[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 126 (Friday, July 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39468-39481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14137]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XC129]


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the U.S. Coast Guard's Floating 
Dock Extension Project at Base Ketchikan, 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 
the United States Coast Guard (USCG) to incidentally harass marine 
mammals during construction of the floating dock extension at Base 
Ketchikan, Alaska.

DATES: This Authorization is effective from July 1, 2022, through June 
30, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Corcoran, 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/action/incidental-take-authorization-united-states-coast-guards-floating-dock-extension-project. 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

[[Page 39469]]

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 March 9, 2021, NMFS received a request from the USCG for an IHA 
to take marine mammals incidental to the construction of the floating 
dock extension at Base Ketchikan, Alaska. Following NMFS' review of the 
request, USCG provided additional information on July 22, 2021, and 
again on March 7, 2022. The application was deemed adequate and 
complete on the latter date. USCG's request is for take of ten species 
of marine mammals by Level B harassment and, for a subset of three 
species, by Level A harassment. Neither USCG nor NMFS expects serious 
injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA 
is appropriate.
    There have been no changes from the proposed to the final IHA.

Description of Activity

Overview

    The USCG requested an IHA for activities associated with the 
construction of the Floating Dock Extension Project in the Tongass 
Narrows at Coast Guard Base Ketchikan (Base Ketchikan) in Ketchikan, 
Alaska. The project will cover a 12-month window during which 
approximately 30 days of pile-installation activity will occur. The 
project involves the installation of ten, 24-inch steel guide piles for 
a third floating dock section. Three different installation methods 
will be used including the Down-the-Hole (DTH) system to create rock 
sockets for new piles, vibratory installation of piles, and final pile 
proofing with limited use of impact pile driving. Sounds resulting from 
pile installation and drilling may result in the incidental take of 
marine mammals by Level A and Level B harassment in the form of 
auditory injury or behavioral harassment.

Dates and Duration

    The IHA is effective from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. The 
total expected work duration will be 15 construction days (5 days of 
DTH, 5 days of vibratory pile installation, and 5 days of impact pile 
driving) with an additional 15 day buffer to account for days where 
work is paused (e.g., inclement weather), for a total work window of 30 
days. The USCG plans to conduct all work during daylight hours.

Specific Geographic Region

    The activity will occur in the Tongass Narrows at Base Ketchikan in 
Ketchikan, Alaska (Figure 1). Base Ketchikan is located on the 
southwestern end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately 235 miles south 
of Juneau and 90 miles north of Prince Rupert, British Columbia. The 
Base is about 1 mile south of downtown Ketchikan, on the industrial 
limits of the city, and on the East Channel of the Tongass Narrows. The 
waters of the Tongass Narrows are heavily used by the public including 
cruise ships, commercial fishing vessels, and private craft and sea 
planes, which contribute significantly to the ambient acoustic 
environment in the Narrows.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

[[Page 39470]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN01JY22.012


[[Page 39471]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN01JY22.013

BILLING CODE 3510-22-C

Detailed Description of Specific Activity

    USCG plans to install ten steel guide piles for a third floating 
dock section at Base Ketchikan to support the homeporting of a third 
Fast Response Cutter (FRC) (Figure 2). The piles will be installed over 
a period of 30 days, allotting five construction days to each of the 
three methods of installation, in addition to 15 additional buffer days 
to account for unforeseen interruptions (e.g., inclement weather). 
These methods include DTH, vibratory pile installation and pile 
proofing using an impact hammer (see Table 1).

                                Table 1--Pile Installation Methods and Durations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Piles driven/
           Installation method             Duration/impacts per pile        day             Estimated days
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH.....................................  60 minutes................               2  5.
Vibratory pile installation.............  6 minutes.................               2  5.
Impact driving pile proofing............  5 impacts.................               2  5 (10 strikes).
                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................  ..........................  ..............  15 (30).\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The total expected work duration is 15 days with an additional 15 day buffer to account for days where work
  is paused (e.g., inclement weather) for a total work window of 30 days.

    A detailed description of the planned construction project was 
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (87 FR 
30894; May 20, 2022). Since that time, no changes have been made to the 
planned construction activities. Therefore, a detailed description is 
not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the 
description of the specific activity.
    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' proposal to issue an IHA to USCG was published in 
the

[[Page 39472]]

Federal Register on May 20, 2022 (87 FR 30894). That notice described, 
in detail, USCG's activities, the marine mammal species that may be 
affected by the activities, 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. This proposed notice was available for a 30-
day public comment period.
    The United States Geological Survey provided a letter stating that 
it had no comment. No other comments were received.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information 
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and 
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species. NMFS 
fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader to 
these descriptions, incorporated here by reference, instead of 
reprinting the information. 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 or stocks for which take is expected and 
authorized for this action, 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'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 stocks managed under the MMPA in this region 
are assessed in NMFS' U.S. Alaska Stock Abundance Reports (SARs) (e.g., 
Muto et al., 2021). All values presented in Table 2 are the most recent 
available at the time of publication (including from the draft 2021 
SARs) and are available online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments).

                                              Table 2--Species Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         ESA/MMPA status;    Stock abundance (CV,
             Common name                  Scientific name               Stock             strategic (Y/N)      Nmin, most recent       PBR     Annual M/
                                                                                                \1\          abundance survey) \2\               SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae:
    Gray whale......................  Eschrichtius robustus..  Eastern North Pacific    -,-,N               26,960 (0.05, 25,849,         801        131
                                                                Stock.                                       2016).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
    Humpback whale..................  Megaptera novaeanglinae  Central North Pacific    -,-,Y               10,103 (0.3, 7,890,            83         26
                                                                Stock.                                       2006).
    Minke whale.....................  Balaenoptera             Alaska Stock...........  -,-,N               N/A (N/A, N/A, N/A)           UND          0
                                       acutorostrata.                                                        \4\.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
    Killer whale....................  Orca orcinus...........  Alaska Resident........  -,-,N               2,347 (N/A, 2347,              24          1
                                                                                                             2012).
                                                               Northern Resident......  -,-,N               302 (N/A, 302, 2018)..        2.2        0.2
                                                               West Coast Transient...  -,-,N               349 (N/A, 349, 2018)..        3.5        0.4
    Pacific white-sided dolphin.....  Lagenorhynchus           North Pacific Stock....  -,-,N               26,880 (N/A, N/A,1990)        UND          0
                                       obliquidens.
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
    Dall's porpoise \5\.............  Phocoenoides dalli.....  Alaska Stock...........  -,-,N               15,432 (0.097,13, 110,        131         37
                                                                                                             2015).
    Harbor porpoise \6\.............  Phocoena phocoena......  Southeast Alaska Stock.  -,-,Y               1302 (0.21, 1057,              11         34
                                                                                                             2019).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
 sea lions):
    Steller sea lion................  Eumetopias jubatus.....  Eastern Stock..........  -,-,N               43,201 (N/A, 43,201,         2592        112
                                                                                                             2017).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
    Harbor seal.....................  Phoca vituline           Clarence Strait Stock..  -,-,N               27,659 (N/A, 24,854,          746         40
                                       richardii.                                                            2015).
    Northern Elephant seal..........  Mirounga angustirostris  California Breeding      -,-,N               187,386 (N/A, 85,369,        5122        5.3
                                                                Stock.                                       2013).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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; Nmin 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 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.

[[Page 39473]]

 
\4\ No population estimates have been made for the number of minke whales in the entire North Pacific. Some information is available on the numbers of
  minke whales on some areas of Alaska, but in the 2009, 2013 and 2015 offshore surveys, so few minke whales were seen during the surveys that a
  population estimate for the species in this area could not be determined (Rone et al., 2017). Therefore, this information is N/A (not available).
\5\ Previous abundance estimates covering the entire stock's range are no longer considered reliable and the current estimates presented in the SARs and
  reported here only cover a portion of the stock's range. Therefore, the calculated Nmin and PBR is based on the 2015 survey of only a small portion of
  the stock's range. PBR is considered to be biased low since it is based on the whole stock whereas the estimate of mortality and serious injury is for
  the entire stock's range.
\6\ Abundance estimates assumed that detection probability on the trackline was perfect; work is underway on a corrected estimate. Additionally,
  preliminary data results based on eDNA analysis show genetic differentiation between harbor porpoise in the northern and southern regions on the
  inland waters of southeast Alaska. Geographic delineation is not yet known. Data to evaluate population structure for harbor porpoise in Southeast
  Alaska have been collected and are currently being analyzed. Should the analysis identify different population structure than is currently reflected
  in the Alaska SARs, NMFS will consider how to best revise stock designations in the future.

    As indicated above, all ten species (with twelve managed stocks) in 
Table 2 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the 
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur, and we have authorized 
it. Fin whale could potentially occur in the area, however there are no 
known sightings nearby and USCG will shut down activity prior to a 
whale entering the harassment zones. Therefore, given the former and 
the rarity of the species, take is not expected to occur and they are 
not discussed further.
    In addition, the northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) may be 
found in the Tongass Narrows. However, northern sea otters are managed 
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are not considered further in 
this document.
    A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by 
USCG's project, including brief introductions to 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 (87 FR 30894; May 20, 
2022); 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.

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    The effects of underwater noise from the Navy's construction 
activities have the potential to result in harassment of marine mammals 
in the vicinity of the survey area. The notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 
30894; May 20, 2022) included a discussion of the effects of underwater 
noise from the USCG's activity on marine mammals and their habitat. 
That information and analysis is incorporated by reference into the 
final IHA determination and is not repeated here; please refer to the 
notice of proposed authorization (87 FR 30894; May 20, 2022).

Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes 
authorized through the IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration 
of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact determinations.
    Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these 
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent 
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of 
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a 
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal 
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, 
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
    Authorized takes will primarily be by Level B harassment, as use of 
the acoustic sources (i.e., vibratory or impact pile driving and DTH) 
has 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, primarily for porpoises and 
harbor seals, due to the cryptic nature of these species in context of 
larger predicted auditory injury zones. Auditory injury is unlikely to 
occur for low- and mid-frequency species and otariids, based on the 
relatively small predicted zones for the latter two groups and because 
of the expected ease of detection for the former group. 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 NMFS believes the best available science 
indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some 
degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water 
that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or 
occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) 
and the number of days of activities. 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). Below, we describe the 
factors considered here in more detail and present the 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). Thresholds have also been developed identifying the 
received level of in-air sound above which exposed pinnipeds would 
likely be behaviorally harassed.
    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 ([mu]Pa) (rms) for 
continuous (e.g., vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 
1 [mu]Pa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or 
intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources. USCG's activity includes 
the use of continuous (vibratory hammer and DTH) and impulsive (DTH and 
impact pile-driving), and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
(rms) are applicable.

[[Page 39474]]

    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). USCG'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 below. 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     PTS onset acoustic thresholds * (received level)
             Hearing group              ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Impulsive                         Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans...........  Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB;   Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
                                          LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans...........  Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB;   Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
                                          LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans..........  Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB;   Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
                                          LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater).....  Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB;   Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
                                          LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater)....  Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB;   Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
                                          LE,OW,24h: 203 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 [mu]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has
  a reference value of 1[mu]Pa\2\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 project. Marine 
mammals are expected to be affected via sound generated by the primary 
components of the project (i.e., impact pile driving, vibratory pile 
driving, vibratory pile removal, 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 project, NMFS used acoustic monitoring data from other locations 
to develop source levels for the various pile types, sizes and methods 
(Table 4).

                        Table 4--Observed Source Levels for Pile Installation and Removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Peak SPL (re 1     RMS SPL (re 1     SEL (re 1 [mu]Pa
             Activity                [mu]Pa (rms))      [mu]Pa (rms))          (rms))              Source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH (24-inch Steel Pipe).........                184                167                159  Heyvaert & Reyff,
                                                                                             2021.
Vibratory (24-inch Steel Pipe) *.                175                162                160  Denes et al., 2016.
Impact (24-Inch Steel Pipe)......                207                194                178  Caltrans 2020.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: SELss = single strike sound exposure level; RMS = root mean square.
* Source levels used here differ from those used in USCG's application.

    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 Level A harassment take. However, these tools offer the 
best way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D 
modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways 
to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address 
the output where appropriate. For stationary sources such as vibratory 
and impact pile driving, vibratory removal and DTH, NMFS User 
Spreadsheet predicts the distance at which, if a marine mammal remained 
at that distance the whole duration of the activity, it would incur 
PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet are reported in Table 1 and 
source levels used in the User Spreadsheet are reported in Table 4. 
Resulting isopleths are reported in Table 5.

[[Page 39475]]



                    Table 5--Level A and Level B Harassment Isopleths for Impact Pile Driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Level A harassment isopleths (PTS) (meters)             Level B
              Activity               ------------------------------------------------------------   harassment
                                          LF          MF          HF        Phocids    Otariids    isopleths (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH (24-inch Steel Pipe)............       434.1        15.4       517.1       232.3        16.9           13594
Vibratory (24-inch Steel Pipe)......           1         0.1         1.5         0.6         0.1          * 6310
Impact (24-inch Steel Pipe).........        21.5         0.8        25.6        11.5         0.8            1848
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Differs from USCG's application due to difference in source level use. See Table 4.

Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation

    In this section we provide the information about the presence, 
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take 
calculations. We also describe how the information provided above is 
brought together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
    Available information regarding marine mammal occurrence and 
abundance in the vicinity of USCG Base Ketchikan includes monitoring 
reports from prior incidental take authorizations (the Tongass Narrows 
project (85 FR 673; January 7, 2020)) and ESA consultations on 
additional projects and is described below for each species. A summary 
of authorized take is in Table 6.
Steller Sea Lions
    Steller sea lions are anticipated to occur in the vicinity of Base 
Ketchikan in the Tongass Narrows. As Base Ketchikan is far enough east 
of the line dividing the Eastern and Western stocks, only members of 
the Eastern Stock of Steller sea lions are anticipated to occur at Base 
Ketchikan. Sightings of Steller sea lions are expected to occur once a 
day with the total number of Steller sea lions in the project area 
reaching up to 10 animals. The project involves 30 days of potential 
in-water work. Therefore, we estimate total take at 10 sea lions x 30 
days = 300 takes at the Level B harassment level. Because the shutdown 
zone is small and Steller sea lions are not cryptic, we believe the 
Level A harassment shutdown zone can be fully implemented by Protected 
Species Observers (PSOs) and no Level A harassment take is authorized.
Harbor Seal
    Harbor seals are anticipated to occur in the project area once per 
day. The typical number of harbor seals observed in the project area is 
up to 12 animals per day. We estimate total take at 12 seals x 30 days 
of activity = 360 takes. Because of the relatively large Level A 
harassment zones for impact pile driving and DTH, and because harbor 
seals are small and cryptic species that could sometimes remain 
undetected within the estimated harassment zones for a duration 
sufficient to experience PTS, we authorize 10 takes (1 seal per day for 
the expected 10 days of impact pile driving and DTH) by Level A 
harassment, and 350 takes by Level B harassment, with total authorized 
take equal to 360.
Dall's Porpoise
    Previous construction project monitoring in the Ketchikan area 
reported approximately two Dall's porpoises per day (NMFS, 2021). 
Therefore, we estimate total take at 2 porpoises per day x 30 days = 60 
takes. Forty of these takes are expected to be Level B harassment 
takes. Because Dall's porpoises are small and cryptic species 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 Porpoise
    Harbor porpoises are expected to occur in the project area no more 
than three times per month and the typical group size for harbor 
porpoises in the project area is 5 animals. The project involves 30 
days (1 month) of in-water work where take could occur. Therefore, we 
estimate total take at 5 porpoises x 3 sightings = 15 takes. Because 
harbor porpoises are small and cryptic species and could remain 
undetected within the estimated harassment zones for a duration 
sufficient to experience PTS, we authorize 5 takes by Level A 
harassment and 10 takes by Level B harassment.
Pacific White-Sided Dolphin
    Previous construction project monitoring in the Ketchikan area 
reported approximately 2.86 Pacific white-sided dolphins per day 
(reported value of 20 dolphins over one week of monitoring) (NMFS, 
2021). Therefore we estimate 2.86 dolphins x 30 days = 86 takes. All of 
these takes are expected to be by Level B harassment as we believe the 
Level A shutdown zones can be fully implemented by PSOs due to their 
large group size, short dive duration, and easy detection of Pacific 
white-sided dolphins, in addition to the smaller size of the shutdown 
zones.
Killer Whale
    Killer whales are expected to occur in the project area no more 
than once per month. Typically a group size for killer whales in the 
project area is conservatively estimated at 10 animals, which equates 
to 0.4 animals per day. Therefore, we estimate total take at 0.4 whales 
x 30 days = 12 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 of the animal, short dive 
duration, and obvious behavior of killer whales, in additional to the 
small size of the shutdown zones.
Gray Whale
    Gray whales are expected to occur no more than once per month. 
Typical group size for gray whales in the project area is two animals. 
Therefore, we conservatively authorize a single group size for the full 
30 days of activity. All of these takes are expected to be by Level B 
harassment as we believe the Level A harassment shutdown zone can be 
fully implemented by PSOs because of the large size of the animal, 
short dive duration, and obvious behaviors of gray whales.
Minke Whales
    Minke whales have not been previously observed in the project area 
but have a potential to occur. They are often solitary animals. 
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 of the animal, the short dive duration, and 
obvious behaviors of minke whales.
Northern Elephant Seals
    Members of the California breeding stock spend most of their time 
at sea and are known to migrate to the Gulf of Alaska to feed on 
benthic prey. Recent

[[Page 39476]]

anecdotal evidence has suggested that an animal may be present near 
Base Ketchikan and repeated sightings of that individual have been 
spotted near Ketchikan docks. Elephant seals are known to dive for 
extended periods of time and it is possible that one individual may be 
encountered within the Level B harassment zone. Therefore one estimated 
take by Level B harassment per day is authorized, bring the total 
authorized take of Elephant seals to 30. We believe the entire Level A 
shutdown zone can be fully implemented given their large size and 
obvious behaviors of elephant seals.
Humpback Whales
    Members of the Western North Pacific stock have the potential to 
occur at Base Ketchikan. Previous construction project monitoring in 
the Ketchikan area reported approximately 0.571 whales per day during 
those activities (NMFS, 2021). Therefore, we estimate total take at 
0.571 whales per day x 30 days = 17 takes by Level B harassment only. 
We do not anticipate any takes by Level A harassment as we believe the 
Level A shutdown zone can be fully implemented by PSOs because of their 
larger size, short dive duration, and obvious behaviors of humpback 
whales.
    Given data in Wade et al., (2021) discussed above on the relative 
frequencies of the Hawaii and Mexico DPS humpback whales in the project 
area, only 2 percent of the local population is expected to comprise of 
the Mexico DPS, equating to 0.34 of the 17 humpback whale takes for 
authorization. Therefore, no takes of Mexico DPS whales are expected to 
occur.

                                      Table 6--Authorized Amount of Taking
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Percent of
               Species                           Stock            Level A    Level B     Total         stock
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale.......................  Central North Pacific...          0         17         17            0.17
Minke whale..........................  Alaska..................          0          1          1             N/A
Killer whale.........................  Alaska Resident.........          0         12         12            0.51
                                       Northern Resident.......                                             3.97
                                       West Coast Transient....                                             3.44
Pacific-white sided dolphin..........  North Pacific...........          0         86         86            0.32
Harbor porpoise......................  Southeast Alaska........          5         10         15            0.13
Dall's porpoise......................  Alaska Stock............         20         40         60            0.46
Gray whale...........................  Eastern North Pacific...          0          2          2            0.01
Harbor seal..........................  Clarence Strait.........         10        340        360            1.30
Northern Elephant Seal...............  California Breeding               0         30         30            0.00
                                        Stock.
Steller sea lion.....................  Eastern.................          0        300        300            0.69
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental 
take authorizations to include information about the availability and 
feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and 
manner of conducting the activity or other means of effecting the least 
practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and 
their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and 
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, 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, 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, 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.
    To ensure no take of any ESA listed whales, there are a number of 
mitigation measures required through the IHA that go beyond, or are in 
addition to, typical mitigation measures we would otherwise require for 
this project, as determined through informal ESA Section 7 
consultation. The mitigation measures in the IHA include:
    <bullet> 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 (note that NMFS expects that a 10 m shutdown zone is 
sufficient to avoid direct physical interaction with marine mammals, 
but USCG will implement a 20 m shutdown zone to avoid physical 
interaction for in-water activities);
    <bullet> Ensure that construction supervisors and crews, the 
monitoring team, and relevant USCG staff are trained prior to the start 
of all pile driving and DTH activity, so that responsibilities, 
communication procedures, monitoring protocols, and operational 
procedures are clearly understood. New personnel joining during the 
project must be trained prior to commencing work;
    <bullet> 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;
    <bullet> For any marine mammal species for which take by Level B 
harassment has not been requested or authorized, in-water pile 
installation/removal and DTH will shut down immediately when the 
animals are sighted;
    <bullet> Employ a minimum of three PSOs for all DTH and pile 
driving activities,

[[Page 39477]]

where one PSO is assigned to the active pile driving or DTH site to 
monitor shutdown zones and as much of the Level B harassment zones as 
possible. Two additional PSOs are required to start at the project site 
and travel along the Tongass Narrows, counting all humpback whales 
present, until they have reached the edge of the respective Level B 
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 DTH and pile driving activities. For the largest 
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.
    <bullet> The placement of the PSOs during all pile driving and 
removal and DTH activities will ensure that the entire shutdown zone is 
visible during activity;
    <bullet> Monitoring must take place from 30 minutes prior to 
initiation of pile driving or DTH activity (i.e., pre-clearance 
monitoring) through 30 minutes post-completion of pile driving or DTH 
activity;
    <bullet> If in-water work ceases for more than 30 minutes, USCG 
will conduct pre-clearance monitoring of both the Level B harassment 
zone and the shutdown zone;
    <bullet> Pre-start clearance monitoring must be conducted during 
periods of visibility sufficient for the lead PSO to determine that the 
shutdown zones indicated in Table 7 are clear of marine mammals. Pile 
driving and DTH may commence following 30 minutes of observation when 
the determination is made that the shutdown zones are clear of marine 
mammals;
    <bullet> If a marine mammal is observed entering or within the 
shutdown zones indicated in Table 7, pile driving and DTH 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 (Table 7) or 15 minutes have passed 
without re-detection of the animal (30 minutes for large cetaceans);
    <bullet> 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; and
    <bullet> 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 in not reduced due to rain, fog, snow, 
etc.). Pile driving may continue for up to 30 minutes after sunset 
during evening civil twilight, as necessary to secure a pile for safety 
prior to demobilization during this time. The length of the post- 
activity monitoring period may be reduced if darkness precludes 
visibility of the shutdown and monitoring zones.
    The following specific mitigation measures must also apply to 
USCG's in-water construction activities:
    Establishment of Level A Harassment and Shutdown Zones--For all 
pile driving/removal and DTH activities, USCG will establish a shutdown 
zone (Table 7). The purpose of a shutdown zone is generally to define 
an area within which shutdown of activity will occur upon sighting of 
marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined 
area). Shutdown zones vary based on activity type and duration and 
marine mammal hearing group (Table 7). All shutdown zones are based on 
the Level A harassment isopleth for the associated activity. The 
placement of PSOs during all construction activities (described in 
detail in the Monitoring and Reporting Section) will ensure that the 
entire shutdown zones are visible during pile installation.

                            Table 7--Shutdown Zones and Level B Harassment Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Shutdown zone (m)
                                     ------------------------------------------------------------     Level B
              Activity                   Low-        Mid-        High-                              harassment
                                       frequency   frequency   frequency    Phocid      Otariid      zone (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory...........................          20          20          20          20          20           13594
DTH.................................         440          20         520         240          20            6310
Impact..............................          30          20          30          20          20            1848
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's 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 
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:
    <bullet> Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area 
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, 
density).
    <bullet> 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).
    <bullet> Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or 
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), 
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
    <bullet> How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) 
long-term fitness and survival of individual

[[Page 39478]]

marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks.
    <bullet> Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey 
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of 
marine mammal habitat).
    <bullet> Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Visual Monitoring

    Monitoring must be conducted by qualified, NMFS-approved PSOs, in 
accordance to the following:
    <bullet> 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 activities pursuant to a NMFS-issued IHA. Other 
PSOs may substitute other relevant experience, education (degree in 
biological science or related field), or training for prior experience 
performing the duties of a PSO during construction activity pursuant to 
a NMFS-issued IHA. Where a team of three or more PSOs is required, a 
lead observer or monitoring coordinator must be designated. The lead 
observer must have prior experience performing the duties of a PSO 
during construction activity pursuant to a NMFS-issued incidental take 
authorization. PSOs must be approved by NMFS prior to beginning any 
activity subject to this IHA; and
    <bullet> PSOs must record all observations of marine mammals 
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:
    <bullet> Ability to conduct field observations and collect data 
according to assigned protocols;
    <bullet> Experience or training in the field identification of 
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
    <bullet> Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations;
    <bullet> 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
    <bullet> 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.
    USCG must employ three PSOs during all pile driving and DTH 
activities. A minimum of one PSO (the lead 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. Two additional 
PSOs are also 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 Level B 
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 DTH and pile driving activities. For the largest 
zones, these are expected to be on the South Tongass Highway near 
Mountain Point and north Tongass Highway just northwest of the 
intersection with Carlanna Creek. 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 are within the harassment 
zone are detected by PSOs.

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 from 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:
    <bullet> Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal 
monitoring;
    <bullet> 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);
    <bullet> PSO locations during marine mammal monitoring;
    <bullet> 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;
    <bullet> Upon observation of a marine mammal, the following 
information: Name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) and PSO location and 
activity at the time of sighting; Time of sighting; Identification of 
the animal(s) (e.g., genus/species, lowest possible taxonomic level, or 
unidentifiable), 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 
sightings (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, 
sex class, 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);
    <bullet> Number of marine mammals detected within the harassment 
zones and shutdown zones; by species;
    <bullet> Detailed information about any implementation of any 
mitigation triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a description of 
specific actions that ensured, and resulting changes in behavior of the 
animal(s), if any; and
    <bullet> If visibility degrades to where PSO(s) cannot view the 
entire harassment zones, 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.
    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) 
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5c0c0e7215080c721133323528332e35323b0e392c332e282f1c32333d3d723b332a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5202007c1b06027c1f3d3c3b263d203b3c350037223d202621123c3d33337c353d24">[email protected]</span></a>), NMFS and to the Alaska Regional

[[Page 39479]]

Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. If the death or injury was 
clearly caused by the specified activity, USCG 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:
    <bullet> Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first 
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
    <bullet> Species identification (if known) or description of the 
animal(s) involved;
    <bullet> Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if 
the animal is dead);
    <bullet> Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
    <bullet> If available, photographs or video footage of the 
animal(s); and
    <bullet> 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, 1989), the impacts from other 
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this 
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as 
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and 
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or 
ambient noise levels).
    To avoid repetition, our analysis applies to all species listed in 
Table 2 for which take could occur, given that NMFS expects the 
anticipated effects of pile driving/removal and DTH on different marine 
mammal stocks to be similar in nature. Where there are meaningful 
differences between species or stocks, or groups of species, in 
anticipated individual responses to activities, impact of expected take 
on the population due to differences in population status, or impacts 
on habitat, NMFS has identified species-specific factors to inform the 
analysis.
    Pile driving and DTH 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. Potential 
takes could occur if individuals are present in the ensonified zone 
when these activities are underway.
    The Level A harassment zones identified in Table 5 are based upon 
an animal exposed to impact pile driving or DTH up to two piles per 
day. Given the short duration to impact drive or vibe, or use DTH 
drilling, each pile and break between pile installations (to reset 
equipment and move piles into place), 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 give marine 
mammal movement in 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 stock, 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 authorized is 
extremely small when compared to stock abundance.
    Behavioral responses of marine mammals to pile driving, pile 
removals, and DTH at the sites in Tongass Narrows are expected to be 
mild, short term, and temporary. Marine mammals within the Level B 
harassment zones may not show any visual cues they are disturbed by 
activities or they 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 that pile driving, pile removal and DTH 
will occur for only a portion of the project's duration, any harassment 
occurring would be temporary. Additionally, many of the species present 
in region would only be present temporarily based on seasonal patterns 
or during transit between other habitats. These temporary present 
species would be exposed to even smaller periods of noise-generating 
activity, further decreasing the impacts.
    For all species except humpback whales, there are no known 
Biologically Important Areas (BIAs) near the project area that would be 
impacted by USCG's planned activities. For humpback whales, the whole 
Southeast of Alaska is a seasonal BIA from March through November 
(Ferguson et al., 2015), however, Tongass Narrows and the Clarence 
Strait are not important portions of this habitat due to human 
development and presence. The Tongass Narrows is also a small 
passageway and represents a very small portion of the total available 
habitat. In addition, while the southeast Alaska is considered an 
important area for feeding humpback whales between March and May 
(Ellison et al., 2012), it is not currently designated as critical 
habitat for humpback whales (86 FR 21082; April 21, 2021).
    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 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:
    <bullet> No mortality is anticipated or authorized.
    <bullet> Authorized Level A harassment will be very small amounts 
and of low degree;
    <bullet> The only known area of specific biological importance 
covers a broad area of southeast Alaska for humpback

[[Page 39480]]

whales, and the project area is a very small portion of that BIA. No 
other known areas of particular biological importance to any of the 
affected species or stocks are impacted by the activity, including ESA-
designated critical habitat;
    <bullet> For all species, the Tongass Narrows is a very small and 
peripheral part of their range;
    <bullet> USCG will implement mitigation measures including soft-
starts 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 PTS;
    <bullet> Monitoring reports from similar work in the Tongass 
Narrows have documented little to no effect on individuals of the same 
species impacted by the specified activity.
    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 
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 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 has authorized is below one third of the 
estimated stock abundance for all species (in fact, take of individuals 
is less than five 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 
will count them as separate takes if they cannot be individually 
identified.
    The most recent estimate for the Alaska stock of Dall's porpoise 
was 13,110 animals however this number just accounts for a portion of 
the stock's range. Therefore, the 60 takes of this stock authorized is 
believed to be an even smaller portion of the overall stock abundance.
    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. The most recent estimate was 11,146 animal (Muto 
et al., 2021) and it is highly unlikely this number has drastically 
declined. Therefore, the 15 takes of this stock authorized 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 take authorized clearly 
represents small numbers of this stock. Additionally, the range of the 
Alaska stock of minke whales is extensive, stretching from the Canadian 
Pacific coast to the Chukchi Sea, and USCG's project area impacts a 
very small portion of this range. Therefore, the singular take of minke 
whale authorized is small relative to estimated survey abundance, even 
if each take occurred to a new individual.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the activity (including 
the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of 
marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be 
taken relative to the population size of the affected species or 
stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact 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). To date, there are 
no reports of subsistence takes of killer whale, Pacific white-sided 
dolphin, harbor porpoise, or Dall's porpoise within Alaska (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). Statewide data are no longer being consistently collected 
for subsistence harvest of Steller sea lions, however subarea collect 
does occur periodically. In 2012, hunters in Southeast Alaska took an 
estimated nine sea lions for subsistence use (Wolfe et al., 2013). Sea 
lions were taken in two communities (Hoonah and Sitka) by three 
hunters. There are no known haulout locations in the project area. Both 
the harbor seal and Steller sea lion may be temporarily displaced from 
the action are However, neither the local population nor any individual 
pinniped are likely to be adversely impacted by the action beyond 
noise-induced harassment or slight injury. The project is anticipated 
to have no long-term impacts on either species' populations, or their 
habitats. 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 mitigation and monitoring 
measures, NMFS has determined that there will not be an unmitigable 
adverse impact on subsistence uses from USCG's activities.

Endangered Species Act

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any 
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize 
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or 
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated 
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, 
NMFS consults internally whenever we authorize take for endangered or 
threatened species, in this case with the Alaska Regional Office.
    No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected 
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that 
formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this 
action.

[[Page 39481]]

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 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 IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded 
from further NEPA review.

Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to the 
United States Coast Guard for the potential harassment of small numbers 
of ten marine mammal species incidental to the floating dock extension 
construction project at Base Ketchikan, Alaska, that includes the 
previously explained mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements.

    Dated: June 28, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-14137 Filed 6-30-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>