Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [RTID 0648-XB713]
 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 NOAA to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only, marine mammals during construction activities associated with the NOAA Port Facility Project in Ketchikan, Alaska.
 DATES: This Authorization is effective from February 3, 2022 through February 2, 2023.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online at: 
                        *https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​permit/​incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.*
                         In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.


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 issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed IHA may be 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 October 26, 2021, NMFS received an application from NOAA's Office of Marine and Aviation Operations requesting an IHA to take small numbers of nine species (Dall's porpoise (
                    *Phocoenoides dalli*), Steller sea lions (
                    *Eumetopias jubatus*), Pacific white-sided dolphin (
                    *Lagenorhynchus obliquidens*), killer whale (
                    *Orcinus orca*), gray whale (
                    *Eschrichtius robustus*), minke whale (
                    *Balaenoptera acutorostrata*), harbor seal (
                    *Phoca vitulina*), harbor porpoise (
                    *Phocoena phocoena*) and humpback whale (
                    *Megaptera novaeangliae*)) of marine mammals incidental to vibratory and impact pile driving and down-the-hole (DTH) system use associated with the project. The application was deemed adequate and complete on November 16, 2021. NOAA's request is for take of a small number of these species by Level A or Level B harassment. Neither NOAA nor NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. Description of the Specified Activity Overview The purpose of the project is to remove an obsolete dock facility and construct a new facility including a 240 feet (ft) × 50 ft floating pier connected to land by a transfer bridge. A small boat dock would be connected to the large ship pier and a small boat launch ramp will be constructed adjacent to the other structures. Table 1 provides a summary of the pile driving activities. Since the proposed authorization the applicant has decided that they may also remove the old steel piles with a vibratory hammer or direct pull. Because the steel piles being removed could be removed using either a vibratory hammer, pile clipper or hydraulic saw, we use the 
                    ( print page 7129)
                    loudest, most precautionary source level for those piles which are pile clippers. That change has no effect however on estimated take (see below). In summary, the project period includes 47 days of pile or DTH activities for which this IHA is requested. A detailed description of the planned project is provided in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     notice for the proposed IHA (86 FR 68223; December 1, 2021). Since that time, no additional changes have been made to the planned activities beyond adding voluntary acoustic monitoring and recognizing that there may be some 18-inch diameter steel piles, intermediate in size to the already identified 14 to 24-inch diameter steel piles as described below. Therefore, a detailed description is not provided here. Please refer to that 
                    **Federal Register**
                     notice for the description of the specific activity. Table 1—Summary of Pile Driving Activities and User Spreadsheet Inputs
Method
Pile type
Number of 
                             piles
Minutes/strikes 
                             per pile
Piles per dayDTH
24-inch Steel
18
25,000
1.5Impact


48
1.5Vibratory
14-inch Timber
130
2
10Vibratory
14 to 16-inch Steel
28
5
5Vibratory
18 to 24-inch Steel
42
5
5Small Pile Clipper
14 to 16-inch Steel
28
10
10Large Pile Clipper
18 to 24-inch Steel
42
10
10Totals

218All User spreadsheet calculations use Transmission Loss = 15 and standard weighting factor adjustments
 Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in detail later in this document (please see Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting). Comments and Responses A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to NOAA was published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     on December 1, 2021 (86 FR 68223). That notice described, in detail, NOAA's activity, the marine mammal species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated effects on marine mammals. During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received no public comments or comments from the Marine Mammal Commission. Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA While we are not requiring acoustic monitoring or sound source verification studies for this project because the construction equipment and pile types and sizes are common ones for which we have significant data, the applicant has requested the possibility of altering shutdown and/or harassment zones based on voluntary acoustic monitoring, so we have added our standard term for this to the IHA (see below). Since the proposed authorization the applicant has decided that they may also remove the old steel piles with a vibratory hammer or direct pull, but as mentioned above, the source levels for these are quieter than the loudest possible tool that could be used to remove these piles, large pile clippers, so there is no effect on take (see above). They have also discovered that there may be some 18-inch diameter steel piles as part of the mix of pile sizes already described that vary from 14- to 24-inch diameter. That change also has no effect however on estimated take. Direct pulling does not generate sounds exceeding the regulatory thresholds so need not be discussed further. The applicant has decided they would rather have hearing-group-specific shutdown zone sizes. Therefore the idea discussed in the proposed IHA of implementing fewer taxa-based shutdown ones has been rejected as described below. Some source level references in Table 4 were incorrect and have been fixed. A few minor typographic errors were corrected. Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species. Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be found in NMFS's 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's website (
                    *https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​find-species*). Table 2 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in the project area 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. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2021). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and other threats. Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in NMFS's U.S. Alaska or Pacific SARs, including the 2021 draft SARs.
                    ( print page 7130) Table 2—Species That Spatially Co-Occur With the Activity to the Degree That Take Is Reasonably Likely To Occur
Common name
Scientific name
Stock
ESA/MMPA 
                             status; strategic  
                             
                                (Y/N) 1
Stock abundance 
                             
                                (CV, N
                                min
                                , most recent 
                             
                             
                                abundance survey) 2
PBR
Annual M/SI 3**Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)**Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):Humpback whale
*Megaptera novaeangliae*
Central North Pacific
-,-; Y
10,103 (0.3, 7,890, 2006)
83
26Minke Whale
*Balaenoptera acutorostrata*
Alaska
-,-; N
N/A (see SAR, N/A, see SAR)
UND
0Family Eschrichtiidae (gray whale):Gray Whale
*Eschrichtius robustus*
Eastern North Pacific
-,-; N
26,960 (0.05, 25,849, 2016)
801
131**Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)**Family Delphinidae:Pacific white-sided dolphin
*Lagenorhynchus obliquidens*
North Pacific
-,-; N
26,880 (N/A, N/A, 1990)
UND
0Killer Whale
*Orcinus orca*
Northern Resident
-,-; N
302 (N/A, 302, 2018)
2.2
0.2Alaska Resident
-,-; N
2,347 (N/A, 2347, 2012)
24
1West Coast Transient
-,-; N
349 (N/A, 349, 2018)
3.5
0.4Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):Harbor porpoise
*Phocoena phocoena*
Southeast Alaska
-, -; N
see SAR (see SAR, see SAR, 2012)
See SAR
34Dall's porpoise
*Phocoenoides dalli*
Entire Alaska Stock
-, -; N
83,400 (0.097, N/A, 1991)
UND
38**Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia**Family Otariidae (sea lions and fur seals):Steller sea lion
*Eumetopias jubatus*
Eastern Stock
-, -; N
43,201 a (see SAR, 43,201, 2017)
2592
112Family Phocidae (earless seals):Harbor seal
*Phoca vitulina*
Clarence Strait
-; N
27,659 (see SAR, 24,854, 2015)
746
401
                         Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.2
                         NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: 
                        *https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-mammal-protection/​marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports.*
                         CV is coefficient of variation; N
                        min
                         is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.3
                         These 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 Mortality/Serious Injury (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.
 Humpback whales, minke whales, gray whales, Pacific white-sided dolphin, killer whale, harbor porpoise, Dall's porpoise, harbor seal, and Steller sea lions spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that take is reasonably likely to occur, and we have proposed authorizing take of these species. Fin whale could potentially occur in the area, however there are no known sightings nearby so the species is very rare, is readily observed, and the applicant would shut down pile driving if they enter the project area. Thus take is not expected to occur, and they are not discussed further. A detailed description of the of the species likely to be affected by the 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 (86 FR 68223; December 1, 2021); 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. Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat The effects of underwater noise from NOAA's construction activities have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals in the vicinity of the survey area. The notice of proposed IHA (86 FR 68223; December 1, 2021) included a discussion of the effects of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential effects of underwater noise from NOAA's construction on marine mammals and their habitat. That information and analysis is incorporated by reference into this final IHA determination and is not repeated here; please refer to the notice of proposed IHA (86 FR 68223; December 1, 2021). Estimated Take This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration of “small numbers” and the negligible impact determination. Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines “harassment” as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
                    ( print page 7131) Authorized takes would primarily be by Level B harassment, as use of the acoustic sources (
                    *i.e.,*
                     vibratory or impact pile driving and DTH) have the potential to result in disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals. There is also some potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment) to result for porpoises and harbor seals because predicted auditory injury zones are larger. The mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to minimize the severity of the taking to the extent practicable. As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated. Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above which 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 basic factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively inform take estimates is also sometimes available (
                    *e.g.,*
                     previous monitoring results or average group size). Due to the lack of marine mammal density, NMFS relied on local occurrence data and group size to estimate take for some species. Below, we describe the factors considered here in more detail and present the proposed take estimate. 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 PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment). *Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources*
                    —Though significantly driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the source (
                    *e.g.,*
                     frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment (
                    *e.g.,*
                     bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall 
                    *et al.,*
                     2007, Ellison 
                    *et al.,*
                     2012). Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above received levels of 120 dB re 1 microPascal (μPa) (root mean square (rms)) for continuous (
                    *e.g.,*
                     vibratory pile-driving) and above 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (
                    *e.g.,*
                     impact pile driving) or intermittent (
                    *e.g.,*
                     scientific sonar) sources. NOAA's proposed activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory hammer and DTH) and impulsive (DTH and impact pile-driving) sources, and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) thresholds are applicable. *Level A harassment for non-explosive sources*
                    —NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). NOAA's activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile-driving and DTH) and non-impulsive (vibratory hammer and DTH) sources. These thresholds are provided in Table 3. The references, analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at 
                    *https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-mammal-protection/​marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.* Table 3—Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
Hearing group
PTS onset acoustic thresholds *
                             (received level)Impulsive
Non-impulsiveLow-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans
*Cell 1:**L*pk,flat*:*
                             219 dB; 
                            *L*E,LF,24h*:*
                             183 dB
*Cell 2:**L*E,LF,24h*:*
                             199 dB.Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans
*Cell 3:**L*pk,flat*:*
                             230 dB; 
                            *L*E,MF,24h*:*
                             185 dB
*Cell 4:**L*E,MF,24h*:*
                             198 dB.High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans
*Cell 5:**L*pk,flat*:*
                             202 dB; 
                            *L*E,HF,24h*:*
                             155 dB
*Cell 6:**L*E,HF,24h*:*
                             173 dB.Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater)
*Cell 7:**L*pk,flat*:*
                             218 dB; 
                            *L*E,PW,24h*:*
                             185 dB
*Cell 8:**L*E,PW,24h*:*
                             201 dB.Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater)
*Cell 9:**L*pk,flat*:*
                             232 dB; 
                            *L*E,OW,24h*:*
                             203 dB
*Cell 10:**L*E,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 (
                        *L*pk
                        ) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (
                        *L*E
                        ) has a reference value of 1μPa2
                        s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript “flat” is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (
                        *i.e.,*
                         varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.
 Ensonified Area Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss coefficient. The sound field in the project area is the existing background noise plus additional construction noise from the proposed project. Marine mammals are expected to be affected via sound generated by the primary components of the project (
                    *i.e.,*
                     impact and vibratory pile driving, and DTH). In order to calculate distances to the Level A harassment and Level B harassment sound thresholds for the methods and piles being used in this 
                    ( print page 7132)
                    project, NMFS used acoustic monitoring data from other locations to develop source levels for the various pile types, sizes and methods (Table 4). Because the steel piles being removed could be removed using either a vibratory hammer, pile clipper or hydraulic saw, we use the loudest, most precautionary source level for our analysis of the removal of those piles. Table 4—Project Sound Source Levels
Method
Estimated noise levels
                             (dB)
Source24-inch DTH—impulsive
154 SELss
Reyff & Heyvaert (2019).24-inch DTH—non-impulsive
166 dB RMS
Denes 
                            *et al.*
                             (2016).24-inch Steel Impact
211.2 Pk, 182.1 SEL, 197 RMS
Denes 
                            *et al.*
                             (2016) max.14-inch Timber Vibratory
157 RMS
WADOT (2011) plus 4 dB.Small Pile Clipper
154 RMS
NAVFAC SW (2020).Large Pile Clipper
161 RMS
NAVFAC SW (2020).**Note:**
                         SEL = single strike sound exposure level; RMS = root mean square.
 Level B Harassment Zones Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is: TL = B * Log10 (R1/R2), where TL = transmission loss in dB B = transmission loss coefficient; for practical spreading equals 15 R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven pile, and R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial measurement The recommended TL coefficient for most nearshore environments is the practical spreading value of 15. This value results in an expected propagation environment that would lie between spherical and cylindrical spreading loss conditions, which is the most appropriate assumption for NOAA's proposed activity in the absence of specific modelling. NOAA determined underwater noise would fall below the behavioral effects threshold of 160 dB RMS for impact driving at 2,530 m and the 120 dB rms threshold for the other methods at between 1848 and 11,659 m (Table 5). It should be noted that based on the bathymetry and geography of the project area, sound will not reach the full distance of the harassment isopleths in all directions. Level A Harassment Zones When the NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in recognition of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more technically challenging to predict because of the duration component in the new thresholds, we developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools to help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going to be overestimates of some degree, which may result in some degree of overestimate of take by Level A harassment. However, these tools offer the best way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address the output where appropriate. For stationary sources such as pile driving or removal and DTH using any of the methods discussed above, NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the closest distance at which, if a marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the activity, it would not incur PTS. We used the User Spreadsheet to determine the Level A harassment isopleths. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet or models are reported in Table 1 and the resulting isopleths are reported in Table 5 for each of the construction methods and scenarios. Table 5—Level A and Level B Isopleths (meters) for Each Method
Method
Pile type
Low 
                             frequency
Mid-
                             frequency
High
                             frequency
Phocids
Otariids
Level BDTH
24-inch steel
130
5
155
70
5
11,659Impact
24-inch steel
151
5
179
81
6
2,530Vibratory
14-inch Timber
2
0
3
1
0
2,929Small Pile Clipper
14 to 20-inch Steel
3.3
0
5
2
0
1,848Large Pile Clipper
14- to 24-inch Steel
9.6
1
14
6
0
5,412
 Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation In this section we provide the information about the presence or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take calculations. No density data are available for species in the project area. Here we describe how the information provided above is brought together to produce a quantitative take estimate. The estimates below are similar to and informed by prior projects in the Ketchikan area as discussed above. A summary of proposed take is in Table 6. Humpback Whale Humpback whales are expected to occur in the project area no more than twice per five-day work week. Typical group size for humpback whales in the project area is two animals. The project involves 47 days (10 work weeks) of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we estimate total take at 2 whales x 2/week x 10 weeks = 40 takes. All of these takes are expected to be Level B harassment takes as we believe the Level A shutdown zones can be 
                    ( print page 7133)
                    fully implemented by Protected Species Observers (PSO) because of the large size, short dive duration, and obvious behaviors of humpback whales. Given the data in Wade (2021) discussed above on the relative frequencies of Hawaii and Mexico DPS humpback whales in the project area the 40 takes is expected to comprise 39 Hawaii DPS animals and 1 Mexico DPS animal. Minke Whale As discussed above minke whales have not been seen in the project area but could occur there. They are often solitary. Therefore we conservatively authorize a single take of minke whales. This one estimated take is expected to be by Level B harassment as we believe the Level A shutdown zones can be fully implemented by PSOs because of the large size, short dive duration, and obvious behaviors of minke whales. Gray Whale Gray whales are expected to occur in the project area no more than once per month. Typical group size for gray whales in the project area is two animals. The project involves 47 days of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we estimate total take at two whales × two full months = four takes. All of these takes are expected to be Level B harassment takes as we believe the Level A shutdown zones can be fully implemented by PSOs because of the large size, short dive duration, and obvious behaviors of gray whales. Killer Whale Killer whales are expected to occur in the project area no more than once per month. Typical group size for killer whales in the project area is conservatively estimated at 10 animals. The project involves 47 days of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we estimate total take at 10 whales × 2 full months = 20 takes. All of these takes are expected to be Level B harassment takes as we believe the Level A shutdown zones can be fully implemented by PSOs because of the large size, short dive duration, and obvious behaviors of killer whales and the smaller size of the shutdown zones. Pacific White-Sided Dolphin Pacific white-sided dolphins are expected to occur in the project area no more than once per week. Typical group size for Pacific white-sided dolphins in the project area is 20 animals. The project involves 10 work weeks of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we estimate total take at 20 dolphins × 10 weeks = 200 takes. All of these takes are expected to be Level B harassment takes as we believe the Level A shutdown zones can be fully implemented by PSOs because of the large group size, short dive duration, and obvious behaviors of Pacific white-sided dolphins and the smaller size of the shutdown zones. Harbor Porpoise Harbor porpoises are expected to occur in the project area no more than three times per month. Typical group size for harbor porpoises in the project area is 5 animals. The project involves 47 days (2 months) of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we estimate total take at 5 porpoises × 6/month = 30 takes. Twenty of these takes are expected to be Level B harassment takes. Because harbor porpoises are small and cryptic and could sometimes remain undetected within the estimated harassment zones for a duration sufficient to experience PTS, we authorize 10 takes by Level A harassment. Dall's Porpoise Dall's porpoises are expected to occur in the project area no more than three times. Typical group size for Dall's porpoises in the project area is 20 animals. The project involves two months of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we estimate total take at 20 porpoises × 3 = 60 takes. Forty of these takes are expected to be Level B harassment takes. Because Dall's porpoises are small and cryptic and could sometimes remain undetected within the estimated harassment zones for a duration sufficient to experience PTS, we authorize 20 takes by Level A harassment. Harbor Seal Harbor seals are expected to occur in the project area once per day. The typical number of harbor seals per day in the project area is up to 12 animals. The project involves 47 days of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we estimate total take at 12 seals × 47 days = 564 takes. Seventy-five percent or 423 of these takes are expected to be Level B harassment takes. Because harbor seals are small and cryptic and could sometimes remain undetected within the estimated harassment zones for a duration sufficient to experience PTS, we authorize 141 takes by Level A harassment. Steller Sea Lion Steller sea lions are expected to occur in the project area once per day. The typical number of Steller sea lions per day in the project area is up to 10 animals. The project involves 47 days of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we estimate total take at 10 sea lions × 47 days = 470 takes. Because the shutdown zone is small and Steller sea lions are not cryptic we believe the Level A shutdown zones can be fully implemented by PSOs and no Level A harassment take is authorized. Table 6—Proposed Authorized Amount of Taking, by Level A Harassment and Level B Harassment, by Species and Stock and Percent of Take by Stock
Common name
Stock
Level B
                             harassment
Level A
                             harassment
Percent
                             of stockHumpback whale *
Central North Pacific
40
0
0.4Minke whale
Alaska
1
0
<0.1Gray whale
Eastern North Pacific
4
0
<0.1Killer whale
Northern Resident, Alaska Resident, West Coast Transient
20
0
<6.7Pacific White-sided dolphin
North Pacific
200
0
0.7Dall's porpoise
Alaska
40
20
<0.1Harbor porpoise
Southeast Alaska
20
10
0.3Harbor seal
Clarence Strait
423
141
2.1Steller sea lion
Eastern DPS
470
0
1.1* 1 take from the ESA listed Mexico DPS.
 
 
 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 IHAs to include information about the availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting the activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)). In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we carefully consider two primary factors: (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability implemented as planned); and (2) The practicability of the measures for applicant implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military readiness activity. Because of the need for an ESA Section 7 consultation for effects of the project on ESA listed humpback whales, there are a number of mitigation measures that go beyond or are in addition to typical mitigation measures we would otherwise require for this sort of project. The measures are however typical for actions in the Ketchikan area. The following mitigation measures are in the IHA: 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;
                Conduct training between construction supervisors and crews and the marine mammal monitoring team and relevant NOAA staff prior to the start of all pile driving and DTH activity and when new personnel join the work, so that responsibilities, communication procedures, monitoring protocols, and operational procedures are clearly understood;
                Pile driving activity must be halted upon observation of either 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 the harassment zone. If an ESA listed marine mammal is determined by the PSO to have been disturbed, harassed, harmed, injured, or killed (*e.g.,*
                     a listed marine mammal is observed entering a shutdown zone before operations can be shut down, or is injured or killed as a direct or indirect result of this action), the PSO will report the incident to within one business day to 
                    *akr.section7@noaa.gov;*
                NOAA will establish and implement the shutdown zones indicated in Table 7. The purpose of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within which shutdown of the activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). Shutdown zones typically vary based on the activity type and marine mammal hearing group. At the applicant's request we will not implement the single shutdown zone size per activity discussed in the proposed IHA;
                Employ PSOs and establish monitoring locations as described in the Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan and Section 5 of the IHA. The Holder must monitor the project area to the maximum extent possible based on the required number of PSOs, required monitoring locations, and environmental conditions. For all pile driving and removal at least three PSOs must be used;
                The placement of the PSOs during all pile driving and removal and DTH activities will ensure that the entire shutdown zone is visible during pile installation. Should environmental conditions deteriorate such that marine mammals within the entire shutdown zone will not be visible (*e.g.,*
                     fog, heavy rain), pile driving and removal must be delayed until the PSO is confident marine mammals within the shutdown zone could be detected;
                Monitoring must take place from 30 minutes prior to initiation of pile driving activity through 30 minutes post-completion of pile driving activity. Pre-start clearance monitoring must be conducted during periods of visibility sufficient for the lead PSO to determine the shutdown zones clear of marine mammals. Pile driving may commence following 30 minutes of observation when the determination is made;
                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 (30 minutes for humpback whales);
                For humpback whales, if the boundaries of the harassment zone have not been monitored continuously during a work stoppage, the entire harassment zone will be surveyed again to ensure that no humpback whales have entered the harassment zone that were not previously accounted for;
                In-water activities will take place only: Between civil dawn and civil dusk when PSOs can effectively monitor for the presence of marine mammals; during conditions with a Beaufort Sea State of 4 or less; when the entire shutdown zone and adjacent waters are visible (*e.g.,*
                     monitoring effectiveness is not reduced due to rain, fog, snow, etc.). Pile driving activities may continue for up to 30 minutes after sunset during evening civil twilight, as necessary to secure a pile for safety prior to demobilization for the evening. PSO(s) will continue to observe shutdown and monitoring zones during this time. The length of the post-activity monitoring period may be reduced if darkness precludes visibility of the shutdown and monitoring zones;
                Vessel operators will maintain a watch for marine mammals at all times while underway; stay at least 91 m (100 yards (yd)) away from listed marine mammals; travel at less than 5 knots (9 km/hr) when within 274 m (300 yd) of a whale; avoid changes in direction and speed when within 274 m (300 yd) of whales, unless doing so is necessary for maritime safety; not position vessel(s) in the path of whales, and will not cut in front of whales in a way or at a distance that causes the whales to change their direction of travel or behavior (including breathing/surfacing pattern); check the waters immediately adjacent to the vessel(s) to ensure that no whales will be injured when the propellers are engaged; reduce vessel speed to 10 knots or less when weather conditions( print page 7135)
                    reduce visibility to 1.6 km (1 mi) or less; adhere to the Alaska Humpback Whale Approach Regulations when transiting to and from the project site (see 50 CFR 216.18, 223.214, and 224.103(b)); not allow lines to remain in the water, and no trash or other debris will be thrown overboard, thereby reducing the potential for marine mammal entanglement; follow established transit routes and will travel <10 knots while in the harassment zones; the speed limit within Tongass Narrows is 7 knots for vessels over 23 ft in length. If a whale's course and speed are such that it will likely cross in front of a vessel that is underway, or approach within 91 m (100 yards (yd)) of the vessel, and if maritime conditions safely allow, the engine will be put in neutral and the whale will be allowed to pass beyond the vessel; and
                NOAA must use soft start techniques when impact pile driving. Soft start requires contractors to provide an initial set of three strikes at reduced energy, followed by a 30-second waiting period, then two subsequent reduced-energy strike sets. A soft start must be implemented at the start of each day's impact pile driving and at any time following cessation of impact pile driving for a period of 30 minutes or longer. Table 7—Minimum Required Shutdown Zones (Meters) by Hearing Group for Each Method
Method
Pile type
Low
                             frequency
Mid-
                             frequency
High
                             frequency
Phocids
OtariidsDTH
24-inch steel
130
10
160
70
10Impact
24-inch steel
160
10
180
90
10Vibratory
14-inch Timber
10
10
10
10
10Small Pile Clipper
14 to 16-inch Steel
10
10
10
10
10Large Pile Clipper
18- to 24-inch Steel
10
10
20
10
10
 Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the mitigation measures provide the means effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance. Monitoring and Reporting In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring. Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following: Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area in which take is anticipated (*e.g.,*
                     presence, abundance, distribution, density);
                Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment (*e.g.,*
                     source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) affected species (
                    *e.g.,*
                     life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure (
                    *e.g.,*
                     age, calving or feeding areas);
                Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
                How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks;
                Effects on marine mammal habitat (*e.g.,*
                     marine mammal prey species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of marine mammal habitat); and
                Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness. Visual Monitoring Monitoring must be conducted by qualified, NMFS-approved PSOs, in accordance with the following: PSOs must be independent (*i.e.,*
                     not construction personnel) 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 IHA. Other PSOs may substitute other relevant experience, education (degree in biological science or related field), or training. PSOs must be approved by NMFS prior to beginning any activity subject to this IHA; and
                PSOs must record all observations of marine mammals as described in the Section 5 of the IHA and the Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, regardless of distance from the pile being driven. PSOs shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven or removed; PSOs must have the following additional qualifications: Ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols;
                Experience or training in the field identification of marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
                Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the construction operation to provide for personal safety during observations;
                Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were conducted; dates, times, and reason for implementation of mitigation (or why mitigation was not implemented when required); and marine mammal behavior; and
                Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals observed in the area as necessary; NOAA must establish the following monitoring locations. For all pile driving and DTH activities, a minimum of one PSO must be assigned to the active pile driving or DTH location to monitor the shutdown zones and as much of the Level B harassment zones as possible. For all pile driving and DTH activities, two additional PSOs are 
                    ( print page 7136)
                    required. The additional PSOs will start at the project site and travel along Tongass Narrows, counting all humpback whales present, until they have reached the edge of the respective harassment zone. At this point, the PSOs will identify suitable observation points from which to observe the width of Tongass Narrows for the duration of pile driving activities. For the largest DTH zones these are expected to be on South Tongass Highway near Mountain Point and North Tongass Highway just northwest of the intersection with Carlanna Creek. See application Figure 11-1 for map of PSO locations. If visibility deteriorates so that the entire width of Tongass Narrows at the harassment zone boundary is not visible, additional PSOs may be positioned so that the entire width is visible, or work will be halted until the entire width is visible to ensure that any humpback whales entering or within the harassment zone are detected by PSOs. Acoustic Monitoring While we are not requiring acoustic monitoring or sound source verification studies for this project because the construction equipment and pile types and sizes are common ones for which we have significant data, the applicant has requested the possibility of altering shutdown and/or harassment zones based on voluntary acoustic monitoring, so we have added our standard term for this to the IHA: The harassment and/or shutdown zones may be modified with NMFS' approval following NMFS' acceptance of an acoustic monitoring report. Reporting A draft marine mammal monitoring report will be submitted to NMFS within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal activities, or 60 days prior to a requested date of issuance of any future IHAs for projects at the same location, whichever comes first. The report will include an overall description of work completed, a narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and associated PSO data sheets. Specifically, the report must include: Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal monitoring;
                Construction activities occurring during each daily observation period, including the number and type of piles driven or removed and by what method (*i.e.,*
                     impact, vibratory or DTH) and the total equipment duration for vibratory removal or DTH for each pile or hole or total 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: Name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) and PSO location and activity at time of sighting; Time of sighting; Identification of the animal(s) (*e.g.,*
                     genus/species, lowest possible taxonomic level, or unidentified), PSO confidence in identification, and the composition of the group if there is a mix of species; Distance and bearing of each marine mammal observed relative to the pile being driven for each sighting (if pile driving was occurring at time of sighting); Estimated number of animals (min/max/best estimate); Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, juveniles, neonates, group composition, etc.); Animal's closest point of approach and estimated time spent within the harassment zone; 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;
                Detailed information about any implementation of any mitigation triggered (*e.g.,*
                     shutdowns and delays), a description of specific actions that ensued, and resulting changes in behavior of the animal(s), if any; and
                If visibility degrades to where the PSO(s) cannot view the entire impact or vibratory harassment zones, take of humpback whales will be extrapolated based on the estimated percentage of the monitoring zone that remains visible and the number of marine mammals observed. If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft final report will constitute the final report. If comments are received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of comments. Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals In the event that personnel involved in the construction activities discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the IHA-holder must immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources (OPR) (
                    *PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov*), NMFS and to the Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. If the death or injury was clearly caused by the specified activity, NOAA must immediately cease the specified activities until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the incident and determine what, if any, additional measures are appropriate to ensure compliance with the terms of the IHA. The IHA-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.,*
                     population-level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be “taken” through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (
                    *e.g.,*
                     intensity, duration), the context of any responses (
                    *e.g.,*
                     critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 
                    ( print page 7137)
                    1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (
                    *e.g.,*
                     as reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels). Pile driving and removal and DTH activities have the potential to disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically, the project activities may result in take, in the form of Level A and Level B harassment from underwater sounds generated from pile driving and removal and DTH. Potential takes could occur if individuals are present in the ensonified zone when these activities are underway. The takes from Level A and Level B harassment would be due to potential behavioral disturbance, TTS, and PTS. No serious injury or mortality is anticipated given the nature of the activity and measures designed to minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for harassment is minimized through the construction method and the implementation of the planned mitigation measures (see Mitigation section). The Level A harassment zones identified in Table 5 are based upon an animal exposed to impact pile driving multiple piles per day. Considering the short duration to impact drive or vibe each pile and breaks between pile installations (to reset equipment and move pile into place), this means an animal would have to remain within the area estimated to be ensonified above the Level A harassment threshold for multiple hours. This is highly unlikely given marine mammal movement throughout the area. If an animal was exposed to accumulated sound energy, the resulting PTS would likely be small (
                    *e.g.,*
                     PTS onset) at lower frequencies where pile driving energy is concentrated, and unlikely to result in impacts to individual fitness, reproduction, or survival. The nature of the pile driving project precludes the likelihood of serious injury or mortality. For all species and stocks, take would occur within a limited, confined area (adjacent to the project site) of the stock's range. Level A and Level B harassment will be reduced to the level of least practicable adverse impact through use of mitigation measures described herein. Further the amount of take proposed to be authorized is extremely small when compared to stock abundance. Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving at the project site, if any, are expected to be mild and temporary. Marine mammals within the Level B harassment zone may not show any visual cues they are disturbed by activities (as noted during modification to the Kodiak Ferry Dock) or could become alert, avoid the area, leave the area, or display other mild responses that are not observable such as changes in vocalization patterns. Given the short duration of noise-generating activities per day, any harassment would be temporary. There are no other areas or times of known biological importance for any of the affected species. In addition, it is unlikely that minor noise effects in a small, localized area of habitat would have any effect on the stocks' 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 will have only minor, short-term effects on individuals. The specified activities are not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival and will 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 the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival: No mortality is anticipated or authorized;
                Authorized Level A harassment would be very small amounts and of low degree;
                No important habitat areas have been identified within the project area;
                For all species, Tongass Narrows is a very small and peripheral part of their range;
                NOAA would implement mitigation measures such as soft-starts, and shut downs; and
                Monitoring reports from similar work in Tongass Narrows have documented little to no effect on individuals of the same species impacted by the specified activities. Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks. Small Numbers As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be authorized under section 101(a)(5)(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 authorizes is below one third of the estimated stock abundance for all species (in fact, take of individuals is less than 10 percent of the abundance of the affected stocks, see Table 6). This is likely a conservative estimate because we assume all takes are of different individual animals, which is likely not the case. Some individuals may return multiple times in a day, but PSOs would count them as separate takes if they cannot be individually identified. The Alaska stock of Dall's porpoise has no official NMFS abundance estimate for this area as the most recent estimate is greater than eight years old. Nevertheless, the most recent estimate was 83,400 animals and it is highly unlikely this number has drastically declined. Therefore, the 60 authorized takes of this stock clearly represent small numbers of this stock. Likewise, the Southeast Alaska stock of harbor porpoise has no official NMFS abundance estimate as the most recent estimate is greater than eight years old. Nevertheless, the most recent estimate was 11,146 animals (Muto 
                    *et al.,*
                     2021) and it is highly unlikely this number has drastically declined. Therefore, the 30 authorized takes of this stock clearly represent small numbers of this stock. There is no current or historical estimate of the Alaska minke whale stock, but there are known to be over 1,000 minke whales in the Gulf of Alaska (Muto 
                    *et al.,*
                     2018) so the 1 authorized take clearly represents small numbers of this stock. Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity (including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species or stocks.
                    ( print page 7138) 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 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity: (1) That is likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by: (i) Causing the marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas; (ii) Directly displacing subsistence users; or (iii) Placing physical barriers between the marine mammals and the subsistence hunters; and (2) That cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to increase the availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs to be met. Alaska Native hunters in the Ketchikan vicinity do not traditionally harvest cetaceans (Muto 
                    *et al.,*
                     2021). Harbor seals are the most commonly targeted marine mammal that is hunted by Alaska Native subsistence hunters within the Ketchikan area. In 2012 an estimated 595 harbor seals were taken for subsistence uses, with 22 of those occurring in Ketchikan (Wolfe 
                    *et al.,*
                     2013). This is the most recent data available. The harbor seal harvest per capita in both communities was low, at 0.02 for Ketchikan. ADF&G subsistence data for Southeast Alaska shows that from 1992 through 2008, plus 2012, from zero to 19 Steller sea lions were taken by Alaska Native hunters per year with typical harvest years ranging from zero to five animals (Wolfe 
                    *et al.,*
                     2013). In 2012, it is estimated 9 sea lions were taken in all of Southeast Alaska and only from Hoonah and Sitka. There are no known haulout locations in the project area. Both the harbor seal and the Steller sea lion may be temporarily displaced from the action area. However, neither the local population nor any individual pinnipeds are likely to be adversely impacted by the proposed action beyond noise-induced harassment or slight injury. The proposed project is anticipated to have no long-term impact on Steller sea lion or harbor seal populations, or their habitat no long term impacts on the availability of marine mammals for subsistence uses is anticipated. 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 proposed mitigation and monitoring measures, NMFS has determined that there will not be an unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence uses from NOAA's proposed activities. National Environmental Policy Act To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 
                    *et seq.*) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, NMFS must review our 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 NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review. Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 
                    *et seq.*) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this case with the Alaska Regional Office, whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species. NMFS is authorizing take of Mexico DPS of humpback whales which are listed under the ESA. The NMFS Alaska Regional Office Protected Resources Division issued a Biological Opinion under section 7 of the ESA, on the issuance of an IHA to NOAA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the NMFS Permits and Conservation Division. The Biological Opinion concluded that the proposed action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of Mexico DPS of humpback whales, and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify Mexico DPS of humpback whales critical habitat. Authorization NMFS has issued an IHA to NOAA for the potential harassment of small numbers of nine marine mammal species incidental to the NOAA Port Facility Project in Ketchikan, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are followed. Dated: February 3, 2022. Kimberly Damon-Randall, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.


[FR Doc. 2022-02633 Filed 2-7-22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P