Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78821 

Gateway will not be creating increased 

sound levels in the marine environment 

for prolonged periods of time. 

Of the 14 marine mammal species 

likely to occur in the area, four are listed 

as endangered under the ESA: North 

Atlantic right, humpback, and fin 

whales. All of these species are also 

considered depleted under the MMPA. 

There is currently no designated critical 

habitat or known reproductive areas for 

any of these species in or near the 

proposed project area. However, there 

are several well-known North Atlantic 

right whale feeding grounds in the Cape 

Cod Bay and Great South Channel. No 

mortality or injury is expected to occur, 

and due to the nature, degree, and 

context of the Level B harassment 

anticipated, the activity is not expected 

to impact rates of recruitment or 

survival. There is no critical habitat or 

biologically important areas for marine 

mammals within the proposed project 

area. 

The population estimates for the 

species that may be taken by Level B 

behavioral harassment contained in the 

most recent U.S. Atlantic Stock 

Assessment Reports were provided 

earlier in this document. From the most 

protective estimates of both marine 

mammal densities in the project area 

and the size of the 120-dB ZOI, the 

maximum calculated number of 

individual marine mammals for each 

species that could potentially be 

harassed annually is small relative to 

the overall population sizes. 

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 

mitigation and monitoring measures, 

NMFS finds that the proposed Northeast 

Gateway LNG Port and Algonquin 

Pipeline Lateral operations and 

maintenance and repair activities would 

result in the incidental take of small 

numbers of marine mammals, by Level 

B harassment only, and that the total 

taking from Northeast Gateway and 

Algonquin’s proposed activities will 

have a negligible impact on the affected 

species or stocks. 

Impact on Availability of Affected 

Species or Stock for Taking for 

Subsistence Uses 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of marine mammals implicated by this 

action. Therefore, NMFS has 

determined that the total taking of 

affected species or stocks would not 

have an unmitigable adverse impact on 

the availability of such species or stocks 

for taking for subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

Our November 18, 2013, Federal 

Register notice of proposed IHA 

described the history and status of 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

compliance for the NE Gateway LNG 

facility. As explained in that notice, the 

biological opinions for construction and 

operation of the facility only analyzed 

impacts on ESA-listed species from 

activities under the initial construction 

period and during operations, and did 

not take into consideration potential 

impacts to marine mammals that could 

result from the subsequent LNG Port 

and Pipeline Lateral maintenance and 

repair activities. In addition, NEG also 

revealed that significantly more water 

usage and vessel operating air emissions 

are needed from what was originally 

evaluated for the LNG Port operation. 

NMFS PR1 initiated consultation with 

NMFS Greater Atlantic Region Fisheries 

Office under section 7 of the ESA on the 

proposed issuance of an IHA to NEG 

under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

for the proposed activities that include 

increased NEG Port and Algonquin 

Pipeline Lateral maintenance and repair 

and water usage for the LNG Port 

operations this activity. A Biological 

Opinion was issued on November 21, 

2014, and concluded that the proposed 

action may adversely affect but is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of ESA-listed right, 

humpback, fin, and sei whales. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

MARAD and the USCG released a 

Final EIS/Environmental Impact Report 

(EIR) for the proposed Northeast 

Gateway Port and Pipeline Lateral. A 

notice of availability was published by 

MARAD on October 26, 2006 (71 FR 

62657). The Final EIS/EIR provides 

detailed information on the proposed 

project facilities, construction methods 

and analysis of potential impacts on 

marine mammals. 

NMFS was a cooperating agency (as 

defined by the Council on 

Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1501.6)) 

in the preparation of the Draft and Final 

EISs. NMFS reviewed the Final EIS and 

adopted it on May 4, 2007. NMFS 

issued a separate Record of Decision for 

issuance of authorizations pursuant to 

section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA for the 

construction and operation of the 

Northeast Gateway’s LNG Port Facility 

in Massachusetts Bay. A 2010 

environmental assessment/

environmental impact assessment 

conducted by TetraTech analyzed the 

increased water usage and other 

operational changes. We reviewed that 

document to determine whether there is 

a need for supplemental NEPA analysis 

based on any substantial changes 

between the current proposed action 

and the proposed action analyzed for 

the FEIS/EIR or any significant new 

circumstances or information relevant to 

environmental concerns and bearing on 

the proposed action or its impacts. 

Based on our review of that analysis, we 

have determined that supplementation 

was not required. 

Authorization 

NMFS has issued an IHA to Northeast 

Gateway for conducting LNG Port 

facility and Pipeline Lateral operations 

and maintenance and repair activities in 

Massachusetts Bay, provided the 

previously mentioned mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting requirements 

are incorporated. 

Dated: December 23, 2014. 

Donna S. Wieting, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30539 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XD644 

Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental 

to Specified Activities; Vashon Seismic 

Retrofit Project 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental 

harassment authorization; request for 

comments and information. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request 

from the Washington State Department 

of Transportation (WSDOT) Ferries 

Division (WSF) for an authorization to 

take small numbers of nine species of 

marine mammals, by Level B 

harassment, incidental to proposed 

construction activities for Vashon 

Seismic Retrofit Project in Vashon 

Island, Washington State. Pursuant to 

the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments 

on its proposal to issue an authorization 

to WDOT to incidentally take, by 

harassment, small numbers of marine 

mammals for a period of 1 year. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than January 30, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the 

application should be addressed to Jolie 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78822 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

Harrison, Chief, Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The 

mailbox address for providing email 

comments is itp.guan@noaa.gov. NMFS 

is not responsible for email comments 

sent to addresses other than the one 

provided here. Comments sent via 

email, including all attachments, must 

not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http://

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/

incidental.htm without change. All 

Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

A copy of the application may be 

obtained by writing to the address 

specified above or visiting the internet 

at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/

permits/incidental.htm. Documents 

cited in this notice may also be viewed, 

by appointment, during regular business 

hours, at the aforementioned address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shane Guan, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

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

the Secretary of Commerce 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 

authorization is provided to the public 

for review. 

An authorization for incidental 

takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 

that the taking will have a negligible 

impact on the species or stock(s), will 

not have an unmitigable adverse impact 

on the availability of the species or 

stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 

relevant), and if the permissible 

methods of taking and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings are set 

forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible 

impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 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.’’ 

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

established an expedited process by 

which citizens of the U.S. can apply for 

a one-year authorization to incidentally 

take small numbers of marine mammals 

by harassment, provided that there is no 

potential for serious injury or mortality 

to result from the activity. Section 

101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time 

limit for NMFS review of an application 

followed by a 30-day public notice and 

comment period on any proposed 

authorizations for the incidental 

harassment of marine mammals. Within 

45 days of the close of the comment 

period, NMFS must either issue or deny 

the authorization. 

Summary of Request 

On June 20, 2014, WSDOT submitted 

a request to NOAA requesting an IHA 

for the possible harassment of small 

numbers of nine marine mammal 

species incidental to construction 

associated with the Vashon Seismic 

Retrofit Project at the Vashon Ferry 

Terminal in Vashon Island, Washington 

between August 1, 2015, and February 

15, 2016. On December 15, 2014, 

WSDOT added a test pile drive and 

removal program to the Vashon Seismic 

Retrofit Project and submitted a revised 

IHA application. The information 

provided here is based on WSDOT’s 

December 15, 2014, IHA application. 

NMFS is proposing to authorize the 

Level B harassment of the following 

marine mammal species/stocks: harbor 

seal, California sea lion, Steller sea lion, 

killer whale (transient and Southern 

Resident stocks), gray whale, humpback 

whale, minke whale, harbor porpoise, 

and Dall’s porpoise. 

Description of the Specified Activity 

Overview 

WSDOT proposes to conduct Vashon 

Seismic Retrofit Project at the WSF 

Terminal in Vashon Island, Washington, 

to ensure the safe and reliable function 

of the Vashon Terminal in case of a 

significant earthquake. 

Approximately 210-linear feet of the 

existing trestle in the nearshore will be 

replaced. Existing decking, 67 13-inch 

diameter creosote-treated timber piles 

and 39 30-inch diameter concretejacketed creosote-treated timber piles 

will be removed with a vibratory 

hammer. Fifty-three 24-inch diameter 

permanent hollow steel piles will be 

installed with a vibratory hammer for 

approximately the first 40 feet, and 

driven with an impact hammer for 

(approximately) the final 10 feet. 

Approximately 44 13-inch diameter 

temporary untreated timber piles will be 

installed with an impact hammer to 

support the weight of a crane that will 

sit on the trestle to drive the permanent 

steel piles. 

Seismic bracing will be installed at up 

to 11 locations and will consist of a 

maximum of 66 24-inch diameter 

hollow steel piles installed with an 

impact hammer. Seismic bracing piles 

will be connected with concrete caps 

that tie each cluster of piles together. 

Approximately 52 temporary 24-inch 

diameter hollow steel piles will be 

required to support temporary falsework and work trestles necessary to 

install the seismic braces concrete caps. 

Each work trestle will consist of 

approximately 6 piles. These piles will 

be driven with a vibratory hammer and 

then proofed with an impact hammer to 

ensure they will bear the weight of the 

false-work and concrete caps. 

In addition, one double walled, one 

Mandrel and one control pile (three 

total) will be driven to the east of the 

Vashon trestle during the Seismic 

Retrofit project in 2015 or 2016 as part 

of the test pile program. The goal is to 

test the drivability of these piles in 

harder soils, and to test the rate of noise 

attenuation. 

Dates and Duration 

WSDOT plans to conduct all in-water 

construction work activities during the 

period from August 1, 2015, to February 

15, 2016. 

The number of days it will take to 

complete the partial trestle replacement 

and install the seismic bracings depends 

on the difficulty in penetrating the 

substrate during pile installation. It is 

assumed that only one vibratory or 

impact hammer will be in operation at 

a time. Durations are conservative, and 

the actual amount of time to install and 

remove piles will likely be less. 

Duration estimates of each of the pile 

driving/removal elements follow: 

• For the partial trestle replacement: 

Æ Impact driving of temporary timber 

piles will take approximately 30 

minutes per pile, with 3 piles installed 

per day over 17 days. 

Æ Vibratory driving of each 

permanent 24-inch steel pile will take 

approximately 60 minutes, followed by 

approximately 30 minutes of impact 

driving (approximately 600 strikes per 

pile), with 2–5 piles installed per day 

over 27 days. 

o Vibratory removal of temporary 

timber piles, and existing timber and 

concrete-jacketed timber piles will take 

approximately 30 minutes per pile, with 

5–10 piles removed per day over 30 

days. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78823 

• For the seismic braces: 

Æ Vibratory driving of each temporary 

24-inch steel pile will take 

approximately 20 minutes, followed by 

approximately 10 minutes of impact 

proofing (approximately 60 strikes per 

pile), with 2–4 piles installed per day 

over 28 days. 

Æ Impact driving of permanent 24- 

inch steel piles will take approximately 

two hours per pile, requiring 

approximately 3,000 strikes per pile, 

with approximately 2–4 piles installed 

per day over 28 days. 

Æ Vibratory removal of temporary 24- 

inch steel piles will take approximately 

30 minutes pile, with up to 3–10 piles 

removed per day over 20 days. 

• For the test pile: 

Æ Impact driving of each 30-inch steel 

pile will take approximately 40 minutes, 

(approximately 3,000 strikes per pile), 

with 3 piles installed over 1–2 days. 

Æ Vibratory removal of each pile will 

take approximately 40 minutes per pile, 

over 1–2 days. 

The maximum anticipated number of 

days for pile driving is 100. The 

maximum anticipated number of days 

for pile removal is 50. The worst-case 

time for pile installation and removal is 

311 hours over 150 days. 

Specified Geographic Region 

The proposed activities will occur at 

the Vashon Ferry Terminal located in 

Vashon, Washington (Figure 1–2 of the 

IHA application). The Vashon Ferry 

Terminal, serving State Route 160, is 

located at the north end of Vashon 

Island, in King County, Washington. 

The terminal is part of what is known 

as the Triangle Route between West 

Seattle (Fauntleroy terminal), Vashon 

Island and the Kitsap Peninsula 

(Southworth terminal). The Vashon 

terminal is located in Section 6, 

Township 23 North, Range 3 East, and 

is adjacent to Colvos Passage to the west 

and south, and the East Passage to the 

east, both tributary to Puget Sound 

(Figure 1–2 of the IHA application). 

Land use in the area is a mix of 

residential, business, small scale 

agriculture, Blake Island State Park, and 

local parks. 

Detailed Description of Vashon Seismic 

Retrofit Project 

The following construction sequence 

is anticipated: 

• For the nearshore partial trestle 

replacement, work will proceed in 

stages as the crane advances away from 

the shore: 

Æ impact drive temporary timber 

piles, 

Æ vibratory/impact drive permanent 

24-inch diameter hollow steel piles, 

Æ advance to next section, 

• Temporary timber piles, and 

existing timber and concrete-jacketed 

timber piles will either be removed with 

a vibratory hammer as the crane 

advances away from shore, or will be 

removed after all permanent steel piles 

are installed, as the crane retreats 

towards the shore. 

• When the partial trestle 

replacement is complete: 

Æ 67 13-inch diameter existing timber 

piles and 39 30-inch diameter existing 

concrete-jacketed timber piles will have 

been removed with a vibratory hammer. 

Æ 44 temporary 13-inch diameter 

timber piles will have been installed 

with an impact hammer, and removed 

with a vibratory hammer. 

Æ 53 permanent 24-inch hollow steel 

piles will have been installed with a 

vibratory and impact hammer. 

• The seismic braces will be installed 

sequentially: 

Æ Vibratory drive/impact proof 

temporary 24-inch diameter hollow 

steel piles, 

Æ impact drive permanent 24-inch 

diameter hollow steel piles, 

Æ construct temporary false-work and 

concrete cap, 

Æ remove false-work, 

Æ remove temporary 24-inch diameter 

hollow steel piles with a vibratory 

hammer, 

Æ advance to next brace location. 

• When the seismic braces are 

complete: 

Æ 52 temporary 24-inch diameter 

hollow steel piles will have been 

installed using a vibratory hammer/

proofed with an impact hammer and 

removed with a vibratory hammer. 

Æ 66 permanent 24-inch diameter 

hollow steel piles will have been 

installed with an impact hammer. 

Detailed descriptions of these 

activities are provided below. 

1. Vibratory Hammer Pile Driving and 

Removal 

Vibratory hammers are commonly 

used in steel pile driving where 

sediments allow and involve the same 

vibratory hammer used in pile removal. 

The pile is placed into position using a 

choker and crane and then vibrated 

between 1,200 and 2,400 vibrations per 

minute. The vibrations liquefy the 

sediment surrounding the pile allowing 

it to penetrate to the required seating 

depth, or to be removed. The type of 

vibratory hammer that will be used for 

the project will likely be an APE 400 

King Kong (or equivalent) with a drive 

force of 361 tons. 

2. Impact Hammer Pile Installation 

Impact hammers are used to install 

plastic/steel core, wood, concrete, or 

steel piles. An impact hammer is a steel 

device that works like a piston. Impact 

hammers are usually large, though small 

impact hammers are used to install 

small diameter plastic/steel core piles. 

Impact hammers have guides (called a 

lead) that hold the hammer in alignment 

with the pile while a heavy piston 

moves up and down, striking the top of 

the pile, and drives it into the substrate 

from the downward force of the hammer 

on the top of the pile. 

To drive the pile, the pile is first 

moved into position and set in the 

proper location using a choker cable or 

vibratory hammer. Once the pile is set 

in place, pile installation with an 

impact hammer can take less than 15 

minutes under good conditions to over 

an hour under poor conditions (such as 

glacial till and bedrock, or exceptionally 

loose material in which the pile 

repeatedly moves out of position). 

Detailed Description of Test Pile 

Program 

One double walled, one Mandrel and 

one control pile (three total) will be 

driven to the east of the Vashon trestle 

during the Seismic Retrofit project in 

2015 or 2016. The location shown on 

the sheet is approximate, as 

construction staging may require that it 

be moved. All test piles are 30’’ hollow 

steel. The control pile will use a bubble 

curtain for attenuation. No unattenuated 

strikes will be allowed. The test will 

take place in water –10 to –25 ft (¥3 to 

¥8 m) mean lower low water (MLLW). 

Piles will be driven approximately 40 ft 

(13 m) into the sediment. The test 

should be complete in one day, though 

two days are proposed in case of 

complications. 

Piles will be impact driven and 

removed with a vibratory hammer. It is 

possible that some or all of the piles will 

not be able to be removed. In that case, 

the pile(s) will be cut below the 

mudline, and filled with sand to the 

natural grade. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of the Specified Activity 

The marine mammal species under 

NMFS jurisdiction most likely to occur 

in the proposed construction area 

include Pacific harbor seal (Phoca 

vitulina richardsi), California sea lion 

(Zalophus californianus), Steller sea 

lion (Eumetopias jubatus), killer whale 

(Orcinus orca) (transient and Southern 

Resident stocks), gray whale 

(Eschrichtius robustus), humpback 

whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), minke 

whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), 

harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), 

and Dall’s porpoise (P. dali). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78824 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

General information on the marine 

mammal species found in California 

waters can be found in Caretta et al. 

(2014), which is available at the 

following URL: http://

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/

po2013.pdf. Refer to that document for 

information on these species. Specific 

information concerning these species in 

the vicinity of the proposed action area 

is provided below. 

Harbor Seal 

Harbor seals are members of the true 

seal family (Phocidae). There are three 

distinct west coast stocks: (1) Inland 

waters of Washington State (including 

Hood Canal, Puget Sound, Georgia Basin 

and the Strait of Juan de Fuca out to 

Cape Flattery), (2) outer coast of Oregon 

and Washington, and (3) California 

(Carretta et al. 2007). 

Pupping seasons vary by geographic 

region. For the southern Puget Sound 

region, pups are born from late June 

through September (WDFW 2012a). 

After October 1 all pups in the inland 

waters of Washington are weaned. 

Harbor seals are the most numerous 

pinniped in the inland marine waters of 

Washington (Calambokidis and Baird 

1994). Jeffries et al. (2003) recorded a 

mean count of 9,550 harbor seals in 

Washington’s inland marine waters and 

estimated the total population to be 

approximately 14,612 animals 

(including the Strait of Juan de Fuca). 

The population across Washington 

increased at an average annual rate of 10 

percent between 1991 and 1996 (Jeffries 

et al. 1997) and is thought to be stable 

(Jeffries et al. 2003). 

The nearest documented harbor seal 

haulout site to the Vashon ferry terminal 

is 9.7 km northwest. The number of 

harbor seals using the haulout is less 

than 100 (WDFW 2000). 

Harbor seals have been observed 

hauled-out on a boat ramp to the east of 

the Vashon Ferry Terminal trestle and 

on a beach to the west of the trestle 

(Stateler 2013, WSF 2009). 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures (structure used to 

reduce wave action) at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, four harbor seals were observed 

near the terminal, three swimming and 

one hauled-out on the beach to the west 

of the trestle (WSF 2009). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there were 38 

confirmed harbor seal strandings in the 

Vashon area in 2010–2013 in the 

September-February work window 

scheduled for this project (NMFS 2014). 

Harbor seals are not ‘‘depleted’’ under 

the MMPA or listed as ‘‘threatened’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ under the ESA. The 

Washington Inland Waters stock of 

harbor seals is not classified as a 

‘‘strategic’’ stock. The stock is also 

considered within its Optimum 

Sustainable Population level (Jeffries et 

al. 2003). 

Harbor seals are the most numerous 

marine mammal species in Puget 

Sound. Harbor seals are non-migratory; 

their local movements are associated 

with such factors as tides, weather, 

season, food availability and 

reproduction (Scheffer and Slipp 1948; 

Fisher 1952; Bigg 1969, 1981). They are 

not known to make extensive pelagic 

migrations, although some long-distance 

movements of tagged animals in Alaska 

(174 km) and along the U.S. west coast 

(up to 550 km) have been recorded 

(Pitcher and McAllister 1981; Brown 

and Mate 1983; Herder 1983). 

Harbor seals haul out on rocks, reefs 

and beaches, and feed in marine, 

estuarine and occasionally fresh waters. 

Harbor seals display strong fidelity for 

haulout sites (Pitcher and Calkins 1979; 

Pitcher and McAllister 1981). 

The nearest documented harbor seal 

haulout site to the Vashon ferry terminal 

is 9.7 km northwest. The level of use of 

this haulout during the fall and winter 

is unknown but is expected to be much 

less as air temperatures become colder 

than water temperatures resulting in 

seals in general hauling out less. Harbor 

seals may also use other undocumented 

haulout sites in the area. 

Transient killer whales often forage to 

the east of Allen Bank for harbor seals 

(Sears 2013), which is within the project 

zone of influence (ZOI). NW Blake 

Island, just north of Vashon Island is a 

‘hot-spot’ for seals that are prey for 

Transients (Stateler 2013). 

California Sea Lion 

The U.S. stock of California sea lion 

was estimated at 296,750 in the 2011 

SAR (NMFS 2011) and may be at 

carrying capacity, although more data 

are needed to verify that determination 

(Carretta et al. 2007). Some 3,000 to 

5,000 animals are estimated to move 

into northwest waters (both Washington 

and British Columbia) during the fall 

(September) and remain until the late 

spring (May) when most return to 

breeding rookeries in California and 

Mexico (Jeffries et al. 2000). Peak counts 

of over 1,000 animals have been made 

in Puget Sound (Jeffries et al. 2000). 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, four California sea lions 

swimming near the terminal (WSF 

2009). 

From November of 2012 to February 

of 2014, the U.S. Navy collected 

sightings data of California sea lions 

hauled-out on the Rich Passage float and 

buoy. In the September to February 

timeframe scheduled for this project, the 

Navy reported a total of 646 California 

sea lions over 14 days of observation, 

with a high of 110 on January 14, 2014 

(U.S. Navy 2014). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there were four 

confirmed California sea lion strandings 

in the Vashon area in 2010–2013, in the 

September-February work window 

scheduled for this project. 

California sea lions are not listed as 

endangered or threatened under the 

ESA or as depleted under the MMPA. 

They are not considered a strategic stock 

under the MMPA, because total humancaused mortality, although unknown, is 

likely to be well less than the PBR 

(9,200) (NMFS 2011). 

California sea lions breed on islands 

off Baja Mexico and southern California 

with primarily males migrating north to 

feed in the northern waters (Everitt et al. 

1980). Females remain in the waters 

near their breeding rookeries off 

California and Mexico. All age classes of 

males are seasonally present in 

Washington waters (WDFW 2000). 

California sea lions were unknown in 

Puget Sound until approximately 1979 

(Steiger and Calambokidis 1986). Everitt 

et al. (1980) reported the initial 

occurrence of large numbers at Port 

Gardner, Everett (northern Puget Sound) 

in the spring of 1979. The number of 

California sea lions using the Everett 

haulout numbered around 1,000. This 

haulout remains the largest in the state 

for sea lions in general and for 

California sea lions specifically. Similar 

sightings and increases in numbers were 

documented throughout the region after 

the initial sighting in 1979 (Steiger and 

Calambokidis 1986), including 

urbanized areas such as Elliott Bay near 

Seattle and heavily used areas of central 

Puget Sound (Gearin et al. 1986). In 

Washington, California sea lions use 

haulout sites within all inland water 

regions (WDFW 2000). The movement 

of California sea lions into Puget Sound 

could be an expansion in range of a 

growing population (Steiger and 

Calambokidis 1986). 

California sea lions do not avoid areas 

with heavy or frequent human activity 

but rather may approach certain areas to 

investigate. This species typically does 

not flush from a buoy or haulout if 

approached. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78825 

The nearest documented California 

sea lion haulout site to the Vashon ferry 

terminal is 7.8 km NW (WDFW 2000). 

Steller Sea Lion 

Steller sea lions comprise two 

recognized management stocks (eastern 

and western), separated at 144ß W 

longitude (Loughlin 1997). Only the 

eastern stock is considered here because 

the western stock occurs outside of the 

geographic area of the proposed activity. 

Breeding rookeries for the eastern stock 

are located along the California, Oregon, 

British Columbia, and southeast Alaska 

coasts but not along the Washington 

coast or in inland Washington waters 

(Angliss and Outlaw 2007). Steller sea 

lions primarily use haulout sites on the 

outer coast of Washington and in the 

Strait of Juan de Fuca along Vancouver 

Island in British Columbia. Only subadults or non-breeding adults may be 

found in the inland waters of 

Washington (Pitcher et al. 2007). 

The eastern stock was estimated at 

52,847 individuals in the 2012 SAR, and 

the most recent estimate for Washington 

state (including the outer coast) is 516 

individuals (non-pups only) (NMFS 

2012a). However, there are estimates 

that 1,000 to 2,000 individuals enter the 

Strait of Juan de Fuca during the fall 

and winter months. 

Steller sea lion numbers in 

Washington State decline during the 

summer months, which correspond to 

the breeding season at Oregon and 

British Columbia rookeries 

(approximately late May to early June) 

and peak during the fall and winter 

months (WDFW 2000). A few Steller sea 

lions can be observed year-round in 

Puget Sound although most of the 

breeding age animals return to rookeries 

in the spring and summer. 

Steller sea lions were listed as 

threatened range-wide under the ESA 

on November 26, 1990 (55 FR 49204). 

After division into two stocks, the 

western stock was listed as endangered 

under the ESA on May 4, 1997 and the 

eastern stock remained classified as 

threatened (62 FR 24345). In 2006 the 

NMFS Steller sea lion recovery team 

proposed removal of the eastern stock 

from listing under the ESA based on its 

annual rate of increase of approximately 

3% since the mid-1970s. The eastern 

stock was delisted in November 2013. 

On August 27, 1993, NMFS published 

a final rule designating critical habitat 

for the Steller sea lion. No critical 

habitat was designated in Washington. 

Critical habitat is associated with 

breeding and haulout areas in Alaska, 

California, and Oregon (NMFS 1993). 

Steller sea lions are listed as depleted 

under the MMPA. Both stocks are 

classified as strategic. 

Adult Steller sea lions congregate at 

rookeries in Oregon, California, and 

British Columbia for pupping and 

breeding from late May to early June 

(Gisiner 1985). Rookeries are usually 

located on beaches of relatively remote 

islands, often in areas exposed to wind 

and waves, where access by humans 

and other mammalian predators is 

difficult (WDFW 1993). 

For Washington inland waters, Steller 

sea lion abundances vary seasonally 

with a minimum estimate of 1,000 to 

2,000 individuals present or passing 

through the Strait of Juan de Fuca in fall 

and winter months. The number of 

haulout sites has increased in recent 

years. 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, no Steller sea lions were 

observed (WSF 2009). 

From November of 2012 to February 

of 2014, the U.S. Navy collected 

sightings data of Steller sea lions 

hauled-out on the Rich Passage float and 

buoy. In the September to February 

timeframe scheduled for this project, the 

Navy reported a total of 48 Steller sea 

lions over 14 days of observation, with 

a high of 9 in January 14, 2014 (U.S. 

Navy 2014). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there were no 

Steller sea lion strandings in the Vashon 

area in 2010–13. 

Killer Whale 

Two sympatric ecotypes of killer 

whales are found within the proposed 

activity area: transient and resident. 

These types vary in diet, distribution, 

acoustic calls, behavior, morphology, 

and coloration (Baird 2000; Ford et al. 

2000). The ranges of transient and 

resident killer whales overlap; however, 

little interaction and high reproductive 

isolation occurs among the two ecotypes 

(Barrett-Lennard 2000; Barrett-Lennard 

and Ellis 2001; Hoelzel et al. 2002. 

Resident killer whales are primarily 

piscivorous, whereas transients 

primarily feed on marine mammals, 

especially harbor seals (Baird and Dill 

1996). Resident killer whales also tend 

to occur in larger (10 to 60 individuals), 

stable family groups known as pods, 

whereas transients occur in smaller (less 

than 10 individuals), less structured 

pods. 

Two stocks of resident killer whales 

occur in Washington State: The 

Southern Resident and Northern 

Resident stocks. Southern Residents 

occur within the activity area, in the 

Strait of Juan de Fuca, Strait of Georgia, 

and in coastal waters off Washington 

and Vancouver Island, British 

Columbia. Northern Residents occur 

primarily in inland and coastal British 

Columbia and Southeast Alaska waters 

and rarely venture into Washington 

State waters. Little interaction (Ford et 

al. 2000) or gene flow (Barrett-Lennard 

2000; Barrett-Lennard and Ellis 2001) is 

known to occur between the two 

resident stocks. 

The Southern Residents live in three 

family groups known as the J, K and L 

pods. The entire Southern Resident 

population has been annually recorded 

since 1973 (Krahn et al. 2004). 

Individual whales are identified through 

photographs of unique saddle patch and 

dorsal fin markings. Each Southern 

Resident pod has a distinctive dialect of 

vocalizations (Ford 1989) and calls can 

travel 10 miles or more underwater. 

Southern Resident killer whale forage 

primarily on salmon, with Chinook 

salmon considered the major prey in the 

Puget Sound region in late spring 

through the fall. Other identified prey 

included chum salmon, other 

salmonids, herring, and rockfish (NMFS 

2008). 

Small population numbers make 

Southern Residents vulnerable to 

inbreeding depression and catastrophic 

events such as disease or a major oil 

spill. Ongoing threats to Southern 

Residents include declining prey 

resources, environmental contaminants, 

noise and physical disturbance (Krahn 

et al. 2004; Wiles 2004). In 

Washington’s inland waters, high levels 

of noise disturbance and potential 

behavior disruption are due to 

recreational boating traffic, private and 

commercial whale watching boats and 

commercial vessel traffic (Wiles 2004). 

Other potential noise disturbance 

includes high output military sonar 

equipment and marine construction. 

Noise effects may include altered prey 

movements and foraging efficiency, 

masking of whale calls, and temporary 

hearing impairment (Krahn et al. 2004). 

The Southern Resident stock was first 

recorded in a 1974 census, at which 

time the population comprised 71 

whales. This population peaked at 97 

animals in 1996, declined to 79 by 2001 

(Center for Whale Research 2011), and 

then increased to 89 animals by 2006 

(Carretta et al. 2007). As of December 

2013, the population collectively 

numbers 80 individuals: J pod has 25 

members, K pod has 19 members, and 

L pod has 36 members (Center for 

Whale Research 2013). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78826 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

The Southern Resident stock has 

declined from 97 individuals is due to 

a decrease in birth rates and an increase 

in mortalities, especially among the L 

pod (Krahn et al. 2004). There are a 

limited number of reproductive-age 

Southern Resident males, and several 

females of reproductive age are not 

having calves. Three major threats were 

identified in the ESA listing: Reduced 

quantity and quality of prey; persistent 

pollutants that could cause immune or 

reproductive system dysfunction; and 

effects from vessels and sound (NMFS 

2008). Other threats identified were 

demographics, small population size, 

and vulnerability to oil spills. 

Previously, declines in the Southern 

Resident population were due to 

shooting by fishermen, whalers, sealers 

and sportsmen largely due to their 

interference with fisheries (Wiles 2004) 

and the aquarium trade, which is 

estimated to have taken a significant 

number of animals from 1967 to 1973 

(Ford et al. 1995). According to the 2012 

SAR, the PBR is 0.14 animals (NMFS 

2012). 

The Southern Resident stock was 

declared depleted under the MMPA in 

May 2003. At that time, NMFS 

announced preparation of a 

conservation plan to restore the stock to 

its optimal sustainable population. On 

November 18, 2005, the Southern 

Resident killer whale stock was listed as 

an endangered distinct population 

segment (DPS) under the ESA. On 

November 29, 2006, NMFS published a 

final rule designating critical habitat for 

the Southern Resident killer whale DPS. 

Both Puget Sound and the San Juan 

Islands are designated as core areas of 

critical habitat under the ESA, 

excluding areas less than 20 feet deep 

relative to extreme high water. 

In Washington State, killer whales 

were listed as a state candidate species 

in 2000. In April 2004, the state 

upgraded their status to a state 

endangered species. 

Southern Residents are documented 

in coastal waters ranging from central 

California to the Queen Charlotte 

Islands, British Columbia (NMFS 2008). 

They occur in all inland marine waters 

within the activity area. While in the 

activity area, resident killer whales 

generally spend more time in deeper 

water and only occasionally enter water 

less than 15 feet deep (Baird 2000). 

Distribution is strongly associated with 

areas of greatest salmon abundance, 

with heaviest foraging activity occurring 

over deep open water and in areas 

characterized by high-relief underwater 

topography, such as subsurface canyons, 

seamounts, ridges, and steep slopes 

(Wiles 2004). 

Records from 1976 through 2006 

document Southern Residents in the 

inland waters of Washington during the 

months of March through June and 

October through December, with the 

primary area of occurrence in inland 

waters north of Admiralty Inlet, located 

in north Puget Sound (The Whale 

Museum 2008). 

Beginning in May or June and through 

the summer months, all three pods (J, K 

and L) of Southern Residents are most 

often located in the protected inshore 

waters of Haro Strait (west of San Juan 

Island), in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, 

and Georgia Strait near the Fraser River. 

Historically, the J pod also occurred 

intermittently during this time in Puget 

Sound; however, records from The 

Whale Museum (2008) from 1997 

through 2007 show that J pod did not 

enter Puget Sound south of the Strait of 

Juan de Fuca from approximately June 

through August. 

In fall, all three Southern Resident 

killer whale pods occur in areas where 

migrating salmon are concentrated such 

as the mouth of the Fraser River. They 

may also enter areas in Puget Sound 

where migrating chum and Chinook 

salmon are concentrated (Osborne 

1999). In the winter months, the K and 

L pods spend progressively less time in 

inland marine waters and depart for 

coastal waters in January or February. 

The J pod is most likely to appear yearround near the San Juan Islands, and in 

the fall/winter, in the lower Puget 

Sound and in Georgia Strait at the 

mouth of the Fraser River. 

Southern Resident killer whales are 

present in the Vashon Island area in 

November–January, coinciding with 

chum salmon runs, with peak sightings 

in November/December. Southern 

Resident killer whales commonly forage 

for salmon on the east side of Vashon 

Island. They tend to pass through the 

Vashon area, traveling at approximately 

4 mph, rather than staying in the area 

(Sears 2013). 

Ann Stateler of the Vashon 

Hydrophone Project (and a Vashon 

Island resident) has been observing 

whales in the area since 1994. Her 

observations since 2005 show that the 

broad window for Southern Resident 

killer whale presence in the Vashon area 

has been from October to March, with 

most encounters occurring between 

November and January. Prey samples 

collected by Mark Sears and NOAA 

researchers in local waters indicate that 

the Southern Resident killer whales are 

targeting Chum and Chinook salmon. 

Southern Resident killer whales use 

all of the waterways surrounding 

Vashon/Maury Island: East Passage, 

Colvos Pass, Dalco Pass, waters off the 

north end between Blake and Vashon 

Islands. Sometimes the Southern 

Resident killer whales circumnavigate 

the island. Southern Resident killer 

whale visits to the Vashon area have 

been highly variable. Typically, 

members of all three pods are observed 

over a year, with the exception of 2006 

when J Pod was not present for the first 

time since observations have been 

recorded. 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, no killer whales were observed 

(WSF 2009). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there were no killer 

whale strandings in the Vashon area in 

2010–13 (NMFS 2014). 

The West Coast Transient stock 

occurs in Washington State. This stock 

ranges from southern California to 

southeast Alaska and is distinguished 

from two other Eastern North Pacific 

transient stocks that occur further north, 

the AT1 and the ‘‘Gulf of Alaska 

transient stocks. This separation was 

based on variations in acoustic calls and 

genetic distinctness (Angliss and 

Outlaw 2007). West Coast transients 

primarily forage on harbor seals (Ford 

and Ellis 1999), but other species such 

as porpoises and sea lions are also taken 

(NMFS 2008). 

The West Coast Transient stock, 

which includes individuals from 

California to southeastern Alaska, was 

estimated to have a minimum number of 

354 in the 2010 SAR (NMFS 2010). 

Trends in abundance for the West 

Coast Transients were unavailable in the 

most recent stock assessment report 

(Angliss and Outlaw 2007). Humancaused mortality and serious injury are 

estimated to be zero animals per year 

and do not exceed the PBR, which is 

estimated at 3.5 animals (NMFS 2010). 

The West Coast Transient stock is not 

designated as depleted under the 

MMPA or listed as ‘‘threatened’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ under the ESA. 

Within the inland waters, Transients 

may frequent areas near seal rookeries 

when pups are weaned (Baird and Dill 

1995). West Coast Transients are 

documented intermittently year-round 

in Washington inland waters. 

Transient sightings have become more 

common since the mid-2000s. Unlike 

the Southern Resident killer whale 

pods, Transients may be present in the 

area for hours as they hunt pinnipeds. 

Transients often forage to the east of 

Allen Bank, which is within the project 

ZOI. NW Blake Island, just north of 

Vashon Island is a ‘hot-spot’ for seals 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78827 

that are prey for Transients. Transients 

may be more present during September/ 

October harbor seal pup weaning. 

Gray Whale 

The North Pacific gray whale stock is 

divided into two distinct geographically 

isolated stocks: Eastern and western 

‘‘Korean.’’ Individuals in this region are 

part of the Eastern North Pacific stock. 

The majority of the Eastern North 

Pacific population spends summers 

feeding in the Bering and Chukchi Seas, 

but some individuals have been 

reported summering in waters off the 

coast of British Columbia, Southeast 

Alaska, Washington, Oregon and 

California (Rice et al. 1984; Angliss and 

Outlaw 2007). Gray whales migrate in 

the fall, south along the coast of North 

America to Baja California, Mexico to 

calve (Rice et al. 1981.) Gray whales are 

recorded in Washington waters during 

feeding migrations between late spring 

and autumn with occasional sightings 

during winter months (Calambokidis et 

al. 1994, 2002). 

Early in the 20th century, it is 

believed that commercial hunting for 

gray whales reduced population 

numbers to below 2,000 individuals 

(Calambokidis and Baird 1994). 

Population surveys since the delisting 

estimate that the population fluctuates 

at or just below the carrying capacity of 

the species (∼26,000 individuals) (Rugh 

et al. 1999; Calambokidis et al. 1994; 

Angliss and Outlaw 2007). 

According to the 2013 SAR, the 

minimum population estimate of the 

Eastern North Pacific stock is 18,017 

(NMFS 2011c). Within Washington 

waters, gray whale sightings reported to 

Cascadia Research and the Whale 

Museum between 1990 and 1993 totaled 

over 1,100 (Calambokidis et al. 1994). 

Abundance estimates calculated for the 

small regional area between Oregon and 

southern Vancouver Island, including 

the San Juan Area and Puget Sound, 

suggest there were 137 to 153 individual 

gray whales from 2001 through 2003 

(Calambokidis et al. 2004). Forty-eight 

individual gray whales were observed in 

Puget Sound and Hood Canal in 2004 

and 2005 (Calambokidis 2007). 

After listing of the species under the 

ESA in 1970, the number of gray whales 

increased dramatically resulting in their 

delisting in 1994. In 2001 NOAA 

Fisheries received a petition to relist the 

stock under the ESA, but it was 

determined that there was not sufficient 

information to warrant the petition 

(Angliss and Outlaw 2007). Since 

delisting under the ESA, the stock has 

not been reclassified under the MMPA. 

The PBR for this stock is 360 animals 

per year (NMFS 2011). 

Gray whales migrate within 5 to 43 

km of the coast of Washington during 

their annual north/south migrations 

(Green et al. 1995). Gray whales migrate 

south to Baja California where they 

calve in November and December, and 

then migrate north to Alaska from 

March through May (Rice et al. 1984; 

Rugh et al. 2001) to summer and feed. 

A few gray whales are observed in 

Washington inland waters between the 

months of September and January, with 

peak numbers of individuals from 

March through May. Peak months of 

gray whale observations in the area of 

activity occur outside the proposed 

work window of September through 

February. The average tenure within 

Washington inland waters is 47 days 

and the longest stay was 112 days. 

Although typically seen during their 

annual migrations on the outer coast, a 

regular group of gray whales annually 

comes into the inland waters at Saratoga 

Passage and Port Susan from March 

through May to feed on ghost shrimp 

(Weitkamp et al. 1992). During this time 

frame they are also seen in the Strait of 

Juan de Fuca, the San Juan Islands, and 

areas of Puget Sound, although the 

observations in Puget Sound are highly 

variable between years (Calambokidis et 

al. 1994). 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, no gray whales were observed 

(WSF 2009). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there were no gray 

whale strandings in the Vashon area in 

2010–13 (NMFS 2014). 

Humpback Whale 

Humpback whales are wide-ranging 

baleen whales that can be found 

virtually worldwide. Recent studies 

have indicated that there are three 

distinct stocks of humpback whale in 

the North Pacific: California-OregonWashington (formerly Eastern North 

Pacific), Central North Pacific and 

Western North Pacific (NMFS 2011). 

The California-Oregon-Washington 

(CA–OR–WA) stock may be found near 

the project site. This stock calves and 

mates in coastal Central America and 

Mexico and migrates up the coast from 

California to southern British Columbia 

in the summer and fall to feed (NMFS 

1991; Marine Mammal Commission 

2003; Carretta et al. 2007). Although 

infrequent, interchange between the 

other two stocks and the CA–OR–WA 

stock occurs in breeding areas (Carretta 

et al. 2007). Few CA–OR–WA stock 

humpback whales are seen in Puget 

Sound, but more frequent sightings 

occur in the Strait of Juan de Fuca and 

near the San Juan Islands. Most 

sightings are in spring and summer. 

Humpback whales feed on krill, small 

shrimp-like crustaceans and various 

kinds of small fish. 

According to the 2013 SAR, the 2007/ 

2008 estimate of 2,043 humpback 

whales is the best estimate for 

abundance for this stock, though it does 

exclude some whales in Washington 

(Calambokidis et al. 2009). 

As a result of commercial whaling, 

humpback whales were listed as 

‘‘endangered’’ under the Endangered 

Species Conservation Act of 1969. This 

protection was transferred to the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1973. 

The species is still listed as 

‘‘endangered’’, and consequently the 

stock is automatically considered as a 

‘‘depleted’’ and ‘‘strategic’’ stock under 

the MMPA. 

Historically, humpback whales were 

common in inland waters of Puget 

Sound and the San Juan Islands 

(Calambokidis et al. 2002). In the early 

part of this century, there was a 

productive commercial hunt for 

humpbacks in Georgia Strait that was 

probably responsible for their long 

disappearance from local waters 

(Osborne et al. 1988). Since the mid1990s, sightings in Puget Sound have 

increased. Between 1996 and 2001, 

Calambokidis et al. (2002) recorded six 

individuals south of Admiralty Inlet 

(northern Puget Sound). 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, no humpback whales were 

observed (WSF 2009). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there were no 

humpback whale strandings in the 

Vashon area in 2010–13 (NMFS 2014). 

Minke Whales 

The northern minke whale is part of 

the Northern Pacific stock, which is 

broken into three management stocks: 

The Alaskan, California/Oregon/

Washington, and the Hawaiian stock 

(NMFS 2008). The California/Oregon/

Washington management stock is 

considered a resident stock, which is 

unlike the other Northern Pacific stocks 

(NMFS 2008). This stock includes 

minke whales within the inland 

Washington waters of Puget Sound and 

the San Juan Islands (Dorsey et al. 1990; 

Carretta et al. 2007), which may be 

present in the project area. 

Minke whales have small, dark sleek 

bodies and a small dorsal fin. These 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78828 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

whales are often recognized by surfacing 

snout first and a shallow but visible 

‘‘bushy’’ blow. Minke whales feed by 

side lunging into schools of prey and 

gulping in large amounts of water. Food 

sources typically consist of krill, 

copepods, and small schooling fish, 

such as anchovies, herring, mackerel, 

and sand lance (NMFS 2008). 

According to the 2013 SAR, the 

minimum population estimate of the 

CA/OR/WA stock is 202 and is likely no 

more than 600 (NE Pacific Minke Project 

2014). Information on minke whale 

population and abundance is limited 

due to difficulty in detection. 

Conducting surveys for the minke whale 

is difficult because of their low profiles, 

indistinct blows, and tendency to occur 

as single individuals (Green et al. 1992). 

Over a 10-year period, 30 individuals 

were photographically identified in the 

U.S./Canada trans-boundary area 

around the San Juan Islands and 

demonstrated high site fidelity (Dorsey 

et al. 1990; Calambokidis and Baird 

1994). In a single year, up to 19 

individuals were photographically 

identified from around the San Juan 

Islands (Dorsey et al. 1990). 

Minke whales are not listed under the 

ESA and are classified as non-depleted 

under the MMPA. The annual mortality 

due to fisheries and ship strikes is less 

than the potential biological removal, so 

they are not considered a strategic 

management stock under the MMPA 

(Carretta et al. 2007). The PBR for this 

stock is two animals per year (NMFS 

2011). 

Minke whales are reported in 

Washington inland waters year-round, 

although few are reported in the winter 

(Calambokidis and Baird 1994). Minke 

whales are relatively common in the 

San Juan Islands and Strait of Juan de 

Fuca (especially around several of the 

banks in both the central and eastern 

Strait), but are relatively rare in Puget 

Sound. 

In the 1980s minke whales were 

found in three main areas around the 

San Juan Islands; west of Shaw Island 

(Minke Lake), the San Juan Channel and 

the Strait of San Juan de Fuca (Salmon 

Bank). However, by the 1990s the first 

two areas were abandoned, and minke 

whales were only found in the Strait of 

Juan de Fuca, despite continued search 

efforts in the other areas. This coincided 

with a general decline of herring in the 

area, possibly associated with 

disturbance of adjacent herring 

spawning grounds. A qualitative change 

in the number of sea birds was also 

noted at this time. In more recent years 

(2005–2011), minke whales were found 

foraging in all three areas again, and 

bird numbers were also higher. But 

minke whales are still predominantly 

found on the banks in the Strait of Juan 

de Fuca (NE Pacific Minke Whale 

Project 2014). 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, no Minke whales were 

observed (WSF 2009). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there were no 

Minke whale strandings in the Vashon 

area in 2010–13 (NMFS 2014). 

Harbor Porpoises 

The Washington Inland Waters Stock 

of harbor porpoise may be found near 

the project site. The Washington Inland 

Waters Stock occurs in waters east of 

Cape Flattery (Strait of Juan de Fuca, 

San Juan Island Region, and Puget 

Sound). 

According to the 2013 SAR, the 

Washington Inland Waters Stock mean 

abundance estimate based on 2002 and 

2003 aerial surveys conducted in the 

Strait of Juan de Fuca, San Juan Islands, 

Gulf Islands, and Strait of Georgia is 

10,682 harbor porpoises (NMFS 2011). 

No harbor porpoises were observed 

within Puget Sound proper during 

comprehensive harbor porpoise surveys 

(Osmek et al. 1994) or Puget Sound 

Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP) 

surveys conducted in the 1990s (WDFW 

2008). Declines were attributed to gillnet fishing, increased vessel activity, 

contaminants, and competition with 

Dall’s porpoise. 

However, populations appear to be 

rebounding with increased sightings in 

central Puget Sound (Carretta et al. 

2007) and southern Puget Sound 

(WDFW 2008). Recent systematic boat 

surveys of the main basin indicate that 

at least several hundred and possibly as 

many as low thousands of harbor 

porpoise are now present. While the 

reasons for this recolonization are 

unclear, it is possible that changing 

conditions outside of Puget Sound, as 

evidenced by a tripling of the 

population in the adjacent waters of the 

Strait of Juan de Fuca and San Juan 

Islands since the early 1990s, and the 

recent higher number of harbor porpoise 

mortalities in coastal waters of Oregon 

and Washington, may have played a role 

in encouraging harbor porpoise to 

explore and shift into areas like Puget 

Sound (Hanson et. al. 2011). 

The Washington Inland Waters Stock 

of harbor porpoise is ‘‘non-depleted’’ 

under MMPA and ‘‘unlisted’’ under the 

ESA. Because there is no current 

estimate of minimum abundance, a PBR 

cannot be calculated for this stock 

(NMFS 2011). 

Harbor porpoises are common in the 

Strait of Juan de Fuca and south into 

Admiralty Inlet, especially during the 

winter, and are becoming more common 

south of Admiralty Inlet. Little 

information exists on harbor porpoise 

movements and stock structure near the 

Vashon area, although it is suspected 

that in some areas harbor porpoises 

migrate (based on seasonal shifts in 

distribution). Washington Department of 

Fish and Wildlife’s (WDFW) Puget 

Sound Ambient Monitoring Program 

(PSAMP) data show peaks in 

Washington waters to occur during the 

winter. 

Hall (2004) found that the frequency 

of sighting of harbor porpoises 

decreased with increasing depth beyond 

150 m with the highest numbers 

observed at water depths ranging from 

61 to 100 m. Although harbor porpoises 

have been spotted in deep water, they 

tend to remain in shallower shelf waters 

(<150 m) where they are most often 

observed in small groups of one to eight 

animals (Baird 2003). Water depths 

within the Vashon ZOIs range from 0 to 

246 m, with roughly 2/3 of the area 

within the ZOI falling within the 61– 

100 m depth where the highest number 

of harbor porpoises may be observed. 

According to Vashon Island area 

whale specialist Mark Sears, harbor 

porpoise are seen in groups of 2–3, and 

occasionally in groups of 6–12, and 

numbers in the area peak in May/June 

(Sears 2013). 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, one harbor porpoise was 

observed (WSF 2009). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there was one 

harbor porpoise stranding in the Vashon 

area in 2010–13, in the SeptemberFebruary work window scheduled for 

this project (NMFS 2013). 

Dall’s Porpoises 

The California, Oregon, and 

Washington Stock of Dall’s porpoise 

may be found near the project site. The 

most recent estimate of Dall’s porpoise 

stock abundance is 42,000, based on 

2005 and 2008 summer/autumn vesselbased line transect surveys of California, 

Oregon, and Washington waters (NMFS 

2011). Within the inland waters of 

Washington and British Columbia, this 

species is most abundant in the Strait of 

Juan de Fuca east to the San Juan 

Islands. The most recent Washington’s 

inland waters estimate is 900 animals 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78829 

(Calambokidis et al. 1997). Prior to the 

1940s, Dall’s porpoises were not 

reported in Puget Sound. 

The California, Oregon, and 

Washington Stock of Dall’s porpoise is 

‘‘non-depleted’’ under the MMPA, and 

‘‘unlisted’’ under the ESA. The PBR for 

this stock is 257 Dall’s porpoises per 

year (NMFS 2011). 

Dall’s porpoises are migratory and 

appear to have predictable seasonal 

movements driven by changes in 

oceanographic conditions (Green et al. 

1992, 1993) and are most abundant in 

Puget Sound during the winter 

(Nysewander et al. 2005; WDFW 2008). 

Despite their migrations, Dall’s 

porpoises occur in all areas of inland 

Washington at all times of year, but with 

different distributions throughout Puget 

Sound from winter to summer. The 

Washington State Department of Fish 

and Wildlife’s (WDFW) Puget Sound 

Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP) 

data show peaks in Washington waters 

to occur during the winter. The average 

winter group size is three animals 

(WDFW 2008). 

In 2009 WSDOT replaced several 

dolphin structures at the Vashon 

terminal. Marine mammal monitoring 

was implemented during this project. 

Over 7 days of monitoring in November 

of 2009, no Dall’s porpoise were 

observed (WSF 2009). 

Dall’s porpoise used to be more 

common that harbor porpoise in the 

Vashon area, though harbor porpoise is 

now more common. The usual 

observation in the Vashon area is a 

single Dall’s porpoise, or a pair (Sears 

2013). 

According to the NMFS National 

Stranding Database, there were no Dall’s 

porpoise strandings in the Vashon area 

in 2010–13 (NMFS 2013). 

Potential Effects of the Specified 

Activity on Marine Mammals 

When considering the influence of 

various kinds of sound on the marine 

environment, it is necessary to 

understand that different kinds of 

marine life are sensitive to different 

frequencies of sound. Based on available 

behavioral data, audiograms have been 

derived using auditory evoked 

potentials, anatomical modeling, and 

other data, Southall et al. (2007) 

designate ‘‘functional hearing groups’’ 

for marine mammals and estimate the 

lower and upper frequencies of 

functional hearing of the groups. The 

functional groups and the associated 

frequencies are indicated below (though 

animals are less sensitive to sounds at 

the outer edge of their functional range 

and most sensitive to sounds of 

frequencies within a smaller range 

somewhere in the middle of their 

functional hearing range): 

• Low frequency cetaceans (13 

species of mysticetes): functional 

hearing is estimated to occur between 

approximately 7 Hz and 22 kHz 

(however, a study by Au et al., (2006) 

of humpback whale songs indicate that 

the range may extend to at least 24 kHz); 

• Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 

species of dolphins, six species of larger 

toothed whales, and 19 species of 

beaked and bottlenose whales): 

functional hearing is estimated to occur 

between approximately 150 Hz and 160 

kHz; 

• High frequency cetaceans (eight 

species of true porpoises, six species of 

river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, 

and four species of cephalorhynchids): 

functional hearing is estimated to occur 

between approximately 200 Hz and 180 

kHz; and 

• Pinnipeds in Water: functional 

hearing is estimated to occur between 

approximately 75 Hz and 75 kHz, with 

the greatest sensitivity between 

approximately 700 Hz and 20 kHz. 

As mentioned previously in this 

document, marine mammal species/

stocks are likely to occur in the 

proposed seismic survey area. WSDOT 

and NMFS determined that in-water 

pile removal and pile driving during the 

Vashon Seismic Retrofit Project has the 

potential to result in behavioral 

harassment of the marine mammal 

species and stocks in the vicinity of the 

proposed activity. 

Marine mammals exposed to highintensity sound repeatedly or for 

prolonged periods can experience 

hearing threshold shift (TS), which is 

the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain 

frequency ranges (Kastak et al. 1999; 

Schlundt et al. 2000; Finneran et al. 

2002; 2005). TS can be permanent 

(PTS), in which case the loss of hearing 

sensitivity is unrecoverable, or 

temporary (TTS), in which case the 

animal’s hearing threshold will recover 

over time (Southall et al. 2007). Since 

marine mammals depend on acoustic 

cues for vital biological functions, such 

as orientation, communication, finding 

prey, and avoiding predators, hearing 

impairment could result in the reduced 

ability of marine mammals to detect or 

interpret important sounds. Repeated 

noise exposure that causes TTS could 

lead to PTS. 

Experiments on a bottlenose dolphin 

(Tursiops truncates) and beluga whale 

(Delphinapterus leucas) showed that 

exposure to a single watergun impulse 

at a received level of 207 kPa (or 30 psi) 

peak-to-peak (p-p), which is equivalent 

to 228 dB (p-p) re 1 mPa, resulted in a 

7 and 6 dB TTS in the beluga whale at 

0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively. 

Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of 

the pre-exposure level within 4 minutes 

of the exposure (Finneran et al. 2002). 

No TTS was observed in the bottlenose 

dolphin. Although the source level of 

one hammer strike for pile driving is 

expected to be much lower than the 

single watergun impulse cited here, 

animals being exposed for a prolonged 

period to repeated hammer strikes could 

receive more noise exposure in terms of 

sound exposure level (SEL) than from 

the single watergun impulse (estimated 

at 188 dB re 1 mPa2-s) in the 

aforementioned experiment (Finneran et 

al. 2002). 

Chronic exposure to excessive, though 

not high-intensity, noise could cause 

masking at particular frequencies for 

marine mammals that utilize sound for 

vital biological functions (Clark et al. 

2009). Masking is the obscuring of 

sounds of interest by other sounds, often 

at similar frequencies. Masking 

generally occurs when sounds in the 

environment are louder than, and of a 

similar frequency as, auditory signals an 

animal is trying to receive. Masking can 

interfere with detection of acoustic 

signals, such as communication calls, 

echolocation sounds, and 

environmental sounds important to 

marine mammals. Therefore, under 

certain circumstances, marine mammals 

whose acoustical sensors or 

environment are being severely masked 

could also be impaired. 

Masking occurs at the frequency band 

which the animals utilize. Since noise 

generated from in-water vibratory pile 

removal and driving is mostly 

concentrated at low frequency ranges, it 

may have little effect on high-frequency 

echolocation sounds by odontocetes 

(toothed whales), which may hunt 

California sea lion and harbor seal. 

However, the lower frequency manmade noises are more likely to affect the 

detection of communication calls and 

other potentially important natural 

sounds, such as surf and prey noise. The 

noises may also affect communication 

signals when those signals occur near 

the noise band, and thus reduce the 

communication space of animals (e.g., 

Clark et al. 2009) and cause increased 

stress levels (e.g., Foote et al. 2004; Holt 

et al. 2009). 

Unlike TS, masking can potentially 

impact the species at community, 

population, or even ecosystem levels, as 

well as individual levels. Masking 

affects both senders and receivers of the 

signals and could have long-term 

chronic effects on marine mammal 

species and populations. Recent science 

suggests that low frequency ambient 

sound levels in the world’s oceans have 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78830 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

increased by as much as 20 dB (more 

than 3 times, in terms of SPL) from preindustrial periods, and most of these 

increases are from distant shipping 

(Hildebrand 2009). All anthropogenic 

noise sources, such as those from vessel 

traffic and pile removal and driving, 

contribute to the elevated ambient noise 

levels, thus intensifying masking. 

Nevertheless, the sum of noise from 

WSDOT’s proposed Vashon Seismic 

Retrofit Project construction activities is 

confined to a limited area by 

surrounding landmasses; therefore, the 

noise generated is not expected to 

contribute to increased ocean ambient 

noise. In addition, due to shallow water 

depths in the project area, underwater 

sound propagation of low-frequency 

sound (which is the major noise source 

from pile driving) is expected to be 

poor. 

Finally, in addition to TS and 

masking, exposure of marine mammals 

to certain sounds could lead to 

behavioral disturbance (Richardson et 

al. 1995), such as: changing durations of 

surfacing and dives, number of blows 

per surfacing, or moving direction and/ 

or speed; reduced/increased vocal 

activities; changing/cessation of certain 

behavioral activities, such as socializing 

or feeding; visible startle response or 

aggressive behavior, such as tail/fluke 

slapping or jaw clapping; avoidance of 

areas where noise sources are located; 

and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds 

flushing into water from haulouts or 

rookeries). 

The biological significance of many of 

these behavioral disturbances is difficult 

to predict, especially if the detected 

disturbances appear minor. However, 

the consequences of behavioral 

modification could be expected to be 

biologically significant if the change 

affects growth, survival, or 

reproduction. Some of these types of 

significant behavioral modifications 

include: 

Drastic change in diving/surfacing 

patterns (such as those thought to be 

causing beaked whale strandings due to 

exposure to military mid-frequency 

tactical sonar); habitat abandonment 

due to loss of desirable acoustic 

environment; and cessation of feeding 

or social interaction. 

The onset of behavioral disturbance 

from anthropogenic noise depends on 

both external factors (characteristics of 

noise sources and their paths) and the 

receiving animals (hearing, motivation, 

experience, demography), and is 

therefore difficult to predict (Southall et 

al. 2007). 

The proposed project area is not a 

prime habitat for marine mammals, nor 

is it considered an area frequented by 

marine mammals. Therefore, behavioral 

disturbances that could result from 

anthropogenic noise associated with 

WSDOT’s construction activities are 

expected to affect only a small number 

of marine mammals on an infrequent 

and limited basis. 

Potential Effects on Marine Mammal 

Habitat 

The primary potential impacts to 

marine mammal habitat are associated 

with elevated sound levels produced by 

vibratory pile removal and pile driving 

in the area. However, other potential 

impacts to the surrounding habitat from 

physical disturbance are also possible. 

Potential Impacts on Prey Species 

With regard to fish as a prey source 

for cetaceans and pinnipeds, fish are 

known to hear and react to sounds and 

to use sound to communicate (Tavolga 

et al. 1981) and possibly avoid predators 

(Wilson and Dill 2002). Experiments 

have shown that fish can sense both the 

strength and direction of sound 

(Hawkins 1981). Primary factors 

determining whether a fish can sense a 

sound signal, and potentially react to it, 

are the frequency of the signal and the 

strength of the signal in relation to the 

natural background noise level. 

The level of sound at which a fish 

will react or alter its behavior is usually 

well above the detection level. Fish 

have been found to react to sounds 

when the sound level increased to about 

20 dB above the detection level of 120 

dB (Ona 1988); however, the response 

threshold can depend on the time of 

year and the fish’s physiological 

condition (Engas et al. 1993). In general, 

fish react more strongly to pulses of 

sound rather than non-pulse signals 

(such as noise from vessels) (Blaxter et 

al. 1981), and a quicker alarm response 

is elicited when the sound signal 

intensity rises rapidly compared to 

sound rising more slowly to the same 

level. 

Further, during the coastal 

construction only a small fraction of the 

available habitat would be ensonified at 

any given time. Disturbance to fish 

species would be short-term and fish 

would return to their pre-disturbance 

behavior once the pile driving activity 

ceases. Thus, the proposed construction 

would have little, if any, impact on the 

abilities of marine mammals to feed in 

the area where construction work is 

planned. 

Finally, the time of the proposed 

construction activity would avoid the 

spawning season of the ESA-listed 

salmonid species. 

Water and Sediment Quality 

Short-term turbidity is a water quality 

effect of most in-water work, pile 

removal and driving. WSDOT must 

comply with state water quality 

standards during these operations by 

limiting the extent of turbidity to the 

immediate project area. 

Roni and Weitkamp (1996) monitored 

water quality parameters during a pier 

replacement project in Manchester, 

Washington. The study measured water 

quality before, during and after pile 

removal and driving. The study found 

that construction activity at the site had 

‘‘little or no effect on dissolved oxygen, 

water temperature and salinity,’’ and 

turbidity (measured in nephelometric 

turbidity units [NTU]) at all depths 

nearest the construction activity was 

typically less than 1 NTU higher than 

stations farther from the project area 

throughout construction. 

Similar results were recorded during 

pile removal operations at two WSF 

ferry facilities. At the Friday Harbor 

terminal, localized turbidity levels (from 

three timber pile removal events) were 

generally less than 0.5 NTU higher than 

background levels and never exceeded 1 

NTU. At the Eagle Harbor maintenance 

facility, local turbidity levels (from 

removal of timber and steel piles) did 

not exceed 0.2 NTU above background 

levels. In general, turbidity associated 

with pile installation is localized to 

about a 25-foot radius around the pile 

(Everitt et al. 1980). 

Cetaceans are not expected to be close 

enough to the Vashon ferry terminal to 

experience effects of turbidity, and any 

pinnipeds will be transiting the terminal 

area and could avoid localized areas of 

turbidity. Therefore, the impact from 

increased turbidity levels is expected to 

be discountable to marine mammals. 

Pile driving and removal at the 

Vashon ferry terminal will not obstruct 

movements of marine mammals. Pile 

work at Vashon will occur within 70 m/ 

230 ft of the shoreline leaving 2 km/1.2 

miles of Puget Sound for marine 

mammals to pass. 

Potential Impacts on Availability of 

Affected Species or Stock for Taking for 

Subsistence Uses 

No subsistence harvest of marine 

mammals occur in the proposed action 

area. 

Proposed Mitigation Measures 

In order to issue an incidental take 

authorization under section 101(a)(5)(D) 

of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the 

permissible methods of taking pursuant 

to such activity, and other means of 

effecting the least practicable adverse 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78831 

impact on such species or stock and its 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance, and on the 

availability of such species or stock for 

taking for certain subsistence uses. 

For WSDOT’s proposed Vashon 

Seismic Retrofit Project, WSDOT 

worked with NMFS and proposed the 

following mitigation measures to 

minimize the potential impacts to 

marine mammals in the Project vicinity. 

The primary purposes of these 

mitigation measures are to minimize 

sound levels from the activities, to 

monitor marine mammals within 

designated ZOI corresponding to NMFS’ 

current Level B harassment thresholds 

and, if marine mammals with the ZOI 

appear disturbed by the work activity, to 

initiate immediate shutdown or power 

down of the piling hammer, making it 

very unlikely potential injury or TTS to 

marine mammals would occur and 

ensuring that Level B behavioral 

harassment of marine mammals would 

be reduced to the lowest level 

practicable. 

Use of Noise Attenuation Devices 

Noise attenuation systems (i.e., bubble 

curtains) will be used during all impact 

pile driving of steel piles to dampen the 

acoustic pressure and reduce the impact 

on marine mammals. By reducing 

underwater sound pressure levels at the 

source, bubble curtains would reduce 

the area over which Level B harassment 

would occur, thereby potentially 

reducing the numbers of marine 

mammals affected. In addition, the 

bubble curtain system would reduce 

sound levels below the threshold for 

injury (Level A harassment) and thus 

eliminate the need for an exclusion zone 

for Level A harassment. 

Time Restriction 

Work would occur only during 

daylight hours, when visual monitoring 

of marine mammals can be conducted. 

In addition, all in-water construction 

will be limited to the period between 

August 1, 2015, and February 15, 2016. 

Establishment of Exclusion Zone and 

Level B Harassment Zones of Influence 

Before the commencement of in-water 

pile driving activities, WSDOT shall 

establish Level B behavioral harassment 

ZOIs where received underwater sound 

pressure levels (SPLs) are higher than 

160 dB (rms) and 120 dB (rms) re 1 mPa 

for impulse noise sources (impact pile 

driving) and non-impulses noise sources 

(vibratory pile driving and mechanic 

dismantling), respectively. 

For the test pile program, because 

glacial till soils will be harder to drive 

through, the assumed attenuation will 

be 8–10 dB, the same bubble-curtain 

attenuation used in the current 

consultation. Based on the 2009 Vashon 

Test Pile, source levels for impact 

driving of 30’’ piles are 210 dB (peak), 

181 dB (SEL), and 189 dB (rms) 

measured at 16 m (Pile P–8 

Unmitigated) (WSDOT 2010). 

The exclusion zones for Level A 

harassment and ZOIs for Level B 

harassment are modeled based on inwater measurements during the WSF 

Bainbridge Island Ferry Terminal and 

presented in Table 2 below. 

TABLE 2—MODELED MAXIMUM LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ZONES FOR VARIOUS PILE DRIVING ACTIVITIES

Pile driving methods 

Distance to 190 

dB re 1 μPa (rms) 

(m) 

Distance to 180 

dB re 1 μPa (rms) 

(m) 

Distance to 160 

dB re 1 μPa (rms) 

(m) 

Distance to 121* 

dB re 1 μPa (rms) 

(m) 

Impact pile driving .................................................................... 3.0 12 251 NA 

Vibratory pile driving & removal (24-in steel concrete-jacketed pile) .............................................................................. NA NA NA 5,000 

Vibratory pile driving & removal (13-in timber pile) ................. NA NA NA 2,000 

Vibratory pile removal (30-in steel pile) ................................... NA NA NA 21,500 

Test pile impact pile driving (assume 8 dB reduction using 

attenuation devices) ............................................................. 4.0 19 402 NA 

*Since the median ambient noise level at the Project area is 121 dB re 1 μPa (rms), this level will be used as the threshold for vibratory pile 

driving and removal. 

Soft Start 

A ‘‘soft-start’’ technique is intended to 

allow marine mammals to vacate the 

area before the pile driver reaches full 

power. Whenever there has been 

downtime of 30 minutes or more 

without pile driving, the contractor will 

initiate the driving with ramp-up 

procedures described below. 

Soft start for vibratory hammers 

requires contractors to initiate hammer 

noise for 15 seconds at reduced energy 

followed by a 1-minute waiting period. 

The procedure will be repeated two 

additional times. Soft start for impact 

hammers requires contractors to provide 

an initial set of three strikes from the 

impact hammer at 40 percent energy, 

followed by a 1-minute waiting period, 

then two subsequent three-strike sets. 

Each day, WSDOT will use the soft-start 

technique at the beginning of pile 

driving or removal, or if pile driving or 

removal has ceased for more than one 

hour. 

Shutdown Measures 

WSDOT shall implement shutdown 

measures if a marine mammal is sighted 

approaching the Level A exclusion 

zone. In-water construction activities 

shall be suspended until the marine 

mammal is sighted moving away from 

the exclusion zone, or if the animal is 

not sighted for 30 minutes after the 

shutdown. 

In addition, WSDOT shall implement 

shutdown measures if southern resident 

killer whales are sighted within the 

vicinity of the project area and are 

approaching the Level B harassment 

zone (zone of influence, or ZOI) during 

in-water construction activities. 

If a killer whale approaches the ZOI 

during pile driving or removal, and it is 

unknown whether it is a Southern 

Resident killer whale or a transient 

killer whale, it shall be assumed to be 

a Southern Resident killer whale and 

WSDOT shall implement the shutdown 

measure. 

If a Southern Resident killer whale or 

an unidentified killer whale enters the 

ZOI undetected, in-water pile driving or 

pile removal shall be suspended until 

the whale exits the ZOI to avoid further 

level B harassment. 

Further, WSDOT shall implement 

shutdown measures if the number of 

any allotted marine mammal takes 

reaches the limit under the IHA, if such 

marine mammals are sighted within the 

vicinity of the project area and are 

approaching the Level B harassment 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78832 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

zone during in-water construction 

activities. 

Mitigation Conclusions 

NMFS has carefully evaluated the 

applicant’s proposed mitigation 

measures and considered a range of 

other measures in the context of 

ensuring that NMFS prescribes the 

means of effecting the least practicable 

impact on the affected marine mammal 

species and stocks and their habitat. Our 

evaluation of potential measures 

included consideration of the following 

factors in relation to one another: 

• The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure is 

expected to minimize adverse impacts 

to marine mammals 

• The proven or likely efficacy of the 

specific measure to minimize adverse 

impacts as planned 

• The practicability of the measure 

for applicant implementation. 

Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed 

by NMFS should be able to accomplish, 

have a reasonable likelihood of 

accomplishing (based on current 

science), or contribute to the 

accomplishment of one or more of the 

general goals listed below: 

(1) Avoidance or minimization of 

injury or death of marine mammals 

wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may 

contribute to this goal). 

(2) A reduction in the numbers of 

marine mammals (total number or 

number at biologically important time 

or location) exposed to received levels 

of pile driving and pile removal or other 

activities expected to result in the take 

of marine mammals (this goal may 

contribute to 1, above, or to reducing 

harassment takes only). 

(3) A reduction in the number of 

times (total number or number at 

biologically important time or location) 

individuals would be exposed to 

received levels of pile driving and pile 

removal, or other activities expected to 

result in the take of marine mammals 

(this goal may contribute to 1, above, or 

to reducing harassment takes only). 

(4) A reduction in the intensity of 

exposures (either total number or 

number at biologically important time 

or location) to received levels of pile 

driving, or other activities expected to 

result in the take of marine mammals 

(this goal may contribute to a, above, or 

to reducing the severity of harassment 

takes only). 

(5) Avoidance or minimization of 

adverse effects to marine mammal 

habitat, paying special attention to the 

food base, activities that block or limit 

passage to or from biologically 

important areas, permanent destruction 

of habitat, or temporary destruction/

disturbance of habitat during a 

biologically important time. 

(6) For monitoring directly related to 

mitigation—an increase in the 

probability of detecting marine 

mammals, thus allowing for more 

effective implementation of the 

mitigation. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s proposed measures, as well 

as other measures considered by NMFS, 

NMFS has preliminarily determined 

that the proposed mitigation measures 

provide the means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on marine mammals 

species or stocks and their habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance. 

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an incidental take 

authorization (ITA) 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 ITAs 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. WSDOT submitted a marine 

mammal monitoring plan as part of the 

IHA application. It can be found at 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/

incidental.htm. The plan may be 

modified or supplemented based on 

comments or new information received 

from the public during the public 

comment period. 

Monitoring measures prescribed by 

NMFS should accomplish one or more 

of the following general goals: 

(1) An increase in the probability of 

detecting marine mammals, both within 

the mitigation zone (thus allowing for 

more effective implementation of the 

mitigation) and in general to generate 

more data to contribute to the analyses 

mentioned below; 

(2) An increase in our understanding 

of how many marine mammals are 

likely to be exposed to levels of pile 

driving that we associate with specific 

adverse effects, such as behavioral 

harassment, TTS, or PTS; 

(3) An increase in our understanding 

of how marine mammals respond to 

stimuli expected to result in take and 

how anticipated adverse effects on 

individuals (in different ways and to 

varying degrees) may impact the 

population, species, or stock 

(specifically through effects on annual 

rates of recruitment or survival) through 

any of the following methods: 

D Behavioral observations in the 

presence of stimuli compared to 

observations in the absence of stimuli 

(need to be able to accurately predict 

received level, distance from source, 

and other pertinent information); 

D Physiological measurements in the 

presence of stimuli compared to 

observations in the absence of stimuli 

(need to be able to accurately predict 

received level, distance from source, 

and other pertinent information); 

D Distribution and/or abundance 

comparisons in times or areas with 

concentrated stimuli versus times or 

areas without stimuli; 

(4) An increased knowledge of the 

affected species; and 

(5) An increase in our understanding 

of the effectiveness of certain mitigation 

and monitoring measures. 

Proposed Monitoring Measures 

WSDOT shall employee NMFSapproved protected species observers 

(PSOs) to conduct marine mammal 

monitoring for its Vashon Seismic 

Retrofit Project. The PSOs will observe 

and collect data on marine mammals in 

and around the project area for 30 

minutes before, during, and for 30 

minutes after all pile removal and pile 

installation work. If a PSO observes a 

marine mammal within a ZOI that 

appears to be disturbed by the work 

activity, the PSO will notify the work 

crew to initiate shutdown measures. 

Monitoring of marine mammals 

around the construction site shall be 

conducted using high-quality binoculars 

(e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power). Marine 

mammal visual monitoring will be 

conducted by land-based biologists at 

the terminal work sites, and boat-based 

biologist(s) travel through the 

monitoring area. 

Data collection during marine 

mammal monitoring will consist of a 

count of all marine mammals by 

species, a description of behavior (if 

possible), location, direction of 

movement, type of construction that is 

occurring, time that pile replacement 

work begins and ends, any acoustic or 

visual disturbance, and time of the 

observation. Environmental conditions 

such as weather, visibility, temperature, 

tide level, current, and sea state would 

also be recorded. 

Proposed Reporting Measures 

WSDOT would be required to submit 

weekly monitoring reports to NMFS that 

summarize the monitoring results, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78833 

construction activities, and 

environmental conditions. 

A final monitoring report would be 

submitted to NMFS within 90 days after 

completion of the construction work. 

This report would detail the monitoring 

protocol, summarize the data recorded 

during monitoring, and estimate the 

number of marine mammals that may 

have been harassed. NMFS would have 

an opportunity to provide comments on 

the report, and if NMFS has comments, 

WSDOT would address the comments 

and submit a final report to NMFS 

within 30 days. 

In addition, NMFS would require 

WSDOT to notify NMFS’ Office of 

Protected Resources and NMFS’ 

Stranding Network within 48 hours of 

sighting an injured or dead marine 

mammal in the vicinity of the 

construction site. WSDOT shall provide 

NMFS with the species or description of 

the animal(s), the condition of the 

animal(s) (including carcass condition, 

if the animal is dead), location, time of 

first discovery, observed behaviors (if 

alive), and photo or video (if available). 

In the event that WSDOT finds an 

injured or dead marine mammal that is 

not in the vicinity of the construction 

area, WSDOT would report the same 

information as listed above to NMFS as 

soon as operationally feasible. 

Estimated Take by Incidental 

Harassment 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, 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]. 

As discussed above, in-water pile 

removal and pile driving (vibratory and 

impact) generate loud noises that could 

potentially harass marine mammals in 

the vicinity of WSDOT’s proposed 

Vashon Seismic Retrofit Project. 

Currently, NMFS uses 120 dB re 1 mPa 

and 160 dB re 1 mPa at the received 

levels for the onset of Level B 

harassment from non-impulse (vibratory 

pile driving and removal) and impulse 

sources (impact pile driving) 

underwater, respectively. Table 3 

summarizes the current NMFS marine 

mammal take criteria. 

TABLE 3—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA FOR NON-EXPLOSIVE SOUND UNDERWATER

Criterion Criterion definition Threshold 

Level A Harassment (Injury) .............. Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) (Any level above that which is known to 

cause TTS).

180 dB re 1 μPa 

(cetaceans), 190 dB re 1 

μPa (pinnipeds), root 

mean square (rms). 

Level B Harassment ........................... Behavioral Disruption (for impulse noises) .................................................... 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms). 

Level B Harassment ........................... Behavioral Disruption (for non-impulse noise) .............................................. 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms). 

As explained above, ZOIs will be 

established that encompass the areas 

where received underwater sound 

pressure levels (SPLs) exceed the 

applicable thresholds for Level B 

harassment. There will not be a zone for 

Level A harassment in this case, because 

the bubble curtain system will keep all 

underwater noise below the threshold 

for Level A harassment. 

Sound Levels From Proposed 

Construction Activity 

As mentioned earlier, the project 

includes impact driving and proofing of 

24-inch hollow steel piling, impact 

driving of 13-inch timber piling, and 

impact driving of 30-inch steel test 

piles. 

Based on in-water measurements 

during the WSF Bainbridge Island Ferry 

Terminal, impact pile driving of a 24- 

inch steel pile generated 170 dB RMS 

(overall average), with the highest 

measured at 189 dB RMS measured at 

10 meters (Laughlin 2005). A bubble 

curtain will be used to attenuate steel 

pile impact driving noise. 

For the test pile program, the more 

conservative cetacean injury zone (19 

m/62 ft) will be used to set the 30-inch 

steel test pile exclusion zone. 

In-water measurements for impact 

driving of 13-inch timber piling are not 

available. Impact driving of 12-inch 

timber piling generated 170 dB RMS 

(WSF 2014). The source level for 13- 

inch timber piles shall be assumed to be 

the same as 12-inch timber piles. A 

bubble curtain will not be used during 

impact driving of timber piles. 

Using practical spreading model to 

calculate sound propagation loss, Table 

2 provides the estimated maximum 

distances for a variety of harassment 

zones. 

As explained above, exclusion zones 

and ZOIs will be established that 

encompass the areas where received 

underwater SPLs exceed the applicable 

thresholds for Level A and Level B 

harassment, respectively. 

Incidental take for each species is 

estimated by determining the likelihood 

of a marine mammal being present 

within a ZOI during pile removal and 

pile driving. Expected marine mammal 

presence is determined by past 

observations and general abundance 

near the Vashon Ferry Terminal during 

the construction window. Typically, 

potential take is estimated by 

multiplying the area of the ZOI by the 

local animal density. This provides an 

estimate of the number of animals that 

might occupy the ZOI at any given 

moment. However, there are no density 

estimates for any Puget Sound 

population of marine mammals. As a 

result, the take requests were estimated 

using local marine mammal data sets 

(e.g., Orca Network, state and federal 

agencies), opinions from state and 

federal agencies, and observations from 

Navy biologists. 

Based on the estimates, approximately 

1,919 Pacific harbor seals, 1,919 

California sea lions, 644 Steller sea 

lions, 438 harbor porpoises, 136 Dall’s 

porpoises, 54 killer whales (50 transient, 

4 Southern Resident killer whales), 71 

gray whales, 36 humpback whales, and 

36 minke whales could be exposed to 

received sound levels that could result 

in takes from the proposed Vashon 

Seismic Retrofit Project. A summary of 

the estimated takes is presented in Table 

4. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78834 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

TABLE 4—ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY BE EXPOSED TO RECEIVED PILE REMOVAL LEVELS

ABOVE 121 DB RE 1 μPA (RMS) 

Species 

Estimated 

marine 

mammal takes 

Abundance Percentage 

Pacific harbor seal ............................................................................................................... 1,919 14,612 13 

California sea lion ................................................................................................................ 1,919 296,750 0 .7 

Steller sea lion ..................................................................................................................... 644 63,160 1 .0 

Harbor porpoise ................................................................................................................... 438 10,682 4 .0 

Dall’s porpoise ..................................................................................................................... 136 42,000 0 .3 

Killer whale, transient .......................................................................................................... 50 521 9 .6 

Killer whale, Southern Resident .......................................................................................... 4 85 4 .7 

Gray whale ........................................................................................................................... 71 19,126 0 .4 

Humpback whale ................................................................................................................. 36 1,918 1 .9 

Minke whale ......................................................................................................................... 36 478 7 .5 

Analysis and Preliminary 

Determinations 

Negligible Impact 

Negligible impact is ‘‘an impact 

resulting from the specified activity that 

cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 

not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 

the species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival’’ 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 

finding is based on the lack of likely 

adverse effects on annual rates of 

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

of Level B harassment 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 behavioral 

harassment, NMFS must consider other 

factors, such as the likely nature of any 

responses (their intensity, duration, 

etc.), the context of any responses 

(critical reproductive time or location, 

migration, etc.), as well as the number 

and nature of estimated Level A 

harassment takes, the number of 

estimated mortalities, and effects on 

habitat. 

WSDOT’s proposed Vashon Seismic 

Retrofit Project would involve pile 

removal and pile driving activities. 

Elevated underwater noises are 

expected to be generated as a result of 

these activities; however, these noises 

are expected to result in no mortality or 

Level A harassment and limited, if any, 

Level B harassment of marine mammals. 

WSDOT would use noise attenuation 

devices (i.e., bubble curtains) during the 

impact pile driving of steel piles, thus 

eliminating the potential for injury 

(including PTS) and TTS from impact 

driving. For vibratory pile removal and 

pile driving and impact pile driving of 

timber piles, noise levels are not 

expected to reach the level that may 

cause TTS, injury (including PTS), or 

mortality to marine mammals. 

Therefore, NMFS does not expect that 

any animals would experience Level A 

harassment (including injury or PTS) or 

Level B harassment in the form of TTS 

from being exposed to in-water pile 

removal and pile driving associated 

with WSDOT’s construction project. 

In addition, WSDOT’s proposed 

activities are localized and of short 

duration. The entire project area is 

limited to WSDOT’s Vashon ferry 

terminal in Vashon Island. The entire 

project would involve the removal of 

106 existing timber piles and 

installation of 119 steel piles. In 

addition, 96 temporary piles will be 

installed and then removed during the 

project. The duration for pile driving 

and removal lasts for about 10 to 120 

minutes per pile, depending on the type 

and dimension of the pile. These lowintensity, localized, and short-term 

noise exposures may cause brief startle 

reactions or short-term behavioral 

modification by the animals. These 

reactions and behavioral changes are 

expected to subside quickly when the 

exposures cease. Moreover, the 

proposed mitigation and monitoring 

measures are expected to reduce 

potential exposures and behavioral 

modifications even further. 

Additionally, no important feeding and/ 

or reproductive areas for marine 

mammals are known to be near the 

proposed action area. Therefore, the 

take resulting from the proposed Vashon 

Seismic Retrofit Project is not 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

marine mammal species or stocks 

through effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival. 

The project also is not expected to 

have significant adverse effects on 

affected marine mammals’ habitat, as 

analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Anticipated 

Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat’’ 

section. The project activities would not 

modify existing marine mammal habitat. 

The activities may cause some fish to 

leave the area of disturbance, thus 

temporarily impacting marine 

mammals’ foraging opportunities in a 

limited portion of the foraging range; 

but, because of the short duration of the 

activities and the relatively small area of 

the habitat that may be affected, the 

impacts to marine mammal habitat are 

not expected to cause significant or 

long-term negative consequences. 

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 

proposed monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS preliminarily finds 

that the total marine mammal take from 

WSDOT’s Vashon Seismic Retrofit 

Project will have a negligible impact on 

the affected marine mammal species or 

stocks. 

Small Number 

Based on analyses provided above, it 

is estimated that approximately 1,919 

harbor seals, 1,919 California sea lions, 

644 Steller sea lions, 438 harbor 

porpoises, 136 Dall’s porpoises, 50 

transient killer whales, 4 Southern 

Resident killer whales, 71 gray whales, 

36 humpback whales, and 36 minke 

whales could be exposed to received 

noise levels that could cause Level B 

behavioral harassment from the 

proposed construction work at the 

Vashon ferry terminal in Washington 

State. These numbers represent 

approximately 0.3% to 14% of the 

populations of these species that could 

be affected by Level B behavioral 

harassment, respectively (see Table 2 

above), which are small percentages 

relative to the total populations of the 

affected species or stocks. 

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 

mitigation and monitoring measures, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78835 

which are expected to reduce the 

number of marine mammals potentially 

affected by the proposed action, NMFS 

preliminarily finds that small numbers 

of marine mammals will be taken 

relative to the populations of the 

affected species or stocks. 

Impact on Availability of Affected 

Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses 

There are no subsistence uses of 

marine mammals in the proposed 

project area; and, thus, no subsistence 

uses impacted by this action. Therefore, 

NMFS has determined that the total 

taking of affected species or stocks 

would not have an unmitigable adverse 

impact on the availability of such 

species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

The humpback whale and the 

Southern Resident stock of killer whale 

are the only marine mammal species 

currently listed under the ESA that 

could occur in the vicinity of WSDOT’s 

proposed construction projects. NMFS’ 

Permits and Conservation Division has 

initiated consultation with NMFS’ 

Protected Resources Division under 

section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of 

an IHA to WSDOT under section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this 

activity. Consultation will be concluded 

prior to a determination on the issuance 

of an IHA. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

NMFS prepared a draft Environmental 

Assessment (EA) for the proposed 

issuance of an IHA, pursuant to NEPA, 

to determine whether or not this 

proposed activity may have a significant 

effect on the human environment. This 

analysis will be completed prior to the 

issuance or denial of this proposed IHA. 

Proposed Authorization 

As a result of these preliminary 

determinations, NMFS proposes to issue 

an IHA to WSDOT for conducting the 

Vashon Seismic Retrofit Project, 

provided the previously mentioned 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

requirements are incorporated. The 

proposed IHA language is provided 

next. 

1. This Authorization is valid from 

August 1, 2015, through July 31, 2016. 

2. This Authorization is valid only for 

activities associated in-water 

construction work at the Vashon 

Seismic Retrofit Project in the State of 

Washington. 

3. (a) The species authorized for 

incidental harassment takings, Level B 

harassment only, are: Pacific harbor seal 

(Phoca vitulina richardsi), California sea 

lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller 

sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), transient 

and Southern Resident killer whales 

(Orcinus orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius 

robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera 

novaeangliae), harbor porpoise 

(Phocoena phocoena), and Dall’s 

porpoise (Phocoena dali). 

(b) The authorization for taking by 

harassment is limited to the following 

acoustic sources and from the following 

activities: 

• Impact and vibratory pile driving; 

• Pile removal; and 

• Work associated with above piling 

activities. 

(c) The taking of any marine mammal 

in a manner prohibited under this 

Authorization must be reported within 

24 hours of the taking to the West Coast 

Administrator (206–526–6150), National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and 

the Chief of the Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, at (301) 

427–8401, or her designee (301–427– 

8418). 

4. The holder of this Authorization 

must notify the Chief of the Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, at least 48 hours 

prior to the start of activities identified 

in 3(b) (unless constrained by the date 

of issuance of this Authorization in 

which case notification shall be made as 

soon as possible). 

5. Prohibitions 

(a) The taking, by incidental 

harassment only, is limited to the 

species listed under condition 3(a) 

above and by the numbers listed in 

Table 4. The taking by Level A 

harassment, injury or death of these 

species or the taking by harassment, 

injury or death of any other species of 

marine mammal is prohibited and may 

result in the modification, suspension, 

or revocation of this Authorization. 

(b) The taking of any marine mammal 

is prohibited whenever the required 

protected species observers (PSOs), 

required by condition 7(a), are not 

present in conformance with condition 

7(a) of this Authorization. 

6. Mitigation 

(a) Use of Noise Attenuation Devices 

A pile driving energy attenuator (such 

as an air bubble curtain system) shall be 

used for all impact pile driving. 

(b) Time Restriction 

In-water construction work shall 

occur only during daylight hours, when 

visual monitoring of marine mammals 

can be conducted. 

(c) Establishment of Level B 

Harassment Zones of Influence 

(i) Before the commencement of inwater pile driving activities, WSDOT 

shall establish Level B behavioral 

harassment zones of influence (ZOIs) 

where received underwater sound 

pressure levels (SPLs) are higher than 

160 dB (rms) and 120 dB (rms) re 1 mPa 

for impulse noise sources (impact pile 

driving) and non-impulses noise sources 

(vibratory pile driving and mechanic 

dismantling), respectively. The modeled 

isopleths for ZOIs are listed in Table 2. 

(ii) Once the underwater acoustic 

measurements are conducted during 

initial test pile driving, WSDOT shall 

adjust the sizes of the ZOIs, and monitor 

these zones as described under the 

Proposed Monitoring section below. 

(d) Monitoring of marine mammals 

shall take place starting 30 minutes 

before pile driving begins until 30 

minutes after pile driving ends. 

(e) Soft Start 

(i) When there has been downtime of 

30 minutes or more without pile 

driving, the contractor will initiate the 

driving with ramp-up procedures 

described below. 

(ii) For vibratory hammers, the 

contractor shall initiate the driving for 

15 seconds at reduced energy, followed 

by a 1 minute waiting period. This 

procedure shall be repeated two 

additional times before continuous 

driving is started. This procedure shall 

also apply to vibratory pile extraction. 

(iii) For impact driving, an initial set 

of three strikes would be made by the 

hammer at 40-percent energy, followed 

by a 1-minute waiting period, then two 

subsequent three-strike sets at 40- 

percent energy, with 1-minute waiting 

periods, before initiating continuous 

driving. 

(f) Power Down and Shutdown 

Measures 

(i) WSDOT shall implement 

shutdown measures if southern resident 

killer whales (SRKWs) are sighted 

within the vicinity of the project area 

and are approaching the Level B 

harassment zone (zone of influence, or 

ZOI) during in-water construction 

activities. 

(ii) If a killer whale approaches the 

ZOI during pile driving or removal, and 

it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or 

a transient killer whale, it shall be 

assumed to be a SRKW and WSDOT 

shall implement the shutdown measure 

identified in 6(f)(i). 

(iii) If a SRKW enters the ZOI 

undetected, in-water pile driving or pile 

removal shall be suspended until the 

SRKW exits the ZOI to avoid further 

level B harassment. 

(iv) WSDOT shall implement 

shutdown measures if the number of 

any allotted marine mammal takes 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78836 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

reaches the limit under the IHA, if such 

marine mammals are sighted within the 

vicinity of the project area and are 

approaching the Level B harassment 

zone during pile removal activities. 

7. Monitoring 

(a) Protected Species Observers 

WSDOT shall employee NMFSapproved PSOs to conduct marine 

mammal monitoring for its construction 

project. 

(i) Visual acuity in both eyes 

(correction is permissible) sufficient for 

discernment of moving targets at the 

water’s surface with ability to estimate 

target size and distance. Use of 

binoculars will be required to correctly 

identify the target. 

(ii) Experience or training in the field 

identification of marine mammals 

(cetaceans and pinnipeds). 

(iii) Sufficient training, orientation or 

experience with the construction 

operation to provide for personal safety 

during observations. 

(iv) 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. 

(v) Experience and ability to conduct 

field observations and collect data 

according to assigned protocols (this 

may include academic experience). 

(vi) Writing skills sufficient to prepare 

a report of observations that would 

include such information as the number 

and type of marine mammals observed; 

the behavior of marine mammals in the 

project area during construction, dates 

and times when observations were 

conducted; dates and times when inwater construction activities were 

conducted; and dates and times when 

marine mammals were present at or 

within the defined ZOI. 

(b) Monitoring Protocols: PSOs shall 

be present on site at all times during 

pile removal and driving. 

(i) A range finder or hand-held global 

positioning system device will be used 

to ensure that the 120 dBrms re 1 mPa 

Level B behavioral harassment ZOI is 

monitored. 

(ii) A 30-minute pre-construction 

marine mammal monitoring will be 

required before the first pile driving or 

pile removal of the day. A 30-minute 

post-construction marine mammal 

monitoring will be required after the last 

pile driving or pile removal of the day. 

If the constructors take a break between 

subsequent pile driving or pile removal 

for more than 30 minutes, then 

additional pre-construction marine 

mammal monitoring will be required 

before the next start-up of pile driving 

or pile removal. 

(iii) Marine mammal visual 

monitoring will be conducted by landbased biologists at the terminal work 

sites, and boat-based biologist(s) travel 

through the monitoring area. 

(iv) If marine mammals are observed, 

the following information will be 

documented: 

(A) Species of observed marine 

mammals; 

(B) Number of observed marine 

mammal individuals; 

(C) Behavioral of observed marine 

mammals; 

(D) Location within the ZOI; and 

(E) Animals’ reaction (if any) to piledriving activities 

(v) During vibratory pile removal and 

driving, one land-based biologist would 

monitor the area from the terminal work 

site, and one monitor will move among 

a number of access points along the 

southern Sinclair Inlet shore. Binoculars 

shall be used during marine mammal 

monitoring. 

(vi) WSDOT shall contact the Orca 

Network and/or Center for Whale 

Research to find out the location of the 

nearest marine mammal sightings. 

(vii) WSDOT shall also utilize marine 

mammal occurrence information 

collected by the Orca Network using 

hydrophone systems to maximize 

marine mammal detection in the project 

vicinity. 

8. Reporting 

(a) WSDOT shall provide NMFS with 

a draft monitoring report within 90 days 

of the conclusion of the construction 

work. This report shall detail the 

monitoring protocol, summarize the 

data recorded during monitoring, and 

estimate the number of marine 

mammals that may have been harassed. 

(b) If comments are received from the 

NMFS West Coast Regional 

Administrator or NMFS Office of 

Protected Resources on the draft report, 

a final report shall be submitted to 

NMFS within 30 days thereafter. If no 

comments are received from NMFS, the 

draft report will be considered to be the 

final report. 

(c) In the unanticipated event that the 

construction activities clearly cause the 

take of a marine mammal in a manner 

prohibited by this Authorization (if 

issued), such as an injury, serious 

injury, or mortality, WSDOT shall 

immediately cease all operations and 

immediately report the incident to the 

Chief, Permits and Conservation 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, and the West Coast Regional 

Stranding Coordinators. The report must 

include the following information: 

(i) time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the incident; 

(ii) description of the incident; 

(iii) status of all sound source use in 

the 24 hours preceding the incident; 

(iv) environmental conditions (e.g., 

wind speed and direction, sea state, 

cloud cover, visibility, and water 

depth); 

(v) description of marine mammal 

observations in the 24 hours preceding 

the incident; 

(vi) species identification or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

(vii) the fate of the animal(s); and 

(viii) photographs or video footage of 

the animal (if equipment is available). 

Activities shall not resume until 

NMFS is able to review the 

circumstances of the prohibited take. 

NMFS shall work with WSDOT to 

determine what is necessary to 

minimize the likelihood of further 

prohibited take and ensure MMPA 

compliance. WSDOT may not resume 

their activities until notified by NMFS 

via letter, email, or telephone. 

(E) In the event that WSDOT 

discovers an injured or dead marine 

mammal, and the lead PSO determines 

that the cause of the injury or death is 

unknown and the death is relatively 

recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state 

of decomposition as described in the 

next paragraph), WSDOT will 

immediately report the incident to the 

Chief, Permits and Conservation 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, and the West Coast Regional 

Stranding Coordinators. The report must 

include the same information identified 

above. Activities may continue while 

NMFS reviews the circumstances of the 

incident. NMFS will work with WSDOT 

to determine whether modifications in 

the activities are appropriate. 

(F) In the event that WSDOT 

discovers an injured or dead marine 

mammal, and the lead PSO determines 

that the injury or death is not associated 

with or related to the activities 

authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously 

wounded animal, carcass with moderate 

to advanced decomposition, or 

scavenger damage), WSDOT shall report 

the incident to the Chief, Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, and the 

West Coast Regional Stranding 

Coordinators, within 24 hours of the 

discovery. WSDOT shall provide 

photographs or video footage (if 

available) or other documentation of the 

stranded animal sighting to NMFS and 

the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. 

WSDOT can continue its operations 

under such a case. 

9. This Authorization may be 

modified, suspended or withdrawn if 

the holder fails to abide by the 

conditions prescribed herein or if the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78837 

1Although pursuant to Section 1017(a)(4)E, of the 

Consumer Financial Protection Act, Public Law 

111–203, the CFPB is not required to comply with 

OMB-issued guidance, it voluntarily follows OMB 

privacy-related guidance as a best practice and to 

facilitate cooperation and collaboration with other 

agencies. 

authorized taking is having more than a 

negligible impact on the species or stock 

of affected marine mammals, or if there 

is an unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of such species or stocks for 

subsistence uses. 

10. A copy of this Authorization and 

the Incidental Take Statement must be 

in the possession of each contractor who 

performs the construction work at the 

Bremerton Ferry Terminals. 

11. WSDOT is required to comply 

with the Terms and Conditions of the 

Incidental Take Statement 

corresponding to NMFS’ Biological 

Opinion. 

Dated: December 23, 2014. 

Donna S. Wieting, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30540 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER 

FINANCIAL PROTECTION 

[Docket No: CFPB–2014–0038] 

Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended 

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

ACTION: Notice of a Revised Privacy Act 

System of Records. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the 

Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection, hereinto referred to as the 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 

(‘‘CFPB’’ or ‘‘Bureau’’), gives notice of 

the establishment of a revised Privacy 

Act System of Records. 

DATES: Comments must be received no 

later than January 30, 2015. The new 

system of records will be effective 

February 9, 2015, unless the comments 

received result in a contrary 

determination. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by the title and docket 

number (see above), by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic: privacy@cfpb.gov or 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Claire Stapleton, Chief 

Privacy Officer, Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20552. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Claire 

Stapleton, Chief Privacy Officer, 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 

1275 1st St. NE., Washington, DC 20002. 

Comments will be available for public 

inspection and copying at 1275 1st St. 

NE., Washington, DC 20002 on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You can 

make an appointment to inspect 

comments by telephoning (202) 435– 

7220. All comments, including 

attachments and other supporting 

materials, will become part of the public 

record and subject to public disclosure. 

You should submit only information 

that you wish to make available 

publicly. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Claire Stapleton, Chief Privacy Officer, 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 

1275 1st St. NE., Washington, DC 20002, 

(202) 435–7220. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CFPB 

revises its Privacy Act System of 

Records Notice (SORN) ‘‘CFPB.001— 

CFPB Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA)/Privacy Act (PA) System.’’ In 

revising this SORN, the CFPB is adding 

a new routine use to add that records 

may be provided to the National 

Archives and the Records 

Administration, Office of Government 

Information Services (OGIS), for all 

purposes set forth in 5 U.S.C. 

552(h)(2)(A–B) and (3). It also revises 

the Categories of Records section to 

indicate that the system also includes 

information related to requests for OGIS 

assistance. 

The report of the revised system of 

records has been submitted to the 

Committee on Oversight and 

Government Reform of the House of 

Representatives, the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs of the Senate, and the Office of 

Management and Budget, pursuant to 

Appendix I to OMB Circular A–130, 

‘‘Federal Agency Responsibilities for 

Maintaining Records About 

Individuals,’’ dated November 30, 

2000,1 and the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 

552a(r). 

The revised system of records entitled 

‘‘CFPB.001–CFPB Freedom of 

Information Act/Privacy Act System’’ is 

published in its entirety below. 

Date: December 23, 2014. 

Claire Stapleton, 

Chief Privacy Officer, Bureau of Consumer 

Financial Protection. 

CFPB.001 

SYSTEM NAME: 

CFPB Freedom of Information Act/

Privacy Act System. 

SYSTEM LOCATION: 

Consumer Financial Protection 

Bureau, 1275 1st St. NE., Washington, 

DC 20002. 

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE

SYSTEM: 

Individuals covered by this system are 

persons who cite the Freedom of 

Information Act or Privacy Act to 

request access to records or whose 

information requests are treated as FOIA 

requests. Other individuals covered 

include CFPB staff assigned to process 

such requests, and employees who may 

have responsive records or are 

mentioned in such records. FOIA 

requests are subject to the PA only to 

the extent that they concern individuals; 

information pertaining to corporations 

and other business entities and 

organizations are not subject to the PA. 

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

Records in the system may contain: 

(1) Correspondence with the requester 

including initial requests and appeals; 

(2) documents generated or compiled 

during the search and processing of the 

request; (3) fee schedules, cost 

calculations, and assessed cost for 

disclosed FOIA records; (4) documents 

and memoranda supporting the decision 

made in response to the request, 

referrals, and copies of records provided 

or withheld; (5) CFPB staff assigned to 

process, consider, and respond to 

requests and, where a request has been 

referred to another agency with equities 

in a responsive document, information 

about the individual handling the 

request on behalf of that agency; (6) 

information identifying the entity that is 

subject to the requests or appeals; (7) 

requester information, including name, 

address, phone number, email address; 

FOIA tracking number, phone number, 

fax number, or some combination 

thereof; and (8) for access requests 

under the Privacy Act, identifying 

information regarding both the party 

who is making the written request or 

appeal, and the individual on whose 

behalf such written requests or appeals 

are made, including name, Social 

Security number (SSNs may be 

submitted with documentation or as 

proof of identification), address, phone 

number, email address, FOIA number, 

phone number, fax number, or some 

combination thereof. This system also 

consists of records related to requests 

for OGIS assistance. 

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: 

Pub. L. 111–203, Title X, Sections 

1011, 1012, 1021, codified at 12 U.S.C. 

5491, 5492, 5511; The Freedom of 

Information Act of 1996, as amended 5 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES