[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 149 (Friday, August 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37841-37850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16486]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XG956


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the South Quay Wall 
Recapitalization Project, Mayport, Florida

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

ACTION: Notice; issuance of incidental harassment authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine 
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given 
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to 
the Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southeast and Naval Facilities 
Engineering Command Atlantic (the Navy) to incidentally harass, by 
Level B harassment only, marine mammals during construction activities 
associated with the South Quay Wall Recapitalization Project at Naval 
Station Mayport (NAVSTA), Jacksonville, Florida.

DATES: This Authorization is effective from February 15, 2020, through 
February 14, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jaclyn Daly, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application 
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in 
this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act. In case of problems accessing these 
documents, please call the contact listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain 
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to 
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of 
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a 
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified 
geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations 
are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a 
incidental take authorization may be provided to the public for review.
    Authorization for incidental takings shall 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 taking for subsistence uses 
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods 
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying 
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar 
significance, and on the availability of such species or stocks for 
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as 
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, 
monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.
    The NDAA (Pub. L. 108-136) removed the ``small numbers'' and 
``specified geographical region'' limitations indicated above and 
amended the definition of ``harassment'' as it applies to a ``military 
readiness activity.'' The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory 
terms cited above are included in the relevant sections below.

Summary of Request

    On December 4, 2018, NMFS received a request from the Navy for an 
IHA to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving at the South Quay 
wall, NAVSTA Mayport, Florida. The application was deemed adequate and 
complete on April 16, 2019. The Navy's request is for take of a small 
number of bottlenose dolphins, by Level B harassment only. Neither the 
Navy nor NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to result from this 
activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
    NMFS previously issued several IHAs to the Navy for similar work at 
NAVSTA Mayport, specifically at Bravo Wharf (81 FR 52637, August 9, 
2018; 83 FR 9287, March 5, 2019) and Wharf C-2 (78 FR 71566, November 
29, 2013; 80 FR 55598, September 16, 2015). The Navy complied with all 
the requirements (e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of the 
previous IHAs and information regarding their monitoring results may be 
found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.

Description of the Activity

    The Navy proposes to install 240 24-inch (in) steel sheet piles 
within 5 feet (ft) of the existing South Quay bulkhead

[[Page 37842]]

located at the end of a channel within the NAVSTA Mayport turning basin 
along the St. Johns River, Florida. The purpose of the project is to 
support the existing bulkhead wall that has been weakened by the 
formation of voids within the wall. To construct the new wall, the Navy 
will install 240 individual sheet piles over the course of 35 days, 
averaging 7 to 10 sheet piles installed per day, with a maximum of 15 
individual piles installed per day. Of the 35 total days of 
installation, 30 days were reserved for vibratory driving and the 
remaining 5 days were reserved for contingency impact driving. The Navy 
estimates each pile will require three minutes of active driving per 
pile (maximum of 45 minutes per day). When impact driving, the Navy 
estimates they will install one pile per day, with each pile requiring 
20 hammer strikes. The use of impact driving would be restricted to 
when vibratory driving is insufficient. The Navy anticipates the entire 
project will take up to one year; however, in-water pile driving work 
would be limited to 35 days. The IHA is valid from February 15, 2020, 
to February 14, 2021.
    A detailed description of the South Quay Wall Recapitalization 
Project is provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA 
(84 FR 23024; 21 May 2019). Since that time, no changes have been made 
to the planned activities reflected in the proposed IHA. Therefore, we 
refer the reader to the aforementioned Federal Register notice for a 
detailed description of the project.

Comments and Responses

    We published a notice of receipt of the Navy's application and 
proposed IHA in the Federal Register on May 21, 2019 (84 FR 23024). We 
received one comment letter from the Marine Mammal Commission 
(Commission).
    Comment 1: The Commission concurs with NMFS's preliminary finding 
and recommends that NMFS issue the incidental harassment authorization, 
subject to the inclusion of the proposed mitigation, monitoring, and 
reporting measures. However, they recommended we increased the number 
of takes to 140 based on previous monitoring reports.
    NMFS Response: The Navy requested 58 takes of bottlenose dolphins 
based on the same method and densities used for two other pile driving 
projects at NAVSTA Mayport: Bravo Wharf and Wharf-C. The Navy did not 
reach or exceed take for any of those projects which are now completed. 
However, in an abundance of caution NMFS has increased the number of 
takes authorized to 70 based on previous monitoring reports (see 
Estimated Take section) and believes the Commission's 140 recommended 
takes is a gross overestimate based on the fact the harassment zones 
are confined to the limited portion of the Mayport basin due to the 
location of the South Quay wall and that pile driving would occur for a 
limited amount of time per day, minimizing potential exposure.
    Comment 2: The Commission questioned whether the public notice 
provisions for IHA renewals fully satisfy the public notice and comment 
provision in the MMPA and discussed the potential burden on reviewers 
of reviewing key documents and developing comments quickly. 
Additionally, the Commission recommended that NMFS use the IHA Renewal 
process sparingly and selectively for activities expected to have the 
lowest levels of impacts to marine mammals and that require less 
complex analysis.
    NMFS Response: The Commission has raised this concern before and 
NMFS refers readers to our full response, which may be found in the 
notice of issuance of an IHA to Avangrid Renewables (84 FR 31035, June 
28, 2019).

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    There are four marine mammal species which may inhabit or transit 
near NAVSTA Mayport at the mouth of the St. Johns River and in nearby 
nearshore Atlantic Ocean. These include the bottlenose dolphin, 
Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis), North Atlantic right 
whale (Eubalaena glacialis), and humpback whale (Megaptera 
novaeangliae). Please refer to NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) 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 (Navy, 
2008; available at www.navfac.navy.mil/products_and_services/ev/products_and_services/marine_resources/marine_resource_assessments.html). All species other than the 
bottlenose dolphin are not included for further analysis due to extreme 
rarity within close proximity to NAVSTA Mayport and lack of sightings 
within NAVSTA Mayport. Unlike previous pile driving projects at NAVSTA 
Mayport where harassment thresholds extended into the mouth of the St. 
Johns River and nearby coastal ocean waters, the South Quay wall is 
positioned such that pile driving noise is not anticipated to propagate 
outside the turning basin. Therefore, we limit our discussion to 
bottlenose dolphins.
    A detailed description of the species and stocks likely to be 
affected by pile driving at Bravo Wharf, including brief introductions 
to the species and relevant stocks as well as available information 
regarding population trends and threats, and information regarding 
local occurrence, were provided in the Federal Register notice for the 
proposed IHA (84 FR 55990; 21 May 2019). Since that time, no new 
information has been made available; therefore, our account of the 
species and stocks have not changed.
    Table 1 lists bottlenose dolphin stocks with expected potential for 
occurrence at NAVSTA Mayport and summarizes information related to the 
population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA 
and potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we 
follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the 
maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may 
be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to 
reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in 
NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR 
and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are 
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and 
other threats.
    Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document 
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or 
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. 
NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total 
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that 
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend 
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in 
NMFS's U.S. 2018 Draft SARs (Hayes et al., 2018). All values presented 
in Table 1 are the most recent available at the time of publication.

[[Page 37843]]



                                        Table 1--Bottlenose Dolphin Stocks Potentially Present at NAVSTA Mayport
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                ESA/ MMPA status;    Stock abundance (CV,
               Species                         Stock             strategic (Y/N)      Nmin, most recent      PBR \3\   Annual M/   Relative occurrence;
                                                                       \1\          abundance survey) \2\                SI \4\    season of occurrence
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
    Bottlenose dolphin..............  Western North Atlantic,  -/D; Y              9,173 (0.46; 6,326;             63       0-12  Possibly common; \8\
                                       southern migratory                           2010-11).                                      Jan-Mar.
                                       coastal.
                                      Western North Atlantic,  -/D; Y              1,219 (0.67; 730; 2010-          7        0.4  Possibly common; \8\
                                       northern Florida                             11).                                           year-round.
                                       coastal.
                                      Jacksonville Estuarine   -; Y                412 \7\ (0.06; unk;          undet        1.2  Possibly common; \8\
                                       System.\6\.                                  1994-97).                                      year-round.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 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 2015 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 2015 SARs. This information was made available
  for public comment and is currently under review and therefore may be revised prior to finalizing the 2015 SARs. However, we consider this information
  to be the best available for use in this document.
\6\ Abundance estimates for this stock 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.

Marine Mammal Hearing

    Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals 
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious 
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to 
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine 
mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine 
mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et 
al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect 
this, Southall et al. (2007, 2019) recommended that marine mammals be 
divided into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or 
estimated hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response 
data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques, 
anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements 
of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes 
(i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). NMFS (2018) described generalized 
hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized 
hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) 
threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception 
for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was 
deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall 
et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing groups and their 
associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 2.

                  Table 2--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
                              [NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Hearing group                 Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen        7 Hz to 35 kHz.
 whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins,     150 Hz to 160 kHz.
 toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose
 whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true         275 Hz to 160 kHz.
 porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
 cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger
 & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true    50 Hz to 86 kHz.
 seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea    60 Hz to 39 kHz.
 lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
  composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
  species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
  hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
  composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
  cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).

    The pinniped functional hearing 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). For more detail 
concerning these groups and associated frequency ranges, please see 
NMFS (2018) for a review of available information. One cetacean species 
is expected to potentially be affected by the specified activity. 
Bottlenose dolphins are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans.

[[Page 37844]]

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that 
components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and 
their habitat. The Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment section 
later in this document includes a quantitative analysis of the number 
of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The 
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination section considers the 
content of this section, the Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment 
section, and the Mitigation section, to draw conclusions regarding the 
likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive success or 
survivorship of individuals and how those impacts on individuals are 
likely to impact marine mammal species or stocks.
    The 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., 2003; 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, such 
as that at NAVSTA Mayport, are typically more structurally complex, 
which leads to rapid sound attenuation. In addition, substrates that 
are soft (e.g., sand and mud like at NAVSTA Mayport) 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 general, the effects of sounds from pile driving might result in 
one or more of the following: Temporary or permanent threshold shift 
(TTS and PTS, respectively), non-auditory physical or physiological 
effects, behavioral disturbance, and masking (Richardson et al., 1995; 
Gordon et al., 2003; Nowacek et al., 2007; Southall et al., 2007). PTS 
and TTS is not anticipated in this case due to the fact all noise would 
be limited to the Mayport basin and the mitigation and monitoring 
measures. Any harassment would likely be behavioral in nature. Exposure 
to pile driving noise can result in dolphin behavioral changes such as 
avoidance, 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), and visible startle response or 
aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping). As reviewed in 
Southall et al. (2007, 2019), the severity of these reactions can range 
from mild to severe and the longevity of reactions can be temporary or 
long-term. Based on marine mammal monitoring data collected by the Navy 
during previous recapitalization projects involving pile driving (Navy 
2016, 2018a, 2018b), dolphins behavior within and around the turning 
basin include foraging, traveling, and social behavior during and in 
absence of pile driving. No reactions attributed to pile driving noise 
are documented in those reports.
    Masking may occur during the short periods of pile driving; 
however, this is unlikely to become biologically significant. 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 possible that vibratory pile driving resulting from the project may 
mask acoustic signals important to bottlenose dolphins, but the short-
term duration and limited affected area would result in insignificant 
impacts from masking. In this case, pile driving durations are 
relatively short and no significant habitat is located within NAVSTA 
Mayport. 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 specified activities at NAVSTA Mayport would not result in 
permanent impacts to habitats used directly by marine mammals as the 
new wall would be built within five feet of the existing wall, 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 of the project area; however the surrounding areas may be 
foraging habitat for the dolphins. Therefore, the main impact issue 
associated with the project 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) and minor impacts to the immediate substrate and water 
column (e.g., elevated turbidity) during installation and removal of 
piles during the wharf construction project. 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.

Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes 
authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration 
of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact determination.
    Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these 
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent 
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of 
pursuit, torment, or annoyance,

[[Page 37845]]

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).
    Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form 
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals 
resulting from exposure to pile driving. Based on the nature of the 
activity and the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures 
(i.e., shutdown--discussed in detail below in Mitigation section, Level 
A harassment is neither anticipated nor authorized.
    As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized 
for the IHA. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
    Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic 
thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science 
indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some 
degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water 
that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or 
occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) 
and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic 
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial 
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively 
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous 
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the 
factors considered here in more detail and present the authorized 
amount of take.

Acoustic Thresholds

    Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic 
thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above 
which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be 
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS 
of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
    Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources--Though significantly 
driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from 
anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by 
other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability, 
duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving 
animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral 
context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007, 
Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what the available science indicates 
and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is 
both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a 
generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the 
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are 
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B 
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above 
received levels of 120 decibels re 1 micoPascal root mean square (dB re 
1 [mu]Pa rms) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile-driving, drilling) 
and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., 
seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
    The Navy's specified activity includes the use of continuous 
(vibratory pile driving) and impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, 
and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa rms are applicable.
    Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical 
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine 
Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual 
criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five 
different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a 
result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources 
(impulsive or non-impulsive). The Navy's specified activity includes 
the use of impulsive (impact pile driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory 
pile driving) sources.
    These thresholds are provided in the Table 3 below. The references, 
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are 
described in NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.

                     Table 3--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    PTS Onset acoustic thresholds \*\ (received level)
             Hearing group              ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Impulsive                         Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans...........  Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB;   Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
                                          LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans...........  Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB;   Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
                                          LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans..........  Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB;   Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
                                          LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater).....  Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB;   Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
                                          LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater)....  Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB;   Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
                                          LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for
  calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level
  thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE)
  has a reference value of 1[micro]Pa\2\s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American
  National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as
  incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript
  ``flat'' is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the
  generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates
  the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds)
  and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could
  be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible,
  it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
  exceeded.

Ensonified Area

    Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the 
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the 
acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss 
coefficient.
    The Navy used results from previous sound source verification tests 
at NAVSTA Mayport to estimate vibratory pile driving source levels. 
Vibratory

[[Page 37846]]

driving of steel sheet piles was monitored during the first year of 
construction at the nearby C-2 Wharf at NAVSTA Mayport during 2015. 
Measurements were conducted from a small boat in the turning basin and 
from the construction barge itself. Driving periods ranged from 
approximately 17 seconds to a little over one minute. Sound levels were 
recorded at a 10-m distance and the measured dB levels were converted 
to pressure values to generate 10-second averages of the levels before 
converting the values back to dB levels. The average and median of the 
levels resulted in a source level of 156 dB re 1[micro]Pa rms (Navy 
2017).
    No impact driving was conducted during this acoustic monitoring; 
therefore, the Navy relied on Caltrans (2015) to estimate source levels 
during impact pile driving of the 24-in sheet piles. The selected sound 
pressure levels used for modeling impact driving steel piles are 180 dB 
single-strike sound exposure level (SEL), 190 dB rms, and 205 dB peak. 
These values were also used in previous Navy Mayport IHAs without 
concern or public comment.
    When the NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in 
recognition of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more 
technically challenging to predict because of the duration component in 
the new thresholds, we developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools 
to help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with 
marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that 
because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for 
these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going 
to be overestimates of some degree, which may result in some degree of 
overestimate of Level A harassment take. However, these tools offer the 
best way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D 
modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways 
to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address 
the output where appropriate. For stationary sources (such as pile 
driving), NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the closest distance at which, 
if a marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the 
activity, it would not incur PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet 
and the resulting isopleths are reported below (Table 4).
    Vibratory pile driving, in general, does have the potential to 
cause injury to marine mammals if the duration of activity and source 
level are such that the threshold for injury in mid-frequency cetaceans 
(198 dB SELcum) is exceeded. In this case, the duration is 
short enough and source level low enough to where a dolphin must be 
within less than 1m of the pile for the entire duration of activity (45 
minutes per day); therefore, the potential for injury is discountable. 
Impact pile driving also has the potential to result in PTS; impact 
driving produces short, sharp pulses with higher peak levels than 
vibratory driving as well as sharp rise time to reach those peaks. 
However, the Navy is proposing to install only one pile per day with an 
impact hammer (at 20 strikes per pile) resulting in very small 
isopleths within which received level would exceed the Level A 
harassment threshold (we note the peak threshold resulted in smaller 
isopleth than the SEL threshold). As evident by the very small 
isopleths in Table 4, the potential for Level A harassment is 
discountable. As a result of this analysis, the Navy did not request, 
nor did NMFS authorize, take by Level A harassment; therefore, it will 
not be discussed further.

                 Table 4--User Spreadsheet Input Values
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Impact pile       Vibratory pile
     User spreadsheet input             driving             driving
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spreadsheet Tab Used............  (E.1) Impact pile   (A) Non-Impulse-
                                   driving.            Stat-Cont.
Source Level....................  180 dB SEL/205 dB   156 dBrms.
                                   peak.
Weighting Factor Adjustment       2.................  2.5.
 (kHz).
(b) Number of strikes per pile..  20................  N/A.
(b) Number of piles per day.....  1.................  0.75 (15 piles x 3
                                                       minutes per
                                                       pile).
Propagation (xLogR).............  15................  15.
Distance of source level          10................  10.
 measurement (meters) \+\.
Level A Harassment Isopleth (mid- 1.7 m.............  0.2 m.
 frequency cetaceans).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To calculate the Level B harassment ensonified area, the Navy 
identified distances to the Level B harassment thresholds for impact 
and vibratory pile driving (160 dB rms and 120 dB rms, respectively) 
using a practical spreading loss model. Resulting isopleth distances 
and ensonified areas (corrected in ArcView GIS to eliminate land; see 
the Navy's application for more details) are presented in Table 5.

           Table 5--Calculated Level A Harassment and Level B Harassment Isopleths and Ensonfied Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Driving method
           Pile type               (source level)          Harassment type         Distance (m)    Area (km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24'' Steel sheet piles.........  Vibratory (156 dB   Level A....................             0.2          0.0002
                                  rms).
                                                     Level B....................           2,512          0.4104
                                 Impact (190 dB      Level A....................             1.7          0.0006
                                  rms).
                                                     Level B....................           1,000          0.3540
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marine Mammal Occurrence

    In this section we provide the information about the presence, 
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take 
calculations.
    Bottlenose dolphin density used for this analysis was based on 
surveys conducted to support wharf recapitalization projects within the 
Mayport turning basin (Navy, 2015). Those surveys demonstrated dolphin 
presence and abundance is not uniform throughout the year. Because it 
is unknown exactly when pile driving will commence and be completed 
within the

[[Page 37847]]

effective period of the IHA, the Navy applied the highest seasonal 
density of 4.15366 dolphins per km\2\ to the estimated take analysis. 
This density has been used in previous IHAs issued to the Navy for 
wharf recapitalization projects within the Mayport turning basin 
without public comment or concern.

Take Calculation and Estimation

    Here we describe how the information provided above is brought 
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
    Bottlenose dolphin density was multiplied by the size of the 
relevant zone of influence and number of piles driven to determine the 
estimated number of Level B harassment exposures per day. Resulting 
vibratory and impact hammering exposures were summed across days to 
produce a total exposure estimate:
    Exposure = (density x vibratory driving area ensonfied above the 
behavioral harassment threshold x number of vibratory pile driving 
days) + (density x impact driving area ensonfied above the behavioral 
harassment threshold x number of impact pile driving days).
    The same methodology was used to estimate takes for work at Wharf 
Bravo, completed in 2017-18. During that project, two to three marine 
mammal observers were stationed strategically to cover the entire Level 
B harassment area. The number of detected observations of marine 
mammals within the Level B harassment zone for that project was only 30 
percent of the number authorized; therefore, this method is considered 
reliable.
    Using the formula above, NMFS proposed authorizing 58 takes by 
Level B harassment incidental to vibratory and impact driving at the 
South Quay wall. However, the Commission recommended this total be 
increased based on previous NAVSTA Mayport monitoring reports. NMFS 
considered previous daily sighting rates and the Level B harassment 
zone size of those previous projects to the Level B harassment zone for 
the South Quay wall project. Average sighting rates within the NAVSTA 
Mayport was 1.7 dolphins/day while observations made both within and 
outside the turning basin ranged from approximately 2-4 dolphins/day. 
On average, group size was 2 animals. Based on these data, NMFS 
increased the amount of take authorized from 58 in the proposed IHA to 
70 in the final IHA (considering 2 animals/day for 35 days). The stocks 
from which these takes could occur are provided in Table 1. Because it 
is not possible to distinguish stocks in the field, we assume all 70 
takes could occur to any single stock. As described above, no Level A 
harassment take is anticipated or authorized.

Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such 
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on 
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to 
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on 
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain 
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS 
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to 
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic 
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such 
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 
216.104(a)(11)).
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and 
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we 
carefully consider two primary factors:
    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful 
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to 
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. 
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being 
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the 
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented 
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as 
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability 
implemented as planned); and
    (2) the practicability of the measures for applicant 
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on 
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, 
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the 
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
    The Navy proposed identical mitigation to that required in previous 
IHAs for work at NAVSTA Mayport, as described in detail in the IHA 
posted on NMFS' website at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. Pile driving will only be conducted during daylight hours. 
For all pile driving, the Navy will implement a minimum shutdown zone 
of 15-m radius around the pile and around any other in-water 
construction equipment. If a marine mammal approaches or enters the 
shutdown zone, all pile driving activities will 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.
    For all pile driving activities, a minimum of two protected species 
observers (PSOs) will be on watch, with one positioned to achieve 
optimal monitoring of the shutdown zone and the second positioned to 
achieve optimal monitoring of monitoring (Level B harassment) zone. 
Observers may be stationed in a tall building at NAVSTA Mayport, the 
construction barge, small vessels, or on the wharf at a location that 
will provide adequate visual coverage for the marine mammal shutdown 
zone.
    The Navy will use soft start techniques 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.
    If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or a 
species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized 
takes are met, is observed approaching or within the monitoring zone, 
pile driving and removal activities must shut down immediately using 
delay and shut-down procedures. Activities must not resume until the 
animal has been confirmed to have left the area or fifteen minutes have 
passed without re-detection of the animal.

Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the 
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for 
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the 
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased 
knowledge

[[Page 37848]]

of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of 
marine mammals that are expected to be present in the action area. 
Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring 
that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring.
    Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should 
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
     Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area 
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, 
density);
     Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure 
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or 
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment 
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) 
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence 
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or 
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
     Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or 
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), 
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
     How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) 
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) 
populations, species, or stocks;
     Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey 
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of 
marine mammal habitat); and
     Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
    The Navy will conduct marine mammal monitoring using two NMFS-
approved PSOs stationed at strategic locations at NAVSTA Mayport, per 
their Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, dated April 2019. Monitoring will 
take place from 30 minutes prior to initiation of pile driving activity 
through thirty minutes post-completion of pile driving activity. In the 
event of a delay or shutdown of activity resulting from marine mammals 
in the shutdown zone, their behavior will be monitored and documented. 
No techniques (e.g., pingers, boats) will be used to entice animals to 
leave the area. Monitoring shall occur throughout the time required to 
drive a pile and continue 30 minutes after pile driving ceases. 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).
    PSOs will be equipped with binoculars (7 x 50 power or greater) to 
ensure sufficient visual acuity and magnification while investigating 
sightings, portable radios or cellular phone(s) to rapidly communicate 
with the appropriate construction personnel to initiate shutdown of 
pile driving activity if required, a digital camera for photographing 
any marine species sighted, data collection forms, and a compass or 
GPS.
    The Navy will collect sighting data 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.
    PSOs will 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(s), if any. In addition, the Navy will attempt 
to distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the 
number of incidences of take.
    Data such as group size, age class, behavior in absence of pile 
driving (if observed when no pile driving is occurring), and any 
detectable observed behavioral responses to pile driving will also be 
recorded. These data will assist in the Navy and NMFS' better 
understanding of the impacts of the activities on bottlenose dolphin 
stocks potentially affected by the activity.

Reporting

    A draft report will 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 information on 
marine mammal monitoring effort and construction activities, marine 
mammal observations pre-activity, during-activity, and post-activity 
during pile driving days, descriptions of sightings and 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. Should the Navy encounter a dead or 
injured marine mammal, additional reporting procedures would be taken.
    All specific monitoring and reporting requirements are available 
for review in the IHA (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities).

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the 
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not 
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough 
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to 
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be 
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the 
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context 
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, 
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness 
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of 
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population 
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing 
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other 
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this 
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as 
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and 
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or 
ambient noise levels).
    Pile driving activities associated with the South Quay Wall 
Recapitalization 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 area ensonified above behavioral harassment 
thresholds when pile driving is happening.

[[Page 37849]]

    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 avoided through the construction methods and the 
implementation of the planned mitigation measures such that take by 
Level A harassment (injury), serious injury and mortality is not 
authorized.
    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 identical to previous NAVSTA Mayport 
recapilization projects, which have taken place with no reported 
injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long-term adverse 
consequences on bottlenose dolphins from behavioral harassment. In 
fact, marine mammal reports from previous projects requiring incidental 
harassment authorizations have found that the dolphins observed did not 
exhibit notable reactions attributed to pile driving noise at NAVSTA 
Mayport. In those reports (e.g., Navy 2016, 2018a, 2018b), traveling 
and foraging behaviors were most common with no overt changes in 
behavior observed during pile driving.
    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. A very limited amount of pile 
driving would occur each day, making extended durations of exposure 
necessary to cause hearing impairment unlikely. Further, as described 
above, marine mammal monitoring reports indicate foraging behavior 
continues despite projects requiring the installation of several 
hundred piles. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small 
subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in decrease in 
fitness for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in any 
adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B harassment severity 
will also 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. 
Finally, NAVSTA Mayport is a small, man-made military basin that does 
not include any significant marine mammal habitat or biologically 
important area.
    In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily 
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity 
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
     No mortality or injury is anticipated or authorized;
     Behavioral disturbance is possible, but expected to be 
minimal due to the limited duration of activities (no more than 35 days 
of pile driving during the authorized year, the time required to drive 
each pile is brief (less than one hour of vibratory driving per day and 
no more than 20 impact strikes per day), and the mitigation measures 
(e.g., shut-downs and soft start) would reduce the severity of acoustic 
impacts to species in the area of activities; and
     The absence of any significant habitat within the project 
area, including known areas or features of special significance for 
foraging or reproduction.
    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 monitoring and mitigation 
measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the 
activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal 
species or stocks.

Small Numbers

    As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be 
authorized under Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for 
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA 
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated 
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to 
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or 
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to 
small numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative 
factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or 
spatial scale of the activities.
    Of the 70 incidents of behavioral harassment authorized for 
bottlenose dolphins, we have no information allowing us to parse the 
predicted incidents amongst the three stocks 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 the 
Florida Coastal and Southern Migratory Coastal stocks, total predicted 
number of incidents of take authorized would be considered small at 
less than six percent and one percent, respectively.
    The total number of authorized takes for bottlenose dolphins of the 
Jacksonville Estuarine stock, if assumed to accrue solely to new 
individuals, is higher relative to current stock abundance compared to 
these two stocks at 17 percent. This assumes all 70 exposures occur to 
70 distinct individuals. This percentage is still relatively low and it 
is unlikely that all takes would occur to new individuals within this 
stock and this estimate all takes would occur to this one stock. 
Bottlenose dolphins belonging to estuarine stocks exhibit high site 
fidelity, resulting in higher likelihood of repeated exposure.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the activity (including 
the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of 
marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be 
taken relative to the population size of the affected species or 
stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

    There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine 
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has 
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would 
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such 
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
    National Environmental Policy Act
    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, 
NMFS must review our action (i.e., the issuance of an incidental 
harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts on the 
human environment.
    This action is consistent with categories of activities identified 
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental harassment authorizations with 
no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for 
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or 
cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality 
of the human environment and for which we have not identified

[[Page 37850]]

any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical 
exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the 
IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any 
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize 
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or 
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated 
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, 
NMFS consults internally, in this case with the Southeast Regional 
Protected Resources Division, whenever we propose to authorize take for 
endangered or threatened species.
    No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected 
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that 
formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this 
action.

Authorization

    NMFS has issued an IHA to the Navy for the harassment of small 
numbers of bottlenose dolphins incidental to the South Quay Wall 
Recapitalization Project at NAVSTA Mayport, Jacksonville, FL, provided 
the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
requirements. A copy of the IHA can be found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.

    Dated: July 29, 2019.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-16486 Filed 8-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P