Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92627 

18See Final Rule, 86 FR 52335. 

in the years that follow.’’ 18

Accordingly, as stated above, the 

petitioner and the Governments of 

China and Japan should submit their 

initial entries of appearance after 

publication of this notice in order to 

appear in the first annual inquiry 

service lists for these orders. Pursuant to 

19 CFR 351.225(n)(3), the petitioner and 

the Governments of China and Japan 

will not need to resubmit their entries 

of appearance each year to continue to 

be included on the annual inquiry 

service list. However, the petitioner and 

the Governments of China and Japan are 

responsible for making amendments to 

their entries of appearance during the 

annual update to the annual inquiry 

service list in accordance with the 

procedures described above. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice constitutes the AD orders 

with respect to printing plates from 

China and Japan and the CVD order 

with respect to printing plates from 

China, pursuant to sections 706(a) and 

736(a) of the Act. Interested parties can 

find a list of AD and CVD orders 

currently in effect at https://

www.trade.gov/datavisualization/ 

adcvd-proceedings. 

These orders are issued and published 

in accordance with sections 706(a) and 

736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b). 

Dated: November 18, 2024. 

Abdelali Elouaradia, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

Appendix 

Scope of the Orders 

The merchandise covered by these orders 

are aluminum lithographic printing plates. 

Aluminum lithographic printing plates 

consist of a flat substrate containing at least 

90 percent aluminum. The aluminumcontaining substrate is generally treated 

using a mechanical, electrochemical, or 

chemical graining process, which is followed 

by one or more anodizing treatments that 

form a hydrophilic layer on the aluminumcontaining substrate. An image-recording, 

oleophilic layer that is sensitive to light, 

including but not limited to ultra-violet, 

visible, or infrared, is dispersed in a 

polymeric binder material that is applied on 

top of the hydrophilic layer, generally on one 

side of the aluminum lithographic printing 

plate. The oleophilic light-sensitive layer is 

capable of capturing an image that is 

transferred onto the plate by either light or 

heat. The image applied to an aluminum 

lithographic printing plate facilitates the 

production of newspapers, magazines, books, 

yearbooks, coupons, packaging, and other 

printed materials through an offset printing 

process, where an aluminum lithographic 

printing plate facilitates the transfer of an 

image onto the printed media. Aluminum 

lithographic printing plates within the scope 

of these orders include all aluminum 

lithographic printing plates, irrespective of 

the dimensions or thickness of the 

underlying aluminum substrate, whether the 

plate requires processing after an image is 

applied to the plate, whether the plate is 

ready to be mounted to a press and used in 

printing operations immediately after an 

image is applied to the plate, or whether the 

plate has been exposed to light or heat to 

create an image on the plate or remains 

unexposed and is free of any image. 

Subject merchandise also includes 

aluminum lithographic printing plates 

produced from an aluminum sheet coil that 

has been coated with a light-sensitive imagerecording layer in a subject country and that 

is subsequently unwound and cut to the final 

dimensions to produce a finished plate in a 

third country (including the United States), 

or exposed to light or heat to create an image 

on the plate in a third country (including in 

a foreign trade zone within the United 

States). 

Excluded from the scope of these orders 

are lithographic printing plates manufactured 

using a substrate produced from a material 

other than aluminum, such as rubber or 

plastic. 

Aluminum lithographic printing plates are 

currently classifiable under Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

subheadings 3701.30.0000 and 3701.99.6060. 

Further, merchandise that falls within the 

scope of these orders may also be entered 

into the United States under HTSUS 

subheadings 3701.99.3000 and 8442.50.1000. 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

scope of these orders is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2024–27426 Filed 11–21–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XE193] 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Gary Paxton 

Industrial Park Vessel Haulout Project 

in Sitka, Alaska 

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 City 

and Borough of Sitka (CBS) to 

incidentally harass marine mammals 

during construction activities associated 

with Gary Paxton Industrial Park Vessel 

Haulout Project in Sawmill Cove in 

Sitka, Alaska. 

DATES: This authorization is effective 

one year from the date of issuance. 

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: Kate 

Fleming, Office of Protected Resources 

(OPR), 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 

proposed or, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, a notice of a proposed IHA 

is provided to the public for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s) 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’’); and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of the takings are set forth. 

The definitions of all applicable MMPA 

statutory terms cited above are included 

in the relevant sections below. 

Summary of Request 

On January 18, 2024, NMFS received 

a request from CBS for an IHA to take 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
92628 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

marine mammals incidental to 

construction associated with the Gary 

Paxton Industrial Park Vessel Haulout 

Project in Sawmill Cove in Sitka, 

Alaska. Following NMFS’ review of the 

application, CBS submitted a revised 

version on March 20, 2024, and another 

on April 27, 2024. The application was 

deemed adequate and complete on May 

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

nine species of marine mammals by 

Level B harassment and, for a subset of 

those species, by Level A harassment. 

Neither CBS nor NMFS expect serious 

injury or mortality to result from this 

activity and, therefore, an IHA is 

appropriate. 

NMFS previously issued an IHA to 

CBS for similar work (82 FR 47717, 

October 13, 2017). CBS complied with 

all the requirements (e.g., mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting) of the 

previous IHA, and information 

regarding their monitoring results may 

be found in the Potential Effects of 

Specified Activities on Marine 

Mammals and Their Habitat section. 

This IHA covers one year of a larger 

project; CBS intends to request a future 

take authorization for subsequent facets 

of the project. In year 1, construction of 

the following elements are planned: 

150-ton capacity vessel haulout piers, 

expanded uplands including stormwater 

collection and treatment, and a vessel 

washdown pad. The larger multi-year 

project involves construction of a 

queuing float, approach dock and 

gangway, a pile-supported deck area, 

vessel haulout ramp, an uplands 

shipyard, and pile anodes. While not 

planned to be constructed as part of this 

project, CBS’s goal is to eventually 

construct additional haulout piers to 

accommodate removal of vessels up to 

300 tons. 

Description of Specified Activity 

Overview 

The CBS is constructing a vessel 

haulout facility at Gary Paxton 

Industrial Park in Sawmill Cove in 

Sitka, Alaska. Across 62 construction 

days across a 1-year period, CBS plans 

to ibratory and impact install 36-in steel 

haulout pier support piles (both vertical 

and battered), vibratory install 24-in 

steel fender piles, and vibratory install 

and remove 24-in steel temporary 

template pipe piles. These methods of 

pile driving would introduce 

underwater sounds that may result in 

take, by Level A and Level B 

harassment, of marine mammals. 

A detailed description of the planned 

construction project is provided in the 

Federal Register notice for the proposed 

IHA (89 FR 56317, July 9, 2024). Since 

that time, no changes have been made 

to the planned activities. Therefore, a 

detailed description is not provided 

here. Please refer to the Federal Register 

notice for the description of the specific 

activity. 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue 

an IHA to CBS was published in the 

Federal Register on July 9, 2024 (89 FR 

56317). That notice described, in detail, 

CBS’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 

analyses, the proposed authorization, 

and any other aspect of the notice of 

proposed IHA, and requested that 

interested persons submit relevant 

information, suggestions, and 

comments. During the 30-day public 

comment period, NMFS did not receive 

any substantive public comments. 

Changes From the Proposed IHA to 

Final IHA 

On May 3, 2024, NMFS published (89 

FR 36762) and solicited public comment 

on its draft updated Technical Guidance 

for Assessing the Effects of 

Anthropogenic Sound on Marine 

Mammal Hearing Underwater and InAir Criteria for Onset of Auditory Injury 

and Temporary Threshold Shifts 

(Version 3.0) (2024 Technical 

Guidance), which includes updated 

thresholds and weighting functions to 

inform auditory injury (AUD INJ) 

estimates. The public comment period 

ended on June 17th, 2024, and the 2024 

Technical Guidance was finalized on 

October 24, 2024. The 2024 Technical 

Guidance represents the best available 

science and has been incorporated into 

the analysis in this final IHA. The 

relevant updated hearing group names, 

thresholds, and weighting functions 

may be found in the executive summary 

of the 2024 Technical Guidance. The 

resultant updated isopleths for this 

project are presented in table 9 of the 

Estimated Take of Marine Mammals 

section. There were no substantive 

changes to Level A harassment isopleths 

for low frequency cetaceans (they 

increased slightly during vibratory 

activities and decreased slightly during 

impact pile driving). However, for highfrequency cetaceans (categorized as 

mid-frequency cetaceans prior to 

application of the 2024 Technical 

Guidance), phocids, and otariids, Level 

A harassment isopleths increased 

substantially during all pile driving 

activities. Additionally, for very high 

frequency cetaceans (categorized as high 

frequency cetaceans prior to application 

of the 2024 Technical Guidance), Level 

A harassment isopleths decreased 

slightly during vibratory activities and 

substantially during impact pile driving. 

Necessary modifications to mitigation 

zones are presented in table 12 in the 

Mitigation section. In cases where the 

Level A harassment zones were smaller, 

the mitigation zones were not adjusted. 

In cases where the Level A harassment 

zones were larger, the mitigation zones 

were increased to either meet the Level 

A harassment isopleth, or to whatever 

distance was established after 

consideration of practicability and 

observability. 

For all species, the total number of 

takes proposed for authorization is 

equal to the total number of takes 

authorized by Level A and Level B 

harassment; for some species, estimates 

of take by Level A harassment were 

updated based on the analysis under the 

2024 Updated Technical Guidance. 

Updated take numbers are presented in 

table 10. 

Specifically, species with increased 

take by Level A harassment include 

Pacific white-sided dolphin 

(Lagenorhynchus obliquidens), harbor 

porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Steller 

sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), 

California sea lion (Zalophus 

californianus), Northern fur seal 

(Callorhinus ursinus), and harbor seal 

(Phoca vitulina). Take by Level A 

harassment increased from 5 from 6 for 

harbor porpoise, 89 to 240 Steller sea 

lion (88 to 237 Eastern Distinct 

Population Segment (DPS); 1 to 3 

Western DPS), and 34 to 53 for harbor 

seal. For Pacific white-sided dolphin, 

California sea lion, and Northern fur 

seal, no take by Level A harassment was 

proposed for authorization; however, 

based on our re-analysis under the 2024 

Technical Guidance, we have 

authorized up to 4 takes by Level A 

harassment for Pacific white-sided 

dolphin. For both California sea lion 

and Northern fur seal, three takes by 

either Level A or Level B harassment 

have been authorized. The negligible 

impact analyses has been updated to 

consider the increases to take by Level 

A harassment for Pacific white-sided 

dolphin, harbor porpoise, Steller sea 

lion, California sea lion, Northern fur 

seal, and harbor seal. 

NMFS also corrected a number of 

typographical errors. In table 6 of the 

proposed IHA Federal Register notice 

(89 FR 56317, July 9, 2024), the total 

number of 24-inch (-in) steel piles to be 

vibratory installed and removed via 

vibratory installation was erroneously 

listed as 2 instead of 4 (permanent piles) 

and 2 instead of 8 (template piles). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92629 

Additionally, the total number of 36-in 

steel piles to be installed via impact pile 

driving was erroneously listed as 4 

instead of 2 (support piles) and 8 

instead of 2 (batter piles). These values 

have been corrected in table 5 of this 

notice. There are no changes to Level A 

and Level B isopleths or associated take 

estimates or mitigation measures 

associated with these typographical 

corrections. 

Next, in table 8 of the proposed IHA 

Federal Register notice (89 FR 56317, 

July 9, 2024), the proposed take as a 

percentage of stock was incorrectly 

reported as <1 instead of 2.2 for the 

Hawai’i stock of humpback whale and 

as 14.2 instead of 2.3 for the Eastern 

North Pacific Stock of killer whale. 

These errors have been corrected in 

table 10 and do not affect the small 

numbers of negligible impact analysis 

and determination. 

Finally, in the small numbers section 

of the proposed IHA Federal Register 

notice (89 FR 56317, July 9, 2024), the 

harbor porpoise take estimates proposed 

for authorization were erroneously 

listed as 16 takes by Level B harassment 

and 6 takes by Level A harassment 

instead of 17 takes by Level B 

harassment and 5 takes by Level A 

harassment. Take estimates were 

correctly listed elsewhere in the notice. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

Sections 3 and 4 of CBS’s 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. For 

some species, this geographic area may 

extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed 

stocks in this region are assessed in 

NMFS’ U.S. Alaska and Pacific 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/ 

marine-mammal-stock-assessments. 

TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES 1 LIKELY TO OCCUR NEAR THE PROJECT AREA THAT MAY BE TAKEN BY CBS’S

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/S1 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 

Family Balaenopteridae 

(rorquals): 

Humpback Whale ............. Megaptera novaeangliae ........ Hawai1i .................................... -, -, N 11,278 (0.56, 7,265, 2020) .... 127 27.09 

Mexico-North Pacific .............. T, D, Y N/A (N/A, N/A, 2006) 5 ..... UND 0.57 

Family Delphinidae: 

Killer Whale ...................... Orcinus orca ........................... Eastern North Pacific Alaska 

Resident.

-, -, N 1,920 (N/A, 1,920, 2019) 6 ..... 19 1.3 

Eastern North Pacific Gulf of 

Alaska, Aleutian Islands 

and Bering Sea Transient.

-, -, N 587 (N/A, 587, 2012) 6 ........... 5.9 0.8 

Eastern Northern Pacific 

Northern Resident.

-, -, N 302 (N/A, 302, 2018) 6 ........... 2.2 0.2 

West Coast Transient ............ -, -, N 349 (N/A, 349, 2018) 6 ........... 3.5 0.4 

Pacific White-Sided Dolphin.Lagenorhynchus obliquidens N Pacific ................................. -, -, N 26,880 (N/A, N/A, 1990) ........ UND 0 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises): 

Harbor Porpoise ............... Phocoena phocoena .............. Yakutat/Southeast Alaska Offshore Waters.-, -, N N/A (N/A, N/A, 1997) 7 ........... UND 22.2 

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 

Northern Fur Seal ............ Callorhinus ursinus ................. Eastern Pacific ....................... -, D, Y 626,618 (0.2, 530,376, 2019) 11,403 373 

Steller Sea Lion ................ Eumetopias jubatus ................ Western .................................. E, D, Y 49,837 (N/A, 49,837, 2022) 8 299 267 

Eastern ................................... -, -, N 36,308 (N/A, 36,308, 2022) 9 2,178 93.2 

Family Phocidae (earless 

seals): 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 
92630 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES 1 LIKELY TO OCCUR NEAR THE PROJECT AREA THAT MAY BE TAKEN BY CBS’S

ACTIVITIES—Continued 

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 2

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance 

survey) 3

PBR Annual 

M/S1 4

Harbor Seal ...................... Phoca vitulina ......................... Sitka/Chatham Strait .............. -, -, N 13,289 (N/A, 11,883, 2015) ... 356 77 

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; Committee on Taxonomy, 2022). 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 SARs online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region. CV 

is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable [explain if this is the case] 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. 5Abundance estimates are based upon data collected more than 8 years ago and, therefore, current estimates are considered unknown. 6 Nest is based upon counts of individuals identified from photo-ID catalogs. 7 New stock split from Southeast Alaska stock. 

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

The overall Nmin is 73,211 and overall PBR is 439. 9 Nest is best estimate of counts, which have not been corrected for animals at sea during abundance surveys. Estimates provided are for the United States only. 

A detailed description of the species 

likely to be affected by CBS’s GPIP 

vessel haulout 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 56317; July 9, 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.). Subsequently, NMFS 

(2018, 2024) described generalized 

hearing ranges for these marine mammal 

hearing groups. 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. Note that between the 

proposed FRN (89 FR 56317, July 9, 

2024) and the issuance of the final IHA, 

NMFS’ 2024 Technical Guidance was 

finalized (89 FR 84872, 24 October 

2024) and has been incorporated into 

this analysis. The marine mammal 

hearing groups and their associated 

hearing ranges included in the proposed 

FRN (89 FR 56317, July 9, 2024) are 

provided in table 2. The re-named 

marine mammal hearing groups that 

have been incorporated into this final 

IHA are presented in table 3. The 

references, analysis, and methodology 

used in the development of the 

thresholds are described in the 2024 

Technical Guidance, which may be 

accessed at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-acoustic-technical-guidance. 

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, Cephalorhynchids, 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). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92631 

TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS

[NMFS 2024] 

Hearing group Generalized hearing 

range * 

Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ..................................................................................................................... 7 Hz to 36 kHz. 

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

Very High-frequency (VHF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger 

& L. australis).

200 Hz to 165 kHz. 

Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) ................................................................................................................... 40 Hz to 90 kHz. 

Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) .............................................................................................. 60 Hz to 68 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 may not be as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from composite audiogram, previous analysis in NMFS 2018, and/or data from Southall et al. 2007; Southall et al. 2019. Additionally, animals are able to detect very loud sounds above 

and below that ‘‘generalized’’ hearing range. 

For more detail concerning these 

groups and associated frequency ranges, 

please see NMFS (2024) for a review of 

available information. 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

The effects of underwater noise from 

CBS’s construction activities have the 

potential to result in the harassment of 

marine mammals in the vicinity of the 

project area. The notice of proposed IHA 

(89 FR 56317; July 9, 2024) included a 

discussion of the effects of 

anthropogenic noise on marine 

mammals and the potential effects of 

underwater noise from CBS’s 

construction 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 56317; July 9, 2024). 

Estimated Take of Marine Mammals 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes 

authorized through the IHA, which 

informed NMFS’ consideration of 

‘‘small numbers,’’ the negligible impact 

determinations, and impacts on 

subsistence uses. 

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 are primarily by 

Level B harassment, as use of the 

acoustic sources (i.e., pile driving) has 

the potential to result in disruption of 

behavioral patterns for individual 

marine mammals. There is also some 

potential for AUD INJ (Level A 

harassment) to result, for all hearing 

groups because, after applying the 2024 

Technical Guidance, the predicted AUD 

INJ zones have increased such that 

Protected Species Observers (PSO) may 

be unable to observe most of these 

species during impact pile driving. The 

mitigation and monitoring measures are 

expected to minimize the severity of the 

taking to the extent practicable. 

As described previously, no serious 

injury or mortality is anticipated or 

authorized for this activity. Below we 

describe how the authorized take 

numbers are estimated. 

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 take estimates. 

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 AUD INJ of 

some degree (equated to Level A 

harassment). 

Level B Harassment—Though 

significantly driven by received level, 

the onset of behavioral disturbance from 

anthropogenic noise exposure is also 

informed to varying degrees by other 

factors related to the source or exposure 

context (e.g., frequency, predictability, 

duty cycle, duration of the exposure, 

signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the 

source), the environment (e.g., 

bathymetry, other noises in the area, 

predators in the area), and the receiving 

animals (hearing, motivation, 

experience, demography, life stage, 

depth) and can be difficult to predict 

(e.g., Southall et al., 2007, 2021; Ellison 

et al., 2012). Based on what the 

available science indicates and the 

practical need to use a threshold based 

on a metric that is both predictable and 

measurable for most activities, NMFS 

typically uses a generalized acoustic 

threshold based on received level to 

estimate the onset of behavioral 

harassment. NMFS generally predicts 

that marine mammals are likely to be 

behaviorally harassed in a manner 

considered to be Level B harassment 

when exposed to underwater 

anthropogenic noise above root-meansquared pressure received levels (RMS 

SPL) of 120 dB (referenced to 1 

micropascal (re 1 mPa)) for continuous 

(e.g., vibratory pile driving, drilling) and 

above RMS SPL 160 dB re 1 mPa for nonexplosive impulsive (e.g., seismic 

airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific 

sonar) sources. Generally speaking, 

Level B harassment take estimates based 

on these behavioral harassment 

thresholds are expected to include any 

likely takes by temporary threshold shift 

(TTS) as, in most cases, the likelihood 

of TTS occurs at distances from the 

source less than those at which 

behavioral harassment is likely. TTS of 

a sufficient degree can manifest as 

behavioral harassment, as reduced 

hearing sensitivity and the potential 

reduced opportunities to detect 

important signals (conspecific 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
92632 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

communication, predators, prey) may 

result in changes in behavior patterns 

that would not otherwise occur. 

CBS’s activity includes the use of 

continuous (vibratory pile driving) and 

impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, 

and therefore the RMS SPL thresholds 

of 120 and 160 dB re 1 mPa are 

applicable. 

Level A Harassment—NMFS’ 2024 

Technical Guidance (NMFS, 2024) 

identifies dual criteria to assess AUD 

INJ (Level A harassment) to 5 different 

marine mammal groups (based on 

hearing sensitivity) as a result of 

exposure to noise from two different 

types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). Note that between the 

proposed FRN (89 FR 56317, July 9, 

2024) and the issuance of the final IHA, 

NMFS’ 2024 Technical Guidance was 

finalized (89 FR 84872, 24 October 

2024) and has been incorporated into 

this analysis. CBS’s activity includes the 

use of impulsive (impact pile driving) 

and non-impulsive (continuous pile 

driving) sources. 

The thresholds identifying the onset 

of Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) 

based on 2018 Technical Guidance and 

included in the proposed FRN (89 FR 

56317, July 9, 2024) are provided in 

table 4. The references, analysis, and 

methodology used in the development 

of the thresholds used in the proposed 

IHA are described in NMFS’ 2018 

Technical Guidance, which may be 

accessed at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-acoustic-technical-guidance. 

The updated thresholds, which identify 

the Onset of AUD INJ based on the 2024 

Technical Guidance, have been 

incorporated in this final IHA are 

presented in table 5. The references, 

analysis, and methodology used in the 

development of the thresholds are 

described in the 2024 Technical 

Guidance, which may be accessed at: 

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

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

marine-mammal-acoustic-technicalguidance. NMFS defines AUD INJ as 

‘‘damage to the inner ear that can result 

in destruction of tissue . . . which may 

or may not result in PTS’’ (NMFS 2024). 

NMFS defined PTS as a permanent, 

irreversible increase in the threshold of 

audibility at a specified frequency or 

portion of an individual’s hearing range 

above a previously established reference 

level (NMFS, 2024). 

TABLE 4—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PTS BASED ON 2018 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Hearing group 

PTS onset acoustic thresholds * 

(received level) 

Impulsive Non-impulsive 

Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ...................................... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ......................... Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB. 

Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ...................................... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ........................ Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB. 

High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ..................................... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ........................ Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB. 

Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) ............................. Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ....................... Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB. 

Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) ............................. Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ....................... Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB. 

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

also be considered. 

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

In this table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect ANSI standards (ANSI, 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being included to indicate peak 

sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW 

pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a 

multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded. 

TABLE 5—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF AUDITORY INJURY BASED ON 2024 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Hearing group 

AUD INJ onset thresholds * 

(received level) 

Impulsive Non-impulsive 

Hearing group.

Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ...................................... Cell 1: Lp,0-pk,flat: 222 dB; LE,p,LF,24h: 183 dB .................. Cell 2: LE,p,LF,24h: 197 dB. 

High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ..................................... Cell 3: Lp,0-pk,flat: 230 dB; LE,p,HF,24h: 193 dB ................. Cell 4: LE,p,, HF,24h: 201 dB. 

Very High-Frequency (VHF) Cetaceans .......................... Cell 5: Lp,0-pk,flat: 202 dB; LE,p,VHF,24h: 159 dB ............... Cell 6: LE,p, VHF,24h: 181 

dB. 

Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) ............................. Cell 7: Lp,0-pk.flat: 223 dB; LE,p,PW,24h: 183 dB ................. Cell 8: LE,p,PW,24h: 195 dB. 

Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) ............................. Cell 9: Lp,0-pk,flat: 230 dB; LE,p,OW,24h: 185 dB ................ Cell 10: LE,p,OW,24h: 199 

dB. 

* Dual metric thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating AUD INJ onset. If a non-impulsive 

sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds are recommended for consideration. 

Note: Peak sound pressure level (Lp,0-pk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and weighted cumulative sound exposure level (LE,p) has a reference value of 1μPa2s. In this table, thresholds are abbreviated to be more reflective of International Organization for Standardization standards 

(ISO 2017). The subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being included to indicate peak sound pressure are flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing 

range of marine mammals (i.e., 7 Hz to 165 kHz). The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, HF, and VHF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The weighted cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying 

exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these 

thresholds will be exceeded. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92633 

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 

planned project. Marine mammals are 

expected to be affected via sound 

generated by the primary components of 

the project (i.e., pile driving and 

removal). 

The project includes vibratory pile 

installation and removal, and impact 

pile driving. Source levels for these 

activities are based on reviews of 

measurements of the same or similar 

types and dimensions of piles available 

in the literature. Source levels for each 

pile size and activity each year are 

presented in table 6. Source levels for 

vibratory installation and removal of 

piles of the same diameter are assumed 

to be the same. 

TABLE 6—ESTIMATES OF MEAN UNDERWATER SOUND LEVELS * GENERATED DURING VIBRATORY AND IMPACT PILE

INSTALLATION AND VIBRATORY PILE REMOVAL

Pile driving method Pile type Pile size dB RMS dB peak dB SEL Reference 

Impact ..................................... Steel Pipe Support Pile .......... 36-in 193 210 183 Caltrans 2015, 2020. 

Steel Pipe Batter Pile ............. .................. .................. .................. ..................

Vibratory Installation and Extraction.Steel Pipe Support .................. 36-in 166 N/A N/A NMFS 2023 Calculations. 

Steel Pipe Batter ..................... .................. .................. .................. ..................

Steel Pipe Fender ................... 24-in 163 N/A N/A NMFS 2023 Calculations 

Steel Pipe Template ............... .................. .................. .................. ..................

Note: dB peak = peak sound level; rms = root mean square; SEL = sound exposure level. 

* All sound levels are referenced at 10 m. 

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 

R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from 

the driven pile, and 

R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the 

initial measurement 

Absent site-specific acoustical 

monitoring with differing measured TL, 

a practical spreading value of 15 is used 

as the TL coefficient in the above 

formula. Site-specific TL data for the 

Sitka Sound are not available; therefore, 

the default coefficient of 15 is used to 

determine the distances to the Level A 

harassment and Level B harassment 

thresholds. 

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 

2024 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 

driving, 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 AUD INJ, 

which includes, but is not limited to, 

PTS. Inputs used in the optional User 

Spreadsheet tool, and the resulting 

estimated isopleths, are reported below. 

Table 8 provides the calculated Level A 

isopleths that are based on the 2018 

Technical Guidance, which were 

presented in the proposed FRN (89 FR 

56317, July 9, 2024) while table 9 

provides the updated Level A isopleths 

using the 2024 Technical Guidance. 

TABLE 7—USER SPREADSHEET INPUTS

Vibratory Impact 

36-in 

haulout pier 

support pile 

36-in 

haulout pier 

batter pile 

24-in 

haulout pier 

fender pile 

24-in 

template 

pile 

36-in 

haulout pier 

support pile 

36-in 

haulout pier 

batter pile 

Installation Installation 

or removal 

Installation 

Spreadsheet Tab Used .................................................... A.1) Vibratory pile driving E.1) Impact pile driving 

Source Level (SPL) .......................................................... 166 RMS 163 RMS 183 SEL 

Transmission Loss Coefficient ......................................... 15 

Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ................................. 2.5 2 

Activity Duration per day (minutes) ................................. 60 120 30 20 .................... ....................


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 
92634 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

TABLE 7—USER SPREADSHEET INPUTS—Continued 

Vibratory Impact 

36-in 

haulout pier 

support pile 

36-in 

haulout pier 

batter pile 

24-in 

haulout pier 

fender pile 

24-in 

template 

pile 

36-in 

haulout pier 

support pile 

36-in 

haulout pier 

batter pile 

Installation Installation 

or removal 

Installation 

Number of strikes per pile ............................................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 2,000 3,000 

Number of piles per day .................................................. 2 4 8 2 

Distance of sound pressure level measurement ............. 10 

TABLE 8—LEVEL A HARASSMENT AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS AND ASSOCIATED AREAS FROM VIBRATORY AND

IMPACT PILE DRIVING AND VIBRATORY REMOVAL, USING THE 2018 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Pile size/type Method 

Level A harassment: isopleths (m), areas (km2) Level B 

harassment: 

isopleth (m), areas 

(km2) 

LF MF HF PW OW 

Haulout Pier Support Pile 

36-in Steel Pipe Pile ......... Vibratory Installation ........ 23.4, (0.006) 2.1, (0.001) 34.5, (0.009) 14.2, (0.004) 1.0, (0.001) 11,659, (9.41) 

Impact Installation ............ 2,516, (3.13) 89.5, (0.022) 2,997, (3.64) 1,347, (1.49) 98, (0.024) 1,585, (1.94) 

Haulout Pier Batter Pile 

36-in Steel Pipe Pile ......... Vibratory Installation ........ 37.1, (0.010) 3.3, (0.003) 54.8, (0.013) 22.5, (0.006) 1.6, (0.001) 11,659, (9.41) 

Impact Installation ............ 3,297, (3.97) 117.3, (0.029) 3,928, (4.64) 1,765, (2.24) 128, (0.032) 1,585, (1.94) 

Haulout Pier Fender Pile 

24-in Steel Pipe Pile ......... Vibratory Installation ........ 14.7, (0.004) 1.3, (0.001) 21.8, (0.006) 9.0, (0.003) 0.6, (0.001) 7,356, (7.61) 

Template Pile 

24-in Steel Pipe Pile ......... Vibratory Installation and 

Removal.

17.9, (0.005) 1.6, (0.001) 26.4, (0.008) 10.9, (0.003) 0.8, (0.001) 7,356, (7.61) 

TABLE 9—LEVEL A HARASSMENT AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS AND ASSOCIATED AREAS * FROM VIBRATORY

AND IMPACT PILE DRIVING AND VIBRATORY REMOVAL, USING THE 2024 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Pile size/type Method 

Level A harassment: isopleths (m), areas (km2) Level B 

harassment: 

isopleth (m), areas 

(km2) 

LF HF 1 VHF 2 PW OW 

Haulout Pier Support Pile 

36-in Steel Pipe Pile .............. Vibratory Installation .............. 31.5 12.1 25.8 40.6 13.7 11,659, (9.41) 

Impact Installation .................. 2,507 319.9 3,880, (4.59) 2,227.3, (2.86) 830.3, (0.62) 1,585, (1.94) 

Haulout Pier Batter Pile 

36-in Steel Pipe Pile .............. Vibratory Installation .............. 50.1 19.2 40.9 64.4 21.7 11,659, (9.41) 

Impact Installation .................. 3,285.4 419.2 5,084.2 (5.73) 2,918.6 (3.55) 1,087.9 (1.01) 1,585, (1.94) 

Haulout Pier Fender Pile 

24-in Steel Pipe Pile .............. Vibratory Installation .............. 19.9 7.6 16.3 25.6 8.6 7,356, (7.61) 

Template Pile 

24-in Steel Pipe Pile .............. Vibratory Installation and Removal.24.1 9.3 19.7 31.0 10.4 7,356, (7.61) 

* Level A harassment areas (km2) have been presented only in cases where they are necessary to calculate updates to take by Level A harassment based on the 

2024 Technical Guidance and methodology used in the Proposed IHA (89 FR 56317, July 9, 2024). In cases where the shutdown zone meets or exceeds the Level A 

harassment isopleth, take by Level A harassment was not reanalyzed. 1Species that were considered Mid-Frequency cetaceans under the NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance are now considered High Frequency cetaceans. 2Species that were considered High-Frequency cetaceans under the NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance are now considered Very High Frequency cetaceans. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 

I I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92635 

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 

the take calculations. 

Additionally, we describe how the 

occurrence information is synthesized 

to produce a quantitative estimate of the 

take that is reasonably likely to occur 

and authorized. Available information 

regarding marine mammal occurrence in 

the vicinity of the project area includes 

site-specific and nearby survey 

information and historic data sets. Prior 

data sets consulted included: (1) PSO 

monitoring completed at the project site 

on 8 days between September 20 and 

29, 2023 during the geotechnical 

investigation preceding this project 

(Solstice, 2023), (2) PSO monitoring 

completed at the project site on 22 days 

between October and November 2017 

during the Multipurpose Dock Project 

(TMC, 2017), (3) PSO monitoring 

completed at O’Connell Bridge 

(approximately 7 km to the east of the 

project site) on 4 days in June 2019 

(CBS, 2019); (4) Land-based surveys 

conducted at Sitka’s Whale Park 

completed weekly between September 

and May 1995—2000 (Straley and 

Pendell (2017)); and, (5) data available 

on the Global Biodiversity Information 

Facility (see CBS’s application for 

further details). 

To estimate take, CBS referred to the 

above referenced data sets to estimate 

total (Level A and Level B combined) 

takes per day for each species and 

multiplied this factor by the total 

number of construction days. NMFS 

finds it more appropriate to describe the 

take estimate inputs according to a daily 

occurrence probability in which groups 

per day and group size are estimated for 

each species and multiplied by the 

number of days of each type of pile 

driving activity. The equation used to 

estimate take by Level B harassment for 

all species is: 

Exposure Estimate = group size × groups 

per day × days of pile driving 

activity. 

CBS initially planned to implement 

shutdown zones for mid-frequency 

cetaceans and otariids (except Steller 

sea lions) that met or exceeded the Level 

A harassment isopleths for all activities. 

Using the 2018 Technical Guidance, the 

calculated Level A harassment zones 

during impact installation of 36-in steel 

piles, planned to occur on 30 

construction days, exceeded the 

shutdown zones for phocids, high 

frequency cetaceans, and low frequency 

cetaceans. After applying the 2024 

Technical Guidance, the calculated 

Level A harassment zones for this 

activity exceeded the shutdown zones 

for all species except killer whale. The 

best available abundance estimates for 

these species cover the general region of 

Sitka Sound and Silver Bay; therefore, 

we used proportional comparisons of 

predicted harassment areas to estimate 

predicted take by Level A harassment. 

In the absence of density data, best 

available monitoring data for the general 

area were used to estimate take by Level 

A harassment. Specifically, to calculate 

estimated take by Level A harassment 

for all species except California sea lion 

and Northern fur seal, which are 

expected to be very rare for the area) we 

proportionally compared, by hearing 

group, the portion of the largest Level A 

harassment area square kilometers (km2) 

that exceeds the planned shutdown 

zone area (km2) to the area (km2) of the 

largest Level B harassment zone across 

that pile type (typically from vibratory 

pile driving). This ratio was then 

multiplied by the group size, daily 

sightings, and number of construction 

days, according to the equation below. 

For LF cetaceans, there was no 

meaningful change to the calculated 

Level A harassment isopleths after 

applying the 2024 Technical Guidance. 

For killer whales, the shutdown zone 

still exceeds the calculated Level A 

harassment isopleths. Therefore, the 

take estimates for these species (LF 

cetaceans and killer whale) have not 

changed. The estimated take by Level A 

harassment has been updated for all 

other species to account for larger Level 

A harassment isopleths which exceed 

the shutdown zone. 

Take by Level A harassment = Level A 

harassment area (km2)/maximum 

Level B harassment area (km2) × 

group size × groups per day × days 

of pile driving. 

For Steller sea lions, during impact 

pile driving of 36-in steel pipe piles 

(batter and support), the shutdown zone 

will be established at 60 meters (m) 

rather than the larger Level A 

harassment isopleths due to 

practicability; local monitoring data 

suggests that Steller sea lions frequently 

occur within close proximity of the 

project site. The method described 

above did not produce an estimate of 

take by Level A harassment consistent 

with the best available data for this 

species at the project location. 

Therefore, recent monitoring data 

collected at this site (Solstice, 2023), 

were used to calculate take by Level A 

harassment. The proportion of Steller 

sea lions detected between 60 m and the 

largest level A zone (130 m based on 

2018 Technical Guidance, updated to 

1,087 m based on the 2024 Technical 

Guidance) was multiplied by group size, 

number of daily sightings, and the 

number of construction days when 

impact pile driving would occur 

according to this equation: 

Take by Level A harassment = group 

size × groups per day × days of 

impact pile driving activity × 

proportion of Steller sea lions 

observed occurring between 60 m 

and the largest level A zone during 

geotechnical drilling. 

Take estimates were rounded up to 

the nearest whole number in table 10. 

Gray Whale 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of 31 gray whales, based on 

an estimated 1 gray whale every 2 days 

for 62 construction days. However, 

during weekly surveys conducted from 

September to May between 1995 and 

2000, gray whales were infrequently 

observed in groups of 3 from Whale 

Park. As such, NMFS proposed 1 group 

of 3 gray whales every 14 construction 

days (62/14 construction days = 4.4 2- 

week construction week periods), 

resulting in 14 takes by Level B 

harassment (1 group × 3 gray whales × 

4.4 construction periods = 13.2 takes by 

Level B harassment). 

The shutdown zone exceeds the 

calculated Level A harassment zone 

except during impact pile driving of 36- 

in steel piles (support and battered), 

estimated across 30 construction days. 

As such, it is possible that gray whales 

may occur in the Level A harassment 

zone and stay long enough to incur AUD 

INJ before exiting during those 30 days. 

For 36-in support piles, the ratio of the 

Level A harassment area (km2) that 

exceeds the shutdown zone to the 

maximum predicted Level B harassment 

area (km2) is 0.06. This activity is 

estimated to take place on 20 

construction days. For 36-in batter piles, 

the ratio of the Level A harassment area 

(km2) that exceeds the shutdown zone 

to the Level B harassment area is 0.16. 

This activity is estimated to take place 

on 10 construction days. As such, 3 

takes by Level A harassment are 

estimated [(0.06 × 4.4 construction 

periods × 1 group × 3 gray whales) + 

(0.16 × 4.4 construction periods × 1 

group × 3 gray whales) = 2.9 takes by 

Level A harassment]. 

Any individuals exposed to the higher 

levels associated with the potential for 

AUD INJ closer to the source might also 

be behaviorally disturbed, however, for 

the purposes of quantifying take we do 

not count those exposures of one 

individual as a take by both Level A and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
92636 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

Level B harassment. Therefore, takes by 

Level B harassment calculated as 

described above were further modified 

to deduct the authorized amount of take 

by Level A harassment. Therefore, 

NMFS has authorized 3 takes by Level 

A harassment and 11 takes by Level B 

harassment for gray whale, for a total of 

14 takes. When allocating take across 

stocks, take estimates are rounded up to 

the nearest whole number. 

Humpback Whale 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of 248 humpback whales, 

based on an estimated 4 humpback 

whales occurring every 1 construction 

day for 62 construction days. NMFS 

concurred with this take estimate, 

acknowledging that 2 groups of 2 

humpback whales occurring each 

construction day is reasonable based on 

previous monitoring data (2 groups × 2 

humpback whales × 62 construction 

days = 248 takes by Level B harassment 

of humpback whale). 

The shutdown zone exceeds the 

calculated Level A harassment zone 

except during impact pile driving of 36- 

in steel piles (support and battered), 

estimated across 30 construction days. 

As such, it is possible that humpback 

whales may occur in the Level A 

harassment zone and stay long enough 

to incur AUD INJ before exiting. For 36- 

in support piles, the ratio of the Level 

A harassment area (km2) that exceeds 

the shutdown zone to the maximum 

predicted Level B harassment area (km2) 

is 0.06. This activity is estimated to take 

place on 20 construction days. For 36- 

in batter piles, the ratio of the Level A 

harassment area (km2) that exceeds the 

shutdown zone to the Level B 

harassment area is 0.16. This activity is 

estimated to take place on 10 

construction days. As such, 12 takes by 

Level A harassment are estimated [(0.06 

× 20 construction days × 2 groups × 2 

humpback whales) + (0.16 × 10 

construction days × 2 groups × 2 

humpback whales) = 11.2 takes by Level 

A harassment]. 

Any individuals exposed to the higher 

levels associated with the potential for 

AUD INJ closer to the source might also 

be behaviorally disturbed, however, for 

the purposes of quantifying take we do 

not count those exposures of one 

individual as a take by both Level A and 

Level B harassment. Therefore, takes by 

Level B harassment calculated as 

described above were further modified 

to deduct the amount of take by Level 

A harassment. Therefore, NMFS has 

authorized 12 takes by Level A 

harassment and 236 takes by Level B 

harassment for humpback whale, for a 

total of 248 takes. When allocating take 

across stocks, take estimates are 

rounded up to the nearest whole 

number. 

Killer Whale 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of 31 killer whales, based on 

an estimated 1 killer whale occurring 

every 2 construction days for 62 

construction days. However, because 

killer whales were unpredictably 

observed from Whale Park in groups of 

4–8 during weekly surveys conducted 

from September to May between 1995 

and 2000, NMFS found it more 

appropriate to propose 1 group of 8 

killer whales every 7 construction days 

(62/7 construction days = 8.9 

construction weeks), and has authorized 

the resulting 71 takes by Level B 

harassment (1 group × 8 killer whales × 

8.9 construction weeks = 71 takes by 

Level B harassment). No takes by Level 

A harassment were requested or are 

authorized. 

Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of 16 Pacific white-sided 

dolphin, based on an estimated 1 Pacific 

white-sided dolphin occurring every 4 

construction days for 62 construction 

days. However, although a rare 

occurrence, Pacific white-sided dolphin 

were observed in groups averaging 4 

individuals when sighted from Whale 

Park during weekly surveys conducted 

from September to May between 1995 

and 2000. As such, NMFS finds it more 

appropriate to authorize 1 group of 4 

Pacific white-sided dolphin every 14 

construction days (62 ÷ 14 = 4.4 2-week 

construction periods), resulting in 18 

authorized takes by Level B harassment 

(1 group × 4 Pacific white-sided dolphin 

× construction 4.4 periods = 17.6 takes 

by Level B harassment). No takes by 

Level A harassment were requested or 

proposed for authorization (89 FR 

56317, July 9, 2024). 

However, using the 2024 Technical 

Guidance, the re-calculated Level A 

harassment zone exceeds the planned 

shutdown zone during impact 

installation of 36-in steel piles 

(estimated to occur on 30 construction 

days). NMFS therefore finds it 

appropriate to authorize 4 takes by 

Level A harassment of Pacific whitesided dolphin, which is derived from 

the following: For 36-in support piles, 

the ratio of the Level A harassment area 

(km2) that exceeds the shutdown zone 

to the maximum predicted Level B 

harassment area (km2) is 0.003. This 

activity is estimated to take place on 20 

construction days (20 construction days 

÷ 14 days = 1.43 2-week construction 

periods). For 36-in batter piles, the ratio 

of the Level A harassment area (km2) 

that exceeds the shutdown zone to the 

Level B harassment area is 0.01. This 

activity is estimated to take place on 10 

construction days (10 construction days 

÷ 14 days = 0.71 2-week periods). As 

such, 0.05 takes by Level A harassment 

are estimated [(0.0 × 1.43 construction 

days × 1 group × 4 Pacific white-sided 

dolphin) + (0.01 × 0.71 construction 

days × 1 group × 4 pacific white-sided 

dolphin) = 0.05 takes by Level A 

harassment]. The take by Level A 

harassment estimate was then increased 

to the minimum estimated group size of 

4 for Pacific white-sided dolphin. 

Any individuals exposed to the higher 

levels associated with the potential for 

AUD INJ closer to the source might also 

be behaviorally disturbed, however, for 

the purposes of quantifying take we do 

not count those exposures of one 

individual as a take by both Level A and 

Level B harassment. Therefore, takes by 

Level B harassment calculated as 

described above were further modified 

to deduct the amount of take by Level 

A harassment. Thus, NMFS has 

authorized 4 takes by Level A 

harassment and 14 takes by Level B 

harassment for Pacific white-sided 

dolphin, for a total of 18 takes. When 

allocating take across stocks, take 

estimates are rounded up to the nearest 

whole number. 

Harbor Porpoise 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of 16 harbor porpoise, based 

on an estimated 1 harbor porpoise 

occurring every 4 construction days for 

62 construction days. However, harbor 

porpoise were rarely observed from 

Whale Park in groups of five during 

weekly surveys conducted from 

September to May between 1995 and 

2000. As such, NMFS finds it more 

appropriate to authorize 1 group of 5 

harbor porpoise every 14 construction 

days (62 ÷ 14 construction days = 4.4 2- 

week construction week periods), 

resulting in 22 takes by Level B 

harassment (1 group × 5 harbor 

porpoises × 4.4 construction periods = 

22 takes by Level B harassment). 

During impact pile driving of 36-in 

steel piles, estimated across 30 

construction days, the expected Level A 

harassment zone is larger than the 

planned shutdown zone (see Figure 1 of 

the Marine Mammal Mitigation and 

Monitoring Plan). As such, it is possible 

that harbor porpoise may enter the Level 

A harassment zone and stay long 

enough to incur AUD INJ before exiting. 

For 36-in support piles, the ratio of the 

Level A harassment area (km2) that 

exceeds the shutdown zone to the 

maximum predicted Level B harassment 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92637 

area (km2) is 0.49 after applying the 

2024 Technical Guidance (increased 

from 0.38). This activity is estimated to 

take place on 20 construction days (20 

construction days ÷ 14 days = 1.43 2- 

week construction periods). For 36-in 

batter piles, the ratio of the portion of 

the Level A harassment area that 

exceeds the shutdown zone area (km2) 

to the maximum predicted Level B 

harassment area is 0.60 after applying 

the 2024 Technical Guidance (increased 

from 0.48). This activity is estimated to 

take place on 10 construction days (10 

construction days ÷ 14 days = 0.71 2- 

week construction periods). As such, six 

instead of five takes by Level A 

harassment are authorized [(0.49 × 1 

group × 5 harbor porpoise × 1.43 2-week 

construction periods) + (0.60 × 1 group 

× 5 harbor porpoises × 0.71 2-week 

construction periods) = 5.6 takes by 

Level A harassment]. 

Any individuals exposed to the higher 

levels associated with the potential for 

AUD INJ closer to the source might also 

be behaviorally disturbed; however, for 

the purposes of quantifying take we do 

not count those exposures of one 

individual as a take by both Level A and 

Level B harassment. Therefore, takes by 

Level B harassment calculated as 

described above were further modified 

to deduct the amount of take by Level 

A harassment. Thus, NMFS has 

authorized 6 takes by Level A 

harassment and 16 takes by Level B 

harassment for harbor porpoise, for a 

total of 22 takes. 

Steller Sea Lion 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of 496 Steller sea lions, 

based on an estimated 8 Steller sea lions 

occurring every 1 construction day for 

62 construction days. NMFS concurs 

with this take estimate, acknowledging 

that four groups of two Steller sea lions 

occurring each construction day is 

reasonable based on previous 

monitoring data (2 groups × 4 Steller sea 

lion × 62 construction days = 496 takes 

by Level B harassment of Steller sea 

lion). 

During impact pile driving of 36-in 

steel piles, estimated across 30 

construction days, the expected Level A 

harassment zone is larger than the 

shutdown zone. As such, it is possible 

that Steller sea lion may enter the Level 

A harassment zone and stay long 

enough to incur AUD INJ before exiting. 

For 36-in support piles, the ratio of the 

Level A harassment area that exceeds 

the planned shutdown zone (km2) to the 

maximum predicted Level B harassment 

area (km2) for is 0.07 after applying the 

2024 Technical Guidance (increased 

from 0.001). This activity is estimated to 

take place on 20 construction days. For 

36-in batter piles, the ratio of the Level 

A harassment area (km2) to the 

maximum predicted Level B harassment 

area is 0.1 after applying the 2024 

Technical Guidance (increased from 

0.002). This activity is estimated to take 

place on 10 construction days. As such, 

one take by Level A harassment was 

estimated [(0.07 × 20 construction days 

× 2 groups × 4 Steller sea lion × 20 

construction days) + (0.1 × 10 

construction days × 2 groups × 4 Steller 

sea lion × 10 construction days) = 19.2 

takes by Level A harassment]. 

However, the 19.2 takes by Level A 

harassment estimated using the method 

described above likely does not reflect 

the true occurrence of Steller sea lion in 

the project area. Based on monitoring 

data collected during geotechnical 

survey conducted to inform CBS’s IHA 

application, Steller sea lions are 

expected to disproportionally occur 

within close proximity to the project 

site. All (100 percent) Steller sea lions 

documented during that survey were 

observed between 60 m and 1,087.9 m, 

which corresponds to the Level A zones 

during impact pile driving of 36-in piles 

after applying the 2024 Technical 

Guidance. These scenarios may occur 

on up to 30 construction days. Therefore 

240 additional takes by Level A 

harassment are anticipated (2 groups of 

4 Steller sea lion × 30 construction days 

× 1 = 240 takes by Level A harassment). 

Any individuals exposed to the higher 

levels associated with the potential for 

AUD INJ closer to the source might also 

be behaviorally disturbed, however, for 

the purposes of quantifying take we do 

not count those exposures of one 

individual as a take by both Level A and 

Level B harassment. Therefore takes by 

Level B harassment calculated as 

described above are further modified to 

deduct the authorized amount of take by 

Level A harassment. Thus, NMFS has 

authorized 240 takes by Level A 

harassment and 256 takes by Level B 

harassment for Steller sea lion, for a 

total of 496 takes. 

California Sea Lion 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of five California sea lions, 

based on an estimated one California sea 

lion occurring every month that 

construction is planned (October to 

March = 5 months) to account for the 

unlikely but small possibility that 

California sea lion could occur in the 

project area. However, NMFS finds it 

more appropriate to estimate take by 

Level B harassment according to 

duration of in-water work (62 

construction days/30 days in 1 month = 

2.06 construction months). As such, 

NMFS authorized take by Level B 

harassment of three California sea lion 

(1 group × 1 California sea lion × 2.06 

construction months = 2.06 takes by 

Level B harassment of California sea 

lion). After applying the 2024 Technical 

Guidance, calculated Level A 

harassment isopleths increased to 830 m 

and 1,087 m during impact pile driving 

activities, which is much further than 

the distances at which we estimate this 

species can reliably be observed by 

PSOs. As such NMFS has authorized a 

maximum total of 3 takes by either 

Level B or Level A harassment. 

Northern Fur Seal 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of five northern fur seals, 

based on an estimated one northern fur 

seal occurring every month that 

construction is planned (October–March 

= 5 months) to account for the unlikely 

but small possibility that northern fur 

seals could occur in the project area. 

However, NMFS finds it more 

appropriate to estimate take by Level B 

harassment according to the duration of 

in-water work (62 construction days/30 

days in 1 month = 2.06 months). As 

such, NMFS authorized take by Level B 

harassment of three northern fur seals (1 

group × 1 northern fur seal × 2.06 

construction months = 2.06 takes by 

Level B harassment of northern fur seal). 

After applying the 2024 Technical 

Guidance, calculated Level A 

harassment isopleths increased to 830 m 

and 1,087 m during impact pile driving 

activities, which is much further than 

the distances at which we estimate this 

species can reliably be observed by 

PSOs. As such, NMFS has authorized a 

maximum total of 3 takes by either 

Level B or Level A harassment. 

Harbor Seal 

CBS requested take by Level B 

harassment of 124 harbor seals, based 

on an estimated 2 harbor seals occurring 

every 2 construction days for 62 

construction days. However, because 

harbor seals are frequently documented 

in the project area, NMFS finds it more 

appropriate to authorize 186 takes by 

Level B harassment of harbor seal, based 

on the maximum groups size of 3 

documented at the project site in 2017 

(1 group × 3 harbor seal × 62 

construction days = 186 takes by Level 

B harassment). 

During impact pile driving of 36-in 

steel piles, estimated across 30 

construction days, the expected Level A 

harassment zone is larger than the 

planned shutdown zone. As such, it is 

possible that harbor seal may enter the 

Level A harassment zone and stay long 

enough to incur AUD INJ before exiting. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
92638 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

For 36-in support piles, the ratio of the 

Level A harassment area (km2) that 

exceeds the planned shutdown zone to 

the Level B harassment area (km2) is 

0.27 after applying the 2024 Technical 

Guidance (increased from 0.16). This 

activity is estimated to take place on 20 

construction days. For 36-in batter piles, 

the ratio of the Level A harassment area 

that exceeds the shutdown zone area 

(km2) to the maximum predicted Level 

B harassment area is 0.24 after applying 

the 2024 Technical Guidance (increased 

from 0.23). This activity is estimated to 

take place on 10 construction days. As 

such, 34 takes by Level A harassment 

are estimated [(0.27 × 20 construction 

days × 1 group × 3 harbor seals) + (0.34 

× 10 construction days × 1 group × 3 

harbor seals) = 52.8 takes by Level A 

harassment]. 

Any individuals exposed to the higher 

levels associated with the potential for 

AUD INJ closer to the source might also 

be behaviorally disturbed, however, for 

the purposes of quantifying take we do 

not count those exposures of one 

individual as a take by both Level A and 

Level B harassment. Therefore, takes by 

Level B harassment calculated as 

described above are further modified to 

deduct the amount of take by Level A 

harassment. Thus, NMFS has authorized 

53 takes by Level A harassment and 133 

takes by Level B harassment for harbor 

seal, for a total of 186 takes. 

The total takes authorized for all 

species are summarized in table 10 

below, which reflects changes 

incorporated after applying the 2024 

Technical Guidance. Take by Level A 

harassment is authorized for a total of 3 

individuals for gray whale, 12 

individuals for humpback whale, 4 

individuals for Pacific white-sided 

dolphin (increased from 0), 6 

individuals for harbor porpoise 

(increased from 5), 240 individuals for 

Steller sea lion (increased from 88), 53 

(increased from 34) individuals for 

harbor seal, 3 individuals of California 

sea lion (increased from 0), and 3 

individuals of Northern fur seal 

(increased from 0). 

TABLE 10—TAKE BY STOCK AND HARASSMENT TYPE AND AS A PERCENTAGE OF STOCK ABUNDANCE PRESENTED IN PROPOSED FRN (89 FR 56317, JULY 9, 2024) AND AS AUTHORIZED BASED ON THE UPDATED 2024 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Species Stock 

Proposed authorized take 1 Authorized take 1 Authorized 

take as a 

percentage 

of stock 

abundance 

Level B 

harassment 

Level A 

harassment 

Level B 

harassment 

Level A 

harassment 

Gray Whale .............. Eastern N. Pacific .... 11 ............................. 3 ............................... 11 3 <1 

Humpback Whale 2 ... Mexico—North Pacific.5 ............................... 1 ............................... 5 1 <1 

Hawai1i ...................... 231 ........................... 11 ............................. 231 11 2.2 

Killer Whale 3 ............ ENP Alaska Resident 44 ............................. 0 ............................... 44 0 2.3 

ENP Northern Resident.7 ............................... 0 ............................... 7 0 2.3 

ENP Gulf of Alaska, 

Aleutian Islands, 

and Bering Sea.

14 ............................. 0 ............................... 14 0 2.4 

West Coast Transient.8 ............................... 0 ............................... 8 0 2.3 

Pacific white-sided 

dolphin.

North Pacific ............. 18 ............................. 0 ............................... 14 4 <1 

Harbor Porpoise ....... Yakutat/Southeast 

Alaska Offshore 

Waters.

17 ............................. 5 ............................... 16 6 (4) 

Steller sea lion 5 ....... Western DPS ........... 5 ............................... 1 ............................... 4 3 <1 

Eastern DPS ............ 402 ........................... 88 ............................. 252 237 1.3 

California sea lion .... United States ........... 3 ............................... 0 ............................... 3 <1 

Northern fur seal ...... Eastern Pacific ......... 3 ............................... 0 ............................... 3 <1 

Harbor Seal .............. Sitka/Chatham Strait 152 ........................... 34 ............................. 133 53 1.4 

1When allocating take across stocks, take estimates are rounded up to the nearest whole number. 

2 2 percent of take by Level A and Level B harassment of humpback whales are allocated to the Mexico DPS according to NMFS, 2021.

3Take by level B harassment of killer whale is allocated across stocks according to the proportion of the stock compared to total number of 

animals in all four stocks that could occur in the project area: Alaska Residents, 60.7 percent; Northern Residents, 9.6 percent; Gulf of Alaska, 

Aleutian Islands, and Bering Sea: 18.6 percent ; West Coast Transient, 11.1 percent. 4A reliable abundance estimate for this stock is currently unavailable. 

5 1.2 percent take by Level A and Level B harassment of Steller sea lions are allocated to the Western DPS according to Hastings et al. 

(2020). 

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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92639 

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, as well as 

subsistence uses. This considers the 

nature of the potential adverse impact 

being mitigated (likelihood, scope, 

range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned), the 

likelihood of effective implementation 

(probability implemented as planned); 

and 

(2) The practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost, and 

impact on operations. 

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and 

Their Habitat 

Shutdown Zones—For all pile driving 

activities, CBS plans to implement 

shutdowns within designated zones. 

The purpose of a shutdown zone is 

generally to define an area within which 

shutdown of the activity will occur 

upon sighting of a marine mammal (or 

in anticipation of an animal entering the 

defined area). Shutdown zones vary 

based on the activity type and marine 

mammal species or hearing group (table 

11 and table 12). In most cases, the 

shutdown zones are based on the 

estimated Level A harassment isopleth 

distances for each hearing group. 

However, in cases where it would be 

challenging to detect marine mammals 

at the Level A harassment isopleth (e.g., 

for all species during impact pile 

driving except killer whale, after 

application of the 2024 Technical 

Guidance) and/or frequent shutdowns 

would create practicability concerns 

(e.g., Steller sea lions during impact pile 

driving), smaller shutdown zones are 

planned (table 12). 

Construction supervisors and crews, 

PSOs, and relevant CBS staff must avoid 

direct physical interaction with marine 

mammals during construction activity. 

If a marine mammal comes within 10 m 

of such activity, operations must cease 

and vessels must reduce speed to the 

minimum level required to maintain 

steerage and safe working conditions, as 

necessary to avoid direct physical 

interaction. If an activity is delayed or 

halted due to the presence of a marine 

mammal, the activity may not 

commence or resume until, either the 

animal has voluntarily exited and been 

visually confirmed beyond the 

shutdown zone indicated in table 11, or 

15 minutes have passed without redetection of the animal. 

Finally, construction activities must 

be halted upon observation of a species 

for which incidental take is not 

authorized or a species for which 

incidental take has been authorized but 

the authorized number of takes has been 

met entering or within any harassment 

zone. If a marine mammal species not 

covered under this IHA enters a 

harassment zone, all in-water activities 

will cease until the animal leaves the 

zone or has not been observed for at 

least 15 minutes, and NMFS would be 

notified about species and precautions 

taken. Pile driving will proceed if the 

unauthorized species is observed 

leaving the harassment zone or if 15 

minutes have passed since the last 

observation. 

TABLE 11—SHUTDOWN ZONES PRESENTED IN THE PROPOSED FRN 

[89 FR 56317, July 9, 2024] 

Pile size/type Method 

Shutdown zones (m) 

LF MF HF PW 

OW 

Steller sea 

lion Other OW 

Haulout Pier Support Pile 

36-in Steel Pipe Pile .......................... Vibratory Installation .......................... 30 10 40 20 10 10 

Impact Installation ............................. 2,000 90 300 130 60 100 

Haulout Pier Batter Pile 

36-in Steel Pipe Pile .......................... Vibratory Installation .......................... 40 10 60 30 10 10 

Impact Installation ............................. 2,000 120 300 130 60 130 

Haulout Pier Fender Pile 

24-in Steel Pipe Pile .......................... Vibratory Installation .......................... 20 10 30 10 10 10 

Template Pile 

24-in Steel Pipe Pile .......................... Vibratory Installation and removal .... 20 10 30 20 10 10 

TABLE 12—FINAL SHUTDOWN ZONES BASED ON THE 2024 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Pile size/type Method 

Shutdown zones (m) 

LF 

HF 1

VHF 2 PW 

OW 

Killer 

whale 

Other 

HF 

Steller 

sea lion 

Other 

OW 

Haulout Pier Support Pile 

36-in Steel Pipe Pile ........................ Vibratory Installation ......................... 3 40 3 20 3 20 40 3 50 3 20 3 20 

Impact Installation ............................ 2,000 3 320 4 300 300 130 60 4 130 

Haulout Pier Batter Pile 

36-in Steel Pipe Pile ........................ Vibratory Installation ......................... 3 60 3 20 3 20 60 3 70 3 30 3 30 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

I 

I I I 
92640 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

TABLE 12—FINAL SHUTDOWN ZONES BASED ON THE 2024 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE—Continued 

Pile size/type Method 

Shutdown zones (m) 

LF 

HF 1

VHF 2 PW 

OW 

Killer 

whale 

Other 

HF 

Steller 

sea lion 

Other 

OW 

Impact Installation ............................ 2,000 3 420 4 300 300 130 60 130 

Haulout Pier Fender Pile 

24-in Steel Pipe Pile ........................ Vibratory Installation ......................... 20 10 10 30 3 30 10 10 

Template Pile 

24-in Steel Pipe Pile ........................ Vibratory Installation and removal ... 3 30 10 10 30 40 20 20 

1Species that were considered Mid-Frequency cetaceans under the NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance are now considered High Frequency cetaceans. 2Species that were considered High-Frequency cetaceans under the NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance are now considered Very High Frequency cetaceans. 

3Shutdown zones have been increased to meet the calculated Level A harassment isopleths using the 2024 Technical Guidance. 

4Shutdown zones have been increased to the extent that this hearing group is expected to be reliably observable. 

Protected Species Observers—The 

number and placement of PSOs during 

all construction activities (described in 

the Monitoring and Reporting section) 

would ensure that the entire shutdown 

zone is visible during impact pile 

driving. In such cases, PSOs will 

monitor the Level A harassment zone 

and corresponding shutdown zone to 

the greatest extent practicable. CBS will 

employ at least three PSOs for all pile 

driving activities. 

Monitoring for Level A and Level B 

Harassment—PSOs will monitor the 

shutdown zones and beyond to the 

extent that PSOs can see. Monitoring 

beyond the shutdown zones enables 

observers to be aware of, and 

communicate the presence of, marine 

mammals in the project areas outside 

the shutdown zones and thus prepare 

for a potential cessation of activity 

should the animal enter the shutdown 

zone. If a marine mammal enters either 

harassment zone, PSOs will document 

the marine mammal’s presence and 

behavior. 

Pre-and Post-Activity Monitoring— 

Prior to the start of daily in-water 

construction activity, or whenever a 

break in pile driving of 30 minutes or 

longer occurs, PSOs will observe the 

shutdown zones and as much as the 

harassment zones as possible for a 

period of 30 minutes. Pre-start clearance 

monitoring must be conducted during 

periods of visibility sufficient for the 

lead PSO to determine that the 

shutdown zones are clear of marine 

mammals. If the shutdown zone is 

obscured by fog or poor lighting 

conditions, in-water construction 

activity will not be initiated until the 

entire shutdown zone is visible. Pile 

driving may commence following 30 

minutes of observation when the 

determination is made that the 

shutdown zones are clear of marine 

mammals. If a marine mammal is 

observed entering or within shutdown 

zones, pile-driving activity must be 

delayed or halted. If pile driving is 

delayed or halted due to the presence of 

a marine mammal, the activity may not 

commence or resume until either the 

animal has voluntarily exited and been 

visually confirmed beyond the 

shutdown zone or 15 minutes have 

passed without re-detection of the 

animal. If a marine mammal for which 

take by Level B harassment is 

authorized is present in the Level B 

harassment zone, activities may begin. 

Soft-Start—The use of soft-start 

procedures are believed to provide 

additional protection to marine 

mammals by providing warning and/or 

giving marine mammals a chance to 

leave the area prior to the hammer 

operating at full capacity. For impact 

pile driving, contractors will be required 

to provide an initial set of three strikes 

from the hammer at reduced energy, 

with each strike followed by a 30- 

second waiting period. This procedure 

will be conducted a total of three times 

before impact pile driving begins. Soft 

start will 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. Soft start is not required 

during vibratory pile driving activities. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s planned measures, NMFS 

has determined that the planned 

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. Note that the 

applicant opted to forgo the use of a 

bubble curtain as a mitigation measure 

as its use would decrease production 

rates due to the need to reposition the 

curtain around piles and vessel traffic, 

the need to maintain and operate the 

compressor, and delays associated with 

mechanical malfunctions. 

Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

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

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92641 

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 NMFS-approved 

PSOs 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 other 

relevant experience, education (degree 

in biological science or related field) or 

training for experience performing the 

duties of a PSO during construction 

activities pursuant to a NMFS-issued 

incidental take authorization; 

• Where a team of three or more PSOs 

is required, a lead observer or 

monitoring coordinator will be 

designated. The lead observer will be 

required to have prior experience 

working as a marine mammal observer 

during construction activity pursuant to 

a NMFS-issued incidental take 

authorization; and 

• PSOs must be approved by NMFS 

prior to beginning any activity subject to 

this IHA. 

PSOs must also 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 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 note 

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. 

Visual monitoring will be conducted 

by a minimum of 3 trained PSOs 

positioned at suitable vantage points, 

such as the project site, Sawmill Creek 

Road and Medveje Hatchery (see figure 

1 in CBS’s Marine Mammal Mitigation 

and Monitoring Plan). During vibratory 

pile driving, at least one PSO will have 

an unobstructed view of all water 

within the shutdown zone. During 

impact pile driving, a second PSO will 

be placed at Sawmill Creek Road to 

ensure the largest shutdown zone 

extending into Eastern Channel is 

observable and a third PSO would be 

placed at Medvejie Hatchery to ensure 

as much of the shutdown zone in Silver 

Bay is observable as possible. All PSOs 

will be stationed on elevated platforms 

to aid in monitoring marine mammals. 

Monitoring will be conducted 30 

minutes before, during, and 30 minutes 

after all in water construction activities. 

In addition, PSOs will 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. 

Reporting 

CBS will submit a draft marine 

mammal monitoring report 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 

monitoring report will include an 

overall description of work completed, 

a narrative regarding marine mammal 

sightings, and associated PSO data 

sheets. Specifically, the report will 

include: 

• Dates and times (begin and end) of 

all marine mammal monitoring; 

• Construction activities occurring 

during each daily observation period, 

including: (1) the number and type of 

piles that were driven and the method 

(e.g., impact or vibratory); and, (2) total 

duration of driving time for each pile 

(vibratory driving) and number of 

strikes for each pile (impact driving); 

• PSO locations during marine 

mammal monitoring; 

• 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; 

• Upon observation of a marine 

mammal, the following information: (1) 

name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) 

and PSO location and activity at time of 

sighting; (2) time of sighting; (3) 

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; (4) distance and location 

of each observed marine mammal 

relative to the pile being driven for each 

sighting; (5) estimated number of 

animals (min/max/best estimate); (6) 

estimated number of animals by cohort 

(adults, juveniles, neonates, group 

composition, etc.); (7) animal’s closest 

point of approach and estimated time 

spent within the harassment zone; and, 

(8) 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 

specific actions that ensued, and 

resulting changes in behavior of the 

animal(s), if any. 

A final report must be prepared and 

submitted within 30 calendar days 

following receipt of any NMFS 

comments on the draft report. If no 

comments are received from NMFS 

within 30 calendar days of receipt of the 

draft report, the report shall be 

considered final. All PSO data will be 

submitted electronically in a format that 

can be queried such as a spreadsheet or 

database and will 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, the 

Holder must report the incident to the 

OPR, NMFS 

(PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov 

and itp.fleming@noaa.gov) and Alaska 

Regional Stranding network (877–925– 

7773) as soon as feasible. If the death or 

injury was clearly caused by the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
92642 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

specified activity, the Holder must 

immediately cease the activities until 

NMFS OPR 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 this IHA. 

The Holder must not resume their 

activities until notified by NMFS. The 

report must include the following 

information: 

• Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the first discovery (and 

updated location information if known 

and applicable); 

• Species identification (if known) or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Condition of the animal(s) 

(including carcass condition if the 

animal is dead); 

• Observed behaviors of the 

animal(s), if alive; 

• If available, photographs or video 

footage of the animal(s); and 

• 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). 

The incorporation of the 2024 

Updated Technical Guidance does not 

alter the original scope of the activity 

analyzed or our effects analysis in a 

manner that materially affects the basis 

for original findings under the IHA. 

Shutdown zones have been increased to 

meet or exceed the Level A harassment 

zone calculated using the 2024 

Technical Guidance where practicable. 

In cases where the shutdown zones 

cannot be increased due to observability 

or practicability concerns, a slightly 

larger proportion of overall proposed 

take has been authorized as take by 

Level A harassment. However, the total 

take authorized remains the same as the 

take proposed for authorization during 

the public comment period for all 

species. Accordingly, we have 

determined that even with the 

incorporation of the 2024 Technical 

Guidance, this project will have a 

negligible impact on the affected species 

stocks and the negligible impact 

analysis presented in the proposed FRN 

remains applicable. 

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. There is little 

information about the nature or severity 

of the impacts, or the size, status, or 

structure of any of these species or 

stocks that would lead to a different 

analysis for this activity. 

Pile driving and removal activities 

associated with the project, as outlined 

previously, have the potential to disturb 

or displace marine mammals. 

Specifically, the specified activities may 

result in take, in the form of Level B 

harassment and, for some species, Level 

A harassment from underwater sounds 

generated by pile driving and removal. 

Potential takes could occur if 

individuals are present in the ensonified 

zone when these activities are 

underway. 

No serious injury or mortality is 

expected, even in the absence of 

required mitigation measures, given the 

nature of the activities. 

Following the incorporation of the 

2024 Updated Technical Guidance take 

by Level A harassment is authorized for 

all species except killer whale. Any take 

by Level A harassment is expected to 

arise from, at most, a small degree of 

AUD INJ (i.e., minor degradation of 

hearing capabilities within regions of 

hearing that align most completely with 

the energy produced by impact pile 

driving such as the low-frequency 

region below 2 kHz), not severe hearing 

impairment or impairment within the 

ranges of greatest hearing sensitivity. 

Animals would need to be exposed to 

higher levels and/or longer duration 

than are expected to occur here in order 

to incur any more than a small degree 

of AUD INJ. 

Further, the amount of take by Level 

A harassment authorized is very low for 

all marine mammal stocks and species, 

except Steller sea lion. NMFS expects 

no more than 3 takes by Level A 

harassment for gray whale, 12 takes by 

Level A harassment for humpback 

whale; 4 takes by Level A harassment 

for Pacific white-sided dolphin, 6 takes 

by Level A harassment for harbor 

porpoise; 53 takes by Level A 

harassment for harbor seal; 3 takes by 

Level A or Level B harassment for 

California sea lion; and, 3 takes by Level 

A or Level B harassment for Northern 

fur seal. Although 240 takes by Level A 

harassment for Steller sea lion are 

authorized, if hearing impairment 

occurs, it is most likely that the affected 

animal would lose only a few dB in its 

hearing sensitivity. Due to the small 

degree anticipated, any AUD INJ 

potential incurred would not be 

expected to affect the reproductive 

success or survival of any individuals, 

much less result in adverse impacts on 

the species or stock. 

Additionally, some subset of the 

individuals that are behaviorally 

harassed could also simultaneously 

incur some small degree of TTS for a 

short duration of time. However, since 

the hearing sensitivity of individuals 

that incur TTS is expected to recover 

completely within minutes to hours, it 

is unlikely that the brief hearing 

impairment would affect the 

individual’s long-term ability to forage 

and communicate with conspecifics, 

and would therefore not likely impact 

reproduction or survival of any 

individual marine mammal, let alone 

adversely affect rates of recruitment or 

survival of the species or stock. 

Effects on individuals that are taken 

by Level B harassment in the form of 

behavioral disruption, on the basis of 

reports in the literature as well as 

monitoring from other similar activities, 

would likely be limited to reactions 

such as avoidance, increased swimming 

speeds, increased surfacing time, or 

decreased foraging (if such activity were 

occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 

2006). Most likely, individuals would 

simply move away from the sound 

source and temporarily avoid the area 

where pile driving is occurring. If sound 

produced by project activities is 

sufficiently disturbing, animals are 

likely to simply avoid the area while the 

activities are occurring. We expect that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 92643 

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 project is also not expected to 

have significant adverse effects on 

affected marine mammals’ habitats. The 

project activities would not modify 

existing marine mammal habitat for a 

significant amount of time. The 

activities may cause a low level of 

turbidity in the water column and some 

fish may 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. 

While Steller sea lions are common in 

the project area, there are no essential 

primary constituent elements, such as 

haulouts or rookeries, present. The 

nearest haulout is well over 25 km 

away. Therefore, the project is not 

expected to have significant adverse 

effects on the critical habitat of Western 

DPS Steller sea lions. No areas of 

specific biological importance (e.g., ESA 

critical habitat, BIAs, or other areas) for 

any other species are known to co-occur 

with the project area. 

In addition, it is unlikely that minor 

noise effects in a small, localized area of 

habitat would have any effect on each 

stock’s ability to recover. In 

combination, we believe that these 

factors, as well as the available body of 

evidence from other similar activities, 

demonstrate that the potential effects of 

the specified activities would have only 

minor, short-term effects on individuals. 

The specified activities are not expected 

to impact rates of recruitment or 

survival and would therefore not result 

in population-level impacts. 

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 would be of a 

low degree, and except for Eastern DPS 

Steller sea lion and harbor seal, of very 

small amounts; 

• For all species, Silver Bay and East 

Channel are a very small and peripheral 

part of their range; 

• Anticipated takes by Level B 

harassment are relatively low for all 

stocks. Level B harassment would be 

primarily in the form of behavioral 

disturbance, resulting in avoidance of 

the project areas around where impact 

or vibratory pile driving is occurring, 

with some low-level TTS that may limit 

the detection of acoustic cues for 

relatively brief amounts of time in 

relatively confined footprints of 

activities; 

• 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; 

• The ensonified areas are very small 

relative to the overall habitat ranges of 

all species and stocks, and would not 

adversely affect ESA-designated critical 

habitat for any species or any areas of 

known biological importance; 

• The lack of anticipated significant 

or long-term negative effects to marine 

mammal habitat; and 

• CBS will implement mitigation 

measures including visual monitoring, 

soft-start, and shutdown zones to 

minimize the numbers of marine 

mammals exposed to injurious levels of 

sound, and to ensure that take by Level 

A harassment is, at most, a small degree 

of AUD INJ. 

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 

planned monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS finds that the total 

marine mammal take from the planned 

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. 

The amount of take NMFS authorized 

is below one third of the estimated stock 

abundance for all species. This is likely 

a conservative estimate because we 

assume all takes are of different 

individual animals, which likely would 

not be the case. Some individuals may 

return multiple times in a day, but PSOs 

will count them as separate takes if they 

cannot be individually identified. 

The most recent abundance estimate 

for the Mexico-North Pacific stock of 

humpback whale is likely unreliable as 

it is more than eight years old. The most 

relevant estimate of this stock’s 

abundance in Southeast Alaska is 918 

humpback whales (Wade, 2021), so the 

4 authorized takes by Level B 

harassment and 1 authorized take by 

Level A harassment is small relative to 

the estimated abundance (<1 percent), 

even if each authorized take occurred to 

a new individual. 

There is no abundance information 

available for the Yakutat/Southeast 

Alaska stock of harbor porpoise. 

However, the take numbers are 

sufficiently small (16 takes by Level B 

harassment and 6 takes by Level A 

harassment, updated from 17 takes by 

Level B harassment and 5 takes by Level 

A harassment after applying the 2024 

Technical Guidance) that we can safely 

assume that they are small relative to 

any reasonable assumption of likely 

population abundance for these stocks. 

For reference, current abundance 

estimates for harbor porpoise stocks in 

Southeast Alaska include 1,619 

(Northern Southeast Alaska Inland 

Waters) and 890 (Southern Southeast 

Alaska Inland Waters). 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the planned activity (including 

the planned mitigation and monitoring 

measures) and the anticipated take of 

marine mammals, NMFS finds that 

small numbers of marine mammals 

would be taken relative to the 

population size of the affected species 

or stocks. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
92644 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 226 / Friday, November 22, 2024 / Notices 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must 

find that the specified activity will not 

have an ‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’ 

on the subsistence uses of the affected 

marine mammal species or stocks by 

Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined 

‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’ in 

§ 216.103 as an impact resulting from 

the specified activity that: (1) is likely 

to reduce the availability of the species 

to a level insufficient for a harvest to 

meet subsistence needs by (i) causing 

the marine mammals to abandon or 

avoid hunting areas, (ii) directly 

displacing subsistence users, or (iii) 

placing physical barriers between the 

marine mammals and the subsistence 

hunters; and, (2) cannot be sufficiently 

mitigated by other measures to increase 

the availability of marine mammals to 

allow subsistence needs to be met. 

For marine mammals, Alaska Natives 

have traditionally harvested harbor seals 

and Steller sea lions in Sitka, Alaska. 

During the most recent ADF&G 

subsistence harvest report (2013), about 

11 percent of Sitka households used 

subsistence-caught marine mammals, 

however, this is the most recent data 

available and there has not been a 

survey since 2013 (ADF&G, 2023). 

The project is not likely to adversely 

impact the availability of any marine 

mammal species or stocks that are 

commonly used for subsistence 

purposes or impact subsistence harvest 

of marine mammals in the region 

because: 

• There is no recent recorded 

subsistence harvest of marine mammals 

in the area; 

• Construction activities are 

temporary and localized to the Gary 

Paxton Industrial Park, and industrial 

area; 

• Construction will not take place 

during the herring spawning season 

when subsistence species are more 

active; 

• Mitigation measures will be 

implemented to minimize disturbance 

of marine mammals in the action area; 

and 

• The project will not result in 

significant changes to availability of 

subsistence resources. 

Based on the description of the 

specified activity, the measures 

described to minimize adverse effects 

on the availability of marine mammals 

for subsistence purposes, and the 

planned mitigation and monitoring 

measures, NMFS has determined that 

there will not be an unmitigable adverse 

impact on subsistence uses from CBS’s 

planned activities. 

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, in 

this case with the Alaska Regional 

Office (AKRO). 

NMFS is authorizing take of western 

DPS of Steller sea lions and the Mexico 

DPS of humpback whales, which are 

listed under the ESA. The NMFS AKRO 

issued a Biological Opinion under 

Section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of 

an IHA to CBS under section 

1010(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by NMFS 

OPR. The biological opinion concluded 

that the action is not likely to jeopardize 

the continued existence of the listed 

species. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

To comply with the NEPA of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA 

Administrative Order (NAO) 216–6A, 

NMFS must review our proposed action 

(i.e., the issuance of an IHA) 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 the IHA qualifies to be categorically 

excluded from further NEPA review. 

Authorization 

NMFS has issued an IHA to CBS for 

the potential harassment of small 

numbers of nine marine mammal 

species incidental to the Gary Paxton 

Industrial Park Vessel Haulout project 

in Sitka, Alaska, that includes the 

previously explained mitigation, 

monitoring and reporting requirements. 

Dated: November 18, 2024. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2024–27342 Filed 11–21–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Marine and Coastal Area-Based 

Management Advisory Committee 

Meeting 

AGENCY: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the 

proposed schedule and agenda of a 

forthcoming meeting of the Marine and 

Coastal Area-based Management 

Advisory Committee (MCAM). The 

members will discuss and provide 

advice on issues outlined under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

December 9, 2024, from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. 

eastern time. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held 

virtually on the Google Meets Platform. 

Registration is not required. Participants 

may join the meeting by computer or by 

phone: 

Join by computer: meet.google.com/pfbmrfv-mtv. 

Join by phone: (US) +1 475–221–6328 

PIN: 102 658 159#. 

The MCAM website may be found at 

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/ocean/ 

marine-coastal-fac/meetings.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellie 

Roberts, Program Analyst, NOAA’s 

Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, 

ellie.roberts@noaa.gov, (240) 533–0676. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As 

required by section 10(a)(2) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 

U.S.C. 1009(a)(2), notice is hereby given 

of a meeting of the MCAM. The MCAM 

was established in 2022 to advise the 

Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Oceans and Atmosphere on sciencebased approaches to area-based 

protection, conservation, restoration, 

and management in coastal and marine 

areas, including the Great Lakes. The 

MCAM charter is located online at 

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/ocean/ 

marine-coastal-fac/. 

I. Matters To Be Considered 

The meeting time and agenda are 

subject to change. The meeting is 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1