76804 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 

purposes as no relevant subsistence uses 

of marine mammals are implicated by 

this action; and, (5) appropriate 

monitoring and reporting requirements 

are included. 

Endangered Species Act 

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal 

agency insure that any action it 

authorizes, funds, or carries out is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat. To ensure 

ESA compliance for the issuance of 

IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this 

case with the NMFS Greater Atlantic 

Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO), 

whenever we propose to authorize take 

for endangered or threatened species. 

NMFS Office of Protected Resources 

has proposed to authorize the incidental 

take of four species of marine mammals 

which are listed under the ESA (the 

North Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm 

whale) and has determined that these 

activities fall within the scope of 

activities analyzed in GARFO’s 

programmatic consultation regarding 

geophysical surveys along the U.S. 

Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic 

Renewable Energy Regions (completed 

June 29, 2021; revised September 2021). 

The proposed renewal IHA provides no 

new information about the effects of the 

action, nor does it change the extent of 

effects of the action, or present any 

other basis to require re-initiation of 

consultation with NMFS GARFO; 

therefore, the ESA consultation has been 

satisfied for the initial IHA and remains 

valid for the renewal IHA. 

Proposed Renewal IHA and Request for 

Public Comment 

As a result of these preliminary 

determinations, NMFS proposes to issue 

a renewal IHA to SouthCoast Wind for 

conducting HRG surveys off the coast of 

Massachusetts and Rhode Island until 

May 11, 2025, provided the previously 

described mitigation, monitoring, and 

reporting requirements are incorporated. 

A draft of the proposed and final initial 

IHA can be found at https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/ 

incidental-take-authorizations-undermarine-mammal-protection-act. We 

request comment on our analyses, the 

proposed renewal IHA, and any other 

aspect of this notice. Please include 

with your comments any supporting 

data or literature citations to help 

inform our final decision on the request 

for MMPA authorization. 

Dated: September 16, 2024. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2024–21457 Filed 9–18–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XE272] 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Washington 

State Department of Transportation’s 

Seattle Slip 3 Vehicle Transfer Span 

Project in Washington State 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental 

harassment authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

regulations implementing the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as 

amended, notification is hereby given 

that NMFS has issued an incidental 

harassment authorization (IHA) to 

Washington State Department of 

Transportation (WSDOT) to incidentally 

harass marine mammals during 

construction activities associated with 

the Seattle Slip 3 Vehicle Transfer Span 

(VTS) Replacement Project in Seattle, 

Washington. 

DATES: This authorization is effective 

from September 12, 2024 through 

September 11, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the 

application and supporting documents, 

as well as a list of the references cited 

in this document, may be obtained 

online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

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

these documents, please call the contact 

listed below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Austin Demarest, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of 

marine mammals, with certain 

exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and 

(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et 

seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce 

(as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon 

request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and either regulations are 

promulgated or, if the taking is limited 

to harassment, an incidental harassment 

authorization is issued. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s) and will not have 

an unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

taking for subsistence uses (where 

relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe 

the permissible methods of taking and 

other ‘‘means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact’’ on the 

affected species or stocks and their 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance, and on the 

availability of the species or stocks for 

taking for certain subsistence uses 

(referred to in shorthand as ‘‘mitigation 

measures’’). NMFS must also prescribe 

requirements pertaining to monitoring 

and reporting of such takings. The 

definition of key terms such as ‘‘take,’’ 

‘‘harassment,’’ and ‘‘negligible impact’’ 

can be found in the MMPA and NMFS’s 

implementing regulations (see 16 U.S.C. 

1362; 50 CFR 216.103).The definitions 

of all applicable MMPA statutory terms 

cited above are included in the relevant 

sections below. 

Summary of Request 

On December 19, 2023, NMFS 

received a request from WSDOT for an 

IHA to take marine mammals incidental 

to Seattle Slip 3 VTS Replacement 

Project in Elliott Bay of the Puget 

Sound, Seattle, WA. Following NMFS’ 

review of the application, WSDOT 

submitted revised versions on March 4, 

April 8, April 18, and April 29, 2024. A 

final revised monitoring plan was 

submitted on May 14, 2024 and a final 

revised application was submitted on 

May 16, 2024. The application was 

deemed adequate and complete on May 

20, 2024. WSDOT’s request is for take of 

12 species of marine mammals, by Level 

B harassment only. The proposed IHA 

was published for public comment on 

July 30, 2024 (89 FR 61064). Neither 

WSDOT nor NMFS expect serious 

injury or mortality to result from this 

activity and, therefore, an IHA is 

appropriate. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 76805 

Description of the Specified Activity 

and Anticipated Impacts 

Overview 

WSDOT plans to replace the Seattle 

Slip 3 VTS at Colman Dock which is 

located in Elliott Bay of the Puget Sound 

in Seattle, Washington. The purpose of 

the construction project is to preserve 

the transportation function of an aging, 

seismically deficient transfer span. The 

existing VTS will be removed and 

replaced with a hydraulic transfer span 

consisting of steel drilled shafts and a 

new steel wingwall. In-water 

construction includes cutting sheet 

piles, installation and removal of steel 

piles with a vibratory hammer, and 

proofing steel piles with an impact 

hammer to drive them to the maximum 

depth and ensure load bearing capacity. 

In-water pile removal and driving with 

vibratory and impact hammers may 

result in incidental take by Level B 

harassment of 12 marine mammal 

species within Elliott Bay and the 

Central Puget Sound. 

A detailed description of the planned 

construction project is provided in the 

Federal Register notice for the proposed 

IHA (89 FR 61064, July 30, 2024). Since 

that time, no changes have been made 

to the planned activities. Therefore, a 

detailed description is not provided 

here. Please refer to that Federal 

Register notice for the description of the 

specific activity. 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue 

an IHA to WSDOT was published in the 

Federal Register on July, 30 2024 (89 FR 

61064). That notice described, in detail, 

WSDOT’s activity, the marine mammal 

species that may be affected by the 

activity, and the anticipated effects on 

marine mammals. In that notice, we 

requested public input on the request 

for authorization described therein, our 

analysis, the proposed authorization, 

and any other aspect of the notice of the 

proposed IHA, and requested that 

interested persons submit relevant 

information, suggestions, and 

comments. During the 30-day public 

comment period, NMFS received a total 

of three public comment letters. Two of 

these were from Federal agencies stating 

simply that they had no comments, and 

the other comment letter was from a 

private citizen. 

The only substantive comment and 

NMFS’ response is provided below, and 

all public comment letters are available 

online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/ 

incidental-take-authorizationwashington-department-transportationsseattle-slip-3-vehicle. 

Comment: One commenter presented 

a suggestion regarding protected species 

observer (PSO) monitoring coverage 

from the Seattle-Bainbridge Island 

ferries during the vibratory installation 

of 24, 30, and 78-in steel pipe piles, 

stating that there are instances when 

only one Seattle-Bainbridge Island ferry 

is operating due to scheduling issues, 

insufficient staffing, or boat mechanical 

issues which necessitate additional PSO 

coverage at those times. The commenter 

suggested adding an alternate 

monitoring location for the second ferry 

based PSO if any of these operational 

issues occurred. 

Response: NMFS agrees with the 

commenter’s concern and added an 

alternate location for the second ferry 

based PSO to monitor from if there are 

delays or only one ferry is operational 

during the installation of the 24, 30 and 

78-in pipe piles. NMFS refers the 

commenter to the Monitoring and 

Reporting section below and the 

Monitoring Requirements section of the 

final issued IHA. 

Changes From the Proposed IHA to 

Final IHA 

In the Monitoring and Reporting 

section of the proposed IHA Federal 

Register notice (89 FR 61064, July 30, 

2024) one PSO was required to be 

stationed on each Seattle-Bainbridge 

Island ferry during the vibratory 

installation of 24, 30, and 78-in steel 

pipe piles. An alternate monitoring 

location for the second ferry stationed 

PSO was added to the Monitoring and 

Reporting section of this notice for 

instances when there are ferry delays or 

only one ferry is operational. Figure 2 

was added as a spatial reference for the 

alternate monitoring location. These 

changes have also been added to the 

Monitoring Requirements section of the 

final issued IHA. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

Sections 3 and 4 of the application 

summarize available information 

regarding status and trends, distribution 

and habitat preferences, and behavior 

and life history of the potentially 

affected species. NMFS fully considered 

all of this information, and we refer the 

reader to these descriptions, instead of 

reprinting the information. Additional 

information regarding population trends 

and threats may be found in NMFS’ 

Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; 

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

marine-mammal-stock-assessments) 

and more general information about 

these species (e.g., physical and 

behavioral descriptions) may be found 

on NMFS’ website (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species). 

Table 1 lists all species or stocks for 

which take is expected and authorized 

for this activity and summarizes 

information related to the population or 

stock, including regulatory status under 

the MMPA and Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) and potential biological removal 

(PBR), where known. PBR is defined by 

the MMPA as the maximum number of 

animals, not including natural 

mortalities, that may be removed from a 

marine mammal stock while allowing 

that stock to reach or maintain its 

optimum sustainable population (as 

described in NMFS’ SARs). While no 

serious injury or mortality is anticipated 

or authorized here, PBR and annual 

serious injury and mortality from 

anthropogenic sources are included here 

as gross indicators of the status of the 

species or stocks and other threats. 

Marine mammal abundance estimates 

presented in this document represent 

the total number of individuals that 

make up a given stock or the total 

number estimated within a particular 

study or survey area. NMFS’ stock 

abundance estimates for most species 

represent the total estimate of 

individuals within the geographic area, 

if known, that comprises that stock. 

Survey abundance (as compared to 

stock or species abundance) is the total 

number of individuals estimated within 

the survey area, which may or may not 

align completely with a stock’s 

geographic range as defined in the 

SARs. For some species, this geographic 

area or surveys may extend beyond U.S. 

waters. All managed stocks in this 

region are assessed in NMFS’ U.S. 

Pacific and Alaska SARs. All values 

presented in table 1 are the most recent 

available at the time of publication 

(including from the draft 2023 SARs) 

and are available online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
76806 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 

TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES 1 LIKELY IMPACTED BY THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

Strategic 

(Y/N) 2

Stock 

abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance 

survey) 3

PBR Annual 

M/SI 4

Order Artiodactyla—Cetacea—Mysticeti (baleen whales) 

Family Eschrichtiidae: 

Gray whale ....................... Eschrichtius robustus ............. Eastern N Pacific ................... -, -, N 26,960 (0.05, 25,849, 2016) .. 801 131 

Minke whale ..................... Balaenoptera acutorostrata .... CA/OR/WA ............................. -, -, N 915 (0.792, 509, 2018) .......... 4.1 0.19 

Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Family Delphinidae: 

Killer whale 5 ..................... Orcinus orca ........................... West Coast Transient ............ -, -, N 349 (N/A, 349, 2018) ............. 3.5 0.4 

Bottlenose dolphin ........... Tursiops truncatus .................. CA/OR/WA offshore ............... -, -, N 3,477 (0.696, 2,048, 2018) .... 19.70 ≥0.82 

Long beaked common 

dolphin.

Delphinus capensis ................ CA .......................................... -, -, N 83,379 (0.216, 69,636, 2018) 668 ≥29.7 

Pacific white-sided Dolphin.Lagenorhynchus obliquidens CA/OR/WA ............................. -, -, N 34,999 (0.222, 29,090, 2018) 279 7 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises): 

Dall’s porpoise .................. Phocoenoides dalli ................. CA/OR/WA ............................. -, -, N 16,498 (0.61, 10,286, 2018) .. 99 ≥0.66 

Harbor porpoise ............... Phocoena phocoena .............. Washington Inland Waters ..... -, -, N 11,233 (0.37, 8,308, 2015) .... 66 ≥7.2 

Order Carnivora—Pinnipedia 

Family Otariidae (eared seals 

and sea lions): 

CA sea lion ....................... Zalophus californianus ........... U.S. ........................................ -, -, N 257,606 (N/A, 233,515, 2014) 14,011 >321 

Steller sea lion 6 ............... Eumetopias jubatus ................ Eastern ................................... -, -, N 36,308 (N/A, 36,308, 2022) ... 2,178 93.2 

Family Phocidae (earless 

seals):.

Harbor seal ....................... Phoca vitulina ......................... Washington Northern Inland 

Waters.

-, -, N 16,451 (0.07, 15,462, 2019) .. 928 40 

Northern elephant seal 7 .. Mirounga angustirostris .......... CA Breeding ........................... -, -, N 187,386 (N/A, 85,369, 2013) 5,122 13.7 

1 Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy’s Committee on Taxonomy 

(https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/). 2ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be 

declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA 

as depleted and as a strategic stock. 3 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports-region. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. 4These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated 

mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 5 Nest is based upon count of individuals identified from photo-ID catalogs in analysis of a subset of data from 1958–2018. 

6 Nest is best estimate of counts, which have not been corrected for animals at sea during abundance surveys. Estimates provided are for the U.S. only. 

7There is uncertainty in available population estimates due to limited surveys, limited reproductive data, and uncertainty in stock relationships and harvest statistics. 

As indicated above, all 12 species in 

table 1 spatially and temporally cooccur with the activity to the degree that 

take is reasonably likely to occur. A 

detailed description of the species likely 

to be affected by WSDOT’s project, 

including brief introductions to the 

species and relevant stocks as well as 

available information regarding 

population trends and threats, and 

information regarding local occurrence, 

were provided in the Federal Register 

notice for the proposed IHA (89 FR 

61064, July 30, 2024); since that time, 

we are not aware of any changes in the 

status of these species and stocks; 

therefore, detailed descriptions are not 

provided here. Please refer to that 

Federal Register notice for these 

descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS’ 

website (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for 

generalized species accounts. 

Marine Mammal Hearing 

Hearing is the most important sensory 

modality for marine mammals 

underwater, and exposure to 

anthropogenic sound can have 

deleterious effects. To appropriately 

assess the potential effects of exposure 

to sound, it is necessary to understand 

the frequency ranges marine mammals 

are able to hear. Not all marine mammal 

species have equal hearing capabilities 

(e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok 

and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 

2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. 

(2007, 2019) recommended that marine 

mammals be divided into hearing 

groups based on directly measured 

(behavioral or auditory evoked potential 

techniques) or estimated hearing ranges 

(behavioral response data, anatomical 

modeling, etc.). Generalized hearing 

ranges were chosen based on the 

approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold 

from the normalized composite 

audiograms, with the exception for 

lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans 

where the lower bound was deemed to 

be biologically implausible and the 

lower bound from Southall et al. (2007) 

retained. Marine mammal hearing 

groups and their associated hearing 

ranges are provided in table 2. 

The pinniped functional hearing 

group was modified from Southall et al. 

(2007) on the basis of data indicating 

that phocid species have consistently 

demonstrated an extended frequency 

range of hearing compared to otariids, 

especially in the higher frequency range 

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

2009; Reichmuth et al., 2013). 

For more detail concerning these 

groups and associated frequency ranges, 

please see NMFS (2018) for a review of 

available information. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 76807 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS (NMFS, 2018) 

Hearing group Generalized hearing 

range * 

Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ................................................................................................................. 7 Hz to 35 kHz. 

Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) ...................................... 150 Hz to 160 kHz. 

High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger & 

L. australis).

275 Hz to 160 kHz. 

Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) .............................................................................................................. 50 Hz to 86 kHz. 

Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) .......................................................................................... 60 Hz to 39 kHz. 

* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’ 

hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram, 

with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation). 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

The effects of underwater noise from 

WSDOT’s construction activities have 

the potential to result in behavioral 

harassment of marine mammals in the 

vicinity of the project area. The notice 

of proposed IHA (89 FR 61064, July 30, 

2024) included a discussion of the 

effects of anthropogenic noise on marine 

mammals and the potential effects of 

underwater noise from WSDOT’s 

construction activity on marine 

mammals and their habitat. That 

information and analysis is referenced 

in this final IHA determination and is 

not repeated here; please refer to the 

notice of proposed IHA (89 FR 61064, 

July 30, 2024). 

Estimated Take of Marine Mammals 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes 

authorized through the IHA, which will 

inform NMFS’ consideration of ‘‘small 

numbers’’ and the negligible impact 

determinations. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, 

which (i) has the potential to injure a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 

or (ii) has the potential to disturb a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild by causing disruption 

of behavioral patterns, including, but 

not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

(Level B harassment). 

Authorized takes may occur by Level 

B harassment only, in the form 

behavioral reactions and temporary 

threshold shift (TTS) for individual 

marine mammals resulting from 

exposure to noise from impact and 

vibratory pile driving and removal. 

Based on the nature of the activity and 

the anticipated effectiveness of the 

mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown 

zones at the Level A harassment area) 

discussed in detail below in the 

Mitigation section, Level A harassment 

is neither anticipated nor authorized. 

As described previously, no serious 

injury or mortality is anticipated or 

authorized for this activity. Below we 

describe how the information provided 

above is synthesized to produce a 

quantitative estimate of the take that is 

reasonably like to occur and is 

authorized. 

For acoustic impacts, generally 

speaking, we estimate take by 

considering: (1) acoustic thresholds 

above which NMFS believes the best 

available science indicates marine 

mammals will be behaviorally harassed 

or incur some degree of permanent 

hearing impairment; (2) the area or 

volume of water that will be ensonified 

above these levels in a day; (3) the 

density or occurrence of marine 

mammals within these ensonified areas; 

and, (4) the number of days of activities. 

We note that while these factors can 

contribute to a basic calculation to 

provide an initial prediction of potential 

takes, additional information that can 

qualitatively inform take estimates is 

also sometimes available (e.g., previous 

monitoring results or average group 

size). Below, we describe the factors 

considered here in more detail and 

present the authorized take numbers. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

NMFS recommends the use of 

acoustic thresholds that identify the 

received level of underwater sound 

above which exposed marine mammals 

would be reasonably expected to be 

behaviorally harassed (equated to Level 

B harassment) or to incur permanent 

threshold shift (PTS) of some degree 

(equated to Level A harassment). 

Acoustic thresholds used in the analysis 

were discussed in detail in the notice of 

proposed IHA (89 FR 61064, July 30, 

2024) and not repeated here. Please see 

that notice for additional detail. 

Ensonified Area 

Here, we describe operational and 

environmental parameters of the activity 

that are used in estimating the area 

ensonified above the acoustic 

thresholds, including source levels and 

transmission loss coefficient. 

The sound field in the project area is 

the existing background noise plus 

additional construction noise from the 

construction project. Marine mammals 

are expected to be affected by sound 

generated from the impact and vibratory 

pile driving components of this project. 

In order to calculate distances to the 

Level A harassment and Level B 

harassment thresholds for the methods 

and piles used in the project, NMFS 

used acoustic monitoring data from 

previous pile driving at WSDOTs 

Bainbridge Island Ferry Terminal 

Project (vibratory removal of 12-inch Hpiles), Phase 2 of Colman Dock 

construction for the Seattle Multimodal 

Project (impact installation of 24-inch 

steel piles), and the Ebey Slough Bridge 

Replacement Project (72-inch steel 

piles). Each of the projects listed above 

occurred within the Puget Sound and 

provided the most suitable source levels 

due to similar physical habitat 

characteristics, pile sizes, and pile 

driving or removal methods (table 3). 

Source levels from the Bainbridge 

Terminal Ferry Project and the Ebey 

Slough Bridge Replacement Project were 

used as proxies for the vibratory 

removal of 14-inch steel H-piles and the 

vibratory installation of 24, 30, and 78- 

inch steel pipe piles for the project 

because source levels for identical pile 

sizes were unavailable. Results from the 

vibratory installation of 72-inch piles at 

the Ebey Slough Bridge Replacement 

Project showed that source levels ranged 

between 148 to 166 dB re 1 mPa at 10 

m, therefore 174 dB re 1 mPa at 10 m, 

as proposed for use by WSDOT, was 

used as a conservative source level 

estimate for the vibratory installation of 

24, 30, and 78-in steel pipe piles 

(WSDOT 2011). The source level for 14- 

inch H-piles was assumed to be 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
76808 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 

equivalent to the vibratory removal of 

12-inch H-piles at the Bainbridge Island 

Ferry Terminal where the unweighted 

RMS SPL source level was 153 dB re 1 

mPa at 10 m (Laughlin 2019). Bubble 

curtains would be employed for impact 

installation of 24-inch steel piles but 

zero dB of effective attenuation is 

assumed because a bubble curtain was 

used at Phase 2 of Colman Dock 

construction for the Seattle Multimodal 

Project, thus source levels would be the 

same. 

TABLE 3—SEATTLE SLIP 3 VEHICLE TRANSFER SPAN PROXY SOUND SOURCE LEVELS FOR PILE SIZES AND DRIVING

METHODS

Pile type and size (in) Method Source level at 10 m 

(dB re 1 μPA) Reference 

14-inch steel H-piles ........................................ Vibratory Removal .......................................... 153 dB rms ................. Laughlin (2019). 

24-inch steel pipe piles .................................... Vibratory installation and removal .................. 174 dB rms ................. WSDOT (2011). 

24-inch steel pipe piles .................................... Impact installation ........................................... 166 SEL, 176 dB rms, 

194 dB peak.

Greenbusch Group 

(2019). 

30-inch steel sheet piles .................................. Vibratory installation ........................................ 174 dB rms ................. WSDOT (2011). 

78-inch steel pipe piles .................................... Vibratory installation ........................................ 174 dB rms ................. WSDOT (2011). 

Level B Harassment Zones 

Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease 

in acoustic intensity as an acoustic 

pressure wave propagates out from a 

source. TL parameters vary with 

frequency, temperature, sea conditions, 

current, source and receiver depth, 

water depth, water chemistry, and 

bottom composition and topography. 

The general formula for underwater TL 

is: 

TL = B * Log10 (R1/R2) 

Where: 

TL = transmission loss in dB 

B = transmission loss coefficient; for practical 

spreading equals 15 

R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from 

the driven pile, and 

R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the 

initial measurement 

The recommended TL coefficient for 

most nearshore environments is the 

practical spreading value of 15. This 

value results in an expected propagation 

environment that would lie between 

spherical and cylindrical spreading loss 

conditions, which is the most 

appropriate assumption for the 

WSDOTs activities in the absence of 

specific modelling. The estimated Level 

B harassment zones for the WSDOTs 

activities are shown in tables 4 and 5. 

Level A Harassment Zones 

The ensonified area associated with 

Level A harassment is more technically 

challenging to predict due to the need 

to account for a duration component. 

Therefore, NMFS developed an optional 

user spreadsheet tool to accompany the 

Technical Guidance that can be used to 

relatively simply predict an isopleth 

distance for use in conjunction with 

marine mammal density or occurrence 

to help predict potential takes. We note 

that because of some of the assumptions 

included in the methods underlying this 

optional tool, we anticipate that the 

resulting isopleth estimates are typically 

going to be overestimates of some 

degree, which may result in an 

overestimate of potential take by Level 

A harassment. However, this optional 

tool offers the best way to estimate 

isopleth distances when more 

sophisticated modeling methods are not 

available or practical. For stationary 

sources such as pile installation and 

removal, the optional User Spreadsheet 

tool predicts the distance at which, if a 

marine mammal remained at that 

distance for the duration of the activity, 

it would be expected to incur PTS. 

Inputs used in the optional User 

Spreadsheet tool (e.g., number of piles 

per day, during and/or strikes per pile) 

are presented in table 1 of the proposed 

IHA Federal Register notice (89 FR 

61064; July 30, 2024), and the resulting 

estimated isopleths and ensonified areas 

are reported in tables 4 and 5 below. 

TABLE 4—LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ZONES

Pile size and type Pile driving method 

Level A harassment zone (m) Level B 

harassment 

zone (m) LF 

cetaceans 

MF 

cetaceans 

HF 

cetaceans Phocids Otarids 

14-inch steel ......... Vibratory removal ................................ 3.2 0.3 4.7 1.9 0.1 1,585 

24-inch steel ......... Vibratory installation and removal ...... 65.8 5.8 97.3 40.0 2.8 a 15,410 

24-inch steel ......... Impact installation ............................... 75.9 2.7 90.4 40.6 3.0 736 

30-inch steel ......... Vibratory installation ............................ 50.2 4.5 74.3 30.5 2.1 a 15,410 

78-in steel ............. Vibratory installation ............................ 50.2 4.5 74.3 30.5 2.1 a 15,410 

a Land is reached at a maximum of 15,410 km/9.6 miles. 

TABLE 5—LEVEL A AND LEVEL B ENSONIFIED AREAS

Pile size and type Pile driving method 

Level A ensonified area (m2) Level B 

harassment 

zone (m) LF 

cetaceans 

MF 

cetaceans 

HF 

cetaceans Phocids Otarids 

14-inch steel ......... Vibratory removal ................................ 8.0 0.07 17.4 2.8 0.007 3,247,392 

24-inch steel ......... Vibratory installation and removal ...... 4,524.5 5.7 6,418 1,294.6 7.07 75,844,286 

24-inch steel ......... Impact installation ............................... 75.9 2.7 90.4 40.6 3.0 861,188 

30-inch steel ......... Vibratory installation ............................ 1,979.2 15.9 4,336 730.6 3.5 75,844,286 

78-inch steel ......... Vibratory Installation ........................... 1,979.2 15.9 4,336 730.6 3.5 75,844,286 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 76809 

Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take 

Estimation 

In this section we provide information 

about the occurrence of marine 

mammals, including density or other 

relevant information which will inform 

take incidental to WSDOTs pile driving 

activities for the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project. Throughout this 

section the pile installation or removal 

will be referred to as ‘‘pile driving’’ 

unless specified otherwise. From 2017 

through 2021 WSDOT monitored for 

marine mammals in Elliott Bay for the 

Seattle Multimodal Project. During this 

time, marine mammal monitoring 

occurred for 377 days. Since the Seattle 

Multimodal Project occurred in Elliott 

Bay, WSDOT considered this marine 

mammal monitoring data to be the most 

comprehensive and relevant for 

estimating take for the Seattle Slip 3 

VTS Replacement Project. Therefore, 

this data compiled all of these 

monitoring results and calculated total 

sightings, average sightings per day, and 

maximum sightings per day for all 

species of marine mammals that were 

observed (table 6). WSDOT used their 

best professional judgement and used 

this data to estimate take by multiplying 

maximum sighting per day by 19, which 

is the maximum number of in-water 

working days WSDOT estimates it 

would take to complete the project in a 

total worst case scenario. 

NMFS has carefully evaluated these 

methods and concludes that it is an 

accurate and appropriate method for 

estimating take for WSDOTs activities 

for this project. 

TABLE 6—MARINE MAMMALS SIGHTED AT THE SEATTLE MULTIMODAL PROJECT

Species 

Total 

individuals 

sighted a

Average 

individuals 

sighted/day 

(377 days) a

Maximum 

individuals 

sighted in 

one-day a

Take 

requested 

Harbor seal ...................................................................................................... 2,271 6.0 32 Yes. 

Northern elephant seal .................................................................................... 1 0.003 1 Yes. 

California sea ion ............................................................................................. 3,669 9.7 29 Yes. 

Steller sea ion .................................................................................................. 112 0.3 10 Yes. 

Unidentified pinniped ....................................................................................... 121 N/A N/A N/A. 

Killer whale Southern resident ........................................................................ 170 0.5 26 No. 

Killer whale transient ....................................................................................... 79 0.2 20 Yes. 

Gray whale ...................................................................................................... 5 0.01 2 Yes. 

Humpback whale ............................................................................................. 8 0.02 1 No. 

Minke whale ..................................................................................................... 3 0.008 1 Yes. 

Unidentified large whale .................................................................................. 2 N/A 1 N/A. 

Unidentified small whale .................................................................................. 10 N/A N/A N/A. 

Harbor porpoise ............................................................................................... 655 1.7 72 Yes. 

Dall’s porpoise ................................................................................................. 8 0.02 5 Yes. 

Common bottlenose dolphin ............................................................................ 6 0.02 2 Yes. 

Pacific white-sided dolphin .............................................................................. 2 0.005 2 Yes. 

Long-beaked common dolphin ........................................................................ 0 N/A 0 Yes. 

Unidentified dolphin/porpoise .......................................................................... 46 N/A 6 N/A. 

aWSDOT 2022. 

Gray Whale—Although gray whales 

are common on the southern ends of 

Whidbey and Camano Islands in the 

Puget Sound February through May, 

they are rarely sighted in the 

construction area (Calambokidis et. al. 

2024). During the Seattle multimodal 

project only five gray whales were 

detected over 377 days of monitoring 

with a maximum of two individuals 

observed on a single day (WSDOT 

2022). WSDOT estimated that up to 2 

gray whales could be taken per day for 

the 19 days of construction, for a total 

of 38 takes by Level B harassment. 

Since Seattle Slip 3 VTS Replacement 

Project construction would occur from 

August through mid-February, gray 

whales occurrence is expected to be 

relatively low. In this context, and given 

that gray whales are highly 

conspicuous, we have a high degree of 

confidence that WSDOT can 

successfully implement shutdowns as 

necessary to avoid any potential Level A 

harassment of gray whales. WSDOT 

must also monitor the Orca Network 

and the Whale Report Alert System 

(WRAS) daily in order to maintain 

awareness of regional whale occurrence 

and movements (see Mitigation and 

Monitoring and Reporting sections 

below). Therefore, take of gray whales 

by Level A harassment is not 

anticipated or authorized. 

Minke Whale—Minke whales are 

uncommon during fall and winter 

months in the Puget Sound but are 

rarely sighted in the construction area 

(Calambokidis and Baird 1994). During 

the Seattle Multimodal Project only 

three minke whale detections occurred 

over 377 days of monitoring with a 

maximum of one detection on a single 

day (WSDOT 2022). WSDOT estimated 

that up to 1 minke whale could be taken 

per day for the 19 days of construction, 

for a total of 19 takes by Level B 

harassment. 

Since the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project construction would 

occur from August through midFebruary, minke whale occurrence is 

expected to be relatively low. In these 

circumstances, and given that minke 

whales are highly conspicuous, we have 

a high degree of confidence that 

WSDOT can successfully implement 

shutdowns as necessary to avoid any 

potential Level A harassment of minke 

whales. WSDOT must also monitor the 

Orca Network and the WRAS daily in 

order to maintain awareness of regional 

whale occurrence and movements (see 

Mitigation and Monitoring and 

Reporting sections below). Therefore, 

take of minke whales by Level A 

harassment is not anticipated or 

authorized. 

Transient Killer Whale—Transient 

killer whales are common in in the 

Puget Sound in all months and a total 

of 79 transient killer whale detections 

occurred over 377 days of monitoring 

for the Seattle Multimodal Project with 

a maximum of 20 detections in a single 

day (Orca Network 2021, WSDOT 2022). 

WSDOT estimated that up to 20 

incidents of take for transient killer 

whales could occur per day for 19 days 

of construction, for a total of 380 takes 

by Level B Harassment. Transient killer 

whales are common in the Puget Sound 

and are highly conspicuous. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
76810 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for mid-frequency cetaceans for all 

construction for the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project is less than 6 m. It 

is highly unlikely that any cetacean 

would enter within 6 m of active pile 

driving, and no take by Level A 

harassment for any mid-frequency 

cetacean is expected to occur. WSDOT 

must also monitor the Orca Network 

and the WRAS daily in order to 

maintain awareness of regional whale 

occurrence and movements (see 

Mitigation and Monitoring and 

Reporting sections below). Therefore, 

take of transient killer whales by Level 

A harassment is not anticipated or 

authorized. 

Bottlenose Dolphin—Bottlenose 

dolphins are considered to be rare in the 

Puget Sound but they were detected by 

the Cascadia Research Collective and 

reported via the Orca Network in 2017 

(Cascadia Research Collective, 2017). 

They were also detected on six 

occasions with a maximum of two 

detections on a single day during the 

Seattle Multimodal Project (WSDOT 

2022). WSDOT estimated that up to 2 

bottlenose dolphins could be taken per 

day for the 19 days of construction, for 

a total of 38 takes by Level B 

harassment. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for mid-frequency cetaceans for all 

construction of the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project is less than 6 m. It 

is highly unlikely that any cetacean 

would enter within 6 m of active pile 

driving, and no take by Level A 

harassment for any mid-frequency 

cetacean is expected to occur. WSDOT 

must also monitor the Orca Network 

and the WRAS daily in order to 

maintain awareness of regional whale 

occurrence and movements (see 

Mitigation and Monitoring and 

Reporting sections below). Therefore, 

take of bottlenose dolphins by Level A 

harassment is not anticipated or 

authorized. 

Long-Beaked Common Dolphin—No 

confirmed detections of long-beaked 

common dolphins occurred during the 

Seattle Multimodal Project but six 

unidentified delphinids were observed 

(WSDOT 2022). WSDOT assumed that 

up to two of these unidentified 

delphinids could have been long-beaked 

common dolphins. Therefore, WSDOT 

estimated that up to 2 long-beaked 

common dolphins could be taken per 

day for the 19 days of construction, for 

a total of 38 takes by Level B 

harassment. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for mid-frequency cetaceans for all 

construction of the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project is less than 6 m. It 

is highly unlikely that any cetacean 

would enter within 6 m of active pile 

driving, and no take by Level A 

harassment for any mid-frequency 

cetacean is expected to occur. WSDOT 

must also monitor the Orca Network 

and the WRAS daily in order to 

maintain awareness of regional whale 

occurrence and movements (see 

Mitigation and Monitoring and 

Reporting sections below). Therefore, 

take of long-beaked common dolphins 

by Level A harassment is not 

anticipated or authorized. 

Pacific White-Sided Dolphin—Pacific 

white-sided dolphins are rare in the 

Puget Sound but have been observed in 

San Juan Channel (Orca Network 2012). 

Two Pacific white sided dolphins were 

also observed during the Seattle 

Multimodal Project (WSDOT 2022). 

WSDOT estimated that up to 2 Pacific 

white-sided dolphins could be taken per 

day for the 19 days of construction, for 

a total of 38 takes by Level B 

harassment. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for mid-frequency cetaceans for all 

construction of the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project is less than 6 m. It 

is highly unlikely that any cetacean 

would enter within 6 m of active pile 

driving, and no take by Level A 

harassment for any mid-frequency 

cetacean is expected to occur. WSDOT 

must also monitor the Orca Network 

and the WRAS daily in order to 

maintain awareness of regional whale 

occurrence and movements (see 

Mitigation and Monitoring and 

Reporting sections below). Therefore, 

take of Pacific white-sided dolphins by 

Level A harassment is not anticipated or 

authorized. 

Dall’s Porpoise—Dall’s porpoises are 

considered rare within the project area. 

WSDOT recorded only eight detections 

over 377 days of monitoring during the 

Seattle Multimodal Project (WSDOT 

2022). WSDOT estimated that up to 5 

Dall’s porpoises could be taken per day 

for the 19 days of construction, for a 

total of 95 takes by Level B harassment. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for high-frequency cetaceans for all 

construction of the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project is less than 100 m. 

Due to the relatively short duration of 

construction for the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project and infrequent 

detections of Dall’s porpoises, WSDOT 

estimated that no Dall’s porpoises 

would be likely to enter the Level A 

harassment zone. Take by Level A 

harassment of Dall’s porpoises is not 

anticipated or authorized. 

Harbor Porpoise—From 2017 through 

2022, WSDOT recorded 655 detections 

of harbor porpoises with a maximum of 

72 detections on a single day (WSDOT 

2022). WSDOT estimated that up to 72 

instances of take for harbor porpoises 

could occur per day for the 19 days of 

construction, for a total of 1,368 takes by 

Level B harassment. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for high-frequency cetaceans is under 

100 m. Although harbor porpoises are 

relatively common in the Puget Sound, 

we assume that WSDOT would be able 

to cease construction if harbor porpoises 

entered the Level A harassment zone 

before sufficient duration of exposure 

for PTS to occur. Take by Level A 

harassment is not anticipated or 

authorized. 

California Sea Lion—California sea 

lions are relatively common throughout 

the Puget Sound. During the Seattle 

Multimodal Project a maximum of 29 

sea lions were detected on a single day 

with a total of 3,669 sightings over the 

377 days of monitoring (WSDOT 2022). 

WSDOT estimated that 32 California sea 

lions would enter the Level B 

harassment zone for each of the 19 days 

of construction, for a total of 551 takes 

by Level B harassment. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for Otariids for all construction of the 

Seattle Slip 3 VTS Replacement Project 

is less than 3 m. It is highly unlikely 

that any Otariids would enter within 3 

m of active pile driving, and no take by 

Level A harassment for any midfrequency cetacean is expected to occur. 

Therefore, take of California sea lions by 

Level A harassment is not anticipated or 

authorized. 

Steller Sea Lion—Monitoring during 

the Seattle Multimodal Project recorded 

112 detections of Steller sea lions over 

377 days of monitoring, which is less 

than 1 detection per day. However, a 

maximum of 10 detections were 

recorded in a single day. Therefore, 

WSDOT estimated that 10 Steller sea 

lions would enter the Level B 

harassment zone each day for the 19 

days of construction of the project, for 

a total of 190 takes by Level B 

harassment. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for Otariids for all construction of the 

Seattle Slip 3 VTS Replacement Project 

is less than 3 m. It is highly unlikely 

that any Otariids would enter within 3 

m of active pile driving, and no take by 

Level A harassment for any midfrequency cetacean is expected to occur. 

Therefore, take of steller sea lions by 

Level A harassment is not anticipated or 

authorized. 

Harbor Seal—Harbor seals are 

common in the project area. During the 

Seattle Multimodal Project WSDOT 

recorded an average of 6 harbor seal 

detections per day and a maximum of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 76811 

32 in a single day (WSDOT 2022). 

WSDOT estimated that a maximum of 

32 harbor seals will enter the Level B 

harassment zones for each of the 19 

days of construction, for a total of 608 

takes by Level B harassment. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for high-frequency phocids is under 41 

m. Although harbor seals are relatively 

common in the Puget Sound, we assume 

that WSDOT would be able to cease 

construction if harbor seals entered the 

Level A harassment zone before 

sufficient duration of exposure for PTS 

to occur. Take by Level A harassment is 

not anticipated or authorized. 

Northern Elephant Seal—Although 

northern elephant seals are rare in the 

Puget Sound, one individual was 

detected during the Seattle Multimodal 

Project. Since northern elephant seals 

are rare in the construction area, 

WSDOT estimated that a maximum of 

one elephant seal would enter the Level 

B harassment zone per day for each of 

the 19 days of construction. A total of 

19 takes by Level B harassment is 

estimated for northern elephant seals for 

construction associated with the Seattle 

Slip 3 VTS Replacement Project. 

Similar to harbor seals, the largest 

harassment zone is less than 41 m for 

all construction activities. Given the 

anticipated rarity of occurrence for 

elephant seals, WSDOT does not expect 

northern elephant seals to enter Level A 

harassment zones without being 

detected prior to shutdown. 

Construction will cease if a northern 

elephant seal is observed entering Level 

A harassment zone. Therefore, no take 

by Level A harassment of northern 

elephant seals is anticipated or 

authorized. 

TABLE 7—ESTIMATED TAKE OF MARINE MAMMAL BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT FOR 19 DAYS OF IN-WATER CONSTRUCTION

Species Maximum 

sightings/day a

Total takes by 

Level B 

harassment 

Percent of 

stock 

Phocids: 

Harbor seal ........................................................................................................................... 32 608 5.51 

Northern elephant seal ......................................................................................................... 1 19 0.02 

Otariids: 

California sea lion ................................................................................................................. 29 551 0.24 

Steller sea lion ...................................................................................................................... 10 190 0.23 

Cetaceans: 

Killer whale transient ............................................................................................................ 20 380 110 

Gray whale ........................................................................................................................... 2 38 0.15 

Minke whale .......................................................................................................................... 1 19 3.7 

Harbor porpoise .................................................................................................................... 72 1,368 16.5 

Dall’s porpoise ...................................................................................................................... 5 95 0.37 

Common bottlenose dolphin ................................................................................................. 2 38 3.0 

Pacific white-sided dolphin ................................................................................................... 2 38 0.13 

Long-beaked common dolphin ............................................................................................. 5 38 0.05 

aWSDOT 2022. 

Mitigation 

In order to issue an IHA under section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must 

set forth the permissible methods of 

taking pursuant to the activity, and 

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 certain subsistence uses 

(latter not applicable for this action). 

NMFS regulations require applicants for 

incidental take authorizations to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting the activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks, and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, NMFS considers two 

primary factors: 

(1) The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 

expected to reduce impacts to marine 

mammals, marine mammal species or 

stocks, and their habitat. This considers 

the nature of the potential adverse 

impact being mitigated (likelihood, 

scope, range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned), the 

likelihood of effective implementation 

(probability implemented as planned), 

and; 

(2) The practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost, and 

impact on operations. 

Shutdown Zones 

Prior to the start of any in-water 

construction, WSDOT must establish 

shutdown zones for all planned 

activities. Shutdown zones are predefined areas within which construction 

will be halted upon sightings of a 

marine mammal or in anticipation of a 

marine mammal entering the 

established shutdown zones. Piledriving will not re-commence until all 

marine mammals are assumed to have 

cleared these established shutdown 

zones. 

WSDOT must establish shutdown 

zones for Southern Resident killer 

whales (SRKWs) and humpback whales 

(HWs) at the Level B harassment zone 

for the vibratory removal of 14-in piles 

at 1,600 m and at 750 m for impact 

driving 24-in piles (table 4 and table 8). 

These shutdown zones are the Level B 

harassment zone rounded up to the 

nearest 50 m for each pile size and 

driving method. Shutdown zones for the 

remaining pile-driving for SRKWs and 

HWs will be established at 15,410 m, 

which is equivalent to the maximum 

Level B harassment area before it 

reaches land. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for the vibratory removal of 14-in piles 

is 3.2 m for all cetaceans and pinnipeds. 

However, WSDOT will implement a 

shutdown zone at 50 m for removal of 

14-in piles. The shutdown zones for the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
76812 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 

remaining pile-driving activities will be 

established at 100 m for all hearing 

groups of cetaceans (except SRKWs and 

HWs, as discussed above) and 50 m for 

all pinnipeds. The largest Level A 

harassment zone amongst all hearing 

groups of cetaceans would be 97.3 m for 

the remaining pile-driving (table 4). The 

largest Level A harassment zone 

amongst pinnipeds will be 40.6 m for 

the remaining pile driving (table 4). 

With WSDOTs established shutdown 

zones, all incidental take will be 

prevented for SRKWs and HWs and 

only take by Level B harassment is 

authorized to occur for the remaining 

species of cetaceans and pinnipeds. 

WSDOT will also establish shutdown 

zones for all other species of marine 

mammals for which take has not been 

authorized or for which incidental take 

has been authorized but the number of 

authorized takes has already been met. 

Those zones will be equivalent to Level 

B harassment zones provided for each 

activity in table 4. 

In addition to the shutdown zones 

mentioned above, WSDOT proposes to 

implement shutdown measures for 

SRKWs and HWs. If SRKWs or HWs are 

observed within or approaching 

established shutdown zones (see table 

8), WSDOT will shut down pile driving 

equipment to avoid take of these 

species. If a killer whale approaches a 

Level B harassment zone, and it is 

unknown if it is a SRKW or a Transient 

killer whale, WSDOT would assume it 

is a SRKW and implement shutdown 

measures. Pile driving would only 

resume if the killer whale could be 

confirmed as a Transient killer whale. 

TABLE 8—SHUTDOWN ZONES FOR ALL PILE-DRIVING ACTIVITIES FOR THE SEATTLE SLIP 3 VTS REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Pile size and type Pile driving method 

Shutdown zones (m) SRKW and HW 

shutdown zones 

(m) LF 

cetaceans 

MF 

cetaceans 

HF 

cetaceans Phocids Otarids 

14-in steel ............. Vibratory removal ................................ 50 50 50 50 50 1,600 

24-in steel ............. Vibratory installation and removal ...... 100 100 100 50 50 * 15,410 

24-in steel ............. Impact installation ............................... 100 100 100 50 50 750 

30-in steel ............. Vibratory installation ............................ 100 100 100 50 50 * 15,410 

78-in steel ............. Vibratory Installation ........................... 100 100 100 50 50 * 15,410 

* 15,410 m is the maximum distance sound can travel before reaching land. 

Protected Species Observers 

The monitoring locations for all PSOs 

during all pile driving activities 

(described in the Monitoring and 

Reporting Section) will ensure that the 

entirety of all shutdown zones are 

visible. If environmental conditions 

deteriorate such that the entirety of 

shutdown zones would not be visible 

(e.g., fog, heavy rain, Beaufort sea state, 

etc.,) all pile driving must be delayed 

until PSOs are confident that marine 

mammals in the shutdown zones could 

be detected. 

Monitoring for Level A and Level B 

Harassment 

All of the harassment zones will be 

monitored by PSOs to the extent 

practicable. Established monitoring 

zones will allow PSOs to observe 

marine mammals and define clear 

monitoring protocols for areas adjacent 

to shutdown zones. The monitoring 

zones and protocols will enable PSOs to 

be aware of and communicate the 

presence of marine mammals in project 

areas and outside of project areas to 

prepare for potential cessation of pile 

driving activities should a marine 

mammal enter a shutdown zone. 

Pre-Activity Monitoring 

Prior to the start of daily in-water 

construction activities, or whenever a 

break in pile driving of 30 minutes or 

longer occurs, PSOs must observe 

shutdown and monitoring zones for a 30 

minute period. The shutdown zone will 

be considered cleared when a marine 

mammal has not been observed within 

the zone for that 30-minute period. If 

pile driving is delayed or halted due to 

the presence of a marine mammal, the 

activities may not commence or resume 

until either the animal has voluntarily 

exited and been visually confirmed 

beyond the shutdown zones or 15 

minutes have passed without redetection of the animal. When a marine 

mammal for which Level B harassment 

take is authorized is present in the Level 

B harassment zone and authorized take 

has not been met, activities may begin. 

If work ceases for more than 30 minutes, 

the pre-activity monitoring of the 

shutdown zones must commence. A 

determination that the shutdown zone is 

clear must be made during a period of 

good visibility (i.e., the entire shutdown 

zone and surrounding waters must be 

visible to the naked eye). 

Soft Start 

Soft-start procedures are used to 

provide additional protection to marine 

mammals by providing warning and/or 

giving marine mammals a chance to 

leave the area prior to the hammer 

operating at full capacity. For impact 

pile driving, contractors are required to 

provide an initial set of three strikes 

from the hammer at reduced energy, 

followed by a 30-second waiting period, 

then two subsequent reduced-energy 

strike sets. Soft start must be 

implemented at the start of each day’s 

impact pile driving and at any time 

following cessation of impact pile 

driving for a period of 30 minutes or 

longer. 

Bubble Curtain 

A bubble curtain will be employed 

during impact installation or proofing of 

steel piles, unless the piles are driven in 

the dry, or water is less than 3 ft (feet) 

(0.9 m) in depth. A noise attenuation 

device is not be required during 

vibratory pile driving. If a bubble 

curtain or similar measure is used, it 

must distribute air bubbles around 100 

percent of the piling perimeter for the 

full depth of the water column. Any 

other attenuation measure would be 

required to provide 100 percent 

coverage in the water column for the 

full depth of the pile. The lowest bubble 

ring must be in contact with the 

mudline for the full circumference of 

the ring. The weights attached to the 

bottom ring would ensure 100 percent 

mudline contact. No parts of the ring or 

other objects will prevent full mudline 

contact. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s mitigation measures, NMFS 

determined that the established 

mitigation measures provide the means 

of effecting the least practicable impact 

on the affected species or stocks and 

their habitat, paying particular attention 

to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas 

of similar significance. 

Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the 

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 76813 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that will result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present while conducting the activities. 

Effective reporting is critical both to 

compliance as well as ensuring that the 

most value is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density); 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

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

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

of marine mammal species with the 

activity; or (4) biological or behavioral 

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

feeding areas); 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors; 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks; 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat); and 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Visual Monitoring 

Marine mammal monitoring during 

pile driving activities must be 

conducted by PSOs meeting NMFS’ 

standards and in a manner consistent 

with the following: 

• PSOs must be independent of the 

activity contractor (for example, 

employed by a subcontractor) and have 

no other assigned tasks during 

monitoring periods; 

• At least one PSO must have prior 

experience performing the duties of a 

PSO during construction activity 

pursuant to a NMFS-issued incidental 

take authorization; 

• Other PSOs may substitute 

education (degree in biological science 

or related field) or training for 

experience; and 

• Where a team of three or more PSOs 

is required, a lead observer or 

monitoring coordinator would be 

designated. The lead observer would be 

required to have prior experience 

working as a marine mammal observer 

during construction. 

• PSOs must be approved by NMFS 

prior to beginning any activities subject 

to this IHA. 

PSOs must have the following 

additional qualifications: 

• Ability to conduct field 

observations and collect data according 

to assigned protocols; 

• Experience or training in the field 

identification of marine mammals, 

including the identification of 

behaviors; 

• Sufficient training, orientation, or 

experience with the construction 

operation to provide for personal safety 

during observations; 

• Writing skills sufficient to prepare a 

report of observations including but not 

limited to the number and species of 

marine mammals observed; dates and 

times when in-water construction 

activities were conducted; dates, times, 

and reason for implementation of 

mitigation (or why mitigation was not 

implemented when required); and 

marine mammal behavior; and 

• Ability to communicate orally, by 

radio or in person, with project 

personnel to provide real-time 

information on marine mammals 

observed in the area as necessary. 

During all pile driving activities, a 

minimum of three PSO will monitor 

shutdown zones during pile driving 

activities. A total of three PSOs will 

monitor the area for the vibratory 

removal 14-in steel H-piles, two PSOs 

will monitor from the construction site 

and the other PSO will monitor from 

Pier 69/70. For the vibratory installation 

and removal of 24, 30, and 78-in steel 

pipe piles eight PSOs will monitor 

shutdown zones. PSOs as described 

above, one PSO will be stationed on 

each of the Seattle-Bainbridge Island 

Ferries (two PSOs in total on ferries), 

one PSO stationed at Alki Beach Pier on 

the south end of Elliott Bay, one PSO 

stationed at Magnolia Viewpoint on the 

north end of Elliott Bay, one PSO station 

at Rolling Bay on Bainbridge Island, and 

another PSO stationed at Rockaway 

Beach on Bainbridge Island. During 

impact pile driving 24-in steel pipe 

piles, two PSOs will be stationed at the 

construction site and an additional PSO 

will be stationed at pier 62 at the north 

end of the SRKW and HW shutdown 

zones (figure 1). If one of the SeattleBainbridge Island Ferries is delayed or 

inoperable during pile installation 

described above, then WSDOT must 

place the second ferry PSO at Creosote 

Bench Park on Bainbridge Island as an 

alternate monitoring location (figure 2). 

Monitoring must be conducted 30 

minutes before, during, and 30 minutes 

after all in water construction activities. 

In addition, observers must record all 

incidents of marine mammal 

occurrence, regardless of distance from 

activity, and will document any 

behavioral reactions in concert with 

distance from piles being driven or 

removed. Pile driving activities include 

the time to install or remove a single 

pile or series of piles, as long as the time 

elapsed between uses of the pile driving 

equipment is no more than 30 minutes. 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
76814 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1EN19SE24.000</GPH>

..... 

=z= 'i'llultlngton 8tnt Y/1 DepNtmont of TraMpo11:allon 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 76815 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

Coordination With Marine Mammal 

Research Networks 

Prior to the start of pile driving for the 

day, the PSOs will contact the Orca 

Network to find out the location of the 

nearest marine mammal sightings. Daily 

sightings information will be checked 

several times a day. The Orca Network 

consists of a list of over 600 (and 

growing) residents, scientists, and 

government agency personnel in the 

United States and Canada. Sightings are 

called or emailed into the Orca Network 

and immediately distributed to the 

NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science 

Center, the Center for Whale Research, 

Cascadia Research, the Whale Museum 

Hotline, and the British Columbia 

Sightings Network. 

Sightings information collected by the 

Orca Network includes detection by 

hydrophone. The SeaSound Remote 

Sensing Network is a system of 

interconnected hydrophones installed 

in the marine environment of Haro 

Strait (west side of San Juan Island) to 

study orca communication, in-water 

noise, bottom fish ecology, and local 

climatic conditions. A hydrophone at 

the Port Townsend Marine Science 

Center measures average in-water sound 

levels and automatically detects 

unusual sounds. These passive acoustic 

devices allow researchers to hear when 

different marine mammals come into 

the region. This acoustic network, 

combined with the volunteer visual 

sighting network allows researchers to 

document presence and location of 

various marine mammal species. 

WSDOT also participates in the 

Whale Report Alert System (WRAS/ 

WhaleReport Alert System—Ocean 

Wise). In October 2018, the Ocean Wise 

Sightings Network (formerly the B.C. 

Cetacean Sightings Network) launched 

an alert system that broadcasts details of 

whale presence to large commercial 

vessels. Information on whale presence 

is obtained from real-time observations 

reported to the Ocean Wise Sightings 

Network via the WhaleReport app. The 

alerts inform shipmasters and pilots of 

cetacean occurrence in their vicinity. 

This awareness better enables vessels to 

undertake adaptive mitigation measures, 

such as slowing down or altering course 

in the presence of cetaceans, to reduce 

the risk of collision and disturbance. 

All WSDOT ferry vessel crews have 

been trained in the use of WRAS, and 

input new sightings of cetaceans so data 

would be available to other vessels and 

to PSOs on the project. The lead PSO 

will check the WRAS sightings regularly 

during the day to be aware of cetaceans 

approaching the shutdown zones. 

With this level of coordination in the 

region of activity, WSDOT would be 

able to get additional real-time 

information on the presence or absence 

of cetaceans prior to start of in-water 

construction each day. 

Reporting 

A draft marine mammal monitoring 

report must be submitted to NMFS 

within 90 days after the completion of 

pile driving activities, or 60 days prior 

to a requested date of issuance of any 

future IHAs for the project, or other 

projects at the same location, whichever 

comes first. The marine mammal report 

would include an overall description of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1EN19SE24.001</GPH>

SRKW/Humpback Shutdown/Harassment Zone 

One FelTY Monitoring 

Seattle Ferry Terminal Slip 3 VTS Project • -= ~ 
76816 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 

work completed, a narrative regarding 

marine mammal sightings, and 

associated PSO data sheets. Specifically, 

the report must include: 

• Dates and times (begin and end) of 

all marine mammal monitoring; 

• Construction activities occurring 

during each daily observation period, 

including: (a) How many and what type 

of piles were driven or removed and the 

method (i.e., impact or vibratory); and 

(b) the total duration of time for each 

pile (vibratory driving) number of 

strikes for each pile (impact driving); 

• PSO locations during marine 

mammal monitoring; and 

• Environmental conditions during 

monitoring periods (at beginning and 

end of PSO shift and whenever 

conditions change significantly), 

including Beaufort sea state and any 

other relevant weather conditions 

including cloud cover, fog, sun glare, 

and overall visibility to the horizon, and 

estimated observable distance. 

For each observation of a marine 

mammal, the following must be 

reported: 

• Name of PSO who sighted the 

animal(s) and PSO location and activity 

at time of sighting; 

• Time of sighting; 

• Identification of the animal(s) (e.g., 

genus/species, lowest possible 

taxonomic level, or unidentified), PSO 

confidence in identification, and the 

composition of the group if there is a 

mix of species; 

• Distance and location of each 

observed marine mammal relative to the 

pile being driven or hole being drilled 

for each sighting; 

• Estimated number of animals (min/ 

max/best estimate); 

• Estimated number of animals by 

cohort (adults, juveniles, neonates, 

group composition, etc.); 

• Description of any marine mammal 

behavioral observations (e.g., observed 

behaviors such as feeding or traveling), 

including an assessment of behavioral 

responses thought to have resulted from 

the activity (e.g., no response or changes 

in behavioral state such as ceasing 

feeding, changing direction, flushing, or 

breaching); 

• Number of marine mammals 

detected within the harassment zones, 

by species; and 

• Detailed information about 

implementation of any mitigation (e.g., 

shutdowns and delays), a description of 

specified actions that ensued, and 

resulting changes in behavior of the 

animal(s), if any. 

If no comments are received from 

NMFS within 30 days, the draft reports 

would constitute the final reports. If 

comments are received, a final report 

addressing NMFS’ comments is required 

to be submitted within 30 days after 

receipt of comments. All PSO datasheets 

and/or raw sighting data must be 

submitted with the draft marine 

mammal report. 

In the event that personnel involved 

in the construction activities discover 

an injured or dead marine mammal, 

WSDOT must report the incident to the 

Office of Protected Resources (OPR) 

(PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov), 

NMFS and to the West Coast Region 

(WCR) regional stranding coordinator as 

soon as feasible. If the death or injury 

was clearly caused by the specified 

activity, WSDOT must immediately 

cease the specified activities until 

NMFS is able to review the 

circumstances of the incident and 

determine what, if any, additional 

measures are appropriate to ensure 

compliance with the terms of the IHAs. 

WSDOT will not resume their activities 

until notified by NMFS. 

The report must include the following 

information: 

1. Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the first discovery (and 

updated location information if known 

and applicable); 

2. Species identification (if known) or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

3. Condition of the animal(s) 

(including carcass condition if the 

animal is dead); 

4. Observed behaviors of the 

animal(s), if alive; 

5. If available, photographs or video 

footage of the animal(s); and 

6. General circumstances under which 

the animal was discovered. 

Negligible Impact Analysis and 

Determination 

NMFS has defined negligible impact 

as an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 

finding is based on the lack of likely 

adverse effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number 

of takes alone is not enough information 

on which to base an impact 

determination. In addition to 

considering estimates of the number of 

marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ 

through harassment, NMFS considers 

other factors, such as the likely nature 

of any impacts or responses (e.g., 

intensity, duration), the context of any 

impacts or responses (e.g., critical 

reproductive time or location, foraging 

impacts affecting energetics), as well as 

effects on habitat, and the likely 

effectiveness of the mitigation. We also 

assess the number, intensity, and 

context of estimated takes by evaluating 

this information relative to population 

status. Consistent with the 1989 

preamble for NMFS’ implementing 

regulations (54 FR 40338, September 29, 

1989), the impacts from other past and 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the baseline (e.g., as 

reflected in the regulatory status of the 

species, population size and growth rate 

where known, ongoing sources of 

human-caused mortality, or ambient 

noise levels). 

Pile driving and removal activities 

associated with this project have the 

potential to disturb or displace marine 

mammals. The activities for this project 

may result in incidental take, in the 

form of Level B harassment, from 

underwater sound generated from pile 

driving or removal. Potential takes 

could occur if marine mammals are 

present in the ensonified zone when 

pile driving activities are underway. 

The takes from Level B harassment 

would be due to potential behavioral 

disturbance and TTS. No serious injury 

or mortality is anticipated given the 

nature of the activities and measures 

designed to minimize the possibility of 

injury to marine mammals. The 

potential for harassment is minimized 

through the construction method and 

the implementation of the planned 

mitigation measures (see Mitigation 

section). 

To avoid repetition, the discussion of 

our analysis applies to all the species 

listed in table 1, given that the 

anticipated effects of this activity on 

these different marine mammal stocks 

are expected to be similar in nature. 

Where there are special circumstances 

for a species or stock (e.g., gray whales), 

they are included as a separate 

subsection below. 

NMFS has identified key factors 

which may be employed to assess the 

level of analysis necessary to conclude 

whether potential impacts associated 

with a specified activity should be 

considered negligible. These include 

(but are not limited to) the type and 

magnitude of taking, the amount and 

importance of the available habitat for 

the species or stock that is affected, the 

duration of the anticipated effect to the 

species or stock, and the status of the 

species or stock. The following factors 

support negligible impact 

determinations for all affected stocks. 

No take by Level A harassment is 

anticipated or authorized incidental to 

the Seattle Slip 3 VTS Replacement 

Project. However, take by Level B 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 76817 

harassment is expected and authorized 

for 12 marine mammal species. Effects 

on individuals that are taken by Level 

B harassment, on the basis of reports in 

the literature as well as monitoring from 

other similar activities, will likely be 

limited to reactions such as area 

avoidance, increased swimming speeds, 

increased surfacing time, or decreased 

foraging (if such activity were occurring) 

(e.g., Thorson and Reyff 2006 and NMFS 

2018). Individual marine mammals 

would most likely move away from 

sound sources and temporarily avoid 

the ensonified area while pile driving is 

occurring. If the sound produced from 

the construction activities is sufficiently 

disturbing, marine mammals are likely 

to simply avoid the area while activities 

are occurring, particularly as the project 

is located on a busy waterfront with 

high amounts of vessel traffic. We 

expect that any avoidance of the project 

areas by marine mammals would be 

temporary in nature and that any marine 

mammals that avoid the project areas 

during construction would not be 

permanently displaced. Short-term 

avoidance of the project areas and 

energetic impacts of interrupted 

foraging or other important behaviors is 

unlikely to affect the reproduction or 

survival of individual marine mammals, 

and the effects of behavioral disturbance 

on individuals is not likely to accrue in 

a manner that would affect the rates of 

recruitment or survival of any affected 

stock. 

The projects are also not expected to 

have significant adverse effects on 

affected marine mammals’ habitats. The 

project activities will not modify 

existing marine mammal habitat for a 

significant amount of time. The 

activities may cause some fish to leave 

the area of disturbance, thus temporarily 

impacting marine mammals’ foraging 

opportunities in a limited portion of the 

foraging range; but, because of the short 

duration of the activities and the 

relatively small area of the habitat that 

may be affected (with no known 

particular importance to marine 

mammals), the impacts to marine 

mammal habitat are not expected to 

cause significant or long-term negative 

consequences. Aside from the 

biologically important area (BIA) for 

gray whales described below, there are 

no known areas of importance for other 

marine mammals, such as feeding or 

pupping areas, in the project area. 

For all species and stocks, take would 

occur within a limited, relatively 

confined area (Elliott Bay within central 

Puget Sound) of the stocks’ ranges. 

Given the availability of suitable habitat 

nearby, any displacement of marine 

mammals from the project areas is not 

expected to affect marine mammals’ 

fitness, survival, and reproduction due 

to the limited geographic area that will 

be affected in comparison to the much 

larger habitat for marine mammals in 

Puget Sound. Level B harassment will 

be reduced to the level of least 

practicable adverse impact to the marine 

mammal species or stocks and their 

habitat through use of mitigation 

measures described herein. Some 

individual marine mammals in the 

project areas may be present and be 

subject to repeated exposure to sound 

from pile driving on multiple days. 

However, these individuals would 

likely return to normal behavior during 

gaps in pile driving activity. The Seattle 

waterfront is a busy area and monitoring 

reports from previous in water pile 

driving activities indicate that marine 

mammals remain in Elliott Bay and the 

central Puget Sound area throughout 

pile driving activities. Therefore, any 

behavioral effects of repeated or long 

duration exposures are not expected to 

negatively affect survival or 

reproductive success of any individuals. 

Thus, even repeated Level B harassment 

of some small subset of an overall stock 

is unlikely to result in any effects on 

rates of reproduction and survival of the 

stock. 

Gray Whales 

The Puget Sound is part of a BIA for 

gray whales as they migrate between the 

Arctic and Mexico (Calambokidis et al., 

2024). Although the project area is 

located within the Puget Sound, the 

gray whale BIA does not overlap with 

the ensonified zones and gray whales 

typically remain further north around 

Whidbey and Camano Islands 

(Calambokidis et al., 2018). Gray whales 

are also rarely seen in the project area. 

This suggests that impacts from the 

project would have minimal to no 

impact on the migration of gray whales 

in the BIA, and would therefore not 

affect reproduction or survival. 

There was an unusual mortality event 

(UME) for gray whales from 2018 

through 2023 (see the Description of 

Marine Mammals in the Area of 

Specified Activities section of this 

notice). However, we do not expect 

authorized takes for this project to have 

any additional affects to reproduction or 

survival. As mentioned previously, no 

take by Level A harassment, serious 

injury or mortality is expected. Takes 

authorized by Level B harassment of 

gray whales would be in the form of 

behavioral disturbance. The results from 

necropsies showed evidence that gray 

whale nutritional condition was poor 

during the UME. The area that would be 

temporarily impacted from construction 

does not overlap with the gray whale 

feeding BIA in the northern Puget 

Sound. Therefore, the construction 

associated with the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement Project is unlikely to 

disrupt any critical behaviors (e.g. 

feeding) or have any effect on 

reproduction or survival of gray whales. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our determination that the impacts 

resulting from this activity are not 

expected to adversely affect any of the 

species or stocks through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival: 

• No serious injury or mortality is 

anticipated or authorized; 

• Level A harassment is not 

anticipated or authorized for all 12 

marine mammal species; 

• Level B harassment would be in the 

form of behavioral disturbance, 

primarily resulting in avoidance of the 

project areas around where impact or 

vibratory pile driving is occurring, and 

some low-level TTS that may limit the 

detection of acoustic cues for relatively 

brief amounts of time in relatively 

confined footprint of the activities; 

• Nearby areas of similar habitat 

value within Puget Sound are available 

for marine mammals that may 

temporarily vacate the project areas 

during construction activities for both 

projects; 

• Effects on species that serve as prey 

for marine mammals from the activities 

are expected to be short-term and, 

therefore, any associated impacts on 

marine mammal feeding are not 

expected to result in significant or longterm consequences for individuals, or to 

accrue to adverse impacts on their 

populations from either project; 

• The number of anticipated takes by 

Level B harassment is relatively low for 

all stocks for both projects; 

• The ensonifed areas from the 

project is very small relative to the 

overall habitat ranges of all species and 

stocks, and will not adversely affect 

ESA-designated critical habitat, or cause 

more than minor impacts in any BIAs or 

any other areas of known biological 

importance; 

• The lack of anticipated significant 

or long-term negative effects to marine 

mammal habitat from the project; 

• The efficacy of the mitigation 

measures in reducing the effects of the 

specified activities on all species and 

stocks for the project; and 

• Monitoring reports from similar 

work in Puget Sound that have 

documented little to no effect on 

individuals of the same species that 

could be impacted by the specified 

activities from the project. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
76818 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Notices 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

monitoring and mitigation measures, 

NMFS determined that the total marine 

mammal take from the activity will have 

a negligible impact on all affected 

marine mammal species or stocks. 

Small Numbers 

As noted previously, only take of 

small numbers of marine mammals may 

be authorized under sections 

101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for 

specified activities other than military 

readiness activities. The MMPA does 

not define small numbers and so, in 

practice, where estimated numbers are 

available, NMFS compares the number 

of individuals taken to the most 

appropriate estimation of abundance of 

the relevant species or stock in our 

determination of whether an 

authorization is limited to small 

numbers of marine mammals. When the 

predicted number of individuals to be 

taken is fewer than one-third of the 

species or stock abundance, the take is 

considered to be of small numbers. 

Additionally, other qualitative factors 

may be considered in the analysis, such 

as the temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. 

For all species and stocks other than 

killer whales from the West Coast 

Transient stock, the authorized take is 

below one-third of the stock abundance. 

The authorized take of Transient killer 

whales as a proportion of the stock 

abundance is greater than one-third, if 

all takes are assumed to occur for 

different individuals. The project area 

represents a small portion of the stock’s 

range from Alaska to California (Muto et 

al., 2019). Sighting reports from the 

Orca Network support that it is 

reasonable to suspect that the same 

individual Transient Killer whales 

would be present within the ensonified 

project area during the relatively short 

duration (19 days) of construction 

activities. Since the construction area 

represents a small portion of Transient 

killer whales range and construction 

would occur over a short period, it is 

more likely that there will be multiple 

takes of the same individuals. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the construction activities 

(including the mitigation and 

monitoring measures) and the 

anticipated take of marine mammals, 

NMFS determined that small numbers 

of marine mammals would be taken 

relative to the population size of the 

affected species or stocks. 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of the affected marine mammal stocks or 

species implicated by this action. 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

the total taking of affected species or 

stocks would not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

such species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act 

Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA of 1973 

(ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires 

that each Federal agency insure that any 

action it authorizes, funds, or carries out 

is not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat. To ensure 

ESA compliance for the issuance of 

IHAs, NMFS consults internally 

whenever we propose to authorize take 

for endangered or threatened species. 

No incidental take of ESA-listed 

species is expected or authorized for 

this activity. Therefore, NMFS has 

determined that formal consultation 

under section 7 of the ESA is not 

required for this action. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

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

NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 

216–6A, NMFS must evaluate our 

proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an 

IHA) and alternatives with respect to 

potential impacts on the human 

environment. 

This action is consistent with 

categories of activities identified in 

Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no 

anticipated serious injury or mortality) 

of the Companion Manual for NAO 216– 

6A, which do not individually or 

cumulatively have the potential for 

significant impacts on the quality of the 

human environment and for which we 

have not identified any extraordinary 

circumstances that would preclude this 

categorical exclusion. Accordingly, 

NMFS has determined that the issuance 

of this IHA qualifies to be categorically 

excluded from further NEPA review. 

Authorization 

NMFS has issued an IHA to WSDOT 

for the potential harassment of small 

numbers of 12 marine mammal species 

incidental to the Seattle Slip 3 VTS 

Replacement project in Seattle, 

Washington, that includes the 

previously explained mitigation, 

monitoring and reporting requirements. 

Dated: September 13, 2024. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2024–21287 Filed 9–18–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER 

SUPERVISION AGENCY FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Publication of Fiscal Year 2023 Service 

Contract Inventory 

AGENCY: Court Services and Offender 

Supervision Agency for the District of 

Columbia (CSOSA). 

ACTION: Notice of public availability. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 

743 of Division C of the FY2010 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, the 

Court Services and Offender 

Supervision Agency hereby advises the 

public of the availability of the FY 2020 

Service Contract Inventory. This 

analysis provides information on service 

contract actions over $25,000 that were 

made in FY2022. The information is 

organized by function to show how 

contracted resources are distributed 

throughout the agency. This inventory 

analysis and plan have been developed 

in accordance with guidance issued on 

November 5, 2010, and December 19, 

2011, by the Office of Management and 

Budget’s Office of Federal Procurement 

Policy (OFPP). CSOSA’s FY2022 Service 

Contract Inventory Analysis, and the 

FY2023 Service Contract Inventory Plan 

is available on CSOSA’s website at: 

CSOSA-SCI-2022-2023-AnalysisReport.pdf. CSOSA’s FY 2022 service 

contract inventory data is included in 

the government-wide inventory posted 

on www.acquisition.gov and the 

government-wide inventory can be 

filtered to display the inventory data for 

CSOSA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Reggie James, Senior Procurement 

Executive, Associate Director, Office of 

Administration, 800 N Capitol St. NW, 

Washington, DC 20002, at (202) 220– 

5707 or Reggie.James@csosa.gov. 

Dated: September 13, 2024. 

Willis Stamps, 

Supervisory Attorney-Advisor. 

[FR Doc. 2024–21384 Filed 9–18–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3129–04–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1