80 FR 46545 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Wharf Recapitalization Project
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 150 (August 5, 2015)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 150 (August 5, 2015)
| Page Range | 46545-46565 | |
| FR Document | 2015-19184 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 150 (Wednesday, August 5, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 46545-46565] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-19184] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE056 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Wharf Recapitalization Project AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request for comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the U.S. Navy (Navy) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to construction activities as part of a wharf recapitalization project. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting public comment on its proposal to issue an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the Navy to take, by Level B harassment only, during the specified activity. DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than September 4, 2015. ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposal should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should be sent to 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments should be sent to [email protected]. Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability An electronic copy of the Navy's application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained by visiting the Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above. National Environmental Policy Act The Navy prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA; 2013) for this project. We subsequently adopted the EA and signed our own Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) prior to [[Page 46546]] issuing the first IHA for this project, in accordance with NEPA and the regulations published by the Council on Environmental Quality. Information in the Navy's application, the Navy's EA, and this notice collectively provide the environmental information related to proposed issuance of this IHA for public review and comment. All documents are available at the aforementioned Web site. We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice as we complete the NEPA process, including a decision of whether to reaffirm the existing FONSI, prior to a final decision on the incidental take authorization request. Background Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals, providing that certain findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established. The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals may be allowed only if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary) finds that the total taking by the specified activity during the specified time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking must be set forth, either in specific regulations or in an authorization. The allowance of such incidental taking under section 101(a)(5)(A), by harassment, serious injury, death, or a combination thereof, requires that regulations be established. Subsequently, a Letter of Authorization may be issued pursuant to the prescriptions established in such regulations, providing that the level of taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under the specific regulations. Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may authorize such incidental taking by harassment only, for periods of not more than one year, pursuant to requirements and conditions contained within an IHA. The establishment of prescriptions through either specific regulations or an authorization requires notice and opportunity for public comment. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``. . . an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.'' Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: ``. . . any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].'' Summary of Request On January 28, 2015, we received a request from the Navy for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving in association with the Wharf C-2 recapitalization project at Naval Station Mayport, Florida (NSM). That request was modified on April 17 and the Navy submitted a revised version of the request on July 24, 2015, which we deemed adequate and complete. In-water work associated with the project is expected to be completed within the one-year timeframe of the proposed IHA, which would be valid for one year from the date of issuance. The use of both vibratory and impact pile driving is expected to produce underwater sound at levels that have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals. Two species of marine mammal have the potential to be affected by the specified activities: Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus truncatus) and Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis). These species may occur year-round in the action area. However, we have determined that incidental take of spotted dolphins is not reasonably likely and do not propose to authorize such take. This is expected to be the second and final year of in-water work associated with the Wharf C-2 project. This would be the second such IHA, if issued, following the IHA issued effective from September 1, 2014, through August 31, 2015 (78 FR 71566; November 29, 2013). Please note that the previous IHA was initially issued with effective dates from December 1, 2013, through November 30, 2014. However, no work was conducted during this period and the effective dates were changed to those stated above (79 FR 27863; May 15, 2014). Description of the Specified Activity Overview Wharf C-2 is a single level, general purpose berthing wharf constructed in 1960. The wharf is one of NSM's two primary deep-draft berths and is one of the primary ordnance handling wharfs. The wharf is a diaphragm steel sheet pile cell structure with a concrete apron, partial concrete encasement of the piling and an asphalt paved deck. The wharf is currently in poor condition due to advanced deterioration of the steel sheeting and lack of corrosion protection, and this structural deterioration has resulted in the institution of load restrictions within 60 ft of the wharf face. The purpose of this project is to complete necessary repairs to Wharf C-2. Please refer to Appendix A of the Navy's application for photos of existing damage and deterioration at the wharf, and to Appendix B for a contractor schematic of the project plan. Dates and Duration The total project was expected to require a maximum of fifty days of in-water vibratory pile driving work over a twelve-month period, with an additional twenty days of impact pile driving included in the specified activity as a contingency for a total of seventy days in- water pile driving. Based on work completed to date and in consideration of the number of piles yet to be driven and pile production rates to date, the Navy estimates that remaining work may require 47 days in total. Specific Geographic Region NSM is located in northeastern Florida, at the mouth of the St. Johns River and adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean (see Figures 2-1 and 2-2 of the Navy's application). The St. Johns River is the longest river in Florida, with the final 35 mi flowing through the city of Jacksonville. This portion of the river is significant for commercial shipping and military use. At the mouth of the river, near the action area, the Atlantic Ocean is the dominant influence and typical salinities are above 30 ppm. Outside the river mouth, in nearshore waters, moderate oceanic currents tend to flow southward parallel to the coast. Sea surface temperatures range from around 16 [deg]C in winter to 28 [deg]C in summer. The specific action area consists of the NSM turning basin, an area of approximately 2,000 by 3,000 ft containing ship berthing facilities at sixteen locations along wharves around [[Page 46547]] the basin perimeter. The basin was constructed during the early 1940s by dredging the eastern part of Ribault Bay (at the mouth of the St. Johns River), with dredge material from the basin used to fill parts of the bay and other low-lying areas in order to elevate the land surface. The basin is currently maintained through regular dredging at a depth of 50 ft, with depths at the berths ranging from 30-50 ft. The turning basin, connected to the St. Johns River by a 500-ft-wide entrance channel, will largely contain sound produced by project activities, with the exception of sound propagating east into nearshore Atlantic waters through the entrance channel (see Figure 2-2 of the Navy's application). Wharf C-2 is located in the northeastern corner of the Mayport turning basin. Detailed Description of Activities In order to rehabilitate Wharf C-2, the Navy proposes to install a new steel king pile/sheet pile (SSP) bulkhead, consisting of large vertical king piles with paired steel sheet piles driven between and connected to the ends of the king piles. Over the course of the entire project, the Navy will install approximately 120 single sheet piles and 119 king piles (all steel) to support the bulkhead wall, as well as fifty polymeric (plastic) fender piles. The SSP wall is anchored at the top and filled behind the wall before a concrete cap is formed along the top and outside face to tie the entire structure together and provide a berthing surface for vessels. The new bulkhead will be designed for a fifty-year service life. Installation of approximately seventy percent of steel piles (84 of 120 sheet piles and 81 of 119 king piles) has been completed as of July 2015, and the Navy expects that all installation of steel piles may be complete by the expiration of the current IHA. However, we include here as a contingency the installation of 25 percent of steel piles in the event that there is a work stoppage or other unforeseen delay prior to expiration of the current IHA. All fifty plastic fender piles would be installed during the period of validity of the proposed IHA. All piles would be driven by vibratory hammer, although impact pile driving may be used as a contingency in cases when vibratory driving is not sufficient to reach the necessary depth. In the unlikely event that impact driving is required, either impact or vibratory driving could occur on a given day, but concurrent use of vibratory and impact drivers would not occur. Including the installation of 25 percent of steel piles as a contingency, the Navy estimates that 47 in-water work days may be required to complete pile driving activity, including ten days for vibratory driving of plastic piles, seventeen days for contingency vibratory driving of steel piles, and twenty days for contingency impact driving, if necessary. Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity There are four marine mammal species which may inhabit or transit through the waters nearby NSM at the mouth of the St. Johns River and in nearby nearshore Atlantic waters. These include the bottlenose dolphin, Atlantic spotted dolphin, North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis), and humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). Multiple additional cetacean species occur in South Atlantic waters but would not be expected to occur in shallow nearshore waters of the action area. Table 1 lists the marine mammal species with expected potential for occurrence in the vicinity of NSM during the project timeframe and summarizes key information regarding stock status and abundance. Taxonomically, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2014). Please see NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR), available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars, for more detailed accounts of these stocks' status and abundance. Please also refer to NMFS' Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals) for generalized species accounts and to the Navy's Marine Resource Assessment for the Charleston/ Jacksonville Operating Area, which documents and describes the marine resources that occur in Navy operating areas of the Southeast (DoN, 2008). The document is publicly available at www.navfac.navy.mil/products_and_services/ev/products_and_services/marine_resources/marine_resource_assessments.html (accessed July 16, 2015). In the species accounts provided here, we offer a brief introduction to the species and relevant stock as well as available information regarding population trends and threats, and describe any information regarding local occurrence. Multiple stocks of bottlenose dolphins may be present in the action area, either seasonally or year- round, and are described further below. We first address the two large whale species that may occur in the action area. Table 1--Marine Mammals Potentially Present in the Vicinity of NSM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Stock abundance (CV, Species Stock ESA/MMPA status; Nmin, most recent PBR \3\ Annual M/ Relative occurrence; strategic (Y/N) \1\ abundance survey) \2\ SI \4\ season of occurrence -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) Family Balaenidae -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- North Atlantic right whale......... Western North Atlantic E/D; Y............... 465 (n/a; 2013)....... 0.9 4.75 Rare inshore, regular \5\. near/offshore; Nov- Apr. Humpback whale..................... Gulf of Maine......... E/D; Y............... 823 (n/a; 2008)....... 2.7 10.15 Rare; Fall-Spring. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) Family Delphinidae -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Common bottlenose dolphin.......... Western North Atlantic -; N................. 77,532 (0.4; 56,053; 561 45.1 Rare; year-round. Offshore. 2011). Common bottlenose dolphin.......... Western North Atlantic -/D; Y............... 9,173 (0.46; 6,326; 63 2.6-16.5 Possibly common; \8\ Coastal, Southern 2010-11). Jan-Mar. Migratory. Common bottlenose dolphin.......... Western North Atlantic -/D; Y............... 1,219 (0.67; 730; 2010- 7 unk Possibly common; \8\ Coastal, Northern 11).\9\ year-round. Florida. [[Page 46548]] Common bottlenose dolphin.......... Jacksonville Estuarine -; Y................. 412 \7\ (0.06; unk; undet. unk Possibly common; \8\ System.\6\ 1994-97). year-round. Atlantic spotted dolphin........... Western North Atlantic -; N................. 44,715 (0.43; 31,610; 316 0 Rare; year-round. 2011). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see footnote 3) or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. \2\ CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For killer whales, the abundance values represent direct counts of individually identifiable animals; therefore there is only a single abundance estimate with no associated CV. For certain stocks, abundance estimates are actual counts of animals and there is no associated CV. The most recent abundance survey that is reflected in the abundance estimate is presented; there may be more recent surveys that have not yet been incorporated into the estimate. \3\ Potential biological removal, defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population size (OSP). \4\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, subsistence hunting, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value. All values presented here are from the draft 2014 SARs (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/draft.htm). \5\ Abundance estimates (and resulting PBR values) for these stocks are new values presented in the draft 2014 SARs. This information was made available for public comment and is currently under review and therefore may be revised prior to finalizing the 2014 SARs. However, we consider this information to be the best available for use in this document. \6\ Abundance estimates for these stocks are greater than eight years old and are therefore not considered current. PBR is considered undetermined for these stocks, as there is no current minimum abundance estimate for use in calculation. We nevertheless present the most recent abundance estimates and PBR values, as these represent the best available information for use in this document. \7\ This abundance estimate is considered an overestimate because it includes non- and seasonally-resident animals. \8\ Bottlenose dolphins in general are common in the project area, but it is not possible to readily identify them to stock. Therefore, these three stocks are listed as possibly common as we have no information about which stock commonly only occurs. Right whales occur in sub-polar to temperate waters in all major ocean basins in the world with a clear migratory pattern, occurring in high latitudes in summer (feeding) and lower latitudes in winter (breeding). North Atlantic right whales exhibit extensive migratory patterns, traveling along the eastern seaboard from calving grounds off Georgia and northern Florida to northern feeding areas off of the northeast U.S. and Canada in March/April and returning in November/ December. Migrations are typically within 30 nmi of the coastline and in waters less than 50 m deep. Although this migratory pattern is well- known, winter distribution for most of the population--the non-calving portion--is poorly known, as many whales are not observed on the calving grounds. It is unknown where these animals spend the winter, although they may occur further offshore or may remain on foraging grounds during winter (Morano et al., 2012). During the winter calving period, right whales occur regularly in offshore waters of northeastern Florida. Critical habitat for right whales in the southeast (as identified under the ESA) is designated to protect calving grounds, and encompasses waters from the coast out to 15 nmi offshore from Mayport. More rarely, right whales have been observed entering the mouth of the St. Johns River for brief periods of time (Schweitzer and Zoodsma, 2011). Right whales are not present in the region outside of the winter calving season. Humpback whales are a cosmopolitan species that migrate seasonally between warm-water (tropical or sub-tropical) breeding and calving areas in winter months and cool-water (temperate to sub-Arctic/ Antarctic) feeding areas in summer months (Gendron and Urban, 1993). They tend to occupy shallow, coastal waters, although migrations are undertaken through deep, pelagic waters. In the North Atlantic, humpback whales are known to aggregate in six summer feeding areas representing relatively discrete subpopulations (Clapham and Mayo, 1987), which share common wintering grounds in the Caribbean (and to a lesser extent off of West Africa) (Winn et al., 1975; Mattila et al., 1994; Palsb[oslash]ll et al., 1997; Smith et al., 1999; Stevick et al., 2003; Cerchio et al., 2010). These populations or aggregations range from the Gulf of Maine in the west to Norway in the east, and the migratory range includes the east coast of the U.S. and Canada. The only managed stock in U.S. waters is the Gulf of Maine feeding aggregation, although other stocks occur in Canadian waters (e.g., Gulf of St. Lawrence feeding aggregation), and it is possible that whales from other stocks could occur in U.S. waters. Significant numbers of whales do remain in mid- to high-latitude waters during the winter months (Clapham et al., 1993; Swingle et al., 1993), and there have been a number of humpback sightings in coastal waters of the southeastern U.S. during the winter (Wiley et al., 1995; Laerm et al., 1997; Waring et al., 2014). According to Waring et al. (2014), it is unclear whether the increased numbers of sightings represent a distributional change, or are simply due to an increase in sighting effort and/or whale abundance. These factors aside, the humpback whale remains relatively rare in U.S. coastal waters south of the mid- Atlantic region, and is considered rare to extralimital in the action area. Any occurrences in the region would be expected in fall, winter, and spring during migration, as whales are unlikely to occur so far south during the summer feeding season. Neither the humpback whale nor the right whale would occur within the turning basin, and only the right whale has been observed to occur as far inshore as the mouth of the St. Johns River. Therefore, the only potential for interaction with these species is likely to be within the narrow sliver of ensonified area expected to extend eastward from the entrance channel during vibratory driving of steel piles (see Figure 6- 1 of the application). As described above, humpback whales are considered rare in the region, and, when considering frequency of occurrence, size of ensonified area (approximately 2.9 km\2\ during vibratory driving of steel [[Page 46549]] piles but less than one square kilometer during vibratory driving of plastic piles), and duration (likely ten days, but no greater than approximately fifty days), we consider the possibility for harassment of humpback whales to be discountable. For right whales, due to the greater potential for interaction during the calving season we considered available density information, including abundance data from NMFS surveys, as analyzed for use in Navy environmental compliance efforts (Roberts et al., 2015), to produce a representative estimate for the specific action area. Use of this estimate (0.045028/km\2\) resulted in zero estimated exposures of right whales to sound produced by project activities. Therefore, the humpback whale and right whale are excluded from further analysis and are not discussed further in this document. The following summarizes the population status and abundance of the remaining species. Bottlenose Dolphin Bottlenose dolphins are found worldwide in tropical to temperate waters and can be found in all depths from estuarine inshore to deep offshore waters. Temperature appears to limit the range of the species, either directly, or indirectly, for example, through distribution of prey. Off North American coasts, common bottlenose dolphins are found where surface water temperatures range from about 10 [deg]C to 32 [deg]C. In many regions, including the southeastern U.S., separate coastal and offshore populations are known. There is significant genetic, morphological, and hematological differentiation evident between the two ecotypes (e.g., Walker, 1981; Duffield et al., 1983; Duffield, 1987; Hoelzel et al., 1998), which correspond to shallow, warm water and deep, cold water. Both ecotypes have been shown to inhabit the western North Atlantic (Hersh and Duffield, 1990; Mead and Potter, 1995), where the deep-water ecotype tends to be larger and darker. In addition, several lines of evidence, including photo- identification and genetic studies, support a distinction between dolphins inhabiting coastal waters near the shore and those present in the inshore waters of bays, sounds and estuaries. This complex differentiation of bottlenose dolphin populations is observed throughout the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts where bottlenose dolphins are found, although estuarine populations have not been fully defined. In the Mayport area, four stocks of bottlenose dolphins are currently managed, none of which are protected under the ESA. Of the four stocks--offshore, southern migratory coastal, northern Florida coastal, and Jacksonville estuarine system--only the latter three are likely to occur in the action area. Bottlenose dolphins typically occur in groups of 2-15 individuals (Shane et al., 1986; Kerr et al., 2005). Although significantly larger groups have also been reported, smaller groups are typical of shallow, confined waters. In addition, such waters typically support some degree of regional site fidelity and limited movement patterns (Shane et al., 1986; Wells et al., 1987). Observations made during marine mammal surveys conducted during 2012- 2013 in the Mayport turning basin show bottlenose dolphins typically occurring individually or in pairs, or less frequently in larger groups. The maximum observed group size during these surveys is six, while the mode is one. Navy observations indicate that bottlenose dolphins rarely linger in a particular area in the turning basin, but rather appear to move purposefully through the basin and then leave, which likely reflects a lack of any regular foraging opportunities or habitat characteristics of any importance in the basin. Based on currently available information, it is not possible to determine which stock dolphins occurring in the action area may belong to. These stocks are described in greater detail below. Western North Atlantic Offshore--This stock, consisting of the deep-water ecotype or offshore form of bottlenose dolphin in the western North Atlantic, is distributed primarily along the outer continental shelf and continental slope, but has been documented to occur relatively close to shore (Waring et al., 2014). The separation between offshore and coastal morphotypes varies depending on location and season, with the ranges overlapping to some degree south of Cape Hatteras. Based on genetic analysis, Torres et al. (2003) found a distributional break at 34 km from shore, with the offshore form found exclusively seaward of 34 km and in waters deeper than 34 m. Within 7.5 km of shore, all animals were of the coastal morphotype. More recently, coastwide, systematic biopsy collection surveys were conducted during the summer and winter to evaluate the degree of spatial overlap between the two morphotypes. South of Cape Hatteras, spatial overlap was found although the probability of a sampled group being from the offshore morphotype increased with increasing depth, and the closest distance for offshore animals was 7.3 km from shore, in water depths of 13 m just south of Cape Lookout (Garrison et al., 2003). The maximum radial distance for the largest ZOI is approximately 7.4 km (Table 3); therefore, while possible, it is unlikely that any individuals of the offshore morphotype would be affected by project activities. In terms of water depth, the affected area is generally in the range of the shallower depth reported for offshore dolphins by Garrison et al. (2003), but is far shallower than the depths reported by Torres et al. (2003). South of Cape Lookout, the zone of spatial overlap between offshore and coastal ecotypes is generally considered to occur in water depths between 20-100 m (Waring et al., 2014), which is generally deeper than waters in the action area. This stock is thus excluded from further analysis. Western North Atlantic Coastal, Southern Migratory--The coastal morphotype of bottlenose dolphin is continuously distributed from the Gulf of Mexico to the Atlantic and north approximately to Long Island (Waring et al., 2014). On the Atlantic coast, Scott et al. (1988) hypothesized a single coastal stock, citing stranding patterns during a high mortality event in 1987-88 and observed density patterns. More recent studies demonstrate that there is instead a complex mosaic of stocks (Zolman, 2002; McLellan et al., 2003; Rosel et al., 2009). The coastal morphotype was managed by NMFS as a single stock until 2009, when it was split into five separate stocks, including northern and southern migratory stocks. The original, single stock of coastal dolphins recognized from 1995-2001 was listed as depleted under the MMPA as a result of a 1987-88 mortality event. That designation was retained when the single stock was split into multiple coastal stocks. Therefore, all coastal stocks of bottlenose dolphins are listed as depleted under the MMPA, and are also considered strategic stocks. According to the Scott et al. (1988) hypothesis, a single stock was thought to migrate seasonally between New Jersey (summer) and central Florida (winter). Instead, it was determined that a mix of resident and migratory stocks exists, with the migratory movements and spatial distribution of the southern migratory stock the most poorly understood of these. Stable isotope analysis and telemetry studies provide evidence for seasonal movements of dolphins between North Carolina and northern Florida (Knoff, 2004; Waring et al., 2014), and genetic analyses and tagging studies support differentiation of northern and southern migratory stocks (Rosel et al., 2009; Waring et al., 2014). Although there is significant [[Page 46550]] uncertainty regarding the southern migratory stock's spatial movements, telemetry data indicates that the stock occupies waters of southern North Carolina (south of Cape Lookout) during the fall (October- December). In winter months (January-March), the stock moves as far south as northern Florida where it overlaps spatially with the northern Florida coastal and Jacksonville estuarine system stocks. In spring (April-June), the stock returns north to waters of North Carolina, and is presumed to remain north of Cape Lookout during the summer months. Therefore, the potential exists for harassment of southern migratory dolphins, most likely during the winter only. Bottlenose dolphins are ubiquitous in coastal waters from the mid- Atlantic through the Gulf of Mexico, and therefore interact with multiple coastal fisheries, including gillnet, trawl, and trap/pot fisheries. Stock-specific total fishery-related mortality and serious injury cannot be directly estimated because of the spatial overlap among stocks of bottlenose dolphins, as well as because of unobserved fisheries. The primary known source of fishery mortality for the southern migratory stock is the mid-Atlantic gillnet fishery (Waring et al., 2014). Between 2004 and 2008, 588 bottlenose dolphins stranded along the Atlantic coast between Florida and Maryland that could potentially be assigned to the southern migratory stock, although the assignment of animals to a particular stock is impossible in some seasons and regions due to spatial overlap amongst stocks (Waring et al., 2014). Many of these animals exhibited some evidence of human interaction, such as line/net marks, gunshot wounds, or vessel strike. In addition, nearshore and estuarine habitats occupied by the coastal morphotype are adjacent to areas of high human population and some are highly industrialized. It should also be noted that stranding data underestimate the extent of fishery-related mortality and serious injury because not all of the marine mammals that die or are seriously injured in fishery interactions are discovered, reported or investigated, nor will all of those that are found necessarily show signs of entanglement or other fishery interaction. The level of technical expertise among stranding network personnel varies widely as does the ability to recognize signs of fishery interactions. Finally, multiple resident populations of bottlenose dolphins have been shown to have high concentrations of organic pollutants (e.g., Kuehl et al., 1991) and, despite little study of contaminant loads in migrating coastal dolphins, exposure to environmental pollutants and subsequent effects on population health is an area of concern and active research. Western North Atlantic Coastal, Northern Florida--Please see above for description of the differences between coastal and offshore ecotypes and the delineation of coastal dolphins into management stocks. The northern Florida coastal stock is one of five stocks of coastal dolphins and one of three known resident stocks (other resident stocks include South Carolina/Georgia and central Florida dolphins). The spatial extent of these stocks, their potential seasonal movements, and their relationships with estuarine stocks are poorly understood. During summer months, when the migratory stocks are known to be in North Carolina waters and further north, bottlenose dolphins are still seen in coastal waters of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, indicating the presence of additional stocks of coastal animals. Speakman et al. (2006) documented dolphins in coastal waters off Charleston, South Carolina, that are not known resident members of the estuarine stock, and genetic analyses indicate significant differences between coastal dolphins from northern Florida, Georgia and central South Carolina (NMFS, 2001; Rosel et al., 2009). The northern Florida stock is thought to be present from approximately the Georgia-Florida border south to 29.4[deg] N. The northern Florida coastal stock is susceptible to interactions with similar fisheries as those described above for the southern migratory stock, including gillnet, trawl, and trap/pot fisheries. From 2004-08, 78 stranded dolphins were recovered in northern Florida waters, although it was not possible to determine whether there was evidence of human interaction for the majority of these (Waring et al., 2014). The same concerns discussed above regarding underestimation of mortality hold for this stock and, as for southern migratory dolphins, pollutant loading is a concern. Jacksonville Estuarine System--Please see above for description of the differences between coastal and offshore ecotypes and the delineation of coastal dolphins into management stocks primarily inhabiting nearshore waters. The coastal morphotype of bottlenose dolphin is also resident to certain inshore estuarine waters (Caldwell, 2001; Gubbins, 2002; Zolman, 2002; Gubbins et al., 2003). Multiple lines of evidence support demographic separation between coastal dolphins found in nearshore waters and those in estuarine waters, as well as between dolphins residing within estuaries along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts (e.g., Wells et al., 1987; Scott et al., 1990; Wells et al., 1996; Cortese, 2000; Zolman, 2002; Speakman, et al. 2006; Stolen et al., 2007; Balmer et al., 2008; Mazzoil et al., 2008). In particular, a study conducted near Jacksonville demonstrated significant genetic differences between coastal and estuarine dolphins (Caldwell, 2001; Rosel et al., 2009). Despite evidence for genetic differentiation between estuarine and nearshore populations, the degree of spatial overlap between these populations remains unclear. Photo- identification studies within estuaries demonstrate seasonal immigration and emigration and the presence of transient animals (e.g., Speakman et al., 2006). In addition, the degree of movement of resident estuarine animals into coastal waters on seasonal or shorter time scales is poorly understood (Waring et al., 2014). The Jacksonville estuarine system (JES) stock has been defined as separate primarily by the results of photo-identification and genetic studies. The stock range is considered to be bounded in the north by the Georgia-Florida border at Cumberland Sound, extending south to approximately Jacksonville Beach, Florida. This encompasses an area defined during a photo-identification study of bottlenose dolphin residency patterns in the area (Caldwell, 2001), and the borders are subject to change upon further study of dolphin residency patterns in estuarine waters of southern Georgia and northern/central Florida. The habitat is comprised of several large brackish rivers, including the St. Johns River, as well as tidal marshes and shallow riverine systems. Three behaviorally different communities were identified during Caldwell's (2001) study: The estuarine waters north (Northern) and south (Southern) of the St. Johns River and the coastal area, all of which differed in density, habitat fidelity and social affiliation patterns. The coastal dolphins are believed to be members of a coastal stock, however (Waring et al., 2014). Although Northern and Southern members of the JES stock show strong site fidelity, members of both groups have been observed outside their preferred areas. Dolphins residing within estuaries south of Jacksonville Beach down to the northern boundary of the Indian River Lagoon Estuarine System (IRLES) stock are currently not included in any stock, as there are insufficient data to determine whether animals in this area exhibit affiliation to the JES stock, the IRLES stock, or are [[Page 46551]] simply transient animals associated with coastal stocks. Further research is needed to establish affinities of dolphins in the area between the ranges, as currently understood, of the JES and IRLES stocks. The JES stock is susceptible to similar fisheries interactions as those described above for coastal stocks, although only trap/pot fisheries are likely to occur in estuarine waters frequented by the stock. Only one dolphin carcass bearing evidence of fisheries interaction was recovered during 2003-07 in the JES area, and an additional sixteen stranded dolphins were recovered during this time, but no determinations regarding human interactions could be made for the majority (Waring et al., 2014). The same concerns discussed above regarding underestimation of mortality hold for this stock and, as for stocks discussed above, pollutant loading is a concern. Although no contaminant analyses have yet been conducted in this area, the JES stock inhabits areas with significant drainage from industrial and urban sources, and as such is exposed to contaminants in runoff from these. In other estuarine areas where such analyses have been conducted, exposure to anthropogenic contaminants has been found to likely have an effect (Hansen et al. 2004; Schwacke et al., 2004; Reif et al., 2008). The original, single stock of coastal dolphins recognized from 1995-2001 was listed as depleted under the MMPA as a result of a 1987- 88 mortality event. That designation was retained when the single stock was split into multiple coastal stocks. However, Scott et al. (1988) suggested that dolphins residing in the bays, sounds and estuaries adjacent to these coastal waters were not affected by the mortality event and these animals were explicitly excluded from the depleted listing (Waring et al., 2014). Gubbins et al. (2003), using data from Caldwell (2001), estimated the stock size to be 412 (CV = 0.06). However, NMFS considers abundance unknown because this estimate likely includes an unknown number of non-resident and seasonally-resident dolphins. It nevertheless represents the best available information regarding stock size. Because the stock size is likely small, and relatively few mortalities and serious injuries would exceed PBR, the stock is considered to be a strategic stock (Waring et al., 2014). Atlantic Spotted Dolphin Atlantic spotted dolphins are distributed in tropical and warm temperate waters of the western North Atlantic predominantly over the continental shelf and upper slope, from southern New England through the Gulf of Mexico (Leatherwood et al., 1976). Spotted dolphins in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico are managed as separate stocks. The Atlantic spotted dolphin occurs in two forms which may be distinct sub- species (Perrin et al., 1987; Rice, 1998); a larger, more heavily spotted form inhabits the continental shelf inside or near the 200-m isobath and is the only form that would be expected to occur in the action area. Although typically observed in deeper waters, spotted dolphins of the western North Atlantic stock do occur regularly in nearshore waters south of the Chesapeake Bay (Mullin and Fulling, 2003). Specific data regarding seasonal occurrence in the region of activity is lacking, but higher numbers of individuals have been reported to occur in nearshore waters of the Gulf of Mexico from November to May, suggesting seasonal migration patterns (Griffin and Griffin, 2003). Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals. This discussion also includes reactions that we consider to rise to the level of a take and those that we do not consider to rise to the level of a take (for example, with acoustics, we may include a discussion of studies that showed animals not reacting at all to sound or exhibiting barely measurable avoidance). This section is intended as a background of potential effects and does not consider either the specific manner in which this activity will be carried out or the mitigation that will be implemented, and how either of those will shape the anticipated impacts from this specific activity. The Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment section later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The Negligible Impact Analyses section will include the analysis of how this specific activity will impact marine mammals and will consider the content of this section, the Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment section, the Proposed Mitigation section, and the Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat section to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of this activity on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and from that on the affected marine mammal populations or stocks. In the following discussion, we provide general background information on sound and marine mammal hearing before considering potential effects to marine mammals from sound produced by vibratory and impact pile driving. Description of Sound Sources Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and is measured in hertz (Hz) or cycles per second. Wavelength is the distance between two peaks of a sound wave; lower frequency sounds have longer wavelengths than higher frequency sounds and attenuate (decrease) more rapidly in shallower water. Amplitude is the height of the sound pressure wave or the `loudness' of a sound and is typically measured using the decibel (dB) scale. A dB is the ratio between a measured pressure (with sound) and a reference pressure (sound at a constant pressure, established by scientific standards). It is a logarithmic unit that accounts for large variations in amplitude; therefore, relatively small changes in dB ratings correspond to large changes in sound pressure. When referring to sound pressure levels (SPLs; the sound force per unit area), sound is referenced in the context of underwater sound pressure to 1 muPascal ([mu]Pa). One pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of one newton exerted over an area of one square meter. The source level (SL) represents the sound level at a distance of 1 m from the source (referenced to 1 [mu]Pa). The received level is the sound level at the listener's position. Note that all underwater sound levels in this document are referenced to a pressure of 1 [mu]Pa and all airborne sound levels in this document are referenced to a pressure of 20 [mu]Pa. Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over the duration of an impulse. Rms is calculated by squaring all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the square root of the average (Urick, 1983). Rms accounts for both positive and negative values; squaring the pressures makes all values positive so that they may be accounted for in the summation of pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be better expressed through averaged units than by peak pressures. When underwater objects vibrate or activity occurs, sound-pressure waves are created. These waves alternately compress and decompress the water as the sound wave travels. Underwater sound waves radiate in all directions [[Page 46552]] away from the source (similar to ripples on the surface of a pond), except in cases where the source is directional. The compressions and decompressions associated with sound waves are detected as changes in pressure by aquatic life and man-made sound receptors such as hydrophones. Even in the absence of sound from the specified activity, the underwater environment is typically loud due to ambient sound. Ambient sound is defined as environmental background sound levels lacking a single source or point (Richardson et al., 1995), and the sound level of a region is defined by the total acoustical energy being generated by known and unknown sources. These sources may include physical (e.g., waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric sound), biological (e.g., sounds produced by marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates), and anthropogenic sound (e.g., vessels, dredging, aircraft, construction). A number of sources contribute to ambient sound, including the following (Richardson et al., 1995):Wind and waves: The complex interactions between wind and water surface, including processes such as breaking waves and wave- induced bubble oscillations and cavitation, are a main source of naturally occurring ambient noise for frequencies between 200 Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In general, ambient sound levels tend to increase with increasing wind speed and wave height. Surf noise becomes important near shore, with measurements collected at a distance of 8.5 km from shore showing an increase of 10 dB in the 100 to 700 Hz band during heavy surf conditions. Precipitation: Sound from rain and hail impacting the water surface can become an important component of total noise at frequencies above 500 Hz, and possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet times. Biological: Marine mammals can contribute significantly to ambient noise levels, as can some fish and shrimp. The frequency band for biological contributions is from approximately 12 Hz to over 100 kHz. Anthropogenic: Sources of ambient noise related to human activity include transportation (surface vessels and aircraft), dredging and construction, oil and gas drilling and production, seismic surveys, sonar, explosions, and ocean acoustic studies. Shipping noise typically dominates the total ambient noise for frequencies between 20 and 300 Hz. In general, the frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are below 1 kHz and, if higher frequency sound levels are created, they attenuate rapidly (Richardson et al., 1995). Sound from identifiable anthropogenic sources other than the activity of interest (e.g., a passing vessel) is sometimes termed background sound, as opposed to ambient sound. The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources at any given location and time--which comprise ``ambient'' or ``background'' sound--depends not only on the source levels (as determined by current weather conditions and levels of biological and shipping activity) but also on the ability of sound to propagate through the environment. In turn, sound propagation is dependent on the spatially and temporally varying properties of the water column and sea floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of the dependence on a large number of varying factors, ambient sound levels can be expected to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial and temporal scales. Sound levels at a given frequency and location can vary by 10-20 dB from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result is that, depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from the specified activity may be a negligible addition to the local environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect marine mammals. The underwater acoustic environment in the Mayport turning basin is likely to be dominated by noise from day-to-day port and vessel activities. The basin is sheltered from most wave noise, but is a high- use area for naval ships, tugboats, and security vessels. When underway, these sources can create noise between 20 Hz and 16 kHz (Lesage et al., 1999), with broadband noise levels up to 180 dB. While there are no current measurements of ambient noise levels in the turning basin, it is likely that levels within the basin periodically exceed the 120 dB threshold and, therefore, that the high levels of anthropogenic activity in the basin create an environment far different from quieter habitats where behavioral reactions to sounds around the 120 dB threshold have been observed (e.g., Malme et al., 1984, 1988). In-water construction activities associated with the project would include impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving. The sounds produced by these activities fall into one of two general sound types: Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction between these two sound types is important because they have differing potential to cause physical effects, particularly with regard to hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see Southall et al., (2007) for an in-depth discussion of these concepts. Pulsed sound sources (e.g., explosions, gunshots, sonic booms, impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients (ANSI, 1986; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003; ANSI, 2005) and occur either as isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed sounds are all characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient pressure to a maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period that may include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and minimal pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce physical injury as compared with sounds that lack these features. Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or prolonged, and may be either continuous or non-continuous (ANSI, 1995; NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses (e.g., rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems (such as those used by the U.S. Navy). The duration of such sounds, as received at a distance, can be greatly extended in a highly reverberant environment. Impact hammers operate by repeatedly dropping a heavy piston onto a pile to drive the pile into the substrate. Sound generated by impact hammers is characterized by rapid rise times and high peak levels, a potentially injurious combination (Hastings and Popper, 2005). Vibratory hammers install piles by vibrating them and allowing the weight of the hammer to push them into the sediment. Vibratory hammers produce significantly less sound than impact hammers. Peak SPLs may be 180 dB or greater, but are generally 10 to 20 dB lower than SPLs generated during impact pile driving of the same-sized pile (Oestman et al., 2009). Rise time is slower, reducing the probability and severity of injury, and sound energy is distributed over a greater amount of time (Nedwell and Edwards, 2002; Carlson et al., 2005). Marine Mammal Hearing Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals, and exposure to sound can have deleterious effects. To appropriately assess these potential effects, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine [[Page 46553]] mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided into functional hearing groups based on measured or estimated hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques, anatomical modeling, and other data. The lower and/or upper frequencies for some of these functional hearing groups have been modified from those designated by Southall et al. (2007). The functional groups and the associated frequencies are indicated below (note that these frequency ranges do not necessarily correspond to the range of best hearing, which varies by species): Low-frequency cetaceans (mysticetes): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 Hz and 25 kHz (extended from 22 kHz; Watkins, 1986; Au et al., 2006; Lucifredi and Stein, 2007; Ketten and Mountain, 2009; Tubelli et al., 2012); Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger toothed whales, beaked whales, and most delphinids): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz; High-frequency cetaceans (porpoises, river dolphins, and members of the genera Kogia and Cephalorhynchus; now considered to include two members of the genus Lagenorhynchus on the basis of recent echolocation data and genetic data [May-Collado and Agnarsson, 2006; Kyhn et al. 2009, 2010; Tougaard et al. 2010]): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 200 Hz and 180 kHz; and Pinnipeds in water: Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 75 Hz to 100 kHz for Phocidae (true seals) and between 100 Hz and 40 kHz for Otariidae (eared seals), with the greatest sensitivity between approximately 700 Hz and 20 kHz. The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range (Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth et al., 2013). Two cetacean species are expected to potentially be affected by the specified activity. The bottlenose and Atlantic spotted dolphins are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans. Acoustic Effects, Underwater Potential Effects of Pile Driving Sound--The effects of sounds from pile driving might result in one or more of the following: Temporary or permanent hearing impairment, non-auditory physical or physiological effects, behavioral disturbance, and masking (Richardson et al., 1995; Gordon et al., 2004; Nowacek et al., 2007; Southall et al., 2007). The effects of pile driving on marine mammals are dependent on several factors, including the size, type, and depth of the animal; the depth, intensity, and duration of the pile driving sound; the depth of the water column; the substrate of the habitat; the standoff distance between the pile and the animal; and the sound propagation properties of the environment. Impacts to marine mammals from pile driving activities are expected to result primarily from acoustic pathways. As such, the degree of effect is intrinsically related to the received level and duration of the sound exposure, which are in turn influenced by the distance between the animal and the source. The further away from the source, the less intense the exposure should be. The substrate and depth of the habitat affect the sound propagation properties of the environment. Shallow environments are typically more structurally complex, which leads to rapid sound attenuation. In addition, substrates that are soft (e.g., sand) would absorb or attenuate the sound more readily than hard substrates (e.g., rock) which may reflect the acoustic wave. Soft porous substrates would also likely require less time to drive the pile, and possibly less forceful equipment, which would ultimately decrease the intensity of the acoustic source. In the absence of mitigation, impacts to marine species would be expected to result from physiological and behavioral responses to both the type and strength of the acoustic signature (Viada et al., 2008). The type and severity of behavioral impacts are more difficult to define due to limited studies addressing the behavioral effects of impulsive sounds on marine mammals. Potential effects from impulsive sound sources can range in severity from effects such as behavioral disturbance or tactile perception to physical discomfort, slight injury of the internal organs and the auditory system, or mortality (Yelverton et al., 1973). Hearing Impairment and Other Physical Effects--Marine mammals exposed to high intensity sound repeatedly or for prolonged periods can experience hearing threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain frequency ranges (Kastak et al., 1999; Schlundt et al., 2000; Finneran et al., 2002, 2005). TS can be permanent (PTS), in which case the loss of hearing sensitivity is not recoverable, or temporary (TTS), in which case the animal's hearing threshold would recover over time (Southall et al., 2007). Marine mammals depend on acoustic cues for vital biological functions, (e.g., orientation, communication, finding prey, avoiding predators); thus, TTS may result in reduced fitness in survival and reproduction. However, this depends on the frequency and duration of TTS, as well as the biological context in which it occurs. TTS of limited duration, occurring in a frequency range that does not coincide with that used for recognition of important acoustic cues, would have little to no effect on an animal's fitness. Repeated sound exposure that leads to TTS could cause PTS. PTS constitutes injury, but TTS does not (Southall et al., 2007). The following subsections discuss in somewhat more detail the possibilities of TTS, PTS, and non-auditory physical effects. Temporary Threshold Shift--TTS is the mildest form of hearing impairment that can occur during exposure to a strong sound (Kryter, 1985). While experiencing TTS, the hearing threshold rises, and a sound must be stronger in order to be heard. In terrestrial mammals, TTS can last from minutes or hours to days (in cases of strong TTS). For sound exposures at or somewhat above the TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity in both terrestrial and marine mammals recovers rapidly after exposure to the sound ends. Few data on sound levels and durations necessary to elicit mild TTS have been obtained for marine mammals, and none of the published data concern TTS elicited by exposure to multiple pulses of sound. Available data on TTS in marine mammals are summarized in Southall et al. (2007). Given the available data, the received level of a single pulse (with no frequency weighting) might need to be approximately 186 dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s (i.e., 186 dB sound exposure level [SEL] or approximately 221-226 dB p-p [peak]) in order to produce brief, mild TTS. Exposure to several strong pulses that each have received levels near 190 dB rms (175-180 dB SEL) might result in cumulative exposure of approximately 186 dB SEL and thus slight TTS in a small odontocete, assuming the TTS threshold is (to a first approximation) a function of the total received pulse energy. The above TTS information for odontocetes is derived from studies on [[Page 46554]] the bottlenose dolphin and beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas). There is no published TTS information for other species of cetaceans. However, preliminary evidence from a harbor porpoise exposed to pulsed sound suggests that its TTS threshold may have been lower (Lucke et al., 2009). As summarized above, data that are now available imply that TTS is unlikely to occur unless odontocetes are exposed to pile driving pulses stronger than 180 dB re 1 [mu]Pa rms. Permanent Threshold Shift--When PTS occurs, there is physical damage to the sound receptors in the ear. In severe cases, there can be total or partial deafness, while in other cases the animal has an impaired ability to hear sounds in specific frequency ranges (Kryter, 1985). There is no specific evidence that exposure to pulses of sound can cause PTS in any marine mammal. However, given the possibility that mammals close to a sound source might incur TTS, there has been further speculation about the possibility that some individuals might incur PTS. Single or occasional occurrences of mild TTS are not indicative of permanent auditory damage, but repeated or (in some cases) single exposures to a level well above that causing TTS onset might elicit PTS. Relationships between TTS and PTS thresholds have not been studied in marine mammals but are assumed to be similar to those in humans and other terrestrial mammals. PTS might occur at a received sound level at least several decibels above that inducing mild TTS if the animal were exposed to strong sound pulses with rapid rise time. Based on data from terrestrial mammals, a precautionary assumption is that the PTS threshold for impulse sounds (such as pile driving pulses as received close to the source) is at least 6 dB higher than the TTS threshold on a peak-pressure basis and probably greater than 6 dB (Southall et al., 2007). On an SEL basis, Southall et al. (2007) estimated that received levels would need to exceed the TTS threshold by at least 15 dB for there to be risk of PTS. Thus, for cetaceans, Southall et al. (2007) estimate that the PTS threshold might be an M-weighted SEL (for the sequence of received pulses) of approximately 198 dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s (15 dB higher than the TTS threshold for an impulse). Given the higher level of sound necessary to cause PTS as compared with TTS, it is considerably less likely that PTS could occur. Measured source levels from impact pile driving can be as high as 214 dB rms. Although no marine mammals have been shown to experience TTS or PTS as a result of being exposed to pile driving activities, captive bottlenose dolphins and beluga whales exhibited changes in behavior when exposed to strong pulsed sounds (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, 2005). The animals tolerated high received levels of sound before exhibiting aversive behaviors. Experiments on a beluga whale showed that exposure to a single watergun impulse at a received level of 207 kPa (30 psi) p-p, which is equivalent to 228 dB p-p, resulted in a 7 and 6 dB TTS in the beluga whale at 0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively. Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of the pre-exposure level within four minutes of the exposure (Finneran et al., 2002). Although the source level of pile driving from one hammer strike is expected to be much lower than the single watergun impulse cited here, animals being exposed for a prolonged period to repeated hammer strikes could receive more sound exposure in terms of SEL than from the single watergun impulse (estimated at 188 dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s) in the aforementioned experiment (Finneran et al., 2002). However, in order for marine mammals to experience TTS or PTS, the animals have to be close enough to be exposed to high intensity sound levels for a prolonged period of time. Based on the best scientific information available, these SPLs are far below the thresholds that could cause TTS or the onset of PTS. Non-auditory Physiological Effects--Non-auditory physiological effects or injuries that theoretically might occur in marine mammals exposed to strong underwater sound include stress, neurological effects, bubble formation, resonance effects, and other types of organ or tissue damage (Cox et al., 2006; Southall et al., 2007). Studies examining such effects are limited. In general, little is known about the potential for pile driving to cause auditory impairment or other physical effects in marine mammals. Available data suggest that such effects, if they occur at all, would presumably be limited to short distances from the sound source and to activities that extend over a prolonged period. The available data do not allow identification of a specific exposure level above which non-auditory effects can be expected (Southall et al., 2007) or any meaningful quantitative predictions of the numbers (if any) of marine mammals that might be affected in those ways. Marine mammals that show behavioral avoidance of pile driving, including some odontocetes and some pinnipeds, are especially unlikely to incur auditory impairment or non-auditory physical effects. Disturbance Reactions Disturbance includes a variety of effects, including subtle changes in behavior, more conspicuous changes in activities, and displacement. Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-specific and reactions, if any, depend on species, state of maturity, experience, current activity, reproductive state, auditory sensitivity, time of day, and many other factors (Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok et al., 2003; Southall et al., 2007). Habituation can occur when an animal's response to a stimulus wanes with repeated exposure, usually in the absence of unpleasant associated events (Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most likely to habituate to sounds that are predictable and unvarying. The opposite process is sensitization, when an unpleasant experience leads to subsequent responses, often in the form of avoidance, at a lower level of exposure. Behavioral state may affect the type of response as well. For example, animals that are resting may show greater behavioral change in response to disturbing sound levels than animals that are highly motivated to remain in an area for feeding (Richardson et al., 1995; NRC, 2003; Wartzok et al., 2003). Controlled experiments with captive marine mammals showed pronounced behavioral reactions, including avoidance of loud sound sources (Ridgway et al., 1997; Finneran et al., 2003). Observed responses of wild marine mammals to loud pulsed sound sources (typically seismic guns or acoustic harassment devices, but also including pile driving) have been varied but often consist of avoidance behavior or other behavioral changes suggesting discomfort (Morton and Symonds, 2002; Thorson and Reyff, 2006; see also Gordon et al., 2004; Wartzok et al., 2003; Nowacek et al., 2007). Responses to continuous sound, such as vibratory pile installation, have not been documented as well as responses to pulsed sounds. With both types of pile driving, it is likely that the onset of pile driving could result in temporary, short term changes in an animal's typical behavior and/or avoidance of the affected area. These behavioral changes may include (Richardson et al., 1995): Changing durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities; changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke [[Page 46555]] slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of areas where sound sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds flushing into water from haul-outs or rookeries). Pinnipeds may increase their haul-out time, possibly to avoid in-water disturbance (Thorson and Reyff, 2006). The biological significance of many of these behavioral disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral modification could be expected to be biologically significant if the change affects growth, survival, or reproduction. Significant behavioral modifications that could potentially lead to effects on growth, survival, or reproduction include: Drastic changes in diving/surfacing patterns (such as those thought to cause beaked whale stranding due to exposure to military mid-frequency tactical sonar); Habitat abandonment due to loss of desirable acoustic environment; and Cessation of feeding or social interaction. The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic sound depends on both external factors (characteristics of sound sources and their paths) and the specific characteristics of the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography) and is difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007). Auditory Masking Natural and artificial sounds can disrupt behavior by masking, or interfering with, a marine mammal's ability to hear other sounds. Masking occurs when the receipt of a sound is interfered with by another coincident sound at similar frequencies and at similar or higher levels. Chronic exposure to excessive, though not high- intensity, sound could cause masking at particular frequencies for marine mammals, which utilize sound for vital biological functions. Masking can interfere with detection of acoustic signals such as communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain circumstances, marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment are being severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their performance fitness in survival and reproduction. If the coincident (masking) sound were man-made, it could be potentially harassing if it disrupted hearing-related behavior. It is important to distinguish TTS and PTS, which persist after the sound exposure, from masking, which occurs during the sound exposure. Because masking (without resulting in TS) is not associated with abnormal physiological function, it is not considered a physiological effect, but rather a potential behavioral effect. The frequency range of the potentially masking sound is important in determining any potential behavioral impacts. Because sound generated from in-water pile driving is mostly concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect on high frequency echolocation sounds made by porpoises. However, lower frequency man- made sounds are more likely to affect detection of communication calls and other potentially important natural sounds such as surf and prey sound. It may also affect communication signals when they occur near the sound band and thus reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009). Masking has the potential to impact species at the population or community levels as well as at individual levels. Masking affects both senders and receivers of the signals and can potentially have long-term chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent research suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms of SPL) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and that most of these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). All anthropogenic sound sources, such as those from vessel traffic, pile driving, and dredging activities, contribute to the elevated ambient sound levels, thus intensifying masking. The most intense underwater sounds in the proposed action are those produced by impact pile driving. Given that the energy distribution of pile driving covers a broad frequency spectrum, sound from these sources would likely be within the audible range of marine mammals present in the project area. Impact pile driving activity is relatively short-term, with rapid pulses occurring for approximately fifteen minutes per pile. The probability for impact pile driving resulting from this proposed action masking acoustic signals important to the behavior and survival of marine mammal species is likely to be negligible. Vibratory pile driving is also relatively short-term, with rapid oscillations occurring for approximately one and a half hours per pile. It is possible that vibratory pile driving resulting from this proposed action may mask acoustic signals important to the behavior and survival of marine mammal species, but the short-term duration and limited affected area would result in insignificant impacts from masking. Any masking event that could possibly rise to Level B harassment under the MMPA would occur concurrently within the zones of behavioral harassment already estimated for vibratory and impact pile driving, and which have already been taken into account in the exposure analysis. Anticipated Effects on Habitat The proposed activities at NSM would not result in permanent impacts to habitats used directly by marine mammals, but may have potential short-term impacts to food sources such as forage fish and may affect acoustic habitat (see masking discussion above). There are no known foraging hotspots or other ocean bottom structure of significant biological importance to marine mammals present in the marine waters in the vicinity of the project area. Therefore, the main impact issue associated with the proposed activity would be temporarily elevated sound levels and the associated direct effects on marine mammals, as discussed previously in this document. The most likely impact to marine mammal habitat occurs from pile driving effects on likely marine mammal prey (i.e., fish) near NSM and minor impacts to the immediate substrate during installation and removal of piles during the wharf construction project. Pile Driving Effects on Potential Prey (Fish) Construction activities may produce both pulsed (i.e., impact pile driving) and continuous (i.e., vibratory pile driving) sounds. Fish react to sounds which are especially strong and/or intermittent low- frequency sounds. Short duration, sharp sounds can cause overt or subtle changes in fish behavior and local distribution. Hastings and Popper (2005) identified several studies that suggest fish may relocate to avoid certain areas of sound energy. Additional studies have documented effects of pile driving (or other types of sounds) on fish, although several are based on studies in support of large, multiyear bridge construction projects (e.g., Scholik and Yan, 2001, 2002; Popper and Hastings, 2009). Sound pulses at received levels of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa may cause subtle changes in fish behavior. SPLs of 180 dB may cause noticeable changes in behavior (Pearson et al., 1992; Skalski et al., 1992). SPLs of sufficient strength have been known to cause injury to fish and fish mortality. The most likely impact to fish from pile driving activities at the project [[Page 46556]] area would be temporary behavioral avoidance of the area. The duration of fish avoidance of this area after pile driving stops is unknown, but a rapid return to normal recruitment, distribution and behavior is anticipated. In general, impacts to marine mammal prey species are expected to be minor and temporary due to the short timeframe for the project. Pile Driving Effects on Potential Foraging Habitat The area likely impacted by the project is relatively small compared to the available habitat in nearshore and estuarine waters in the region. Avoidance by potential prey (i.e., fish) of the immediate area due to the temporary loss of this foraging habitat is also possible. The duration of fish avoidance of this area after pile driving stops is unknown, but a rapid return to normal recruitment, distribution and behavior is anticipated. Any behavioral avoidance by fish of the disturbed area would still leave significantly large areas of fish and marine mammal foraging habitat in the nearby vicinity. In summary, given the short daily duration of sound associated with individual pile driving events and the relatively small areas being affected, pile driving activities associated with the proposed action are not likely to have a permanent, adverse effect on any fish habitat, or populations of fish species. Therefore, pile driving is not likely to have a permanent, adverse effect on marine mammal foraging habitat at the project area. The Mayport turning basin itself is a man-made basin with significant levels of industrial activity and regular dredging, and is unlikely to harbor significant amounts of forage fish. Thus, any impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations. Proposed Mitigation In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses. Measurements from similar pile driving events were coupled with practical spreading loss to estimate zones of influence (ZOI; see Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment); these values were used to develop mitigation measures for pile driving activities at NSM. The ZOIs effectively represent the mitigation zone that would be established around each pile to prevent Level A harassment to marine mammals, while providing estimates of the areas within which Level B harassment might occur. In addition to the specific measures described later in this section, the Navy would conduct briefings between construction supervisors and crews, marine mammal monitoring team, and Navy staff prior to the start of all pile driving activity, and when new personnel join the work, in order to explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and operational procedures. Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile Driving The following measures would apply to the Navy's mitigation through shutdown and disturbance zones: Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving activities, the Navy will establish a shutdown zone intended to contain the area in which SPLs equal or exceed the 190 dB rms acoustic injury criteria. The purpose of a shutdown zone is to define an area within which shutdown of activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area), thus preventing injury of marine mammals (as described previously under Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals, serious injury or death are unlikely outcomes even in the absence of mitigation measures). Modeled radial distances for shutdown zones are shown in Table 3. However, a minimum shutdown zone of 15 m (which is larger than the maximum predicted injury zone) will be established during all pile driving activities, regardless of the estimated zone. Vibratory pile driving activities are not predicted to produce sound exceeding the 190-dB Level A harassment threshold, but these precautionary measures are intended to prevent the already unlikely possibility of physical interaction with construction equipment and to further reduce any possibility of acoustic injury. For impact driving of steel piles, if necessary, the radial distance of the shutdown would be established at 40 m. Disturbance Zone--Disturbance zones are the areas in which SPLs equal or exceed 160 and 120 dB rms (for impulse and continuous sound, respectively). Disturbance zones provide utility for monitoring conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone monitoring) by establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones enables observers to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area but outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of activity. However, the primary purpose of disturbance zone monitoring is for documenting incidents of Level B harassment; disturbance zone monitoring is discussed in greater detail later (see Proposed Monitoring and Reporting). Nominal radial distances for disturbance zones are shown in Table 3. Given the size of the disturbance zone for vibratory pile driving, it is impossible to guarantee that all animals would be observed or to make comprehensive observations of fine-scale behavioral reactions to sound, and only a portion of the zone (e.g., what may be reasonably observed by visual observers stationed within the turning basin) would be observed. In order to document observed incidents of harassment, monitors record all marine mammal observations, regardless of location. The observer's location, as well as the location of the pile being driven, is known from a GPS. The location of the animal is estimated as a distance from the observer, which is then compared to the location from the pile. It may then be estimated whether the animal was exposed to sound levels constituting incidental harassment on the basis of predicted distances to relevant thresholds in post-processing of observational and acoustic data, and a precise accounting of observed incidences of harassment created. This information may then be used to extrapolate observed takes to reach an approximate understanding of actual total takes. Monitoring Protocols--Monitoring would be conducted before, during, and after pile driving activities. In addition, observers shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven. Observations made outside the shutdown zone will not result in shutdown; that pile segment would be completed without cessation, unless the animal approaches or enters the shutdown zone, at which point all pile driving activities would be halted. Monitoring will take place from fifteen minutes prior to initiation through thirty minutes post-completion of pile driving activities. Pile driving activities include the time to install or remove a single pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile driving equipment is no more than [[Page 46557]] thirty minutes. Please see the Monitoring Plan (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm), developed by the Navy in agreement with NMFS, for full details of the monitoring protocols. The following additional measures apply to visual monitoring: (1) Monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. Qualified observers are typically trained biologists, with the following minimum qualifications: Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars may be necessary to correctly identify the target; Advanced education in biological science, wildlife management, mammalogy, or related fields (bachelor's degree or higher is required); Experience and ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic experience); Experience or training in the field identification of marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors; Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the construction operation to provide for personal safety during observations; Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were conducted; dates and times when in-water construction activities were suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from construction sound of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown zone; and marine mammal behavior; and Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals observed in the area as necessary. For this project, we waive the requirement for advanced education, as the observers will be personnel hired by the engineering contractor that may not have backgrounds in biological science or related fields. These observers will be required to watch the Navy's Marine Species Awareness Training video and shall receive training sufficient to achieve all other qualifications listed above (where relevant). (2) Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone will be monitored for fifteen minutes to ensure that it is clear of marine mammals. Pile driving will only commence once observers have declared the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals; animals will be allowed to remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition) and their behavior will be monitored and documented. The shutdown zone may only be declared clear, and pile driving started, when the entire shutdown zone is visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog, etc.). In addition, if such conditions should arise during impact pile driving that is already underway, the activity would be halted. (3) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone during the course of pile driving operations, activity will be halted and delayed until either the animal has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone or fifteen minutes have passed without re-detection of the animal. Monitoring will be conducted throughout the time required to drive a pile. Soft Start The use of a soft start procedure is believed to provide additional protection to marine mammals by warning or providing a chance to leave the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity, and typically involves a requirement to initiate sound from the hammer at reduced energy followed by a waiting period. This procedure is repeated two additional times. It is difficult to specify the reduction in energy for any given hammer because of variation across drivers and, for impact hammers, the actual number of strikes at reduced energy will vary because operating the hammer at less than full power results in ``bouncing'' of the hammer as it strikes the pile, resulting in multiple ``strikes.'' For impact driving, we require an initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at reduced energy, followed by a thirty-second waiting period, then two subsequent three strike sets. Soft start will be required at the beginning of each day's impact pile driving work and at any time following a cessation of impact pile driving of thirty minutes or longer. We have carefully evaluated the Navy's proposed mitigation measures and considered their effectiveness in past implementation to preliminarily determine whether they are likely to effect the least practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the following factors in relation to one another: (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2) the proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse impacts as planned; and (3) the practicability of the measure for applicant implementation. Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe should be able to accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of the general goals listed below: (1) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal). (2) A reduction in the number (total number or number at biologically important time or location) of individual marine mammals exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment only). (3) A reduction in the number (total number or number at biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment only). (4) A reduction in the intensity of exposure to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing the severity of behavioral harassment only). (5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal habitat, paying particular attention to the prey base, blockage or limitation of passage to or from biologically important areas, permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary disturbance of habitat during a biologically important time. (6) For monitoring directly related to mitigation, an increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation. Based on our evaluation of the Navy's proposed measures, as well as any other potential measures that may be relevant to the specified activity, we have preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat, [[Page 46558]] paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance. Proposed Monitoring and Reporting In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking''. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for incidental take authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area. Any monitoring requirement we prescribe should improve our understanding of one or more of the following: Occurrence of marine mammal species in action area (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density). Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment (e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) Affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) Co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) Biological or behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas). Individual responses to acute stressors, or impacts of chronic exposures (behavioral or physiological). How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) Long-term fitness and survival of an individual; or (2) Population, species, or stock. Effects on marine mammal habitat and resultant impacts to marine mammals. Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness. The Navy's proposed monitoring and reporting is also described in their Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. Visual Marine Mammal Observations The Navy will collect sighting data and behavioral responses to construction for marine mammal species observed in the region of activity during the period of activity. All observers will be trained in marine mammal identification and behaviors and are required to have no other construction-related tasks while conducting monitoring. The Navy will monitor the shutdown zone and disturbance zone before, during, and after pile driving, with observers located at the best practicable vantage points. Based on our requirements, the Navy would implement the following procedures for pile driving: MMOs would be located at the best vantage point(s) in order to properly see the entire shutdown zone and as much of the disturbance zone as possible. During all observation periods, observers will use binoculars and the naked eye to search continuously for marine mammals. If the shutdown zones are obscured by fog or poor lighting conditions, pile driving at that location will not be initiated until that zone is visible. Should such conditions arise while impact driving is underway, the activity would be halted. The shutdown and disturbance zones around the pile will be monitored for the presence of marine mammals before, during, and after any pile driving or removal activity. Individuals implementing the monitoring protocol will assess its effectiveness using an adaptive approach. Monitoring biologists will use their best professional judgment throughout implementation and seek improvements to these methods when deemed appropriate. Any modifications to protocol will be coordinated between NMFS and the Navy. Data Collection We require that observers use approved data forms. Among other pieces of information, the Navy will record detailed information about any implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, the Navy will attempt to distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the number of incidences of take. We require that, at a minimum, the following information be collected on the sighting forms: Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends; Construction activities occurring during each observation period; Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility); Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state); Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of marine mammals; Description of any observable marine mammal behavior patterns, including bearing and direction of travel, and if possible, the correlation to SPLs; Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point; Description of implementation of mitigation measures (e.g., shutdown or delay); Locations of all marine mammal observations; and Other human activity in the area. Reporting A draft report would be submitted to NMFS within 90 days of the completion of marine mammal monitoring, or sixty days prior to the requested date of issuance of any future IHA for projects at the same location, whichever comes first. The report will include marine mammal observations pre-activity, during-activity, and post-activity during pile driving days, and will also provide descriptions of any behavioral responses to construction activities by marine mammals and a complete description of all mitigation shutdowns and the results of those actions and an extrapolated total take estimate based on the number of marine mammals observed during the course of construction. A final report must be submitted within thirty days following resolution of comments on the draft report. Monitoring Results From Previously Authorized Activities The Navy complied with the mitigation and monitoring required under the previous authorization for the Wharf C-2 project. Marine mammal monitoring occurred before, during, and after each pile driving event. During the course of these activities, the Navy did not exceed the take levels authorized under the IHA. The Navy has summarized monitoring results to date in their application, and we will make the required monitoring report available to the public when submitted. Under the terms of the previous IHA, the Navy was required to conduct acoustic monitoring and to submit a report within 75 days of completion. Those results are not yet available but will be provided upon report submittal. As noted previously, the Navy has completed approximately seventy percent of steel pile installation required for the project, over the course of 28 in-water work days. During this time, 117 observations of bottlenose dolphins have occurred within the defined Level B harassment zone. No Atlantic spotted dolphins, or any other species, have been observed. [[Page 46559]] Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: ``. . . any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].'' All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment resulting from vibratory and impact pile driving and involving temporary changes in behavior. The proposed mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to minimize the possibility of injurious or lethal takes such that take by Level A harassment, serious injury, or mortality is considered discountable. However, it is unlikely that injurious or lethal takes would occur even in the absence of the planned mitigation and monitoring measures. If a marine mammal responds to a stimulus by changing its behavior (e.g., through relatively minor changes in locomotion direction/speed or vocalization behavior), the response may or may not constitute taking at the individual level, and is unlikely to affect the stock or the species as a whole. However, if a sound source displaces marine mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for a prolonged period, impacts on animals or on the stock or species could potentially be significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007). Given the many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types of impacts of sound on marine mammals, it is common practice to estimate how many animals are likely to be present within a particular distance of a given activity, or exposed to a particular level of sound. In practice, depending on the amount of information available to characterize daily and seasonal movement and distribution of affected marine mammals, it can be difficult to distinguish between the number of individuals harassed and the instances of harassment and, when duration of the activity is considered, it can result in a take estimate that overestimates the number of individuals harassed. In particular, for stationary activities, it is more likely that some smaller number of individuals may accrue a number of incidences of harassment per individual than for each incidence to accrue to a new individual, especially if those individuals display some degree of residency or site fidelity and the impetus to use the site (e.g., because of foraging opportunities) is stronger than the deterrence presented by the harassing activity. The turning basin is not important habitat for marine mammals, as it is a man-made, semi-enclosed basin with frequent industrial activity and regular maintenance dredging. The small area of ensonification extending out of the turning basin into nearshore waters is also not believed to be of any particular importance, nor is it considered an area frequented by marine mammals. Bottlenose dolphins may be observed at any time of year in estuarine and nearshore waters of the action area, but sightings of other species are rare. Therefore, behavioral disturbances that could result from anthropogenic sound associated with these activities are expected to affect only a relatively small number of individual marine mammals, although those effects could be recurring over the life of the project if the same individuals remain in the project vicinity. The Navy has requested authorization for the incidental taking of small numbers of bottlenose dolphins and Atlantic spotted dolphins in the Mayport turning basin and associated nearshore waters that may result from pile driving during construction activities associated with the project described previously in this document. In order to estimate the potential incidents of take that may occur incidental to the specified activity, we must first estimate the extent of the sound field that may be produced by the activity and then consider in combination with information about marine mammal density or abundance in the project area. We first provide information on applicable sound thresholds for determining effects to marine mammals before describing the information used in estimating the sound fields, the available marine mammal density or abundance information, and the method of estimating potential incidents of take. Sound Thresholds We use generic sound exposure thresholds to determine when an activity that produces sound might result in impacts to a marine mammal such that a take by harassment might occur. To date, no studies have been conducted that explicitly examine impacts to marine mammals from pile driving sounds or from which empirical sound thresholds have been established. These thresholds (Table 2) are used to estimate when harassment may occur (i.e., when an animal is exposed to levels equal to or exceeding the relevant criterion) in specific contexts; however, useful contextual information that may inform our assessment of effects is typically lacking and we consider these thresholds as step functions. NMFS is working to revise these acoustic guidelines; for more information on that process, please visit www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm. Table 2--Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Criterion Definition Threshold ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Level A harassment Injury (PTS-- 180 dB (cetaceans)/190 (underwater). any level dB (pinnipeds) (rms). above that which is known to cause TTS). Level B harassment Behavioral 160 dB (impulsive (underwater). disruption. source)/120 dB (continuous source) (rms). Level B harassment (airborne) Behavioral 90 dB (harbor seals)/100 disruption. dB (other pinnipeds) (unweighted). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Distance to Sound Thresholds Underwater Sound Propagation Formula--Pile driving generates underwater noise that can potentially result in disturbance to marine mammals in the project area. Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is: TL = B * log 10 (R1 /R2 ), Where: R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven pile, and R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the [[Page 46560]] initial measurement. This formula neglects loss due to scattering and absorption, which is assumed to be zero here. The degree to which underwater sound propagates away from a sound source is dependent on a variety of factors, most notably the water bathymetry and presence or absence of reflective or absorptive conditions including in-water structures and sediments. Spherical spreading occurs in a perfectly unobstructed (free-field) environment not limited by depth or water surface, resulting in a 6 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of distance from the source (20*log[range]). Cylindrical spreading occurs in an environment in which sound propagation is bounded by the water surface and sea bottom, resulting in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for each doubling of distance from the source (10*log[range]). A practical spreading value of fifteen is often used under conditions, such as at the NSM turning basin, where water increases with depth as the receiver moves away from the shoreline, resulting in an expected propagation environment that would lie between spherical and cylindrical spreading loss conditions. Practical spreading loss (4.5 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of distance) is assumed here. Underwater Sound--The intensity of pile driving sounds is greatly influenced by factors such as the type of piles, hammers, and the physical environment in which the activity takes place. A number of studies, primarily on the west coast, have measured sound produced during underwater pile driving projects. However, these data are largely for impact driving of steel pipe piles and concrete piles as well as vibratory driving of steel pipe piles. We know of no existing measurements for the specific pile types planned for use at NSM (i.e., king piles, paired sheet piles, plastic pipe piles), although some data exist for single sheet piles. Results of acoustic monitoring are not yet available for consideration here. It was therefore necessary to extrapolate from available data to determine reasonable source levels for this project. In order to determine reasonable SPLs and their associated effects on marine mammals that are likely to result from pile driving at NSM, the Navy first compared linear lengths (in terms of radiative surface length) of the pile types proposed for use with those for which measurements of underwater SPLs exist. For example, the total linear length of a king pile (with width of 17.87 in and height of 41.47 in) is equivalent to the circumference (i.e., linear length) of a 24-in diameter pipe pile. Please see Table 6-2 of the Navy's application for more detail on these comparisons. We recognize that these pile types may produce sound differently, given different radiative geometries, and that there may be differences in the frequency spectrum produced, but believe this to be the best available method of determining proxy source levels. We considered existing measurements from similar physical environments (sandy sediments and water depths greater than 15 ft) for impact and vibratory driving of 24-in steel pipe piles and for steel sheet piles. These studies, largely conducted by the Washington State Department of Transportation and the California Department of Transportation, show typical values around 160 dB for vibratory driving of 24-in pipe piles and sheet piles, and around 185-195 dB for impact driving of similar pipe piles (all measured at 10 m; e.g., Laughlin, 2005a, 2005b; Illingworth and Rodkin, 2010, 2012, 2013; CalTrans, 2012). For vibratory driving, a precautionary value of 163 dB (the highest representative value; CalTrans, 2012) was selected as a proxy source value for both sheet piles and king piles. For impact driving of both sheet piles and king piles (should it be required), a proxy source value of 189 dB (CalTrans, 2012) was selected for use in acoustic modeling based on similarity to the physical environment at NSM and because of the measurement location in mid-water column. No measurements are known to be available for vibratory driving of plastic polymer piles, so timber piles were considered as likely to be the most similar pile material. Although timber piles are typically installed via impact drivers, Laughlin (2011) reported a mean source measurement (at 16 m) for vibratory removal of timber piles. This value (150 dB) was selected as a proxy source value on the basis of similarity of materials between timber and polymer. CalTrans (2012) reports one dataset for impact driving of plastic piles (153 dB at 10 m). Please see Tables 6-3 and 6-4 in the Navy's application. All calculated distances to and the total area encompassed by the marine mammal sound thresholds are provided in Table 3. Table 3--Distances to Relevant Underwater Sound Thresholds and Areas of Ensonification ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Distance (m) Area (sq km) Pile type Method Threshold \1\ \2\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steel (sheet and king piles)...... Vibratory............ Level A harassment n/a 0 (180 dB). Level B harassment 7,356 2.9 (120 dB). Impact............... Level A harassment 40 0.004 (180 dB). Level B harassment 858 0.67 (160 dB). Polymeric (plastic fender piles).. Vibratory............ Level A harassment n/a 0 (180 dB). Level B harassment 1,585 0.88 (120 dB). Impact............... Level A harassment n/a 0 (180 dB). Level B harassment 3.4 0.00004 (160 dB). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Areas presented take into account attenuation and/or shadowing by land. Calculated distances to relevant thresholds cannot be reached in most directions form source piles. Please see Figures 6-1 through 6-3 in the Navy's application. The Mayport turning basin does not represent open water, or free field, conditions. Therefore, sounds would attenuate as per the confines of the basin, and may only reach the full estimated distances to the harassment thresholds via the narrow, east-facing entrance channel. Distances shown in Table 1 are estimated for free-field conditions, but areas are calculated per the actual conditions of the action area. See Figures 6-1 through 6-3 of the Navy's application for a depiction of areas in which each underwater sound threshold is predicted to occur at the project area due to pile driving. Marine Mammal Densities For all species, the best scientific information available was considered for use in the marine mammal take assessment calculations. Density value for the Atlantic spotted dolphin is from recent density estimates produced by Roberts et al. (2015); we use the highest [[Page 46561]] relevant seasonal density value (spring). Density for bottlenose dolphins is derived from site-specific surveys conducted by the Navy; it is not currently possible to identify observed individuals to stock. This survey effort consists of 24 half-day observation periods covering mornings and afternoons during four seasons (December 10-13, 2012, March 4-7, 2013, June 3-6, 2013, and September 9-12, 2013). During each observation period, two observers (a primary observer at an elevated observation point and a secondary observer at ground level) monitored for the presence of marine mammals in the turning basin (0.712 km\2\) and an additional grid east of the basin entrance. Observers tracked marine mammal movements and behavior within the observation area, with observations recorded for five-minute intervals every half-hour. Morning sessions typically ran from 7:00-11:30 and afternoon sessions from 1:00 to 5:30. Most observations were of individuals or pairs, although larger groups were occasionally observed (median number of dolphins observed ranged from 1-3.5 across seasons). Densities were calculated using observational data from the primary observer supplemented with data from the secondary observer for grids not visible by the primary observer. Season-specific density was then adjusted by applying a correction factor for observer error (i.e., perception bias). The seasonal densities range from 1.98603 (winter) to 4.15366 (summer) dolphins/km\2\. We conservatively use the largest density value to assess take, as the Navy does not have specific information about when in-water work may occur during the proposed period of validity. Description of Take Calculation The following assumptions are made when estimating potential incidents of take:All marine mammal individuals potentially available are assumed to be present within the relevant area, and thus incidentally taken; An individual can only be taken once during a 24-h period; and, There will be 27 total days of vibratory driving (seventeen days for steel piles and ten days for plastic piles) and twenty days of impact pile driving. Exposures to sound levels at or above the relevant thresholds equate to take, as defined by the MMPA. The estimation of marine mammal takes typically uses the following calculation: Exposure estimate = (n * ZOI) * days of total activity Where: n = density estimate used for each species/season ZOI = sound threshold ZOI area; the area encompassed by all locations where the SPLs equal or exceed the threshold being evaluated n * ZOI produces an estimate of the abundance of animals that could be present in the area for exposure, and is rounded to the nearest whole number before multiplying by days of total activity. The ZOI impact area is estimated using the relevant distances in Table 3, taking into consideration the possible affected area with attenuation due to the constraints of the basin. Because the basin restricts sound from propagating outward, with the exception of the east-facing entrance channel, the radial distances to thresholds are not generally reached. There are a number of reasons why estimates of potential incidents of take may be conservative, assuming that available density or abundance estimates and estimated ZOI areas are accurate. We assume, in the absence of information supporting a more refined conclusion, that the output of the calculation represents the number of individuals that may be taken by the specified activity. In fact, in the context of stationary activities such as pile driving and in areas where resident animals may be present, this number more realistically represents the number of incidents of take that may accrue to a smaller number of individuals. While pile driving can occur any day throughout the in- water work window, and the analysis is conducted on a per day basis, only a fraction of that time (typically a matter of hours on any given day) is actually spent pile driving. The potential effectiveness of mitigation measures in reducing the number of takes is typically not quantified in the take estimation process. For these reasons, these take estimates may be conservative. The quantitative exercise described above indicates that no incidents of Level A harassment would be expected, independent of the implementation of required mitigation measures. The twenty days of contingency impact driving considered here could include either steel or plastic piles on any of the days; because the ZOI for impact driving of steel piles subsumes the ZOI for impact driving of plastic piles, we consider only the former here. See Table 4 for total estimated incidents of take. Table 4--Calculations for Incidental Take Estimation ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Total proposed Species n (animals/ Activity n * ZOI \1\ authorized authorized km\2\) takes \2\ takes ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bottlenose dolphin........... 4.15366......... Impact driving 3 60 \3\ 304 (steel). Vibratory 12 204 driving (steel). Vibratory 4 40 driving (plastic). Atlantic spotted dolphin..... 0.005402 Impact driving 0 0 0 (spring). (steel). Vibratory 0 0 driving (steel). Vibratory 0 0 driving (plastic). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See Table 3 for relevant ZOIs. The product of this calculation is rounded to the nearest whole number. \2\ The product of n * ZOI is multiplied by the total number of activity-specific days to estimate the number of takes. \3\ It is impossible to estimate from available information which stock these takes may accrue to. Analyses and Preliminary Determinations Negligible Impact Analysis NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``. . . an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.'' A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of Level B harassment takes alone is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be ``taken'' [[Page 46562]] through behavioral harassment, we consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat. Pile driving activities associated with the wharf construction project, as outlined previously, have the potential to disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may result in take, in the form of Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) only, from underwater sounds generated from pile driving. Potential takes could occur if individuals of these species are present in the ensonified zone when pile driving is happening. No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated given the nature of the activities and measures designed to minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for these outcomes is minimized through the construction method and the implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Specifically, vibratory hammers will be the primary method of installation (impact driving is included only as a contingency and is not expected to be required), and this activity does not have the potential to cause injury to marine mammals due to the relatively low source levels produced (less than 180 dB) and the lack of potentially injurious source characteristics. Impact pile driving produces short, sharp pulses with higher peak levels and much sharper rise time to reach those peaks. If impact driving is necessary, implementation of soft start and shutdown zones significantly reduces any possibility of injury. Given sufficient ``notice'' through use of soft start (for impact driving), marine mammals are expected to move away from a sound source that is annoying prior to its becoming potentially injurious. Environmental conditions in the confined and protected Mayport turning basin mean that marine mammal detection ability by trained observers is high, enabling a high rate of success in implementation of shutdowns to avoid injury. Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 2006; HDR, Inc., 2012). Most likely, individuals will simply move away from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the areas of pile driving, although even this reaction has been observed primarily only in association with impact pile driving. The pile driving activities analyzed here are similar to, or less impactful than, numerous other construction activities conducted in San Francisco Bay and in the Puget Sound region, which have taken place with no reported injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long-term adverse consequences from behavioral harassment. Repeated exposures of individuals to levels of sound that may cause Level B harassment are unlikely to result in hearing impairment or to significantly disrupt foraging behavior. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in viability for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B harassment will be reduced to the level of least practicable impact through use of mitigation measures described herein and, if sound produced by project activities is sufficiently disturbing, animals are likely to simply avoid the turning basin while the activity is occurring. In summary, this negligible impact analysis is founded on the following factors: (1) The possibility of injury, serious injury, or mortality may reasonably be considered discountable; (2) the anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior; (3) the absence of any significant habitat within the project area, including known areas or features of special significance for foraging or reproduction; (4) the presumed efficacy of the proposed mitigation measures in reducing the effects of the specified activity to the level of least practicable impact. In addition, these stocks are not listed under the ESA, although coastal bottlenose dolphins are designated as depleted under the MMPA. In combination, we believe that these factors, as well as the available body of evidence from other similar activities, demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified activity will have only short-term effects on individuals. The specified activity is not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival and will therefore not result in population-level impacts. Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, we preliminarily find that the total marine mammal take from the Navy's wharf construction activities will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks. Small Numbers Analysis As described previously, of the 304 incidents of behavioral harassment predicted to occur for bottlenose dolphin, we have no information allowing us to parse those predicted incidents amongst the three stocks of bottlenose dolphin that may occur in the project area. Therefore, we assessed the total number of predicted incidents of take against the best abundance estimate for each stock, as though the total would occur for the stock in question. For two of the bottlenose dolphin stocks, the total predicted number of incidents of take authorized would be considered small--approximately three percent for the southern migratory stock and less than 25 percent for the northern Florida coastal stock--even if each estimated taking occurred to a new individual. This is an extremely unlikely scenario as, for bottlenose dolphins in estuarine and nearshore waters, there is likely to be some overlap in individuals present day-to-day. The total number of authorized takes proposed for bottlenose dolphins, if assumed to accrue solely to new individuals of the JES stock, is higher relative to the total stock abundance, which is currently considered unknown. However, these numbers represent the estimated incidents of take, not the number of individuals taken. That is, it is highly likely that a relatively small subset of JES bottlenose dolphins would be harassed by project activities. JES bottlenose dolphins range from Cumberland Sound at the Georgia-Florida border south to approximately Palm Coast, Florida, an area spanning over 120 linear km of coastline and including habitat consisting of complex inshore and estuarine waterways. JES dolphins, divided by Caldwell (2001) into Northern and Southern groups, show strong site fidelity and, although members of both groups have been observed outside their preferred areas, it is likely that the majority of JES dolphins would not occur within waters ensonified by project activities. Further, although the largest area of ensonification is predicted to extend up to 7.5 km offshore from NSM, estuarine dolphins are generally considered as restricted to inshore waters and only 1-2 km offshore. In summary, JES dolphins are (1) known to form two groups and exhibit strong site fidelity [[Page 46563]] (i.e., individuals do not generally range throughout the recognized overall JES stock range); (2) would not occur at all in a significant portion of the larger ZOI extending offshore from NSM; and (3) the specified activity will be stationary within an enclosed basin not recognized as an area of any special significance that would serve to attract or aggregate dolphins. We therefore believe that the estimated numbers of takes, were they to occur, likely represent repeated exposures of a much smaller number of bottlenose dolphins and that these estimated incidents of take represent small numbers of bottlenose dolphins. Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring measures, we preliminarily find that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the populations of the affected species or stocks. Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated by this action. Therefore, we have determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes. Endangered Species Act (ESA) No marine mammal species listed under the ESA are expected to be affected by these activities. Therefore, we have determined that section 7 consultation under the ESA are not required. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the Navy prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) to consider the direct, indirect and cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from the pier maintenance project. NMFS made the Navy's EA available to the public for review and comment, in relation to its suitability for adoption by NMFS in order to assess the impacts to the human environment of issuance of an IHA to the Navy. Also in compliance with NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well as NOAA Administrative Order 216- 6, NMFS has reviewed the Navy's EA, determined it to be sufficient, and adopted that EA and signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on November 20, 2013. We have reviewed the Navy's application for a renewed IHA for ongoing construction activities for 2015-16 and preliminary results of required marine mammal monitoring. Based on that review, we have determined that the proposed action is very similar to that considered in the previous IHA. In addition, no significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns have been identified. Thus, we have determined preliminarily that the preparation of a new or supplemental NEPA document is not necessary, and will, after review of public comments determine whether or not to reaffirm our 2013 FONSI. The 2013 NEPA documents are available for review at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. Proposed Authorization As a result of these preliminary determinations, we propose to authorize the take of marine mammals incidental to the Navy's wharf project, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. Specific language from the proposed IHA is provided next. This section contains a draft of the IHA. The wording contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if issued). 1. This Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) is valid for one year from the date of issuance. 2. This IHA is valid only for pile driving activities associated with the Wharf C-2 Recapitalization Project at Naval Station Mayport, Florida. 3. General Conditions (a) A copy of this IHA must be in the possession of the Navy, its designees, and work crew personnel operating under the authority of this IHA. (b) The species authorized for taking is the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). (c) The taking, by Level B harassment only, is limited to the species listed in condition 3(b). See Table 1 for numbers of take authorized. Table 1--Authorized Take Numbers ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Authorized Species take ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bottlenose dolphin...................................... 304 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (d) The taking by injury (Level A harassment), serious injury, or death of the species listed in condition 3(b) of the Authorization or any taking of any other species of marine mammal is prohibited and may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA. (e) The Navy shall conduct briefings between construction supervisors and crews, marine mammal monitoring team, and Navy staff prior to the start of all pile driving activity, and when new personnel join the work, in order to explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and operational procedures. 4. Mitigation Measures The holder of this Authorization is required to implement the following mitigation measures: (a) For all pile driving, the Navy shall implement a minimum shutdown zone of 15 m radius around the pile. If a marine mammal comes within or approaches the shutdown zone, such operations shall cease. For impact driving of steel piles, the minimum shutdown zone shall be of 40 m radius. (b) The Navy shall establish monitoring locations as described below. Please also refer to the Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan (Monitoring Plan; attached). i. For all pile driving activities, a minimum of two observers shall be deployed, with one positioned to achieve optimal monitoring of the shutdown zone and the second positioned to achieve optimal monitoring of surrounding waters of the turning basin, the entrance to that basin, and portions of the Atlantic Ocean. If practicable, the second observer should be deployed to an elevated position, preferably opposite Wharf C-2 and with clear sight lines to the wharf and out the entrance channel. ii. These observers shall record all observations of marine mammals, regardless of distance from the pile being driven, as well as behavior and potential behavioral reactions of the animals. Observations within the turning basin shall be distinguished from those in the entrance channel and nearshore waters of the Atlantic Ocean. iii. All observers shall be equipped for communication of marine mammal observations amongst themselves and to other relevant personnel (e.g., those necessary to effect activity delay or shutdown). (c) Monitoring shall take place from fifteen minutes prior to initiation of pile driving activity through thirty minutes post- completion of pile driving activity. Pre-activity monitoring shall be conducted for fifteen minutes to ensure that the shutdown zone is clear of marine mammals, and pile driving may commence when observers have [[Page 46564]] declared the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals. In the event of a delay or shutdown of activity resulting from marine mammals in the shutdown zone, animals shall be allowed to remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition) and their behavior shall be monitored and documented. Monitoring shall occur throughout the time required to drive a pile. The shutdown zone must be determined to be clear during periods of good visibility (i.e., the entire shutdown zone and surrounding waters must be visible to the naked eye). (d) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone, all pile driving activities at that location shall be halted. If pile driving is halted or delayed due to the presence of a marine mammal, the activity may not commence or resume until either the animal has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone or fifteen minutes have passed without re-detection of the animal. (e) Monitoring shall be conducted by qualified observers, as described in the Monitoring Plan. Trained observers shall be placed from the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for marine mammals and implement shutdown or delay procedures when applicable through communication with the equipment operator. Observer training must be provided prior to project start and in accordance with the monitoring plan, and shall include instruction on species identification (sufficient to distinguish the species listed in 3(b)), description and categorization of observed behaviors and interpretation of behaviors that may be construed as being reactions to the specified activity, proper completion of data forms, and other basic components of biological monitoring, including tracking of observed animals or groups of animals such that repeat sound exposures may be attributed to individuals (to the extent possible). (f) The Navy shall use soft start techniques recommended by NMFS for impact pile driving. Soft start requires contractors to provide an initial set of strikes at reduced energy, followed by a thirty-second waiting period, then two subsequent reduced energy strike sets. Soft start shall be implemented at the start of each day's impact pile driving and at any time following cessation of impact pile driving for a period of thirty minutes or longer. (g) Pile driving shall only be conducted during daylight hours. 5. Monitoring The holder of this Authorization is required to conduct marine mammal monitoring during pile driving activity. Marine mammal monitoring and reporting shall be conducted in accordance with the Monitoring Plan. (a) The Navy shall collect sighting data and behavioral responses to pile driving for marine mammal species observed in the region of activity during the period of activity. All observers shall be trained in marine mammal identification and behaviors, and shall have no other construction-related tasks while conducting monitoring. (b) For all marine mammal monitoring, the information shall be recorded as described in the Monitoring Plan. 6. Reporting The holder of this Authorization is required to: (a) Submit a draft report on all monitoring conducted under the IHA within ninety days of the completion of marine mammal monitoring, or sixty days prior to the issuance of any subsequent IHA for projects at NSM, whichever comes first. A final report shall be prepared and submitted within thirty days following resolution of comments on the draft report from NMFS. This report must contain the informational elements described in the Monitoring Plan, at minimum (see attached), and shall also include: i. Detailed information about any implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting behavior of the animal, if any. ii. Description of attempts to distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the number of incidents of take, such as ability to track groups or individuals. iii. An estimated total take estimate extrapolated from the number of marine mammals observed during the course of construction activities, if necessary. (b) Reporting injured or dead marine mammals: i. In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by this IHA, such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury, or mortality, Navy shall immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Southeast Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. The report must include the following information: A. Time and date of the incident; B. Description of the incident; C. Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility); D. Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 hours preceding the incident; E. Species identification or description of the animal(s) involved; F. Fate of the animal(s); and G. Photographs or video footage of the animal(s). Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS will work with Navy to determine what measures are necessary to minimize the likelihood of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Navy may not resume their activities until notified by NMFS. ii. In the event that Navy discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead observer determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (e.g., in less than a moderate state of decomposition), Navy shall immediately report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Southeast Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. The report must include the same information identified in 6(b)(i) of this IHA. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS will work with Navy to determine whether additional mitigation measures or modifications to the activities are appropriate. iii. In the event that Navy discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead observer determines that the injury or death is not associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, scavenger damage), Navy shall report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Southeast Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS, within 24 hours of the discovery. Navy shall provide photographs or video footage or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS. 7. This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein, or if NMFS determines the authorized taking is having more than a negligible impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals. Request for Public Comments We request comment on our analyses, the draft authorization, and any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHAs for Navy's wharf construction activities. Please include with your comments any supporting data or literature citations to [[Page 46565]] help inform our final decision on Navy's request for an MMPA authorization. Dated: July 31, 2015. Angela Somma, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2015-19184 Filed 8-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Notices 46545
September 2015. The intent of the and September 2012, January and SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request
meeting is to consider options for the September 2013, April and September from the U.S. Navy (Navy) for
conservation and management of 2014 and March 2015), among other authorization to take marine mammals
Atlantic HMS. The meeting is open to things. incidental to construction activities as
the public. The intent of this meeting is to part of a wharf recapitalization project.
DATES: The AP meeting and webinar consider alternatives for the Pursuant to the Marine Mammal
will be held from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on conservation and management of all Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is
Wednesday, September 9, 2015; and Atlantic tunas, swordfish, billfish, and requesting public comment on its
from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. on Thursday, shark fisheries. We anticipate discussing proposal to issue an incidental
September 10, 2015. Final Amendment 6 to the 2006 harassment authorization (IHA) to the
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Consolidated HMS FMP on the future of Navy to take, by Level B harassment
the Sheraton Silver Spring, 8777 shark fishery, providing updates on only, during the specified activity.
Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, MD Amendment 5b on dusky shark DATES: Comments and information must
20910. The meeting presentations will management and Amendment 9 on be received no later than September 4,
also be available via WebEx webinar/ smoothhound shark management, 2015.
conference call. reviewing the results of the ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposal
On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, smoothhound shark stock assessment, should be addressed to Jolie Harrison,
the conference call information is phone discussing implementation of Final Chief, Permits and Conservation
number 1–800–857–6552; Participant Amendment 7 on bluefin tuna Division, Office of Protected Resources,
Code: 8099565; and the webinar event management measures, as well as National Marine Fisheries Service.
address is: https:// discussing the Final HMS Essential Fish Physical comments should be sent to
noaaevents2.webex.com/noaaevents2/ Habitat 5-Year Review and next steps. 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,
onstage/g.php?d=393951018&t=a; event The meeting will also include MD 20910 and electronic comments
password: NOAA. discussion of a survey of Atlantic HMS should be sent to ITP.Laws@noaa.gov.
On Thursday, September 10, 2015, the tournaments that is in development, and Instructions: NMFS is not responsible
conference call information is phone providing updates on various topics for comments sent by any other method,
number 1–800–857–6552; Participant relevant to Atlantic HMS fisheries to any other address or individual, or
Code: 8099565; and the webinar event management. received after the end of the comment
address is: https:// Additional information on the period. Comments received
noaaevents2.webex.com/noaaevents2/ meeting and a copy of the draft agenda electronically, including all
onstage/g.php?d=395887510&t=a; event will be posted prior to the meeting at: attachments, must not exceed a 25-
password: NOAA. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/ megabyte file size. Attachments to
Participants are strongly encouraged advisory_panels/hms_ap/meetings/ap_ electronic comments will be accepted in
to log/dial in fifteen minutes prior to the meetings.html. Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF
meeting. NMFS will show the Special Accommodations file formats only. All comments
presentations via webinar and allow received are a part of the public record
public comment during identified times This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for and will generally be posted to the
on the agenda. Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
sign language interpretation or other
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: permits/incidental/construction.htm
auxiliary aids should be directed to
LeAnn Hogan or Margo Schulze-Haugen without change. All personal identifying
LeAnn Hogan at (301) 427–8503 at least
at (301) 427–8503. information (e.g., name, address)
7 days prior to the meeting.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The voluntarily submitted by the commenter
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Dated: July 30, 2015. may be publicly accessible. Do not
Conservation and Management Act, 16 Emily H. Menashes, submit confidential business
U.S.C. 1801 et seq., as amended by the Acting Director, Office of Sustainable information or otherwise sensitive or
Sustainable Fisheries Act, Public Law Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. protected information.
104–297, provided for the establishment [FR Doc. 2015–19148 Filed 8–4–15; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
of an AP to assist in the collection and BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Laws, Office of Protected Resources,
evaluation of information relevant to the NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
development of any Fishery SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Management Plan (FMP) or FMP DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
amendment for Atlantic HMS. NMFS Availability
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
consults with and considers the An electronic copy of the Navy’s
Administration
comments and views of AP members application and supporting documents,
when preparing and implementing RIN 0648–XE056 as well as a list of the references cited
FMPs or FMP amendments for Atlantic in this document, may be obtained by
tunas, swordfish, billfish, and sharks. Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to visiting the Internet at:
The AP has previously consulted with Specified Activities; Taking Marine www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
NMFS on: Amendment 1 to the Billfish Mammals Incidental to a Wharf incidental/construction.htm. In case of
FMP (April 1999); the HMS FMP (April Recapitalization Project
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
problems accessing these documents,
1999); Amendment 1 to the HMS FMP AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries please call the contact listed above.
(December 2003); the Consolidated HMS Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
FMP (October 2006); and Amendments National Environmental Policy Act
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
1, 2, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 6, 7, 8, and 9 to the Commerce. The Navy prepared an Environmental
2006 Atlantic Consolidated HMS FMP Assessment (EA; 2013) for this project.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
(April and October 2008, February and We subsequently adopted the EA and
harassment authorization; request for
September 2009, May and September signed our own Finding of No
comments.
2010, April and September 2011, March Significant Impact (FONSI) prior to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_46695/page/1.svg)
![46546 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Notices
issuing the first IHA for this project, in NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible stated above (79 FR 27863; May 15,
accordance with NEPA and the impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘. . . an 2014).
regulations published by the Council on impact resulting from the specified
Description of the Specified Activity
Environmental Quality. Information in activity that cannot be reasonably
the Navy’s application, the Navy’s EA, expected to, and is not reasonably likely Overview
and this notice collectively provide the to, adversely affect the species or stock Wharf C–2 is a single level, general
environmental information related to through effects on annual rates of purpose berthing wharf constructed in
proposed issuance of this IHA for public recruitment or survival.’’ Except with 1960. The wharf is one of NSM’s two
review and comment. All documents are respect to certain activities not pertinent primary deep-draft berths and is one of
available at the aforementioned Web here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines the primary ordnance handling wharfs.
site. We will review all comments ‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘. . . any act of The wharf is a diaphragm steel sheet
submitted in response to this notice as pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) pile cell structure with a concrete apron,
we complete the NEPA process, has the potential to injure a marine partial concrete encasement of the
including a decision of whether to mammal or marine mammal stock in the piling and an asphalt paved deck. The
reaffirm the existing FONSI, prior to a wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has wharf is currently in poor condition due
final decision on the incidental take the potential to disturb a marine to advanced deterioration of the steel
authorization request. mammal or marine mammal stock in the sheeting and lack of corrosion
wild by causing disruption of behavioral protection, and this structural
Background
patterns, including, but not limited to, deterioration has resulted in the
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, institution of load restrictions within 60
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct feeding, or sheltering [Level B ft of the wharf face. The purpose of this
the Secretary of Commerce to allow, harassment].’’ project is to complete necessary repairs
upon request by U.S. citizens who to Wharf C–2. Please refer to Appendix
Summary of Request
engage in a specified activity (other than A of the Navy’s application for photos
commercial fishing) within a specified On January 28, 2015, we received a of existing damage and deterioration at
area, the incidental, but not intentional, request from the Navy for authorization the wharf, and to Appendix B for a
taking of small numbers of marine to take marine mammals incidental to contractor schematic of the project plan.
mammals, providing that certain pile driving in association with the
findings are made and the necessary Wharf C–2 recapitalization project at Dates and Duration
prescriptions are established. Naval Station Mayport, Florida (NSM). The total project was expected to
The incidental taking of small That request was modified on April 17 require a maximum of fifty days of in-
numbers of marine mammals may be and the Navy submitted a revised water vibratory pile driving work over a
allowed only if NMFS (through version of the request on July 24, 2015, twelve-month period, with an
authority delegated by the Secretary) which we deemed adequate and additional twenty days of impact pile
finds that the total taking by the complete. In-water work associated with driving included in the specified
specified activity during the specified the project is expected to be completed activity as a contingency for a total of
time period will (i) have a negligible within the one-year timeframe of the seventy days in-water pile driving.
impact on the species or stock(s) and (ii) proposed IHA, which would be valid for Based on work completed to date and in
not have an unmitigable adverse impact one year from the date of issuance. consideration of the number of piles yet
on the availability of the species or The use of both vibratory and impact to be driven and pile production rates
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where pile driving is expected to produce to date, the Navy estimates that
relevant). Further, the permissible underwater sound at levels that have the remaining work may require 47 days in
methods of taking and requirements potential to result in behavioral total.
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring harassment of marine mammals. Two
and reporting of such taking must be set species of marine mammal have the Specific Geographic Region
forth, either in specific regulations or in potential to be affected by the specified NSM is located in northeastern
an authorization. activities: Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops Florida, at the mouth of the St. Johns
The allowance of such incidental truncatus truncatus) and Atlantic River and adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean
taking under section 101(a)(5)(A), by spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis). (see Figures 2–1 and 2–2 of the Navy’s
harassment, serious injury, death, or a These species may occur year-round in application). The St. Johns River is the
combination thereof, requires that the action area. However, we have longest river in Florida, with the final
regulations be established. determined that incidental take of 35 mi flowing through the city of
Subsequently, a Letter of Authorization spotted dolphins is not reasonably Jacksonville. This portion of the river is
may be issued pursuant to the likely and do not propose to authorize significant for commercial shipping and
prescriptions established in such such take. military use. At the mouth of the river,
regulations, providing that the level of This is expected to be the second and near the action area, the Atlantic Ocean
taking will be consistent with the final year of in-water work associated is the dominant influence and typical
findings made for the total taking with the Wharf C–2 project. This would salinities are above 30 ppm. Outside the
allowable under the specific regulations. be the second such IHA, if issued, river mouth, in nearshore waters,
Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may following the IHA issued effective from moderate oceanic currents tend to flow
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
authorize such incidental taking by September 1, 2014, through August 31, southward parallel to the coast. Sea
harassment only, for periods of not more 2015 (78 FR 71566; November 29, 2013). surface temperatures range from around
than one year, pursuant to requirements Please note that the previous IHA was 16 °C in winter to 28 °C in summer.
and conditions contained within an initially issued with effective dates from The specific action area consists of
IHA. The establishment of prescriptions December 1, 2013, through November the NSM turning basin, an area of
through either specific regulations or an 30, 2014. However, no work was approximately 2,000 by 3,000 ft
authorization requires notice and conducted during this period and the containing ship berthing facilities at
opportunity for public comment. effective dates were changed to those sixteen locations along wharves around
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_46695/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Notices 46553
mammals are able to hear. Current data Acoustic Effects, Underwater at certain frequency ranges (Kastak et
indicate that not all marine mammal Potential Effects of Pile Driving al., 1999; Schlundt et al., 2000;
species have equal hearing capabilities Sound—The effects of sounds from pile Finneran et al., 2002, 2005). TS can be
(e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok driving might result in one or more of permanent (PTS), in which case the loss
and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, the following: Temporary or permanent of hearing sensitivity is not recoverable,
2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. hearing impairment, non-auditory or temporary (TTS), in which case the
(2007) recommended that marine physical or physiological effects, animal’s hearing threshold would
mammals be divided into functional behavioral disturbance, and masking recover over time (Southall et al., 2007).
hearing groups based on measured or (Richardson et al., 1995; Gordon et al., Marine mammals depend on acoustic
estimated hearing ranges on the basis of 2004; Nowacek et al., 2007; Southall et cues for vital biological functions, (e.g.,
available behavioral data, audiograms al., 2007). The effects of pile driving on orientation, communication, finding
derived using auditory evoked potential marine mammals are dependent on prey, avoiding predators); thus, TTS
techniques, anatomical modeling, and may result in reduced fitness in survival
several factors, including the size, type,
other data. The lower and/or upper and reproduction. However, this
and depth of the animal; the depth,
frequencies for some of these functional depends on the frequency and duration
intensity, and duration of the pile
hearing groups have been modified from of TTS, as well as the biological context
driving sound; the depth of the water
those designated by Southall et al. in which it occurs. TTS of limited
column; the substrate of the habitat; the
(2007). The functional groups and the duration, occurring in a frequency range
standoff distance between the pile and
associated frequencies are indicated that does not coincide with that used for
the animal; and the sound propagation
below (note that these frequency ranges recognition of important acoustic cues,
properties of the environment. Impacts
do not necessarily correspond to the would have little to no effect on an
to marine mammals from pile driving
range of best hearing, which varies by animal’s fitness. Repeated sound
activities are expected to result exposure that leads to TTS could cause
species):
• Low-frequency cetaceans primarily from acoustic pathways. As PTS. PTS constitutes injury, but TTS
(mysticetes): Functional hearing is such, the degree of effect is intrinsically does not (Southall et al., 2007). The
estimated to occur between related to the received level and following subsections discuss in
approximately 7 Hz and 25 kHz duration of the sound exposure, which somewhat more detail the possibilities
(extended from 22 kHz; Watkins, 1986; are in turn influenced by the distance of TTS, PTS, and non-auditory physical
Au et al., 2006; Lucifredi and Stein, between the animal and the source. The effects.
2007; Ketten and Mountain, 2009; further away from the source, the less Temporary Threshold Shift—TTS is
Tubelli et al., 2012); intense the exposure should be. The the mildest form of hearing impairment
• Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger substrate and depth of the habitat affect that can occur during exposure to a
toothed whales, beaked whales, and the sound propagation properties of the strong sound (Kryter, 1985). While
most delphinids): Functional hearing is environment. Shallow environments are experiencing TTS, the hearing threshold
estimated to occur between typically more structurally complex, rises, and a sound must be stronger in
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz; which leads to rapid sound attenuation. order to be heard. In terrestrial
• High-frequency cetaceans In addition, substrates that are soft (e.g., mammals, TTS can last from minutes or
(porpoises, river dolphins, and members sand) would absorb or attenuate the hours to days (in cases of strong TTS).
of the genera Kogia and sound more readily than hard substrates For sound exposures at or somewhat
Cephalorhynchus; now considered to (e.g., rock) which may reflect the above the TTS threshold, hearing
include two members of the genus acoustic wave. Soft porous substrates sensitivity in both terrestrial and marine
Lagenorhynchus on the basis of recent would also likely require less time to mammals recovers rapidly after
echolocation data and genetic data drive the pile, and possibly less forceful exposure to the sound ends. Few data
[May-Collado and Agnarsson, 2006; equipment, which would ultimately on sound levels and durations necessary
Kyhn et al. 2009, 2010; Tougaard et al. decrease the intensity of the acoustic to elicit mild TTS have been obtained
2010]): Functional hearing is estimated source. for marine mammals, and none of the
to occur between approximately 200 Hz In the absence of mitigation, impacts published data concern TTS elicited by
and 180 kHz; and to marine species would be expected to exposure to multiple pulses of sound.
• Pinnipeds in water: Functional result from physiological and behavioral Available data on TTS in marine
hearing is estimated to occur between responses to both the type and strength mammals are summarized in Southall et
approximately 75 Hz to 100 kHz for of the acoustic signature (Viada et al., al. (2007).
Phocidae (true seals) and between 100 2008). The type and severity of Given the available data, the received
Hz and 40 kHz for Otariidae (eared behavioral impacts are more difficult to level of a single pulse (with no
seals), with the greatest sensitivity define due to limited studies addressing frequency weighting) might need to be
between approximately 700 Hz and 20 the behavioral effects of impulsive approximately 186 dB re 1 mPa2-s (i.e.,
kHz. The pinniped functional hearing sounds on marine mammals. Potential 186 dB sound exposure level [SEL] or
group was modified from Southall et al. effects from impulsive sound sources approximately 221–226 dB p-p [peak])
(2007) on the basis of data indicating can range in severity from effects such in order to produce brief, mild TTS.
that phocid species have consistently as behavioral disturbance or tactile Exposure to several strong pulses that
demonstrated an extended frequency perception to physical discomfort, slight each have received levels near 190 dB
range of hearing compared to otariids, injury of the internal organs and the rms (175–180 dB SEL) might result in
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
especially in the higher frequency range auditory system, or mortality (Yelverton cumulative exposure of approximately
(Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., et al., 1973). 186 dB SEL and thus slight TTS in a
2009; Reichmuth et al., 2013). Hearing Impairment and Other small odontocete, assuming the TTS
Two cetacean species are expected to Physical Effects—Marine mammals threshold is (to a first approximation) a
potentially be affected by the specified exposed to high intensity sound function of the total received pulse
activity. The bottlenose and Atlantic repeatedly or for prolonged periods can energy.
spotted dolphins are classified as mid- experience hearing threshold shift (TS), The above TTS information for
frequency cetaceans. which is the loss of hearing sensitivity odontocetes is derived from studies on
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_46695/page/9.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Notices 46559
Estimated Take by Incidental to be present within a particular small numbers of bottlenose dolphins
Harassment distance of a given activity, or exposed and Atlantic spotted dolphins in the
Except with respect to certain to a particular level of sound. In Mayport turning basin and associated
activities not pertinent here, section practice, depending on the amount of nearshore waters that may result from
3(18) of the MMPA defines information available to characterize pile driving during construction
‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘. . . any act of daily and seasonal movement and activities associated with the project
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) distribution of affected marine described previously in this document.
has the potential to injure a marine mammals, it can be difficult to In order to estimate the potential
mammal or marine mammal stock in the distinguish between the number of incidents of take that may occur
wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has individuals harassed and the instances incidental to the specified activity, we
the potential to disturb a marine of harassment and, when duration of the must first estimate the extent of the
mammal or marine mammal stock in the activity is considered, it can result in a sound field that may be produced by the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral take estimate that overestimates the activity and then consider in
patterns, including, but not limited to, number of individuals harassed. In combination with information about
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, particular, for stationary activities, it is marine mammal density or abundance
feeding, or sheltering [Level B more likely that some smaller number of in the project area. We first provide
harassment].’’ individuals may accrue a number of information on applicable sound
All anticipated takes would be by incidences of harassment per individual thresholds for determining effects to
Level B harassment resulting from than for each incidence to accrue to a marine mammals before describing the
vibratory and impact pile driving and new individual, especially if those information used in estimating the
involving temporary changes in individuals display some degree of sound fields, the available marine
behavior. The proposed mitigation and residency or site fidelity and the mammal density or abundance
monitoring measures are expected to impetus to use the site (e.g., because of information, and the method of
minimize the possibility of injurious or foraging opportunities) is stronger than estimating potential incidents of take.
lethal takes such that take by Level A the deterrence presented by the
harassing activity. Sound Thresholds
harassment, serious injury, or mortality
is considered discountable. However, it The turning basin is not important We use generic sound exposure
is unlikely that injurious or lethal takes habitat for marine mammals, as it is a thresholds to determine when an
would occur even in the absence of the man-made, semi-enclosed basin with activity that produces sound might
planned mitigation and monitoring frequent industrial activity and regular result in impacts to a marine mammal
measures. maintenance dredging. The small area of such that a take by harassment might
If a marine mammal responds to a ensonification extending out of the occur. To date, no studies have been
stimulus by changing its behavior (e.g., turning basin into nearshore waters is conducted that explicitly examine
through relatively minor changes in also not believed to be of any particular impacts to marine mammals from pile
locomotion direction/speed or importance, nor is it considered an area driving sounds or from which empirical
vocalization behavior), the response frequented by marine mammals. sound thresholds have been established.
may or may not constitute taking at the Bottlenose dolphins may be observed at These thresholds (Table 2) are used to
individual level, and is unlikely to any time of year in estuarine and estimate when harassment may occur
affect the stock or the species as a nearshore waters of the action area, but (i.e., when an animal is exposed to
whole. However, if a sound source sightings of other species are rare. levels equal to or exceeding the relevant
displaces marine mammals from an Therefore, behavioral disturbances that criterion) in specific contexts; however,
important feeding or breeding area for a could result from anthropogenic sound useful contextual information that may
prolonged period, impacts on animals or associated with these activities are inform our assessment of effects is
on the stock or species could potentially expected to affect only a relatively small typically lacking and we consider these
be significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, number of individual marine mammals, thresholds as step functions. NMFS is
2007; Weilgart, 2007). Given the many although those effects could be working to revise these acoustic
uncertainties in predicting the quantity recurring over the life of the project if guidelines; for more information on that
and types of impacts of sound on the same individuals remain in the process, please visit
marine mammals, it is common practice project vicinity. The Navy has requested www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/
to estimate how many animals are likely authorization for the incidental taking of guidelines.htm.
TABLE 2—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA
Criterion Definition Threshold
Level A harassment (underwater) ........ Injury (PTS—any level above that 180 dB (cetaceans)/190 dB (pinnipeds) (rms).
which is known to cause TTS).
Level B harassment (underwater) ........ Behavioral disruption ........................... 160 dB (impulsive source)/120 dB (continuous source) (rms).
Level B harassment (airborne) ............. Behavioral disruption ........................... 90 dB (harbor seals)/100 dB (other pinnipeds) (unweighted).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Distance to Sound Thresholds in acoustic intensity as an acoustic The general formula for underwater TL
pressure wave propagates out from a is:
Underwater Sound Propagation source. TL parameters vary with
Formula—Pile driving generates TL = B * log10(R1/R2),
frequency, temperature, sea conditions,
underwater noise that can potentially Where:
current, source and receiver depth,
result in disturbance to marine R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from
water depth, water chemistry, and
mammals in the project area. the driven pile, and
Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease bottom composition and topography. R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_46695/page/15.svg)
![46560 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Notices
initial measurement. are largely for impact driving of steel Washington State Department of
This formula neglects loss due to pipe piles and concrete piles as well as Transportation and the California
scattering and absorption, which is vibratory driving of steel pipe piles. We Department of Transportation, show
assumed to be zero here. The degree to know of no existing measurements for typical values around 160 dB for
which underwater sound propagates the specific pile types planned for use vibratory driving of 24-in pipe piles and
away from a sound source is dependent at NSM (i.e., king piles, paired sheet sheet piles, and around 185–195 dB for
on a variety of factors, most notably the piles, plastic pipe piles), although some impact driving of similar pipe piles (all
water bathymetry and presence or data exist for single sheet piles. Results measured at 10 m; e.g., Laughlin, 2005a,
absence of reflective or absorptive of acoustic monitoring are not yet 2005b; Illingworth and Rodkin, 2010,
conditions including in-water structures available for consideration here. It was 2012, 2013; CalTrans, 2012). For
and sediments. Spherical spreading therefore necessary to extrapolate from vibratory driving, a precautionary value
occurs in a perfectly unobstructed (free- available data to determine reasonable of 163 dB (the highest representative
field) environment not limited by depth source levels for this project. value; CalTrans, 2012) was selected as a
or water surface, resulting in a 6 dB In order to determine reasonable SPLs proxy source value for both sheet piles
reduction in sound level for each and their associated effects on marine and king piles. For impact driving of
doubling of distance from the source mammals that are likely to result from both sheet piles and king piles (should
(20*log[range]). Cylindrical spreading pile driving at NSM, the Navy first it be required), a proxy source value of
occurs in an environment in which compared linear lengths (in terms of 189 dB (CalTrans, 2012) was selected for
sound propagation is bounded by the radiative surface length) of the pile use in acoustic modeling based on
water surface and sea bottom, resulting types proposed for use with those for similarity to the physical environment
in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for which measurements of underwater at NSM and because of the measurement
each doubling of distance from the SPLs exist. For example, the total linear location in mid-water column.
source (10*log[range]). A practical length of a king pile (with width of
spreading value of fifteen is often used 17.87 in and height of 41.47 in) is No measurements are known to be
under conditions, such as at the NSM equivalent to the circumference (i.e., available for vibratory driving of plastic
turning basin, where water increases linear length) of a 24-in diameter pipe polymer piles, so timber piles were
with depth as the receiver moves away pile. Please see Table 6–2 of the Navy’s considered as likely to be the most
from the shoreline, resulting in an application for more detail on these similar pile material. Although timber
expected propagation environment that comparisons. We recognize that these piles are typically installed via impact
would lie between spherical and pile types may produce sound drivers, Laughlin (2011) reported a
cylindrical spreading loss conditions. differently, given different radiative mean source measurement (at 16 m) for
Practical spreading loss (4.5 dB geometries, and that there may be vibratory removal of timber piles. This
reduction in sound level for each differences in the frequency spectrum value (150 dB) was selected as a proxy
doubling of distance) is assumed here. produced, but believe this to be the best source value on the basis of similarity
Underwater Sound—The intensity of available method of determining proxy of materials between timber and
pile driving sounds is greatly influenced source levels. polymer. CalTrans (2012) reports one
by factors such as the type of piles, We considered existing measurements dataset for impact driving of plastic
hammers, and the physical environment from similar physical environments piles (153 dB at 10 m). Please see Tables
in which the activity takes place. A (sandy sediments and water depths 6–3 and 6–4 in the Navy’s application.
number of studies, primarily on the greater than 15 ft) for impact and All calculated distances to and the total
west coast, have measured sound vibratory driving of 24-in steel pipe area encompassed by the marine
produced during underwater pile piles and for steel sheet piles. These mammal sound thresholds are provided
driving projects. However, these data studies, largely conducted by the in Table 3.
TABLE 3—DISTANCES TO RELEVANT UNDERWATER SOUND THRESHOLDS AND AREAS OF ENSONIFICATION
Distance Area
Pile type Method Threshold (m) 1 (sq km) 2
Steel (sheet and king piles) ................... Vibratory .......................... Level A harassment (180 dB) ............... n/a 0
Level B harassment (120 dB) ............... 7,356 2.9
Impact .............................. Level A harassment (180 dB) ............... 40 0.004
Level B harassment (160 dB) ............... 858 0.67
Polymeric (plastic fender piles) .............. Vibratory .......................... Level A harassment (180 dB) ............... n/a 0
Level B harassment (120 dB) ............... 1,585 0.88
Impact .............................. Level A harassment (180 dB) ............... n/a 0
Level B harassment (160 dB) ............... 3.4 0.00004
1 Areas presented take into account attenuation and/or shadowing by land. Calculated distances to relevant thresholds cannot be reached in
most directions form source piles. Please see Figures 6–1 through 6–3 in the Navy’s application.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The Mayport turning basin does not Table 1 are estimated for free-field Marine Mammal Densities
represent open water, or free field, conditions, but areas are calculated per
conditions. Therefore, sounds would the actual conditions of the action area. For all species, the best scientific
attenuate as per the confines of the See Figures 6–1 through 6–3 of the information available was considered
basin, and may only reach the full Navy’s application for a depiction of for use in the marine mammal take
estimated distances to the harassment areas in which each underwater sound assessment calculations. Density value
thresholds via the narrow, east-facing threshold is predicted to occur at the for the Atlantic spotted dolphin is from
entrance channel. Distances shown in project area due to pile driving. recent density estimates produced by
Roberts et al. (2015); we use the highest
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_46695/page/16.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Notices 46565
help inform our final decision on Navy’s must include the completed and signed authorization (IHA) issued to the Maine
request for an MMPA authorization. application form, evidence of Department of Transportation (ME DOT)
Dated: July 31, 2015. documented participation in the fishery, to incidentally harass, by Level B
Angela Somma,
and non-refundable payment for the harassment only, small numbers of four
application-processing fee. species of marine mammals during
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected
If NMFS receives more completed construction activities associated with a
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
applications than the available permits breakwater replacement project in
[FR Doc. 2015–19184 Filed 8–4–15; 8:45 am]
for a given permit class, NMFS will Eastport, Maine. The project has been
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P prioritize applicants using only the delayed and the effective dates revised
information in the applications and accordingly.
documentation provided by the DATES: This authorization is now
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE applicants. If an applicant requests effective from July 20, 2015, through
National Oceanic and Atmospheric NMFS, in writing, that NMFS use NMFS July 19, 2016.
Administration longline logbook data as evidence of
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
documented participation, the applicant
RIN 0648–XE029 Shane Guan, Office of Protected
must specify the qualifying vessel,
official number, and month and year of Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
Pacific Islands Pelagic Fisheries; the logbook records. NMFS will not SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
American Samoa Longline Limited conduct an unlimited search for records.
Entry Program Background
Applicants with the earliest
documented participation in the fishery On February 21, 2014, NMFS received
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries an application from ME DOT requesting
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and on a Class A sized vessel will receive
the highest priorities for obtaining an IHA for the take, by Level B
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), harassment, of small numbers of harbor
Commerce. permits in any size class, followed by
applicants with the earliest documented seals (Phoca vitulina), gray seals
ACTION: Notice; availability of permits. (Halichoerus grypus), harbor porpoises
participation in Classes B, C, and D, in
SUMMARY: NMFS announces that 12 that order. In the event of a tie in the (Phocoena phocoena), and Atlantic
American Samoa pelagic longline priority ranking between two or more white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus
limited entry permits in three vessel applicants, NMFS will rank higher in acutus) incidental to in-water
size classes are available for 2015. priority the applicant whose second construction activities in Eastport,
NMFS is accepting applications for documented participation is earlier. Maine. On July 31, 2014, NMFS
these available permits. Detailed criteria for prioritization of published a Federal Register notice (FR
eligible applicants are in the regulations 79 44407) for the proposed IHA, and
DATES: NMFS must receive completed
at 50 CFR 665.816(g). subsequently published final notice of
permit applications and payment by
NMFS must receive applications by our issuance of the IHA on October 1,
December 3, 2015.
December 3, 2015 to be considered for 2014 (79 FR 59247), effective from
ADDRESSES: Request a blank application
a permit (see ADDRESSES). NMFS will October 1, 2014, through September 30,
form from the NMFS Pacific Islands 2015. In June 2015, ME DOT informed
not accept applications received after
Regional Office (PIR), 1845 Wasp Blvd., NMFS that no work had occurred
that date.
Bldg. 176, Honolulu, HI 96818, or the relevant to the IHA specified activity
PIR Web site http://www.fpir.noaa.gov/ Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
due to difficulties in developing a
Library/SFD/Samoa_LE_App_Fillable_ Dated: July 30, 2015. passive acoustic monitoring plan for
02Feb15.pdf. Mail your completed Emily H. Menashes, sound source verification of test pile
application and payment to: ASLE Acting Director, Office of Sustainable driving. Accordingly, ME DOT
Permits, NOAA NMFS PIR, 1845 Wasp Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. requested that NMFS revise the effective
Blvd., Bldg. 176, Honolulu, HI 96818. [FR Doc. 2015–19102 Filed 8–4–15; 8:45 am] date of the IHA to a one-year period
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BILLING CODE 3510–22–P beginning on July 20, 2015, to
Walter Ikehara, Sustainable Fisheries, accommodate the delayed schedule,
NMFS PIR, tel 808–725–5175, fax 808– with no other changes.
725–5215, or email PIRO-permits@ DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
noaa.gov. Summary of the Activity
National Oceanic and Atmospheric The proposed Eastport breakwater
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal
Administration replacement project will replace an
regulations at 50 CFR 665.816 allow
NMFS to issue new permits for the RIN 0648–XD330 open pier that is supported by 151 piles,
American Samoa pelagic longline consisting of steel pipe piles, reinforced
limited entry program if the number of Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to concrete pile caps, and a pre-stressed
permits in a size class falls below the Specified Activities; Taking Marine plank deck with structural overlay. The
maximum allowed. At least 12 permits Mammals Incidental to a Breakwater proposed approach pier will be 40 ft by
are available for issuance, as follows: Replacement Project in Eastport, 300 ft and the proposed main pier
• Nine in Class A (vessels less than or Maine section that would be parallel to the
shoreline will be 50 ft by 400 ft.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
equal to 40 ft in overall length); AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
• Two in Class B (over 40 ft to 50 ft); Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and The replacement pier will consist of
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), two different sections. The approach
• One in Class D (over 70 ft). Commerce. pier will be replaced in kind by placing
Please note that the number of available ACTION: Notice; revision of an incidental
fill inside of a sheet pile enclosure,
permits may change before the harassment authorization. supported by driven piles. The
application period closes. approach section will consist of sheet
Each application must be complete for SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that we piles that are driven just outside of the
NMFS to consider it. An application have revised an incidental harassment existing sheet piles. The sheet piles can
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_46695/page/21.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-23 10:53:11
Document Modified: 2018-02-23 10:53:11
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request for comments. | |
| Dates | Comments and information must be received no later than September 4, 2015. | |
| Contact | Ben Laws, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 46545 | |
| RIN Number | 0648-XE05 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR