4970 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 

this document. For example, to find 

information about the potential issuance 

of Permit No. 12345A, you would go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for ‘‘12345A’’. 

V. Authority 

We issue this notice under the 

authority of the implementing 

regulations and under the authority of 

the Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992 

(16 U.S.C. 4901–4916). This notice is 

provided pursuant to section 112(4) of 

the Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992, 

50 CFR 15.26(c). 

Timothy MacDonald, 

Government Information Specialist, Branch 

of Permits, Division of Management 

Authority. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01373 Filed 1–24–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2023–0212; 

FXES111607MRG01–245–FF07CAMM00] 

Marine Mammals; Incidental Take 

During Specified Activities; Proposed 

Incidental Harassment Authorization 

for Southwest Alaska Stock of 

Northern Sea Otters in Kodiak, Alaska 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of receipt of application; 

proposed incidental harassment 

authorization; draft environmental 

assessment; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, in response to a 

request under the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act of 1972, as amended, 

from Trident Seafoods Corporation, 

propose to authorize nonlethal 

incidental take by harassment of small 

numbers of the Southwest Alaska stock 

of northern sea otters (Enhydra lutris 

kenyoni) for 1 year from the date of 

issuance of the incidental harassment 

authorization. The applicant requested 

this authorization for take by 

harassment that may result from 

activities associated with pile driving 

and marine construction activities in 

Near Island Channel in Kodiak, Alaska. 

We estimate that this project may result 

in the nonlethal incidental take by 

harassment of up to 460 northern sea 

otters from the Southwest Alaska stock. 

This proposed authorization, if 

finalized, will be for up to 3,160 takes 

of 460 northern sea otters by Level B 

harassment. No take by Level A 

harassment or lethal take are requested, 

or expected, and no such take will be 

authorized. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

incidental harassment authorization and 

the accompanying draft environmental 

assessment must be received by 

February 26, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: 

Accessing documents: You may view 

this proposed incidental harassment 

authorization, the application package, 

supporting information, draft 

environmental assessment, and the list 

of references cited herein at https://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R7–ES–2023–0212. Alternatively, 

you may request these documents from 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Submitting comments: You may 

submit comments on the proposed 

authorization by one of the following 

methods: 

• U.S. mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS–R7– 

ES–2023–212, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, MS: PRB (JAO/3W), 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803. 

• Internet: https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments to 

Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2023–212. 

We will post all comments at https:// 

www.regulations.gov. You may request 

that we withhold personal identifying 

information from public review; 

however, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. See Request for 

Public Comments for more information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Hamilton, by U.S. mail at the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS 341, 

1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 

99503; by email at R7mmmregulatory@

fws.gov; or by telephone at 1–800–362– 

5148. Individuals in the United States 

who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, 

or have a speech disability may dial 711 

(TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act of 1972 

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

authorizes the Secretary of the Interior 

(Secretary) to allow, upon request, the 

incidental, but not intentional, taking by 

harassment of small numbers of marine 

mammals in response to requests by 

U.S. citizens (as defined in title 50 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

in part 18, at 50 CFR 18.27(c)) engaged 

in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) in a specified 

geographic region during a period of not 

more than 1 year. The Secretary has 

delegated authority for implementation 

of the MMPA to the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (‘‘Service’’ or ‘‘we’’). 

According to the MMPA, the Service 

shall allow this incidental taking if we 

make findings that the total of such 

taking for the 1-year period: 

(1) is of small numbers of marine 

mammals of a species or stock; 

(2) will have a negligible impact on 

such species or stocks; and 

(3) will not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

these species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence use by Alaska Natives. 

If the requisite findings are made, we 

issue an authorization that sets forth the 

following, where applicable: 

(a) permissible methods of taking; 

(b) means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact on the 

species or stock and its habitat and the 

availability of the species or stock for 

subsistence uses; and 

(c) requirements for monitoring and 

reporting of such taking by harassment, 

including, in certain circumstances, 

requirements for the independent peer 

review of proposed monitoring plans or 

other research proposals. 

The term ‘‘take’’ means to harass, 

hunt, capture, or kill, or to attempt to 

harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine 

mammal. ‘‘Harassment’’ means any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which 

(i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild (the MMPA defines this as ‘‘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 (the MMPA defines this as 

‘‘Level B harassment’’). 

The terms ‘‘negligible impact’’ and 

‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’ are 

defined in 50 CFR 18.27 (i.e., 

regulations governing small takes of 

marine mammals incidental to specified 

activities) as follows: ‘‘Negligible 

impact’’ is 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. 

‘‘Unmitigable adverse impact’’ means an 

impact resulting from the specified 

activity: (1) that is likely to reduce the 

availability of the species to a level 

insufficient for a harvest to meet 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 4971 

subsistence needs by (i) causing the 

marine mammals to abandon or avoid 

hunting areas, (ii) directly displacing 

subsistence users, or (iii) placing 

physical barriers between the marine 

mammals and the subsistence hunters; 

and (2) that cannot be sufficiently 

mitigated by other measures to increase 

the availability of marine mammals to 

allow subsistence needs to be met. 

The term ‘‘small numbers’’ is also 

defined in 50 CFR 18.27. However, we 

do not rely on that definition here as it 

conflates ‘‘small numbers’’ with 

‘‘negligible impacts.’’ We recognize 

‘‘small numbers’’ and ‘‘negligible 

impacts’’ as two separate and distinct 

considerations when reviewing requests 

for incidental harassment authorizations 

(IHA) under the MMPA (see Natural 

Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Evans, 232 F. 

Supp. 2d 1003, 1025 (N.D. Cal. 2003)). 

Instead, for our small numbers 

determination, we estimate the likely 

number of marine mammals to be taken 

and evaluate if that number is small 

relative to the size of the species or 

stock. 

The term ‘‘least practicable adverse 

impact’’ is not defined in the MMPA or 

its enacting regulations. For this IHA, 

we ensure the least practicable adverse 

impact by requiring mitigation measures 

that are effective in reducing the impact 

of project activities, but they are not so 

restrictive as to make project activities 

unduly burdensome or impossible to 

undertake and complete. 

If the requisite findings are made, we 

shall issue an IHA, which may set forth 

the following, where applicable: (i) 

permissible methods of taking; (ii) other 

means of effecting the least practicable 

impact on the species or stock and its 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance, and on the 

availability of the species or stock for 

taking for subsistence uses by coastaldwelling Alaska Natives (if applicable); 

and (iii) requirements for monitoring 

and reporting take by harassment. 

Summary of Request 

On May 25, 2023, Trident Seafoods 

Corporation (hereafter ‘‘Trident’’ or ‘‘the 

applicant’’) submitted a request to the 

Service for authorization to take by 

Level B harassment a small number of 

northern sea otters (Enhydra lutris 

kenyoni) (hereafter ‘‘sea otters’’ or 

‘‘otters’’ unless another species is 

specified) from the Southwest Alaska 

stock. The Service sent requests for 

additional information on May 30, June 

13, July 26, August 30, September 25, 

and October 5, 2023. We received 

updated versions of the request on July 

17, September 5, and October 9. The 

Service determined the October 9, 2023, 

application to be adequate and 

complete. Trident expects take by 

harassment may occur during the 

construction of their crew bunkhouse 

and associated facilities in Near Island 

Channel at Kodiak, Alaska. 

Description of Specified Activities and 

Specified Geographic Region 

The specified activity (hereafter 

‘‘project’’) will include installation and 

removal of piles for the construction of 

a ∼46-by-23-meter (m) (∼150-by-75-foot 

(ft)) dock at Trident’s crew bunkhouse 

in Kodiak, Alaska (see figure below), 

between March 2024 and March 2025. 

Trident will remove sixty 41-centimeter 

(cm) (16-inch (in)) diameter steel piles, 

seventy-five 36-cm (14-in) steel piles, 

and 100 36-cm (14-in) timber piles, and 

will permanently install the following 

types of piles: twenty-six 41-cm (16-in) 

and fifty-two 61-cm (24-in) diameter 

steel piles. Twenty 61-cm (24-in) 

diameter steel piles will be temporarily 

installed. Dock components that will be 

installed out of water include bull rail, 

fenders, mooring cleat, pre-cast concrete 

dock surface, and mast lights. Piledriving activities will occur over 55 

nonconsecutive days for approximately 

94 hours during the course of 1 year 

from the date of issuance of the IHA. If 

the IHA is issued after Trident’s 

intended start date in March 2024, the 

schedule for conducting the specified 

activities may be adjusted accordingly. 

Pile installation will be done with a 

combination of vibratory and down-thehole (DTH) drilling. Temporary and 

extant piles will be removed by the 

deadpull method; it is anticipated that 

up to 10 percent of piles may require 

vibratory removal. Materials and 

equipment will be transported via 

barges, and workers will be transported 

to and from the barge work platform via 

skiff. 

Additional project details may be 

reviewed in the application materials 

available as described under ADDRESSES

or may also be requested as described 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
4972 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Specified Geographic Region 

Sea Otter Biology 

There are three sea otter stocks in 

Alaska: the Southeast Alaska stock, the 

Southcentral Alaska stock, and the 

Southwest Alaska stock. Only the 

Southwest Alaska stock is represented 

in the project area. Detailed information 

about the biology of this stock can be 

found in the most recent Southwest 

Alaska revised stock assessment report 

(USFWS 2023), announced in the 

Federal Register at 88 FR 53510, August 

8, 2023, and also available at https://

www.regulations.gov/document/FWSR7-ES-2022-0155-0012 and https://

www.fws.gov/media/northern-sea-ottersouthwest-alaska-stock-assessmentreport-0. 

Sea otters may be distributed 

anywhere within the specified project 

area other than upland areas; however, 

they generally occur in shallow water 

near the shoreline. They are most 

commonly observed within the 40-m 

(131-ft) depth contour (USFWS 2023), 

although they can be found in areas 

with deeper water. Ocean depth is 

generally correlated with distance to 

shore, and sea otters typically remain 

within 1 to 2 kilometers (km) (0.62 to 

1.24 miles (mi)) of shore (Riedman and 

Estes 1990). They tend to be found 

closer to shore during storms but 

venture farther out during good weather 

and calm seas (Lensink 1962; Kenyon 

1969). 

Sea otters are nonmigratory and 

generally do not disperse over long 

distances (Garshelis and Garshelis 

1984), usually remaining within a few 

kilometers of their established feeding 

grounds (Kenyon 1981). Breeding males 

stay for all or part of the year in a 

breeding territory covering up to 1 km 

(0.62 mi) of coastline, while adult 

females maintain home ranges of 

approximately 8 to 16 km (5 to 10 mi), 

which may include one or more male 

territories. Juveniles move greater 

distances between resting and foraging 

areas (Lensink 1962; Kenyon 1969; 

Riedman and Estes 1990; Tinker and 

Estes 1996). Although sea otters 

generally remain local to an area, they 

are capable of long-distance travel. Sea 

otters in Alaska have shown daily 

movement distances greater than 3 km 

(1.9 mi) at speeds up to 5.5 km per hour 

(3.4 mi per hour) (Garshelis and 

Garshelis 1984). 

Southwest Alaska Sea Otter Stock 

The Southwest Alaska sea otter stock 

occurs from western Cook Inlet to Attu 

Island in the Aleutian chain (USFWS 

2023). On August 9, 2005, the 

Southwest Alaska sea otter stock was 

listed as threatened under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) as a 

distinct population segment (DPS) (70 

FR 46366). This stock is divided into 

five management units: Western 

Aleutians; Eastern Aleutians; South 

Alaska Peninsula; Bristol Bay; and 

Kodiak, Kamishak, and Alaska 

Peninsula (USFWS 2013, 2023). The 

specified geographic region occurs 

within the ranges of the Kodiak, 

Kamishak, and Alaska Peninsula 

management units. 

The range of the Kodiak, Kamishak, 

and Alaska Peninsula management unit 

extends from Castle Cape to Western 

Cook Inlet on the southern side of the 

Alaska Peninsula and also encompasses 

Kodiak Island (USFWS 2020). The 

specified geographic region is within 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICESEN25JA24.007</GPH>

N 

A 

Alaska 

Specified geographic region of project 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 4973 

the range of the sea otter population at 

Kodiak Archipelago. Waters 

surrounding Kodiak Island were 

surveyed in 2014 using the BodkinUdevitz aerial survey protocol (Cobb 

2018). The estimate of sea otter density 

that resulted from these surveys is 2.54 

animals per square kilometer (km2). 

Data collected by ABR, Inc.— 

Environmental Research & Services 

during work at the Kodiak ferry terminal 

(ABR 2016) indicate periods with 

presence of higher numbers of sea 

otters, occasionally with rafts of above 

200 animals and daily counts of sea 

otters totaling over 450 individuals. It is 

likely that sea otters use Near Island 

Channel, which is relatively protected 

in comparison with surrounding 

coastline, for shelter during storm 

events. 

Potential Impacts of the Specified 

Activities on Marine Mammals 

Effects of Noise on Sea Otters 

We characterized ‘‘noise’’ as sound 

released into the environment from 

human activities that exceeds ambient 

levels or interferes with normal sound 

production or reception by sea otters. 

The terms ‘‘acoustic disturbance’’ or 

‘‘acoustic harassment’’ are disturbances 

or harassment events resulting from 

noise exposure. Potential effects of noise 

exposure are likely to depend on the 

distance of the sea otter from the sound 

source, the level and intensity of sound 

the sea otter receives, background noise 

levels, noise frequency, noise duration, 

and whether the noise is pulsed or 

continuous. The actual noise level 

perceived by individual sea otters will 

also depend on whether the sea otter is 

above or below water and atmospheric 

and environmental conditions. 

Temporary disturbance of sea otters or 

localized displacement reactions are the 

most likely effects to occur from noise 

exposure. 

Sea Otter Hearing 

Pile driving and marine construction 

activities will fall within the hearing 

range of sea otters. Controlled sound 

exposure trials on southern sea otters 

(Enhydra lutris nereis) indicate that sea 

otters can hear frequencies between 125 

hertz (Hz) and 38 kilohertz (kHz) with 

best sensitivity between 1.2 and 27 kHz 

(Ghoul and Reichmuth 2014). Aerial 

and underwater audiograms for a 

captive adult male southern sea otter in 

the presence of ambient noise suggest 

the sea otter’s hearing was less sensitive 

to high-frequency (greater than 22 kHz) 

and low-frequency (less than 2 kHz) 

sound than terrestrial mustelids but was 

similar to that of a California sea lion 

(Zalophus californianus). However, the 

sea otter was still able to hear lowfrequency sounds, and the detection 

thresholds for sounds between 0.125–1 

kHz were between 116–101 decibels 

(dB), respectively. Dominant 

frequencies of southern sea otter 

vocalizations are between 3 and 8 kHz, 

with some energy extending above 60 

kHz (McShane et al. 1995, Ghoul and 

Reichmuth 2012). 

Exposure to high levels of sound may 

cause changes in behavior, masking of 

communications, temporary or 

permanent changes in hearing 

sensitivity, discomfort, and injury to 

marine mammals. Unlike other marine 

mammals, sea otters do not rely on 

sound to orient themselves, locate prey, 

or communicate under water; therefore, 

masking of communications by 

anthropogenic sound is less of a concern 

than for other marine mammals. 

However, sea otters, especially mothers 

and pups, do use sound for 

communication in air (McShane et al. 

1995), and sea otters may monitor 

underwater sound to avoid predators 

(Davis et al. 1987). 

Exposure Thresholds 

Underwater Sounds 

Noise exposure criteria for identifying 

underwater noise levels capable of 

causing Level A harassment to marine 

mammal species, including sea otters, 

have been established using the same 

methods as those used by the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

(Southall et al. 2019). These criteria are 

based on estimated levels of sound 

exposure capable of causing a 

permanent shift in sensitivity of hearing 

(i.e., a permanent threshold shift (PTS) 

(NMFS 2018)). PTS occurs when noise 

exposure causes hairs within the inner 

ear system to die (Ketten 2012). 

Although the effects of PTS are, by 

definition, permanent, PTS does not 

equate to total hearing loss. 

Sound exposure thresholds 

incorporate two metrics of exposure: the 

peak level of instantaneous exposure 

likely to cause PTS and the cumulative 

sound exposure level (SELCUM) during a 

24-hour period. They also include 

weighting adjustments for the 

sensitivity of different species to varying 

frequencies. PTS-based injury criteria 

were developed from theoretical 

extrapolation of observations of 

temporary threshold shifts (TTS) 

detected in lab settings during sound 

exposure trials (Finneran 2015). 

Southall and colleagues (2019) predict 

PTS for sea otters, which are included 

in the ‘‘other marine carnivores’’ 

category, will occur at 232 dB peak or 

203 dB SELCUM for impulsive 

underwater sound and 219 dB SELCUM

for non-impulsive (continuous) 

underwater sound. 

Thresholds based on TTS have been 

used as a proxy for Level B harassment 

(i.e., 70 FR 1871, January 11, 2005; 71 

FR 3260, January 20, 2006; 73 FR 41318, 

July 18, 2008). Southall et al. (2007) 

derived TTS thresholds for pinnipeds 

(walruses, seals, and sea lions) based on 

212 dB peak and 171 dB SELCUM. 

Exposures resulting in TTS in pinnipeds 

were found to range from 152 to 174 dB 

(183 to 206 dB SEL) (Kastak et al. 2005), 

with a persistent TTS, if not a PTS, after 

60 seconds of 184 dB SEL (Kastak et al. 

2008). Kastelein et al. (2012) found 

small but statistically significant TTS at 

approximately 170 dB SEL (136 dB, 60 

minutes) and 178 dB SEL (148 dB, 15 

minutes). Based on these findings, 

Southall et al. (2019) developed TTS 

thresholds for sea otters, which are 

included in the ‘‘other marine 

carnivores’’ category, of 188 dB SELCUM

for impulsive sounds and 199 dB 

SELCUM for non-impulsive sounds. 

The NMFS (2018) criteria do not 

identify thresholds for avoidance of 

Level B harassment. For pinnipeds 

(seals and sea lions), NMFS has adopted 

a 160-dB threshold for Level B 

harassment from exposure to impulsive 

noise and a 120-dB threshold for 

continuous noise (NMFS 1998, HESS 

1999, NMFS 2018). These thresholds 

were developed from observations of 

mysticete (baleen) whales responding to 

airgun operations (e.g., Malme et al. 

1983; Malme and Miles 1983; 

Richardson et al. 1986, 1995) and from 

equating Level B harassment with noise 

levels capable of causing TTS in lab 

settings. Southall et al. (2007, 2019) 

assessed behavioral response studies 

and found considerable variability 

among pinnipeds. The authors 

determined that exposures between 

approximately 90 to 140 dB generally do 

not appear to induce strong behavioral 

responses from pinnipeds in water. 

However, they found behavioral effects, 

including avoidance, become more 

likely in the range between 120 to 160 

dB, and most marine mammals showed 

some, albeit variable, responses to 

sound between 140 to 180 dB. Wood et 

al. (2012) adapted the approach 

identified in Southall et al. (2007) to 

develop a probabilistic scale for marine 

mammal taxa at which 10 percent, 50 

percent, and 90 percent of individuals 

exposed are assumed to produce a 

behavioral response. For many marine 

mammals, including pinnipeds, these 

response rates were set at sound 

pressure levels of 140, 160, and 180 dB, 

respectively. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
4974 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 

We have evaluated these thresholds 

and determined that the Level B 

threshold of 120 dB for non-impulsive 

noise is not applicable to sea otters. The 

120-dB threshold is based on studies in 

which gray whales (Eschrichtius 

robustus) were exposed to experimental 

playbacks of industrial noise (Malme et 

al. 1983; Malme and Miles 1983). 

During these playback studies, southern 

sea otter responses to industrial noise 

were also monitored (Riedman 1983, 

1984). Gray whales exhibited avoidance 

to industrial noise at the 120-dB 

threshold; however, there was no 

evidence of disturbance reactions or 

avoidance in southern sea otters. Thus, 

given the different range of frequencies 

to which sea otters and gray whales are 

sensitive, the NMFS 120-dB threshold 

based on gray whale behavior is not 

appropriate for predicting sea otter 

behavioral responses, particularly for 

low-frequency sound. 

Based on the lack of sea otter 

disturbance response or any other 

reaction to the playback studies from 

the 1980s, as well as the absence of a 

clear pattern of disturbance or 

avoidance behaviors attributable to 

underwater sound levels up to about 

160 dB resulting from low-frequency 

broadband noise, we assume 120 dB is 

not an appropriate behavioral response 

threshold for sea otters exposed to 

continuous underwater noise. 

Based on the best available scientific 

information about sea otters, and closely 

related marine mammals when sea otter 

data are limited, the Service has set 160 

dB of received underwater sound as a 

threshold for Level B harassment by 

disturbance for sea otters for this 

proposed IHA. Exposure to unmitigated 

in-water noise levels between 125 Hz 

and 38 kHz that are greater than 160 

dB—for both impulsive and nonimpulsive sound sources—will be 

considered by the Service as Level B 

harassment. Thresholds for Level A 

harassment (which entails the potential 

for injury) will be 232 dB peak or 203 

dB SELCUM for impulsive sounds and 

219 dB SELCUM for continuous sounds 

(table 1). 

Airborne Sounds 

The NMFS (2018) guidance neither 

addresses thresholds for preventing 

injury or disturbance from airborne 

noise, nor provides thresholds for 

avoidance of Level B harassment. 

Southall et al. (2007) suggested 

thresholds for PTS and TTS for sea lions 

exposed to nonpulsed airborne noise of 

172.5 and 159 dB re (20 mPa)2-s SEL. 

Conveyance of underwater noise into 

the air is of little concern since the 

effects of pressure release and 

interference at the water’s surface 

reduce underwater noise transmission 

into the air. For activities that create 

both in-air and underwater sounds, we 

will estimate take based on parameters 

for underwater noise transmission. 

Considering sound energy travels more 

efficiently through water than through 

air, this estimation will also account for 

exposures to sea otters at the surface. 

TABLE 1—TEMPORARY THRESHOLD SHIFT (TTS) AND PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT (PTS) THRESHOLDS ESTABLISHED

BY SOUTHALL ET AL. (2019) THROUGH MODELING AND EXTRAPOLATION FOR ‘‘OTHER MARINE CARNIVORES,’’ WHICH

INCLUDES SEA OTTERS

TTS PTS 

Non-impulsive Impulsive Non-impulsive Impulsive 

SELCUM SELCUM Peak SPL SELCUM SELCUM Peak SPL 

Air ............................................................................ 157 146 170 177 161 176 

Water ....................................................................... 199 188 226 219 203 232 

Note: Values are weighted for other marine carnivores’ hearing thresholds and given in cumulative sound exposure level (SELCUM dB re (20 

micropascal (μPa) in air and SELCUM dB re 1 μPa in water) for impulsive and non-impulsive sounds and unweighted peak sound pressure level 

(SPL) in air (dB re 20μPa) and water (dB 1μPa) (impulsive sounds only). 

Evidence From Sea Otter Studies 

Sea otters may be more resistant to the 

effects of sound disturbance and human 

activities than other marine mammals. 

For example, observers have noted no 

changes from southern sea otters in 

regard to their presence, density, or 

behavior in response to underwater 

sounds from industrial noise recordings 

at 110 dB and a frequency range of 50 

Hz to 20 kHz and airguns, even at the 

closest distance of 0.5 nautical miles (<1 

km or 0.6 mi) (Riedman 1983). Southern 

sea otters did not respond noticeably to 

noise from a single 1,638 cubic 

centimeters (cm3) (100 cubic inches 

[in3]) airgun, and no sea otter 

disturbance reactions were evident 

when a 67,006 cm3 (4,089 in3) airgun 

array was as close as 0.9 km (0.6 mi) to 

sea otters (Riedman 1983, 1984). 

However, southern sea otters displayed 

slight reactions to airborne engine noise 

(Riedman 1983). 

Northern sea otters were observed to 

exhibit a limited response to a variety of 

airborne and underwater sounds, 

including a warble tone, sea otter pup 

calls, calls from killer whales (Orcinus 

orca) (which are predators to sea otters), 

air horns, and an underwater noise 

harassment system designed to drive 

marine mammals away from crude oil 

spills (Davis et al. 1988). These sounds 

elicited reactions from northern sea 

otters, including startle responses and 

movement away from noise sources. 

However, these reactions were observed 

only when northern sea otters were 

within 100 to 200 m (328 to 656 ft) of 

noise sources. Further, northern sea 

otters appeared to become habituated to 

the noises within 2 hours or, at most, 3– 

4 days (Davis et al. 1988). 

Noise exposure may be influenced by 

the amount of time sea otters spend at 

the water’s surface. Noise at the water’s 

surface can be attenuated by turbulence 

from wind and waves more quickly 

compared to deeper water, reducing 

potential noise exposure (Greene and 

Richardson 1988, Richardson et al. 

1995). Additionally, turbulence at the 

water’s surface limits the transference of 

sound from water to air. A sea otter with 

its head above water will be exposed to 

only a small fraction of the sound 

energy traveling through the water 

beneath it. The average amount of time 

that sea otters spend above the water 

each day while resting and grooming 

varies between males and females and 

across seasons (Esslinger et al. 2014, 

Zellmer et al. 2021). For example, 

female sea otters foraged for an average 

of 8.78 hours per day compared to male 

sea otters, which foraged for an average 

of 7.85 hours per day during the 

summer months (Esslinger et al. 2014). 

Male and female sea otters spend an 

average of 63 to 67 percent of their day 

at the surface resting and grooming 

during the summer months (Esslinger et 

al. 2014). Few studies have evaluated 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 4975 

foraging times during the winter 

months. Garshelis et al. (1986) found 

that foraging times increased from 5.1 

hours per day to 16.6 hours per day in 

the winter; however, Gelatt et al. (2002) 

did not find a significant difference in 

seasonal foraging times. It is likely that 

seasonal variation is determined by 

seasonal differences in energetic 

demand and the quality and availability 

of prey sources (Esslinger et al. 2014). 

These findings suggest that the large 

portion of the day sea otters spend at the 

surface may help limit sea otters’ 

exposure during noise-generating 

operations. 

Sea otter sensitivity to industrial 

activities may be influenced by the 

overall level of human activity within 

the sea otter population’s range. In 

locations that lack frequent human 

activity, sea otters appear to have a 

lower threshold for disturbance. Sea 

otters in Alaska exhibited escape 

behaviors in response to the presence 

and approach of vessels (Udevitz et al. 

1995). Behaviors included diving or 

actively swimming away from a vessel, 

entering the water from haulouts, and 

disbanding groups with sea otters 

swimming in multiple different 

directions (Udevitz et al. 1995). Sea 

otters in Alaska were also observed to 

avoid areas with heavy boat traffic in 

the summer and return to these areas 

during seasons with less vessel traffic 

(Garshelis and Garshelis 1984). In Cook 

Inlet, sea otters drifting on a tide 

trajectory that would have taken them 

within 500 m (0.3 mi) of an active 

offshore drilling rig were observed to 

swim in order to avoid a close approach 

of the drilling rig despite near-ambient 

noise levels (BlueCrest 2013). 

Individual sea otters in Near Island 

Channel will likely show a range of 

responses to noise from pile-driving 

activities. Some sea otters will likely 

dive, show startle responses, change 

direction of travel, or prematurely 

surface. Sea otters reacting to piledriving activities may divert time and 

attention from biologically important 

behaviors, such as feeding and nursing 

pups. Sea otter responses to disturbance 

can result in energetic costs, which 

increases the amount of prey required 

by sea otters (Barrett 2019). This 

increased prey consumption may 

impact sea otter prey availability and 

cause sea otters to spend more time 

foraging and less time resting (Barrett 

2019). Some sea otters may abandon the 

project area and return when the 

disturbance has ceased. Based on the 

observed movement patterns of sea 

otters (i.e., Lensink 1962; Kenyon 1969, 

1981; Garshelis and Garshelis 1984; 

Riedman and Estes 1990; Tinker and 

Estes 1996), we expect some individuals 

will respond to pile-driving activities by 

dispersing to nearby areas of suitable 

habitat; however, other sea otters, 

especially territorial adult males, are 

less likely to be displaced. 

Consequences of Disturbance 

The reactions of wildlife to 

disturbance can range from short-term 

behavioral changes to long-term impacts 

that affect survival and reproduction. 

When disturbed by noise, animals may 

respond behaviorally (e.g., escape 

response) or physiologically (e.g., 

increased heart rate, hormonal response) 

(Harms et al. 1997, Tempel and 

Gutie ́rrez 2003). Theoretically, the 

energy expense and associated 

physiological effects from repeated 

disturbance could ultimately lead to 

reduced survival and reproduction (Gill 

and Sutherland 2000, Frid and Dill 

2002). For example, South American sea 

lions (Otaria byronia) visited by tourists 

exhibited an increase in the state of 

alertness and a decrease in maternal 

attendance and resting time on land, 

thereby potentially reducing population 

size (Pavez et al. 2015). In another 

example, killer whales that lost feeding 

opportunities due to boat traffic faced a 

substantial (18 percent) estimated 

decrease in energy intake (Williams et 

al. 2006). In severe cases, such 

disturbance effects could have 

population-level consequences. For 

example, increased disturbance by 

tourism vessels has been associated 

with a decline in abundance of 

bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops spp.) 

(Bejder et al. 2006, Lusseau et al. 2006). 

However, these examples evaluated 

sources of disturbance that were longer 

term and more consistent than the 

temporary and intermittent nature of the 

specified project activities. 

These examples illustrate direct 

effects on survival and reproductive 

success, but disturbances can also have 

indirect effects. Response to noise 

disturbance is considered a nonlethal 

stimulus that is similar to an 

antipredator response (Frid and Dill 

2002). Sea otters are susceptible to 

predation, particularly from killer 

whales and eagles, and have a welldeveloped antipredator response to 

perceived threats. For example, the 

presence of a harbor seal (Phoca 

vitulina) did not appear to disturb 

southern sea otters, but they 

demonstrated a fear response in the 

presence of a California sea lion by 

actively looking above and beneath the 

water (Limbaugh 1961). 

Although an increase in vigilance or 

a flight response is nonlethal, a tradeoff 

occurs between risk avoidance and 

energy conservation. An animal’s 

reactions to noise disturbance may 

cause stress and direct an animal’s 

energy away from fitness-enhancing 

activities such as feeding and mating 

(Frid and Dill 2002, Goudie and Jones 

2004). For example, southern sea otters 

in areas with heavy recreational boat 

traffic demonstrated changes in 

behavioral time budgeting, showing 

decreased time resting and changes in 

haulout patterns and distribution 

(Benham 2006, Maldini et al. 2012). 

Chronic stress can also lead to 

weakened reflexes, lowered learning 

responses (Welch and Welch 1970, van 

Polanen Petel et al. 2006), compromised 

immune function, decreased body 

weight, and abnormal thyroid function 

(Selye 1979). 

Changes in behavior resulting from 

anthropogenic disturbance can include 

increased agonistic interactions between 

individuals or temporary or permanent 

abandonment of an area (Barton et al. 

1998). Additionally, the extent of 

previous exposure to humans (Holcomb 

et al. 2009), the type of disturbance 

(Andersen et al. 2012), and the age or 

sex of the individuals (Shaughnessy et 

al. 2008, Holcomb et al. 2009) may 

influence the type and extent of 

response in individual sea otters. 

Vessel Activities 

Vessel collisions with marine 

mammals can result in death or serious 

injury. Wounds resulting from vessel 

strike may include massive trauma, 

hemorrhaging, broken bones, or 

propeller lacerations (Knowlton and 

Kraus 2001). An animal may be harmed 

by a vessel when the vessel runs over 

the animal at the surface, the animal 

hits the bottom of a vessel while the 

animal is surfacing, or the animal is cut 

by a vessel’s propeller. 

Vessel strike has been documented as 

a cause of death across all three stocks 

of northern sea otters in Alaska. Since 

2002, the Service has conducted 1,433 

sea otter necropsies to determine cause 

of death, disease incidence, and the 

general health status of sea otters in 

Alaska. Vessel strike or blunt trauma 

was identified as a definitive or 

presumptive cause of death in 65 cases 

(4 percent) (USFWS 2020). In most of 

these cases, trauma was determined to 

be the ultimate cause of death; however, 

there was a contributing factor, such as 

disease or biotoxin exposure, which 

incapacitated the sea otter and made it 

more vulnerable to vessel strike 

(USFWS 2023). 

Vessel speed influences the likelihood 

of vessel strikes involving sea otters. 

The probability of death or serious 

injury to a marine mammal increases as 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
4976 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 

vessel speed increases (Laist et al. 2001, 

Vanderlaan and Taggart 2007). Sea 

otters spend a considerable portion of 

their time at the water’s surface 

(Esslinger et al. 2014). They are 

typically visually aware of approaching 

vessels and can move away if a vessel 

is not traveling too quickly. Mitigation 

measures to be applied to vessel 

operations to prevent collisions or 

interactions are included below in the 

proposed authorization portion of this 

document under Avoidance and 

Minimization. 

Sea otters exhibit behavioral 

flexibility in response to vessels, and 

their responses may be influenced by 

the intensity and duration of the vessel’s 

activity. As noted above, sea otter 

populations in Alaska were observed to 

avoid areas with heavy vessel traffic but 

return to those same areas during 

seasons with less vessel traffic 

(Garshelis and Garshelis 1984). Sea 

otters have also shown signs of 

disturbance or escape behaviors in 

response to the presence and approach 

of survey vessels, including sea otters 

diving and/or actively swimming away 

from a vessel, sea otters on haulouts 

entering the water, and groups of sea 

otters disbanding and swimming in 

multiple different directions (Udevitz et 

al. 1995). 

Additionally, sea otter responses to 

vessels may be influenced by the sea 

otter’s previous experience with vessels. 

Groups of southern sea otters in two 

locations in California showed markedly 

different responses to kayakers 

approaching to within specific 

distances, suggesting a different level of 

tolerance between the groups 

(Gunvalson 2011). Benham (2006) found 

evidence that the sea otters exposed to 

high levels of recreational activity may 

have become more tolerant than 

individuals in less-disturbed areas. Sea 

otters off the California coast showed 

only mild interest in vessels passing 

within hundreds of meters and 

appeared to have habituated to vessel 

traffic (Riedman 1983, Curland 1997). 

These findings indicate that sea otters 

may adjust their responses to vessel 

activities depending on the level of 

activity. Vessel activity during the 

project includes the transit of four 

barges for materials and construction, 

all of which will remain onsite, mostly 

stationary, to support the work; 

additionally, four skiffs will be used 

during the project for transporting 

workers short distances to the crane 

barges. Vessels will not be used 

extensively or over a long duration 

during the planned work; therefore, we 

do not anticipate that sea otters will 

experience changes in behavior 

indicative of tolerance or habituation. 

Effects on Sea Otter Habitat and Prey 

Physical and biological features of 

habitat essential to the conservation of 

sea otters include the benthic 

invertebrates that sea otters eat and the 

shallow rocky areas and kelp beds that 

provide cover from predators. Sea otter 

habitat in the project area includes 

coastal areas within the 40-m (131-ft) 

depth contour where high densities of 

sea otters have been detected. 

Industrial activities, such as pile 

driving, may generate in-water noise at 

levels that can temporarily displace sea 

otters from important habitat and 

impact sea otter prey species. The 

primary prey species for sea otters are 

sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus spp. 

and Mesocentrotus spp.), abalone 

(Haliotis spp.), clams (e.g., 

Clinocardium nuttallii, Leukoma 

staminea, and Saxidomus gigantea), 

mussels (Mytilus spp.), crabs (e.g., 

Metacarcinus magister, Pugettia spp., 

Telemessus cheiragonus, and Cancer 

spp.), and squid (Loligo spp.) (Tinker 

and Estes 1996, LaRoche et al. 2021). 

When preferential prey are scarce, sea 

otters will also eat kelp, slow-moving 

benthic fishes, sea cucumbers (e.g., 

Apostichopus californicus), egg cases of 

rays, turban snails (Tegula spp.), 

octopuses (e.g., Octopus spp.), barnacles 

(Balanus spp.), sea stars (e.g., 

Pycnopodia helianthoides), scallops 

(e.g., Patinopecten caurinus), rock 

oysters (Saccostrea spp.), worms (e.g., 

Eudistylia spp.), and chitons (e.g., 

Mopalia spp.) (Riedman and Estes 1990, 

Davis and Bodkin 2021). 

Several studies have addressed the 

effects of noise on invertebrates (Tidau 

and Briffa 2016, Carroll et al. 2017). 

Behavioral changes, such as an increase 

in lobster (Homarus americanus) 

feeding levels (Payne et al. 2007), an 

increase in avoidance behavior by wildcaught captive reef squid (Sepioteuthis 

australis) (Fewtrell and McCauley 

2012), and deeper digging by razor 

clams (Sinonovacula constricta) (Peng et 

al. 2016) have been observed following 

experimental exposures to sound. 

Physical changes have also been 

observed in response to increased sound 

levels, including changes in serum 

biochemistry and hepatopancreatic cells 

in lobsters (Payne et al. 2007) and longterm damage to the statocysts required 

for hearing in several cephalopod 

species (Andre ́ et al. 2011, Sole ́ et al. 

2013). De Soto et al. (2013) found 

impaired embryonic development in 

scallop (Pecten novaezelandiae) larvae 

when exposed to 160 dB. Christian et al. 

(2003) noted a reduction in the speed of 

egg development of bottom-dwelling 

crabs following exposure to noise; 

however, the sound level (221 dB at 2 

m or 6.6 ft) was far higher than the 

planned project activities will produce. 

Industrial noise can also impact larval 

settlement by masking the natural 

acoustic settlement cues for crustaceans 

and fish (Pine et al. 2012, Simpson et al. 

2016, Tidau and Briffa 2016). 

While these studies provide evidence 

of deleterious effects to invertebrates as 

a result of increased sound levels, 

Carroll et al. (2017) caution that there is 

a wide disparity between results 

obtained in field and laboratory settings. 

In experimental settings, changes were 

observed only when animals were 

housed in enclosed tanks, and many 

were exposed to prolonged bouts of 

continuous, pure tones. We would not 

expect similar results in open marine 

conditions. It is unlikely that noises 

generated by project activities will have 

any lasting effect on sea otter prey given 

the short-term duration of sounds 

produced by each component of the 

planned work. 

Noise-generating activities that 

interact with the seabed can produce 

vibrations, resulting in the disturbance 

of sediment and increased turbidity in 

the water. Although turbidity is likely to 

have little impact on sea otters and prey 

species (Todd et al. 2015), there may be 

some impacts from vibrations and 

increased sedimentation. For example, 

mussels (Mytilus edulis) exhibited 

changes in valve gape and oxygen 

demand, and hermit crabs (Pagurus 

bernhardus) exhibited limited 

behavioral changes in response to 

vibrations caused by pile driving 

(Roberts et al. 2016). Increased 

sedimentation is likely to reduce sea 

otter visibility, which may result in 

reduced foraging efficiency and a 

potential shift to less-preferred prey 

species. These outcomes may cause sea 

otters to spend more energy on foraging 

or processing the prey items; however, 

the impacts of a change in energy 

expenditure are not likely seen at the 

population level (Newsome et al. 2015). 

Additionally, the benthic invertebrates 

may be impacted by increased 

sedimentation, resulting in higher 

abundances of opportunistic species 

that recover quickly from industrial 

activities that increase sedimentation 

(Kotta et al. 2009). Although sea otter 

foraging could be impacted by industrial 

activities that cause vibrations and 

increased sedimentation, it is more 

likely that sea otters would be 

temporarily displaced from the project 

area due to impacts from noise rather 

than vibrations and sedimentation. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 4977 

Potential Impacts of the Specified 

Activities on Subsistence Uses 

The planned specified activities will 

occur near marine subsistence harvest 

areas used by Alaska Native Peoples 

from Kodiak and the surrounding areas. 

Subsistence harvest of sea otters around 

Kodiak Island takes place primarily in 

Ouzinkie, Kodiak, and Port Lions with 

totals of 422, 192, and 130 sea otters 

taken, respectively, from 2017 through 

2021. 

The planned project would occur 

within the Kodiak city limits, where 

firearm use is prohibited. The area 

potentially affected by the planned 

project does not significantly overlap 

with current subsistence harvest areas. 

Construction activities will not preclude 

access to hunting areas or interfere in 

any way with individuals wishing to 

hunt. Despite no conflict with 

subsistence use being anticipated, the 

Service will conduct outreach with 

potentially affected communities to see 

whether there are any questions, 

concerns, or potential conflicts 

regarding subsistence use in those areas. 

If any conflicts are identified in the 

future, Trident will develop a plan of 

cooperation specifying the steps 

necessary to minimize any effects the 

project may have on subsistence 

harvest. 

Estimated Take 

Definitions of Incidental Take Under the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

Below we provide definitions of three 

potential types of take of sea otters. The 

Service does not anticipate and is not 

authorizing lethal take as a part of this 

proposed IHA; however, the definitions 

of these take types are provided for 

context and background: 

Lethal Take—Human activity may 

result in biologically significant impacts 

to sea otters. In the most serious 

interactions, human actions can result 

in mortality of sea otters. 

Level A Harassment—Human activity 

may result in the injury of sea otters. 

Level A harassment, for nonmilitary 

readiness activities, is defined as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance that 

has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild. 

Level B Harassment—Level B 

Harassment, for nonmilitary readiness 

activities, means any act of pursuit, 

torment, or annoyance that 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, feeding, 

or sheltering. Changes in behavior that 

disrupt biologically significant 

behaviors or activities for the affected 

animal are indicative of take by Level B 

harassment under the MMPA. 

The Service has identified the 

following sea otter behaviors as 

indicative of possible Level B 

harassment: 

• Swimming away at a fast pace on 

belly (i.e., porpoising); 

• Repeatedly raising the head 

vertically above the water to get a better 

view (i.e., spyhopping) while apparently 

agitated or while swimming away; 

• In the case of a pup, repeatedly 

spyhopping while hiding behind and 

holding onto its mother’s head; 

• Abandoning prey or feeding area; 

• Ceasing to nurse and/or rest 

(applies to dependent pups); 

• Ceasing to rest (applies to 

independent animals); 

• Ceasing to use movement corridors; 

• Ceasing mating behaviors; 

• Shifting/jostling/agitation in a raft 

so that the raft disperses; 

• Sudden diving of an entire raft; or 

• Flushing animals off a haulout. 

This list is not meant to encompass all 

possible behaviors; other behavioral 

responses may equate to take by Level 

B harassment. Relatively minor changes 

in behavior such as increased vigilance 

or a short-term change in direction of 

travel are not likely to disrupt 

biologically important behavioral 

patterns, and the Service does not view 

such minor changes in behavior as 

indicative of a take by Level B 

harassment. 

Calculating Take 

We assumed all animals exposed to 

underwater sound levels that meet the 

acoustic exposure criteria defined above 

in Exposure Thresholds will experience 

take by Level A or Level B harassment 

due to exposure to underwater noise. 

Spatially explicit zones of 

ensonification were established around 

the planned construction location to 

estimate the number of otters that may 

be exposed to these sound levels. 

We determined the number of otters 

expected to be present in Near Island 

Channel using sightings data collected 

during work conducted at the Kodiak 

Ferry terminal between November 2015 

and June 2016 (ABR 2016). Sea otters 

were generally observed in singles or 

small groups with total daily counts of 

fewer than ∼40 animals. However, there 

were several days on which rafts of 50 

to 200 sea otters were observed with 

total daily counts of up to 459 animals. 

Sightings of large rafts and high daily 

totals coincided with days on which the 

observers noted higher sea states and it 

is likely that sea otters came from 

nearby exposed coastline to seek shelter 

Near Island Channel during storm 

events. 

The project can be divided into three 

major components: DTH drilling, pile 

driving using a vibratory driver, and 

vessel use to support construction. Each 

of these components will generate a 

different type of in-water noise. 

Vibratory pile driving and the use of 

vessels will produce non-impulsive or 

continuous noise and DTH drilling is 

considered to produce both impulsive 

and continuous noise (NMFS 2020). A 

summary of the sizes and types of piles, 

installation and removal methods, and 

time to install and remove piles is 

shown in table 2. 

The level of sound anticipated from 

each project component was established 

using recorded data from several 

sources listed in table 3. We used the 

NMFS Technical Guidance and User 

Spreadsheet (NMFS 2018, 2020) to 

determine the distance at which sound 

levels would attenuate to Level A 

harassment thresholds. Empirical data 

from the proxy projects were used to 

determine the distance at which sound 

levels would attenuate to Level B 

harassment thresholds (table 1). The 

weighting factor adjustment included in 

the NMFS user spreadsheet accounts for 

sounds created in portions of an 

organism’s hearing range where they 

have less sensitivity. We used the 

weighting factor adjustment for otariid 

pinnipeds (eared seals) as they are the 

closest available physiological and 

anatomical proxy for sea otters. The 

spreadsheet also incorporates a 

transmission loss coefficient, which 

accounts for the reduction in sound 

level outward from a sound source. We 

used the NMFS-recommended 

transmission loss coefficient of 15 for 

coastal pile-driving activities to indicate 

practical spread (NMFS 2020). 

We calculated the harassment zones 

for DTH drilling with input from NMFS. 

The sound pressure levels produced by 

DTH drilling were provided by NMFS in 

2022 via correspondence with Solstice 

Alaska Consulting, who created the 

application for this IHA on behalf of 

Trident. We then used the NMFS 

Technical Guidance and User 

Spreadsheet (NMFS 2018, 2020) to 

determine the distance at which these 

sounds would attenuate to Level A 

harassment thresholds. To estimate the 

distances at which sounds would 

attenuate to Level B harassment 

thresholds, we used the NMFSrecommended transmission loss 

coefficient of 15 for coastal pile-driving 

activities in a practical spreading loss 

model (NMFS 2020) to determine the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
4978 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 

distance at which sound levels attenuate 

to 160 dB re 1 mPa. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, AND DAYS OF IMPACT FROM PILE INSTALLATION AND REMOVAL

AT TRIDENT’S SITE AT NEAR ISLAND CHANNEL

Activity and pile diameter 

Removal of existing piles Temporary piles, 24-in Permanent installation 

16-in 14-in 14-in Installation Removal 16-in 24-in 

Pile material ......................................................................................... Steel ......... Steel ......... Timber ...... Steel ......... Steel ......... Steel ......... Steel. 

Pile type ............................................................................................... Pipe .......... H-pile ........ Round ...... Pipe .......... Pipe .......... Pipe .......... Pipe. 

Total number of piles ........................................................................... 60 ............. 75 ............. 100 ........... 20 ............. 20 ............. 26 ............. 52. 

Vibratory pile driving 

Number of piles ................................................................................... 60 ............. 75 ............. 100 ........... 20 ............. 20 ............. 26 ............. 52. 

Maximum number of piles per day ...................................................... 20 ............. 20 ............. 25 ............. 6 ............... 8 ............... 5 ............... 4. 

Vibratory time per pile (minutes) ......................................................... 2 ............... 2 ............... 2 ............... 2 ............... 2 ............... 2 ............... 2. 

Vibratory time per day (minutes) ......................................................... 40 ............. 40 ............. 50 ............. 12 ............. 16 ............. 10 ............. 8. 

Number of days ................................................................................... 3 ............... 4 ............... 4 ............... 3 ............... 3 ............... 5 ............... 13. 

Total vibratory time (minutes) .............................................................. 120 ........... 150 ........... 200 ........... 40 ............. 40 ............. 52 ............. 104. 

DTH drilling 

Number of piles ................................................................................... 0 ............... 0 ............... 0 ............... 20 ............. 0 ............... 26 ............. 52. 

Maximum number of piles per day ...................................................... 0 ............... 0 ............... 0 ............... 6 ............... 0 ............... 6 ............... 4. 

DTH time per pile (minutes) ................................................................ 0 ............... 0 ............... 0 ............... 30 ............. 0 ............... 45 ............. 60. 

DTH time per day (minutes) ................................................................ 0 ............... 0 ............... 0 ............... 180 ........... 0 ............... 270 ........... 240. 

Number of days ................................................................................... 0 ............... 0 ............... 0 ............... 3 ............... 0 ............... 4 ............... 13. 

Total DTH time (minutes) .................................................................... 0 ............... 0 ............... 0 ............... 600 ........... 0 ............... 1,170 ........ 3,120. 

TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF SOUND LEVEL, TIMING OF SOUND PRODUCTION, DISTANCE (m) FROM SOUND SOURCE TO BELOW

LEVEL A HARASSMENT AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS FOR SOUND-PRODUCING ACTIVITIES AT TRIDENT’S

KODIAK BUNKHOUSE SITE

Source Sound level (dB (RMS) 

re 1μPa at 10 m) 

Reference Distance to 

below Level A 

harassment 

threshold 

Distance to 

below Level B 

harassment 

threshold 

14-in timber (vibratory removal) .............................. 162 Caltrans 2020 .......................................................... 0.3 13.6 

14-in H (vibratory removal) ..................................... 150 Caltrans 2020 .......................................................... 0.2 2.2 

16-in steel (vibratory installation) ............................ 161 NAVFAC a 2015 (used 24-in piles) ......................... 0.1 11.7 

16-in steel (vibratory removal) ................................ 161 NAVFAC 2015 (used 24-in piles) ........................... 0.2 11.7 

24-in steel (vibratory installation—temporary piles) 161 NAVFAC 2015 ........................................................ 0.1 11.7 

24-in steel (vibratory installation—permanent piles) 161 NAVFAC 2015 ........................................................ 0.1 11.7 

24-in steel (vibratory removal) ................................ 161 NAVFAC 2015 ........................................................ 0.1 11.7 

Work skiff ................................................................. 160 Richardson et al. 1995; Kipple and Gabriele 2007 0.0 10.0 

Tug operations ........................................................ 176 LGL/JASCO/Greeneridge 2014 .............................. 9.2 116.6 

DTH Drilling 

Source db rms (bubble 

curtain) 

db SEL 

(bubble 

curtain) 

Reference Distance to 

below Level A 

harassment 

threshold 

Distance to 

below Level B 

harassment 

threshold 

16-in steel installation .............................................. 162 (167) 141 (146) Heyvaert & Reyff 2021 (used 24-in piles); Guan & 

Miner 2020.

1.8 13.6 

24-in steel DTH installation—temporary ................. 162 (167) 154 (159) Heyvaert & Reyff 2021 ........................................... 10.3 13.6 

24-in steel DTH installation—permanent ................ 162 (167) 154 (159) Heyvaert & Reyff 2021 ........................................... 12.5 13.6 

a Naval Facilities Engineering Command. 

Sound levels for all sources are 

unweighted and given in dB re 1 mPa. 

Non-impulsive sounds are in the form of 

mean maximum root mean square 

(RMS) sound pressure level (SPL) as it 

is more conservative than cumulative 

sound exposure level (SEL) or peak SPL 

for these activities. 

We used the ABR Environmental 

Research & Services 2016 data to derive 

a local density of sea otters in Near 

Island Channel on the days of highest 

presence and arrived at 710 animals per 

km2. Applying this density to the largest 

Level B harassment zone for pile driving 

(14 m [46 ft]) yielded a result of 

approximately 1 individual otter 

exposed. Applying this density to the 

Level B harassment zone for heavy 

towing operations (117m [383 ft]) 

yielded a result of approximately 31 

individual otters exposed. Although the 

harassment zone for the work skiff is 

sufficiently small to be easily monitored 

(10 m [33 ft]), the skiff will make 

multiple trips between the harbor and 

the work site each day. On days when 

several hundred sea otters occupy the 

relatively small area of Near Channel, it 

would not be feasible for a protected 

species observer (PSO) to determine 

whether the individual animals present 

in the harassment zones remain 

constant over time. As such, we 

assumed that it was possible that each 

individual sea otter in Near Channel 

would enter a Level B harassment zone 

at least once over the course of each day 

of operations. 

To estimate the number of sea otters 

anticipated in the waters surrounding 

Near Island Channel during the project, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

I I I 

I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 4979 

we applied the distribution of daily sea 

otter counts observed during the Kodiak 

Ferry work (ABR 2016) to the length of 

Trident’s work period (55 days). We 

used the result to estimate the daily sea 

otter counts anticipated during Trident’s 

work period (table 4). The daily count 

range categories were selected based on 

natural breaks in the sightings data. 

TABLE 4—DISTRIBUTION OF DAYS ANTICIPATED WITHIN TRIDENT’S 55-DAY WORK PERIOD FOR EACH CATEGORY OF

DAILY SEA OTTER COUNTS AND ANTICIPATED TOTAL NUMBER OF EXPOSURES OF SEA OTTERS IN NEAR ISLAND

CHANNEL OVER THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. BASED ON SIGHTINGS DATA FROM OBSERVATIONS CONDUCTED AT

KODIAK FERRY TERMINAL

[ABR 2016] 

Range of daily 

sea otter count 

Number of days 

in 55-day period 

Exposures of 

sea otters 

throughout 

project 

1 to 10 .............................................................................................................................................................. 19 190 

11 to 20 ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 180 

21 to 30 ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 120 

31 to 40 ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 200 

41 to 50 ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 150 

51 to 60 ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 60 

61 to 75 ............................................................................................................................................................ 2 150 

76 to 85 ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 340 

85 to 100 .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 200 

101 to 135 ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 270 

136 to 155 ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 155 

156 to 225 ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 225 

226 to 460 ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 920 

Totals ........................................................................................................................................................ 55 3,160 

We assumed that the different types of 

activities could occur either 

sequentially or concurrently and that 

the total number of days of work would 

equal the full 55-day work window. 

While it is possible that more than one 

type of activity will take place on some 

days, which would reduce the number 

of days of exposure within a year, we 

cannot know this information in 

advance. As such, the estimated number 

of days and, therefore, exposures over 

the duration of the project are the 

maximum possible for the planned 

work. 

In order to minimize exposure of sea 

otters to sounds above Level A 

harassment thresholds, Trident will 

implement shutdown zones (appendix C 

in Solstice 2023) ranging from 10 to 15 

m (33 to 49 ft), based on the pile size 

and type of pile driving or marine 

construction activity, where operations 

will cease should a sea otter enter or 

approach the specified zone. Because 

the shutdown radii are larger than the 

sound isopleths for Level A harassment, 

no Level A harassment is anticipated. 

Soft-start and zone clearance prior to 

startup will also limit the exposure of 

sea otters to sound levels that could 

cause PTS. 

Critical Assumptions 

We estimate that 3,160 takes of 460 

sea otters by Level B harassment may 

occur due to Trident’s planned dock 

repair and construction activities. In 

order to conduct this analysis and 

estimate the potential amount of take by 

harassment, several critical assumptions 

were made. 

Level B harassment is equated herein 

with behavioral responses that indicate 

harassment or disturbance. There is 

likely a portion of animals that respond 

in ways that indicate some level of 

disturbance but do not experience 

significant biological consequences. 

We used the sea otter presence for the 

Near Island Channel area from surveys 

and analyses conducted by ABR, Inc. 

(2016). Methods and assumptions for 

these surveys can be found in the 

original publication. We assumed that 

the distribution of daily total counts of 

sea otters during Trident’s work period 

would be similar to that observed 

during the Kodiak Ferry Terminal work. 

We used sound source verification 

from recent pile-driving activities in a 

number of locations within and beyond 

Alaska to generate sound level estimates 

for construction activities. 

Environmental conditions in these 

locations, including water depth, 

substrate, and ambient sound levels are 

similar to those in the project location, 

but not identical. Further, estimation of 

ensonification zones were based on 

sound attenuation models using a 

practical spreading loss model. These 

factors may lead to actual sound values 

differing slightly from those estimated 

here. 

We assumed that all piles will be 

installed and removed while submerged 

in water. Some piles will be located in 

the intertidal zone. Work performed at 

lower tidal heights would likely result 

in decreased transmission of sounds to 

the water column. However, as the 

timing of pile installation and removal 

was not known in advance, we 

accounted for the possibility that all 

work may occur at a tidal height that 

allows for full sound transmission. 

Finally, the pile-driving activities 

described here will also create in-air 

noise. Because sea otters spend over half 

of their day with their heads above 

water (Esslinger et al. 2014), they will be 

exposed to an increase of in-air noise 

from construction equipment. However, 

we have calculated Level B harassment 

with the assumption that an individual 

may be harassed only one time per 24- 

hour period, and underwater sound 

levels will be more disturbing and 

extend farther than in-air noise. Thus, 

while sea otters may be disturbed by 

noise both in-air and underwater, we 

have relied on the more conservative 

underwater estimates. 

Sum of Harassment From All Sources 

The applicant plans to conduct pile 

driving and marine construction 

activities in Kodiak, Alaska, over the 

course of a year from the date of 

issuance of the IHA. Over the course of 

the project, we estimate 3,160 instances 

of take by Level B harassment of 460 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
4980 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 

northern sea otters from the 

Southcentral Alaska stock due to 

behavioral responses of TTS associated 

with noise exposure. Although multiple 

instances of Level B harassment of 

individual sea otters are expected, these 

events would not have significant 

consequences for the health, 

reproduction, or survival of affected 

animals and therefore would not rise to 

the level of an injury or Level A 

harassment. 

The use of soft-start procedures, zone 

clearance prior to startup, and 

shutdown zones (appendix C in Solstice 

2023) is anticipated to eliminate both 

the number of sea otters exposed to 

sounds above Level A harassment 

thresholds and the exposure time of any 

sea otters venturing into a Level A 

harassment zone. We therefore do not 

anticipate any losses of hearing 

sensitivity that might impact the health, 

reproduction, or survival of affected 

animals. We anticipate that PSOs will 

be able to reliably detect and prevent 

take by Level A harassment of sea otters 

beyond the largest sound isopleth for 

Level A harassment (15 m [45 ft]), 

therefore we do not anticipate that any 

sea otters will be exposed to sounds 

capable of causing PTS or Level A 

harassment. 

Determinations and Findings 

Sea otters exposed to sound from the 

specified activities are likely to respond 

with temporary behavioral modification 

or displacement. The specified activities 

could temporarily interrupt the feeding, 

resting, and movement of sea otters. 

Because activities will occur during a 

limited amount of time and in a 

localized region, the impacts associated 

with the project are likewise temporary 

and localized. The anticipated effects 

are short-term behavioral reactions and 

displacement of sea otters near active 

operations. 

Sea otters that encounter the specified 

activity may exert more energy than 

otherwise due to temporary cessation of 

feeding, increased vigilance, and 

retreating from the project area. We 

expect that affected sea otters will 

tolerate this exertion without 

measurable effects on health or 

reproduction. The anticipated takes will 

be due to short-term Level B harassment 

in the form of TTS, startling reactions, 

or temporary displacement. The 

mitigation measures incorporated into 

Trident’s request will eliminate 

occurrences of Level A harassment to 

the extent where take by Level A 

harassment is not anticipated. 

With the adoption of the mitigation 

measures incorporated in Trident’s 

request and required by this proposed 

IHA, anticipated take was reduced. 

Those mitigation measures are further 

described below. 

Small Numbers 

To assess whether the authorized 

incidental taking would be limited to 

‘‘small numbers’’ of marine mammals, 

the Service uses a proportional 

approach that considers whether the 

estimated number of marine mammals 

to be subjected to incidental take is 

small relative to the population size of 

the species or stock. Here, predicted 

levels of take were determined based on 

the estimated density of sea otters in the 

project area and ensonification zones 

developed using empirical evidence 

from similar geographic areas. 

We estimate Trident’s specified 

activities in the specified geographic 

region will result in no more than 3,160 

takes of 460 sea otters by Level B 

harassment during the 1-year period of 

this proposed IHA (see Sum of 

Harassment from All Sources). Take of 

460 animals is 0.9 percent of the best 

available estimate of the current 

Southwest Alaska stock size of 51,935 

animals (USFWS 2023) ((460 ÷ 51,935) 

× 100 ≈ 0.9) and represents a ‘‘small 

number’’ of sea otters of that stock. 

Negligible Impact 

We propose a finding that any 

incidental take by harassment resulting 

from the specified activities cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

sea otter through effects on annual rates 

of recruitment or survival and will, 

therefore, have no more than a 

negligible impact on the Southwest 

Alaska stock of northern sea otters. In 

making this finding, we considered the 

best available scientific information, 

including the biological and behavioral 

characteristics of the species, the most 

recent information on species 

distribution and abundance within the 

area of the specified activities, the 

current and expected future status of the 

stock (including existing and 

foreseeable human and natural 

stressors), the potential sources of 

disturbance caused by the project, and 

the potential responses of marine 

mammals to this disturbance. In 

addition, we reviewed applicantprovided materials, information in our 

files and datasets, published reference 

materials, and species experts. 

Sea otters are likely to respond to 

planned activities with temporary 

behavioral modification or temporary 

displacement. These reactions are not 

anticipated to have consequences for the 

long-term health, reproduction, or 

survival of affected animals. Most 

animals will respond to disturbance by 

moving away from the source, which 

may cause temporary interruption of 

foraging, resting, or other natural 

behaviors. Affected animals are 

expected to resume normal behaviors 

soon after exposure with no lasting 

consequences. Each sea otter is 

estimated to be exposed to construction 

noise for between 4 and 55 days, 

resulting in repeated exposures. 

However, injuries (i.e., Level A 

harassment or PTS) due to chronic 

sound exposure is estimated to occur at 

a longer time scale (Southall et al. 2019). 

The area that will experience noise 

greater than Level B thresholds due to 

pile driving is small (less than 0.01 

km2), and an animal that may be 

disturbed could escape the noise by 

moving to nearby quiet areas. Further, 

sea otters spend over half of their time 

above the surface during the summer 

months (Esslinger et al. 2014), and 

likely no more than 70 percent of their 

time foraging during winter months 

(Gelatt et al. 2002). Thus, their ears will 

not be exposed to continuous noise, and 

the amount of time it may take for 

permanent injury is considerably longer 

than that of mammals primarily under 

water. Some animals may exhibit some 

of the stronger responses typical of 

Level B harassment, such as fleeing, 

interruption of feeding, or flushing from 

a haulout. These responses could have 

temporary biological impacts for 

affected individuals but are not 

anticipated to result in measurable 

changes in survival or reproduction. 

The total number of animals affected, 

and severity of impact is not sufficient 

to change the current population 

dynamics at the stock scale. Although 

the specified activities may result in 

approximately 3,160 incidental takes of 

460 sea otters from the Southwest 

Alaska stock, we do not expect this level 

of harassment to affect annual rates of 

recruitment or survival or result in 

adverse effects on the stock. 

Our proposed finding of negligible 

impact applies to incidental take 

associated with the specified activities 

as mitigated by the avoidance and 

minimization measures identified in 

Trident’s mitigation and monitoring 

plan. These mitigation measures are 

designed to minimize interactions with 

and impacts to sea otters. These 

measures, along with the monitoring 

and reporting procedures, are required 

for the validity of our finding and are a 

necessary component of the proposed 

IHA. For these reasons, we propose a 

finding that the specified project will 

have a negligible impact on the 

Southwest Alaska stock of northern sea 

otters. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 4981 

Least Practicable Adverse Impacts 

We find that the mitigation measures 

required by this proposed IHA will 

affect the least practicable adverse 

impacts on the stock from any 

incidental take likely to occur in 

association with the specified activities. 

In making this finding, we considered 

the biological characteristics of sea 

otters, the nature of the specified 

activities, the potential effects of the 

activities on sea otters, the documented 

impacts of similar activities on sea 

otters, and alternative mitigation 

measures. 

In evaluating what mitigation 

measures are appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses, we considered 

the manner and degree to which the 

successful implementation of the 

measures are expected to achieve this 

goal. We considered the nature of the 

potential adverse impact being 

mitigated (likelihood, scope, range), the 

likelihood that the measures will be 

effective if implemented, and the 

likelihood of effective implementation. 

We also considered the practicability of 

the measures for applicant 

implementation (e.g., cost, impact on 

operations). We assessed whether any 

additional, practicable requirements 

could be implemented to further reduce 

effects, but did not identify any. 

To reduce the potential for 

disturbance from acoustic stimuli 

associated with the activities, Trident 

will implement mitigation measures, 

including the following: 

• Using the smallest diameter piles 

practicable while minimizing the 

overall number of piles; 

• Using a project design that does not 

include dredging or blasting; 

• Using pile caps made of highdensity polyethylene or ultra-highmolecular-weight polyethylene 

softening materials during pile driving; 

• Foregoing the use of an impact 

hammer; 

• Employing a deep bubble curtain 

during all DTH drilling to reduce noise 

impacts; 

• Development of a marine mammal 

monitoring and mitigation plan; 

• Establishment of shutdown and 

monitoring zones; 

• Visual mitigation monitoring by 

designated PSOs; 

• Site clearance before startup; 

• Soft-start procedures; and 

• Shutdown procedures. 

The Service has not identified any 

additional (i.e., not already incorporated 

into Trident’s request) mitigation or 

monitoring measures that are 

practicable and would further reduce 

potential impacts to sea otters and their 

habitat. 

Impact on Subsistence Use 

The project will not preclude access 

to harvest areas or interfere with the 

availability of sea otters for harvest. 

Additionally, the bunkhouse dock and 

associated facilities are located within 

the City of Kodiak, where firearm use is 

prohibited. We therefore propose a 

finding that Trident’s anticipated 

harassment will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of any stock of northern sea 

otters for taking for subsistence uses. In 

making this finding, we considered the 

timing and location of the planned 

activities and the timing and location of 

subsistence harvest activities in the 

project area. 

Monitoring and Reporting 

The purposes of the monitoring 

requirements are to document and 

provide data for assessing the effects of 

specified activities on sea otters; to 

ensure that take is consistent with that 

anticipated in the small numbers, 

negligible impact, and subsistence use 

analyses; and to detect any 

unanticipated effects on the species. 

Monitoring plans include steps to 

document when and how sea otters are 

encountered and their numbers and 

behaviors during these encounters. This 

information allows the Service to 

measure encounter rates and trends and 

to estimate numbers of animals 

potentially affected. To the extent 

possible, monitors will record group 

size, age, sex, reaction, duration of 

interaction, and closest approach to the 

project activity. 

As proposed, monitoring activities 

will be summarized and reported in 

formal reports. Trident must submit 

monthly reports for all months during 

which noise-generating work takes place 

as well as a final monitoring report that 

must be submitted no later than 90 days 

after the expiration of the IHA. We will 

require an approved plan for monitoring 

and reporting the effects of pile driving 

and marine construction activities on 

sea otters prior to issuance of an IHA. 

We will require approval of the 

monitoring results for continued 

operation under the IHA. 

We find that these proposed 

monitoring and reporting requirements 

to evaluate the potential impacts of 

planned activities will ensure that the 

effects of the activities remain 

consistent with the rest of the findings. 

Required Determinations 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

We have prepared a draft 

environmental assessment in 

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

4321 et seq.). We have preliminarily 

concluded that authorizing the 

nonlethal, incidental, unintentional take 

by Level B harassment of up to 3,160 

takes of 460 sea otters from the 

Southwest Alaska stock in the specified 

geographic region during the specified 

activities during the authorization 

period would not significantly affect the 

quality of the human environment and, 

thus, preparation of an environmental 

impact statement for this proposed IHA 

is not required by section 102(2) of 

NEPA or its implementing regulations. 

We are accepting comments on the draft 

environmental assessment as specified 

above in DATES and ADDRESSES. 

Endangered Species Act 

Under the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)), 

all Federal agencies are required to 

ensure the actions they authorize are not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any threatened or 

endangered species or result in 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. Because the Southwest 

Alaska stock is listed as threatened 

under the ESA, prior to finalizing the 

proposed IHA, if warranted, the Service 

will complete intra-Service consultation 

under section 7 of the ESA on our 

proposed issuance of this IHA. These 

evaluations and findings will be made 

available on the Service’s website at 

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/ 

biological-opinion. The authorization of 

incidental take of sea otters and the 

measures included in the proposed IHA 

would not affect other listed species or 

designated critical habitat. 

Government-to-Government 

Consultation 

It is our responsibility to 

communicate and work directly on a 

Government-to-Government basis with 

federally recognized Alaska Native 

Tribes in developing programs for 

healthy ecosystems. We seek their full 

and meaningful participation in 

evaluating and addressing conservation 

concerns for protected species. It is our 

goal to remain sensitive to Alaska 

Native culture, and to make information 

available to Alaska Native people. Our 

efforts are guided by the following 

policies and directives: 

(1) The Native American Policy of the 

Service (January 20, 2016); 

(2) The Alaska Native Relations Policy 

(currently in draft form); 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
4982 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 

(3) Executive Order 13175 (January 9, 

2000); 

(4) Department of the Interior 

Secretary’s Orders 3206 (June 5, 1997), 

3225 (January 19, 2001), 3317 

(December 1, 2011), and 3342 (October 

21, 2016); 

(5) The Alaska Government-toGovernment Policy (a departmental 

memorandum issued January 18, 2001); 

and 

(6) The Department of the Interior’s 

policies on consultation with Alaska 

Native Tribes and Organizations. 

We have evaluated possible effects of 

the specified activities on federally 

recognized Alaska Native Tribes and 

Organizations. The Service has 

determined that, due to this project’s 

locations and activities, the Tribal 

Organizations and communities near 

Kodiak, Alaska, as well as relevant 

Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 

corporations, will not be impacted by 

this project. However, we will be 

reaching out to them to inform them of 

the availability of this proposed IHA 

and offer them the opportunity to 

consult. 

We invite continued discussion, 

either about the project and its impacts 

or about our coordination and 

information exchange throughout the 

IHA process. 

Proposed Authorization 

We propose to authorize the nonlethal 

incidental take by Level B harassment of 

3,160 takes of 460 sea otters from the 

Southwest Alaska stock. Authorized 

take may be caused by pile driving and 

marine construction activities 

conducted by Trident Seafoods 

Corporation (Trident) in Kodiak, Alaska, 

over the course of a year from the date 

of issuance of the IHA. We do not 

anticipate or authorize any take by Level 

A harassment or lethal take to sea otters 

resulting from these activities. 

A. General Conditions for the Incidental 

Harassment Authorization (IHA) 

(1) Activities must be conducted in 

the manner described in the October 9, 

2023, revised request from Trident for 

an IHA and in accordance with all 

applicable conditions and mitigation 

measures. The taking of sea otters 

whenever the required conditions, 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

measures are not fully implemented as 

required by the IHA is prohibited. 

Failure to follow the measures specified 

both in the revised request and within 

this proposed authorization may result 

in the modification, suspension, or 

revocation of the IHA. 

(2) If project activities cause 

unauthorized take (i.e., greater than 

3,160 takes of 460 northern sea otters 

from the Southwest Alaska stock, a form 

of take other than Level B harassment, 

or take of one or more sea otters through 

methods not described in the IHA), 

Trident must take the following actions: 

(i) Cease its activities immediately (or 

reduce activities to the minimum level 

necessary to maintain safety); 

(ii) Report the details of the incident 

to the Service within 48 hours; and 

(iii) Suspend further activities until 

the Service has reviewed the 

circumstances and determined whether 

additional mitigation measures are 

necessary to avoid further unauthorized 

taking. 

(3) All operations managers, vehicle 

operators, and machine operators must 

receive a copy of this IHA and maintain 

access to it for reference at all times 

during project work. These personnel 

must understand, be fully aware of, and 

be capable of implementing the 

conditions of the IHA at all times during 

project work. 

(4) This IHA will apply to activities 

associated with the specified project as 

described in this document and in 

Trident’s revised request. Changes to the 

specified project without prior 

authorization may invalidate the IHA. 

(5) Trident’s revised request is 

approved and fully incorporated into 

this IHA unless exceptions are 

specifically noted herein. The request 

includes: 

(i) Trident’s original request for an 

IHA, dated May 25, 2023; 

(ii) Revised applications, dated 

September 5 and October 9, 2023; 

(iii) Marine Mammal Mitigation and 

Monitoring Plan; 

(iv) Bubble curtain schematics; and 

(v) Pile coordinates. 

(6) Operators will allow Service 

personnel or the Service’s designated 

representative to visit project worksites 

to monitor for impacts to sea otters and 

subsistence uses of sea otters at any time 

throughout project activities so long as 

it is safe to do so. ‘‘Operators’’ are all 

personnel operating under Trident’s 

authority, including all contractors and 

subcontractors. 

B. Avoidance and Minimization 

(1) Construction activities must be 

conducted using equipment that 

generates the lowest practicable levels 

of underwater sound within the range of 

frequencies audible to sea otters. 

(2) If the number of sea otters present 

in the area of Near Island Channel 

exceeds 450, or if the number of sea 

otters present in a Level B monitoring 

zone exceeds 25, or if the combination 

of sea state and a high number of sea 

otters in the area is so high as to 

preclude an accurate count, work will 

cease until PSOs can confirm that the 

number of sea otters in the area is less 

than above limits. 

(3) During all pile-installation 

activities, regardless of predicted sound 

levels, a physical interaction shutdown 

zone of 10 m (33 ft) must be enforced. 

If a sea otter enters the shutdown zone, 

in-water activities must be delayed until 

either the animal has been visually 

observed outside the shutdown zone, or 

15 minutes have elapsed since the last 

observation time without redetection of 

the animal. A shutdown zone of 15 m 

(49 ft) will be enforced for DTH drilling 

where the 160 dB sound isopleth 

exceeds the 10 m (33 ft) physical 

interaction shutdown zone. 

(4) In-water activity must be 

conducted in daylight. If environmental 

conditions prevent visual detection of 

sea otters within the shutdown zone, inwater activities must be stopped until 

visibility is regained. 

(5) All in-water work along the 

shoreline must be conducted during low 

tide when the site is dewatered to the 

maximum extent practicable. 

C. Mitigation Measures for Vessel 

Operations 

Vessel operators must take every 

precaution to avoid harassment of sea 

otters when a vessel is operating near 

these animals. The applicant must carry 

out the following measures: 

(1) Vessels must remain at least 500 

m (0.3 mi) from rafts of sea otters unless 

safety is a factor. Vessels must reduce 

speed and maintain a distance of 100 m 

(328 ft) from all sea otters unless safety 

is a factor. 

(2) Vessels must not be operated in 

such a way as to separate members of 

a group of sea otters from other 

members of the group and must avoid 

alongshore travel in shallow water (<20 

m (66 ft)) whenever practicable. 

(3) When weather conditions require, 

such as when visibility drops, vessels 

must adjust speed accordingly to avoid 

the likelihood of injury to sea otters. 

(4) Vessel operators must be provided 

written guidance for avoiding collisions 

and minimizing disturbances to sea 

otters. Guidance will include measures 

identified in paragraphs (C)(12) through 

(15) of this section. 

D. Monitoring 

(1) Operators shall work with PSOs to 

apply mitigation measures and shall 

recognize the authority of PSOs up to 

and including stopping work, except 

where doing so poses a significant safety 

risk to personnel. 

(2) Duties of the PSOs include 

watching for and identifying sea otters, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 4983 

recording observation details, 

documenting presence in any applicable 

monitoring zone, identifying and 

documenting potential harassment, and 

working with operators to implement all 

appropriate mitigation measures. 

(3) A sufficient number of PSOs will 

be available to meet the following 

criteria: 100 percent monitoring of 

exclusion zones during all daytime 

periods of underwater noise-generating 

work; a maximum of 4 consecutive 

hours on watch per PSO; a maximum of 

approximately 12 hours on watch per 

day per PSO. 

(4) All PSOs will complete a training 

course designed to familiarize 

individuals with monitoring and data 

collection procedures. A field crew 

leader with prior experience as a sea 

otter observer will supervise the PSO 

team. Initially, new or inexperienced 

PSOs will be paired with experienced 

PSOs so that the quality of marine 

mammal observations and data 

recording is kept consistent. Resumes 

for candidate PSOs will be made 

available for the Service to review. 

(5) Observers will be provided with 

reticule binoculars (7×50 or better), bigeye binoculars or spotting scopes (30×), 

inclinometers, and range finders. Field 

guides, instructional handbooks, maps, 

and a contact list will also be made 

available. 

(6) Observers will collect data using 

the following procedures: 

(i) All data will be recorded onto a 

field form or database. 

(ii) Global positioning system data, 

sea state, wind force, and weather will 

be collected at the beginning and end of 

a monitoring period, every hour in 

between, at the change of an observer, 

and upon sightings of sea otters. 

(iii) Observation records of sea otters 

will include date; time; the observer’s 

locations, heading, and speed (if 

moving); weather; visibility; number of 

animals; group size and composition 

(adults/juveniles); and the location of 

the animals (or distance and direction 

from the observer). 

(iv) Observation records will also 

include initial behaviors of the sea 

otters, descriptions of project activities 

and underwater sound levels being 

generated, the position of sea otters 

relative to applicable monitoring and 

mitigation zones, any mitigation 

measures applied, and any apparent 

reactions to the project activities before 

and after mitigation. 

(v) For all sea otters in or near a 

mitigation zone, observers will record 

the distance from the sound source to 

the sea otter upon initial observation, 

the duration of the encounter, and the 

distance at last observation in order to 

monitor cumulative sound exposures. 

(vi) Observers will note any instances 

of animals lingering close to or traveling 

with vessels for prolonged periods of 

time. 

(7) Monitoring of the shutdown zone 

must continue for 30 minutes following 

completion of pile installation. 

E. Measures To Reduce Impacts to 

Subsistence Users 

Prior to conducting the work, Trident 

will take the following steps to reduce 

potential effects on subsistence harvest 

of sea otters: 

(1) Avoid work in areas of known sea 

otter subsistence harvest; 

(2) Discuss the planned activities with 

subsistence stakeholders including 

Southwest Alaska villages and 

traditional councils; 

(3) Identify and work to resolve 

concerns of stakeholders regarding the 

project’s effects on subsistence hunting 

of sea otters; and 

(4) If any concerns remain, develop a 

POC in consultation with the Service 

and subsistence stakeholders to address 

these concerns. 

F. Reporting Requirements 

(1) Trident must notify the Service at 

least 48 hours prior to commencement 

of activities. 

(2) Monthly reports will be submitted 

to the Service’s Marine Mammal 

Management office (MMM) for all 

months during which noise-generating 

work takes place. The monthly report 

will contain and summarize the 

following information: dates, times, 

weather, and sea conditions (including 

the Beaufort Scale sea state and wind 

force conditions) when sea otters were 

sighted; the number, location, distance 

from the sound source, and behavior of 

the sea otters; the associated project 

activities; and a description of the 

implementation and effectiveness of 

mitigation measures with a discussion 

of any specific behaviors the sea otters 

exhibited in response to mitigation. 

(3) A final report will be submitted to 

the Service’s MMM within 90 days after 

completion of work or expiration of the 

IHA. The report will include: 

(i) A summary of monitoring efforts 

(hours of monitoring, activities 

monitored, number of PSOs, and, if 

requested by the Service, the daily 

monitoring logs). 

(ii) A description of all project 

activities, along with any additional 

work yet to be done. Factors influencing 

visibility and detectability of marine 

mammals (e.g., sea state, number of 

observers, and fog and glare) will be 

discussed. 

(iii) A description of the factors 

affecting the presence and distribution 

of sea otters (e.g., weather, sea state, and 

project activities). An estimate will be 

included of the number of sea otters 

exposed to noise at received levels 

greater than or equal to 160 dB (based 

on visual observation). 

(iv) A description of changes in sea 

otter behavior resulting from project 

activities and any specific behaviors of 

interest. 

(v) A discussion of the mitigation 

measures implemented during project 

activities and their observed 

effectiveness for minimizing impacts to 

sea otters. Sea otter observation records 

will be provided to the Service in the 

form of electronic database or 

spreadsheet files. 

(4) Injured, dead, or distressed sea 

otters that are not associated with 

project activities (e.g., animals known to 

be from outside the project area, 

previously wounded animals, or 

carcasses with moderate to advanced 

decomposition or scavenger damage) 

must be reported to the Service within 

24 hours of the discovery to either the 

Service’s MMM (1–800–362–5148, 

business hours); or the Alaska SeaLife 

Center in Seward (1–888–774–7325, 24 

hours a day); or both. Photographs, 

video, location information, or any other 

available documentation must be 

provided to the Service. 

(5) All reports shall be submitted by 

email to fw7_mmm_reports@fws.gov. 

Trident must notify the Service upon 

project completion or end of the work 

season. 

Request for Public Comments 

If you wish to comment on this 

proposed authorization, the associated 

draft environmental assessment, or both 

documents, you may submit your 

comments by either of the methods 

described in ADDRESSES. Please identify 

if you are commenting on the proposed 

authorization, draft environmental 

assessment, or both, make your 

comments as specific as possible, 

confine them to issues pertinent to the 

proposed authorization, and explain the 

reason for any changes you recommend. 

Where possible, your comments should 

reference the specific section or 

paragraph that you are addressing. The 

Service will consider all comments that 

are received before the close of the 

comment period (see DATES). The 

Service does not anticipate extending 

the public comment period beyond the 

30 days required under section 

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

Comments, including names and 

street addresses of respondents, will 

become part of the administrative record 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
4984 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 2024 / Notices 

for this proposal. Before including your 

address, telephone number, email 

address, or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, be 

advised that your entire comment, 

including your personal identifying 

information, may be made publicly 

available at any time. While you can ask 

us in your comments to withhold from 

public review your personal identifying 

information, we cannot guarantee that 

we will be able to do so. 

Peter Fasbender, 

Assistant Regional Director for Fisheries and 

Ecological Services, Alaska Region. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01416 Filed 1–24–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

[245A2100DD/AAKC001030/ 

A0A501010.999900] 

Land Acquisitions; Pascua Yaqui 

Tribe, Eleven Parcels, Pima County, 

Arizona 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary— 

Indian Affairs made a final agency 

determination to acquire in trust 25.56 

acres, more or less, of land consisting of 

eleven off-reservation parcels in Pima 

County, Arizona, (Site) for the Pascua 

Yaqui Tribe of Arizona, (Tribe) for 

gaming and other purposes. 

DATES: This final determination was 

made on December 29, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of Indian 

Gaming, Mailstop 3543, 1849 C Street 

NW, Washington, DC 20240, 

paula.hart@bia.gov, (202) 219–4066. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On the 

date listed in the DATES section of this 

notice, the Assistant Secretary—Indian 

Affairs made a final agency 

determination to acquire the Site, 

consisting of 25.56 acres, more or less, 

in trust for the Tribe under the authority 

of the Old Pascua Community Land 

Acquisition Act of 2022, Public Law 

117–275, 136 Stat. 4184 (2022), and 

Department regulations. 

The Assistant Secretary—Indian 

Affairs, on behalf of the Secretary of the 

Interior, will immediately acquire title 

to the Site in the name of the United 

States of America in trust for the Tribe 

upon fulfillment of all Departmental 

requirements. The legal description for 

the Site is as follows: 

Legal Description of Property 

Description: 901 W Grant, 2395 N 

Fairview, and 1055 W Grant, 901 W 

Grant and 2395 N Fairview aka 

11516001B and 11516001C 

Parcel No. 1: APN: 115–16–001B 

A parcel of land located in the 

Northwest quarter of Section 2, 

Township 14 South, Range 13 East, Gila 

and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pima 

County, Arizona, more particularly 

described as follows: 

COMMENCING at the North quarter 

corner of said Section 2, being a brass 

cap survey monument at the 

intersection of the centerline of Grant 

Road and the Westerly right-of-way of 

Fairview Avenue, each public roadways 

within the City of Tucson, Arizona; 

THENCE along the centerline of Grant 

Road, North 89°05′59′′ West, 90.07 feet 

to a point; 

THENCE South 00°54′01′′ West, 60.00 

feet to the Northeast corner of Lot 13 of 

Grant Interstate Commons, a 

subdivision of record in Book 46 of 

Maps and Plats. Page 27, records of 

Pima County, Arizona, being the POINT 

OF BEGINNING of the herein described 

parcel; 

THENCE along the Easterly boundary 

of Lot 13, as amended by Scrivener’s 

Error recorded in Docket 10302. Page 

146, South 00°13′42′′ East, 138.47 feet to 

a point; 

THENCE North 89°42′33′′ East, 92.00 

feet to a point on the Westerly right-ofway of Fairview Avenue; THENCE along 

said right-of-way, North 00°27′04′′ West, 

83.83 feet to the beginning of a curve 

tangent to the line; 

THENCE Northerly, Northwesterly 

and Westerly 83.55 feet along the curve 

concave to the Southwest, having a 

radius of 54.00 feet and a central angle 

of 88°38′55′′ to a point on the Southerly 

right-of-way of Grant Road; 

THENCE along the Grant Road rightof-way, North 89°05′59′′ West tangent to 

the curve 38.74 feet to the POINT OF 

BEGINNING of the herein described 

parcel. 

Parcel No. 2: APN: 11516001C 

A parcel of land located in the 

Northwest quarter of Section 2, 

Township 14 South, Range 13 East, Gila 

and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pima 

County, Arizona, more particularly 

described as follows: 

COMMENCING at the North quarter 

corner of said Section 2, being a brass 

cap survey monument at the 

intersection of the centerline of Grant 

Road and the Westerly right-of-way of 

Fairview Avenue, each public roadway 

within the City of Tucson, Arizona; 

THENCE along the centerline of Grant 

Road, North 89°05′59′′ West, 90.07 feet 

to a point; 

THENCE South 00°54′01′′ West, 60.00 

feet to the Northeast corner of Lot 13 of 

Grant Interstate Commons, a 

subdivision of record in Book 46 of 

Maps and Plats. Page 27, records of 

Pima County, Arizona; 

THENCE along the Easterly boundary 

of Lot 13, as amended by Scrivener’s 

Error recorded in Docket 10302. Page 

146, South 00°13′42′′ East, 138.47 feet to 

the POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein 

described parcel; 

THENCE continuing South 00°13′42′′ 

East, along the Easterly boundaries of 

Lots 13 and 12 of said subdivision, a 

distance of 259.48 feet to the 

Southeastern corner of Lot 12; 

THENCE South 89°05′20′′ East, 93.03 

feet to a point on the Westerly right-ofway of Fairview Avenue; 

THENCE along said right-of-way, 

North 00°27′04′′ West, 261.44 feet to a 

point; 

THENCE South 89°42′33′′ West, 92.00 

feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the 

herein described. 

Description: 1055 W Grant aka APN 

115160130 

Parcel No. 1 

A portion of the Northwest Quarter of 

Section 2, Township 14 South, Range 13 

East, Gila and Salt River Meridian, Pima 

County, Arizona, described as follows: 

Beginning at a point in the East line 

of said Northwest Quarter of Section 2, 

which point is South 0 degrees 27 

minutes 07 seconds East, along said East 

line, a distance of 678.02 feet from the 

North quarter corner of said Section 2, 

which point of beginning is identical 

with the point of beginning of Parcel 

No. 1 as described in Deed of Trust 

recorded in the Office of the County 

Recorder of Pima County, Arizona, in 

Docket 1655 at page 201; 

Thence North 89 degrees 57 minutes 

43 seconds West, along a portion of the 

North line of said Parcel No. 1 described 

in Docket 1655 at page 201, and its 

Westerly extension, a distance of 586.40 

feet to a point in the Southerly 

extension of the West line of Parcel No. 

2 as described in said Docket 1655 at 

page 201; 

Thence South 0 degrees 29 minutes 

32 seconds East, along said Southerly 

extension, a distance of 93.20 feet to a 

point in the center line (10 feet from 

east side) of that certain easement 

conveyed to the City of Tucson by 

instrument recorded in said office of the 

County Recorder in Docket 2005 at page 

138; 

Thence South 52 degrees 58 minutes 

37 seconds West, along said center line, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES