[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 235 (Tuesday, December 8, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67669-67672]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-32534]



[[Page 67669]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 092498A]


Small Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Explosives Testing at Eglin Air Force Base, FL

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection 
Act (MMPA), as amended, notification is hereby given that an Incidental 
Harassment Authorization (IHA) has been issued to the U.S. Air Force to 
take small numbers of bottlenose dolphins, spotted dolphins, and 
possibly other cetacean species by harassment and non-serious injury 
incidental to explosive testing of obstacle and mine clearance systems 
at Eglin Air Force Base (Eglin), FL.

DATES: This authorization is effective from December 1, 1998, through 
March 31, 1999.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the application and draft environmental 
assessments (EAs) may be obtained by writing to the Chief, Marine 
Mammal Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-
3225, or by telephoning one of the contacts listed here.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Hollingshead 301-713-2055, or 
David Bernhart, 727-570-5312.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) directs 
the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but 
not intentional, taking of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage 
in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a 
specified geographical region if certain findings are made and 
regulations are issued.
    Permission may be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a 
negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or 
stock(s) for subsistence uses and that the permissible methods of 
taking and requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of 
such taking are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 
CFR 216.103 as ``...an impact resulting from the specified activity 
that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, 
adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates 
of recruitment or survival.''
    Subsection 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited 
process by which U.S. citizens can apply for an authorization to 
incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment for a 
period of up to 1 year. The MMPA defines ``harassment'' as:

     ...any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (a) has the 
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the 
wild; or (b) 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.

    Subsection 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS 
review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and a 
comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental 
harassment of small numbers of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the 
close of the comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny issuance of 
the authorization.

Summary of Request

    On July 20, 1998, NMFS received a complete application from the Air 
Force Development Test Center, Department of the Air Force, Eglin. The 
Air Force, in cooperation with the Naval Surface Warfare Center-Coastal 
Systems Station (NSWC-CSS), U.S. Navy, is requesting an authorization 
to take, by harassment and non-serious injury, bottlenose dolphins 
(Tursiops truncatus), spotted dolphins (Stenella plagiodon), and 
possibly other cetacean species incidental to explosive testing of 
obstacle and mine clearance systems at Eglin. Eglin is located in the 
Florida Panhandle, approximately midway between the cities of Pensacola 
and Panama City, FL. The location of the proposed action is on the 
beach areas on Santa Rosa Island (SRI), approximately 27 kilometers 
(km)(17 miles (mi)) west of Destin, FL.
    The Navy's current capability to clear obstacles and mines in the 
surf zone is limited to the hand placement of explosive charges by Navy 
combat swimmers. The effectiveness of this capability is limited by the 
ability of swimmers to locate submerged targets and to carry sufficient 
explosives to destroy the targets. Such operations are considered 
highly hazardous, and the reliability of obstacle removal is considered 
to be poor. To facilitate U.S. Marine amphibious assaults, the U.S. 
Navy is committed to developing and testing methods to safely and 
effectively clear a path through such obstacles.
    NWSC-CSS has requested permission from Eglin to test four anti-mine 
systems in the shallow surf zone along U.S. Air Force-controlled lands 
of SRI. The four test systems are the Shallow Water Assault Breaching 
(SABRE) system, the Distributed Explosive Technology (DET) system, the 
MK-82 general purpose bombs (GPBs), and the MK-5 Mine Clearance System 
(MCS).
    The proposed action is to perform up to a total of 10 underwater 
detonation tests (2 tests using the SABRE system and up to 8 tests 
using the DET array); and a series of tests of explosive systems at 
Eglin.
    In order to avoid impacting the endangered West Indian manatee 
(Trichiechus manatus)(which is more commonly found south of the region 
and during warmer months) and sea turtles, tests will be conducted in 
the fall and winter 1998/99. While a brief description of the four 
systems proposed for testing is included here, more detailed 
descriptions of the activity and the expected impact can be found in 
the application and in the two EAs on the activities. These documents 
are available upon request (see ADDRESSES).

SABRE System

    An operational full-length SABRE-line charge consists of 130 10-
pound (lb)(4.5 kg) net explosive weight (N.E.W.) charges on 3-ft (0.9 
m) centers which is deployed from a Landing Craft Air-Cushion (LCAC) by 
an MK-22 Mod 4 rocket motor. Each charge consists of approximately 9.6 
lb (4.3 kg) of PBXN-103 explosive and a W-11 booster, weighing 
approximately 0.4 lb (0.2 kg). A detonating cord runs through the 
centers of the booster and main charge.
    For the two proposed tests, a total of 22 and 23 SABRE charges will 
be hand-laid on the sea bottom, perpendicular to the beach in 3 ft (.91 
m) and 10 ft (3.0 m) of water, respectively. For both tests, the 
detonation sequence will be from the offshore end toward the beach. For 
these events, 27 to 31 inert mines will be placed perpendicular to the 
line charge and parallel to the shoreline. Total NE.W. of the SABRE 
tests will be 221 lb (100.2 kg) and 232 lb (105.2 kg), respectively.

DET System

    An operational, full-size DET array consists of parallel lines of 
detonating cord, whose overall footprint is 180 by 180 ft (54.9 m by 
54.9 m). The array is

[[Page 67670]]

packed in a container and launched from an LCAC by two MK-22 Mod 4 
rocket motors for expansion and subsequent deployment.
    Full-scale systems are not required for these tests. Previous tests 
have shown that partial-length SABRE segments and partial-size DET 
arrays are adequate for evaluations. The data acquired from small-scale 
tests can be scaled up in order to make predictions for military 
applications. Thus, for the DET system, the Navy is proposing to use an 
11-ft by 60-ft (3.3 m by 18.3 m) DET array in 3 ft (0.9 m) of water. 
There will be eight separate DET events, spanning several days, with 
two to three arrays tested per day. The NE.W. of each array is 42 lb 
(19 kg), with arrays being detonated at the seaward end. Each array 
will be placed above a maximum of four live mines consisting of either 
22 or 26.4 lb (10 or 12 kg) of explosive. Therefore, depending upon the 
mine type, total NE.W. of each test would be up to either 130 lb (59 
kg) or 147.6 lb (67 kg). DET events will be hand-deployed from a boat 
and exploded electronically by trained personnel.

MK-82 GPBs

    The proposed action is an evaluation of the MK-82 GPBs to clear 
anti-invasion beach obstacles and mines in the surf zone. The MK-82 
GPBs to be tested consist of seven GPBs, each containing 192 lb (87.1 
kg) of explosive for a total NE.W. of 1,344 lb (610 kg). The 
configuration for testing will be a linear arrangement of seven bombs 
spaced 24 ft (7.3 m) apart, located parallel to the shoreline in 6 ft 
(1.8 m) of water.
    Two separate deployments and firings are required to test this 
configuration. All MK-82s will be buried vertically to approximately 
one-half length (about 3 ft (0.9 m)) by jetting. The MK-82s will be 
detonated using approximately 1/4 block of C-4 explosive paced into the 
aft fuse well. The MK-82s will be detonated simultaneously in 6 ft (1.8 
m) of water using remote detonators to detonate the C-4. Beach 
obstacles (log posts, concrete cubes, and steel hedgehogs) and inert 
mines will be placed around the bombs to serve as targets for bomb 
fragments and blast.

MK-5 MCS

    The MK-5 MCS consists of a 350-ft (106.7 m) continuous length 
charge of composition C-4 explosive (with a distribution of 5 lb (2.3 
kg) per linear foot and a pair of detonating cords (totaling 11 lb (5 
kg). Total NE.W. of the system is 1,750 lb (794 kg). The MK-5 MCS would 
be deployed in the surf zone about 550 ft (167.6 m) from shore by an 
LCAC. Once fully deployed, it will then be detonated. Testing will take 
place over a 3-day period. On the first day, there will be inert 
firings of four MK5 systems. The second day will consist of one inert 
firing and one live firing of a MK5 system. The third day will consist 
of three separate live firings.

Comments and Responses

    A notice of receipt of the application and proposed authorization 
was published on October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54676), and a 30-day public 
comment period was provided on the application and proposed 
authorization. During the 30-day comment period, comments were received 
from the Marine Mammal Commission (MMC), the Animal Protection 
Institute (API), the Animal Rights Foundation of Florida, and two 
private citizens.
    Comment 1: Two commenters expressed concern that the underwater 
explosions would affect the sensory perceptions of wild dolphins and 
would inflict unnecessary stress and possible injury to the animals.
    Response: While underwater explosions have the potential to harass, 
injure, or kill marine mammals, the notice of proposed authorization 
and the accompanying EAs provided information on mitigation measures 
that would be undertaken by the applicant to ensure that no mortality 
or serious injuries and few harassment takings would occur. These 
measures are repeated later in this document.
    Comment 2: Two individuals recommended that the tests be conducted 
at an inland lake or pond on the Eglin property.
    Response: As discussed in the draft EAs, while some testing can be 
conducted in ponds, test ponds are unable to replicate the sea and surf 
conditions, including wave action and berm formation, found in the 
nearshore coastal waters. These conditions are necessary for successful 
testing.
    Comment 3: While recognizing that subsection 101(a)(5)(D) of the 
MMPA authorizes the incidental harassment of marine mammals, the API 
expressed concern over the numbers of dolphins that may be impacted by 
the activity. They believe that the number of dolphins proposed for a 
take by harassment should not be considered a small number.
    Response: Interim regulations implementing subsection 101(a)(5)(D) 
of the MMPA were issued on April 10, 1996 (61 FR 15884). These 
regulations contain specific definitions to interpret Congressional 
meaning of the terms ``small numbers'' and ``negligible impact.'' For 
the purposes of this part, ``small numbers'' means a portion of a 
marine mammal species or stock whose taking would have a negligible 
impact on that species or stock. ``Negligible impact'' is an impact 
resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably 
expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or 
survival. Because, due to mitigation measures required under IHA, no 
marine mammals are likely to be killed or seriously injured by the 
proposed activities, harassment takings are expected to be reduced to 
the lowest level practicable, the number of authorized takings is 
considered small, and the takings have no more than a negligible impact 
on the affected species and stocks of marine mammals.
    Comment 4: The API also believes that, because explosives have a 
potential lethal impact on marine mammals, the application and 
authorization would not fall under MMPA subsection 101(a)(5)(D).
    Response: Depending upon the distance between the explosive and the 
animal and the charge weight, explosives in the marine environment have 
the potential to seriously injure or kill marine mammals. However, if 
mitigating measures imposed on an applicant's activity through an IHA 
reduce the impacts of the activity such that it is unlikely that 
serious injury or mortality will result, then an IHA may be 
appropriate. If however, upon review, an activity's mitigation measures 
are not considered sufficient to eliminate mortality and serious 
injury, NMFS will deny the application request and recommend the 
applicant apply for a taking authorization under subsection 
101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA. An authorization under that section of the 
MMPA allows for lethal takings incidental to an activity.
    Comment 5: The API recommends that NMFS deny an IHA to the Air 
Force to test underwater anti-mine devices in the waters off Eglin. One 
individual recommended denial, partly because it would open the door to 
future testing that could be harmful to marine life.
    Response: NMFS would like to clarify that NMFS' responsibility in 
this action is limited to the issuance or denial of an authorization 
for the short-term, incidental harassment of a small number of marine 
mammals by the Air Force while conducting explosive testing of obstacle 
and mine clearance systems at Eglin. NMFS does not authorize the 
activity itself, as such authorization is provided by the U.S. 
Department of Defense and is not within the jurisdiction of the 
Secretary of

[[Page 67671]]

Commerce. As provided by subsection 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, unless 
NMFS finds that the activity will result in a taking of marine mammals 
that is either not small or results in more than a negligible impact, 
the authorization is warranted. Authorizations to take marine mammals 
incidental to detonating explosives in the marine environment have been 
issued previously.
    Comment 6: Concerned that there is the possibility that a manatee 
could be within the zone of influence of the detonations, the MMC 
recommended the Air Force consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (USFWS) under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
    Response: The Air Force consulted with the USFWS under section 7 of 
the ESA on this activity. This consultation was principally for the 
Gulf sturgeon, a listed fish species. Neither agency indicated that 
manatees inhabit the test area during the time of the year that tests 
are authorized.

Description of Habitat and Marine Mammals Affected by the Activity

    A description of the project area ecosystem in the eastern Gulf of 
Mexico (GOM) can be found in the application and in the associated 
draft EAs and needs not be repeated here.

Marine Mammals

    Although approximately 27 species of marine mammals (whales, 
dolphins, and porpoises) reside in or pass through the northeastern 
GOM, the only species of marine mammals that are likely to be impacted 
by the activities proposed for the shallow coastal waters off SRI are 
the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and the Atlantic spotted 
dolphin (Stenella frontalis). Information on these two species may be 
found in the application and in the supporting EAs for these projects. 
Additional information on these and other species of marine mammals in 
the GOM can be found in Blaylock et al. (1995) and Waring et al. 
(1997). Please refer to those documents for information on the biology, 
distribution, and abundance of these species.

Potential Effects of Explosives on Marine Mammals

    Potential impacts to those marine mammal species known to occur in 
the SRI area from explosives include both lethal and non-lethal injury, 
as well as incidental harassment. The pressure wave from the explosive 
can impact air cavities, such as lungs and intestines. Extensive 
hemorrhaging into the lungs due to underwater shock waves may cause 
death to a marine mammal through suffocation (Hill, 1978). Other common 
injuries which may result in mortality include circulatory failure, 
broncho-pneumonia in damaged lungs, or peritonitis resulting from 
perforations of the intestinal wall (Hill, 1978). Because impulse 
levels sufficient to cause lethal injury increase with increased mammal 
mass (Yelverton et al., 1973), conservative criteria are based on the 
lowest possible affected mammalian weight (e.g., an infant dolphin). 
Extensive lung hemorrhage is an injury which would be debilitating, and 
not all animals would be expected to survive (1- percent mortality is 
predicted at the onset level). As the severity of extensive lung 
hemorrhage increases beyond the onset level, gastro-intestinal tract 
injuries can increase significantly. The expected mortality level 
associated with these combined severe injuries would be significantly 
higher than 1 percent (U.S. Navy, 1998).
    Non-lethal injuries involve slight lung hemorrhage and tympanic 
membrane (TM) rupture from which the mammal is expected to recover 
(Yelverton et al., 1973; Richmond et al., 1973). Eardrum damage 
criteria are based upon a limited number of small charge tests 
(Yelverton et al., 1973; Richmond et al., 1973). Ranges for percent TM 
rupture incurred by underwater explosives can be calculated by a 
conservative TM damage model (U.S. Navy, 1996). General criteria for TM 
damage have been reported to occur at impulse levels down to 20 psi-
msec (Yelverton et al., 1973).
    Because eardrum (e.g., TM) rupture, rather than slight lung 
hemorrhage, usually occurs at lower impulse levels, TM rupture is used 
by NMFS and others to conservatively define the non-lethal injury zone. 
A maximum impulse of 10 psi-msec is often considered to define the non-
lethal injury zone, where a very low incidence of blast injuries are 
likely to occur (Yelverton et al., 1973). A level of pressure impulse 
at which marine mammals are not expected to experience non-lethal 
injury (nor instantaneous mortality or lethal injury) is reported to be 
5 psi-msec (Yelverton et al., 1973). This is the impulse level adopted 
by the Air Force to designate no injurious takings by this activity.
    In addition to lethal, serious, and non-serious injury, harassment 
of marine mammals may occur as a result of non-injurious physiological 
responses to an explosion-generated shockwave and its acoustic 
signature. Based upon information provided in the SEAWOLF shock trial 
final environmental impact statement (U.S. Navy, 1998), a dual 
criterion for marine mammal acoustic harassment has been developed for 
explosive-generated signals: (1) An energy-based temporary threshold 
shift (TTS) injury criterion of 182 dB re 1 uPa2 -sec 
derived from experiments with bottlenose dolphins (Ridgway et al., 
1997), and (2) a 12- lbs/in2 (psi) peak pressure cited by 
Ketten (1995) as associated with a ``safe outer limit (for the 10,000 
lb charge for minimal, recoverable auditory trauma'' (i.e., TTS)). For 
this activity, noise levels that fall between the 5 psi-msec and out to 
a transmission distance where a noise level of 180 dB re 1 
uPa2 -sec (Air Force, 1998) will be considered to fall 
within the incidental harassment zone.
    The potential impact to Atlantic bottlenose dolphins and the 
Atlantic spotted dolphins, the two species that may potentially be 
affected, was evaluated using modeling on the effects of underwater 
explosions resulting from each of the test systems described previously 
(see application). Based upon data provided in Tables 5.2 and 5.3 in 
the application, the maximum number of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins 
potentially injured from all tests ranges from 4 to 13. The maximum 
number of Atlantic spotted dolphins potentially injured from all tests 
combined is less than 1. These are the maximum injury levels without 
implementation of mitigation.
    The estimated total numbers of bottlenose dolphins and spotted 
dolphins potentially exposed to takes by harassment are 33 and 1, 
respectively. The total number of bottlenose dolphins potentially 
exposed to noise from the source of the noise to 180 dB re 1 
uPa2 -sec ranges from 4 to 15 for the MK-82 GPB tests, 1 to 
3 for the MK5 MCS tests, 1 to 2 for the combined SABRE tests, and 4 to 
13 for all DET array tests combined. However, mitigation is expected to 
obviate any injury to marine mammals.

Mitigation

    There are two forms of mitigation: (1) Natural, as provided by the 
environment and (2) human, designed to protect marine mammals to the 
greatest extent practicable.
    Natural mitigation: Physical characteristics of the proposed test 
area and test methods will ameliorate the underwater shock wave. Tests 
will be conducted in approximately 3 to 10 ft (0.9 to 3.0 m) of water. 
At this shallow depth, some protection of the energy from the 
detonations will be directed through the surface of the water rather 
than transmitted through the water. Another consequence of the shallow, 
as opposed to the deep water detonation depth, is that bubble pulse is 
not

[[Page 67672]]

significant and there will be far less energy in any oscillations. 
Additionally, these tests will be conducted inside the offshore bar at 
the SRI site. The offshore bar ameliorates the transmission of the 
underwater portion of the shock wave. Also, MK-82 GPBs will be buried 
in bottom sands to approximately their center of gravity (3 ft (0.9 m), 
a factor expected to mitigate the transmission of the shock wave as the 
detonations will be directed downwards.
    Human mitigation: Eglin has established safety zones to prevent 
marine mammal injury for each test. These safety zones are: 0.75 km 
(0.47 mi) for SABRE-22, 1.0 km (0.62 mi) for SABRE-23, 1.0 km (0.62 mi) 
for DET, 6.0 km (3.73 mi) for MK-82 GPB, and 0.5 km (0.31 mi) for MK-5 
MCS.
    Eglin has proposed that base personnel conduct a 30-minute pre-
detonation aerial monitoring survey immediately prior to each test to 
ensure no marine mammals are within each test area's designated safety 
zone. With water depths less than 18 m (59 ft), low turbidity, and 
white sand bottom, exceptional marine mammal visibility is ensured. 
Aerial surveys will be conducted at approximately 100 ft (30.5 m) 
elevation.
    In order to ensure adequate visibility for locating marine mammals 
(and sea turtles), no tests will take place if sea state conditions are 
greater than category 3 and water clarity is not adequate for 
conducting surveys. No tests will take place if marine mammals or sea 
turtles are sighted within the safety zone.

Monitoring

    In addition to pre-detonation monitoring mentioned previously, 
Eglin will conduct aerial surveys immediately following each detonation 
event. The post-test monitoring will be conducted in a similar manner 
to the pre-test monitoring, except that observation personnel will be 
focusing on locating any injured marine mammals. If any injured marine 
mammals are observed during post-test monitoring, subsequent 
detonations will be postponed, and the local stranding network 
notified. The project will be required to be reviewed by Air Force and 
NMFS personnel prior to conducting any additional tests.

Reporting

    Any takes of marine mammals other than those authorized by the IHA 
will be reported to the Regional Administrator, NMFS, by the next 
working day. A draft final report of the entire test results and marine 
mammal observations for pre- and post-detonation monitoring will be 
submitted to NMFS within 90 days after completion of the last test. 
Unless notified by NMFS to the contrary, that draft final report will 
be considered the final report under the IHA.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    As part of its request for a small take authorization, the Air 
Force prepared two EAs, one for SABRE and DET and a second document for 
the MK-82/MK-5 systems. These EAs, which supplement information 
contained in the application, are necessary for determining whether the 
activities proposed for receiving small take authorizations are having 
a negligible impact on affected marine mammal stocks. NMFS has reviewed 
the EAs and concurs with the findings. As a result, NMFS finds that it 
is unnecessary to prepare its own NEPA documentation and hereby adopts 
the Air Force EAs as its own, as provided by 40 CFR 1506.3. NMFS finds 
that the issuance of an IHA to the Air Force will not result in a 
signficant environmental impact on the human environment and that it is 
unnecessary to either prepare its own NEPA documentation or to 
recirculate the Air Force EAs for additional comments.

Consultation

    On October 15, 1998, NMFS completed consultation with the Air Force 
under section 7 of the ESA. The finding of that consultation was that 
the proposed testing activity is not likely to adversely affect 
endangered or threatened species of whales or sea turtles, if the 
conservation and mitigation measures specified in the Biological 
Assessment prepared by the Air Force are undertaken. NMFS concludes, 
therefore, that the issuance of an IHA to the Air Force to take small 
numbers of bottlenose dolphins, spotted dolphins and possibly other 
cetacean species by harassment incidental to explosive testing at Eglin 
is not likely to adversely affect endangered or threatened species of 
whales or sea turtles.

Conclusions

    NMFS has determined that the short-term impact of incidentally 
taking small numbers of bottlenose dolphins, spotted dolphins, and 
possibly other cetacean species by harassment and non-serious injury 
incidental to explosive testing of obstacle and mine clearance systems 
at Eglin, as described previously in this document, will result, at 
worst, in the brief harassment of these species and possibly in a 
temporary behavioral modification. While behavioral modifications may 
be made by these species to avoid the resultant acoustic disturbance, 
this action is expected to have a negligible impact on both individual 
animals and the stocks of these mammals. In addition, no take by injury 
and/or death is anticipated, and harassment takes will be at the lowest 
level practicable due to incorporation of the mitigation measures 
mentioned above.
    Since NMFS is assured that the taking would not result in more than 
the incidental harassment (as defined by the MMPA) of small numbers of 
bottlenose dolphins, spotted dolphins and possibly other cetacean 
species and would result in the least practicable impact on the stocks, 
NMFS has determined that the requirements of subsection 101(a)(5)(D) 
have been met and the authorization can be issued.

Authorization

    For the above reasons, NMFS has issued an IHA to the Air Force for 
the incidental harassment and non-serious injury of a small number of 
bottlenose dolphins, spotted dolphins, and possibly other cetacean 
species. NMFS has determined that, provided the mitigation, monitoring, 
and reporting requirements described in the authorization are 
undertaken the short-term impact of explosives testing for obstacle and 
mine clearance systems at Eglin has the potential to result in no more 
than a negligible impact on affected marine mammal stocks.

    Dated: December 3, 1998.
Patricia A. Montanio,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 98-32534 Filed 12-7-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F