coupled with the docking of 

submarines at these piers, the piers are 

presumed to disrupt sound propagation 

southward in the river. 

TABLE 5—CALCULATED AREAS OF ZONE OF INFLUENCE AND MAXIMUM DISTANCES

Year Activity description 

Source level @

10m, dB 

(rms/SEL) 

Level A distance 

(m)/area 

(km2) 

Level B distance 

(m)/area 

(km2) 

1 .............. Impact driving 14′′ steel H-pile 1,000 strikes per pile, 4 piles/day 187/177 536/0.4468 ............. 631/0.5468. 

Vibratory & rock socket drilling installation of 36′′ concrete-filled 

steel piles; average 10 minutes/day.

168 <4/<0.0001 ............. 4,642/2.2002. 

Impact driving 36′′ concrete-filled steel piles; 1,000 strikes per 

pile; average 2.5 piles per day.

198/183 984/0.886 ............... 3,415/2.037. 

Rocket socket drilling of 30′′ concrete-filled steel piles and 16′′ 

fiberglass reinforced plastic piles; average 1.04 hours/day.

154 Activity will occur concurrently with above 

activities that have much bigger zones 

2 .............. Vibratory installation of 36′′ concrete-filled steel piles; average 6 

minutes/day.

168 <4/<0.0001 ............. 4,642/2.2002. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36783 

TABLE 5—CALCULATED AREAS OF ZONE OF INFLUENCE AND MAXIMUM DISTANCES—Continued 

Year Activity description 

Source level @

10m, dB 

(rms/SEL) 

Level A distance 

(m)/area 

(km2) 

Level B distance 

(m)/area 

(km2) 

Impact pile driving 36′′ concrete-filled steel piles; 1,000 strikes 

per pile; average 2.5 piles per day.

198/183 984/0.886 ............... 3,415/2.037. 

3 .............. Vibratory installation of 16′′ fiberglass plastic piles; 40 minutes/ 

day.

153 0.9/<0.0001 ............ 1,584/1.1584. 

Impact installation of 16′′ fiberglass plastic piles; 1,000 strikes 

per pile; average 2.5 piles per day.

153/144 2.5/<0.0001 ............ 1/<0.000. 

4 .............. Vibratory removal of 14′′ steel H-piles; average 100 minutes/day 158 <4/<0.0001 ............. 3,415/1.8372. 

Vibratory removal of 24′′ concrete-filled steel piles (Pier 32); average 190 minutes/day.160 2.7/<0.0001 ............ 4,642/2.2002. 

Vibratory removal of 30′′ concrete-filled steel piles (Pier 32); average 40 minutes/day.165 5.9/<0.0001 ............ 4,642/2.2002. 

Vibratory removal of 24′′ concrete-filled steel piles (Pier 10); average 40 minutes/day.160 7.7/<0.0001 ............ 4,642/2.2002. 

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. 

The Navy’s Marine Species Density 

Database (NMSDD) has density 

estimates for harbor and gray seals that 

occur in Long Island Sound. The 

NMSDD density estimates for harbor 

seals and gray seals are the same, 

0.0703/km2 during fall, winter, and 

spring, and 0.0174/km2 during summer 

months. These estimates, however, are 

based on broad-scale oceanic surveys, 

which have not extended up the 

Thames River. 

Marine mammal surveys were 

conducted in fall 2014 and winter, 

spring, and summer of 2015 as part of 

a nearshore biological survey at 

Submarine Base New London. No 

marine mammals were observed (Tetra 

Tech 2016). Harbor seals have been 

sighted in the Thames River near the 

submarine base by Navy personnel. 

Both gray and harbor seals have 

rookeries in Long Island Sound. A twoyear detailed, systematic survey of 

marine mammals in the Thames River 

began in January 2017. During the first 

nine months of the survey through 

September, one pinniped (gray seal) was 

observed approximately 23⁄4 miles 

downstream of SUBASE at a fishing 

dock near the ferry terminal, 

approximately 3,000 feet south of the 

Gold Star Memorial Bridge (I–95). 

There are no survey-based estimates 

of the relative abundances of the two 

species in the Thames River. Up to two 

harbor seals have been observed near 

the submarine base by base personnel. 

No gray seals have been observed by the 

Navy close to the submarine base. 

However, the Navy states that during 

preparation of the LOA they have 

learned that since the population of gray 

seals is generally growing in the region 

that gray seals are likely to also occur 

in the area of effect by the first year of 

construction, 2020, but in smaller 

numbers. A ratio of 3 to 1 harbor seals 

to gray seals was identified as a 

reasonable approximation of their 

relative abundance. No evidence is 

available to suggest a different ratio. 

There are no areas (haul outs) where 

seals are known to be concentrated nor 

have there been contemporary sightings 

of larger numbers of seals along this 

stretch of the river, and the animals seen 

at the submarine base are likely to move 

up and down as well as across the river. 

Given that the Thames River is about 

500 m (1,640 ft) wide at the Submarine 

Base New London, and similarly 

developed areas extend about 1 km 

(3,280 ft) up and down the river, the 

Navy believes it is reasonable to 

extrapolate the observations at the 

Submarine Base New London to an area 

of about 1 km2 for the purpose of 

estimating density. This would result in 

an average density of 0.45 harbor and 

0.15 gray seals per km2 within the 

project ZOIs from September through 

May. Very few animals were sighted 

outside the September through May 

time frame. Therefore, the September 

through May data is used for density 

estimates to be conservative. 

Take Calculation and Estimation 

Here we describe how the information 

provided above is brought together to 

produce a quantitative take estimate. 

For both harbor and gray seals, 

estimated takes are calculated based on 

ensonified area for a specific pile 

driving activity multiplied by the 

marine mammal density in the action 

area, multiplied by the number of pile 

driving (or removal) days. Distances to 

and areas of different harassment zones 

are listed in Table 4. 

For both Level A and Level B 

harassment, take calculations and 

assumptions are as follows: 

• Number of takes per activity = 

density (average number of seals per 

km2) * area of ZOI (km2) * number of 

days, rounded to the nearest whole 

number. 

• Seal density in the project area is 

estimated as 0.6/km2 from September 

through May (zero from June through 

August), consisting of 75% harbor seals 

(0.45/km2) and 25% gray seals (0.15/ 

km2). 

• Assumes as a worst case that 

activities will occur up to a maximum 

of 180 workdays (5 days per week) 

when seals are present (September 

through May) during each full 

construction year. 

• Assumes vibratory and impact 

hammer pile driving would not occur 

on the same days. 

• Level A and Level B takes are 

calculated separately based on the 

respective ZOIs for each type of activity, 

providing a maximum estimate for each 

type of take which corresponds to the 

authorization requested under the 

MMPA. 

• Assumes that the effective 

implementation of a 10 m shutdown 

zone will prevent non-acoustic injuries 

and will prevent animals from entering 

acoustic harassment ZOIs that extend 

less than 10 m from the source. 

The maximum extent of the potential 

injury zone (for impact pile driving of 

steel piles) is 984 m (3,228 ft) from the 

source for 36-inch concrete-filled steel 

piles and 536 m (1,758 ft) for 14-inch 

steel H-piles; other potential acoustic 

injury ZOIs for vibratory pile extraction 

and installation are only 1 to 7.7 m (3 

to 25 ft) from the source (Table 4). Seals 

within about 10 m (33 ft) of in-water 

construction or demolition may also be 

at risk of injury from interaction with 

construction equipment. These potential 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36784 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

injury zones and the 10 m (33 ft) 

shutdown distance would be monitored 

during all in-water construction/ 

demolition activities, and the activities 

would be halted if a marine mammal 

were to approach within these 

distances. 

The estimated numbers of instances of 

acoustic harassment (takes) by year, 

species and severity (Level A or Level 

B) are shown in Table 6. Total Level A 

takes are estimated as 12 harbor seals 

and 4 gray seals (total 16), and Level B 

takes are estimated as 504 harbor seals 

and 168 gray seals (total 672). 

TABLE 6—ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY BE EXPOSED TO RECEIVED NOISE LEVELS THAT CAUSE

LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT

Year Species Estimated 

Level A take 

Estimated 

Level B take 

Estimated 

total take Abundance Percentage 

1 .......................................... Harbor seal ......................... 6 166 172 75,834 0.23 

Gray seal ............................ 2 55 57 27,131 0.21 

2 .......................................... Harbor seal ......................... 6 177 183 75,834 0.24 

Gray seal ............................ 2 59 61 505,000 0.01 

3 .......................................... Harbor seal ......................... 0 51 51 75,834 0.07 

Gray seal ............................ 0 17 17 27,131 0.06 

4 .......................................... Harbor seal ......................... 0 110 110 75,834 0.13 

Gray seal ............................ 0 37 37 27,131 0.12 

Mitigation 

In order to issue an LOA under 

section 101(a)(5)(A) 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 and 

impact on operations. 

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and 

Their Habitat 

1. Time Restriction. 

Work will occur only during daylight 

hours, when visual monitoring of 

marine mammals can be conducted. 

2. Establishing and Monitoring Level 

A and Level B Harassment Zones, and 

Shutdown Zones. These zones may be 

adjusted as appropriate on the basis of 

the acoustic monitoring described 

below. 

Before the commencement of in-water 

construction activities, which include 

impact pile driving and vibratory pile 

driving and pile removal, the Navy shall 

establish Level A harassment zones 

where received underwater SELcum

could cause PTS (see Table 5 above). 

The Navy shall also establish Level B 

harassment zones where received 

underwater SPLs are higher than 160 

dBrms re 1 mPa for impulsive noise 

sources (impact pile driving) and 120 

dBrms re 1 mPa for non-impulsive noise 

sources (vibratory pile driving and pile 

removal). 

The Navy shall establish a 10-m (33- 

ft) shutdown zone for all in-water 

construction and demolition work. 

If marine mammals are found within 

the shutdown zone, pile driving of the 

segment would be delayed until they 

move out of the area. If a marine 

mammal is seen above water and then 

dives below, the contractor would wait 

15 minutes. If no marine mammals are 

seen by the observer in that time it can 

be assumed that the animal has moved 

beyond the shutdown zone. 

If pile driving of a segment ceases for 

30 minutes or more and a marine 

mammal is sighted within the 

designated shutdown zone prior to 

commencement of pile driving, the 

observer(s) must notify the pile driving 

operator (or other authorized 

individual) immediately and continue 

to monitor the shutdown zone. 

Operations may not resume until the 

marine mammal has exited the 

shutdown zone or 15 minutes have 

elapsed since the last sighting. 

3. Shutdown Measures. 

The Navy shall implement shutdown 

measures if a marine mammal is 

detected moving towards or entered the 

10-m (33-ft) shutdown zone. 

Further, the Navy shall implement 

shutdown measures if the number of 

authorized takes for any particular 

species reaches the limit under the LOA 

and such marine mammals are sighted 

within the vicinity of the project area 

and are approaching the Level B 

harassment zone during in-water 

construction activities. 

In addition, the Navy shall implement 

shutdown measures if species not 

authorized to take are sighted within the 

vicinity of the project area and are 

approaching the Level B harassment 

zone during in-water construction 

activities. 

4. Soft Start. 

The Navy shall implement soft start 

techniques for impact pile driving. The 

Navy shall conduct an initial set of three 

strikes from the impact hammer at 40 

percent energy, followed by a 1-minute 

waiting period, then two subsequent 

three strike sets. Soft start shall be 

required for any impact driving, 

including at the beginning of the day, 

and at any time following a cessation of 

impact pile driving of thirty minutes or 

longer. 

Whenever there has been downtime of 

30 minutes or more without impact 

driving, the contractor shall initiate 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36785 

impact driving with soft-start 

procedures described above. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

required measures, NMFS has 

determined that the prescribed 

mitigation measures provide the means 

effecting the least practicable adverse 

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 LOA for an 

activity, section 101(a)(5)(A) 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) 

state that requests for authorizations 

must include the suggested means of 

accomplishing the necessary monitoring 

and reporting that will result in 

increased knowledge of the species and 

of the level of taking or impacts on 

populations of marine mammals that are 

expected to be present in the proposed 

action area. Effective reporting is critical 

both to compliance as well as ensuring 

that the most value is obtained from the 

required monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density); 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) Action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

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

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

of marine mammal species with the 

action; or (4) biological or behavioral 

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

feeding areas); 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors; 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks; 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat); and 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Monitoring Measures 

The Navy shall employ trained 

protected species observers (PSOs) to 

conduct marine mammal monitoring for 

its Submarine Base New London pier 

construction project. The purposes of 

marine mammal monitoring are to 

implement mitigation measures and 

learn more about impacts to marine 

mammals from the Navy’s construction 

activities. The PSOs will observe and 

collect data on marine mammals in and 

around the project area for 15 minutes 

before, during, and for 30 minutes after 

all pile removal and pile installation 

work. 

Protected Species Observer 

Qualifications 

NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the 

following requirements: 

1. Independent observers (i.e., not 

construction personnel) are required; 

2. At least one observer must have 

prior experience working as an observer; 

3. Other observers may substitute 

education (undergraduate degree in 

biological science or related field) or 

training for experience; 

4. Where a team of three or more 

observers are required, one observer 

should be designated as lead observer or 

monitoring coordinator. The lead 

observer must have prior experience 

working as an observer; and 

5. NMFS will require submission and 

approval of observer CVs. 

Marine Mammal Monitoring Protocols 

The Navy shall conduct briefings 

between construction supervisors and 

crews and the PSO team prior to the 

start of all pile driving activities, and 

when new personnel join the work, in 

order to explain responsibilities, 

communication procedures, marine 

mammal monitoring protocol, and 

operational procedures. All personnel 

working in the project area shall watch 

the Navy’s Marine Species Awareness 

Training video. An informal guide shall 

be included with the monitoring plan to 

aid in identifying species if they are 

observed in the vicinity of the project 

area. 

The Navy will monitor the Level A 

and Level B harassment zones before, 

during, and after pile driving activities 

for all in-water constructions. The 

Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan would 

include the following procedures: 

• PSOs will be primarily located on 

boats, docks, and piers at the best 

vantage point(s) in order to properly see 

the entire shutdown zone(s). 

• PSOs will be located at the best 

vantage point(s) to observe the zone 

associated with behavioral impact 

thresholds. 

• During all observation periods, 

PSOs will use high-magnification (25X), 

as well as standard handheld (7X) 

binoculars, and the naked eye to search 

continuously for marine mammals. 

• Monitoring distances will be 

measured with range finders. Distances 

to animals will be based on the best 

estimate of the PSO, relative to known 

distances to objects in the vicinity of the 

PSO. 

• Bearings to animals will be 

determined using a compass. 

• Pile driving shall only take place 

when the shutdown and Level A zones 

are visible and can be adequately 

monitored. If conditions (e.g., fog) 

prevent the visual detection of marine 

mammals, activities with the potential 

to result in Level A harassment shall not 

be initiated. If such conditions arise 

after the activity has begun, pile driving 

or pile removal activities shall be halted 

if the 10-m shutdown zone is not 

visible. 

• Three (3) PSOs shall be posted to 

monitor marine mammals during inwater pile driving and pile removal. 

One PSO will be located on land and 

two will be located in a boat to monitor 

the farther locations. 

• Pre-Activity Monitoring: 

The shutdown zone will be monitored 

for 15 minutes prior to in-water 

construction/demolition activities. If a 

marine mammal is present within the 

10-m shutdown zone, the activity will 

be delayed until the animal(s) leave the 

shutdown zone. Activity will resume 

only after the PSO has determined that, 

through sighting or by waiting 15 

minutes, the animal(s) has moved 

outside the shutdown zone. If a marine 

mammal is observed approaching the 

shutdown zone, the PSO who sighted 

that animal will notify all other PSOs of 

its presence. 

• During Activity Monitoring: 

If a marine mammal is observed 

entering the Level A or Level B zones 

outside the 10-m shutdown zone, the 

pile segment being worked on will be 

completed without cessation, unless the 

animal enters or approaches the 

shutdown zone, at which point all pile 

driving activities will be halted. If an 

animal is observed within the shutdown 

zone during pile driving, then pile 

driving will be stopped as soon as it is 

safe to do so. Pile driving can only 

resume once the animal has left the 

shutdown zone of its own volition or 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36786 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

has not been re-sighted for a period of 

15 minutes. 

• Post-Activity Monitoring: 

Monitoring of all zones will continue 

for 30 minutes following the completion 

of the activity. 

Acoustic Monitoring 

(1) Sound Source Verification 

The Navy shall conduct pile driving 

sound source verification for the types 

and sizes of piles with no prior 

measurements. These piles include: 

• Vibratory and impact installation of 

at least 5 16-in fiberglass reinforced 

plastic piles, and 

• Rock socket drilling of at least 3 

30-in and 3 16-in piles. 

Sound source measurements of these 

piles sound be conducted at distances 

approximately 10 m from the source. 

For vibratory pile driving/removal 

source level measurements, reports 

should include 1-s sound exposure level 

(SEL), source spectrum, duration of 

recordings used to derived the SEL, and 

24-hour cumulative SEL extrapolated 

from measurements. 

For impact pile driving source level 

measurements, report should include 

peak sound pressure level (SPLpk), rootmean-square SPL (SPLrms), single strike 

SEL (SELss), integration time for SPLrms, 

SELss spectrum, and 24-hour cumulative 

SEL extrapolated from measurements. 

(2) Level B Harassment Distance 

Verification 

The Navy shall empirically determine 

the Level B harassment distance either 

by extrapolating from in situ 

measurements conducted at several 

points between 10 and 500 m from the 

source, or by direct measurements at far 

distance to locate the distance where the 

received levels reach 120 dB or below, 

or at the ambient noise level. 

Level B behavioral harassment zones 

need to be empirically determined 

include: 

• Rock socket drilling of at least 3 

30-in and 3 16-in piles, 

• Vibratory installation of at least 3 

36-in steel piles, and 

• Vibratory removal of at least 3 

24-in concrete and 3 33-in concrete 

piles. 

For extent of Level B distance 

verification, the Navy shall report the 

measured or extrapolated distances 

where the received levels SPLrms decay 

to 120-dB or to the ambient noise level, 

whichever is higher, as well as 

integration time for such SPLrms. 

The sound levels reported should be 

in median and linear average (i.e., taking 

averages of sound intensity before 

converting to dB). 

The acoustic monitoring reports shall 

also include sediment type where 

measurements are made. 

Reporting Measures 

The Navy is required to submit an 

annual report within 90 days after each 

activity year, starting from the date 

when the LOA is issued (for the first 

annual report) or from the date when 

the previous annual report ended. These 

reports will detail the monitoring 

protocol, summarize the data recorded 

during monitoring, and estimate the 

number of marine mammals that may 

have been harassed during the period of 

the report. Results from acoustic 

monitoring should also be included 

within the monitoring report, as 

discussed above. NMFS will provide 

comments within 30 days after receiving 

these reports, and the Navy shall 

address the comments and submit 

revisions within 30 days after receiving 

NMFS comments. If no comment is 

received from NMFS within 30 days, the 

annual report is considered completed. 

The Navy is also required to submit 

a draft monitoring report within 90 days 

after completion of the construction 

work or the expiration of the final LOA, 

whichever comes earlier. This report 

will synthesize all data recorded during 

marine mammal monitoring, and 

estimate the number of marine 

mammals that may have been harassed 

through the entire project. NMFS will 

provide comments within 30 days after 

receiving this report, and the Navy shall 

address the comments and submit 

revisions within 30 days after receiving 

NMFS comments. If no comment is 

received from NMFS within 30 days, the 

monitoring report is considered as final. 

In addition, NMFS requires the Navy 

to notify NMFS’ Office of Protected 

Resources and NMFS’ Greater Atlantic 

Stranding Coordinator within 48 hours 

of sighting an injured or dead marine 

mammal in the construction site. The 

Navy shall provide NMFS and the 

Stranding Network with the species or 

description of the animal(s), the 

condition of the animal(s) (including 

carcass condition, if the animal is dead), 

location, time of first discovery, 

observed behaviors (if alive), and photo 

or video (if available). 

In the event that the Navy finds an 

injured or dead marine mammal that is 

not in the construction area, the Navy 

will report the same information as 

listed above to NMFS as soon as 

operationally feasible. 

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). 

To avoid repetition, this introductory 

discussion of our analyses applies to 

both of the species listed in Table 2, 

given that the anticipated effects of the 

Navy’s Submarine Base New London 

pier construction project activities 

involving pile driving and pile removal 

on marine mammals are expected to be 

relatively similar in nature. There is no 

information about the nature or severity 

of the impacts, or the size, status, or 

structure of any species or stock that 

would lead to a different analysis by 

species for this activity, or else speciesspecific factors would be identified and 

analyzed. 

Although a few individual seals (6 

harbor seals and 2 gray seals each in 

year 1 and year 2) are estimated to 

experience Level A harassment in the 

form of PTS if they stay within the Level 

A harassment zone during the entire 

pile driving for the day, the degree of 

injury is expected to be mild and is not 

likely to affect the reproduction or 

survival of the individual animals. It is 

expected that, if hearing impairments 

occurs, most likely the affected animal 

would lose a few dB in its hearing 

sensitivity, which in most cases is not 

likely to affect its survival and 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36787 

recruitment. Hearing impairment that 

might occur for these individual 

animals would be limited to the 

dominant frequency of the noise 

sources, i.e., in the low-frequency region 

below 2 kHz. Nevertheless, as for all 

marine mammal species, it is known 

that in general these pinnipeds will 

avoid areas where sound levels could 

cause hearing impairment. Therefore it 

is not likely that an animal would stay 

in an area with intense noise that could 

cause severe levels of hearing damage. 

Under the majority of the 

circumstances, anticipated takes are 

expected to be limited to short-term 

Level B harassment. Marine mammals 

present in the vicinity of the action area 

and taken by Level B harassment would 

most likely show overt brief disturbance 

(startle reaction) and avoidance of the 

area from elevated noise levels during 

pile driving and pile removal. Given the 

limited estimated number of incidents 

of Level A and Level B harassment and 

the limited, short-term nature of the 

responses by the individuals, the 

impacts of the estimated take cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and are not 

reasonably likely to, rise to the level that 

they would adversely affect either 

species at the population level, through 

effects on annual rates of recruitment or 

survival. 

There are no known important 

habitats, such as rookeries or haul-outs, 

in the vicinity of the Navy’s proposed 

Submarine Base New London pier 

construction project. The project also is 

not expected to have significant adverse 

effects on affected marine mammals’ 

habitat, including prey, as analyzed in 

detail in the ‘‘Anticipated Effects on 

Marine Mammal Habitat’’ subsection. 

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 

proposed monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS finds that the total take 

from the proposed 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)(A) of the MMPA 

for specified activities other than 

military readiness activities. The MMPA 

does not define small numbers and so, 

in practice, 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. 

The estimated takes are below one 

percent of the population for all marine 

mammals (Table 6). 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the proposed activity 

(including the prescribed 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 

Subsistence 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. 

Adaptive Management 

The regulations governing the take of 

marine mammals incidental to Navy 

maintenance construction activities 

would contain an adaptive management 

component. 

The reporting requirements associated 

with this proposed rule are designed to 

provide NMFS with monitoring data 

from the previous year to allow 

consideration of whether any changes 

are appropriate. The use of adaptive 

management allows NMFS to consider 

new information from different sources 

to determine (with input from the Navy 

regarding practicability) on an annual or 

biennial basis if mitigation or 

monitoring measures should be 

modified (including additions or 

deletions). Mitigation measures could be 

modified if new data suggests that such 

modifications would have a reasonable 

likelihood of reducing adverse effects to 

marine mammals and if the measures 

are practicable. 

The following are some of the 

possible sources of applicable data to be 

considered through the adaptive 

management process: (1) Results from 

monitoring reports, as required by 

MMPA authorizations; (2) results from 

general marine mammal and sound 

research; and (3) any information which 

reveals that marine mammals may have 

been taken in a manner, extent, or 

number not authorized by these 

regulations or subsequent LOAs. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

Issuance of an MMPA authorization 

requires compliance with NEPA. 

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

4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative 

Order (NAO) 216–6A, we have 

determined that issuance of this rule 

and subsequent LOAs qualifies to be 

categorically excluded from further 

NEPA review. Issuance of the rule is 

consistent with categories of activities 

identified in CE B4 of the Companion 

Manual and we have not identified any 

extraordinary circumstances listed in 

Chapter 4 of the Companion Manual 

that would preclude use of this 

categorical exclusion. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

No incidental take of ESA-listed 

species is proposed for authorization or 

expected to result from this activity. 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

formal consultation under section 7 of 

the ESA is not required for this action. 

Classification 

Pursuant to the procedures 

established to implement Executive 

Order 12866, the Office of Management 

and Budget has determined that this 

proposed rule is not significant. 

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the 

Chief Counsel for Regulation of the 

Department of Commerce has certified 

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration that this 

proposed rule, if adopted, would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The U.S. Navy is the sole entity that 

would be subject to the requirements in 

these proposed regulations, and the 

Navy is not a small governmental 

jurisdiction, small organization, or small 

business, as defined by the RFA. 

Because of this certification, a 

regulatory flexibility analysis is not 

required and none has been prepared. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

a collection-of-information requirement 

subject to the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

because the applicant is a federal 

agency. Notwithstanding any other 

provision of law, no person is required 

to respond to nor shall a person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

These requirements have been approved 

by OMB under control number 0648– 

0151 and include applications for 

regulations, subsequent LOAs, and 

reports. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 217 

Exports, Fish, Imports, Incidental 

take, Indians, Labeling, Marine 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36788 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

mammals, Navy, Penalties, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Seafood, Sonar, Transportation. 

Dated: July 20, 2018. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

50 CFR part 217 is amended as follows: 

PART 217—REGULATIONS 

GOVERNING THE TAKING AND 

IMPORTING OF MARINE MAMMALS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 217 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq., unless 

otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Add subpart J to part 217 to read 

as follows: 

Subpart J—Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; U.S. Navy’s Submarine Base 

New London Pier Construction 

Sec. 

217.90 Specified activity and specified 

geographical region. 

217.91 Effective dates. 

217.92 Permissible methods of taking. 

217.93 Prohibitions. 

217.94 Mitigation requirements. 

217.95 Requirements for monitoring and 

reporting. 

217.96 Letters of Authorization. 

217.97 Renewals and modifications of 

Letters of Authorization. 

217.98 [Reserved] 

217.99 [Reserved] 

Subpart J—Taking and Importing 

Marine Mammals; U.S. Navy’s 

Submarine Base New London Pier 

Construction 

§ 217.90 Specified activity and specified 

geographical region. 

(a) Regulations in this subpart apply 

only to the U.S. Navy (Navy) and those 

persons it authorizes or funds to 

conduct activities on its behalf for the 

taking of marine mammals that occurs 

in the area outlined in paragraph (b) of 

this section and that occurs incidental 

to the activities described in paragraph 

(c) of this section. 

(b) The taking of marine mammals by 

the Navy may be authorized in Letters 

of Authorization (LOAs) only if it occurs 

within the Navy Submarine Base New 

London Study Area, which is located in 

the towns of Groton and Ledyard in 

New London County, Connecticut. 

(c) The taking of marine mammals by 

the Navy is only authorized if it occurs 

incidental to the Navy’s conducting inwater pier construction or demolition 

activities. 

§ 217.91 Effective dates and definitions. 

Regulations in this subpart are 

effective March 1, 2020 through 

February 28, 2025. 

§ 217.92 Permissible methods of taking. 

Under LOAs issued pursuant to 

§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96, 

the Holder of the LOAs (hereinafter 

‘‘Navy’’) may incidentally, but not 

intentionally, take marine mammals 

within the area described in § 217.90(b) 

by Level A harassment and Level B 

harassment associated with in-water 

pile driving and pile removal activities, 

provided the activity is in compliance 

with all terms, conditions, and 

requirements of the regulations in this 

subpart and the applicable LOAs. 

§ 217.93 Prohibitions. 

Notwithstanding takings 

contemplated in § 217.92 and 

authorized by LOAs issued under 

§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96, 

no person in connection with the 

activities described in § 217.90 may: 

(a) Violate, or fail to comply with, the 

terms, conditions, and requirements of 

this subpart or a LOA issued under 

§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96; 

(b) Take any marine mammal not 

specified in such LOAs; 

(c) Take any marine mammal 

specified in such LOAs in any manner 

other than as specified; 

(d) Take a marine mammal specified 

in such LOAs if NMFS determines such 

taking results in more than a negligible 

impact on the species or stocks of such 

marine mammal; or 

(e) Take a marine mammal specified 

in such LOAs if NMFS determines such 

taking results in an unmitigable adverse 

impact on the availability of such 

species or stock of marine mammal for 

taking for subsistence uses. 

§ 217.94 Mitigation requirements. 

When conducting the activities 

identified in § 217.90(c), the mitigation 

measures contained in any LOAs issued 

under § 216.106 of this chapter and 

§ 217.96 must be implemented. These 

mitigation measures shall include but 

are not limited to: 

(a) Time restriction. In-water 

construction and demolition work shall 

occur only during daylight hours. 

(b) Establishment of monitoring and 

shutdown zones. (1) For all relevant inwater construction and demolition 

activity, the Navy shall designate Level 

A harassment zones with radial 

distances as identified in any LOA 

issued under § 216.106 of this chapter 

and § 217.96. 

(2) For all relevant in-water 

construction and demolition activity, 

the Navy shall designate Level B 

harassment zones with radial distances 

as identified in any LOA issued under 

§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96. 

(3) For all in-water construction and 

demolition activity, the Navy shall 

implement a minimum shutdown zone 

of a 10-m radius around the pile. If a 

marine mammal comes within or 

approaches the shutdown zone, such 

operations shall cease. 

(c) Monitoring visibility. Pile driving 

shall only take place when the 

shutdown and Level A zones are visible 

and can be adequately monitored. If 

conditions (e.g., fog) prevent the visual 

detection of marine mammals, activities 

with the potential to result in Level A 

harassment shall not be initiated. If such 

conditions arise after the activity has 

begun, pile driving or pile removal 

activities shall be halted if the 10-m 

shutdown zone is not visible. 

(d) Shutdown measures. (1) The Navy 

shall deploy three protected species 

observers (PSOs) to monitor marine 

mammals during in-water pile driving 

and pile removal. One PSO shall be 

located on land and two shall be located 

in a boat to monitor the farther 

locations. 

(2) Monitoring shall take place from 

15 minutes prior to initiation of pile 

driving or removal activity through 30 

minutes post-completion of pile driving 

or removal activity. Pre-activity 

monitoring shall be conducted for 15 

minutes to ensure that the shutdown 

zone is clear of marine mammals, and 

pile driving or removal may commence 

when observers have declared the 

shutdown zone clear of marine 

mammals. In the event of a delay or 

shutdown of activity resulting from 

marine mammals in the shutdown zone, 

animals shall be allowed to remain in 

the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of 

their own volition) and their behavior 

shall be monitored and documented. 

Monitoring shall occur throughout the 

time required to drive or remove a pile. 

A determination that the shutdown zone 

is clear must be made during a period 

of good visibility (i.e., the entire 

shutdown zone and surrounding waters 

must be visible to the naked eye). 

(3) If a marine mammal approaches or 

enters the shutdown zone, or if a marine 

mammal not specified in the LOAs 

enters the Level B harassment zone, or 

if the take of a marine mammal species 

or stock has reached the take limits 

specified in any LOA issued under 

§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96 

and enters the Level B harassment zone, 

all pile driving or removal activities at 

that location shall be halted. If pile 

driving or removal is halted or delayed 

due to the presence of a marine 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36789 

mammal, the activity may not 

commence or resume until either the 

animal has voluntarily left and been 

visually confirmed beyond the 

shutdown zone or fifteen minutes have 

passed without re-detection of the 

animal. 

(4) The Navy shall implement 

shutdown measures if the number of 

authorized takes for any particular 

species reaches the limit under the 

applicable LOA and if such marine 

mammals are sighted within the vicinity 

of the project area and are approaching 

the Level B harassment zone during inwater construction or demolition 

activities. 

(e) Soft start. (1) The Navy shall 

implement soft start techniques for 

impact pile driving. The Navy shall 

conduct an initial set of three strikes 

from the impact hammer at 40 percent 

energy, followed by a 1-minute waiting 

period, then two subsequent three strike 

sets. 

(2) Soft start shall be required for any 

impact driving, including at the 

beginning of the day, and at any time 

following a cessation of impact pile 

driving of 30 minutes or longer. 

§ 217.95 Requirements for monitoring and 

reporting. 

(a) Marine mammal monitoring—(1) 

General requirements. The Navy shall 

employ trained protected species 

observers (PSOs) to conduct marine 

mammal monitoring for its Submarine 

Base New London pier construction 

project. The PSOs shall observe and 

collect data on marine mammals in and 

around the project area for 15 minutes 

before, during, and for 30 minutes after 

all pile removal and pile installation 

work. PSOs shall have no other assigned 

tasks during monitoring periods, and 

shall be placed at the best vantage 

point(s) practicable to monitor for 

marine mammals and implement 

shutdown or delay procedures when 

applicable through communication with 

the equipment operator. 

(2) Protected species observer 

qualifications. NMFS-approved PSOs 

shall meet the following requirements: 

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

construction personnel) are required; 

(ii) At least one observer must have 

prior experience working as an observer; 

(iii) Other observers may substitute 

education (undergraduate degree in 

biological science or related field) or 

training for experience; 

(iv) Where a team of three or more 

observers are required, one observer 

should be designated as lead observer or 

monitoring coordinator. The lead 

observer must have prior experience 

working as an observer; and 

(v) NMFS will require submission and 

approval of observer CVs. 

(3) Marine mammal monitoring 

protocols. (i) The Navy shall conduct 

briefings between construction 

supervisors and crews and the PSO 

team prior to the start of all pile driving 

activities, and when new personnel join 

the work, in order to explain 

responsibilities, communication 

procedures, marine mammal monitoring 

protocol, and operational procedures. 

All personnel working in the project 

area shall watch the Navy’s Marine 

Species Awareness Training video. An 

informal guide shall be included with 

the monitoring plan to aid in identifying 

species if they are observed in the 

vicinity of the project area. 

(ii) The Navy shall monitor the Level 

A and Level B harassment zones before, 

during, and after pile driving activities 

for all in-water constructions. The 

Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan shall 

include the following procedures: 

(A) PSO location. PSOs will be 

primarily located on boats, docks, and 

piers at the best vantage point(s) in 

order to properly see the entire 

shutdown zone(s). 

(B) PSO vantage point. PSOs will be 

located at the best vantage point(s) to 

observe the zone associated with 

behavioral impact thresholds. 

(C) Observation equipment. During all 

observation periods, PSOs will use highmagnification (25X), as well as standard 

handheld (7X) binoculars, and the 

naked eye to search continuously for 

marine mammals. 

(D) Ranging equipment. Monitoring 

distances will be measured with range 

finders. Distances to animals will be 

based on the best estimate of the PSO, 

relative to known distances to objects in 

the vicinity of the PSO. 

(E) Bearing. Bearings to animals will 

be determined using a compass. 

(F) Pre-activity monitoring. The 

shutdown zone will be monitored for 15 

minutes prior to in-water construction/ 

demolition activities. If a marine 

mammal is present within the 10-m 

shutdown zone, the activity will be 

delayed until the animal(s) leaves the 

shutdown zone. Activity will resume 

only after the PSO has determined that, 

through sighting or by waiting 15 

minutes, the animal(s) has moved 

outside the shutdown zone. If a marine 

mammal is observed approaching the 

shutdown zone, the PSO who sighted 

that animal will notify all other PSOs of 

its presence. 

(G) During activity monitoring. If a 

marine mammal is observed entering 

the Level A or Level B harassment zones 

outside the 10-m shutdown zone, the 

pile segment being worked on will be 

completed without cessation, unless the 

animal enters or approaches the 

shutdown zone, at which point all pile 

driving activities will be halted. If an 

animal is observed within the shutdown 

zone during pile driving, then pile 

driving will be stopped as soon as it is 

safe to do so. Pile driving can only 

resume once the animal has left the 

shutdown zone of its own volition or 

has not been re-sighted for a period of 

15 minutes. 

(H) Post-activity monitoring. 

Monitoring of all zones will continue for 

30 minutes following the completion of 

the activity. 

(b) Acoustic monitoring—(1) Sound 

source verification. (i) The Navy shall 

conduct pile driving sound source 

verification for the following types and 

sizes of piles: 

(A) Vibratory and impact installation 

of at least 5 16-in fiberglass reinforced 

plastic piles; and 

(B) Rock socket drilling of at least 3 

30-in and 3 16-in piles. 

(ii) Sound source measurements of 

these piles sound shall be conducted at 

distances approximately 10 m from the 

source. 

(iii) For vibratory pile driving/ 

removal source level measurements, 

reports shall include 1-s sound exposure 

level (SEL), source spectrum, duration 

of recordings used to derived the SEL, 

and 24-hour cumulative SEL 

extrapolated from measurements. 

(iv) For impact pile driving source 

level measurements, report should 

include peak sound pressure level 

(SPLpk), root-mean-square SPL (SPLrms), 

single strike SEL (SELss), integration 

time for SPLrms, SELss spectrum, and 24- 

hour cumulative SEL extrapolated from 

measurements. 

(2) Level B harassment distance 

verification. (i) The Navy shall 

empirically determine the Level B 

harassment distance either by 

extrapolating from in situ measurements 

conducted at several points between 10 

and 500 m from the source, or by direct 

measurements to locate the distance 

where the received levels reach 120 dB 

or below, or at the ambient noise level. 

(ii) Level B harassment zones to be 

empirically verified include: 

(A) Rock socket drilling of at least 3 

30-in and 3 16-in piles; 

(B) Vibratory installation of at least 3 

36-in steel piles; and 

(C) Vibratory removal of at least 3 24- 

in concrete and 3 33-in concrete piles. 

(iii) For extent of Level B harassment 

zone verification, the Navy shall report 

the measured or extrapolated distances 

where the received levels SPLrms decay 

to 120-dB or to the ambient noise level, 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
36790 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

whichever is higher, as well as 

integration time for such SPLrms. 

(3) Source level calculation. The 

sound levels reported should be in 

median and linear average (i.e., taking 

averages of sound intensity before 

converting to dB). 

(4) Sediment type. The passive 

acoustic monitoring reports shall also 

include sediment type where 

measurements are made. 

(c) Reporting measures—(1) Annual 

reports. (i) The Navy shall submit an 

annual report within 90 days after each 

activity year, starting from the date 

when the LOA is issued (for the first 

annual report) or from the date when 

the previous annual report ended. 

(ii) Annual reports shall detail the 

monitoring protocol, summarize the 

data recorded during monitoring, and 

estimate the number of marine 

mammals that may have been harassed 

during the period of the report. 

(iii) Annual reports shall also include 

results from acoustic monitoring 

detailed in paragraph (b) of this section. 

(iv) NMFS shall provide comments 

within 30 days after receiving annual 

reports, and the Navy shall address the 

comments and submit revisions within 

30 days after receiving NMFS 

comments. If no comment is received 

from the NMFS within 30 days, the 

annual report is considered completed. 

(2) Final report. (i) The Navy shall 

submit a comprehensive summary 

report to NMFS not later than 90 days 

following the conclusion of marine 

mammal monitoring efforts described in 

this subpart. 

(ii) The final report shall synthesize 

all data recorded during marine 

mammal monitoring, and estimate the 

number of marine mammals that may 

have been harassed through the entire 

project. 

(iii) NMFS would provide comments 

within 30 days after receiving this 

report, and the Navy shall address the 

comments and submit revisions within 

30 days after receiving NMFS 

comments. If no comment is received 

from the NMFS within 30 days, the final 

report is considered as final. 

(3) Reporting of injured or dead 

marine mammals. (i) In the 

unanticipated event that the 

construction or demolition activities 

clearly cause the take of a marine 

mammal in a prohibited manner, such 

as an injury, serious injury, or mortality, 

the Navy shall immediately cease all 

operations and immediately report the 

incident to the NMFS Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, and the 

Greater Atlantic Region Stranding 

Coordinators. The report must include 

the following information: 

(A) Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the incident; 

(B) Description of the incident; 

(C) Status of all sound source use in 

the 24 hours preceding the incident; 

(D) Environmental conditions (e.g., 

wind speed and direction, sea state, 

cloud cover, visibility, and water 

depth); 

(E) Description of marine mammal 

observations in the 24 hours preceding 

the incident; 

(F) Species identification or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

(G) The fate of the animal(s); and 

(H) Photographs or video footage of 

the animal (if equipment is available). 

(ii) Activities shall not resume until 

NMFS is able to review the 

circumstances of the prohibited take. 

NMFS shall work with the Navy to 

determine what is necessary to 

minimize the likelihood of further 

prohibited take and ensure MMPA 

compliance. The Navy may not resume 

their activities until notified by NMFS 

via letter, email, or telephone. 

(iii) In the event that the Navy 

discovers an injured or dead marine 

mammal, and the lead PSO determines 

that the cause of the injury or death is 

unknown and the death is relatively 

recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state 

of decomposition as described in the 

next paragraph), the Navy will 

immediately report the incident to the 

NMFS Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, and the Greater Atlantic 

Regional Stranding Coordinators. The 

report must include the same 

information identified in paragraph 

(c)(3)(i)(A) of this section. Activities 

may continue while NMFS reviews the 

circumstances of the incident. NMFS 

will work with the Navy to determine 

whether modifications in the activities 

are appropriate. 

(iv) In the event that the Navy 

discovers an injured or dead marine 

mammal, and the lead protected species 

observer determines that the injury or 

death is not associated with or related 

to the activities authorized in the IHA 

(e.g., previously wounded animal, 

carcass with moderate to advanced 

decomposition, or scavenger damage), 

the Navy shall report the incident to the 

NMFS Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, and the Greater Atlantic 

Regional Stranding Coordinators, within 

24 hours of the discovery. The Navy 

shall provide photographs or video 

footage (if available) or other 

documentation of the stranded animal 

sighting to NMFS and the Marine 

Mammal Stranding Network. The Navy 

can continue its operations under such 

a case. 

§ 217.96 Letters of Authorization. 

(a) To incidentally take marine 

mammals pursuant to these regulations, 

the Navy must apply for and obtain 

LOAs in accordance with § 216.106 of 

this chapter for conducting the activity 

identified in § 217.90(c). 

(b) LOAs, unless suspended or 

revoked, may be effective for a period of 

time not to extend beyond the 

expiration date of these regulations. 

(c) If an LOAs expires prior to the 

expiration date of these regulations, the 

Navy may apply for and obtain a 

renewal of the LOAs. 

(d) In the event of projected changes 

to the activity or to mitigation, 

monitoring, reporting (excluding 

changes made pursuant to the adaptive 

management provision of § 217.97(c)(1)) 

required by an LOA, the Navy must 

apply for and obtain a modification of 

LOAs as described in § 217.97. 

(e) Each LOA shall set forth: 

(1) Permissible methods of incidental 

taking; 

(2) Means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact (i.e., 

mitigation) on the species, their habitat, 

and the availability of the species for 

subsistence uses; and 

(3) Requirements for monitoring and 

reporting. 

(f) Issuance of the LOAs shall be 

based on a determination that the level 

of taking shall be consistent with the 

findings made for the total taking 

allowable under these regulations. 

(g) Notice of issuance or denial of the 

LOAs shall be published in the Federal 

Register within 30 days of a 

determination. 

§ 217.97 Renewals and modifications of 

Letters of Authorization. 

(a) An LOA issued under § 216.106 of 

this chapter and § 217.96 for the activity 

identified in § 217.90(c) shall be 

renewed or modified upon request by 

the applicant, provided that: 

(1) The proposed specified activity 

and mitigation, monitoring, and 

reporting measures, as well as the 

anticipated impacts, are the same as 

those described and analyzed for these 

regulations (excluding changes made 

pursuant to the adaptive management 

provision in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section); and 

(2) NMFS determines that the 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

measures required by the previous 

LOAs under these regulations were 

implemented. 

(b) For LOA modification or renewal 

requests by the applicant that include 

changes to the activity or the mitigation, 

monitoring, or reporting measures 

(excluding changes made pursuant to 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36791 

the adaptive management provision in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section) that do 

not change the findings made for the 

regulations or result in no more than a 

minor change in the total estimated 

number of takes (or distribution by 

species or years), NMFS may publish a 

notice of proposed LOA in the Federal 

Register, including the associated 

analysis of the change, and solicit 

public comment before issuing the LOA. 

(c) An LOA issued under § 216.106 of 

this chapter and § 217.96 for the activity 

identified in § 217.90(c) may be 

modified by NMFS under the following 

circumstances: 

(1) Adaptive management. After 

consulting with the Navy regarding the 

practicability of the modifications, 

NMFS may modify (including by adding 

or removing measures) the existing 

mitigation, monitoring, or reporting 

measures if doing so creates a 

reasonable likelihood of more 

effectively accomplishing the goals of 

the mitigation and monitoring set forth 

in the preamble for these regulations. 

(i) Possible sources of data that could 

contribute to the decision to modify the 

mitigation, monitoring, or reporting 

measures in an LOA: 

(A) Results from the Navy’s 

monitoring from the previous year(s); 

(B) Results from other marine 

mammal and/or sound research or 

studies; or 

(C) Any information that reveals 

marine mammals may have been taken 

in a manner, extent or number not 

authorized by these regulations or 

subsequent LOAs. 

(ii) If, through adaptive management, 

the modifications to the mitigation, 

monitoring, or reporting measures are 

substantial, NMFS shall publish a notice 

of proposed LOA in the Federal 

Register and solicit public comment. 

(2) Emergencies. If NMFS determines 

that an emergency exists that poses a 

significant risk to the well-being of the 

species or stocks of marine mammals 

specified in LOAs issued pursuant to 

§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96, 

an LOA may be modified without prior 

notice or opportunity for public 

comment. Notice would be published in 

the Federal Register within thirty days 

of the action. 

§ 217.98 [Reserved] 

§ 217.99 [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2018–15938 Filed 7–30–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES