Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46199
2021, provided the previously (Authority: Pub. L. 116–224, 112, Dec. 18, period. Comments, including all mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and 2020, 134 Stat. 1072) attachments, must not exceed a 25- reporting requirements are incorporated. Scott Lundgren, megabyte file size. All comments Dated: August 11, 2021. Director, Office of Response and Restoration, received are a part of the public record Catherine Marzin, National Ocean Service. and will generally be posted online at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/ Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, [FR Doc. 2021–17738 Filed 8–17–21; 8:45 am] incidental-take-authorizations-under- National Marine Fisheries Service. BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P marine-mammal-protection-act without [FR Doc. 2021–17683 Filed 8–17–21; 8:45 am] change. All personal identifying BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric may be publicly accessible. Do not Administration submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or National Oceanic and Atmospheric [RTID 0648–XB163] Administration protected information. Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reopening of Solicitation of Specified Activities; Taking Marine Robert Pauline, Office of Protected Nominations for the Marine Debris Mammals Incidental to the Palmer Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. Foundation Board of Directors Station Pier Replacement Project, Electronic copies of the application and supporting documents, as well as a list AGENCY: National Ocean Service (NOS), Antarctica National Oceanic and Atmospheric of the references cited in this document, AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries may be obtained online at: https:// Administration (NOAA), Department of Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Commerce (DOC). www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/ Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), incidental-take-authorizations-under- ACTION: Reopening of solicitation of Commerce. marine-mammal-protection-act. In case nominations. ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental of problems accessing these documents, SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and harassment authorization; request for please call the contact listed above. Atmospheric Administration published comments on proposed authorization SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and possible renewal. a notice in the Federal Register on May Background 19, 2021 seeking nominations of SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of qualified candidates to be considered from the National Science Foundation for appointment as a member of the marine mammals, with certain (NSF) for authorization to take marine exceptions. sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) Marine Debris Foundation Board of mammals incidental to the Palmer Directors (Board). This solicitation of of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) Station Pier Replacement Project in direct the Secretary of Commerce (as nominations of qualified persons to the Anvers Island, Antarctica. Pursuant to Board is hereby reopened. delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon the Marine Mammal Protection Act request, the incidental, but not DATES: Nominations to the Board of (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments Directors for the Marine Debris intentional, taking of small numbers of on its proposal to issue an incidental marine mammals by U.S. citizens who Foundation must be received in entirety harassment authorization (IHA) to no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT on August engage in a specified activity (other than incidentally take marine mammals commercial fishing) within a specified 27, 2021. Nomination packages received during the specified activities. NMFS is after this time will not be considered. geographical region if certain findings also requesting comments on a possible are made and either regulations are ADDRESSES: All nominations should be one-time, one-year renewal that could issued or, if the taking is limited to emailed (recommended) to be issued under certain circumstances harassment, a notice of a proposed [email protected] and if all requirements are met, as incidental take authorization may be with the subject line ‘‘Marine Debris described in Request for Public provided to the public for review. Foundation Nomination,’’ or mailed to Comments at the end of this notice. Authorization for incidental takings Caitlin Wessel, Marine Debris NMFS will consider public comments shall be granted if NMFS finds that the Foundation Nomination, c/o NOAA prior to making any final decision on taking will have a negligible impact on Disaster Response Center, 7344 Ziegler the issuance of the requested MMPA the species or stock(s) and will not have Blvd., Mobile, AL 36608. authorizations and agency responses an unmitigable adverse impact on the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: will be summarized in the final notice availability of the species or stock(s) for Caitlin Wessel, Ph.D., Phone 251–222– of our decision. taking for subsistence uses (where 0276; Email [email protected] or DATES: Comments and information must relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe visit the NOAA Marine Debris Program be received no later than September 17, the permissible methods of taking and website at https:// 2021. other ‘‘means of effecting the least marinedebris.noaa.gov/who-we-are/ ADDRESSES: Comments should be practicable adverse impact’’ on the marine-debris-foundation. addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, affected species or stocks and their SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Refer to Permits and Conservation Division, habitat, paying particular attention to the Federal Register Notice of May 19, Office of Protected Resources, National rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 2021 (86 FR 27070) and the NOAA Marine Fisheries Service. Written similar significance, and on the Marine Debris Program website at comments should be submitted via availability of the species or stocks for https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/who-we- email to [email protected]. taking for certain subsistence uses are/marine-debris-foundation for the Instructions: NMFS is not responsible (referred to in shorthand as items that are required parts of the for comments sent by any other method, ‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements nomination package and additional to any other address or individual, or pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring information. received after the end of the comment and reporting of the takings are set forth.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46200 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
The definitions of all applicable Level A harassment. Neither NSF nor season is limited due to ice and MMPA statutory terms cited above are NMFS expects serious injury or weather. Construction work cannot included in the relevant sections below. mortality to result from this activity begin until the sea ice has vacated Hero and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. Inlet and work must be completed prior National Environmental Policy Act to the return of sea ice so that personnel Description of Proposed Activity To comply with the National and equipment can be safely Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Overview demobilized. The proposed IHA would (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and be effective for a period of one year from NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) The purpose of the project is to construct a replacement pier at Palmer October 1, 2021 through September 30, 216–6A, NMFS must review our 2022. In-water activities will occur proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an Station on Anvers Island, Antarctica for the United States Antarctic Program. It during daylight hours only. Work would IHA) with respect to potential impacts be conducted 7 days per week for 12 on the human environment. is severely deteriorated, and needs to be replaced as soon as possible. hours (hr) per day and up to 89 days of Accordingly, NMFS plans to adopt in-water construction is anticipated. NSF’s Initial Environmental Evaluation Construction of the replacement pier (IEE), which is generally the equivalent and removal of the existing pier will Specific Geographic Region of an environmental assessment (EA) require down-the-hole (DTH) pile under the Antarctic Conservation Act installation, and vibratory pile removal. The activities would occur at Palmer (16 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.), provided our Limited impact driving will occur only Station on Hero Inlet, between Gamage independent evaluation of the to proof piles after they have been Point and Bonaparte Point on the document finds that it includes installed. The proposed project is southwestern coast of Anvers Island in adequate information analyzing the expected to take up to 89 days of in- the Antarctica Peninsula (Figure 1). The water work and will include the coordinates for the station are: 64°46′ S, effects on the human environment of ° ′ issuing the IHA. installation of 52 piles and removal of 64 03 W. Substrate at the project We will review all comments 36 piles. Construction is expected to location consists of solid rock. In submitted in response to this notice and begin no later than November 2021, addition to the pier, there are several the draft IEE prior to concluding our depending on local sea ice conditions, buildings, plus two large fuel tanks, and NEPA process or making a final and would be completed by mid-April a helicopter pad. The area frequently decision on the IHA request. 2022. The pile driving and removal experiences high winds, up to 130 activities can result in take of marine kilometers (km) per hour, or greater. Summary of Request mammals from sound in the water Palmer Station lies outside the Antarctic On December 29, 2020, NMFS which results in behavioral harassment Circle, so there are 19 hours of light and received a request from the National or auditory injury. Note that hereafter 5 hours of twilight at the height of Science Foundation (NSF) for an IHA to (unless otherwise specified) the term austral summer and only 5 hours of take marine mammals incidental to ‘‘pile driving’’ is used to refer to both daylight each day in the middle of construction activities associated with pile installation (including DTH pile austral winter. Hero Inlet is a narrow the Palmer Station Pier Replacement installation) and pile removal. inlet (approximately 135 meters (m) Project on Anvers Island, Antarctica. wide) along the southwest side of NSF submitted several revisions of the Dates and Duration Anvers Island. Maximum observed tidal application until it was deemed The work described here is likely to range is 2.5 m with mean sea level at adequate and complete on July 15, 2021. begin in October or November 2021 and 0.72 m. The shoreline and upland area NSF’s request is for take of a small would be completed by mid-April 2022 is generally rocky or exposed bedrock. number of 17 species of marine with demobilization occurring no later Ice cliffs rise above the station. mammals by Level B harassment and/or than June of 2022. The construction BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46201
_, AI.--N!S-'11! GoQllitl!___ _,.,AjN11~7 • » - 1~ e-::...::::,_--IN- I Figure 1. Map of Proposed Project Area
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C construction of the new pier and New pile installation would include Detailed Description of Specific Activity installation of wave attenuator piles. steel gravel-filled pipe piles as outlined While piles for the wave attenuator will in Table 1. The deck and pile caps for The existing pier at Palmer Station be installed in this project, the wave the pier are supported by the piles, consists of a sheetpile bulkhead attenuator itself would be installed later. which are installed in holes (sockets) backfilled with gravel and cobble that (NMFS does not expect installation of created in the shallow bedrock by the was built in 1967. It is severely the wave attenuator to result in take.) DTH systems. Support vessels, deteriorated, and needs to be replaced The existing bulkhead pier must be including a tugboat, one stationary as soon as possible. demolished prior to construction of the barge, a temporary floating construction This project would replace the new pier. The existing sheetpile platform, a 16-ft. (5-m) skiff and one 200 existing pier with a new steel pipe pile cofferdam bulkhead would be supported concrete deck pier, new demolished and the sheets would be horsepower work boat would be used modern energy absorbing fender system removed by a vibratory hammer or cut for the duration of the project to and on-site power and lighting. Work on off at the mudline. Sheet pile removed complete in-water work. A separate the fendering system would be above from the pier cell would be loaded onto gravel barge would deliver material at water. In-water work with the potential the material barge for disposal. A pier the beginning of the project, but would to produce underwater noise includes cell is a structure that has hollow only be onsite for approximately 3 days. demolition of the existing pier, sections (i.e., cells).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES EN18AU21.168 46202 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
TABLE 1—PILE SUMMARY
Socket Structure Size and type of pile depth Number of (feet [ft]) piles
Pier Abutment ...... 32 or 36-in. diameter steel pile in approximate 38-in. diameter holes ...... 30 4. Pier ...... 36-in. steel pile in approximate 38-in. diameter holes ...... 20 Up to 18.a Retaining Wall ...... H pile inserted in 24-in. diameter hole ...... 10 Up to 9.a Wave Attenuator Piles ...... 24-in. steel pile ...... 20 2. Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat Fender ..... 24-in. steel pile ...... 20 3. Template Piles (temporary) ...... 24-in. steel pile ...... 10 32.b Sheetpile Removal ...... 3/8-in ...... 0 20. a Includes 2 piles as a contingency for design flexibility. b 16 of these piles are removed once they are no longer needed as templates.
The primary source of underwater installation and removal of piles to that could result in the take of marine noise that may result in takes during support the pier and fenders. Table 2 mammals. construction would be from the shows project components and activities
TABLE 2—PROJECT COMPONENTS: POTENTIAL FOR MARINE MAMMAL TAKE
Potential for marine Project component Equipment mammal take (yes/no)
Pile/Sheetpile Removal ...... Excavator and loader operated above water ...... No. Crane operated above water ...... No. Vibratory hammer ...... Yes. Underwater cutting tool 1 ...... Yes. Pile Installation ...... Crane operated above water ...... No. DTH drill ...... Yes. Impact hammer ...... Yes. Vibratory hammer ...... Yes. Anode Protection ...... Pneumatic hydrogrinder or needle scaler 2 ...... Yes. Rock chipping (optional) ...... Hoe ram ...... Yes.3 1 Underwater cutting tool operation, if necessary, would occur on the same days as vibratory extraction. Estimated take associated with cutting tool operation was calculated by utilizing higher underwater source levels associated with vibratory extraction. 2 These tools scrape off surfaces for rust, paint, etc. Use of these tools would be limited and would occur once pile installation is complete. Un- derwater source levels are estimated at 146 dB at 10m and have been accounted for in the take estimate. 3 Rock chipping may not be necessary. However if it does occur it would occur on the same days as DTH pile installation.
Piles would be socketed in place since Once the pile is set, the remaining void ‘‘breakers’’ or powerful percussion the substrate comprises rocky or space is filled with a high-performance hammers used to break up large exposed bedrock. This involves drilling cement-based sealing grout. Temporary concrete structures. If rock chipping is and hammering into the rock to create template piles used during construction necessary, it would likely occur prior to a socket hole deeper and larger than the would be removed with a vibratory but on the same days as DTH pile pile diameter. The primary technique hammer or cut off at the mudline. installation. Approximately one to two piles for creating the socket holes and their The project design includes would be installed over a 12-hour work piles would be by DTH pile installation. installation of anode corrosion day. As a precautionary measure, it is DTH installation uses both rotary and protection for the major submerged steel assumed that two installation activities hammering actions on a drill bit (i.e., components. Divers would install would be occurring at the same time like a hammer drill hand tool) to create aluminum alloy anodes below the (i.e., simultaneous). The main method of a hole in the bedrock or sediment. It waterline by welding and using a pile installation would be by DTH. Two pneumatic hydrogrinder, needle scaler, uses the rotation of the drill system and DTH systems would be available on site or similar equipment. They would use a (typically pneumatic) hammering and could be used simultaneously. One these tools to scrape rust, paint, etc. off mechanism to break up rock to create a vibratory hammer would possibly be surfaces. This activity would occur only hole. Since construction techniques used to remove existing piles, and one could vary depending on specific site impact hammer could be used to proof after pile installation is complete. The conditions, a small impact hammer may piles. hydrogrinder or needle scaler would also need to be used at the end of the Rock chipping may be required to only be used approximately one hour process to firmly seat the pile in the ensure accurate pile location and per day over an 18-day period. hole. This may require no more than 10 alignment with the sea bottom at pile Table 3 provides the number of piles strikes. It is unlikely that a vibratory locations. Rock chipping involves the and the estimated number of days of hammer would be used to install piles. use of excavators fitted with hydraulic installation.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46203
TABLE 3—PILE INSTALLATION AND REMOVAL DURATION
Pile type Number of piles Total days of installation 1
36-in. piles 2 (pier Bents 2, 3, and 4) ...... Up to 18 ...... 47 32-in. piles (pier abutment Bent 1) ...... 4. 24-in. RHIB (rigid hull inflatable boat) fender ...... 3 ...... 16 24-in. template piles ...... 16. 24-in. retaining wall ...... 2. 24-in. H piles (retaining wall) ...... Up to 9. Pile Removal (24-in.) ...... 16 ...... 4 Sheetpile Removal ...... 20 ...... 4 Anode Installation ...... 0 ...... 18 Rock chipping ...... 0. Up to 88 ...... 89 1 This is a conservative estimate. It is possible that 24-in. piles may be driven on the same day as 36-in. piles. If this occurs, overall days may be reduced for pile installation. 2 For the purposes of calculating take, there is reference to Scenario 1A which involves pile installation of two 36-in piles simultaneously. In this table, Scenarios 1 and 1A are synonymous in terms of representing the number of estimated days for installation.
Description of Marine Mammals in the information on these species may be Vulnerable) and two non-threatened Area of Specified Activities found in Section 3 of NSF’s application. categories (Near Threatened and Least Table 4 lists all species or stocks for For species occurring in United States Concern) (www.iucnredlist.org/; which take is expected and proposed to Antarctic Marine Living Resources accessed June 10, 2021). These be authorized for this action, and (AMLR) survey area of the Southern assessments are generally made relative summarizes best available information Ocean, the International Union for the to the species’ global status, and on the population or stock, including Conservation of Nature (IUCN) status is therefore may have limited applicability regulatory status under the MMPA and provided. The IUCN systematically when marine mammal stocks are Endangered Species Act. For taxonomy, assesses the relative risk of extinction defined because we analyze the we follow Committee on Taxonomy for terrestrial and aquatic plant and potential population-level effects of the (2020). Marine mammals in the Project animal species via a classification specified activity to the relevant stock. Area do not constitute stocks under U.S. scheme using five designations, However, where stocks are not defined, jurisdiction; therefore, there are no stock including three threatened categories IUCN status can provide a useful assessment reports. Additional (Critically Endangered, Endangered, and reference. TABLE 4—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT AREA
ESA/MMPA/IUCN Common name Scientific name Stock 2 Abundance (CV) 4 status 3
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
Family Balaenidae (right whales): Southern right whale ...... Eubalaena australis ...... E/D/LC 1,755 (0.62).5 Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals): Humpback whale ...... Megaptera novaeangliae australis ...... E/D/LC 9,484 (0.28).5 Antarctic minke whale ...... Balaenoptera bonaerensis ...... -/NT 18,125 (0.28).5 Fin whale ...... B. physalus quoyi ...... E/D/VU 4,672 (0.42).5 Blue whale ...... B. musculus musculus ...... E/D/EN 1,700.13 Sei whale ...... Balaenoptera borealis ...... E/D/EN 626.14
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Physeteridae: Sperm whale ...... Physeter macrocephalus ...... E/D/VU 12,069 (0.17).7 Family Ziphiidae (beaked whales): Arnoux’s beaked whale ...... Berardius arnuxii ...... /DD Unknown. Southern bottlenose whale ...... Hyperoodon planifrons ...... -/LC 53,743 (0.12).8 Family Delphinidae: Hourglass dolphin ...... Lagenorhynchus cruciger ...... -/LC 144,300 (0.17).9 Killer whale ...... Orcinus orca 1 ...... -/DD 24,790 (0.23).8 Long-finned pilot whale ...... Globicephala melas edwardii ...... -/LC 200,000 (0.35).9
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions): Antarctic fur seal ...... Arctocephalus gazella ...... South Georgia ...... -/LC 2,700,000.10 Family Phocidae (earless seals): Southern elephant seal ...... Mirounga leonina ...... South Georgia ...... -/LC 401,572.11 Weddell seal ...... Leptonychotes weddellii ...... -/LC 500,000–1,000,000.12 Crabeater seal ...... Lobodon carcinophaga ...... -/LC 5,000,000–10,000,000.12 Leopard seal ...... Hydrurga leptonyx ...... -/LC 222,000–440,000.12 1 Three distinct forms of killer whale have been described from Antarctic waters; referred to as types A, B, and C, they are purported prey specialists on Antarctic minke whales, seals, and fish, respectively (Pitman and Ensor, 2003; Pitman et al., 2010). 2 For most species in the AMLR, stocks are not delineated and entries refer generally to individuals of the species occurring in the research area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46204 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
3 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. Any species listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted. IUCN status: Endan- gered (EN), Vulnerable (VU), Near Threatened (NT), Least Concern (LC), Data Deficient (DD). 4 CV is coefficient of variation. All abundance estimates, except for those from Reilly et al., (2004) (right, humpback, minke, and fin whales), are for entire Southern Ocean (i.e., waters south of 60°S) and not the smaller area comprising the Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) research area. 5 Abundance estimates reported in Reilly et al., (2004) for the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) survey area from 2000. Surveys include Antarctic Peninsula (473,300 km2) and Scotia Sea (1,109,800 km2) strata, which correspond roughly to SWFSC’s Antarctic Research Area (ARA), as reported by Hewitt et al., (2004). 6 Southern Ocean abundance estimate (Branch et al., 2007). 7 Southern Ocean abundance estimate (IWC, 2001 in Whitehead, 2002). 8 Southern Ocean abundance estimate from circumpolar surveys covering 68 percent of waters south of 60°S from 1991–98 (Branch and Butterworth, 2001). 9 Southern Ocean abundance estimate derived from surveys conducted from 1976–88 (Kasamatsu and Joyce, 1995). 10 South Georgia abundance estimate; likely >95 percent of range-wide abundance (Forcada and Staniland, 2009). Genetic evidence shows two distinct population regions, likely descended from surviving post-sealing populations at South Georgia, Bouvet
Antarctic Minke Whale populations remain separated leading to minke whales, with summer Antarctic minke whales are similar in genetic isolation of the populations. The concentrations mainly between the fin whale is found in most large water subtropical and Antarctic convergences shape and coloration to the more global ° ° species of minke whale (B. masses of the world, from tropical to (between 40 S and 50 S). Sei feed on acutorostrata). The two species differ in polar regions. However, in the most copepods, euphausiids, shoals of fish, extreme latitudes individuals may be and squid if they are encountered. relative size and shape of several cranial absent near the ice limit. Overall, fin features, and Antarctic minke whales Hourglass Dolphin whale densities in the southern lack the distinct white flipper mark of hemisphere tend to be higher outside Hourglass dolphins are pelagic and the more common minke whale. the continental slope than inside it. circumpolar in the Southern Ocean; The seasonal distribution and Fin whales feed on an assortment of they are found in Antarctic and sub- migration patterns of nearly all prey items, depending on their Antarctic waters. Most sightings of live populations of minke whales are poorly availability (Kawamura 1980; as cited in hourglass dolphins reflect observer understood (Risch et al., 2019). Wursig et al., 2018); their diet varies effort, and are centered on the Antarctic Antarctic minke whales are abundant convergence with most sightings from ° with season and locality. Southern from 60 S to the ice edge during the Hemisphere fin whales have a diet of the Drake Passage. Hourglass dolphins austral summer then retreat in the almost exclusively krill, and other often feed in large aggregations of austral winter to breeding grounds in planktonic crustaceans. In the Southern seabirds such as great shearwaters and mid-latitudes in the Pacific and other Hemisphere, fin whales seasonally black-browed albatrosses, and in locations off Australia and South Africa. migrate north to south; they feed in the plankton slicks (White et al., 1999; as Antarctic minke feed mainly on summer at high latitudes and breed and cited in Wursig et al., 2018). Their prey euphausiids (krill (Euphausia superba)). fast in the winter at low latitudes. items include small fish (about 2.4 g and This species is highly associated with One fin whale was recently seen a length of 55 mm), small squid, and sea ice and is generally less abundant in within a few miles of the station (Ari crustaceans. They are believed to feed in ice-free waters. In general, minke Friedlander, personal communication). surface waters. whales are commonly observed alone or Migratory movements of this species in small groups of two or three Blue Whale are not well known. It is thought that individuals. Aggregations of up to 400 Blue whales in the Southern hourglass dolphins from the Antarctic may form on occasion in high latitudes. Hemisphere are on average larger than convergence zone and the continental During the feeding season, mature those in the Northern Hemisphere. Blue shelf break may move into sub-Antarctic females are found closer to the ice than whales are a cosmopolitan species with waters in winter. Thus, the range of the immature females, and immature males North Atlantic, North Pacific, and species thus probably shifts north and are more solitary than mature males. Southern hemisphere populations. They south with the seasons (Carwardine Over the period January 21, 2019 were historically most abundant in the 1995; as cited in Wursig et al., 2018). through March 31, 2020, one minke Southern Ocean, but are very rare today Although oceanic, hourglass dolphins whale was observed during bird in the Project Area. Due to food are often observed near islands and observation studies at Palmer Station in availability they are found banks, in areas with turbulent waters; Arthur Harbor, which is on the other predominantly offshore. Blue whales they have been observed in the Project side of the peninsula separated from feed almost exclusively on euphausiids Area (Ari Friedlander, personal Hero Inlet. The whale was observed in areas of cold water upwelling. communication). feeding about 300 m offshore. A lead Principal Investigator studying marine Sei Whale Humpback Whale mammals as part of the Long-Term Sei whales inhabit all ocean basins; Humpback whales are distributed Ecological Research Program at Palmer they are oceanic and not commonly throughout the world. They are highly Station notes minke whales are common found in shelf seas. Sei whales migrate migratory, spending spring through fall within a few miles of the station (Ari seasonally, spending the summer on feeding grounds in mid- or high- Friedlander, personal communication). months feeding in the subpolar higher latitude waters, and wintering on latitudes and returning to the lower calving grounds in the tropics, where Fin Whale latitudes to calve in winter. In the they do not eat (Dawbin 1966; as Fin whales are closely related to blue Southern Hemisphere, they are rarely referenced in Wursig et al., 2018). Seven and sei whales. Northern and southern found as far south as blue, fin, and populations of humpback whales are
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46205
found in the Southern hemisphere and 20 or more individuals. Reports of larger beaked whales often occur in groups of feed throughout the waters off groups usually involve temporary 6–10 and occasionally up to 50 or more Antarctica. In the Southern Hemisphere, aggregations of smaller, more stable (Balcomb 1989). Arnoux’s beaked humpback whales feed in circumpolar social units. whales have been observed in the waters and migrate to breeding grounds Currently only one species of killer Project area. Because they are heavily in tropical waters to the north. Seven whale is recognized (O. orca), but it is ice-associated Arnoux’s, beaked whales breeding populations are recognized by likely that some of genetically distinct may be directly affected by loss of sea the International Whaling Commission forms found in different regions of the ice due to climate change. in the Southern Hemisphere, and these world represent distinct species (Wursig Southern Bottlenose Whale are linked to six feeding areas in the et al., 2018). In the Antarctic, five Antarctic. Bettridge et al., (2015) distinct forms of killer whale have been Southern bottlenose whales are identify the southeast Pacific breeding identified: Types A, B1, B2, C, and D. widely distributed throughout the stock as feeding in waters to the west of They differ in coloration, morphology, Southern Hemisphere, mainly south of the Antarctic Peninsula where Palmer and in some cases diet (Pitman and 30°S, and are most common between station is located. These animals breed Ensor 2003). Types B1 and B2 are the 58°S and 62°S. Bottlenose whales seem in the Pacific-Central America waters. most common form observed around the to prefer deeper waters and, like other Humpback whales are considered Antarctic Peninsula and Anvers Island beaked whales, they make regular deep generalists, feeding on euphausiids and (Durban et al., 2016). dives to forage. Stomach content various species of small schooling fish. Killer whales prey on a wide range of analyses of six southern bottlenose They appear to be unique among large vertebrates and invertebrates; they have whales show that this species feeds whales in their use of bubbles to corral no natural predators other than humans. primarily on squid (MacLeod et al., or trap these schooling fish. It is the only cetacean that routinely 2003). Bottlenose whales are typically Humpback whales are the most preys upon marine mammals, with observed in small groups of up to 10 common whale seen within a few miles attacks or kills documented for 50 individuals, though groups of up to 20 of the station (Ari Friedlander, personal different species. Mammalian taxa that animals of mixed age/sex classes have communication). From January 21, 2019 are prey of killer whales include other been reported. Social behaviors have not through March 31, 2020, marine cetaceans—both mysticetes and been studied in southern bottlenose mammal sightings have been recorded odontocetes—pinnipeds, sirenians, whales. during bird observation studies at mustelids and, on rare occasions, Southern Right Whale Palmer Station. On January 23, 2019, ungulates. A variety of fish species are three humpback whales (two adults and also important food of killer whales. In Southern right whales are found one juvenile) were observed feeding off the Antarctic, killer whales in open between 20°S and 60°S. Right whales Torgersen Island, and one adult and one water prey on Antarctic minke whales, are ‘‘skimmers’’ (Baumgartner et al., juvenile were observed feeding in seals, and fish. 2007; as cited in Wursig et al., 2018). Arthur Harbor on January 26, 2019. Killer whales are commonly observed They feed offshore in pelagic regions in Several groups of up to four individuals within a few miles of the station (Ari areas of high productivity by swimming (likely adults and juveniles) were Friedlander, personal communication). forward with the mouth agape. Feeding observed feeding in Arthur Harbor in can occur at or just below the surface, early February 2019. No humpbacks Long-Finned Pilot Whale where it can be observed easily, or at were observed after February 12. At the Long-finned pilot whales inhabit the depth. At times, right whales apparently end of May 2019, two humpback whales cold temperate waters of both the North feed very close to the bottom, because were again observed near Bonaparte Atlantic and the Southern Ocean. They they are observed to surface at the end Point, with no other sightings until the are circumpolar in the Southern of an extended dive with mud on their end of December 2019 when one Hemisphere and occur as far north as heads. Typical feeding dives last for 10– humpback was observed feeding in 14°S in the Pacific and south to the 20 min. It is likely that krill comprise a Arthur Harbor. In late December 2019 Antarctic Convergence (Olson 2009). high proportion of the diet in southern through early February 2020, individual Pilot whales are found in both nearshore right whales. whales or groups of two adults and and pelagic environments. Pilot whales Sperm Whale possibly a juvenile feeding in Arthur are generally nomadic, but are highly Harbor were recorded on 10 separate social and are usually observed in Sperm whales are widely distributed, occasions. A large group of five whales schools of several to hundreds of but distribution of the sexes are (four adults and a juvenile) was animals. They also have been observed different. Female sperm whales almost observed in Arthur Harbor on March 3, in mixed species aggregations. Their always inhabit water deeper than 1,000 2020. This was the last sighting diet consists mostly of squid and other m and at latitudes less than 40°S, recorded. cephalopods, with smaller amounts of corresponding roughly to sea surface fish. Pilot whales are known to dive temperatures greater than 15°C. Sperm Killer Whale deep for prey; the maximum dive depth whales dive to about 600 m below the The killer whale is found in all the measured is about 1,000 m. surface where they hunt primarily for world’s oceans and most seas. It is the squid. Distribution and relative largest member of the family Arnoux’s Beaked Whale abundance can vary in response to prey Delphinidae and has very distinctive Arnoux’s beaked whales inhabit vast availability, most notably squid (Jaquet black-and-white coloration. Antarctic areas of the Southern Hemisphere, & Gendron 2002). killer whales make periodic rapid long- between 24°S and Antarctica. They are Large males from high latitudes can distance migrations to subtropical a deep diving species and can be found be found in almost any ice-free deep waters, possibly for skin maintenance in areas of heavy ice cover. Little is water. Therefore, any sperm whales (Durban and Pitman 2011; as referenced known of the diet of Arnoux’s beaked encountered in Antarctic waters are in Wursig et al., 2018). Killer whales are whales but one individual’s stomach highly likely to be male. They are more social animals that are usually observed was found to be mostly filled with squid likely to be sighted in productive traveling in groups containing a few to beaks (Wursig et al. 2018). Arnoux’s waters, such as those along the edges of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46206 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
continental shelves. Sperm whales have pattern in summer that generally bottom dwelling organisms, including low birth rates, slow growth and high involves hauling out on ice floes during fish, squid, crab, and octopus. They are survival rates. the middle of the day (Bengtson and extraordinary divers with some dive Cameron, 2004; as referenced in Wursig depths exceeding 1,500 m and lasting Antarctic Fur Seal et al., 2018), though usually less than 80 up to 120 minutes. Antarctic fur seals have a circumpolar percent are hauled out on the ice at the Over three seasons (two Antarctic distribution. They are found from the same time. summers and one winter) from January Antarctic continent to the Falkland Antarctic krill is the primary prey 21, 2019 through March 31, 2020, one Islands. Land-based breeding strongly item for crabeater seals, constituting elephant seal was observed lying on influences the distribution of females over 95 percent of their diet. They also shore near Palmer Station in early and their foraging ecology. Lactating eat small quantities of fish and squid March of 2019. No other seals were females are restricted to foraging in the (;ritsland, 1977; as referenced in observed again until October of 2019 waters immediately surrounding the Wursig et al., 2018). Crabeater seals do when on six days over the period breeding beaches, whereas males can not appear to seasonally switch prey. October 8 to 19, 2019 a single seal was disperse after mating. Female During daily nocturnal foraging periods observed lying on the ice in Arthur distribution expands after breeding as in summer, crabeater seals will nearly Harbor. Additional sightings were noted they leave rookeries. continuously dive for up to 16 h at a in November and December 2019 in Antarctic krill dominates the diet of time. Hero Inlet. Sightings increased from Antarctic fur seals in the vicinity of the Over three seasons (i.e., two Antarctic January 6 to February 10, 2020, when Project Area. Penguins are occasionally summers and one winter) from January elephant seals were observed at taken by Antarctic fur seal bulls. Killer 21, 2019 through March 31, 2020, Bonaparte Point as individuals or in whales are likely the main predator of marine mammal sightings have been groups as large as 7 nearly every day the species, but leopard seals are recorded during bird observation and sometimes several times a day. No thought to limit the population growth studies at Palmer Station. Crabeater elephant seals were observed after at Elephant Island in the South Shetland seals were commonly observed February 10, 2020. This is noticeably Islands. Large bulls of other species also individually or in small groups lying on different than 2019, when no elephant prey on pups where species coexist. the ice in Arthur Harbor and Hero Inlet seals were observed in January or Over three seasons from 2019 through in late January and February of 2019; February (NSF, personal 2020 (i.e., two Antarctic summers and the frequency of sightings decreased by communication). one winter), marine mammal sightings March. Groups of up to four individuals have been recorded during daily bird were observed in or near the Project Leopard Seal observation studies at Palmer Station. A Area in early April of 2019, some were The leopard seal (Hydrurga leptonyx) total of 73 fur seals were observed either lying on the floating dock. Groups of is the largest Antarctic pack ice seal. hauled out or swimming in Hero Inlet crabeater seals were observed swimming Leopard seals are solitary pinnipeds, during the Antarctic summer months in Hero Inlet near Gamage Point in April and are widely dispersed at low between January and March 2019. Over and early May of 2019. No crabeater densities on the circumpolar Antarctic a longer summer period between seals were recorded in June, but in early pack ice (Rogers et al., 2013; as cited in October 2019 and March 2020, there July of 2019 groups of two seals and Wursig et al., 2018). Most of the leopard were 242 seals observed in Hero Inlet, individuals were observed on the ice at seal population remains within the pack with the majority of seals hauled out Arthur Harbor and Hero Inlet, and on ice, but when the sea ice extent is (see Table 6–1 in application). During the shore at Bonaparte Point. No minimal, leopard seals are restricted to the winter months between March and crabeater seals were observed from mid- coastal habitats (Meade et al., 2015; as October 2019, 70 seals were observed in July to mid-October of 2019. cited in Wursig et al., 2018). Hero Inlet. Fewer fur seals were Observations of crabeater seals These seals prey on penguins, other observed over the same 2019–2020 increased in Arthur Harbor frequency marine mammals, and zooplankton; this months in Arthur Harbor. See Section 6 into November of 2019, with sightings combination of apex predator and of the application for additional details continuing into December. However, planktivore is unique for marine on seal observations in the project from January of 2020 through March of mammals. Due to the size of their vicinity (NSF, personal 2020, crabeater seals were only observed mouth, leopard seals can take large- communication). on nine occasions; this was less frequent bodied prey including crabeater, than sightings recorded from January to Weddell, southern elephant seals, and Crabeater Seal March of 2019 (NSF, personal fur seals. Crabeater seals have a circumpolar communication). During three seasons (two Antarctic Antarctic distribution; they spend the summers and one winter) of observation entire year in pack ice. They move over Southern Elephant Seal studies at Palmer Station, single leopard large distances with the annual advance Southern elephant seals are the largest seals were occasionally observed lying and retreat of pack ice. Although they of all pinnipeds. Southern elephant on the ice in Arthur Harbor or can be found anywhere within the pack seals can be divided into three distinct swimming in Hero Inlet starting in late ice zone, they are typically found at the stocks: Maguire Island, Iles Kerguelen, January until April of 2019. One edge of the continental shelf, as well as and South Georgia, the latter of which additional sighting was recorded in July, in the marginal ice zone (Burns et al., is relevant to the Project Area. There is and no leopard seals were observed 2004 and Southwell et al., 2005; as some separation of feeding areas again until November 19, 2019, when referenced in Wursig et al., 2018). between the sexes, with males tending three were observed on the ice in Arthur Crabeater seals sometimes congregate in to feed more in continental shelf waters, Harbor. Occasional sightings continued large groups of up to several hundred, while females either use ice-free waters from November 2019 through March of which might be associated with general broadly associated with the Antarctic 2020. On March 31, a leopard seal was patterns of seasonal movement or Polar Front, or the marginal ice zone, observed feeding on a crabeater seal in foraging. As with other Antarctic seals, moving northward as the ice expands. Hero Inlet (NSF, personal crabeater seals have a daily haul out Elephant seals prey on deepwater and communication).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46207
Weddell Seal Over three seasons (two Antarctic assess the potential effects of exposure Weddell seals are large pinnipeds summers and one winter) of observation to sound, it is necessary to understand weighing up to 600 kg with typical from January 21, 2019 through March the frequency ranges marine mammals weights between 300 and 500 kg. 31, 2020, individual Weddell seals were are able to hear. Current data indicate Weddell seals aggregate on the ice to observed on shore at Bonaparte Point that not all marine mammal species molt, and also sporadically dive during from the end of February of 2019 have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., this period. After molting in fall-winter through April of 2019. Weddell seals Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and these seals disperse to sea; some were observed swimming in Hero Inlet Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). individuals remain within the vicinity in early April 2019 on several occasions. To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) of their colonies, whereas other No Weddell seals were sighted again recommended that marine mammals be individuals disperse several hundreds until mid-September of 2019, when an divided into functional hearing groups of kilometers away and may not return individual was again observed on the based on directly measured or estimated to their colonies for several weeks. ice in Hero Inlet. After September 16, hearing ranges on the basis of available The Weddell seal’s range includes 2019, no Weddell seals were observed behavioral response data, audiograms coastal areas around the Antarctic in the vicinity of Palmer Station until derived using auditory evoked potential continent and they are found in areas of January 6, 2020; at that time a seal was techniques, anatomical modeling, and both fast and pack ice. Weddell seals observed in the vicinity of the outfall. other data. No direct measurements of rarely venture into open, ice-free waters. As with 2019 observations, Weddell seal hearing ability have been successfully Animals inhabiting the islands of the sightings at Bonaparte Pointe increased completed for mysticetes (i.e., low- mostly ice-free northern Antarctic in mid- to late February of 2020, and frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, Peninsula are primarily coastal in their continued every day or every few days NMFS (2018) described generalized distribution. through March 27, 2020. hearing ranges for these marine mammal Weddell seals consume epipelagic (0– As indicated above, all 17 species in hearing groups. Generalized hearing 200 m), mesopelagic (200–1000 m) and Table 4 temporally and spatially co- ranges were chosen based on the benthic prey. They can dive to depths occur with the activity to the degree that approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold over 600 m to reach the deeper prey take is reasonably likely to occur, and from the normalized composite items. Their diet consists mainly of fish we have proposed authorizing it. audiograms, with the exception for but they also eat cephalopods, decapods lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans Marine Mammal Hearing and Antarctic krill. Their feeding/haul where the lower bound was deemed to out pattern is diurnal; they haulout Hearing is the most important sensory be biologically implausible and the during the day and forage at night in modality for marine mammals lower bound from Southall et al., (2007) response to the vertical migration of underwater, and exposure to retained. Marine mammal hearing their prey (Andrews-Goff et al., 2010; as anthropogenic sound can have groups and their associated hearing cited in Wursig et al., 2018). deleterious effects. To appropriately ranges are provided in Table 5.
TABLE 5—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS (NMFS, 2018)
Generalized hearing Hearing group range *
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ...... 7 Hz to 35 kHz. Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) ...... 150 Hz to 16 kHz. High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L. 275 Hz to 160 kHz. australis). Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) ...... 50 Hz to 86 kHz. Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) ...... 60 Hz to 39 kHz. * Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’ hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing and ziphiid species and the sperm content of this section, the Estimated group was modified from Southall et al. whale), one is classified as a high- Take section, and the Proposed (2007) on the basis of data indicating frequency cetacean species (i.e., Mitigation section, to draw conclusions that phocid species have consistently hourglass dolphin.) and there is one regarding the likely impacts of these demonstrated an extended frequency species of otariid and 4 phocids. activities on the reproductive success or range of hearing compared to otariids, survivorship of individuals and how Potential Effects of Specified Activities especially in the higher frequency range those impacts on individuals are likely (Hemila¨ et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat to impact marine mammal species or 2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013). This section includes a summary and stocks. For more detail concerning these discussion of the ways that components Acoustic effects on marine mammals groups and associated frequency ranges, of the specified activity may impact during the specified activity can occur please see NMFS (2018) for a review of marine mammals and their habitat. The from the underwater noise resulting available information. Of the seventeen Estimated Take section later in this from DTH pile installation, vibratory marine mammal species that may be document includes a quantitative hammer removal, limited impact present, six are classified as low- analysis of the number of individuals driving to seat piles, rock chipping, and frequency cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete that are expected to be taken by this the use of a hydrogrinder. The effects of species), five are classified as mid- activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis underwater noise from NSF’s proposed frequency cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid and Determination section considers the activities have the potential to result in
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46208 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
Level A or Level B harassment of marine receiver characteristics (e.g., age, size, usually an increase, in the threshold of mammals in the Project Area. depth of the marine mammal receiving audibility at a specified frequency or the sound during exposure); the energy portion of an individual’s hearing range Description of Sound Sources needed to drive the pile (usually related above a previously established reference The primary relevant stressor to to pile size, depth driven, and level’’ (NMFS, 2016b). The amount of marine mammals from the proposed substrate), the standoff distance between threshold shift is customarily expressed activity is the introduction of noise into the pile and receiver; and the sound in dB (ANSI 1995, Yost 2007). A TS can the aquatic environment; therefore, we propagation properties of the be permanent (PTS) or temporary (TTS). focus our impact analysis on the effects environment. As described in NMFS (2018), there are of anthropogenic noise on marine Impacts to marine mammals from pile numerous factors to consider when mammals. To better understand the driving activities are expected to result examining the consequence of TS, potential impacts, we describe sound primarily from acoustic pathways. As including, but not limited to, the signal source characteristics below. such, the degree of effect is intrinsically temporal pattern (e.g., impulsive or non- Specifically, we look at the following related to the received level and impulsive), likelihood an individual two ways to characterize sound: By its duration of the sound exposure, which would be exposed for a long enough temporal (i.e., continuous or are in turn influenced by the distance duration or to a high enough level to intermittent) and its pulse (i.e., between the animal and the source. The induce a TS, the magnitude of the TS, impulsive or non-impulsive) properties. further away from the source, the less time to recovery (seconds to minutes or Continuous sounds are those whose intense the exposure should be. The hours to days), the frequency range of sound pressure level remains above that type of pile driving also influences the the exposure (i.e., spectral content), the of the ambient sound, with negligibly type of impacts, for example, exposure hearing and vocalization frequency small fluctuations in level (NIOSH, to impact pile driving or DTH may range of the exposed species relative to 1998; ANSI, 2005), while intermittent result in temporary or permanent the signal’s frequency spectrum (i.e., sounds are defined as sounds with hearing impairment, while auditory how animal uses sound within the interrupted levels of low or no sound impacts are unlikely to result from frequency band of the signal; e.g., (NIOSH, 1998). Impulsive sounds, such exposure to vibratory pile driving. The Kastelein et al., 2014), and the overlap as those generated by impact pile substrate and depth of the habitat affect between the animal and the source (e.g., driving, are typically transient, brief (< the sound propagation properties of the spatial, temporal, and spectral). 1 sec), broadband, and consist of a high environment. Shallow environments are Permanent Threshold Shift— NMFS peak pressure with rapid rise time and typically more structurally complex, defines PTS as a permanent, irreversible rapid decay (ANSI, 1986; NIOSH, 1998). which leads to rapid sound attenuation. increase in the threshold of audibility at The majority of energy in pile impact In addition, substrates that are soft (e.g., a specified frequency or portion of an pulses is at frequencies below 500 hertz sand) absorb or attenuate the sound individual’s hearing range above a (Hz). Impulsive sounds, by definition, more readily than hard substrates (e.g., previously established reference level are intermittent. Non-impulsive sounds, rock) which may reflect the acoustic (NMFS, 2018). Available data from such as those generated by vibratory wave. Soft porous substrates also likely humans and other terrestrial mammals pile removal can be broadband, require less time to drive the pile, and indicate that a 40 dB threshold shift narrowband or tonal, brief or prolonged, possibly less forceful equipment, which approximates PTS onset (see NMFS and typically do not have a high peak ultimately decrease the intensity of the 2018 for review). sound pressure with rapid rise/decay acoustic source. Temporary Threshold Shift—NMFS time that impulsive sounds do (ANSI, Richardson et al. (1995) described defines TTS as a temporary, reversible 1995; NIOSH, 1998). Non-impulsive zones of increasing intensity of effect increase in the threshold of audibility at sounds can be intermittent or that might be expected to occur, in a specified frequency or portion of an continuous. Similar to impact pile relation to distance from a source and individual’s hearing range above a driving, vibratory pile driving generates assuming that the signal is within an previously established reference level low frequency sounds. Vibratory pile animal’s hearing range. First is the area (NMFS, 2018). Based on data from driving is considered a non-impulsive, within which the acoustic signal would cetacean TTS measurements (see continuous source. DTH is a hybrid be audible (potentially perceived) to the Finneran 2015 for a review), a TTS of source- the rotary drill action produces animal, but not strong enough to elicit 6 dB is considered the minimum non-impulsive, continuous sounds any overt behavioral or physiological threshold shift clearly larger than any while the hammer function produces response. The next zone corresponds day-to-day or session-to-session impulsive sounds. Discussion on the with the area where the signal is audible variation in a subject’s normal hearing appropriate harassment threshold to the animal and of sufficient intensity ability (Schlundt et al., 2000; Finneran associated with these types of sources to elicit behavioral or physiological et al., 2000; Finneran et al., 2002). As based on these characteristics can be responsiveness. Third is a zone within described in Finneran (2016), marine found in the Estimated Take section. which, for signals of high intensity, the mammal studies have shown the received level is sufficient to potentially amount of TTS increases with Potential Effects of Pile Driving cause discomfort or tissue damage to cumulative sound exposure level In general, the effects of sounds from auditory or other systems. Overlaying (SELcum) in an accelerating fashion: At pile driving to marine mammals might these zones to a certain extent is the low exposures with lower SELcum, the result in one or more of the following: area within which masking (i.e., when a amount of TTS is typically small and Temporary or permanent hearing sound interferes with or masks the the growth curves have shallow slopes. impairment, non-auditory physical or ability of an animal to detect a signal of At exposures with higher SELcum, the physiological effects, behavioral interest that is above the absolute growth curves become steeper and disturbance, and masking (Richardson hearing threshold) may occur; the approach linear relationships with the et al., 1995; Nowacek et al., 2007; masking zone may be highly variable in noise SEL. Southall et al., 2007). The potential for size. Depending on the degree (elevation of and magnitude of these effects are NMFS defines a noise-induced threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery dependent on several factors, including threshold shift (TS) as ‘‘a change, time), and frequency range of TTS, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46209
the context in which it is experienced, being exposed for a prolonged period to absence of unpleasant associated events TTS can have effects on marine repeated hammer strikes could receive (Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most mammals ranging from discountable to more sound exposure in terms of SEL likely to habituate to sounds that are serious (similar to those discussed in than from the single watergun impulse predictable and unvarying. It is auditory masking, below). For example, (estimated at 188 dB re 1 mPa2-s) in the important to note that habituation is a marine mammal may be able to readily aforementioned experiment (Finneran et appropriately considered as a compensate for a brief, relatively small al., 2002). Results of these studies ‘‘progressive reduction in response to amount of TTS in a non-critical suggest odontocetes are susceptible to stimuli that are perceived as neither frequency range that takes place during TTS from pile driving, but that they aversive nor beneficial,’’ rather than as, a time when the animal is traveling seem to recover quickly from at least more generally, moderation in response through the open ocean, where ambient small amounts of TTS. to human disturbance (Bejder et al., noise is lower and there are not as many Behavioral Responses—Behavioral 2009). The opposite process is competing sounds present. disturbance may include a variety of sensitization, when an unpleasant Alternatively, a larger amount and effects, including subtle changes in experience leads to subsequent longer duration of TTS sustained during behavior (e.g., minor or brief avoidance responses, often in the form of time when communication is critical for of an area or changes in vocalizations), avoidance, at a lower level of exposure. successful mother/calf interactions more conspicuous changes in similar As noted above, behavioral state may could have more serious impacts. We behavioral activities, and more affect the type of response. For example, note that reduced hearing sensitivity as sustained and/or potentially severe animals that are resting may show a simple function of aging has been reactions, such as displacement from or greater behavioral change in response to observed in marine mammals, as well as abandonment of high-quality habitat. disturbing sound levels than animals humans and other taxa (Southall et al., Disturbance may result in changing that are highly motivated to remain in 2007), so we can infer that strategies durations of surfacing and dives, an area for feeding (Richardson et al., exist for coping with this condition to number of blows per surfacing, or 1995; NRC, 2003; Wartzok et al., 2003). some degree, though likely not without moving direction and/or speed; Controlled experiments with captive cost. reduced/increased vocal activities; marine mammals have showed Schlundt et al. (2000) performed a changing/cessation of certain behavioral pronounced behavioral reactions, study exposing five bottlenose dolphins activities (such as socializing or including avoidance of loud sound and two beluga whales (same feeding); visible startle response or sources (Ridgway et al., 1997; Finneran individuals as Finneran’s studies) to aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke et al., 2003). Observed responses of wild intense one second tones at different slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of marine mammals to loud pulsed sound frequencies. The resulting levels of areas where sound sources are located. sources (typically seismic airguns or fatiguing stimuli necessary to induce 6 Pinnipeds may increase their haul out acoustic harassment devices) have been dB or larger masked TTSs were time, possibly to avoid in-water varied but often consist of avoidance generally between 192 and 201 dB re: 1 disturbance (Thorson and Reyff, 2006). behavior or other behavioral changes microPascal (mPa). Dolphins began to Behavioral responses to sound are suggesting discomfort (Morton and exhibit altered behavior at levels of 178– highly variable and context-specific and Symonds 2002; see also Richardson et 193 dB re: 1 m Pa and above; beluga any reactions depend on numerous al., 1995; Nowacek et al., 2007). whales displayed altered behavior at intrinsic and extrinsic factors (e.g., Available studies show wide variation 180–196 dB re: 1 m Pa and above. At the species, state of maturity, experience, in marine mammal response to conclusion of the study, all thresholds current activity, reproductive state, underwater sound; therefore, it is were at baseline values. auditory sensitivity, time of day), as difficult to predict specifically how any There are a limited number of studies well as the interplay between factors given sound in a particular instance investigating the potential for cetacean (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok et might affect marine mammals TTS from pile driving and only one has al., 2003; Southall et al., 2007; Weilgart, perceiving the signal. If a marine elicited a small amount of TTS in a 2007; Archer et al., 2010). Behavioral mammal does react briefly to an single harbor porpoise individual reactions can vary not only among underwater sound by changing its (Kastelein et al., 2015). However, individuals but also within an behavior or moving a small distance, the captive bottlenose dolphins and beluga individual, depending on previous impacts of the change are unlikely to be whales have exhibited changes in experience with a sound source, significant to the individual, let alone behavior when exposed to pulsed context, and numerous other factors the stock or population. However, if a sounds (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, and (Ellison et al., 2012), and can vary sound source displaces marine 2005). The animals tolerated high depending on characteristics associated mammals from an important feeding or received levels of sound before with the sound source (e.g., whether it breeding area for a prolonged period, exhibiting aversive behaviors. is moving or stationary, number of impacts on individuals and populations Experiments on a beluga whale showed sources, distance from the source). In could be significant (e.g., Lusseau and that exposure to a single watergun general, pinnipeds seem more tolerant Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007; NRC, impulse at a received level of 207 of, or at least habituate more quickly to, 2005). There are broad categories of kiloPascal (kPa) (30 psi) p-p, which is potentially disturbing underwater sound potential response, which we describe equivalent to 228 dB p-p, resulted in a than do cetaceans, and generally seem in greater detail here, that include 7 and 6 dB TTS in the beluga whale at to be less responsive to exposure to alteration of dive behavior, alteration of 0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively. industrial sound than most cetaceans. foraging behavior, effects to breathing, Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of Please see Appendices B–C of Southall interference with or alteration of the pre-exposure level within four et al., (2007) for a review of studies vocalization, avoidance, and flight. minutes of the exposure (Finneran et al., involving marine mammal behavioral Changes in dive behavior can vary 2002). Although the source level of pile responses to sound. widely and may consist of increased or driving from one hammer strike is Habituation can occur when an decreased dive times and surface expected to be lower than the single animal’s response to a stimulus wanes intervals as well as changes in the rates watergun impulse cited here, animals with repeated exposure, usually in the of ascent and descent during a dive (e.g.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46210 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
Frankel and Clark, 2000; Costa et al., humpback whales and killer whales critical behaviors such as foraging or 2003; Ng and Leung, 2003; Nowacek et have been observed to increase the resting). These effects have generally not al., 2004; Goldbogen et al., 2013a,b). length of their songs (Miller et al., 2000; been demonstrated for marine Variations in dive behavior may reflect Fristrup et al., 2003; Foote et al., 2004), mammals, but studies involving fish interruptions in biologically significant while North Atlantic right whales and terrestrial animals have shown that activities (e.g., foraging) or they may be (Eubalaena glacialis) have been increased vigilance may substantially of little biological significance. The observed to shift the frequency content reduce feeding rates (e.g., Beauchamp impact of an alteration to dive behavior of their calls upward while reducing the and Livoreil 1997; Fritz et al, 2002; resulting from an acoustic exposure rate of calling in areas of increased Purser and Radford, 2011). In addition, depends on what the animal is doing at anthropogenic noise (Parks et al., 2007). chronic disturbance can cause the time of the exposure and the type In some cases, animals may cease sound population declines through reduction and magnitude of the response. production during production of of fitness (e.g., decline in body Disruption of feeding behavior can be aversive signals (Bowles et al., 1994). condition) and subsequent reduction in difficult to correlate with anthropogenic Avoidance is the displacement of an reproductive success, survival, or both sound exposure, so it is usually inferred individual from an area or migration (e.g., Harrington and Veitch, 1992; Daan by observed displacement from known path as a result of the presence of a et al., 1996; Bradshaw et al., 1998). foraging areas, the appearance of sound or other stressors, and is one of However, Ridgway et al., (2006) secondary indicators (e.g., bubble nets the most obvious manifestations of reported that increased vigilance in or sediment plumes), or changes in dive disturbance in marine mammals bottlenose dolphins exposed to sound behavior. As for other types of (Richardson et al., 1995). For example, over a five-day period did not cause any behavioral response, the frequency, gray whales are known to change sleep deprivation or stress effects. duration, and temporal pattern of signal direction—deflecting from customary Many animals perform vital functions, presentation, as well as differences in migratory paths—in order to avoid noise such as feeding, resting, traveling, and species sensitivity, are likely from seismic surveys (Malme et al., socializing, on a diel cycle (24-hour contributing factors to differences in 1984). Avoidance may be short-term, cycle). Disruption of functions resulting response in any given circumstance with animals returning to the area once from reactions to stressors such as (e.g., Croll et al., 2001; Nowacek et al., the noise has ceased (e.g., Bowles et al., sound exposure are more likely to be 2004; Madsen et al., 2006; Yazvenko et 1994; Goold, 1996; Morton and significant if they last more than one al., 2007). A determination of whether Symonds, 2002; Gailey et al., 2007). diel cycle or recur on subsequent days foraging disruptions incur fitness Longer-term displacement is possible, (Southall et al., 2007). Consequently, a consequences would require however, which may lead to changes in behavioral response lasting less than information on or estimates of the abundance or distribution patterns of one day and not recurring on energetic requirements of the affected the affected species in the affected subsequent days is not considered individuals and the relationship region if habituation to the presence of particularly severe unless it could between prey availability, foraging effort the sound does not occur (e.g., directly affect reproduction or survival and success, and the life history stage of Blackwell et al., 2004; Bejder et al., (Southall et al., 2007). Note that there is the animal. 2006; Teilmann et al., 2006). a difference between multi-day Respiratory variations with different A flight response is a dramatic change substantive behavioral reactions and behaviors and alterations to breathing in normal movement to a directed and multi-day anthropogenic activities. For rate as a function of acoustic exposure rapid movement away from the example, just because an activity lasts can be expected to co-occur with other perceived location of a sound source. for multiple days does not necessarily behavioral reactions, such as a flight The flight response differs from other mean that individual animals are either response or an alteration in diving. avoidance responses in the intensity of exposed to activity-related stressors for However, respiration rates in and of the response (e.g., directed movement, multiple days or, further, exposed in a themselves may be representative of rate of travel). Relatively little manner resulting in sustained multi-day annoyance or an acute stress response. information on flight responses of substantive behavioral responses. Various studies have shown that marine mammals to anthropogenic Stress responses—An animal’s respiration rates may either be signals exist, although observations of perception of a threat may be sufficient unaffected or could increase, depending flight responses to the presence of to trigger stress responses consisting of on the species and signal characteristics, predators have occurred (Connor and some combination of behavioral again highlighting the importance in Heithaus, 1996). The result of a flight responses, autonomic nervous system understanding species differences in the response could range from brief, responses, neuroendocrine responses, or tolerance of underwater noise when temporary exertion and displacement immune responses (e.g., Seyle, 1950; determining the potential for impacts from the area where the signal provokes Moberg, 2000). In many cases, an resulting from anthropogenic sound flight to, in extreme cases, marine animal’s first and sometimes most exposure (e.g., Kastelein et al., 2001, mammal strandings (Evans and economical (in terms of energetic costs) 2005b, 2006; Gailey et al., 2007). England, 2001). However, it should be response is behavioral avoidance of the Marine mammals vocalize for noted that response to a perceived potential stressor. Autonomic nervous different purposes and across multiple predator does not necessarily invoke system responses to stress typically modes, such as whistling, echolocation flight (Ford and Reeves, 2008), and involve changes in heart rate, blood click production, calling, and singing. whether individuals are solitary or in pressure, and gastrointestinal activity. Changes in vocalization behavior in groups may influence the response. These responses have a relatively short response to anthropogenic noise can Behavioral disturbance can also duration and may or may not have a occur for any of these modes and may impact marine mammals in more subtle significant long-term effect on an result from a need to compete with an ways. Increased vigilance may result in animal’s fitness. increase in background noise or may costs related to diversion of focus and Neuroendocrine stress responses often reflect increased vigilance or a startle attention (i.e., when a response consists involve the hypothalamus-pituitary- response. For example, in the presence of increased vigilance, it may come at adrenal system. Virtually all of potentially masking signals, the cost of decreased attention to other neuroendocrine functions that are
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46211
affected by stress—including immune Masking occurs when the receipt of a localized, and minimal. In general, competence, reproduction, metabolism, sound is interfered with by another turbidity associated with pile and behavior—are regulated by pituitary coincident sound at similar frequencies installation is localized to about a 25- hormones. Stress-induced changes in and at similar or higher intensity, and foot (7.6 m) radius around the pile the secretion of pituitary hormones have may occur whether the sound is natural (Everitt et al., 1980). Cetaceans are not been implicated in failed reproduction, (e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves, expected to be close enough to the altered metabolism, reduced immune precipitation) or anthropogenic (e.g., project activity areas to experience competence, and behavioral disturbance pile driving, shipping, sonar, seismic effects of turbidity, and any small (e.g., Moberg, 1987; Blecha, 2000). exploration) in origin. The ability of a cetaceans and pinnipeds could avoid Increases in the circulation of noise source to mask biologically localized areas of turbidity. Therefore, glucocorticoids are also equated with important sounds depends on the the impact from increased turbidity stress (Romano et al., 2004). characteristics of both the noise source levels is expected to be discountable to The primary distinction between and the signal of interest (e.g., signal-to- marine mammals. No turbidity impacts stress (which is adaptive and does not noise ratio, temporal variability, to Hero Inlet or nearby foraging habitats normally place an animal at risk) and direction), in relation to each other and are anticipated. ‘‘distress’’ is the cost of the response. to an animal’s hearing abilities (e.g., Sound may affect marine mammals During a stress response, an animal uses sensitivity, frequency range, critical and their habitat through impacts on the glycogen stores that can be quickly ratios, frequency discrimination, abundance, behavior, or distribution of replenished once the stress is alleviated. directional discrimination, age or TTS prey species (e.g., crustaceans, In such circumstances, the cost of the hearing loss), and existing ambient cephalopods, fish, and zooplankton). stress response would not pose serious noise and propagation conditions. Marine mammal prey varies by species, fitness consequences. However, when Masking of natural sounds can result season, and location. Here, we describe an animal does not have sufficient when human activities produce high studies regarding the effects of noise on energy reserves to satisfy the energetic levels of background sound at known marine mammal prey. costs of a stress response, energy frequencies important to marine Fish utilize the soundscape and resources must be diverted from other mammals. Conversely, if the components of sound in their functions. This state of distress will last background level of underwater sound environment to perform important until the animal replenishes its is high (e.g., on a day with strong wind functions such as foraging, predator energetic reserves sufficient to restore and high waves), an anthropogenic avoidance, mating, and spawning (e.g., normal function. sound source would not be detectable as Zelick and Mann, 1999; Fay, 2009). Relationships between these far away as would be possible under Depending on their hearing anatomy physiological mechanisms, animal quieter conditions and would itself be and peripheral sensory structures, behavior, and the costs of stress masked. Given the limited vessel traffic which vary among species, fishes hear responses are well-studied through near the Project Area and intermittent sounds using pressure and particle controlled experiments and for both nature of pile installation and removal motion sensitivity capabilities and laboratory and free-ranging animals operations, any masking effects on detect the motion of surrounding water (e.g., Holberton et al., 1996; Hood et al., marine mammals would likely be (Fay et al., 2008). The potential effects 1998; Jessop et al., 2003; Krausman et negligible. of noise on fishes depends on the al., 2004; Lankford et al., 2005). Stress In-Water Construction Effects on overlapping frequency range, distance responses due to exposure to Marine Mammal Habitat—NSF’s from the sound source, water depth of anthropogenic sounds or other stressors construction activities could have exposure, and species-specific hearing and their effects on marine mammals localized, temporary impacts on marine sensitivity, anatomy, and physiology. have also been reviewed (Fair and mammal habitat by increasing in-water Key impacts to fishes may include Becker, 2000; Romano et al., 2002b, sound pressure levels and slightly behavioral responses, hearing damage, Wright et al., 2007) and, more rarely, decreasing water quality. Construction barotrauma (pressure-related injuries), studied in wild populations (e.g., activities are of short duration and and mortality. Romano et al., 2002a). For example, would likely have temporary impacts on Fish react to sounds that are Rolland et al. (2012) found that noise marine mammal habitat through especially strong and/or intermittent reduction from reduced ship traffic in increases in underwater sound. low-frequency sounds, and behavioral the Bay of Fundy was associated with Increased noise levels may affect responses such as flight or avoidance decreased stress in North Atlantic right acoustic habitat (see masking discussion are the most likely effects. Short whales. These and other studies lead to above) and adversely affect marine duration, sharp sounds can cause overt a reasonable expectation that some mammal prey in the vicinity of the or subtle changes in fish behavior and marine mammals will experience project area (see discussion below). local distribution. The reaction of fish to physiological stress responses upon During pile installation activities, noise depends on the physiological state exposure to acoustic stressors and that elevated levels of underwater noise of the fish, past exposures, motivation it is possible that some of these would would ensonify Hero Inlet and nearby (e.g., feeding, spawning, migration), and be classified as ‘‘distress.’’ In addition, waters where both fish and mammals other environmental factors. Hastings any animal experiencing TTS would may occur and could affect foraging and Popper (2005) identified several likely also experience stress responses success. Additionally, marine mammals studies that suggest fish may relocate to (NRC, 2003). may avoid the area during construction, avoid certain areas of sound energy. Masking—Sound can disrupt behavior however, displacement due to noise is Additional studies have documented through masking, or interfering with, an expected to be temporary and is not effects of pile driving on fish, although animal’s ability to detect, recognize, or expected to result in long-term effects to several are based on studies in support discriminate between acoustic signals of the individuals or populations. of large, multiyear bridge construction interest (e.g., those used for intraspecific Pile driving activities may projects (e.g., Scholik and Yan, 2001, communication and social interactions, temporarily increase turbidity resulting 2002; Popper and Hastings, 2009). prey detection, predator avoidance, from suspended sediments. Any Several studies have demonstrated that navigation) (Richardson et al., 1995). increases would be temporary, impulse sounds might affect the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46212 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
distribution and behavior of some 2019). Therefore, based on the distance expected to minimize the severity of the fishes, potentially impacting foraging to Bonaparte Point, it is unlikely that taking to the extent practicable. opportunities or increasing energetic animals hauled out across Hero Inlet As described previously, no mortality costs (e.g., Fewtrell and McCauley, will be exposed to levels above the or serious injury is anticipated or 2012; Pearson et al., 1992; Skalski et al., NMFS Level B harassment threshold for proposed to be authorized for this 1992; Santulli et al., 1999; Paxton et al., disturbance. activity. Below we describe how the 2017). However, some studies have In summary, given the relatively small take is estimated. shown no or slight reaction to impulse areas being affected (i.e., Hero Inlet and Generally speaking, we estimate take sounds (e.g., Pena et al., 2013; Wardle highly truncated sound fields extending by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds et al., 2001; Jorgenson and Gyselman, out to 18 km), construction activities above which NMFS believes the best 2009; Cott et al., 2012). associated with the proposed action are available science indicates marine Sound pressure levels (SPLs) of not likely to have a permanent, adverse mammals will be behaviorally harassed sufficient strength have been known to effect on any fish habitat, or populations or incur some degree of permanent cause injury to fish and fish mortality. of fish species. Any behavioral hearing impairment; (2) the area or However, in most fish species, hair cells avoidance by fish of the disturbed area volume of water that will be ensonified in the ear continuously regenerate and would still leave significantly large above these levels in a day; (3) the loss of auditory function likely is areas of fish and marine mammal density or occurrence of marine restored when damaged cells are foraging habitat in the nearby vicinity. mammals within these ensonified areas; replaced with new cells. Halvorsen et Thus, we conclude that impacts of the and (4) and the number of days of al., (2012a) showed that a TTS of 4–6 dB specified activity are not likely to have activities. We note that while these was recoverable within 24 hours for one more than short-term adverse effects on factors can contribute to a basic species. Impacts would be most severe any prey habitat or populations of prey calculation to provide an initial when the individual fish is close to the species. Further, any impacts to marine prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively source and when the duration of mammal habitat are not expected to inform take estimates is also sometimes exposure is long. Injury caused by result in significant or long-term available (e.g., previous monitoring barotrauma can range from slight to consequences for individual marine results or average group size). Below, we severe and can cause death, and is most mammals, or to contribute to adverse describe the factors considered here in likely for fish with swim bladders. impacts on their populations. Barotrauma injuries have been more detail and present the proposed documented during controlled exposure Estimated Take take estimate. to impact pile driving (Halvorsen et al., This section provides an estimate of Acoustic Thresholds 2012b; Casper et al., 2013). the number of incidental takes proposed The most likely impact to fish from NMFS recommends the use of for authorization through this IHA, construction activities at the Project acoustic thresholds that identify the which will inform both NMFS’ Area would be temporary behavioral received level of underwater sound consideration of ‘‘small numbers’’ and avoidance of the area. The duration of above which exposed marine mammals fish avoidance of this area after pile the negligible impact determination. would be reasonably expected to be driving stops is unknown, but a rapid Harassment is the only type of take behaviorally harassed (equated to Level return to normal recruitment, expected to result from these activities. B harassment) or to incur PTS of some distribution and behavior is anticipated. Except with respect to certain activities degree (equated to Level A harassment). Airborne Acoustic Effects—Pinnipeds not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the Level B Harassment for non-explosive that occur near the project site could be MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act sources—Though significantly driven by exposed to airborne sounds associated of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, received level, the onset of behavioral with pile driving that have the potential which (i) has the potential to injure a disturbance from anthropogenic noise to cause behavioral harassment, marine mammal or marine mammal exposure is also informed to varying depending on their distance from pile stock in the wild (Level A harassment); degrees by other factors related to the driving activities. However, in-air noise or (ii) has the potential to disturb a source (e.g., frequency, predictability, generated during pile driving activities marine mammal or marine mammal duty cycle), the environment (e.g., at the pier should attenuate in air to less stock in the wild by causing disruption bathymetry), and the receiving animals than levels that exceed NMFS of behavioral patterns, including, but (hearing, motivation, experience, established Level B harassment not limited to, migration, breathing, demography, behavioral context) and thresholds, before reaching the opposite nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering can be difficult to predict (Southall et side of Hero Inlet where seals may be on (Level B harassment). al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2012). Based on shore. A 2016 Final Rule for Authorized takes would primarily be what the available science indicates and construction of a Navy Pier (81 FR by Level B harassment, as use of the the practical need to use a threshold 52614; August 9, 2016) estimated the acoustic sources (i.e., pile installation based on a factor that is both predictable greatest possible distances to airborne and removal equipment) has the and measurable for most activities, noise during installation of a 24″ steel potential to result in disruption of NMFS uses a generalized acoustic pile (using a source level of 111 dB re behavioral patterns for individual threshold based on received level to 20 microPascals) as 168.3 m to the 90 marine mammals. There is also some estimate the onset of behavioral dB threshold for harbor seals and 53.2 potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment. NMFS predicts that marine m for all other seals (using a 100dB harassment) to result, primarily for mammals are likely to be behaviorally threshold). A 2019 Final Rule published mysticetes due to large PTS zones as harassed in a manner we consider Level for construction of the Liberty well as for phocids and otariids due to B harassment when exposed to Development in Alaska estimated haulouts in the vicinity of the Project underwater anthropogenic noise above airborne noise during impact pile Area. Auditory injury is unlikely to received levels of 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) driving as 81 dB re 20 microPascals at occur for high frequency or mid- for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile- 100 m and 93 dB re 20 microPascals at frequency species. The proposed driving, DTH) and above 160 dB re 1 160 m (84 FR 70274; December 20, mitigation and monitoring measures are mPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46213
(e.g., seismic airguns, impact pile harassment, DTH pile installation Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) driving) or intermittent (e.g., scientific activities are evaluated according to the (Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies sonar) sources. impulsive criteria and using 160 dB dual criteria to assess auditory injury DTH pile installation includes drilling rms. Level B harassment isopleths for (Level A harassment) to five different (non-impulsive sound) and hammering DTH are determined by applying non- marine mammal groups (based on (impulsive sound) to penetrate rocky impulsive criteria and using the 120 dB hearing sensitivity) as a result of substrates (Denes et al., 2016; Denes et rms threshold which is also used for exposure to noise from two different al., 2019; Reyff and Heyvaert 2019). vibratory driving. This approach types of sources (impulsive or non- DTH pile installation was initially ensures that the largest ranges to effect impulsive). NSF’s proposed activity thought be a primarily non-impulsive for both Level A and Level B harassment includes the use of impulsive (i.e., noise source. However, Denes et al., are accounted for in the take estimation impact hammer, DTH pile installation) (2019) concluded from a study process for DTH. and non-impulsive (i.e., vibratory conducted in Virginia, that DTH pile NSF’s proposed activity includes the hammer, DTH pile installation, rock installation should also be characterized use of continuous (vibratory hammer, chipping, hydrogrinder) sources. as impulsive based on Southall et al., DTH pile installation, hydrogrinder) and These thresholds are provided in the (2007), who stated that signals with a >3 impulsive (impact pile driving, DTH Table 6. The references, analysis, and dB difference in sound pressure level in pile installation) sources, and therefore methodology used in the development a 0.035-second window compared to a the 120 and 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) is/ of the thresholds are described in NMFS 1-second window can be considered are applicable. 2018 Technical Guidance, which may impulsive. Therefore, DTH pile Level A harassment for non-explosive be accessed at https:// installation is treated as both an sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ impulsive and non-impulsive noise for Assessing the Effects of marine-mammal-protection/marine- source. In order to evaluate Level A Anthropogenic Sound on Marine mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
TABLE 6—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT
PTS onset acoustic thresholds * Hearing group (received level) Impulsive Non-impulsive
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ...... Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB. Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ...... Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB. High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ...... Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB. Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) ...... Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ...... Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB. Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) ...... Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ...... Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB. * Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impul- sive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered. 2 Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.
Ensonified Area sound source levels for all planned pile installation and 24-in sockets which are more conservative than those Here, we describe operational and equipment. Sound levels from pile recommended by NMFS, and NMFS environmental parameters of the activity installation used in NSF’s application deemed this approach acceptable. that will feed into identifying the area came from the Caltrans Compendium ensonified above the acoustic (2015) or are based on empirical data NSF determined the SSLs for rock thresholds, which include source levels collected from other sites with similar chipping based on underwater sounds and transmission loss coefficient. conditions (e.g., rock substrate where measured for concrete demolition. NSF The sound field in the Project Area is DTH driving would be used to install examined two sets of data available the existing background noise plus piles). NSF referenced two studies to during the demolition of the Tappan additional construction noise from the arrive at SSLs for 24-in DTH pile Zee Bridge (state of New York) pier proposed project. Marine mammals are installation. Noise studies from Kodiak structures. NSF also considered the expected to be affected via sound ferry terminal (Denes et al., 2016) and results from another study conducted by generated by the primary components of Skagway cruise ship terminal (Reyff and the Washington State Department of the project (i.e., DTH pile installation, Heyvart, 2019; Reyff, 2020). Results are Transportation (WSDOT). Results from vibratory pile removal, limited impact shown in Table 7. NMFS has developed that analysis are shown in Table 7. for proofing purpose, rock chipping and DTH pile installation guidelines which The U.S. Navy has assessed sound use of hydrogrinders). contain recommendations for levels of the use of a hydrogrinder The estimated sound source levels appropriate SSLs. NSF applied these through underwater measurements (U.S. (SSL) proposed by NSF and used in this recommendations for 36-in DTH pile Navy 2018). The Navy measurements assessment are described below and are installation. However, NSF proposed to were reported in 1/1-octave frequency shown in Table 7. Appendix A in the use the DTH pile installation SSLs bands from 125 to 8,000 Hz for the application discusses in detail the shown in Table 7, which for 24-in DTH helmet position that was assumed to be
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46214 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
0.5 to 1 meter from the hydraulic piles installed simultaneously or one installation, takes are accounted for by grinder operation. The overall 36-in pile and one 24-in pile. Brief using the area ensonified during DTH unweighted sound level was computed impact pile driving of about 10 strikes pile installation to calculate takes. This to be 167.5 dB at 0.5 to 1 meter. Source may be used to seat the piles. A likely precautionary approach overestimates sound levels in this report are provided approach to installing 36-in piles would takes that could occur if only rock for 10-m distances. Since this is a point be to use DTH to install two 36-in piles chipping is conducted by itself. Rock source of sound, spherical spreading 20 simultaneously; one 36-in pile would be chipping is considered to be an Log TL coefficient results in a source installed to 20-ft socket depth while a impulsive source. sound level of 142 to 148 dB at 10 second 36-in abutment pile would be Existing sheetpile would be removed meters (see Appendix A in the installed to a 30-ft socket depth. The through vibratory extraction. In some application). A value of 146 dB at 10m abutment piles require additional depth instances it may be necessary to remove has been used to estimate marine to support lateral loads and to provide piles by cutting them off at the mudline mammal take associated with these side friction against ice uplift that could using underwater hand cutting tools. tools. occur at the shoreline. It is also possible Such activity would occur on the same NSF assumed that installation of that both 36-in piles may be installed days as vibratory extraction. Cutting approximately one to two piles would simultaneously to 20-ft socket. piles off at the mudline would result in occur over a 12-hour work day. To be Rock chipping may be required to less underwater noise than vibratory precautionary in calculating isopleths, level pile areas and would normally removal. To be precautionary, estimated this application assumes two occur on the same day as DTH pile marine mammal takes were calculated installation activities would occur installation, if possible. If rock chipping by assuming all piles were removed by simultaneously. For example, two 36-in is conducted separately from DTH pile vibratory extraction.
TABLE 7—SOUND SOURCE LEVELS
Measured sound levels 1 Source Activity Peak RMS SEL 2 TL
24-in Piles
DTH pile installation ...... 190 166 154 15 Denes et al., (2016). Vibratory Driving 4 ...... 170 165 165 15 Caltrans (2015). Impact Driving ...... 195 181 168 15 Caltrans (2015).
36-in Piles
DTH pile installation ...... 194 166 164 15 The DTH sound source proxy of 164 dB SEL is from 42-in piles, Reyff (2020) and Denes et al., (2019). Vibratory Driving ...... 180 170 170 15 Caltrans (2015). Impact Driving ...... 210 193 183 15 Caltrans (2015).
H Piles inserted in 24-in. Sockets
DTH pile installation ...... 190 166 154 15 Denes et al., (2016). Vibratory Driving ...... 170 165 165 15 Caltrans (2015). Impact Driving ...... 195 180 170 15 Caltrans (2015).
Removal of 24-in Template Piles
Vibratory Driving ...... 170 165 165 15 Caltrans (2015).
Removal of Sheet Piles
Vibratory Driving ...... 175 160 160 15 Caltrans (2015).
Rock Chipping
Hydraulic Breaker ...... 197 184 175 22 Tappan Zee Bridge 67.
Anode Installation
Hydro-grinder ...... 146 ...... 20 U.S. Navy (2008). 1 See Appendix A in application for references and discussion of all sound sources. 2 SEL is single strike for impact driving and DTH pile installation. SEL for vibratory installation is per second. 4 Includes removal of 24-in. piles 5 While it is possible the socket depth would be only 20 feet, this application assumes the greater depth to be precautionary. 6 Reyff, J. 2018. Demolition of Existing Tappan Zee Bridge. Summary of Underwater Sound Measurements for Mechanical Demolition of Con- crete Pile Caps at Piers 114 and 115, Circular Caisson at Pier 166, and Rectangular Caisson at Pier 170. To David Capobianco, New York State Thruway Authority. December 18, 2020. 7 Reyff, J. 2018. Demolition of Existing Tappan Zee Bridge Subject: Summary of Underwater Sound Measurements for Mechanical Demolition of Ice Breakers at Piers 173 and 169. To Kristine Edwards, New York State Thruway Authority. January 10, 2018.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46215
When the sound fields from two or overlap. The increased SLs potentially from DTH pile installation is 166 dB more concurrent pile installation associated with two concurrent sources regardless of the size of the pile. Under activities overlap, the decibel addition with overlapping sound fields are decibel addition, simultaneous DTH of continuous noise sources results in shown in Table 8 (WSDOT 2015). pile installation activities would use a much larger zone sizes than a single Decibel addition is only applicable to SL of 169 (166 + 3) to derive the source. Decibel addition is not a continuous sources. According to NMFS isopleth for the Level B harassment consideration when sound fields do not guidance the SL for continuous sounds zone.
TABLE 8—SIMULTANEOUS SOURCE DECIBEL ADDITION
Difference Hammer types in SSL Level A zones Level B zones
Vibratory, Impact ...... Any ...... Use impact zones ...... Use largest zone. Impact, Impact ...... Any ...... Use zones for each pile size and number of Use zone for each pile size. strikes. Vibratory, Vibratory ...... 0 or 1 dB ... Add 3 dB to the higher source level ...... Add 3 dB to the higher source level. 2 or 3 dB ... Add 2 dB to the higher source level ...... Add 2 dB to the higher source level. 4 to 9 dB .... Add 1 dB to the higher source level ...... Add 1 dB to the higher source level. 10 dB or Add 0 dB to the higher source level ...... Add 0 dB to the higher source level. more.
Level B Harassment Zones specific modelling. Level B harassment where appropriate. For stationary isopleths are shown in Table 15 and sources such as those planned for this Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease Table 16. project, NMFS User Spreadsheet in acoustic intensity as an acoustic predicts the distance at which, if a pressure wave propagates out from a Level A Harassment Zones marine mammal remained at that source. TL parameters vary with When the NMFS Technical Guidance distance the whole duration of the frequency, temperature, sea conditions, (2016) was published, in recognition of activity, it would incur PTS. Inputs current, source and receiver depth, the fact that ensonified area/volume used in the User Spreadsheet, and the water depth, water chemistry, and could be more technically challenging resulting isopleths are reported below. bottom composition and topography. to predict because of the duration Tables 9, 10 and 11 shows User inputs The general formula for underwater TL component in the new thresholds, we for single sound sources while Tables is: developed a User Spreadsheet that 12, 13, and 14 contain User inputs for TL = B * Log10 (R1/R2), includes tools to help predict a simple simultaneous sources. The resulting Where: isopleth that can be used in conjunction Level A harassment isopleths for non- TL = transmission loss in dB with marine mammal density or simultaneous activities and B = transmission loss coefficient; for practical occurrence to help predict takes. We simultaneous activities are shown in spreading equals 15 note that because of some of the Table 15 and Table 16 respectively. R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from assumptions included in the methods Level B harassment isopleths for the driven pile, and used for these tools, we anticipate that simultaneous DTH pile installation R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the isopleths produced are typically going utilize a 169 dB SL and corresponding initial measurement to be overestimates of some degree, isopleths are shown in Table 16. Note The recommended TL coefficient for which may result in some degree of that strike numbers for DTH pile most nearshore environments is the overestimate of Level A harassment installation were derived by applying practical spreading value of 15. This take. However, these tools offer the best the duration required to drive a single value results in an expected propagation way to predict appropriate isopleths pile (minutes), the number of piles environment that would lie between when more sophisticated 3D modeling driven per day, and the strike rate spherical and cylindrical spreading loss methods are not available, and NMFS (average strikes per second) rates to conditions, which is the most continues to develop ways to arrive at the total number of strikes in appropriate assumption for NSF’s quantitatively refine these tools, and a 24-hour period. A rate of 10 strikes per proposed activity in the absence of will qualitatively address the output second was assumed. TABLE 9—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET INPUTS TO CALCULATE PTS ISOPLETHS FOR NON- SIMULTANEOUS VIBRATORY PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES AND HYDROGRINDING
36-in (dock RHIB fender 24-in template 24-in wave 24-in template Sheet pile Anode dock piles 24-in 10′ socket attenuator pile removal removal installation abutment)-in piles-in (hydro- grinding) A.1) Non- A.1) Non- A.1) Non- A.1) Non- Spreadsheet tab used A.1) Non- impul, stat, impul, stat, A.1) Non- impul, stat, impul, stat, A.1) Non- impul, stat, cont. cont. impul, stat, cont. cont. impul, stat, cont. cont. cont.
Source Level (SPL RMS) ...... 170 165 165 165 165 160 146 15 Transmission Loss Coefficient ...... 15 15 15 15 15 15 20 Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ...... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Time to install/remove single pile (minutes) 30 30 30 30 30 30 120 Piles to install/remove per day ...... 1 1 2 1 16 16 1
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46216 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
TABLE 10—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET INPUT TO CALCULATE PTS ISOPLETHS FOR NON- SIMULTANEOUS IMPACT PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
36-in 24-in RHIB Rock chipping (dock, dock (template, abutment) wave attenuator) E) Stationary Spreadsheet Tab Used source: E.1) Impact E.1) Impact impulsive, pile driving pile driving intermittent
Source Level (Single Strike/shot SEL) ...... 183 168 197 Transmission Loss Coefficient ...... 15 15 22 Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ...... 2 2 0 Number of pulses in 1-hr period ...... 10 10 2,700 Piles per day ...... 1 1 ......
TABLE 11—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET INPUT TO CALCULATE PTS ISOPLETHS FOR NON- SIMULTANEOUS DTH PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
36-in dock 20′ Dock abut- 24-in RHIB, socket ment-36-in template, 30′ socket wave attenuator Spreadsheet tab used E.2) DTH pile driving E.2) DTH pile E.2) DTH pile driving driving
Source Level (Single Strike/Shot SEL) ...... 164 164 154 Transmission Loss Coefficient ...... 15 15 15 Strike rate (Strikes/sec) ...... 10 10 10 Duration (min) ...... 345 518 345 Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ...... 2 2 2 SStrikes/pile ...... 207,000 310,500 207,000 Piles to install/remove per day ...... 1 1 1
TABLE 12—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET INPUT TO CALCULATE PTS ISOPLETHS FOR SIMULTANEOUS VIBRATORY PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
36-in dock 20′ RHIB fender 24-in wave 24-in wave socket x 2 piles 24-in x 2 attenuator attenuator dock abutment piles-10′ piles-20′ 24-in template socket x 2 socket x 2 A.1) Non- 10′ socket x 4 Spreadsheet tab used A.1) Non- impul, stat, A.1) Non- A.1) Non- impul, stat, cont. impul, stat, impul, stat, cont. cont. cont.
Source Level (SPL RMS) ...... 173 168 168 168 168 Transmission Loss Coefficient ...... 15 15 15 15 15 Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ...... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Time to install/remove single pile (minutes) ...... 30 30 15 30 30 Piles to install/remove per day ...... 2 2 4 2 2
TABLE 13—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET INPUT TO CALCULATE PTS ISOPLETHS FOR SIMULTANEOUS IMPACT PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
36-in (dock 20′ RHIB fender 24-in template 24-in wave socket x 2) piles 24-in x 2 10′ socket x 4 attenuator or piles x 2 dock abut- ment-36-in 30′ and 20′ Spreadsheet tab used socket E.1) Impact E.1) Impact E.1) Impact pile driving pile driving pile driving E.1) Impact pile driving
Source Level (Single Strike/shot SEL) ...... 183 168 168 168 Transmission Loss Coefficient ...... 15 15 15 15 Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ...... 2 2 2 2 Strikes/pile ...... 10 10 10 10 Piles per day ...... 2 2 4 2
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46217
TABLE 14—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET INPUT TO CALCULATE PTS ISOPLETHS FOR SIMULTANEOUS DTH PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
36-in dock 20′ Dock 24-in template 24-in wave socket x 2 abutment- 10′ socket x 4 attenuator 36-in piles- 30′ and 20′ 10′ socket x 2/ socket RHIB fender Spreadsheet tab used E.2) DTH pile E.2) DTH pile piles 24-in x 2 driving driving E.2) DTH pile E.2) DTH pile driving driving
Source Level (Single Strike/Shot SEL) ...... 164 164 154 154 Transmission Loss Coefficient ...... 15 15 15 15 Strike rate (Strikes/sec) ...... 10 10 10 10 Duration (min) ...... 345 430 172.5 345 Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ...... 2 2 2 2 Strikes/pile ...... 414,000 517,500 103,500 207,000 Piles to install per day ...... 2 2 4 2
TABLE 15—LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS FOR NON-SIMULTANEOUS PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
Level A harassment zones (m) based on SELcum Level B harassment Cetaceans Pinnipeds zone (m) LF MF HF PW OW
Dock, 36-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ Socket Depth— DTH Pile Drilling ...... 1,891 67 2,253 1,012 74 11,659 1 pile/day. Dock Abutment, 36-in Dia. Pile Installation, 30′ Sock- DTH Pile Drilling ...... 2,478 88 2,951 1,326 97 11,659 et Depth—1 pile/day. RHIB Fender Piles, 24-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ DTH Pile Drilling ...... 407 15 485 218 16 11,659 Socket—1 pile/day. 24-in Dia. Template Piles, 10′ Socket Depth—2 piles/ DTH Pile Drilling ...... 407 15 485 218 16 11,659 day. 24-in Dia Wave Attenuator Piles, 20′ Socket Depth— DTH Pile Drilling ...... 407 15 485 218 16 11,659 1 pile/day. Retaining Wall HP Pile inserted in Drilled 24-in Dia DTH Pile Drilling ...... 407 15 485 218 16 11,659 Sockets, 20′ Socket Depth—1 pile/day. Removal of 24-in Dia. Template Piles—16 piles ...... Vibratory ...... 51 5 75 31 2 10,000 Removal of Sheet Piles ...... Vibratory ...... 23 2 35 14 1 4,642 Rock Chipping/Floor Preparation ...... Hydraulic Breaker ...... 403 50 716 204 29 123 Anode Installation...... Hydrogrinder ...... 1.9 0.3 2.5 1.3 0.2 200
TABLE 16—LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS FOR SIMULTANEOUS PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
Level A harassment zones (m) based on SELcum Level B Installation harassment Daily activity scenario method Cetaceans Pinnipeds zone (m) LF MF HF PW OW
Dock, 36-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ Socket Depth— DTH Pile Installation ...... 3,002 107 3,576 1,607 117 18,478 2 pile/day. Dock Abutment, 36-in Dia. Pile Installation, 30′ Sock- 3,484 124 4,149 1,864 136 18,478 et Depth and 36-in Dia. Pile 20′ Socket Depth. RHIB Fender Piles, 24-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ 647 23 770 346 25 18,478 Socket—2 pile/day. 24-in Dia. Template Piles, 10′ Socket Depth—4 piles/ day. 24-in Dia Wave Attenuator Piles, 20′ Socket Depth— 2 pile/day. Retaining Wall—HP Pile inserted in Drilled 24-in Dia Sockets, 20′ Socket Depth—2 piles/day. Dock, 36-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ Socket Depth— 2,011 72 2,395 1,076 78 18,478 1 pile/day and Wave Attenuator, 24-in Dia. Pile In- stallation, 20′ Socket—1 pile/day. Dock 36-in Dia. Pile Installation 30′ Socket Depth and 2,885 103 3,436 1,544 133 18,478 24-in Dia Pile Installation 20′ Socket Depth. 36-in Dock 20′ socket x 2 Dock Abutment ...... Vibratory Installation ...... 43 4 64 26 2 34,146 RHIB Fender Piles 24-in x 2 ...... 20 2 30 12 1 15,849 24-in template 10′ socket x 4. 24-in wave attenuator piles-10′ socket x 2 ...... 31.8 3 47 19 1.4 24-in wave attenuator piles-20′ socket x 2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46218 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
The calculated area that would be and the areas potentially ensonified (1.4 km2) for phocids in water (PW), ensonified by single or multiple pile above Level A and Level B harassment 3,484m (3.38 km2) for LF cetaceans, and installation and removal sound sources thresholds is truncated by the location 4,149m (4.4 km2) for HF cetaceans is calculated based on the distance from of land masses including assorted (although HF cetaceans are considered the Palmer Station Pier installation islands (i.e., shadow effect). rare in the Project Area and Level A location to the edge of the isopleth for Table 16 shows the construction harassment takes are not proposed). The Level B harassment and for each hearing scenario (installation of two 36-in piles, largest Level B harassment isopleth is group for Level A harassment. The one at 30- ft and a second at 20-ft socket associated with simultaneous DTH pile scenario with the largest zone is used to depth) that results in the largest PTS installation and would be at a distance zone isopleths while Table 17 shows the estimate potential marine mammal of 18,478 m from the source covering an exposures and those areas are shown in areas of the corresponding zones area of 54.99 m. Table 17. The Palmer Station Pier is ensonified areas. The maximum Level A located in a narrow portion of Hero Inlet harassment distance would be 1,864 m
TABLE 17—HARASSMENT ZONE AREAS USED FOR TAKE ESTIMATION 1
Level A max area Level A max area Level B area Pile type Total piles cetaceans3 pinnipeds3 all species (km2) (km2) (km2)
36-in piles (one @30-ft socket depth and one @20-ft socket depth) 18 3.38 (LF), 4.4 1.4 (PW), 0.03 54.99 4 (HF), 0.03 (MF) (OW) 32-in piles (Bent 1). Pile Removal (24-in) ...... 16 0.006 (LF), 0.012 0.002 (PW) 20.78 (MF), ∼0 (MF) Sheetpile Removal ...... 20 0.001 (LF), 0.003 0.0006 (PW) 5.27 (HF), ∼0 (MF) Anode Installation ...... n/a n/a n/a 0.07 Rock Chipping ...... unk
Total ...... 88 1 Assumes simultaneous installation (i.e., two pile installations occurring at the same time).
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take 6–3 in the application. For some species and offshore densities were available, Estimation only offshore data were available, for the higher of the two densities is used In this section we provide the some only nearshore data, and for others to estimate take. Note that designated information about the presence, density, data existed for both areas. Offshore shutdown zones cover all of the Level or group dynamics of marine mammals densities were used to estimate take for A harassment zones with the exception that will inform the take calculations. eight species. Nearshore densities were of pinnipeds, where the zones in some The approach by which the unavailable for three species. Nearshore cases are larger than the proposed 50-m information provided above is brought densities were used to calculate take for shutdown zone. However, we are together to produce a quantitative take four species. Data from these offshore proposing to authorize take for some estimate is described here. For some sources results in averaging across large cetacean species where the calculated species only observational data is portions of the region. NSF notes that Level A harassment take is significant, available and is used to estimate take. these data are from areas where and the large PTS zone sizes could For marine mammals with known cetaceans may occur in significantly allow animals to enter into these zones density information estimated greater densities than the Palmer Pier without being observed by protected harassment take numbers are calculated Project Area due to expected increased species observers (PSOs). using the following equation (summed faunal density along the sea ice edge A similar approach was employed to across each type of activity): and shelf-frontal features in the derive estimated take by Level B Estimated take = animal density × southern oceans. These oceanographic harassment. The Level B harassment ensonified area × operating days features are not present within the zones are determined by taking the total As noted above we used the most Project Area, so lower densities of area of the Level B harassment zones conservative option for estimating cetaceans are expected within close (54.99 km2; 20.78 km2; 5.27 km2; 0.07 ensonified area for each activity. We proximity to Palmer Station. Therefore, km2) and subtracting the Level A also used conservative estimates of the the offshore densities may represent an harassment areas as defined by activity number of days of work for each overestimate of anticipated densities type and hearing group. activity. within the Palmer Station Project Area. The Level B harassment zone area was Takes were estimated by considering NSF estimated Level A harassment multiplied by the highest density for a the density of marine mammals per km2 takes by multiplying the Level A species (nearshore or offshore as multiplied by the potential area harassment areas by the species density described above) which was multiplied ensonified (km2) and the number of (nearshore or offshore as described by the expected number of pile driving days the noise could occur during in- above) which was then multiplied by days for each activity type. The water construction. The Project Area is the expected number of pile driving exposures for each activity were located in the nearshore environment days for each activity type. The summed to arrive at the calculated Level relative to the Antarctic Peninsula as exposures for each activity were added B harassment take numbers as shown in defined by data reported in Santora et to arrive at calculated Level A Table 18. Additional detailed al. (2009). Sources for density data and harassment take number as shown in information may be found in Appendix average group sizes are found in Table Table 20. In cases where both nearshore B of the application.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46219
TABLE 18—CALCULATED LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT EXPOSURES
Level A Level B harassment harassment Species total total exposures exposures
Antarctic Minke Whale (LF) ...... 15.23 312.25 Arnoux’s Beaked Whale (MF) ...... 0.0001 0.14 Blue Whale (LF) ...... 0.0081 0.17 Fin Whale (LF) ...... 13.74 281.70 Hourglass Dolphin (HF) ...... 0.32 4.94 Humpback Whale (LF) ...... 5.91 121.21 Killer Whale (MF) ...... 0.04 111.70 Long-finned Pilot Whale (MF) ...... 0.01 28.19 Southern Bottlenose Whale (MF) ...... 0.009 23.55 Sei Whale (LF) ...... 0.04 0.84 Southern Right Whale (LF) ...... 0.07 1.34 Sperm Whale (MF) ...... 0.02 16.73 Antarctic Fur Seal (OW) ...... 0.15 356.50 Crabeater Seal (PW) ...... 119.07 6128.78 Southern Elephant Seal (PW) ...... 0.02 1.04 Leopard Seal (PW) ...... 0.02 1.04 Weddell Seal (PW) ...... 3.65 187.97
In addition to considering density Inlet near Palmer Station included southeast of the Pier area. Table 19 data presented in the literature, recent animals observed in the waters of Hero shows a comparison between marine mammal observation data from Inlet, or hauled out at Gamage Point or observational data from the Project Area Hero Inlet and nearby areas between Bonaparte Point. Gamage Point is (NSF, personal communication) and the January 21, 2019 and March 31, 2020 approximately 100 m west of the pier calculated takes by Level A harassment are also considered in the take area on Anvil Island while Bonaparte based on density data. estimates. Observations within Hero Point is located across Hero Inlet 135m
TABLE 19—COMPARISON OF OBSERVATION DATA FROM HERO INLET, GAMAGE POINT AND BONAPARTE POINT 2019–2020 TO TOTAL LEVEL A HARASSMENT EXPOSURE ESTIMATES CALCULATED BASED ON DENSITY DATA
January 21– October 12, March 28, 2019–March Density-based Species 2019 31, 2020 total observations observations exposures
Humpback Whale (LF) ...... 0 0 5.91 Antarctic Fur Seal (OW) ...... 73 70 0.15 Crabeater Seal (PW) ...... 20 24 119.07 Southern Elephant Seal (PW) ...... 1 0 0.02 Leopard Seal (PW) ...... 3 2 0.02 Weddell Seal (PW) ...... 8 6 3.65
Comparing the estimated exposures sei whale, and Southern right whale enough to accrue enough energy to based on pinniped densities, number of have been adjusted based on group size experience PTS. Therefore, no Level A days, and the Level A Harassment zone such that a higher level of Level B take was requested by NSF nor is to local observational data from Palmer harassment take is proposed than was proposed for authorization by NMFS. Station over two multiple-month projected solely based on densities. Blue whales are unlikely to be found in periods suggests that some pinniped Arnoux’s beaked whales often occur in the Project Area. However, NSF species were potentially observed at a groups of 6–10 and occasionally up to requested and NMFS conservatively greater rate than would be expected 50 or more (Balcomb 1989). As a proposes to authorize two Level B from density information. In the interest precautionary measure NSF requested harassment takes based on one average of generating a more conservative and NMFS has proposed authorizing 12 group size (NMFS, 2020). Hourglass estimate that will ensure coverage for takes of this species by Level B Dolphins group size is generally 2–6 any marine mammals encountered, the harassment. Classified as HF cetaceans, individuals with groups of up to 25 number of Antarctic fur, leopard and these beaked whales have a relatively observed (Santora 2012). Classified as Weddell seal takes have been increased large Level A harassment zone that HF cetaceans, these dolphins have a to reflect the number individuals extends to as much as 4,149 m. relatively large Level A harassment zone observed in Hero Inlet. However, calculated take by Level A that extends to 4,149 m. However, local Table 20 compares the number of harassment is fractional and observational data sets have not calculated and proposed Level A and B furthermore, this is a deep diving and recorded a single animal and the species harassment takes for each species. Level deep foraging species and it would be tends to be found in waters close to the B harassment takes for Arnoux’s beaked unlikely that animals would congregate Antarctic Convergence. Given this whale, blue whale, hourglass dolphin, in a Level A harassment zone long information NMFS proposes to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46220 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
authorize 25 takes by Level B conservatively proposes to authorize 20 since leopard seals are thought to be harassment which is a reduction from takes of Southern right whale by Level more likely to spend more time in the 60 takes requested by NSF. Level A B harassment. No take by Level A immediate vicinity (i.e., not as likely to harassment takes are not expected or harassment is anticipated or proposed travel through as the cetacean species authorized since the dolphin species is for authorization. discussed above) and potentially highly mobile and is unlikely to remain As discussed above, the proposed enough time in the Level A harassment in the zone long enough to experience takes have been adjusted from the zone to incur PTS, NMFS is also PTS. Sei whales have an average group calculated takes based on observation proposing to authorize 5 takes by Level size of 6 (NMFS 2020) and generally data as summarized in Table 19. Local A harassment. Finally, eight and six inhabit continental shelf and slope observers recorded 73 and 70 Antarctic Weddell seals were observed in 2019 waters far from coastlines. They are fur seals in 2019 and 2020 respectively and 2020, respectively. Given this unlikely to occur but as a precautionary located in close proximity to the pier information, and again to be measure NSF has requested and NMFS during months when construction precautionary NSF has requested and proposes to authorize 6 takes by Level would take place. As a precaution, the NMFS is proposing to authorize 10 takes B harassment. Takes by Level A number of takes by Level A harassment by Level A harassment. Finally, NMFS harassment are not expected or requested by NSF and proposed for has proposed a single take by Level A proposed for authorization. Southern authorization by NMFS has been harassment of Southern elephant seal. right whales live in groups of up to 20 increased beyond the calculated density Like all seals authorized for take there individuals, but are more commonly value to 80. Similarly, three leopard are driving scenarios where the PTS found in groups of two or three, unless seals were observed in 2019 and two isopleth would be larger than 50-m at feeding grounds. Observational were recorded in 2020. To be pinniped shutdown zone. While only surveys near Palmer Station did not precautionary, NSF requested and one elephant seal has been observed record the presence of these whales. NMFS is proposing to authorize 5 near Palmer Station, it could occur in Therefore, NSF requested and NMFS leopard seal takes by Level B. Further, the Level A harassment zone.
TABLE 20—PROPOSED TAKES BY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT COMPARED TO CALCULATED EXPOSURES
Calculated Proposed Calculated Proposed Level A Level A Level B Level B Takes as Species harassment harassment harassment harassment percent of exposures take exposures take abundance
Antarctic Minke Whale (LF) ...... 15.23 15 312.25 312 1.80 Arnoux’s Beaked Whale (MF) a ...... 0.00 0 0.14 12 Unknown Blue Whale (LF) a ...... 0.01 0 0.17 2 0.12 Fin Whale (LF) ...... 13.74 14 281.70 282 6.33 Hourglass Dolphin (HF) a ...... 0.32 0 4.94 25 0.01 Humpback Whale (LF) ...... 5.91 6 121.21 121 1.34 Killer Whale (MF) ...... 0.04 0 111.7 112 0.45 Long-finned Pilot Whale (MF) ...... 0.01 0 28.19 28 0.01 Southern Bottlenose Whale (MF) ...... 0.01 0 23.55 24 0.04 Sei Whale (LF) a ...... 0.04 0 0.84 6 0.96 Southern Right Whale (LF) a ...... 0.07 0 1.34 20 1.13 Sperm Whale (MF) ...... 0.02 0 16.73 17 0.14 Antarctic Fur Seal (OW) ...... 0.15 b 80 356.5 357 0.02 Crabeater Seal (PW) ...... 119.07 120 6,128.78 6,129 0.12 Southern Elephant Seal (PW) ...... 0.02 1 1.04 1 <0.01 Leopard Seal (PW) ...... 0.02 b 5 1.04 1 <0.01 Weddell Seal (PW) ...... 3.65 b 10 187.97 188 0.04 a Level B harassment takes increased to account for group size assuming one group is encountered during the project. b Increased from calculated exposures due to local observational data.
Table 20 also shows the proposed take incidental take authorizations to include implementation of the measure(s) is by harassment for all species as a information about the availability and expected to reduce impacts to marine percentage of stock abundance. feasibility (economic and technological) mammals, marine mammal species or of equipment, methods, and manner of stocks, and their habitat. This considers Proposed Mitigation conducting the activity or other means the nature of the potential adverse In order to issue an IHA under section of effecting the least practicable adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must impact upon the affected species or scope, range). It further considers the set forth the permissible methods of stocks and their habitat (50 CFR likelihood that the measure will be taking pursuant to the activity, and 216.104(a)(11)). effective if implemented (probability of other means of effecting the least In evaluating how mitigation may or accomplishing the mitigating result if practicable impact on the species or may not be appropriate to ensure the implemented as planned), the stock and its habitat, paying particular least practicable adverse impact on likelihood of effective implementation attention to rookeries, mating grounds, species or stocks and their habitat, as (probability implemented as planned); and areas of similar significance, and on well as subsistence uses where and the availability of the species or stock applicable, we carefully consider two (2) The practicability of the measures for taking for certain subsistence uses primary factors: for applicant implementation, which (latter not applicable for this action). (1) The manner in which, and the may consider such things as cost, NMFS regulations require applicants for degree to which, the successful impact on operations, and, in the case
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46221
of a military readiness activity, Shutdown zones for cetaceans and other passed without re-detection of the personnel safety, practicality of pinnipeds are based on Level A animal; implementation, and impact on the harassment isopleths shown in Table • If impact driving should be needed effectiveness of the military readiness 17. Based on observation data, fur seals (i.e., for proofing) NSF must use soft activity. are known to swim up Hero Inlet start techniques when impact pile The following mitigation measures are (approximately 135 m wide) to haul out. driving. Soft start requires contractors to proposed in the IHA: The proposed 50-m shutdown zone for • provide an initial set of three strikes at NSF must avoid direct physical fur seals can safely be observed, would reduced energy, followed by a 30- interaction with marine mammals prevent injury to seals while still second waiting period, then two during construction activities. If a allowing seals to move up the inlet subsequent reduced-energy strike sets. marine mammal comes within 10 m of where they may haul out on land, and A soft start must be implemented at the such activity, operations must cease and would allow construction to continue start of each day that begins with impact vessels must reduce speed to the safely and efficiently; pile driving and at any time impact • minimum level required to maintain Shutdown zones have been driving would occur after cessation of steerage and safe working conditions; established for all hearing groups under • impact pile driving for a period of 30 Training would occur between all driving scenarios as shown in Tables minutes or longer; construction supervisors and crews and 21 and 22 and are based on calculated • In-water construction would occur the PSO team and relevant NSF staff Level A harassment zones; prior to the start of all pile driving and • Monitoring must take place from 30 during daylight over a 12-hour workday construction activities, and when new minutes prior to initiation of pile to minimize the potential for PTS for personnel join the work, in order to driving activity through 30 minutes species that may occur within the Level explain responsibilities, communication post-completion of pile driving activity. A harassment zones; and procedures, marine mammal monitoring Pre-start clearance monitoring must be • When transiting to the site, marine protocol, and operational procedures are conducted during periods of visibility mammal watches must be conducted by clearly understood; sufficient for the lead PSO to determine crew or those navigating the vessel. • Pile driving activities must be the shutdown zones clear of marine When in the Project Area, if a whale is halted upon observation of either a mammals. Pile driving may commence sighted in the path of a support vessel species for which incidental take is not following 30 minutes of observation or within 92 m (300 feet) from the authorized or a species for which when the determination is made; vessel, NSF must reduce speed and incidental take has been authorized but • If the Level A harassment shutdown must not engage the engines until the the authorized number of takes has been zones are not visible due to poor animals are clear of the area. If a whale met, entering or within the harassment environmental conditions (e.g., is sighted farther than 92 m (300 feet) zone; excessive wind or fog, high Beaufort from the vessel, NSF must maintain a • NSF will establish and implement a state), pile installation would cease distance of 92 m (300 feet) or greater shutdown zone of 50 m for fur seals until the entirety of the Level A between the whale and the vessel and under all pile driving scenarios. The harassment shutdown zones is reduce speed to 10 knots or less. Vessels purpose of a shutdown zone is generally observable; must not be operated in such a way as to define an area within which • If pile driving is delayed or halted to separate members of a group of shutdown of the activity would occur due to the presence of a marine whales from other members of the upon sighting of a marine mammal (or mammal, the activity may not group. A group is defined as being three in anticipation of an animal entering the commence or resume until either the or more whales observed within a 500 defined area). Shutdown zones typically animal has voluntarily exited and been m area and displaying behaviors of vary based on the activity type and visually confirmed beyond the directed or coordinated activity (e.g., marine mammal hearing group. shutdown zone or 15 minutes have group feeding).
TABLE 21—SHUTDOWN AND HARASSMENT ZONES (METERS) FOR NON-SIMULTANEOUS PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
Minimum shutdown zone Level B harassment Pile size, type, and method Cetaceans Pinnipeds zone LF MF HF PW OW (m)
Dock, 36-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ Socket Depth—1 pile/day (DTH) ...... 1,900 70 2,255 1,015 50 11,659 Dock Abutment, 36-in Dia. Pile Installa- tion, 30′ Socket Depth—1 pile/day (DTH) ...... 2,500 90 2,955 1,330 RHIB Fender Piles, 24-in Dia. Pile Instal- lation, 20′ Socket—1 pile/day ...... 410 15 485 220 24-in Dia. Template Piles, 10′ Socket Depth—2 piles/day. 24-in Dia. Wave Attenuator Piles, 20′ Socket Depth—1 pile/day. Retaining Wall HP Pile inserted in Drilled 24-in Dia. Sockets, 20′ Socket Depth— 1 pile/day. Removal of 24-in Dia. Template Piles— 16 piles ...... 55 10 75 35 10,000 Removal of Sheet Piles ...... 25 35 15 4,642 Rock Chipping/Floor Preparation ...... 405 50 720 205 123
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46222 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
TABLE 21—SHUTDOWN AND HARASSMENT ZONES (METERS) FOR NON-SIMULTANEOUS PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES— Continued
Minimum shutdown zone Level B harassment Pile size, type, and method Cetaceans Pinnipeds zone LF MF HF PW OW (m)
Anode Installation ...... 10 10 10 10 200
TABLE 22—SHUTDOWN AND HARASSMENT ZONES (METERS) FOR SIMULTANEOUS PILE INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES
Minimum shutdown zone Level B harassment Daily activity scenario Cetaceans Pinnipeds zone LF MF HF PW OW (m)
Dock, 36-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ Socket Depth—2 pile/day ...... 3,500 110 3,580 1,610 50 18,478 Dock Abutment, 36-in Dia. Pile Installa- tion, 30′ Socket Depth and 36-in Dia. Pile 20′ Socket Depth ...... 125 4,150 1,865 RHIB Fender Piles, 24-in Dia. Pile Instal- lation, 20′ Socket—2 pile/day ...... 650 25 770 350 24-in Dia. Template Piles, 10′ Socket Depth—4 piles/day. 24-in Dia. Wave Attenuator Piles, 20′ Socket Depth—2 pile/day. Retaining Wall—HP Pile inserted in Drilled 24-in Dia. Sockets, 20′ Socket Depth—2 piles/day. Dock, 36-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ Socket Depth—1 pile/day and Wave Attenuator, 24-in Dia. Pile Installation, 20′ Socket—1 pile/day ...... 2,050 75 2,400 1,080 Dock 36-in Dia. Pile Installation 30′ Socket Depth and 24-in Dia. Pile In- stallation 20′ Socket Depth ...... 2,900 105 3,500 1,545 36-in Dock 20′ socket x 2 Dock Abut- ment ...... 45 10 65 30 34,146 RHIB Fender Piles 24-in x 2 ...... 20 30 10 15,849 24-in template 10′ socket x 4. 24-in wave attenuator piles-10′ socket x 2 ...... 35 50 24-in wave attenuator piles-20′ socket x 2 ...... 35 50
Based on our evaluation of the the necessary monitoring and reporting cumulative, acute or chronic), through applicant’s proposed measures, as well that will result in increased knowledge better understanding of: (1) Action or as other measures considered by NMFS, of the species and of the level of taking environment (e.g., source NMFS has preliminarily determined or impacts on populations of marine characterization, propagation, ambient that the proposed mitigation measures mammals that are expected to be noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life provide the means effecting the least present in the proposed Project Area. history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence practicable impact on the affected Effective reporting is critical both to of marine mammal species with the species or stocks and their habitat, compliance as well as ensuring that the action; or (4) biological or behavioral paying particular attention to rookeries, most value is obtained from the required context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or mating grounds, and areas of similar monitoring. feeding areas). significance. Monitoring and reporting • requirements prescribed by NMFS Individual marine mammal Proposed Monitoring and Reporting should contribute to improved responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or In order to issue an IHA for an understanding of one or more of the cumulative), other stressors, or activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the following: cumulative impacts from multiple MMPA states that NMFS must set forth • Occurrence of marine mammal requirements pertaining to the species or stocks in the area in which stressors. monitoring and reporting of such taking. take is anticipated (e.g., presence, • How anticipated responses to The MMPA implementing regulations at abundance, distribution, density). stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that • Nature, scope, or context of likely fitness and survival of individual requests for authorizations must include marine mammal exposure to potential marine mammals; or (2) populations, the suggested means of accomplishing stressors/impacts (individual or species, or stocks.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:14 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46223
• Effects on marine mammal habitat • Ability to communicate orally, by Level A or Level B harassment zones are (e.g., marine mammal prey species, radio or in person, with project not practicable because the remote acoustic habitat, or other important personnel to provide real-time location of the Project Area presents physical components of marine information on marine mammals both safety and logistical challenges. mammal habitat). observed in the area as necessary. Given the comparatively limited • Mitigation and monitoring Two PSOs must be on duty during all information regarding the species in this effectiveness. in-water construction activities and area and the likely impacts of must record all observations of marine construction activities on the species in Visual Monitoring mammals regardless of distance from this area, NMFS is specifically One NMFS-approved, formally the pile being driven or covered activity. requesting public comment on the trained PSO with prior experience PSOs shall document any behavioral proposed monitoring and mitigation performing the duties of a PSO during reactions in concert with distance from requirements. construction activities would serve as piles being driven or removed. PSOs are team leader, supported by three PSOs limited to monitoring no more than 4 Reporting trained on site or through available hours per shift with sufficient breaks A draft marine mammal monitoring online training programs compliant and no more than 12 hours per day to report will be submitted to NMFS with NMFS standards. PSOs must be minimize fatigue. within 90 days after the completion of independent (i.e., not construction The placement of PSOs during all pile pile driving and removal activities, or personnel) and have no other assigned driving and removal and drilling 60 days prior to a requested date of tasks during monitoring periods. Prior activities will ensure that the entire issuance of any future IHAs for projects to initiation of construction, PSOs shutdown zones are visible during pile at the same location, whichever comes would complete a training/refresher installation. Should environmental first. The report will include an overall session on marine mammal monitoring, conditions deteriorate such that marine description of work completed, a to be conducted shortly before the mammals within the entire shutdown narrative regarding marine mammal anticipated start of the open water zone will not be visible (e.g., fog, heavy sightings, and associated PSO data season construction activities. rain), pile driving and removal must be sheets. Specifically, the report must Primary objectives of the training delayed until the PSO is confident include: session include: marine mammals within the shutdown • Dates and times (begin and end) of • Review of the mitigation, zone could be detected. The primary all marine mammal monitoring; • monitoring, and reporting requirements monitoring location currently proposed Construction activities occurring provided in the application and IHA, by NSF would be on the roof platform during each daily observation period, including any modifications specified of the Garage Warehouse Recreation including the number and type of piles by NMFS in the authorization; (GWR) building (approximately 20 driven or removed and by what method • Review of marine mammal sighting, meters above sea level) to provide visual (i.e., impact or cutting) and the total identification, and distance estimation coverage of the Level A shutdown equipment duration for cutting for each methods; zones. NMFS agrees that the GWR pile or total number of strikes for each • Review of operation of specialized building is an appropriate monitoring pile (impact driving); equipment (bigeye binoculars, GPS); location. The primary PSO can monitor • PSO locations during marine and the Project Area generally south- mammal monitoring; • Review of, and classroom practice southeast while the second PSO can • Environmental conditions during with, data recording and data entry monitor the area generally west- monitoring periods (at beginning and systems, including procedures for southwest that may be ensonified. With end of PSO shift and whenever recording data on marine mammal reticle binoculars the distance conditions change significantly), sightings, monitoring operations, potentially visible by a 1.8-m tall PSO including Beaufort sea state and any environmental conditions, and entry from this point would be about 4,360 m. other relevant weather conditions error control. Mounted big eye binoculars would be including cloud cover, fog, sun glare, PSOs must have the following provided to PSOs to better cover the and overall visibility to the horizon, and additional qualifications: Level A harassment zone. NSF believes estimated observable distance; • Ability to conduct field this location and is adequate to fully • Upon observation of a marine observations and collect data according monitor the Level A harassment and mammal, the following information: to assigned protocols; shutdown zones, however, we note that Name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) • Experience or training in the field sea state, glare, observer expertise, and and PSO location and activity at time of identification of marine mammals, other factors can affect the ability of sighting; Time of sighting; Identification including the identification of PSOs to see and identify marine of the animal(s) (e.g., genus/species, behaviors; mammals to hearing group at such large lowest possible taxonomic level, or • Sufficient training, orientation, or distances, even if those distances are unidentified), PSO confidence in experience with the construction theoretically observable. Local identification, and the composition of operation to provide for personal safety researchers have reported that very little the group if there is a mix of species; during observations; of some level B harassment zones will Distance and bearing of each marine • Writing skills sufficient to prepare a be visible (Ari Friedlander, personal mammal observed relative to the pile report of observations including but not communication). being driven for each sighting (if pile limited to the number and species of Palmer Station normally has 2.8 meter driving was occurring at time of marine mammals observed; dates and RHIBs, 2 4.8 m RHIBs, and a number of sighting); Estimated number of animals times when in-water construction smaller boats that are normally available (min/max/best estimate); Estimated activities were conducted; dates, times, and used on a daily basis in areas number of animals by cohort (adults, and reason for implementation of within 2–3 miles of the station (Ari juveniles, neonates, group composition, mitigation (or why mitigation was not Friedlander, personal communication). etc.); Animal’s closest point of approach implemented when required); and NSF has stated that PSOs in boats that and estimated time spent within the marine mammal behavior; and would monitor the outer part of the harassment zone; Description of any
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46224 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
marine mammal behavioral observations reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 2006; HDR Inc. 2012; Lerma 2014; ABR (e.g., observed behaviors such as feeding species or stock through effects on 2016). Most likely, individuals will or traveling), including an assessment of annual rates of recruitment or survival simply move away from the sound behavioral responses thought to have (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact source and be temporarily displaced resulted from the activity (e.g., no finding is based on the lack of likely from the areas of pile installation, response or changes in behavioral state adverse effects on annual rates of although even this reaction has been such as ceasing feeding, changing recruitment or survival (i.e., population- observed primarily only in association direction, flushing, or breaching); level effects). An estimate of the number with impact pile driving. If sound • Number of marine mammals of takes alone is not enough information produced by project activities is detected within the harassment zones, on which to base an impact sufficiently disturbing, animals are by species; and determination. In addition to likely to simply avoid the area while the • Detailed information about any considering estimates of the number of activity is occurring. While DTH pile implementation of any mitigation marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ installation associated with the triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a through harassment, NMFS considers proposed project may produce sound at description of specific actions that other factors, such as the likely nature distances of many kilometers from the ensued, and resulting changes in of any responses (e.g., intensity, project site, we expect that animals behavior of the animal(s), if any. duration), the context of any responses annoyed by project sound would simply If no comments are received from (e.g., critical reproductive time or avoid the area and use more-preferred NMFS within 30 days, the draft final location, migration), as well as effects habitats. Furthermore, during any report will constitute the final report. If on habitat, and the likely effectiveness impact driving, implementation of soft comments are received, a final report of the mitigation. We also assess the start procedures will be required and addressing NMFS comments must be number, intensity, and context of monitoring of established shutdown submitted within 30 days after receipt of estimated takes by evaluating this zones will be required for all pile comments. information relative to population installation and removal activities, status. Consistent with the 1989 significantly reducing the possibility of Reporting Injured or Dead Marine preamble for NMFS’s implementing Mammals injury. Use of impact driving will be regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, limited to proofing of piles after they In the event that personnel involved 1989), the impacts from other past and have been set in place. Given sufficient in the construction activities discover ongoing anthropogenic activities are notice through use of soft start (for an injured or dead marine mammal, the incorporated into this analysis via their impact driving), marine mammals are IHA-holder must immediately cease the impacts on the environmental baseline expected to move away from an specified activities and report the (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status irritating sound source prior to it incident to the Office of Protected of the species, population size and becoming potentially injurious. This Resources (PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@ growth rate where known, ongoing sort of low-level localized displacement, noaa.gov), NMFS as soon as feasible. If sources of human-caused mortality, or in the absence of any specific known the death or injury was clearly caused ambient noise levels). biologically important areas, would not by the specified activity, NSF must DTH pile installation, vibratory pile be expected to impact the reproduction immediately cease the specified removal, limited impact pile driving for or survival of any individuals. activities until NMFS is able to review proofing, rock chipping and use of a In addition to the expected effects the circumstances of the incident and hydrogrinder have the potential to resulting from authorized Level B determine what, if any, additional disturb or displace marine mammals. harassment, we anticipate that Antarctic measures are appropriate to ensure Specifically, the project activities may minke whales, fin whales, and compliance with the terms of the IHA. result in take, in the form of Level A and humpback whales may sustain some The IHA-holder must not resume their Level B harassment from underwater limited Level A harassment in the form activities until notified by NMFS. The sounds generated from pile driving of auditory injury due to large PTS report must include the following activities. Potential takes could occur if zones for LF cetaceans. We are also information: individuals are present in the ensonified • Time, date, and location (latitude/ zone when these activities are proposing to authorize take by Level A longitude) of the first discovery (and underway. harassment of Antarctic fur seals, updated location information if known The takes from Level A and Level B crabeater seals, leopard seals, Weddell and applicable); harassment would be due to potential seals, and Southern elephant seals since • Species identification (if known) or PTS, TTS and behavioral disturbance. the Level A harassment zones are large description of the animal(s) involved; Even absent mitigation, no mortality or relative to the ability to detect low • Condition of the animal(s) serious injury is anticipated given the profile, species that are common in the (including carcass condition if the nature of the activity and construction region. However, animals that animal is dead); method. The potential for harassment experience PTS would likely be • Observed behaviors of the would be further minimized through the subjected to slight PTS, i.e., minor animal(s), if alive; implementation of the planned degradation of hearing capabilities • If available, photographs or video mitigation measures (see Proposed within regions of hearing that align most footage of the animal(s); and Mitigation section). completely with the frequency range of • General circumstances under which Effects on individual animals that are the energy produced by pile driving, the animal was discovered. taken by Level B harassment, on the i.e., the low-frequency region below 2 basis of reports in the literature as well kHz, not severe hearing impairment or Negligible Impact Analysis and as monitoring from other similar impairment in the regions of greatest Determination activities, will likely be limited to hearing sensitivity. If hearing NMFS has defined negligible impact reactions such as increased swimming impairment occurs, it is most likely that as an impact resulting from the speeds, increased surfacing time, or the affected animal would lose a few specified activity that cannot be decreased foraging (if such activity were decibels in its hearing sensitivity, which reasonably expected to, and is not occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff in most cases is not likely to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices 46225
meaningfully affect its ability to forage consideration the implementation of the Endangered Species Act and communicate with conspecifics. proposed monitoring and mitigation Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered The project is also not expected to measures, NMFS preliminarily finds Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. have significant adverse effects on that the total marine mammal take from 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal affected marine mammals’ habitats. The the proposed activity will have a agency insure that any action it project activities would not modify negligible impact on all affected marine authorizes, funds, or carries out is not existing marine mammal habitat for a mammal species or stocks. likely to jeopardize the continued significant amount of time. The existence of any endangered or activities may cause some fish to leave Small Numbers threatened species or result in the the area of disturbance, thus temporarily As noted above, only small numbers destruction or adverse modification of impacting marine mammals’ foraging of incidental take may be authorized designated critical habitat. To ensure opportunities in a limited portion of the under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of ESA compliance for the issuance of foraging range; but, because of the the MMPA for specified activities other IHAs, NMFS consults internally relatively small area of the habitat that than military readiness activities. The whenever we propose to authorize take may be affected, the impacts to marine MMPA does not define small numbers for endangered or threatened species, in mammal habitat are not expected to and so, in practice, where estimated this case with the ESA Interagency cause significant or long-term negative numbers are available, NMFS compares Cooperation Division. consequences for marine mammals. the number of individuals taken to the NMFS is proposing to authorize take The nature of NSF’s proposed most appropriate estimation of of blue whale, fin whale, sei whale, construction activities precludes the abundance of the relevant species or Southern right whale, and sperm whale, likelihood of serious injury or mortality, stock in our determination of whether which are listed as endangered under even absent mitigation. For all species an authorization is limited to small the ESA. and stocks, take would occur within a numbers of marine mammals. When the The Permit and Conservation Division limited area (Hero Inlet and nearby predicted number of individuals to be has requested initiation of Section 7 waters) that constitutes a small portion taken is fewer than one third of the consultation with the Interagency of the ranges for authorized species. species or stock abundance, the take is Cooperation Division for the issuance of Level A and Level B harassment will be considered to be of small numbers. this IHA. NMFS will conclude the ESA reduced to the level of least practicable Additionally, other qualitative factors consultation prior to reaching a adverse impact through use of may be considered in the analysis, such determination regarding the proposed mitigation measures described herein. as the temporal or spatial scale of the issuance of the authorization. Further, the amount of take proposed to activities. be authorized is extremely small when Proposed Authorization compared to stock abundance of The amount of take NMFS proposes to authorize is below one third of the As a result of these preliminary authorized species. determinations, NMFS proposes to issue In summary and as described above, estimated stock abundances for all 17 an IHA to NSF to conduct the Palmer the following factors primarily support species. For all requested species, the Station Pier Replacement project at our preliminary determination that the proposed take of individuals is less than Anvers Island, Antarctica, provided the impacts resulting from this activity are 6.4 percent of the abundance of the previously mentioned mitigation, not expected to adversely affect the affected species or stock as shown in monitoring, and reporting requirements species or stock through effects on Table 20. This is likely a conservative are incorporated. A draft of the annual rates of recruitment or survival: estimate because it assumes all take are • No mortality or serious injury is of different individual animals, which is proposed IHA can be found at https:// anticipated or authorized; likely not the case. Some individuals www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/ • The relatively small number of may return multiple times in a day, but incidental-take-authorizations-under- Level A harassment exposures are PSOs would count them as separate marine-mammal-protection-act. anticipated to result only in slight PTS takes if they cannot be individually Request for Public Comments within the lower frequencies associated identified. We request comment on our analyses, with pile driving; Based on the analysis contained • The anticipated incidents of Level B the proposed authorization, and any herein of the proposed activity other aspect of this notice of proposed harassment would consist of, at worst, (including the proposed mitigation and temporary modifications in behavior IHA for the proposed Palmer Station monitoring measures) and the Pier Replacement project. We also that would not result in fitness impacts anticipated take of marine mammals, to individuals; request at this time comment on the • NMFS preliminarily finds that small potential Renewal of this proposed IHA No adverse effects on affected numbers of marine mammals will be marine mammals’ habitat are as described in the paragraph below. taken relative to the population size of Please include with your comments any anticipated; the affected species or stocks. • No important habitat areas have supporting data or literature citations to been identified within the Project Area; Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis help inform decisions on the request for • For all species, Hero Inlet and and Determination this IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA. nearby waters represent very small and On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may peripheral part of their ranges; and There are no relevant subsistence uses issue a one-time, one-year Renewal IHA • The required mitigation measures of the affected marine mammal stocks or following notice to the public providing (i.e., shutdown zones) are expected to be species implicated by this action. an additional 15 days for public effective in reducing the effects of the Therefore, NMFS has determined that comments when (1) up to another year specified activity. the total taking of affected species or of identical or nearly identical, or nearly Based on the analysis contained stocks would not have an unmitigable identical, activities as described in the herein of the likely effects of the adverse impact on the availability of Description of Proposed Activities specified activity on marine mammals such species or stocks for taking for section of this notice is planned or (2) and their habitat, and taking into subsistence purposes. the activities as described in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES 46226 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 18, 2021 / Notices
Description of Proposed Activities ACTION: Announcement of receipt of management measures that failed to section of this notice would not be petition for rulemaking; request for address low recruitment, neglected to completed by the time the IHA expires comments. account for model errors and and a Renewal would allow for uncertainty when setting catch advice, completion of the activities beyond that SUMMARY: NMFS announces the receipt approved uncertainty buffers that do not described in the Dates and Duration of a petition for rulemaking from the account for this uncertainty, and section of this notice, provided all of the Conservation Law Foundation. This approved the use of an inadequate following conditions are met: petition requests NMFS prepare a acceptable biological catch (ABC) • A request for renewal is received no Secretarial Amendment and take control rule. In addition, CLF states that later than 60 days prior to the needed specific emergency action to end NMFS has failed to conduct adequate Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing overfishing and rebuild Atlantic cod. rebuilding progress reviews for both the that the Renewal IHA expiration date DATES: Comments must be received on Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank cod cannot extend beyond one year from or before October 4, 2021. stocks as required under the Magnuson- expiration of the initial IHA); ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Stevens Fishery Conservation and • The request for renewal must identified by NOAA–NMFS–2021–0039, Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens include the following: by either of the following methods: Act), or as required by the supplemental (1) An explanation that the activities • Electronic Submission: Submit all rebuilding program review process to be conducted under the requested electronic public comments via the implemented in Framework Adjustment Renewal IHA are identical to the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 51 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery activities analyzed under the initial http://www.regulations.gov and enter Management Plan (FMP). This review IHA, are a subset of the activities, or NOAA–NMFS–2021–0039 in the Search process requires the Council to review include changes so minor (e.g., box. Click on the ‘‘Comment’’ icon, a rebuilding plan if: The total catch reduction in pile size) that the changes complete the required fields, and enter limit for a stock has not been exceeded do not affect the previous analyses, or attach your comments. during the rebuilding program; new mitigation and monitoring Instructions: Comments sent by any scientific information indicates that the requirements, or take estimates (with other method, to any other address or stock is not rebuilding according to the the exception of reducing the type or individual, or received after the end of program trajectory; and if the fishing amount of take); and the comment period, may not be mortality associated with rebuilding (2) A preliminary monitoring report considered by NMFS. All comments (Frebuild) drops below 75 percent of the showing the results of the required received are a part of the public record fishing mortality associated with monitoring to date and an explanation and will generally be posted for public maximum sustainable yield (FMSY)). showing that the monitoring results do viewing on www.regulations.gov According to CLF, the Gulf of Maine cod not indicate impacts of a scale or nature without change. All personal identifying stock has met all three of these criteria, not previously analyzed or authorized; information (e.g., name, address, etc.), but the Council has not initiated its and confidential business information, or required rebuilding program review. Upon review of the request for otherwise sensitive information Further, CLF asserts that NMFS has Renewal, the status of the affected submitted voluntarily by the sender will failed to recognize or account for the species or stocks, and any other be publically accessible. NMFS will findings of a National Research Council pertinent information, NMFS accept anonymous comments (enter (NRC) Rebuilding Committee, which determines that there are no more than ‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish identified several reasons why stocks minor changes in the activities, the to remain anonymous). may not rebuild as expected under their mitigation and monitoring measures FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: respective rebuilding plans. Finally, will remain the same and appropriate, Peter Christopher, Supervisory Fishery CLF states that in NMFS’s denial of a and the findings in the initial IHA Policy Analyst, telephone 978–281– 2015 petition for rulemaking on Gulf of remain valid. 9288, email: peter.christopher@ Maine cod, NMFS committed to prevent Dated: August 13, 2021. noaa.gov. overfishing, rebuild the stock, and Shannon Bettridge, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The adjust management measures as needed in response to the findings of a 2015 Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) has National Marine Fisheries Service. petitioned NMFS to implement assessment. CLF asserts that these emergency regulations and a Secretarial commitments were not upheld, and that [FR Doc. 2021–17725 Filed 8–17–21; 8:45 am] NMFS did not properly balance BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Amendment for the Northeast multispecies fishery, and other relevant biological and socioeconomic impacts fisheries that use gear capable of in its rationale to deny the 2015 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE catching more than a minimal amount petition. of Atlantic cod. CLF’s petition asserts CLF’s petition also alleges that National Oceanic and Atmospheric that NMFS has repeatedly approved inadequate at-sea monitoring coverage Administration New England Fishery Management in the sector fishery has failed to Council actions that have failed to provide sufficiently accurate and [RTID 0648–XA720] prevent and end overfishing and rebuild precise data to prevent and end Fisheries of the Northeastern United Atlantic cod stocks. CLF is petitioning overfishing or rebuild the cod stocks. States; Northeast Multispecies NMFS to implement conservation and CLF asserts that inadequate monitoring Fishery; Receipt of Petition for management measures it deems coverage targets, coupled with low Rulemaking for Atlantic Cod necessary to end overfishing and rebuild quotas, have created incentives for the the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank cod fishing industry to illegally discard and AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries stocks. misreport cod catch. Additionally, CLF Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and CLF cites numerous reasons for NMFS relies on recent analyses in the Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), to take Secretarial action. CLF asserts development of Amendment 23 to the Commerce. that NMFS has consistently approved Northeast Multispecies FMP indicating
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Aug 17, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18AUN1.SGM 18AUN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES