42986 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XF687 

Western Pacific Fishery Management 

Council; Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Western Pacific Fishery 

Management Council (Council) will 

hold a meeting of its Social Science 

Planning Committee (SSPC) in 

Honolulu, HI. 

DATES: The SSPC meeting will be held 

on Tuesday and Wednesday, September 

26 and 27, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Council Offices at 1164 Bishop 

Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; 

telephone: (808) 522–8220. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public 

comment periods will be provided. The 

order in which agenda items are 

addressed may change. The Committee 

will meet as late as necessary to 

complete scheduled business. 

Agenda 

Tuesday, September 26, 2017, 9 a.m. 

1. Introductions 

2. Approval of Agenda 

3. Report on the 170th Council meeting 

recommendations 

4. Report on Pacific Islands Fisheries Science 

Center Human Dimensions Review 

5. Social Science and Planning Committee 

Review and Revisions 

A. Report from the SSPC Working Group 

B. Review and revision of Draft Plan 

i. Drivers 

ii. Purpose and Need 

iii. Goals and Objectives 

iv. Tasks and Activities 

v. Other strategic plan items 

6. Public Comment 

7. Summary and tasking of SSPC committee 

members 

Wednesday, September 27, 2017, 

9 a.m. 

8. Review of SSPC Strategic Planning from 

Prior Day 

9. Report from Committee members on 

Revisions and Finalization of Strategic 

Plan 

10. SSPC Research Priorities 

A. Report on Working Group Findings 

i. Pacific Islands Human Dimensions 

Research Priority Areas 

ii. Prioritization of Research by Priority 

Areas to meet Strategic Plan Goals and 

Objectives. 

iii. Other Issues. 

11. Public Comment 

12. Discussion and Recommendations 

13. Other Business 

Special Accommodations 

These meetings are physically 

accessible to people with disabilities. 

Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, 

(808) 522–8220 (voice) or (808) 522– 

8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the 

meeting date. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: September 8, 2017. 

Jeffrey N. Lonergan, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–19438 Filed 9–12–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XF460 

Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 

Incidental to a Pile Driving Activities 

for Waterfront Repairs at the U.S. 

Coast Guard Station Monterey, 

Monterey, California 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental 

harassment authorization; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request 

from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) for 

authorization to take marine mammals 

incidental to pile driving activities for 

waterfront repairs at the USCG 

Monterey Station in Monterey, 

California. Pursuant to the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS 

is requesting comments on its proposal 

to issue an incidental harassment 

authorization (IHA) to take marine 

mammals during the specified activities. 

NMFS will consider public comments 

prior to making any final decision on 

the issuance of the requested MMPA 

authorization and agency responses will 

be summarized in the final notice of our 

decision. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than October 13, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 

Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service. Physical 

comments should be sent to 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 

and electronic comments should be sent 

to ITP.egger@noaa.gov. 

Instructions: NMFS is not responsible 

for comments sent by any other method, 

to any other address or individual, or 

received after the end of the comment 

period. Comments received 

electronically, including all 

attachments, must not exceed a 25- 

megabyte file size. Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 

Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF 

file formats only. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted online at 

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

incidental/construction.htm without 

change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephanie Egger, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

Electronic copies of the applications 

and supporting documents, as well as a 

list of the references cited in this 

document, may be obtained online at 

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

incidental/construction.htm. In case of 

problems accessing these documents, 

please call the contact listed above. 

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 (as delegated 

to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the 

incidental, but not intentional, taking of 

small numbers of marine mammals by 

U.S. citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specified geographical region if 

certain findings are made and either 

regulations are issued or, if the taking is 

limited to harassment, a notice of a 

proposed 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. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 42987 

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. 

The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’ 

means to harass, hunt, capture, or kill, 

or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or 

kill any marine mammal. 

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). 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

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

NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 

216–6A, NMFS must review our 

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

incidental harassment authorization) 

with respect to potential impacts on the 

human environment. Accordingly, 

NMFS plans to adopt the USCG’s 

Supplemental Environmental 

Assessment (SEA) entitled 

Supplemental Environmental 

Assessment for Waterfront Repairs at 

U.S. Coast Guard Station Monterey, 

Monterey, California, and provided our 

independent evaluation of the 

document finds that it includes 

adequate information analyzing the 

effects on the human environment of 

issuing the IHA. The USCG’s SEA is 

available for public comment on our 

Web site at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ 

permits/incidental/construction.htm. 

We will review all comments submitted 

in response to this notice prior to 

concluding our NEPA process or making 

a final decision on the IHA request. 

Summary of Request 

On February 10, 2017, NMFS received 

a request from the USCG for an IHA to 

take marine mammals incidental to pile 

driving activities for waterfront 

restoration, at the USCG Station 

Monterey in Monterrey, California. 

USCG’s request is for take of eight 

species of marine mammals, by Level B 

harassment. Neither USCG nor NMFS 

expect mortality to result from this 

activity and, therefore, an IHA is 

appropriate. 

NMFS previously issued an IHA to 

the USCG for similar work (79 FR 

57052; September 24, 2014). However, 

no work was conducted under that IHA. 

Description of Proposed Activity 

Overview 

USCG Station Monterey occupies an 

upland site and adjacent waterside 

structures including a 1,700-foot 

breakwater, a wharf constructed over 

the breakwater, and floating docks to the 

east of the wharf in Monterey Harbor. 

The USCG intends to conduct 

maintenance on the existing wharf, 

which is used to berth vessels that are 

critical to support USCG Station 

Monterey’s mission. 

The wharf is constructed of timber 

and steel material and is supported by 

64 piles. In 1995, 47 of the original 

timber piles were replaced with 14-inch 

(in) steel pipe piles and the remaining 

17 timber piles had polyvinyl chloride 

(PVC) pile wraps installed. The 17 

remaining timber piles are bearing piles 

that have exceeded their service life 

partially due to marine bores and the 

harsh marine environment to which 

they are exposed, and they need to be 

replaced. The proposed project requires 

replacement of these 17 timber piles 

including removal of the existing timber 

deck, replacing stringers, steel pipe 

caps, steel support beams, and hardware 

in order to access the timber piles. The 

timber piles will be removed using 

vibratory pile driving and replaced with 

steel piles using vibratory pile driving 

and if needed an impact hammer. 

In-water noise from pile driving 

activities will result in the take, by 

Level B harassment only, of eight 

species of marine mammals. 

Dates and Duration 

In-water construction for this 

application is proposed to occur 

between October 16, 2017 and October 

15, 2018. Pile-driving activities are 

expected to occur for an estimated 

minimum of three to a maximum of 

eight days of the total construction time. 

It is assumed that driving time would be 

approximately 20 minutes (min) per pile 

for vibratory or impact pile driving. It is 

assumed that vibratory extraction of the 

existing piles would take approximately 

10 min per pile. Pile driving and 

extraction would therefore result in an 

estimated of 240 min per day (4 hours 

(hrs)); 510 min for the total project or 

approximately 8.5 hrs. 

Specified Geographic Region 

USCG Station Monterey is located at 

100 Lighthouse Avenue at the southern 

end of Monterey Bay in Monterey 

Harbor, Monterey, California. The USCG 

Monterey Station’s area of responsibility 

extends 50 miles offshore for 

approximately 120 nautical miles of 

coastline, from Point An ̃ o Nuevo south 

to the Monterey-San Luis Obispo 

County line, encompassing 5,000 square 

miles. Monterey Bay is one of the widest 

bays on the Pacific Coast of the U.S. and 

approximately 3.5 miles of coastline are 

within the city limits of Monterey; the 

Monterey Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary (MBNMS) encompasses the 

entirety of the bay and further extends 

northward and southward along the 

Pacific Coast. 

Detailed Description of Specific 

Activities 

The 17 timber piles, approximately 16 

to 18-in in diameter, will be removed 

using a vibratory extractor. Each timber 

pile will be replaced with a 14-in steel 

pipe pile installed using a vibratory 

hammer (the preferred method) and 

each pipe pile will be positioned and 

installed in the footprint of the extracted 

timber pile. Pile installation would be 

adjacent to a rock jetty that would 

provide substantial underwater 

shielding of sound transmission to areas 

north (or through the jetty) (see Figure 

1–2 of the application). 

Pile proofing will be conducted via 

impact hammer. If, due to substrate or 

breakwater armor, a pipe pile is unable 

to be driven to 30 feet below the mud 

line using a vibratory hammer, then an 

impact hammer will be used; and if the 

pile cannot be driven with an impact 

hammer, the pipe pile would be posted 

onto the armor stone. The steel pipe 

piles would not be filled with concrete. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

The marine mammal species under 

NMFS’s jurisdiction that have the 

potential to occur in the proposed 

construction area include California sea 

lion (Zalophus californianus), Pacific 

harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), harbor 

porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Risso’s 

dolphin (Grampus griseus), bottlenose 

dolphin (Tursiops truncates), killer 

whale (Orcinus orca), gray whale 

(Megaptera novaengliae), humpback 

whale (Eschrichtius robustus), and 

southern sea otters (Enhydra lutris 

nereis). The southern sea otter is 

managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service and not discussed further in this 

proposed authorization. Humpback 

whales are protected under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). 

Pertinent information for each of these 

species is presented in this document to 

provide the necessary background to 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
42988 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 

understand their demographics and 

distribution in the area. 

Sections 2 and 3 of the USCG’s 

application summarize available 

information regarding status and trends, 

distribution and habitat preferences, 

and behavior and life history, of the 

potentially affected species. Additional 

information regarding population trends 

and threats may be found in NMFS’s 

Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/) and more 

general information about these species 

(e.g., physical and behavioral 

descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s 

Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ 

species/mammals/). 

Table 1 lists all species with expected 

potential for occurrence in the Monterey 

Bay area and summarizes information 

related to the population or stock, 

including regulatory status under the 

MMPA and ESA and potential 

biological removal (PBR), where known. 

For taxonomy, we follow Committee on 

Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the 

MMPA as the maximum number of 

animals, not including natural 

mortalities, that may be removed from a 

marine mammal stock while allowing 

that stock to reach or maintain its 

optimum sustainable population (as 

described in NMFS’s SARs). While no 

mortality is anticipated or authorized 

here, PBR and annual serious injury and 

mortality from anthropogenic sources 

are included here as gross indicators of 

the status of the species and other 

threats. 

Marine mammal abundance estimates 

presented in this document represent 

the total number of individuals that 

make up a given stock or the total 

number estimated within a particular 

study or survey area. NMFS’s stock 

abundance estimates for most species 

represent the total estimate of 

individuals within the geographic area, 

if known, that comprises that stock. For 

some species, this geographic area may 

extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed 

stocks in this region are assessed in 

NMFS’s U.S. 2015 SARs (Carretta et al. 

2016). All values presented in Table 1 

are the most recent available at the time 

of publication and are available in the 

2016 SARs (Carretta et al. 2016). 

TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN REGION OF ACTIVITY

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock abundance (CV, 

Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) 

Family Eschrichtiidae 

Gray whale .................... Eschrichtius robustus .... Eastern North Pacific .... -; N ........... 20,990 (0.05; 20,125; 

2011).

624 132 

Family Balaenidae 

Humpback whale ........... Megaptera novaeangliae 

novaeangliae.

California/Oregon/Washington.E; D .......... 1,918 (0.03; 1,855; 

2011).

11.0 ≥5.5 

Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Family Delphinidae 

Killer whale .................... Orcinus orca .................. Eastern North Pacific 

Offshore.

-; N ........... 240 (0.49, 162, 2008) ... 1.6 0 

Risso’s dolphin .............. Grampus griseus ........... California/Oregon/Washington.-; N ........... 6,336 (0.32; (4,817, 

2014).

46 ≥3.7 

Bottlenose dolphin ......... Tursiops truncatus ......... California Coastal .......... -; N ........... 453 (0.06, 346, 2011) ... 2.7 ≥2.0 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises) 

Harbor Porpoise ............ Phocoena phocoena ..... Monterey Bay ................ -; N ........... 3,715 (0.51; 2,480; 

2011).

25 0 

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia 

Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) 

California sea lion .......... Zalophus californianus .. U.S. ............................... -; N ........... 296,750 (na, 153,337, 

2011).

9,200 389 

Family Phocidae (earless seals) 

Harbor seal .................... Phoca vitulina ................ California ....................... -; N ........... 30,968 (na; 27,348 

2012).

1,641 43 

1—Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is 

not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct 

human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. 

Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 

2—NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. 

3—These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined 

(e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual mortality/serious injury (M/SI) often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 42989 

All species that could potentially 

occur in the proposed project area are 

included in Table 1. As described 

below, all eight species temporally and 

spatially co-occur with the activity to 

the degree that take is reasonably likely 

to occur, and we have proposed 

authorizing it. Some additional 

information about species being taken is 

provided below. 

California Sea Lion 

California sea lions breed during July 

on the Channel Islands off southern 

California which is approximately 100 

mi (161 km) south of MBNMS, and off 

Baja and mainland Mexico (Odell 1981), 

although a few pups have been born on 

An ̃o Nuevo Island (in San Mateo 

County) (Keith et al., 1984). Following 

the breeding season on the Channel 

Islands, most adult and sub-adult males 

migrate northward to central and 

northern California and to the Pacific 

Northwest, while most females and 

young animals either remain on or near 

the breeding grounds throughout the 

year or move southward or northward, 

as far as Monterey Bay. 

Stage structure of California sea lions 

within the MBNMS varies by location, 

but generally, the majority of animals 

are adult and subadult males, primarily 

using the central California area to feed 

during the non-breeding season and are 

most common in the MBNMS during 

fall and spring migrations between 

southern breeding areas and northern 

feeding areas. Though males are 

generally most common, females may 

comprise 34 to 37 percent of juvenile 

individuals on the Monterey breakwater 

during El Nin ̃ o events (Nicholson 1986). 

California sea lions are the most 

abundant marine mammal in the project 

area and regularly use the Monterey 

Breakwater and portions of the pier as 

a haul-out site. 

Harbor Seal 

In California, there are approximately 

400 to 600 haul-out sites located on a 

mixture of rock shores, intertidal sand 

bars, and beaches associated with the 

mainland and offshore islands (NOAA 

2015c). Harbor seals are residents in the 

MBNMS throughout the year. They haul 

out at dozens of sites from Point Sur to 

An ̃ o Nuevo. Within MBNMS, tagged 

harbor seals have been documented to 

move substantial distances (10–20 km 

(3.9–7.8 mi)) to foraging areas each night 

(Oxman 1995; Trumble 1995). Overall, 

radio-tagged individuals have moved 

total distances of 480 km (Allen et al., 

1987). Pupping within the MBNMS 

occurs primarily during March and 

April, followed by a molt during May 

and June. Peak abundance on land 

within the Sanctuary is reached in late 

spring and early summer when harbor 

seals haul out to breed, give birth to 

pups, and molt. 

Pacific harbor seals are not known to 

regularly use the Monterey Breakwater 

as a haul-out site, but may use beaches 

or other relatively low-gradient areas to 

haul-out in the project area, and in areas 

nearby such as beaches along Cannery 

Row in the City of Monterey. 

Harbor Porpoise 

The harbor porpoise is a resident 

species of Monterey Bay and could 

occur within the project area. The 

Monterey Bay stock of harbor porpoise 

occurs from Point Sur to near Pigeon 

Point (Forney et al. 2014). 

Risso’s Dolphin and Bottlenose Dolphin 

Breeding and calving for Risso’s 

dolphin may occur year-round with a 

gestation period of 13 to 14 months and 

most births occurring from fall to winter 

in California waters (NOAA 2012). The 

California coastal bottlenose dolphin 

has been consistently sighted in and 

around Monterey Bay and could occur 

within the project area (NOAA 2008). 

Killer Whales 

Killer whales (both West Coast 

transients and Eastern North Pacific 

offshore stocks) visit the MBNMS on an 

intermittent and unpredictable basis. 

Transient killer whales prey on gray 

whales and California sea lions within 

the MBNMS, and have the potential to 

occur in the project area (MBNMS 

2016). 

Gray Whale 

From mid-February to May gray 

whales can be seen migrating northward 

with their calves along the West Coast 

(NOAA 2013a). The population migrates 

south along the West Coast in the fall to 

wintering grounds on the west coast of 

Baja California, Mexico, and the 

southeastern Gulf of California (NOAA 

2014). Although gray whales are not 

resident species within the project area, 

during their annual migration they can 

occur within approximately two miles 

of the coast of Monterey Bay (MBNMS 

2014). 

Humpback Whale 

Humpback whales are one of the more 

commonly observed large baleen whales 

in the MBNMS, mostly seen during 

summer and fall as they are feeding 

(NOAA 2014b). Both the Mexico 

Distinct Population Segment (DPS) and 

the Central America DPS can occur in 

the vicinity of the project area. 

Humpback whales are typically found 

further offshore than gray whales, but 

since 2014 higher numbers of humpback 

whales have been observed in and near 

Monterey Bay by whale-watching 

vessels. 

Marine Mammal Hearing 

Hearing is the most important sensory 

modality for marine mammals 

underwater, and exposure to 

anthropogenic sound can have 

deleterious effects. To appropriately 

assess the potential effects of exposure 

to sound, it is necessary to understand 

the frequency ranges marine mammals 

are able to hear. Current data indicate 

that not all marine mammal species 

have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., 

Richardson et al. 1995; Wartzok and 

Ketten 1999; Au and Hastings 2008). To 

reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) 

recommended that marine mammals be 

divided into functional hearing groups 

based on directly measured or estimated 

hearing ranges on the basis of available 

behavioral response data, audiograms 

derived using auditory evoked potential 

techniques, anatomical modeling, and 

other data. Note that no direct 

measurements of hearing ability have 

been successfully completed for 

mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency 

cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2016a) 

described generalized hearing ranges for 

these marine mammal hearing groups. 

Generalized hearing ranges were chosen 

based on the approximately 65 dB 

threshold from the normalized 

composite audiograms, with the 

exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower 

bound was deemed to be biologically 

implausible and the lower bound from 

Southall et al. (2007) retained. The 

functional groups and the associated 

frequencies are indicated below (note 

that these frequency ranges correspond 

to the range for the composite group, 

with the entire range not necessarily 

reflecting the capabilities of every 

species within that group): 

D Low-frequency cetaceans 

(mysticetes): Generalized hearing is 

estimated to occur between 

approximately 7 hertz (Hz) and 35 

kilohertz (kHz), with best hearing 

estimated to be from 100 Hz to 8 kHz; 

D Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger 

toothed whales, beaked whales, and 

most delphinids): Generalized hearing is 

estimated to occur between 

approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz, 

with best hearing from 10 to less than 

100 kHz; 

D High-frequency cetaceans 

(porpoises, river dolphins, and members 

of the genera Kogia and 

Cephalorhynchus; including two 

members of the genus Lagenorhynchus, 

on the basis of recent echolocation data 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
42990 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 

and genetic data): Generalized hearing is 

estimated to occur between 

approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz. 

D Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true 

seals): Generalized hearing is estimated 

to occur between approximately 50 Hz 

to 86 kHz, with best hearing between 1– 

50 kHz; 

D Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae (eared 

seals and sea lions): Generalized hearing 

is estimated to occur between 60 Hz and 

39 kHz, with best hearing between 2–48 

kHz. 

The pinniped functional hearing 

group was modified from Southall et al. 

(2007) on the basis of data indicating 

that phocid species have consistently 

demonstrated an extended frequency 

range of hearing compared to otariids, 

especially in the higher frequency range 

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

2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013). 

For more detail concerning these 

groups and associated frequency ranges, 

please see NMFS (2016a) for a review of 

available information. Eight marine 

mammal species (6 cetacean and 2 

pinniped (1 otariid and 1 phocid 

species) have the reasonable potential to 

co-occur with the proposed survey 

activities. Please refer to Table 1. Of the 

cetacean species that may be present, 

three are classified as low-frequency 

cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete species), 

two are classified as mid-frequency 

cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid and ziphiid 

species), and two are classified as highfrequency cetaceans (i.e., harbor 

porpoise). 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

This section includes a summary and 

discussion of the ways that components 

of the specified activity may impact 

marine mammals and their habitat. The 

‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental 

Harassment’’ section later in this 

document will include a quantitative 

analysis of the number of individuals 

that are expected to be taken by this 

activity. The ‘‘Negligible Impact 

Analysis and Determination’’ section 

will consider the content of this section, 

the ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental 

Harassment’’ section, and the ‘‘Proposed 

Mitigation’’ section, to draw 

conclusions regarding the likely impacts 

of these activities on the reproductive 

success or survivorship of individuals 

and how those impacts on individuals 

are likely to impact marine mammal 

species or stocks. 

The USCG Monterey Station Project 

involves in-water pile driving and pile 

removal that could adversely affect 

marine mammal species and stocks by 

exposing them to elevated underwater 

noise levels in the vicinity of the 

activity area. Although marine 

mammals (primarily pinnipeds hauled 

out on the adjacent jetty) could be 

exposed to airborne noise associated 

with pile replacement, airborne noise 

would likely cause behavioral responses 

similar to those discussed below in 

relation to underwater noise and is 

accounted for in the ‘‘Estimated Take’’ 

section and therefore is not discussed 

further. 

Exposure to high intensity sound for 

a sufficient duration may result in 

auditory effects such as a noise-induced 

threshold shift (TS)—an increase in the 

auditory threshold after exposure to 

noise (Finneran et al. 2005). Factors that 

influence the amount of threshold shift 

include the amplitude, duration, 

frequency content, temporal pattern, 

and energy distribution of noise 

exposure. The magnitude of hearing 

threshold shift normally decreases over 

time following cessation of the noise 

exposure. The amount of threshold shift 

just after exposure is the initial 

threshold shift. If the threshold shift 

eventually returns to zero (i.e., the 

threshold returns to the pre-exposure 

value), it is a temporary threshold shift 

(Southall et al. 2007). 

Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of 

hearing)—When animals exhibit 

reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds 

must be louder for an animal to detect 

them) following exposure to an intense 

sound or sound for long duration, it is 

referred to as TS. An animal can 

experience temporary threshold shift 

(TTS) or permanent threshold shift 

(PTS). TTS can last from minutes or 

hours to days (i.e., there is complete 

recovery), can occur in specific 

frequency ranges (i.e., an animal might 

only have a temporary loss of hearing 

sensitivity between the frequencies of 1 

and 10 kHz), and can be of varying 

amounts (for example, an animal’s 

hearing sensitivity might be reduced 

initially by only 6 dB or reduced by 30 

dB). PTS is permanent, but some 

recovery is possible. PTS can also occur 

in a specific frequency range and 

amount as mentioned above for TTS. 

For marine mammals, published data 

are limited to the captive bottlenose 

dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and 

Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran et 

al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a, 

2010b; Finneran and Schlundt, 2010; 

Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a, 

2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b; 

Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et al., 

2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For 

pinnipeds in water, data are limited to 

measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an 

elephant seal, and California sea lions 

(Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et 

al., 2012b). 

Marine mammal hearing plays a 

critical role in communication with 

conspecifics, and interpretation of 

environmental cues for purposes such 

as predator avoidance and prey capture. 

Depending on the degree (elevation of 

threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery 

time), and frequency range of TTS, and 

the context in which it is experienced, 

TTS can have effects on marine 

mammals ranging from discountable to 

serious (similar to those discussed in 

auditory masking, below). For example, 

a marine mammal may be able to readily 

compensate for a brief, relatively small 

amount of TTS in a non-critical 

frequency range that occurs during a 

time where ambient noise is lower and 

there are not as many competing sounds 

present. Alternatively, a larger amount 

and longer duration of TTS sustained 

during time when communication is 

critical for successful mother/calf 

interactions could have more serious 

impacts. Also, depending on the degree 

and frequency range, the effects of PTS 

on an animal could range in severity, 

although it is considered generally more 

serious because it is a permanent 

condition. Of note, reduced hearing 

sensitivity as a simple function of aging 

has been observed in marine mammals, 

as well as humans and other taxa 

(Southall et al. 2007), so one can infer 

that strategies exist for coping with this 

condition to some degree, though likely 

not without cost. 

Masking—In addition, chronic 

exposure to excessive, though not highintensity, noise could cause masking at 

particular frequencies for marine 

mammals that utilize sound for vital 

biological functions (Clark et al. 2009). 

Acoustic masking is when other noises 

such as from human sources interfere 

with animal 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 from maximizing 

their performance fitness in survival 

and reproduction. 

Masking occurs at the frequency band 

that the animals utilize. Therefore, since 

noise generated from vibratory pile 

driving activity is mostly concentrated 

at low frequency ranges, it may have 

less effect on high frequency 

echolocation sounds by odontocetes 

(toothed whales). However, lower 

frequency man-made noises are more 

likely to affect detection of 

communication calls and other 

potentially important natural sounds 

such as surf and prey noise. It may also 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 42991 

affect communication signals when they 

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, which can occur 

over large temporal and spatial scales, 

can potentially affect the species at 

population, community, 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 have 

increased by as much as 20 dB (more 

than three times in terms of sound 

pressure level) in the world’s ocean 

from pre-industrial periods, and most of 

these increases are from distant 

shipping (Hildebrand 2009). 

Behavioral disturbance—Finally, 

marine mammals’ exposure 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 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 also 

difficult to predict (Southall et al., 

2007). Currently NMFS uses a received 

level of 160 dB re 1 mPa root mean 

square (rms) to predict the onset of 

behavioral harassment from impulse 

noises (such as impact pile driving), and 

120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for continuous 

noises (such as vibratory pile driving). 

For the proposed USCG Monterey 

Station Project, both of these noise 

levels are considered for effects analysis 

because the USCG plans to use both 

impact and vibratory pile driving, as 

well as vibratory pile removal. 

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 biologically 

significant if the change affects growth, 

survival, and/or reproduction, which 

depends on the severity, duration, and 

context of the effects. 

Habitat—The primary potential 

impacts to marine mammal habitat are 

associated with elevated sound levels 

produced by pile driving and removal 

associated with marine mammal prey 

species. However, other potential 

impacts to the surrounding habitat and 

prey species from physical disturbance 

are also possible. 

No permanent impacts to habitat are 

proposed to or would occur as a result 

of the proposed project. The USCG’s 

proposed Station Monterey waterfront 

repair activity would not increase the 

pier’s existing footprint, and no new 

structures would be installed that would 

result in the loss of additional habitat. 

A temporary, small-scale loss of foraging 

habitat may occur for marine mammals 

if marine mammals leave the area 

during pile extraction and driving 

activities. 

Short-term turbidity is a water quality 

effect of most in-water work, including 

pile driving. Cetaceans are not expected 

to be close enough to the Monterey 

Station Project to experience 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. 

Acoustic energy created during pile 

replacement work would have the 

potential to disturb fish within the 

vicinity of the pile replacement work. 

As a result, the affected area could 

temporarily lose foraging value to 

marine mammals. During pile driving, 

high noise levels may exclude fish from 

the vicinity of pile driving. Hastings and 

Popper (2005) identified several studies 

that suggest fish will relocate to avoid 

areas of damaging noise energy. 

Therefore, if fish leave the area of 

disturbance, pinniped foraging habitat 

may have temporarily decreased 

foraging value when piles are driven 

using impact hammering. The duration 

of fish avoidance of this area after pile 

driving stops is unknown. However, the 

affected area represents an extremely 

small portion of the total area within 

foraging range of marine mammals that 

may be present in the project area. 

Monterey Bay is classified as Essential 

Fish Habitat (EFH) under the MagnusonStevens Fisheries Conservation and 

Management Act, as amended by the 

Sustainable Fisheries Act. The EFH 

provisions of the Sustainable Fisheries 

Act are designed to protect fisheries 

habitat from being lost due to 

disturbance and degradation. The act 

requires implementation of measures to 

conserve and enhance EFH. The 

Monterey Bay is classified as an EFH for 

118 species of commercially important 

fish, 30 of which have potential to occur 

within the project area. Some of these 

species are likely prey to pinnipeds. In 

addition to EFH designations, portions 

of the Monterey Bay are designated as 

a Habitat Area of Particular Concern 

(HAPC) for various fish species within 

the Pacific Groundfish, Pacific Coast 

Salmon, Highly Migratory Species, and 

Coastal Pelagic Fisheries management 

plans. A concurrence letter was issued 

by NMFS (2013) (and still applies) 

concluding that the proposed action 

would adversely affect EFH for various 

federally managed fish species, 

including a temporary increase in 

suspended sediments in the water 

column from pile driving and removal, 

conversion of soft bottom habitat to 

artificial substrate, and an increase in 

underwater sound levels in the water 

column associated with pile driving. 

However, the project includes measures 

to avoid, minimize, or otherwise offset 

adverse effects, such that NMFS has no 

further EFH conservation 

recommendations to provide (NOAA 

2013). 

During construction activity of the 

proposed USCG Monterey Station 

Project, only a small fraction of the 

available habitat of the Monterey Harbor 

would be ensonified within Monterey 

Bay at any given time. Disturbance to 

fish species would be short-term and 

fish would be expected to return to their 

pre-disturbance behavior once the pile 

driving activity ceases (refer to the 

USCG’s SEA). The impacts to marine 

mammals and the food sources that they 

utilize are not expected to cause 

significant or long-term consequences 

for individual marine mammals or their 

populations. For all the discussed above 

reasons, any adverse effects to marine 

mammal habitat in the area from the 

USCG’s proposed Monterey Station 

project would not be significant. 

Estimated Take 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes proposed 

for authorization through this IHA, 

which will inform both NMFS’s 

consideration of whether the number of 

takes is ‘‘small’’ and the negligible 

impact determination. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any 

act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance 

which (i) has the potential to injure a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 

or (ii) has the potential to disturb a 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
42992 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild by causing disruption 

of behavioral patterns, including, but 

not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

(Level B harassment). 

Authorized takes would be by Level B 

harassment only, in the form of 

disruption of behavioral patterns for 

individual marine mammals resulting 

from exposure to noise from pile driving 

and removal activities. Based on the 

nature of the activity and the 

anticipated effectiveness of the 

mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown 

measures—discussed in detail below in 

Proposed Mitigation section), Level A 

harassment is neither anticipated nor 

proposed to be authorized. 

As described previously, no mortality 

is anticipated or proposed to be 

authorized for this activity. Below we 

describe how the take is estimated. 

Described in the most basic way, we 

estimate take by considering: (1) 

Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS 

believes the best available science 

indicates marine mammals will be 

behaviorally harassed or incur some 

degree of hearing impairment; (2) the 

area or volume of water that will be 

ensonified above these levels in a day; 

(3) the density or occurrence of marine 

mammals within these ensonified areas; 

and, (4) and the number of days of 

activities. Below, we describe these 

components in more detail and present 

the proposed take estimate. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

Using the best available science, 

NMFS has developed acoustic 

thresholds that identify the received 

level of underwater sound above which 

exposed marine mammals would be 

reasonably expected to be behaviorally 

harassed (equated to Level B 

harassment) or to incur PTS of some 

degree (equated to Level A harassment). 

Level B Harassment for non-explosive 

sources—Though significantly driven by 

received level, the onset of behavioral 

disturbance from anthropogenic noise 

exposure is also informed to varying 

degrees by other factors related to the 

source (e.g., frequency, predictability, 

duty cycle), the environment (e.g., 

bathymetry), and the receiving animals 

(hearing, motivation, experience, 

demography, behavioral context) and 

can be difficult to predict (Southall et al. 

2007, Ellison et al. 2011). Based on what 

the available science indicates and the 

practical need to use a threshold based 

on a factor that is both predictable and 

measurable for most activities, NMFS 

uses a generalized acoustic threshold 

based on received level to estimate the 

onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS 

predicts that marine mammals are likely 

to be behaviorally harassed in a manner 

we consider Level B harassment when 

exposed to underwater anthropogenic 

noise above received levels of 120 dB re 

1 mPa (rms) for continuous (e.g., 

vibratory pile-driving, drilling) sources 

and above 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for 

non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic 

airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific 

sonar) sources. USCG’s proposed 

activity includes the use of continuous 

(vibratory pile driving and removal) and 

impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, 

and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 

mPa (rms) are applicable. 

Level A harassment for non-explosive 

sources—NMFS’s Technical Guidance 

for Assessing the Effects of 

Anthropogenic Sound on Marine 

Mammal Hearing (NMFS, 2016a) 

identifies dual criteria to assess auditory 

injury (Level A harassment) to five 

different marine mammal groups (based 

on hearing sensitivity) as a result of 

exposure to noise from two different 

types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). USCG’s proposed activity 

includes the use of non-impulsive 

(vibratory pile driving and removal) and 

impulsive (impact pile driving) sources. 

These thresholds were developed by 

compiling and synthesizing the best 

available science and soliciting input 

multiple times from both the public and 

peer reviewers to inform the final 

product, and are provided in Table 2 

below. The references, analysis, and 

methodology used in the development 

of the thresholds are described in NMFS 

2016 Technical Guidance, which may 

be accessed at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ 

acoustics/guidelines.htm. 

TABLE 2—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT

Hearing group 

PTS onset thresholds 

Impulsive Non-impulsive 

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

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

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

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

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

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

also be considered. 

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

In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure 

is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being 

included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated 

with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF 

cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level 

thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for 

action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded. 

Ensonified Area 

Here, we describe operational and 

environmental parameters of the activity 

that will feed into identifying the area 

ensonified above the acoustic 

thresholds. 

Background noise is the sound level 

that would exist without the proposed 

activity (pile driving and removal, in 

this case), while ambient sound levels 

are those without human activity 

(NOAA 2009). Natural actions that 

contribute to ambient noise include 

waves, wind, rainfall, current 

fluctuations, chemical composition, and 

biological sound sources (e.g., marine 

mammals, fish, and shrimp, Carr et al. 

2006). Background noise levels will be 

compared to the NOAA/NMFS 

threshold levels designed to protect 

marine mammals to determine the Level 

B Harassment Zones for noise sources. 

The background noise at Monterey 

Harbor is relatively high due to boat 

traffic, foot traffic, and noise from the 

USCG Monterey Station. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 42993 

Pile installation would be adjacent to 

a rock jetty that would provide 

substantial underwater shielding of 

sound transmission to areas north (or 

through the jetty) (see Figure 1–2 of the 

Application). 

To more accurately estimate the 

extent of underwater noise, the software 

package SoundPlan was used to 

simulate the effect of the Monterey 

Breakwater in reducing underwater 

sound transmission from the proposed 

project (Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc. 

2012). A conservative source level of 

168 dB rms at 33 feet (ft) (10 meters (m)) 

level was used to characterize the sound 

that would be produced from vibratory 

pile installation (from data produced by 

the Navy for their Test Pile Program in 

Bangor, Washington and then also 

compared to CALTRANS data (see 

Appendix A of the application)). For the 

Navy’s Test Pile Program, there was a 

considerable range in the rms levels 

measured across vibratory pile driving 

event, where the highest average rms 

level was 169 dB rms at 33 ft (10 m) for 

36-inch piles. In comparison, the range 

of vibratory sound levels at 33 ft or 10 

m reported by CALTRANS is 155 dB 

rms for 12-in diameter piles to 175 dB 

rms for 36-in piles (based on maximum 

1-second rms levels). All of these piles 

were driven in relatively shallow water 

similar to Monterey Harbor. Because the 

USCG proposes to use 14-in steel piles, 

and to be conservative, the USCG input 

into Sound Plan an rms level greater 

than those for 12-in piles from 

CATLRANS data and closer to the rms 

level for 36-in piles from the 

CALTRANS and the Navy’s Test Pile 

Program data. 

Table 3 shows the results of the 

modeled underwater noise analysis for 

vibratory pile driving where 120 dB 

RMS (Level B threshold) levels would 

end, and Figure 5–1 from the 

application shows the pattern of sound 

expected from vibratory pile extraction 

and pile installation, taking into account 

shielding from the Monterey 

Breakwater. From these data, a Level B 

zone of influence (ZOI) was calculated 

at approximately 7.3 square kilometers 

(km2). The modeled distances shown in 

the table below are likely an 

overestimate of the extent of underwater 

noise, because practical spreading loss 

(15 log10) sound propagation were 

assumed, and the Monterey Breakwater 

would likely reduce noise considerably 

faster than assumed. Per the sound 

assessment completed for the project 

(included in Appendix A of the 

application) the following assumptions 

and parameters were used for the 

analysis: For vibratory pile installation, 

it is estimated that it would take 

approximately 20 minutes (1200 

seconds) to vibrate in each pile. 

TABLE 3—MODELED EXTENT OF LEVEL B ZONES FROM VIBRATORY PILE EXTRACTION AND DRIVING

Modeling scenario Level B Zone 

(Distance to 120 dB rms) 

Modeled north ................................................................................................................................................................. 2,000 m. 

Modeled northeast shoreline .......................................................................................................................................... 2,400 m. 

Modeled east to shoreline .............................................................................................................................................. 1,800 m. 

Modeled south to shoreline ............................................................................................................................................ 550 m. 

Area of Influence ............................................................................................................................................................ 7.3 km2. 

Notes: dB = decibel, RMS = root mean square. 

The extent of underwater noise from 

impact pile driving was also predicted 

using the SoundPlan software package 

as described above for vibratory pile 

driving. Per the sound assessment 

completed for the project and included 

in Appendix A the following 

assumptions and parameters were used 

for the analysis: The assumption that a 

hammer is used that moves the pile at 

about 30 to 40 blows per minute, up to 

20 minutes of impact pile driving would 

be required for each pile. Measurements 

conducted for the USCG Tongue Point 

Pier Repairs in the Columbia River were 

found to be most representative for this 

project. The Tongue Point Pier included 

installation of 24-in steel pipe piles. 

Average sound levels measured at 

Tongue Point include peak pressures of 

189 to 207 dB, rms sound pressure 

levels of 178 to 189 dB, and SEL levels 

of 160 to 175 dB per strike at 33 ft (10 

m). Due to the difference in pile sizes, 

use of the Tongue Point data would 

likely overestimate sound levels 

expected at the proposed USCG Station 

Monterey project. Based on the Tongue 

Point sound measurements, 

unattenuated near-source impact pile 

driving levels of 208 dB peak, 195 rms 

and 174 dB SEL were applied to this 

project. Table 4 shows the extent of 

noise levels for NMFS’ acoustic criteria, 

assuming the use of noise attenuation 

(bubble curtain). Figure 5–3 of the 

application shows the extent of 

attenuated noise levels for impact pile 

driving out to the NMFS behavioral 

criterion of 160 dB rms. The area 

encompassed by the 160 dB criterion is 

approximately 0.27 km2. 

TABLE 4—MODELED EXTENT OF LEVEL B ZONES FROM IMPACT PILE DRIVING

Modeling scenario 

Distance to marine 

mammal criteria 

rms 

(dB re: 1μPa) 

160 dB 

(Level B Threshold) 

Modeled attenuated noise transmission north and northeast (through breakwater) .......................................................... 76 m. 

Modeled attenuated noise transmission in all other directions .......................................................................................... 465 m. 

Area of Influence ................................................................................................................................................................. 0.27 km2. 

Notes: Assumes 10 dB of underwater noise attenuation by using a bubble curtain during pile driving Distances and method of calculation are 

presented in Appendix A of the application. 

dB = decibel. 

rms = root mean square (dB re: 1μPa). 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
42994 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 

The incidental take requested is Level 

B harassment of any marine mammal 

occurring within the 160 dB rms 

disturbance threshold during impact 

pile driving of 14-in steel pipe piles; the 

120 dB rms disturbance threshold for 

vibratory pile driving of 14-in steel pipe 

piles; and the 120 dB rms disturbance 

threshold for vibratory removal of 16-in 

to 18-in timber piles. Level B 

harassment zones have been established 

as described in Tables 3 and 4 that will 

be in place during active pile removal 

or installation. 

When NMFS Technical Guidance 

(NMFS 2016) was published, in 

recognition of the fact that ensonified 

area/volume could be more technically 

challenging to predict because of the 

duration component in the new 

thresholds, we developed a User 

Spreadsheet that includes tools to help 

predict a simple isopleth that can be 

used in conjunction with marine 

mammal density or occurrence to help 

predict takes. We note that because of 

some of the assumptions included in the 

methods used for these tools, we 

anticipate that isopleths produced are 

typically going to be overestimates of 

some degree, which will result in some 

degree of overestimate of Level A take. 

However, these tools offer the best way 

to predict appropriate isopleths when 

more sophisticated 3D modeling 

methods are not available, and NMFS 

continues to develop ways to 

quantitatively refine these tools, and 

will qualitatively address the output 

where appropriate. For stationary 

sources such as vibratory and impact 

pile driving, NMFS’s User Spreadsheet 

predicts the closest distance at which, if 

a marine mammal remained at that 

distance the whole duration of the 

activity, it would not incur PTS. Inputs 

used in the User Spreadsheet, and the 

resulting isopleths are reported below 

(Tables 5 and 6). 

The PTS isopleths were identified for 

each hearing group for impact and 

vibratory installation and removal 

methods that will be used in the 

proposed Monterey Station Project. The 

PTS isopleth distances were calculated 

using the NMFS acoustic threshold 

calculator (NMFS 2016), with inputs 

based on measured and surrogate noise 

measurements. Data from the U.S Navy 

for their Test Pile Program at Bangor, 

Washington with a source level of 168 

dB rms (at 10 m) was used to 

characterize the sound that would be 

produced from vibratory pile driving 

and removal. For impact pile driving, 

referenced data provided for similar 

piles and substrate identified in the 

California Department of Transportation 

Compendium of Pile Driving Sound 

Data Report (Caltrans 2007) with a 

source level (in SEL) of 174 dB at a 

distance of 10 m with an average of 30 

strikes per pile. 

TABLE 5—NMFS TECHNICAL ACOUSTIC GUIDANCE USER SPREADSHEET INPUT TO PREDICT PTS ISOPLETHS

User spreadsheet input 

Spreadsheet tab used 

Sound source 1 Sound source 2 

(A) Vibratory pile driving 

(removal and installation) 

(E.1) Impact pile driving 

(installation) 

Source Level (rms SPL) .................................................................................. 168 dB 

Source Level (Single Strike/shot SEL) ............................................................ .................................................... 174 dB 

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

(a) Number of strikes in 1 h ............................................................................ .................................................... 30 

(a) Activity Duration (h) within 24-h period ...................................................... 4 5 

Propagation (xLogR) ........................................................................................ 15 15 

Distance of source level measurement (meters) + .......................................... 10 14 

TABLE 6—NMFS TECHNICAL ACOUSTIC GUIDANCE USER SPREADSHEET OUTPUT FOR PREDICTED PTS ISOPLETHS AND

LEVEL A DAILY ENSONIFIED AREAS

User spreadsheet output 

Sound source type Low-frequency 

cetaceans 

Mid-frequency 

cetaceans 

High-frequency 

cetaceans 

Phocid 

pinnipeds 

Otariid 

pinnipeds 

PTS Isopleth (meters) 

Vibratory (removal and installation) ........................... 50.4 4.5 74.5 30.6 2.2 

Impact (installation) .................................................... 70.8 2.5 84.4 37.9 2.8 

Daily Ensonified Area (km2) 

Vibratory (pile removal and installation) .................... 0.00798 0.00006 0.01744 0.00294 0.00002 

Impact (installation) .................................................... 0.01575 0.00002 0.02238 0.00451 0.00002 

Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take 

Calculation and Estimation 

In this section we provide the 

information about the presence, density, 

or group dynamics of marine mammals 

that will inform the take calculation and 

we describe how the marine mammal 

occurrence information is brought 

together to produce a quantitative take 

estimate. 

Take estimates are based on the 

number of animals per unit area in the 

project area multiplied by the area size 

of ensonified zones within which 

received noise levels exceed certain 

thresholds (i.e., Level B harassment) 

from specific activities, then multiplied 

by the total number of days such 

activities would occur. Local abundance 

data are used for take calculations for 

the proposed authorized take where 

density is not available or applicable to 

the project area. 

Unless otherwise described, 

incidental take is estimated by the 

following equation: 

Incidental take estimate = species 

density * zone of influence (7.3 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 42995 

km2) * days of pile-related activity 

(8 days) 

Harbor Seals 

Pacific harbor seals are much less 

abundant in the project area than 

California sea lions, and only two 

annual surveys conducted since 1998 

identified any individuals. The 2004 

annual pinniped survey conducted by 

NMFS counted 28 Pacific harbor seals 

in Monterey Harbor in 2004, and 1 in 

2005 (Lowry 2012). Pacific harbor seals 

hauled-out along Cannery Row, north of 

the Monterey Breakwater, ranged from 1 

to 24 in 2002, 2004, and 2009. During 

repairs on the Pier in 2009, Pacific 

harbor seals were occasionally observed 

in the nearby waters, but were never 

observed to haul-out on the breakwater 

(Harvey and Hoover 2009). The density 

for harbor seals was determined by 

drawing a 5 km radius in ArcGIS with 

the jetty haul-out site at the center. The 

area within this circle was calculated, 

excluding the land, resulting in a 29 

km2 foraging area. The calculation for 

take of Harbor seals estimate assumes 28 

individuals (the most observed during 

any single survey) to be in the water at 

any given time within 5 km of the 

breakwater (area 29 km2); therefore, the 

calculated density is 0.97 seals/km2. 

The estimated Level B take is 0.97 seals 

multiplied by 7.3 km2 and 8 days of 

activity for a total of 57 harbor seals (see 

Table 7). Since the calculated Level A 

zones of phocids are small and 

mitigation is in place to avoid Level A 

take (Table 6), we do not consider it 

likely that any harbor seals would be 

taken by Level A harassment. 

California Sea Lions 

The calculation for Level B take of 

California sea lions in the water 

assumes an average density of 8.62 

individuals/km2. This density was 

determined by drawing a 5 km radius in 

ArcGIS with the jetty haul-out site at the 

center. The area within this circle was 

calculated, excluding the land, resulting 

in a 29 km2 foraging area. An average of 

250 sea lions were assumed in the water 

at any given time. Therefore, 250 sea 

lions divided by 29 km2 equals 8.62 sea 

lions/km2. Estimated take is then 

calculated using 8.62 sea lions 

multiplied by 7.3 km2 and 8 days of 

activity for a total of 504 California sea 

lions (see Table 7). For the additional 

California sea lions that are present on 

the breakwater (which we would also 

expect to enter the water during the 

project): The overall average number of 

sea lions for all of the surveys of the 

Monterey Breakwater combined was 250 

individuals. Therefore, 250 animals was 

multiplied by 8 days of activity for a 

total of 2,000 California sea lions (see 

Table 7). Since the calculated Level A 

zones of otariids are all very small and 

mitigation is in place to avoid Level A 

take (Table 6), we do not consider it 

likely that any sea lions would be taken 

by Level A harassment. 

Killer Whale 

Due to the low frequency and 

unpredictability of killer whales 

entering the project area, the application 

of a density equation is not reasonable 

for predicting take. When killer whales 

enter Monterey Bay, they typically are 

in groups of 3 to 8 at a time (Guzman 

2016). To be conservative, the proposed 

take estimate for Level B harassment is 

based on a larger group of eight animals 

that may enter the area (Table 7). Since 

the Level A zones of mid-frequency 

cetaceans are small and mitigation is in 

place to avoid Level A take (Table 6), we 

do not consider it likely that any killer 

whales would be taken by Level A 

harassment. 

Bottlenose Dolphin 

Abundance and densities of cetaceans 

in the California Current ecosystem 

were conducted from 1991 to 2005 

(Barlow, Forney 2007). The results of 

the surveys indicate that bottlenose 

dolphin population density throughout 

the entire west coast shoreline is 1.78 

individuals/100 km2. During the same 

survey, the mean group size for 

bottlenose dolphins observed in Central 

California was four individuals. Other, 

more recent data suggest that densities 

may be up to 0.04/km2 (Weller 2016). 

Even when using the higher density, 

estimated take results in very low 

numbers (<1 over the entire period of 

construction). Rather than using density 

calculations to estimate take, to be 

conservative, the proposed Level B take 

is a small pod of 10 bottlenose dolphins 

(Table 7). Since the Level A zones of 

mid-frequency cetaceans are small and 

mitigation is in place to avoid Level A 

take (Table 6), we do not consider it 

likely that any bottlenose dolphins 

would be taken by Level A harassment. 

Risso’s Dolphin 

Because there is not reliable local data 

for Monterey Bay, the proposed Level B 

take estimate for Risso’s dolphins is a 

single occurrence of a small pod of 10 

animals (see Table 7) as groups of 

Risso’s dolphins average between 10–30 

animals. Since the Level A zones of 

mid-frequency cetaceans are small and 

mitigation is in place to avoid Level A 

take (Table 6), we do not consider it 

likely that any Risso’s dolphin would be 

taken by Level A harassment. 

Harbor Porpoise 

An estimate of the density of harbor 

porpoise in the southern portion of 

Monterey Bay nearshore is 

approximately 2.321 per km2 (Forney et 

al. 2014). Therefore, the estimated take 

for Level B harassment is 2.231 porpoise 

multiplied by 7.3 km2 and 8 days of 

activity for a total of 136 harbor 

porpoise (see Table 7). Since the 

calculated Level A zones of high 

frequency cetaceans are small and 

mitigation is in place to avoid Level A 

take (Table 6), we do not consider it 

likely that any harbor porpoise would 

be taken by Level A harassment. 

Humpback Whale 

Humpback whales are typically found 

further offshore than gray whales and 

occurrence is rare; however, since 2014 

greater numbers of humpback whales 

have been observed in and near 

Monterey Bay by whale-watching 

vessels. Because USCG will shutdown 

for all observed humpbacks (in Level A 

and B zones), no takes of humpback 

whales are proposed. 

Gray Whale 

The occurrence of gray whales is 

extremely rare near shore in the project 

area. If gray whales would approach the 

project area they would be more likely 

to occur during the spring migration 

north, when they tend to stay closer to 

shore than during the winter southern 

migration. The NOAA National Center 

for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) 

reported densities of gray whales at 0.1 

to 0.5 per km2 (NCCOS 2007); however, 

it is unclear how applicable these data 

are for the very near-shore environment 

of the project area. Therefore, instead of 

using density, the proposed Level B take 

of four gray whales is proposed for the 

project. Since the Level A zones of lowfrequency cetaceans are small and 

mitigation is in place to avoid Level A 

take (see Table 6) we do not consider it 

likely that any gray whales would be 

taken by Level A harassment during 

removal or impact installation. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
42996 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 

TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF REQUESTED INCIDENTAL TAKE BY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT

Species Stock size 

Proposed 

authorized 

Level B take 

Proposed 

authorized 

total take 

% of 

Population 

Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) ............... 30,968 57 ................................................................... 57 Less than 1. 

California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) ... 296,750 504 (Animals already in the water) ................ 2,504 Less than 1. 

California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) ... 296,750 2,000 (Animals that enter the water from the 

breakwater).

Transient killer whale (Orcinus orca) ............. 240 8 ..................................................................... 8 3.33. 

Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) ........ 453 10 (single occurrence of a small pod) ........... 10 4.19. 

Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) ................ 6,336 10 (single occurrence of a small pod) ........... 10 Less than 1. 

Harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) ......... 3,715 136 ................................................................. 136 3.66. 

Humpback whale (Megaptera novaengliae) .. 1,918 0* .................................................................... 0 0. 

Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus) ............... 20,990 4 ..................................................................... 4 Less than 1. 

* USCG will implement shutdown measures for any humpback observed; therefore, the take is considered to be zero. 

Proposed Mitigation 

In order to issue an IHA under section 

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

set forth the permissible methods of 

taking pursuant to such activity, ‘‘and 

other means of effecting the least 

practicable 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 

(latter not applicable for this action). 

NMFS regulations require applicants for 

incidental take authorizations to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting such activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, we carefully consider two 

primary factors: 

(1) The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 

expected to reduce impacts to marine 

mammals, marine mammal species or 

stocks, and their habitat. This considers 

the nature of the potential adverse 

impact being mitigated (likelihood, 

scope, range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned) the likelihood 

of effective implementation (probability 

implemented as planned), and; 

(2) the practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost, 

impact on operations, and, in the case 

of a military readiness activity, 

personnel safety, practicality of 

implementation, and impact on the 

effectiveness of the military readiness 

activity. 

Several measures are proposed for 

mitigating effects on marine mammals 

from the pile installation and removal 

activities at for the USCG Monterey 

Station and are described below. 

Timing Restrictions 

All work would be conducted during 

daylight hours. 

Noise Attenuation 

A bubble curtain and cushion pads 

will be used during pile driving 

activities with an impact hammer to 

reduce sound levels. In addition, the 

USCG has proposed performing ‘‘predrilling.’’ Pre-drilling would be 

performed and would be discontinued 

when the pile tip is approximately five 

feet (ft) above the required pile tip 

elevation. Pre-drilling is a method that 

starts the ‘‘hole’’ for the new pile; the 

pile is inserted after the hole has been 

pre-drilled which creates less friction 

and overall noise and turbidity during 

installation. 

Exclusion Zones 

Exclusion Zones calculated from the 

PTS isopleths will be implemented to 

protect marine mammals from Level A 

harassment (refer to Table 6). If a marine 

mammal is observed at or within the 

Exclusion Zone, work will shut down 

(stop work) until the individual has 

been observed outside of the zone, or 

has not been observed for at least 15 

minutes for pinnipeds and small 

cetaceans and 30 minutes for large 

whales. 

Additional Shutdown Measures 

If a humpback whale is observed 

within the Level A or Level B zones, the 

USCG will implement shutdown 

measures. Work would not commence 

until 30-minutes after the last sighting 

of a humpback within these zones. 

During impact pile driving because 

the Level B Zone is smaller (76 m) 

compared to the Level A Zone (84.4 m) 

for high frequency cetaceans for noise 

transmission north and northeast 

(through breakwater), the USCG will 

consider both the Level A and B zones 

to be at 84.4 m and will implement 

shutdown measures. 

USCG will implement shutdown 

measures if the number of authorized 

takes for any particular species reaches 

the limit under the IHA and if such 

marine mammals are sighted within the 

vicinity of the project area and are 

approaching the Level B harassment 

zone during in-water construction 

activities. 

If a marine mammal species under 

NMFS’ jurisdiction is observed within 

the Level A or B zones that has not been 

authorized for take, the USCG will 

implement shutdown measures. 

Level B Harassment Zones 

USCG will monitor the Level B 

harassment ZOIs as described in Tables 

3 and 4. 

Soft-Start for Impact Pile Driving 

For impact pile installation, 

contractors will provide an initial set of 

three strikes from the impact hammer at 

40 percent energy, followed by a oneminute waiting period, then two 

subsequent three-strike sets. Each day, 

USCG will use the soft-start technique at 

the beginning of impact pile driving, or 

if impact pile driving has ceased for 

more than 30 minutes. 

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 the affected 

species or stocks and their habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 42997 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance. 

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

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

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, 

‘‘requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such 

taking.’’ The MMPA implementing 

regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) 

indicate that requests for authorizations 

must include the suggested means of 

accomplishing the necessary monitoring 

and reporting that will result in 

increased knowledge of the species and 

of the level of taking or impacts on 

populations of marine mammals that are 

expected to be present in the proposed 

action area. Effective reporting is critical 

both to compliance as well as ensuring 

that the most value is obtained from the 

required monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density). 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) Action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

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

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

of marine mammal species with the 

action; or (4) biological or behavioral 

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

feeding areas). 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors. 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks. 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat). 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Marine mammal monitoring will be 

conducted in strategic locations around 

the area of potential effects at all times 

during in-water pile driving and 

removal as described below: 

• During pile removal or installation 

the observer will monitor from the most 

practicable vantage point possible (i.e., 

the pier itself, the breakwater, adjacent 

boat docks in the harbor, or a boat) to 

determine whether marine mammals 

enter the exclusion zone and to record 

take when marine mammals enter the 

relevant Level B Harassment Zones 

based on type of construction activity. 

• If a marine mammal approaches an 

Exclusion Zone, the observation will be 

reported to the Construction Manager 

and the individual will be watched 

closely. If the marine mammal crosses 

into an Exclusion Zone, a stop-work 

order will be issued. In the event that a 

stop-work order is triggered, the 

observed marine mammal(s) will be 

closely monitored while it remains in or 

near the Exclusion Zone, and only when 

it moves well outside of the Exclusion 

Zone or has not been observed for at 

least 15 minutes for pinnipeds and 30 

minutes for whales will the lead 

monitor allow work to recommence. 

Protected Species Observers 

USCG shall employ NMFS-approved 

protected species observers (PSOs) to 

conduct marine mammal monitoring for 

its Monterey Station 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. NMFS-approved 

PSOs shall meet the following 

requirements: 

1. 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 may be necessary to correctly 

identify the target. 

2. Advanced education in biological 

science, wildlife management, 

mammalogy or related fields (Bachelors 

degree or higher is preferred), but not 

required. 

3. Experience or training in the field 

identification of marine mammals 

(cetaceans and pinnipeds). 

4. Sufficient training, orientation or 

experience with the construction 

operation to provide for personal safety 

during observations. 

5. 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. 

6. Experience and ability to conduct 

field observations and collect data 

according to assigned protocols (this 

may include academic experience). 

7. 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. 

8. If a team of three or more observers 

are required, one observer should be 

designated as lead observer or 

monitoring coordinator. The lead 

observer must have prior experience 

working as an observer. 

9. NMFS will require submission and 

approval of observer CVs. 

10. PSOs will monitor marine 

mammals around the construction site 

using high-quality binoculars (e.g., 

Zeiss, 10 x 42 power) and/or spotting 

scopes. 

11. If marine mammals are observed, 

the following information will be 

documented: 

(A) Date and time that monitored 

activity begins or ends; 

(B) Construction activities occurring 

during each observation period; 

(C) Weather parameters (e.g., percent 

cover, visibility); 

(D) Water conditions (e.g., sea state, 

tide state); 

(E) Species, numbers, and, if possible, 

sex and age class of marine mammals; 

(F) Description of any observable 

marine mammal behavior patterns, 

including bearing and direction of travel 

and distance from pile driving activity; 

(G) Distance from pile driving 

activities to marine mammals and 

distance from the marine mammals to 

the observation point; 

(H) Locations of all marine mammal 

observations; and 

(I) Other human activity in the area. 

Proposed Reporting Measures 

Marine Mammal Monitoring Report 

USCG would be required to submit a 

draft marine mammal monitoring report 

within 90 days after completion of the 

in-water construction work or the 

expiration of the IHA (if issued), 

whichever comes earlier. The report 

would include data from marine 

mammal sightings as described: Date, 

time, location, species, group size, and 

behavior, any observed reactions to 

construction, distance to operating pile 

hammer, and construction activities 

occurring at time of sighting and 

environmental data for the period (i.e., 

wind speed and direction, sea state, 

tidal state, cloud cover, and visibility). 

The marine mammal monitoring report 

will also include total takes, takes by 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
42998 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 

day, and stop-work orders for each 

species. NMFS would have an 

opportunity to provide comments on the 

report, and if NMFS has comments, 

USCG would address the comments and 

submit a final report to NMFS within 30 

days. 

In the unanticipated event that the 

specified activity clearly causes the take 

of a marine mammal in a manner 

prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such 

as an injury (Level A harassment), 

serious injury, or mortality, USCG 

would immediately cease the specified 

activities and immediately report the 

incident to the Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS and the 

NMFS’ West Coast Stranding 

Coordinator. The report must include 

the following information: 

• Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the incident; 

• Description of the incident; 

• Status of all sound source use in the 

24 hrs preceding the incident; 

• Water depth; 

• Environmental conditions (e.g., 

wind speed and direction, sea state, 

cloud cover, and visibility); 

• Description of all marine mammal 

observations in the 24 hrs preceding the 

incident; 

• Species identification or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Fate of the animal(s); and 

• Photographs or video footage of the 

animal(s) (if equipment is available). 

Activities would not resume until 

NMFS is able to review the 

circumstances of the prohibited take. 

NMFS would work with USCG to 

determine what is necessary to 

minimize the likelihood of further 

prohibited take and ensure MMPA 

compliance. USCG may not resume 

their activities until notified by NMFS 

via letter, email, or telephone. 

Reporting of Injured or Dead Marine 

Mammals 

In the event that the USCG 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), 

USCG would immediately report the 

incident to the Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS and the 

NMFS’ West Coast Stranding 

Coordinator. The report must include 

the same information identified in the 

paragraph above. Activities may 

continue while NMFS reviews the 

circumstances of the incident. NMFS 

would work with USCG to determine 

whether modifications in the activities 

are appropriate. 

In the event that USCG 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), 

USCG would report the incident to the 

Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, NMFS 

and the NMFS Stranding Hotline and/or 

by email to the NMFS’ West Coast 

Stranding Coordinator within 24 hrs of 

the discovery. USCG would provide 

photographs or video footage (if 

available) or other documentation of the 

stranded animal sighting to NMFS. 

Activities may continue while NMFS 

reviews the circumstances of the 

incident. 

Negligible Impact Analysis and 

Determination 

NMFS has defined negligible impact 

as ‘‘an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival’’ 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 

finding is based on the lack of likely 

adverse effects on annual rates of 

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

of takes alone is not enough information 

on which to base an impact 

determination. In addition to 

considering estimates of the number of 

marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ 

through harassment, NMFS considers 

other factors, such as the likely nature 

of any responses (e.g., intensity, 

duration), the context of any responses 

(e.g., critical reproductive time or 

location, migration), as well as effects 

on habitat, and the likely effectiveness 

of the mitigation. We also assess the 

number, intensity, and context of 

estimated takes by evaluating this 

information relative to population 

status. Consistent with the 1989 

preamble for NMFS’s implementing 

regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 

1989), the impacts from other past and 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the environmental baseline 

(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status 

of the species, population size and 

growth rate where known, ongoing 

sources of human-caused mortality, or 

ambient noise levels). 

No serious injury or mortality is 

anticipated or proposed to be authorized 

for the Monterey Station Project. Takes 

that are anticipated and proposed to be 

authorized are expected to be limited to 

short-term Level B harassment 

(behavioral) only. Marine mammals 

present in the vicinity of the action area 

and taken by Level B harassment would 

most likely show overt brief disturbance 

(startle reaction) and avoidance of the 

area from elevated noise levels during 

pile driving and pile removal and the 

implosion noise. 

There is one endangered species that 

may occur in the project area, 

humpback whales. However, if any 

humpbacks are detected within the 

Level B harassment zone of the project 

area, the USCG will shut down. 

The Monterey Breakwater is a haulout 

location for approximately 250 

California sea lions. There no other 

know critical habitat areas, haulouts or 

import feeding areas in close 

proximately to the project area. 

The project also is not expected to 

have significant adverse effects on 

affected marine mammals’ habitat, as 

analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Potential 

Effects of Specified Activities on Marine 

Mammals and their Habitat’’ section. 

Project activities would not 

permanently modify existing marine 

mammal habitat. The activities may kill 

some fish and cause other fish to leave 

the area temporarily, thus 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. Therefore, given the 

consideration of potential impacts to 

marine mammal prey species and their 

physical environment, USCG’s proposed 

Monterey Station would not adversely 

affect marine mammal habitat. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our preliminary determination that the 

impacts resulting from this activity are 

not expected to adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival: 

• No serious injury or mortality is 

anticipated or authorized. 

• Takes that are anticipated and 

proposed to be authorized are expected 

to be limited to short-term Level B 

harassment (behavioral). 

• The project also is not expected to 

have significant adverse effects on 

affected marine mammals’ habitat. 

• There are no known important 

feeding or pupping areas. There is one 

haulout (the breakwater) within the 

project area. There are no other known 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 42999 

important areas for marine mammals 

with the footprint of the project area. 

• For five out of eight species, take is 

less than one percent of the stock 

abundance. Instances of take for the 

other three species (killer whale, 

bottlenose dolphin, and harbor 

porpoise) range from 3–4 percent of the 

stock abundance. 

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 

the proposed activity will have a 

negligible impact on all affected marine 

mammal species or stocks. 

Small Numbers 

As noted above, only small numbers 

of incidental take may be authorized 

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

for specified activities other than 

military readiness activities. The MMPA 

does not define small numbers and so, 

in practice, where estimated numbers 

are available, NMFS compares the 

number of individuals taken to the most 

appropriate estimation of abundance of 

the relevant species or stock in our 

determination of whether an 

authorization is limited to small 

numbers of marine mammals. 

Additionally, other factors may be 

considered in the analysis, such as the 

temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. 

For five out of eight species, take is 

less than one percent of the stock 

abundance. Instances of take for the 

other three species (killer whale, 

bottlenose dolphin, and harbor 

porpoise) range from 3–4 percent of the 

stock abundance. Based on the analysis 

contained herein of the proposed 

activity (including the proposed 

mitigation and monitoring measures) 

and the anticipated take of marine 

mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds 

that small numbers of marine mammals 

will be taken relative to the population 

sizes of the affected species or stocks. 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of the affected marine mammal stocks or 

species implicated by this action. 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

the total taking of affected species or 

stocks would not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

such species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA of 1973 (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each 

Federal agency insure that any action it 

authorizes, funds, or carries out is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat. To ensure 

ESA compliance for the issuance of 

IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this 

case with the West Coast Regional 

Office, whenever we propose to 

authorize take for endangered or 

threatened species. 

NMFS is proposing to not authorize 

take of humpback whales, which are 

listed under the ESA, as the applicant 

will implement shutdown measures 

whenever humpbacks are observed 

(Level A or B). Therefore, consultation 

under section 7 of the ESA is not 

required. 

The Permit and Conservation Division 

has requested initiation of section 7 

consultation with the West Coast 

Regional Office for the issuance of this 

IHA. NMFS will conclude the ESA 

consultation prior to reaching a 

determination regarding the proposed 

issuance of the authorization. 

Proposed Authorization 

As a result of these preliminary 

determinations, NMFS proposes to issue 

an IHA to the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) 

for conducting pile driving and removal 

activities at the USCG Monterey Station, 

Monterey, California from October 2017 

to October 2018, provided the 

previously mentioned mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting requirements 

are incorporated. This section contains 

a draft of the IHA itself. The wording 

contained in this section is proposed for 

inclusion in the IHA (if issued). 

The proposed IHA language is 

provided next. 

1. This Authorization is valid from 

October 16, 2017, through October 15, 

2018. 

2. This Authorization is valid only for 

activities associated with in-water 

construction work at the USCG 

Monterey Station Project, Monterey, 

California. 

3. General Condition. 

(a) The species authorized for taking, 

by Level B harassment only, and in the 

numbers shown in Table 7 are: 

California sea lion (Zalophus 

californianus), Pacific harbor seal 

(Phoca vitulina), harbor porpoise 

(Phocoena phocoena), Risso’s dolphin 

(Grampus griseus), bottlenose dolphin 

(Tursiops truncates), killer whale 

(Orcinus orca), and gray whale 

(Eschrichtius robustus). 

(b) The authorization for taking by 

harassment is limited to the following 

acoustic sources and from the following 

activities: 

D Impact pile driving; 

D Vibratory pile driving; and 

D Vibratory pile removal 

4. 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 7 of this notice. The taking by 

serious injury or death of these species 

or the taking by harassment, injury or 

death of any other species of marine 

mammal is prohibited unless separately 

authorized or exempted under the 

MMPA 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 6(b), are not 

present in conformance with condition 

6(b) of this Authorization. 

5. Mitigation. 

(a) Time Restriction. 

In-water construction work shall 

occur only during daylight hours. 

(b) Noise Attenuation. 

A bubble curtain and cushion pads 

shall be used during pile driving 

activities with an impact hammer to 

reduce sound levels. In addition, the 

USCG has proposed performing ‘‘predrilling.’’ Pre-drilling shall be 

performed and would be discontinued 

when the pile tip is approximately five 

ft above the required pile tip elevation. 

Pre-drilling is a method that starts the 

‘‘hole’’ for the new pile; the pile is 

inserted after the hole has been predrilled which creates less friction and 

overall noise and turbidity during 

installation. 

(c) Level B Harassment Zones. 

USCG shall monitor the Level B 

harassment ZOIs as described in Table 

3 and 4 of this notice. 

(d) Exclusion Zones. 

USCG shall shut down (stop work) in 

the Exclusion Zones using the PTS 

isopleths as described in Table 6 of this 

notice to protect marine mammals from 

Level A harassment. 

(i) USCG shall implement a minimum 

shutdown zone of 10 m radius around 

each pile for all construction methods 

other than pile driving for all marine 

mammals. 

(ii) If a marine mammal is observed at 

or within the Exclusion Zone, work 

shall stop until the individual has been 

observed outside of the zone, or has not 

been observed for at least 15 minutes for 

pinnipeds and small cetaceans and 30 

minutes for large whales. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
43000 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 

(e) Additional Shutdown Measures. 

(i) If a humpback whale is observed 

within the Level A or Level B zones, the 

USCG shall implement shutdown 

measures. Work would not commence 

until 30-minutes after the last sighting 

of a humpback within these zones. 

(ii) USCG shall implement shutdown 

measures if the number of authorized 

takes for any particular species reaches 

the limit under the IHA and if such 

marine mammals are sighted within the 

vicinity of the project area and are 

approaching the Level B harassment 

zone during in-water construction 

activities. 

(iii) During impact pile driving 

because the Level B Zone is smaller (76 

m) compared to the Level A Zone (84.4 

m) for high frequency cetaceans for 

noise transmission north and northeast 

(through breakwater), the USCG shall 

consider both the Level A and B zones 

to be at 84.4 m and will implement 

shutdown measures. 

(iv) If a species is observed within the 

Level A or B zones that has not been 

authorized for take, the USCG shall 

implement shutdown measures. 

(f) Soft-Start for Impact Pile Driving. 

For impact pile installation, 

contractors will provide an initial set of 

three strikes from the impact hammer at 

40 percent energy, followed by a oneminute waiting period, then two 

subsequent three-strike sets. 

6. Monitoring. 

(a) Protected Species Observers. 

USCG shall employ NMFS-approved 

PSOs to conduct marine mammal 

monitoring for its construction project. 

NMFS-approved PSOs will meet the 

following qualifications. 

(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 may be necessary to correctly 

identify the target. 

(ii) Advanced education in biological 

science, wildlife management, 

mammalogy or related fields (Bachelors 

degree or higher is preferred), but not 

required. 

(iii) Experience or training in the field 

identification of marine mammals 

(cetaceans and pinnipeds). 

(iv) Sufficient training, orientation or 

experience with the construction 

operation to provide for personal safety 

during observations. 

(v) 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. 

(vi) Experience and ability to conduct 

field observations and collect data 

according to assigned protocols (this 

may include academic experience). 

(vii) 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 in-water construction 

activities were conducted; and dates 

and times when marine mammals were 

present at or within the defined ZOI. 

(viii) If a team of three or more 

observers are required, one observer 

should be designated as lead observer or 

monitoring coordinator. The lead 

observer must have prior experience 

working as an observer. 

(ix) NMFS shall require submission 

and approval of observer CVs. 

(b) Monitoring Protocols: PSOs shall 

be present on site at all times during 

pile removal and driving. 

(i) A 30-minute pre-construction 

marine mammal monitoring shall be 

required before the first pile driving or 

pile removal of the day. A 30-minute 

post-construction marine mammal 

monitoring shall 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 30-minute pre-construction 

marine mammal monitoring shall be 

required before the next start-up of pile 

driving or pile removal. 

(ii) During pile removal or 

installation, the monitors shall be 

positioned such that each monitor has a 

most practicable vantage point possible 

(i.e., the pier itself, the breakwater, 

adjacent boat docks in the harbor, or a 

boat) and distinct view-shed and the 

monitors collectively have overlapping 

view-sheds. 

(iii) Monitors shall record take when 

marine mammals enter their relevant 

Level B Harassment Zones based on 

type of construction activity. 

(iv) If a marine mammal approaches 

an Exclusion Zone, the observation shall 

be reported to the Construction Manager 

and the individual shall be watched 

closely. If the marine mammal crosses 

into an Exclusion Zone, a stop-work 

order shall be issued. In the event that 

a stop-work order is triggered, the 

observed marine mammal(s) shall be 

closely monitored while it remains in or 

near the Exclusion Zone, and only when 

it moves well outside of the Exclusion 

Zone or has not been observed for at 

least 15 minutes for pinnipeds and 

small cetaceans and 30 minutes for large 

whales shall the lead monitor allow 

work to recommence. 

(v) PSOs shall monitor marine 

mammals around the construction site 

using high-quality binoculars (e.g., 

Zeiss, 10 x 42 power) and/or spotting 

scopes. 

(vi) If marine mammals are observed, 

the following information shall be 

documented: 

(A) Date and time that monitored 

activity begins or ends; 

(B) Construction activities occurring 

during each observation period; 

(C) Weather parameters (e.g., percent 

cover, visibility); 

(D) Water conditions (e.g., sea state, 

tide state); 

(E) Species, numbers, and, if possible, 

sex and age class of marine mammals; 

(F) Description of any observable 

marine mammal behavior patterns, 

including bearing and direction of travel 

and distance from pile driving activity; 

(G) Distance from pile driving 

activities to marine mammals and 

distance from the marine mammals to 

the observation point; 

(H) Locations of all marine mammal 

observations; and 

(I) Other human activity in the area. 

(viii) Acoustic Monitoring—USCG 

shall conduct acoustic monitoring and 

background noise recordings (in the 

absence of pile-related work) following 

the NMFS’s 2012 Guidance Documents: 

Sound Propagation Modeling to 

Characterize Pile Driving Sounds 

Relevant to Marine Mammals and Data 

Collection Methods to Characterize 

Underwater Background Sound 

Relevant to Marine Mammals in Coastal 

Nearshore Waters and Rivers of 

Washington and Oregon. 

7. Reporting. 

(a) Marine Mammal Monitoring. 

(i) USCG shall submit a draft marine 

mammal monitoring report within 90 

days after completion of the in-water 

construction work or the expiration of 

the IHA (if issued), whichever comes 

earlier. The report shall include data 

from marine mammal sightings as 

described: date, time, location, species, 

group size, and behavior, any observed 

reactions to construction, distance to 

operating pile hammer, and 

construction activities occurring at time 

of sighting and environmental data for 

the period (i.e., wind speed and 

direction, sea state, tidal state, cloud 

cover, and visibility). The marine 

mammal monitoring report shall also 

include total takes, takes by day, and 

stop-work orders for each species. 

(ii) If comments are received from 

NMFS Office of Protected Resources on 

the draft report, a final report shall be 

submitted to NMFS within 30 days 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2017 / Notices 43001 

thereafter. If no comments are received 

from NMFS, the draft report shall be 

considered to be the final report. 

(iii) In the unanticipated event that 

the specified activity clearly causes the 

take of a marine mammal in a manner 

prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such 

as an injury (Level A harassment), 

serious injury, or mortality, USCG shall 

immediately cease the specified 

activities and immediately report the 

incident to the Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS and the 

NMFS’ West Coast Stranding 

Coordinator. The report must include 

the following information: 

• Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the incident; 

• Name and type of vessel involved; 

• Vessel’s speed during and leading 

up to the incident; 

• Description of the incident; 

• Status of all sound source use in the 

24 hrs preceding the incident; 

• Water depth; 

• Environmental conditions (e.g., 

wind speed and direction, sea state, 

cloud cover, and visibility); 

• Description of all marine mammal 

observations in the 24 hrs preceding the 

incident; 

• Species identification or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Fate of the animal(s); and 

• Photographs or video footage of the 

animal(s) (if equipment is available). 

Activities would not resume until 

NMFS is able to review the 

circumstances of the prohibited take. 

NMFS shall work with USCG to 

determine what is necessary to 

minimize the likelihood of further 

prohibited take and ensure MMPA 

compliance. USCG shall not resume 

their activities until notified by NMFS 

via letter, email, or telephone. 

(b) Reporting of Injured or Dead 

Marine Mammals. 

(i) In the event that USCG 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), 

USCG shall immediately report the 

incident to the Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS and the 

NMFS’ West Coast Stranding 

Coordinator. The report must include 

the same information identified in 

7(a)(iii). Activities may continue while 

NMFS reviews the circumstances of the 

incident. NMFS shall work with USCG 

to determine whether modifications in 

the activities are appropriate. 

(ii) In the event that USCG 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), 

USCG shall report the incident to the 

Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, NMFS 

and the NMFS Stranding Hotline and/or 

by email to the NMFS’ West Coast 

Stranding Coordinator within 24 hrs of 

the discovery. USCG shall provide 

photographs or video footage (if 

available) or other documentation of the 

stranded animal sighting to NMFS. 

Activities may continue while NMFS 

reviews the circumstances of the 

incident. 

(c) Acoustic Monitoring Report— 

USCG shall submit an Acoustic 

Monitoring Report that will provide 

details on the monitored piles, method 

of installation, monitoring equipment, 

and sound levels documented during 

monitoring. NMFS shall review the 

acoustic monitoring report and suggest 

any changes in monitoring as needed. 

8. This Authorization may be 

modified, suspended or withdrawn if 

the holder fails to abide by the 

conditions prescribed herein or if NMFS 

determines the authorized taking is 

having more than a negligible impact on 

the species or stock of affected marine 

mammals. 

9. A copy of this Authorization must 

be in the possession of each contractor 

who performs the construction work at 

the Monterey Station Project. 

Request for Public Comments 

We request comment on our analyses, 

the draft authorization, and any other 

aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA 

for the proposed pile driving activities 

for the USCG Monterey Station Project. 

Please include with your comments any 

supporting data or literature citations to 

help inform our final decision on the 

request for MMPA authorization. 

Dated: September 6, 2017. 

Donna S. Wieting, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–19352 Filed 9–12–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Proposed Information Collection; 

Comment Request; Annual Northern 

Seal Subsistence Harvest Reporting 

and St. George Harvest Management 

Plan 

AGENCY: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Commerce, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork and 

respondent burden, invites the general 

public and other Federal agencies to 

take this opportunity to comment on 

proposed and/or continuing information 

collections, as required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before November 13, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental 

Paperwork Clearance Officer, 

Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 

14th and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230 (or via the 

Internet at pracomments@doc.gov). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the information collection 

instrument and instructions should be 

directed to Michael Williams, (907) 

271–5117, or michael.williams@

noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

The subsistence harvest of northern 

fur seals is cooperatively managed by 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration’s (NOAA) National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and 

the Tribal Governments of St. Paul and 

St. George Islands (Pribilof Islands) 

under section 119 of the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 1388 

(MMPA) and governed by regulations 

under section 102 of the Fur Seal Act, 

16 U.S.C. 1152 (FSA) found in 50 CFR 

part 216 subpart F, Taking for 

Subsistence Purposes. The regulations, 

laws, and cooperative agreement are 

focused on conserving northern fur seals 

through cooperative effort and 

consultation regarding effective 

management of human activities related 

to the subsistence harvests of northern 

fur seals and Steller sea lions. 

This request is for extension of the 

information collection for the annual 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES