Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Wharf Recapitalization Project, 71566-71575 [2013-28650]
Download as PDF
71566
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
Council address: New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950;
telephone: (978) 465–0492.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director,
New England Fishery Management
Council, (978) 465–0492.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Monday, December 16, 2013
The Council will begin the first day of
this meeting with introductions by the
Chairman, followed by an open public
comment period during which any
interested party may provide brief
remarks on issues relevant to Council
business but not listed on the meeting
agenda. The Council will then discuss
and approve NEFMC management
priorities for 2014. The herring fishery
management priorities approved at the
November 2013 Council meeting will
not be addressed at the December
meeting. After a lunch break, the
Scientific and Statistical Committee
(SSC) will report an on overfishing limit
and acceptable biological catch
recommendations for sea scallops for
fishing years 2014–15. The report also
will include the SSC’s review of an OFL
and ABC for Gulf of Maine haddock for
fishing years 2013–15. The Scallop
Committee will update the Council
about several modified alternatives in
Framework Adjustment 25 to the Sea
Scallop Fishery Management Plan
(FMP). Before adjournment for the day
a Northeast Fisheries Science Center
representative will provide an overview
of the National Standard 2 final rule.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
The NEFMC’s Groundfish Oversight
Committee will present final measures
to be approved at this meeting for
inclusion in Framework Adjustment 51
to the Northeast Multispecies
(Groundfish) FMP. These will address
but are not limited to the 2014–16
overfishing level (OFL), acceptable
biological catch (ABC) and annual catch
level (ACL) for white hake, the 2014–15
OFL, ABC and ACL for Georges Bank
yellowtail flounder, ACLs for Eastern
Georges Bank haddock and Eastern
Georges Bank cod, revisions to the Gulf
of Maine cod and American plaice
rebuilding plans, and small-mesh
accountability measures (AMs) for the
Georges Bank yellowtail flounder subACL. Other provisions will address inseason adjustments to the U.S./Canada
quotas, including the distribution of the
haddock quota in the Eastern and
Western U.S./Canada areas. The Council
also will consider a prohibition on
yellowtail flounder by limited access
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
scallop fishery vessels, and possibly
other adjustments to the groundfish
management measures. Issues related to
this fishery will be addressed until
adjournment at the end of the afternoon
on Tuesday.
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
During the final day of the Council
meeting, members will review the
Habitat Omnibus Amendment 2 Draft
Environmental Impact Statement and
identify preferred alternatives. The day
will end with consideration of any other
outstanding business that may have
been deferred until the end of the
meeting.
Although other non-emergency issues
not contained in this agenda may come
before this Council for discussion, those
issues may not be the subjects of formal
action during this meeting. Council
action will be restricted to those issues
specifically listed in this notice and any
issues arising after publication of this
notice that require emergency action
under section 305(c) of the MagnusonStevens Act, provided that the public
has been notified of the Council’s intent
to take final action to address the
emergency.
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to
Thomas A. Nies (see ADDRESSES) at least
5 days prior to the meeting date.
Dated: November 25, 2013.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–28707 Filed 11–27–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XC762
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to a Wharf
Recapitalization Project
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
amended, notification is hereby given
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
that we have issued an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to the
U.S. Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass,
by Level B harassment only, two species
of marine mammals during construction
activities associated with a wharf
recapitalization project at Naval Station
Mayport, Florida.
DATES: This authorization is effective
from December 1, 2013, through
November 30, 2014.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the Navy’s
application and any supporting
documents, as well as a list of the
references cited in this document, may
be obtained by visiting the internet at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm. In the case of problems
accessing these documents, please call
the contact listed below. A
memorandum describing our adoption
of the Navy’s Environmental
Assessment (2013) and our associated
Finding of No Significant Impact,
prepared pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act, are also
available at the same site.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Laws, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
area, the incidental, but not intentional,
taking of small numbers of marine
mammals, providing that certain
findings are made and the necessary
prescriptions are established.
The incidental taking of small
numbers of marine mammals may be
allowed only if NMFS (through
authority delegated by the Secretary)
finds that the total taking by the
specified activity during the specified
time period will (i) have a negligible
impact on the species or stock(s) and (ii)
not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant). Further, the permissible
methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such taking must be set
forth, either in specific regulations or in
an authorization.
The allowance of such incidental
taking under section 101(a)(5)(A), by
harassment, serious injury, death or a
combination thereof, requires that
regulations be established.
Subsequently, a Letter of Authorization
may be issued pursuant to the
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
prescriptions established in such
regulations, providing that the level of
taking will be consistent with the
findings made for the total taking
allowable under the specific regulations.
Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may
authorize such incidental taking by
harassment only, for periods of not more
than 1 year, pursuant to requirements
and conditions contained within an
Incidental Harassment Authorization.
The establishment of prescriptions
through either specific regulations or an
authorization requires notice and
opportunity for public comment.
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘. . . an
impact resulting from the specified
activity that cannot be reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely
to, adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.’’ Except with
respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines
‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘. . . any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild; 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.’’ The former is termed Level
A harassment and the latter is termed
Level B harassment.
Summary of Request
On April 4, 2013, we received a
request from the Navy for authorization
of the taking, by Level B harassment
only, of marine mammals incidental to
pile driving in association with the
Wharf C–2 recapitalization project at
Naval Station Mayport, Florida (NSM).
That request was modified on May 9
and June 5, 2013, and a final version,
which we deemed adequate and
complete, was submitted on August 7,
2013. In-water work associated with the
project is expected to be completed
within the one-year timeframe of the
IHA (December 1, 2013 through
November 30, 2014). Two species of
marine mammal are expected to be
affected by the specified activities:
bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus
truncatus) and Atlantic spotted dolphin
(Stenella frontalis). These species may
occur year-round in the action area.
Wharf C–2 is a single level, general
purpose berthing wharf constructed in
1960. The wharf is one of NSM’s two
primary deep-draft berths and is one of
the primary ordnance handling wharfs.
The wharf is a diaphragm steel sheet
pile cell structure with a concrete apron,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
partial concrete encasement of the
piling and an asphalt paved deck. The
wharf is currently in poor condition due
to advanced deterioration of the steel
sheeting and lack of corrosion
protection, and this structural
deterioration has resulted in the
institution of load restrictions within 60
ft of the wharf face. The purpose of this
project is to complete necessary repairs
to Wharf C–2. Please refer to Appendix
A of the Navy’s application for photos
of existing damage and deterioration at
the wharf, and to Appendix B for a
contractor schematic of the project plan.
Effects to marine mammals from the
specified activity are expected to result
from underwater sound produced by
vibratory and impact pile driving. In
order to assess project impacts, the Navy
used thresholds recommended by
NMFS, outlined later in this document.
The Navy assumed practical spreading
loss and used empirically-measured
source levels from representative pile
driving events to estimate potential
marine mammal exposures. Predicted
exposures are described later in this
document. The calculations predict that
only Level B harassment would occur
associated with pile driving activities,
and required mitigation measures
further ensure that no more than Level
B harassment would occur.
Description of the Specified Activity
Additional details regarding the
specified activity were described in our
Federal Register notice of proposed
authorization (78 FR 52148; August 22,
2013; hereafter, the FR notice); please
see that document or the Navy’s
application for more information.
Specific Geographic Region and
Duration
NSM is located in northeastern
Florida, at the mouth of the St. Johns
River and adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean
(see Figure 2–1 of the Navy’s
application). The specific action area
consists of the NSM turning basin, an
area of approximately 2,000 by 3,000 ft
containing ship berthing facilities at
sixteen locations along wharves around
the basin perimeter. The turning basin,
connected to the St. Johns River by a
500-ft-wide entrance channel, will
largely contain sound produced by
project activities, with the exception of
sound propagating east into nearshore
Atlantic waters through the entrance
channel (see Figure 2–2 of the Navy’s
application). Wharf C–2 is located in the
northeastern corner of the Mayport
turning basin.
The project is expected to require a
maximum of 50 days of in-water
vibratory pile driving work over a 12-
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71567
month period. It is not expected that
significant impact pile driving would be
necessary, on the basis of expected
subsurface driving conditions and past
experience driving piles in the same
location. However, twenty additional
days of impact pile driving are included
in the specified activity as a
contingency, for a total of 70 days inwater pile driving considered over the
12-month timeframe of the proposed
IHA.
Description of Specified Activity
In order to rehabilitate Wharf C–2, the
Navy proposes to install a new steel
king pile/sheet pile (SSP) bulkhead. An
SSP system consists of large vertical
king piles with paired steel sheet piles
driven inbetween and connected to the
ends of the king piles. Please see Figures
1–1 through 1–4 and Table 1–1 in the
Navy’s application for project
schematics, descriptive photographs,
and further information about the pile
types to be used.
The project will require installation of
approximately 120 single sheet piles
and 119 king piles (all steel) to support
the bulkhead wall, and fifty polymeric
(plastic) fender piles. Vibratory
installation of the steel piles will require
approximately 45 days, with
approximately 5 additional days needed
for vibratory installation of the plastic
piles. King piles are long I-shaped guide
piles that provide the structural support
for the bulkhead wall. Sheet piles,
which form the actual wall, will be
driven in pairs between the king piles.
Once piles are in position, it is expected
that less than 60 seconds of vibratory
driving would be required per pile to
reach the required depth. Time interval
between driving of each pile pair will
vary, but is expected to be a minimum
of several minutes due to time required
for positioning, etc. One template
consists of the combination of five king
piles and four sheet pile pairs; it is
expected that three such templates may
be driven per day. Polymeric fender
piles will be installed after completion
of the bulkhead, at an expected rate of
approximately ten piles per day.
Impact pile driving is not expected to
be required for most piles, but may be
used as a contingency in cases when
vibratory driving is not sufficient to
reach the necessary depth. A similar
project completed at an adjacent wharf
required impact pile driving on only
seven piles (over the course of two
days). Impact pile driving, if it were
required, could occur on the same day
as vibratory pile driving, but driving rigs
would not be operated simultaneously.
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
71568
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
Description of Sound Sources and
Distances to Thresholds
An in-depth description of sound
sources in general was provided in the
FR notice (78 FR 52148; August 22,
2013). Significant sound-producing inwater construction activities associated
with the project include vibratory pile
driving and potentially impact pile
driving.
Sound Thresholds
NMFS currently uses acoustic
exposure thresholds as important tools
to help better characterize and quantify
the effects of human-induced noise on
marine mammals. These thresholds
have predominantly been presented in
the form of single received levels for
particular source categories (e.g.,
impulse, continuous, or explosive)
above which an exposed animal would
be predicted to incur auditory injury or
be behaviorally harassed. Current NMFS
practice (in relation to the MMPA)
regarding exposure of marine mammals
to sound is that cetaceans and
pinnipeds exposed to sound levels of
180 and 190 dB rms or above,
respectively, are considered to have
been taken by Level A (i.e., injurious)
harassment, while behavioral
harassment (Level B) is considered to
have occurred when marine mammals
are exposed to sounds at or above 120
dB rms for continuous sound (such as
will be produced by vibratory pile
driving) and 160 dB rms for pulsed
sound (produced by impact pile
driving), but below injurious thresholds.
NMFS uses these levels as guidelines to
estimate when harassment may occur.
NMFS is in the process of revising
these acoustic thresholds, with the first
step being to identify new auditory
injury criteria for all source types and
new behavioral criteria for seismic
activities (primarily airgun-type
sources). For more information on that
process, please visit https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/
guidelines.htm.
Distance to Sound Thresholds
Pile driving generates underwater
noise that can potentially result in
disturbance to marine mammals in the
project area. Please see the FR notice (78
FR 52148; August 22, 2013) for a
detailed description of the calculations
and information used to estimate
distances to relevant threshold levels. In
general, the sound pressure level (SPL)
at some distance away from the source
(e.g., driven pile) is governed by a
measured source level, minus the
transmission loss of the energy as it
dissipates with distance. A practical
spreading value of 15 (4.5 dB reduction
in sound level for each doubling of
distance) is often used under
intermediate conditions, and is assumed
here.
Source level, or the intensity of pile
driving sound, is greatly influenced by
factors such as the type of piles,
hammers, and the physical environment
in which the activity takes place. A
number of studies, primarily on the
west coast, have measured sound
produced during underwater pile
driving projects. However, these data
are largely for impact driving of steel
pipe piles and concrete piles as well as
vibratory driving of steel pipe piles. We
know of no existing measurements for
the specific pile types planned for use
at NSM (i.e., king piles, paired sheet
piles, plastic pipe piles), although some
data exist for single sheet piles. It was
therefore necessary to extrapolate from
available data to determine reasonable
source levels for this project.
Representative data for pile driving
SPLs recorded from similar construction
activities in recent years, as well as
additional assumptions made in
determining appropriate proxy values,
were presented in the FR notice (78 FR
52148; August 22, 2013). Underwater
sound levels from pile driving for this
project are assumed to be as follows:
• For vibratory driving of steel sheet
and king piles, 178 dB re 1 mPa (rms).
This proxy value was the highest
representative value for vibratory
driving of steel sheet piles and
appropriately-sized steel pipe piles
found in the California Department of
Transportation’s compendium of pile
driving data (Caltrans, 2012).
• For impact driving of steel sheet
and king piles, 204 dB re 1 mPa (rms).
This proxy value was deemed to be the
most representative value for impact
driving of appropriately-sized steel pipe
piles, as found in the California
Department of Transportation’s
compendium of pile driving data.
• For vibratory driving of polymeric
piles 168 dB re 1 mPa (rms). This proxy
value, measured by the Washington
State Department of Transportation for
vibratory removal of timber piles, was
determined to be the only reasonable
approximation of these pile types
(Laughlin, 2011).
Please see Tables 6–3 and 6–4 in the
Navy’s application. All calculated
distances to and the total area
encompassed by the marine mammal
sound thresholds are provided in Table
1.
TABLE 1—CALCULATED DISTANCE(S) TO AND AREA ENCOMPASSED BY UNDERWATER MARINE MAMMAL SOUND
THRESHOLDS DURING PILE INSTALLATION
Pile type
Method
Steel (sheet and king piles) .....................
Vibratory ....................
...............................
Impact ........................
...............................
Vibratory ....................
...............................
Polymeric (plastic fender piles) ...............
Distance (m)1
Threshold
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A
B
A
B
A
B
harassment
harassment
harassment
harassment
harassment
harassment
(180
(120
(180
(160
(180
(120
dB)
dB)
dB)
dB)
dB)
dB)
Area (sq. km)2
n/a
7,356
40
858
n/a
1,585
0
2.9
0.004
0.67
0
0.88
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
1 SPLs (levels at source) used for calculations were: 204 dB for impact driving, 178 dB for vibratory driving steel piles, and 168 dB for vibratory
driving plastic piles.
2 Areas presented take into account attenuation and/or shadowing by land. Calculated distances to relevant thresholds cannot be reached in
most directions form source piles. Please see Figures 6–1 through 6–3 in the Navy’s application.
The Mayport turning basin does not
represent open water, or free field,
conditions. Therefore, sounds would
attenuate as per the confines of the
basin, and may only reach the full
estimated distances to the harassment
thresholds via the narrow, east-facing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
entrance channel. Distances shown in
Table 1 are estimated for free-field
conditions, but areas are calculated per
the actual conditions of the action area.
See Figures 6–1 through 6–3 of the
Navy’s application for a depiction of
areas in which each underwater sound
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
threshold is predicted to occur at the
project area due to pile driving.
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of receipt of
the Navy’s application and proposed
IHA in the Federal Register on August
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
22, 2013 (78 FR 52148). NMFS received
comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission). The
Commission’s comments and our
responses are provided here, and the
comments have been posted on the
internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
pr/permits/incidental.htm.
Comment 1: The Commission
recommends that we require the Navy to
implement soft start procedures if
impact pile driving activities have
ceased for at least 15 minutes.
Response: We do not believe the
recommendation would be effective in
reducing the number or intensity of
incidents of harassment—in fact, we
believe that implementation of this
recommendation may actually increase
the number of incidents of harassment
by extending the overall project
duration—while imposing a high cost in
terms of operational practicability. We
note here that, while the Commission
recommends use of the measure to
avoid serious injury (i.e., injury that will
result in death of the animal), such an
outcome is extremely unlikely even in
the absence of any mitigation measures
(as described in the FR notice).
Therefore, we address our response to
the potential usefulness of the measure
in avoidance of non-serious injury (i.e.,
Level A harassment).
Soft start is required for the first
impact pile driving of each day and,
subsequently, after any impact pile
driving stoppage of 30 minutes or
greater. The purpose of a soft start is to
provide a ‘‘warning’’ to animals by
initiating the production of underwater
sound at lower levels than are produced
at full operating power. This warning is
presumed to allow animals the
opportunity to move away from an
unpleasant stimulus and to potentially
reduce the intensity of behavioral
reactions to noise or prevent injury of
animals that may remain undetected in
the zone ensonified to potentially
injurious levels. However, soft start
requires additional time, resulting in a
larger temporal footprint for the project.
That is, soft start requires a longer
cumulative period of pile driving (i.e.,
hours) but, more importantly, leads to a
longer overall duration (i.e., more days
on which pile driving occurs). In order
to maximize the effectiveness of soft
start while minimizing the
implementation costs, we require soft
start after a period of extended and
unobserved relative silence (i.e., at the
beginning of the day, after the end of the
required 30-minute post-activity
monitoring period, or after 30 minutes
with no impact driving). It is after these
periods that marine mammals are more
likely to closely approach the site
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
(because it is relatively quiet) and less
likely to be observed prior to initiation
of the activity (because continuous
monitoring has been interrupted).
The Commission justifies this
recommendation on the basis of the
potential for undetected animals to
remain in the shutdown zone. This may
occur because an animal remains
submerged and is not available to be
observed, because dolphins occur singly
or in pairs and are difficult to perceive,
or because the observer simply does not
detect the animal in the period when it
surfaces and is available to be observed.
However, we do not believe that time is
a factor in determining the influence of
these biases on the probability of
observing an animal in the shutdown
zone. That is, an observer is not more
likely to detect the presence of an
animal at the 15-minute mark of
continuous monitoring than after 30
minutes (it is established that soft start
is required after any unmonitored
period). Therefore, requiring soft start
after 15 minutes (i.e., more soft starts) is
not likely to result in increased
avoidance of injury. Finally, we do not
believe that the use of soft start may be
expected to appreciably reduce the
potential for injury where the
probability of detection is high (e.g.,
small, shallow zones with good
environmental conditions). Rather, the
primary purpose of soft start under such
conditions is to reduce the intensity of
potential behavioral reactions to
underwater sound in the disturbance
zone.
As noted above, there are multiple
reasons why marine mammals may
remain in a shutdown zone and yet be
undetected by observers. Animals are
missed because they are underwater
(availability bias) or because they are
available to be seen, but are missed by
observers (perception and detection
biases) (e.g., Marsh and Sinclair, 1989).
Negative bias on perception or detection
of an available animal may result from
environmental conditions, limitations
inherent to the observation platform, or
observer ability. While missed
detections are possible in theory, this
would require that an animal would
either (a) remain submerged (i.e., be
unavailable) for periods of time
approaching or exceeding 15 minutes
and/or (b) remain undetected while at
the surface. We provide further sitespecific detail below.
First, the Mayport turning basin is an
enclosed area, and provides a relatively
sheltered environment and
circumscribed area of observation. We
would therefore expect a high
probability of detection given an animal
at the surface and multiple well-
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71569
positioned observers. Unlike the moving
aerial or vessel-based observation
platforms for which detectability bias is
often a concern, the observers here will
be positioned in the most suitable
locations to ensure high detectability
(randomness of observations is not a
concern, as it is for abundance
sampling). Regarding availability, the
only species likely to be present in the
turning basin is the bottlenose dolphin.
For bottlenose dolphins, while a
significant proportion of time is
typically spent submerged, dive
intervals are also typically very short,
meaning that surfacing occurs
frequently. Mate et al. (1995) report a
typical dive duration from another
shallow bay (Tampa Bay) of only 25
seconds. While bottlenose dolphins may
display deeper dive times in other
contexts (e.g., deep-water foraging),
there is no conceivable reason why a
dolphin would remain submerged for
durations approaching 15 minutes in
the turning basin (i.e., a shallow
environment of no particular
significance for foraging). Short dive
duration means high availability,
providing additional confidence in the
ability of observers to detect marine
mammals in the shutdown zones
estimated for this project.
Comment 2: The Commission
recommends that we require the Navy to
monitor the extent of the Level B
harassment zones by strategically
positioning the observers (e.g., one
monitoring the immediate shutdown
zone and portions of the turning basin
and the other monitoring portions of the
turning basin, the entrance to that basin,
and portions of the Atlantic Ocean) to
(1) determine more accurately the
numbers of marine mammals taken
during pile driving activities and (2)
characterize the effects on those marine
mammals.
Response: We support the
Commission’s recommendation, and
agree that the recommended changes to
the Navy’s Monitoring Plan could be
useful in achieving a more accurate (1)
determination of the numbers of marine
mammals taken during pile driving
activities and (2) characterization of the
effects on those marine mammals. One
existing observer will be required to
observe the turning basin, the entrance
to that basin, and portions of the
Atlantic Ocean, to the extent possible.
In addition, we will require a third
shore-based observer be present for
three days of vibratory driving, to be
focused solely on the entrance to the
turning basin and surrounding,
observable portions of the Atlantic
Ocean that may be ensonified by project
activities.
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
71570
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
There are four marine mammal
species which may inhabit or transit
through the waters nearby NSM at the
mouth of the St. Johns River and in
nearby nearshore Atlantic waters. These
include the bottlenose dolphin, Atlantic
spotted dolphin, North Atlantic right
whale (Eubalaena glacialis), and
humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae). Multiple stocks of
bottlenose dolphins may be present in
the action area, either seasonally or
year-round. Multiple additional
cetacean species occur in South Atlantic
waters but would not be expected to
occur in shallow nearshore waters of the
action area. The right and humpback
whales are both listed under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) as
endangered; however, for reasons
described in the FR notice (78 FR 52148;
August 22, 2013), the humpback whale
and right whale are not expected to be
harassed by project activities and are
therefore excluded from further analysis
and not discussed further in this
document. Table 2 lists the marine
mammal species with potential for
occurrence in the vicinity of NSM
during the project timeframe. The FR
notice (78 FR 52148; August 22, 2013)
summarizes the population status and
abundance of these species, and the
Navy’s application provides detailed life
history information.
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF NSM
Species
Stock abundance 1 (CV,
Nmin)
Relative occurrence in action area
North Atlantic right whale ....................................................
Western North Atlantic stock ..............................................
Humpback whale .................................................................
Gulf of Maine stock .............................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin .......................................................
Western North Atlantic stock
Bottlenose dolphin ...............................................................
Western North Atlantic offshore stock
Bottlenose dolphin ...............................................................
Western North Atlantic coastal, southern migratory stock
Bottlenose dolphin ...............................................................
Western North Atlantic coastal, northern Florida stock ......
Bottlenose dolphin ...............................................................
Jacksonville Estuarine System stock ..................................
444 (n/a, 444) ......................
823 (n/a, 823) ......................
Rare inshore, regular near/
offshore.
Rare .....................................
Fall-Spring.
26,798 (0.66, 16,151) ..........
Rare .....................................
Year-round.
81,588 (0.17, 70,775) ..........
Rare .....................................
Year-round.
12,482 (0.32, 9,591) ............
Possibly common (seasonal)
January to March.
3,064 (0.24, 2,511) ..............
Possibly common ................
Year-round.
4122 (0.06, unknown) ..........
Possibly common ................
Year-round.
Season of occurrence
November to April.
1 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm. CV is coefficient of variation; N
min is the
minimum estimate of stock abundance.
2 This abundance estimate is considered an overestimate because it includes non- and seasonally-resident animals.
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals
We have determined that pile driving,
as outlined in the project description,
has the potential to result in behavioral
harassment of marine mammals that
may be present in the project vicinity
while construction activity is being
conducted. The FR notice (78 FR 52148;
August 22, 2013) provides a detailed
description of marine mammal hearing
and of the potential effects of these
construction activities on marine
mammals.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The proposed activities at NSM
would not result in permanent impacts
to habitats used directly by marine
mammals, but may have potential shortterm impacts to food sources such as
forage fish and may affect acoustic
habitat (see masking discussion in
proposed IHA FR notice). There are no
known foraging hotspots or other ocean
bottom structure of significant biological
importance to marine mammals present
in the marine waters in the vicinity of
the project area. Therefore, the main
impact issue associated with the
proposed activity would be temporarily
elevated sound levels and the associated
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
direct effects on marine mammals, as
discussed previously in this document.
The most likely impact to marine
mammal habitat occurs from pile
driving effects on likely marine mammal
prey (i.e., fish) near NSM and minor
impacts to the immediate substrate
during installation and removal of piles
during the wharf construction project.
The FR notice (78 FR 52148; August 22,
2013) describes these potential impacts
in greater detail.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization (ITA) under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, we 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
(where relevant).
Measurements from proxy pile
driving events were coupled with
practical spreading loss to estimate
zones of influence (ZOIs; see ‘‘Estimated
Take by Incidental Harassment’’); these
values were used to develop mitigation
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
measures for pile driving activities at
NSM. The ZOIs effectively represent the
mitigation zone that would be
established around each pile to prevent
Level A harassment to marine
mammals, while providing estimates of
the areas within which Level B
harassment might occur. In addition to
the specific measures described later in
this section, the Navy will conduct
briefings between construction
supervisors and crews, marine mammal
monitoring team, and Navy staff prior to
the start of all pile driving activity, and
when new personnel join the work, in
order to explain responsibilities,
communication procedures, marine
mammal monitoring protocol, and
operational procedures.
Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile
Driving
The following measures apply to the
Navy’s mitigation through shutdown
and disturbance zones:
Shutdown Zone—For all pile driving
and removal activities, the Navy will
establish a shutdown zone intended to
contain the area in which SPLs equal or
exceed the 180 dB rms acoustic injury
criteria. The purpose of a shutdown
zone is to define an area within which
shutdown of activity would occur upon
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
sighting of a marine mammal (or in
anticipation of an animal entering the
defined area), thus preventing injury,
serious injury, or death of marine
mammals. Radial distances for
shutdown zones are shown in Table 1.
However, for this project, a minimum
shutdown zone of 15 m will be
established during all pile driving
activities, regardless of the estimated
zone. Vibratory pile driving activities
are not predicted to produce sound
exceeding the Level A standard, but
these precautionary measures are
intended to prevent the already unlikely
possibility of physical interaction with
construction equipment and to further
reduce any possibility of acoustic
injury. For impact driving of steel piles,
the radial distance of the shutdown
would be established at 40 m (Table 1).
Disturbance Zone—Disturbance zones
are the areas in which SPLs equal or
exceed 160 and 120 dB rms (for pulsed
and non-pulsed sound, respectively).
Disturbance zones provide utility for
monitoring conducted for mitigation
purposes (i.e., shutdown zone
monitoring) by establishing monitoring
protocols for areas adjacent to the
shutdown zones. Monitoring of
disturbance zones enables observers to
be aware of and communicate the
presence of marine mammals in the
project area but outside the shutdown
zone and thus prepare for potential
shutdowns of activity. However, the
primary purpose of disturbance zone
monitoring is for documenting incidents
of Level B harassment; disturbance zone
monitoring is discussed in greater detail
later (see ‘‘Monitoring and Reporting’’).
Nominal radial distances for
disturbance zones are shown in Table 1.
Given the size of the disturbance zone
for vibratory pile driving, it is
impossible to guarantee that all animals
would be observed or to make
comprehensive observations of finescale behavioral reactions to sound, and
only a portion of the zone (e.g., what
may be reasonably observed by visual
observers stationed on land in the
vicinity of the turning basin) will be
observed.
In order to document observed
incidences of harassment, monitors
record all marine mammal observations,
regardless of location. The observer’s
location, as well as the location of the
pile being driven, is known from a GPS.
The location of the animal is estimated
as a distance from the observer, which
is then compared to the location from
the pile. If acoustic monitoring is being
conducted for that pile, a received SPL
may be estimated, or the received level
may be estimated on the basis of past or
subsequent acoustic monitoring. It may
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
then be determined whether the animal
was exposed to sound levels
constituting incidental harassment in
post-processing of observational and
acoustic data, and a precise accounting
of observed incidences of harassment
created. Therefore, although the
predicted distances to behavioral
harassment thresholds are useful for
estimating incidental harassment for
purposes of authorizing levels of
incidental take, actual take may be
determined in part through the use of
empirical data. That information may
then be used to extrapolate observed
takes to reach an approximate
understanding of actual total takes.
Monitoring Protocols—Monitoring
will be conducted before, during, and
after pile driving activities. In addition,
observers shall record all incidences of
marine mammal occurrence, regardless
of distance from activity, and shall
document any behavioral reactions in
concert with distance from piles being
driven. Observations made outside the
shutdown zone will not result in
shutdown; that pile segment would be
completed without cessation, unless the
animal approaches or enters the
shutdown zone, at which point all pile
driving activities would be halted.
Please see the Monitoring Plan
(available at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
pr/permits/incidental.htm), developed
by the Navy in agreement with NMFS,
for full details of the monitoring
protocols. Monitoring will take place
from 15 minutes prior to initiation
through 30 minutes post-completion of
pile driving activities. Pile driving
activities include the time to remove a
single pile or series of piles, as long as
the time elapsed between uses of the
pile driving equipment is no more than
30 minutes.
The following additional measures
apply to visual monitoring:
(1) Monitoring will be conducted by
qualified observers, who will be placed
at the best vantage point(s) practicable
to monitor for marine mammals and
implement shutdown/delay procedures
when applicable by calling for the
shutdown to the hammer operator.
Qualified observers are typically trained
biologists, with the following minimum
qualifications:
• Visual acuity in both eyes
(correction is permissible) sufficient for
discernment of moving targets at the
water’s surface with ability to estimate
target size and distance; use of
binoculars may be necessary to correctly
identify the target;
• Advanced education in biological
science, wildlife management,
mammalogy, or related fields (bachelor’s
degree or higher is required);
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71571
• Experience and ability to conduct
field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols (this
may include academic experience);
• Experience or training in the field
identification of marine mammals,
including the identification of
behaviors;
• Sufficient training, orientation, or
experience with the construction
operation to provide for personal safety
during observations;
• Writing skills sufficient to prepare a
report of observations including but not
limited to the number and species of
marine mammals observed; dates and
times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates and
times when in-water construction
activities were suspended to avoid
potential incidental injury from
construction sound of marine mammals
observed within a defined shutdown
zone; and marine mammal behavior;
and
• Ability to communicate orally, by
radio or in person, with project
personnel to provide real-time
information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary. For
this project, we waive the requirement
for advanced education, as the observers
will be personnel hired by the
engineering contractor that may not
have backgrounds in biological science
or related fields. These observers will be
required to watch the Navy’s Marine
Species Awareness Training video and
shall receive training sufficient to
achieve all other qualifications listed
above (where relevant).
(2) Prior to the start of pile driving
activity, the shutdown zone will be
monitored for 15 minutes to ensure that
it is clear of marine mammals. Pile
driving will only commence once
observers have declared the shutdown
zone clear of marine mammals; animals
will be allowed to remain in the
shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their
own volition) and their behavior will be
monitored and documented. The
shutdown zone may only be declared
clear, and pile driving started, when the
entire shutdown zone is visible (i.e.,
when not obscured by dark, rain, fog,
etc.). In addition, if such conditions
should arise during impact pile driving
that is already underway, the activity
will be halted.
(3) If a marine mammal approaches or
enters the shutdown zone during the
course of pile driving operations,
activity will be halted and delayed until
either the animal has voluntarily left
and been visually confirmed beyond the
shutdown zone or 15 minutes have
passed without re-detection of the
animal. Monitoring will be conducted
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
71572
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
throughout the time required to drive a
pile.
Soft Start
The use of a soft-start procedure is
believed to provide additional
protection to marine mammals by
warning or providing a chance to leave
the area prior to the hammer operating
at full capacity, and typically involves
a requirement to initiate sound from
vibratory hammers for fifteen seconds at
reduced energy followed by a 30-second
waiting period. This procedure is
repeated two additional times. However,
implementation of soft start for
vibratory pile driving during previous
pile driving work conducted by the
Navy at another location has led to
equipment failure and serious human
safety concerns. Therefore, vibratory
soft start is not required as a mitigation
measure for this project, as we have
determined it not to be practicable. We
have further determined this measure
unnecessary to providing the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on
marine mammals and their habitat. Prior
to issuing any further IHAs to the Navy
for pile driving activities in 2014 and
beyond, we plan to facilitate
consultation between the Navy and
other practitioners (e.g., Washington
State Department of Transportation and/
or the California Department of
Transportation) in order to determine
whether the potentially significant
human safety issue is inherent to
implementation of the measure or is due
to operator error. For impact driving,
soft start will be required, and
contractors will provide an initial set of
three strikes from the impact hammer at
40 percent energy, followed by a 30second waiting period, then two
subsequent three-strike sets.
We have carefully evaluated the
applicant’s planned mitigation measures
and considered a range of other
measures in the context of ensuring that
we prescribe the means of effecting the
least practicable impact on the affected
marine mammal species and stocks and
their habitat. Our evaluation of potential
measures included consideration of the
following factors in relation to one
another: (1) the manner in which, and
the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is
expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals; (2) the proven or
likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned;
and (3) the practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s planned measures, as well as
any other potential measures that may
be relevant to the specified activity, we
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
have determined that these mitigation
measures provide the means of effecting
the least practicable impact on marine
mammal species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that we 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 ITAs must
include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring
and reporting that will result in
increased knowledge of the species and
of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are
expected to be present in the proposed
action area. The Navy’s planned
monitoring and reporting is also
described in their Marine Mammal
Monitoring Plan.
Acoustic Monitoring
The Navy will implement a sound
source level verification study during
the specified activities. Data would be
collected in order to estimate airborne
and underwater source levels.
Monitoring will include two underwater
positions and one airborne monitoring
position. These exact positions will be
determined in the field during
consultation with Navy personnel,
subject to constraints related to logistics
and security requirements. Underwater
sound monitoring will include the
measurement of peak and rms sound
pressure levels during pile driving
activities at Wharf C–2. Typical ambient
levels will be measured during lulls in
the pile installation and reported in
terms of rms sound pressure levels.
Frequency spectra will be provided for
pile driving sounds.
Visual Marine Mammal Observations
The Navy will collect sighting data
and behavioral responses to
construction for marine mammal
species observed in the region of
activity during the period of activity. All
observers will be trained in marine
mammal identification and behaviors
and are required to have no other
construction-related tasks while
conducting monitoring. The Navy will
monitor the shutdown zone and
disturbance zone before, during, and
after pile driving, with observers located
at the best practicable vantage points.
Based on our requirements, the Navy
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
will implement the following
procedures for pile driving:
• MMOs will be located at the best
vantage point(s) in order to properly see
the entire shutdown zone and as much
of the disturbance zone as possible.
• During all observation periods,
observers will use binoculars and the
naked eye to search continuously for
marine mammals.
• If the shutdown zones are obscured
by fog or poor lighting conditions, pile
driving at that location will not be
initiated until that zone is visible.
Should such conditions arise while
impact driving is underway, the activity
would be halted.
• The shutdown and disturbance
zones around the pile will be monitored
for the presence of marine mammals
before, during, and after any pile driving
or removal activity.
Individuals implementing the
monitoring protocol will assess its
effectiveness using an adaptive
approach. Monitoring biologists will use
their best professional judgment
throughout implementation and seek
improvements to these methods when
deemed appropriate. Any modifications
to protocol will be coordinated between
NMFS and the Navy.
Data Collection
We require that observers use
approved data forms. Among other
pieces of information, the Navy will
record detailed information about any
implementation of shutdowns,
including the distance of animals to the
pile and description of specific actions
that ensued and resulting behavior of
the animal, if any. In addition, the Navy
will attempt to distinguish between the
number of individual animals taken and
the number of incidences of take. We
require that, at a minimum, the
following information be collected on
the sighting forms:
• Date and time that monitored
activity begins or ends;
• Construction activities occurring
during each observation period;
• Weather parameters (e.g., percent
cover, visibility);
• Water conditions (e.g., sea state,
tide state);
• Species, numbers, and, if possible,
sex and age class of marine mammals;
• Description of any observable
marine mammal behavior patterns,
including bearing and direction of
travel, and if possible, the correlation to
SPLs;
• Distance from pile driving activities
to marine mammals and distance from
the marine mammals to the observation
point;
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
• Locations of all marine mammal
observations; and
• Other human activity in the area.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Reporting
A draft report will be submitted to
NMFS within 90 days of the completion
of marine mammal monitoring. The
report will include marine mammal
observations pre-activity, duringactivity, and post-activity during pile
driving days, and will also provide
descriptions of any adverse responses to
construction activities by marine
mammals and a complete description of
all mitigation shutdowns and the results
of those actions and a refined take
estimate based on the number of marine
mammals observed during the course of
construction. A final report will be
prepared and submitted within 30 days
following resolution of comments on the
draft report. A technical report
summarizing the acoustic monitoring
data collected will be prepared within
75 days of completion of monitoring.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
With respect to the activities
described here, the MMPA defines
‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘any act of pursuit,
torment, or annoyance which (i) has the
potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level
A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration,
breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering [Level B harassment].’’ All
anticipated takes will be by Level B
harassment, involving temporary
changes in behavior. The planned
mitigation and monitoring measures are
expected to minimize the possibility of
injurious or lethal takes such that take
by Level A harassment, serious injury,
or mortality is considered discountable.
However, it is unlikely that injurious or
lethal takes would occur even in the
absence of the proposed mitigation and
monitoring measures.
If a marine mammal responds to a
stimulus by changing its behavior (e.g.,
through relatively minor changes in
locomotion direction/speed or
vocalization behavior), the response
may or may not constitute taking at the
individual level, and is unlikely to
affect the stock or the species as a
whole. However, if a sound source
displaces marine mammals from an
important feeding or breeding area for a
prolonged period, impacts on animals or
on the stock or species could potentially
be significant (Lusseau and Bejder,
2007; Weilgart, 2007). Given the many
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
uncertainties in predicting the quantity
and types of impacts of sound on
marine mammals, it is common practice
to estimate how many animals are likely
to be present within a particular
distance of a given activity, or exposed
to a particular level of sound. This
practice potentially overestimates the
numbers of marine mammals taken. In
addition, it is often difficult to
distinguish between the number of
individuals harassed and incidences of
harassment. In particular, for stationary
activities, it is more likely that some
smaller number of individuals may
accrue a number of incidences of
harassment per individual than for each
incidence to accrue to a new individual,
especially if those individuals display
some degree of residency or site fidelity
and the impetus to use the site (e.g.,
because of foraging opportunities) is
stronger than the deterrence presented
by the harassing activity.
The turning basin is not important
habitat for marine mammals, as it is a
man-made, semi-enclosed basin with
frequent industrial activity and regular
maintenance dredging. The small area of
ensonification extending out of the
turning basin into nearshore waters is
also not believed to be of any particular
importance, nor is it considered an area
frequented by marine mammals.
Bottlenose dolphins may be observed at
any time of year in estuarine and
nearshore waters of the action area, but
sightings of other species are rare.
Therefore, behavioral disturbances that
could result from anthropogenic sound
associated with these activities are
expected to affect only a relatively small
number of individual marine mammals,
although those effects could be
recurring over the life of the project if
the same individuals remain in the
project vicinity. The Navy has requested
authorization for the incidental taking of
small numbers of bottlenose dolphins
and Atlantic spotted dolphins in the
Mayport turning basin and associated
nearshore waters that may be ensonified
by project activities.
Marine Mammal Densities
For all species, the best scientific
information available was used to derive
density estimates and the maximum
appropriate density value for each
species was used in the marine mammal
take assessment calculation. Density
values for the Atlantic spotted dolphin
were derived from global density
estimates produced by Sea Mammal
Research Unit, Ltd. (SMRU), as
presented in DoN (2012), and the
highest seasonal density (spring; 0.6803/
km2) was used for take estimation.
Density for bottlenose dolphin is
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71573
derived from site-specific surveys
conducted by the Navy. Only bottlenose
dolphins have been observed in the
turning basin; it is not currently
possible to identify observed
individuals to stock. This survey effort
consists of twelve half-day observation
periods covering mornings and
afternoons during December 10–13,
2012, and March 4–7, 2013. During each
observation period, two observers (one
at ground level and one positioned at a
fourth-floor observation point)
monitored for the presence of marine
mammals in the turning basin (0.712
km2) and tracked their movements and
behavior while inside the basin, with
observations recorded for five-minute
intervals every half-hour. Morning
sessions typically ran from 7:00–11:30
and afternoon sessions from 1:00 to
5:30. Most observations were of
individuals or pairs (mode of 1)
although a maximum group size of six
was observed. It was assumed that the
average observed group size (1.8) could
occur in the action area each day, and
was thus used to calculate a density of
2.53/km2. For comparison, the
maximum density value available from
the NMSDD for bottlenose dolphins in
inshore areas is significantly lower
(winter, 0.217/km2, SMRU estimate) and
would likely underestimate the
occurrence of bottlenose dolphins in the
turning basin.
Description of Take Calculation
The take calculations presented here
rely on the best data currently available
for marine mammal populations in the
vicinity of Mayport. The methodology
for estimating take was described in
detail in the FR notice (78 FR 52148;
August 22, 2013). The ZOI impact area
is the estimated range of impact to the
sound criteria. The distances specified
in Table 1 were used to calculate ZOIs
around each pile. The ZOI impact area
calculations took into consideration the
possible affected area with attenuation
due to the constraints of the basin.
Because the basin restricts sound from
propagating outward, with the
exception of the east-facing entrance
channel, the radial distances to
thresholds cannot generally be reached.
While pile driving can occur any day,
and the analysis is conducted on a per
day basis, only a fraction of that time
(typically a matter of hours on any given
day) is actually spent pile driving. The
exposure assessment methodology is an
estimate of the numbers of individuals
exposed to the effects of pile driving
activities exceeding NMFS-established
thresholds. Of note in these exposure
estimates, mitigation methods (i.e.,
visual monitoring and the use of
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
71574
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
shutdown zones; soft start for impact
pile driving) were not quantified within
the assessment and successful
implementation of mitigation is not
reflected in exposure estimates. In
addition, equating exposure with
response (i.e., a behavioral response
meeting the definition of take under the
MMPA) is simplistic and conservative
assumption. For these reasons, results
from this acoustic exposure assessment
likely overestimate take estimates to
some degree.
TABLE 3—NUMBER OF POTENTIAL INCIDENTAL TAKES OF MARINE MAMMALS WITHIN VARIOUS ACOUSTIC THRESHOLD
ZONES
Estimated incidences of take 1
Species
Activity
Total
Level A
Bottlenose dolphin 2 ........................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ...................................
Impact driving (steel piles) .............................
Vibratory driving (steel piles) .........................
Vibratory driving (plastic piles) .......................
Impact driving (steel piles) .............................
Vibratory driving (steel piles) .........................
Vibratory driving (plastic piles) .......................
Level B
0
0
0
0
0
0
40
315
10
0
90
5
365
........................
........................
95
........................
........................
1 Acoustic injury threshold is 180 dB for cetaceans; behavioral harassment threshold applicable to impact pile driving is 160 dB and to vibratory
driving is 120 dB.
2 It is impossible to estimate from available information which stock these takes may accrue to.
Only bottlenose dolphins are likely to
occur inside the turning basin;
therefore, the estimates for spotted
dolphin are likely overestimates because
the ZOI areas include the turning basin.
Bottlenose dolphins are likely to be
exposed to sound levels that could
cause behavioral harassment if they
enter the turning basin while pile
driving activity is occurring. Outside the
turning basin, potential takes could
occur if individuals of these species
move through the ensonified area when
pile driving is occurring. It is not
possible to determine, from available
information, how many of the estimated
incidences of take for bottlenose
dolphins may accrue to the different
stocks that may occur in the action area.
Similarly, animals observed in the
ensonified areas will not be able to be
identified to stock on the basis of visual
observation.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers
Analyses and Determinations
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.’’ In making a
negligible impact determination, we
consider a variety of factors, including
but not limited to: (1) The number of
anticipated mortalities; (2) the number
and nature of anticipated injuries; (3)
the number, nature, intensity, and
duration of Level B harassment; and (4)
the context in which the take occurs.
Small Numbers Analysis
The number of incidences of take
authorized for Atlantic spotted dolphins
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
is small relative to the relevant stock—
less than one percent. As described
previously, of the 365 incidences of
behavioral harassment predicted to
occur for bottlenose dolphin, we have
no information allowing us to parse
those predicted incidences amongst the
three stocks of bottlenose dolphin that
may occur in the ensonified area.
Therefore, we assessed the total number
of predicted incidences of take against
the best abundance estimate for each
stock, as though the total would occur
for the stock in question. For two of the
bottlenose dolphin stocks, the total
predicted number of incidences of take
authorized would be considered small—
less than three percent for the southern
migratory stock and less than twelve
percent for the northern Florida coastal
stock—even if each estimated taking
occurred to a new individual. This is an
extremely unlikely scenario as, for
bottlenose dolphins in estuarine and
nearshore waters, there is likely to be
some overlap in individuals present
day-to-day.
The total number of authorized takes
proposed for bottlenose dolphins, if
assumed to accrue solely to new
individuals of the JES stock, is higher
relative to the total stock abundance,
which is currently considered
unknown. However, these numbers
represent the estimated incidences of
take, not the number of individuals
taken. That is, it is highly likely that a
relatively small subset of JES bottlenose
dolphins would be harassed by project
activities. JES bottlenose dolphins range
from Cumberland Sound at the GeorgiaFlorida border south to approximately
Palm Coast, Florida, an area spanning
over 120 linear km of coastline and
including habitat consisting of complex
inshore and estuarine waterways. JES
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
dolphins, divided by Caldwell (2001)
into Northern and Southern groups,
show strong site fidelity and, although
members of both groups have been
observed outside their preferred areas, it
is likely that the majority of JES
dolphins would not occur within waters
ensonified by project activities. Further,
although the largest area of
ensonification is predicted to extend up
to 7.5 km offshore from NSM, estuarine
dolphins are generally considered as
restricted to inshore waters and only 1–
2 km offshore. In summary, JES
dolphins are (1) known to form two
groups and exhibit strong site fidelity
(i.e., individuals do not generally range
throughout the recognized overall JES
stock range); (2) would not occur at all
in a significant portion of the larger ZOI
extending offshore from NSM; and (3)
the specified activity will be stationary
within an enclosed basin not recognized
as an area of any special significance
that would serve to attract or aggregate
dolphins. We therefore believe that the
estimated numbers of takes, were they
to occur, likely represent repeated
exposures of a much smaller number of
bottlenose dolphins and that these
estimated incidences of take represent
small numbers of bottlenose dolphins.
Negligible Impact Analysis
Pile driving activities associated with
the Navy’s wharf project, as outlined
previously, have the potential to disturb
or displace marine mammals.
Specifically, the specified activities may
result in take, in the form of Level B
harassment (behavioral disturbance)
only, from underwater sounds generated
from pile driving. Potential takes could
occur if individuals of these species are
present in the ensonified zone when
pile driving is happening.
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Notices
No injury, serious injury, or mortality
is anticipated given the likely methods
of installation and measures designed to
minimize the possibility of injury to
marine mammals. The potential for
these outcomes is minimized through
the construction method and the
implementation of the planned
mitigation measures. Specifically,
vibratory hammers will be the primary
method of installation, and this activity
does not have significant potential to
cause injury to marine mammals due to
the relatively low source levels
produced (less than 180 dB) and the
lack of potentially injurious source
characteristics. Impact pile driving
produces short, sharp pulses with
higher peak levels and much sharper
rise time to reach those peaks. If impact
driving is necessary, implementation of
soft start and shutdown zones
significantly reduces any possibility of
injury. Given sufficient ‘‘notice’’
through use of soft start (for impact
driving), marine mammals are expected
to move away from a sound source that
is annoying prior to its becoming
potentially injurious. Environmental
conditions in the confined and
protected Mayport turning basin mean
that marine mammal detection ability
by trained observers is high, enabling a
high rate of success in implementation
of shutdowns to avoid injury, serious
injury, or mortality.
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). Most likely, individuals will
simply move away from the sound
source and be temporarily displaced
from the areas of pile driving, although
even this reaction has been observed
primarily only in association with
impact pile driving. The pile driving
activities analyzed here are similar to
numerous other construction activities
conducted in San Francisco Bay and in
the Puget Sound region, which have
taken place with no reported injuries or
mortality to marine mammals, and no
known long-term adverse consequences
from behavioral harassment. Repeated
exposures of individuals to levels of
sound that may cause Level B
harassment are unlikely to result in
hearing impairment or to significantly
disrupt foraging behavior. Thus, even
repeated Level B harassment of some
small subset of the overall stock is
unlikely to result in any significant
realized decrease in viability for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:56 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
bottlenose dolphins, and thus would not
result in any adverse impact to the stock
as a whole. Level B harassment will be
reduced to the level of least practicable
impact through use of mitigation
measures described herein and, if sound
produced by project activities is
sufficiently disturbing, animals are
likely to simply avoid the turning basin
while the activity is occurring.
In summary, this negligible impact
analysis is founded on the following
factors: (1) The possibility of injury,
serious injury, or mortality may
reasonably be considered discountable;
(2) the anticipated incidences of Level B
harassment consist of, at worst,
temporary modifications in behavior; (3)
the absence of any significant habitat
within the project area, including
known areas or features of special
significance for foraging or
reproduction; (4) the presumed efficacy
of the planned mitigation measures in
reducing the effects of the specified
activity to the level of least practicable
impact. In addition, none of these stocks
are listed under the ESA, although
coastal bottlenose dolphins are
considered depleted under the MMPA.
In combination, we believe that these
factors, as well as the available body of
evidence from other similar activities,
demonstrate that the potential effects of
the specified activity will have only
short-term effects on individuals. The
specified activity is not expected to
impact rates of recruitment or survival
and will therefore not result in
population-level impacts.
Determinations
The number of marine mammals
actually incidentally harassed by the
project will depend on the distribution
and abundance of marine mammals in
the vicinity of the survey activity.
However, we find that the number of
potential takings authorized (by level B
harassment only), which we consider to
be a conservative, maximum estimate, is
small relative to the relevant regional
stock or population numbers, and that
the effect of the activity will be
mitigated to the level of least practicable
impact through implementation of the
mitigation and monitoring measures
described previously. Based on the
analysis contained herein of the likely
effects of the specified activity on
marine mammals and their habitat, we
find that the total taking from the
activity will have a negligible impact on
the affected species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
71575
action. Therefore, we have determined
that the total taking of affected species
or stocks would not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of
such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are no ESA-listed marine
mammals expected to occur in the
action area. Therefore, the Navy has not
requested authorization of the
incidental take of ESA-listed species
and no such authorization is issued;
therefore, no consultation under the
ESA is required.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by
the regulations published by the
Council on Environmental Quality (40
CFR parts 1500–1508), the Navy
prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA) to consider the direct, indirect and
cumulative effects to the human
environment resulting from the wharf
recapitalization project. NMFS made the
Navy’s EA available to the public for
review and comment, in relation to its
suitability for adoption by NMFS in
order to assess the impacts to the human
environment of issuance of an IHA to
the Navy. Also in compliance with
NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well
as NOAA Administrative Order 216–6,
NMFS has reviewed the Navy’s EA,
determined it to be sufficient, and
adopted that EA and signed a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on
November 20, 2013. The Navy’s EA and
NMFS’ FONSI for this action may be
found at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
permits/incidental.htm.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
we have issued an IHA to the Navy to
conduct the specified activities in Naval
Station Mayport, FL for one year, from
December 1, 2013, through November
30, 2014, provided the previously
described mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: November 25, 2013.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–28650 Filed 11–27–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71566-71575]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28650]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XC762
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Wharf Recapitalization Project
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the
U.S. Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only,
two species of marine mammals during construction activities associated
with a wharf recapitalization project at Naval Station Mayport,
Florida.
DATES: This authorization is effective from December 1, 2013, through
November 30, 2014.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the Navy's application and any supporting
documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document,
may be obtained by visiting the internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. In the case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed below. A memorandum
describing our adoption of the Navy's Environmental Assessment (2013)
and our associated Finding of No Significant Impact, prepared pursuant
to the National Environmental Policy Act, are also available at the
same site.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial
fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional,
taking of small numbers of marine mammals, providing that certain
findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established.
The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals may be
allowed only if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary)
finds that the total taking by the specified activity during the
specified time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species
or stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking
must be set forth, either in specific regulations or in an
authorization.
The allowance of such incidental taking under section 101(a)(5)(A),
by harassment, serious injury, death or a combination thereof, requires
that regulations be established. Subsequently, a Letter of
Authorization may be issued pursuant to the
[[Page 71567]]
prescriptions established in such regulations, providing that the level
of taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total
taking allowable under the specific regulations. Under section
101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may authorize such incidental taking by harassment
only, for periods of not more than 1 year, pursuant to requirements and
conditions contained within an Incidental Harassment Authorization. The
establishment of prescriptions through either specific regulations or
an authorization requires notice and opportunity for public comment.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``. . .
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.'' Except with respect to certain activities
not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment''
as: ``. . . any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild;
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.'' The former is termed Level A harassment and
the latter is termed Level B harassment.
Summary of Request
On April 4, 2013, we received a request from the Navy for
authorization of the taking, by Level B harassment only, of marine
mammals incidental to pile driving in association with the Wharf C-2
recapitalization project at Naval Station Mayport, Florida (NSM). That
request was modified on May 9 and June 5, 2013, and a final version,
which we deemed adequate and complete, was submitted on August 7, 2013.
In-water work associated with the project is expected to be completed
within the one-year timeframe of the IHA (December 1, 2013 through
November 30, 2014). Two species of marine mammal are expected to be
affected by the specified activities: bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
truncatus truncatus) and Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis).
These species may occur year-round in the action area.
Wharf C-2 is a single level, general purpose berthing wharf
constructed in 1960. The wharf is one of NSM's two primary deep-draft
berths and is one of the primary ordnance handling wharfs. The wharf is
a diaphragm steel sheet pile cell structure with a concrete apron,
partial concrete encasement of the piling and an asphalt paved deck.
The wharf is currently in poor condition due to advanced deterioration
of the steel sheeting and lack of corrosion protection, and this
structural deterioration has resulted in the institution of load
restrictions within 60 ft of the wharf face. The purpose of this
project is to complete necessary repairs to Wharf C-2. Please refer to
Appendix A of the Navy's application for photos of existing damage and
deterioration at the wharf, and to Appendix B for a contractor
schematic of the project plan.
Effects to marine mammals from the specified activity are expected
to result from underwater sound produced by vibratory and impact pile
driving. In order to assess project impacts, the Navy used thresholds
recommended by NMFS, outlined later in this document. The Navy assumed
practical spreading loss and used empirically-measured source levels
from representative pile driving events to estimate potential marine
mammal exposures. Predicted exposures are described later in this
document. The calculations predict that only Level B harassment would
occur associated with pile driving activities, and required mitigation
measures further ensure that no more than Level B harassment would
occur.
Description of the Specified Activity
Additional details regarding the specified activity were described
in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (78 FR 52148;
August 22, 2013; hereafter, the FR notice); please see that document or
the Navy's application for more information.
Specific Geographic Region and Duration
NSM is located in northeastern Florida, at the mouth of the St.
Johns River and adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean (see Figure 2-1 of the
Navy's application). The specific action area consists of the NSM
turning basin, an area of approximately 2,000 by 3,000 ft containing
ship berthing facilities at sixteen locations along wharves around the
basin perimeter. The turning basin, connected to the St. Johns River by
a 500-ft-wide entrance channel, will largely contain sound produced by
project activities, with the exception of sound propagating east into
nearshore Atlantic waters through the entrance channel (see Figure 2-2
of the Navy's application). Wharf C-2 is located in the northeastern
corner of the Mayport turning basin.
The project is expected to require a maximum of 50 days of in-water
vibratory pile driving work over a 12-month period. It is not expected
that significant impact pile driving would be necessary, on the basis
of expected subsurface driving conditions and past experience driving
piles in the same location. However, twenty additional days of impact
pile driving are included in the specified activity as a contingency,
for a total of 70 days in-water pile driving considered over the 12-
month timeframe of the proposed IHA.
Description of Specified Activity
In order to rehabilitate Wharf C-2, the Navy proposes to install a
new steel king pile/sheet pile (SSP) bulkhead. An SSP system consists
of large vertical king piles with paired steel sheet piles driven
inbetween and connected to the ends of the king piles. Please see
Figures 1-1 through 1-4 and Table 1-1 in the Navy's application for
project schematics, descriptive photographs, and further information
about the pile types to be used.
The project will require installation of approximately 120 single
sheet piles and 119 king piles (all steel) to support the bulkhead
wall, and fifty polymeric (plastic) fender piles. Vibratory
installation of the steel piles will require approximately 45 days,
with approximately 5 additional days needed for vibratory installation
of the plastic piles. King piles are long I-shaped guide piles that
provide the structural support for the bulkhead wall. Sheet piles,
which form the actual wall, will be driven in pairs between the king
piles. Once piles are in position, it is expected that less than 60
seconds of vibratory driving would be required per pile to reach the
required depth. Time interval between driving of each pile pair will
vary, but is expected to be a minimum of several minutes due to time
required for positioning, etc. One template consists of the combination
of five king piles and four sheet pile pairs; it is expected that three
such templates may be driven per day. Polymeric fender piles will be
installed after completion of the bulkhead, at an expected rate of
approximately ten piles per day.
Impact pile driving is not expected to be required for most piles,
but may be used as a contingency in cases when vibratory driving is not
sufficient to reach the necessary depth. A similar project completed at
an adjacent wharf required impact pile driving on only seven piles
(over the course of two days). Impact pile driving, if it were
required, could occur on the same day as vibratory pile driving, but
driving rigs would not be operated simultaneously.
[[Page 71568]]
Description of Sound Sources and Distances to Thresholds
An in-depth description of sound sources in general was provided in
the FR notice (78 FR 52148; August 22, 2013). Significant sound-
producing in-water construction activities associated with the project
include vibratory pile driving and potentially impact pile driving.
Sound Thresholds
NMFS currently uses acoustic exposure thresholds as important tools
to help better characterize and quantify the effects of human-induced
noise on marine mammals. These thresholds have predominantly been
presented in the form of single received levels for particular source
categories (e.g., impulse, continuous, or explosive) above which an
exposed animal would be predicted to incur auditory injury or be
behaviorally harassed. Current NMFS practice (in relation to the MMPA)
regarding exposure of marine mammals to sound is that cetaceans and
pinnipeds exposed to sound levels of 180 and 190 dB rms or above,
respectively, are considered to have been taken by Level A (i.e.,
injurious) harassment, while behavioral harassment (Level B) is
considered to have occurred when marine mammals are exposed to sounds
at or above 120 dB rms for continuous sound (such as will be produced
by vibratory pile driving) and 160 dB rms for pulsed sound (produced by
impact pile driving), but below injurious thresholds. NMFS uses these
levels as guidelines to estimate when harassment may occur.
NMFS is in the process of revising these acoustic thresholds, with
the first step being to identify new auditory injury criteria for all
source types and new behavioral criteria for seismic activities
(primarily airgun-type sources). For more information on that process,
please visit https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.
Distance to Sound Thresholds
Pile driving generates underwater noise that can potentially result
in disturbance to marine mammals in the project area. Please see the FR
notice (78 FR 52148; August 22, 2013) for a detailed description of the
calculations and information used to estimate distances to relevant
threshold levels. In general, the sound pressure level (SPL) at some
distance away from the source (e.g., driven pile) is governed by a
measured source level, minus the transmission loss of the energy as it
dissipates with distance. A practical spreading value of 15 (4.5 dB
reduction in sound level for each doubling of distance) is often used
under intermediate conditions, and is assumed here.
Source level, or the intensity of pile driving sound, is greatly
influenced by factors such as the type of piles, hammers, and the
physical environment in which the activity takes place. A number of
studies, primarily on the west coast, have measured sound produced
during underwater pile driving projects. However, these data are
largely for impact driving of steel pipe piles and concrete piles as
well as vibratory driving of steel pipe piles. We know of no existing
measurements for the specific pile types planned for use at NSM (i.e.,
king piles, paired sheet piles, plastic pipe piles), although some data
exist for single sheet piles. It was therefore necessary to extrapolate
from available data to determine reasonable source levels for this
project.
Representative data for pile driving SPLs recorded from similar
construction activities in recent years, as well as additional
assumptions made in determining appropriate proxy values, were
presented in the FR notice (78 FR 52148; August 22, 2013). Underwater
sound levels from pile driving for this project are assumed to be as
follows:
For vibratory driving of steel sheet and king piles, 178
dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms). This proxy value was the highest representative
value for vibratory driving of steel sheet piles and appropriately-
sized steel pipe piles found in the California Department of
Transportation's compendium of pile driving data (Caltrans, 2012).
For impact driving of steel sheet and king piles, 204 dB
re 1 [mu]Pa (rms). This proxy value was deemed to be the most
representative value for impact driving of appropriately-sized steel
pipe piles, as found in the California Department of Transportation's
compendium of pile driving data.
For vibratory driving of polymeric piles 168 dB re 1
[mu]Pa (rms). This proxy value, measured by the Washington State
Department of Transportation for vibratory removal of timber piles, was
determined to be the only reasonable approximation of these pile types
(Laughlin, 2011).
Please see Tables 6-3 and 6-4 in the Navy's application. All
calculated distances to and the total area encompassed by the marine
mammal sound thresholds are provided in Table 1.
Table 1--Calculated Distance(s) To and Area Encompassed By Underwater Marine Mammal Sound Thresholds During Pile
Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance Area (sq.
Pile type Method Threshold (m)\1\ km)\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steel (sheet and king piles)... Vibratory................... Level A n/a 0
harassment (180
dB).
............................ Level B 7,356 2.9
harassment (120
dB).
Impact...................... Level A 40 0.004
harassment (180
dB).
............................ Level B 858 0.67
harassment (160
dB).
Polymeric (plastic fender Vibratory................... Level A n/a 0
piles). harassment (180
dB).
............................ Level B 1,585 0.88
harassment (120
dB).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SPLs (levels at source) used for calculations were: 204 dB for impact driving, 178 dB for vibratory driving
steel piles, and 168 dB for vibratory driving plastic piles.
\2\ Areas presented take into account attenuation and/or shadowing by land. Calculated distances to relevant
thresholds cannot be reached in most directions form source piles. Please see Figures 6-1 through 6-3 in the
Navy's application.
The Mayport turning basin does not represent open water, or free
field, conditions. Therefore, sounds would attenuate as per the
confines of the basin, and may only reach the full estimated distances
to the harassment thresholds via the narrow, east-facing entrance
channel. Distances shown in Table 1 are estimated for free-field
conditions, but areas are calculated per the actual conditions of the
action area. See Figures 6-1 through 6-3 of the Navy's application for
a depiction of areas in which each underwater sound threshold is
predicted to occur at the project area due to pile driving.
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of receipt of the Navy's application and
proposed IHA in the Federal Register on August
[[Page 71569]]
22, 2013 (78 FR 52148). NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission). The Commission's comments and our responses
are provided here, and the comments have been posted on the internet
at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that we require the Navy to
implement soft start procedures if impact pile driving activities have
ceased for at least 15 minutes.
Response: We do not believe the recommendation would be effective
in reducing the number or intensity of incidents of harassment--in
fact, we believe that implementation of this recommendation may
actually increase the number of incidents of harassment by extending
the overall project duration--while imposing a high cost in terms of
operational practicability. We note here that, while the Commission
recommends use of the measure to avoid serious injury (i.e., injury
that will result in death of the animal), such an outcome is extremely
unlikely even in the absence of any mitigation measures (as described
in the FR notice). Therefore, we address our response to the potential
usefulness of the measure in avoidance of non-serious injury (i.e.,
Level A harassment).
Soft start is required for the first impact pile driving of each
day and, subsequently, after any impact pile driving stoppage of 30
minutes or greater. The purpose of a soft start is to provide a
``warning'' to animals by initiating the production of underwater sound
at lower levels than are produced at full operating power. This warning
is presumed to allow animals the opportunity to move away from an
unpleasant stimulus and to potentially reduce the intensity of
behavioral reactions to noise or prevent injury of animals that may
remain undetected in the zone ensonified to potentially injurious
levels. However, soft start requires additional time, resulting in a
larger temporal footprint for the project. That is, soft start requires
a longer cumulative period of pile driving (i.e., hours) but, more
importantly, leads to a longer overall duration (i.e., more days on
which pile driving occurs). In order to maximize the effectiveness of
soft start while minimizing the implementation costs, we require soft
start after a period of extended and unobserved relative silence (i.e.,
at the beginning of the day, after the end of the required 30-minute
post-activity monitoring period, or after 30 minutes with no impact
driving). It is after these periods that marine mammals are more likely
to closely approach the site (because it is relatively quiet) and less
likely to be observed prior to initiation of the activity (because
continuous monitoring has been interrupted).
The Commission justifies this recommendation on the basis of the
potential for undetected animals to remain in the shutdown zone. This
may occur because an animal remains submerged and is not available to
be observed, because dolphins occur singly or in pairs and are
difficult to perceive, or because the observer simply does not detect
the animal in the period when it surfaces and is available to be
observed. However, we do not believe that time is a factor in
determining the influence of these biases on the probability of
observing an animal in the shutdown zone. That is, an observer is not
more likely to detect the presence of an animal at the 15-minute mark
of continuous monitoring than after 30 minutes (it is established that
soft start is required after any unmonitored period). Therefore,
requiring soft start after 15 minutes (i.e., more soft starts) is not
likely to result in increased avoidance of injury. Finally, we do not
believe that the use of soft start may be expected to appreciably
reduce the potential for injury where the probability of detection is
high (e.g., small, shallow zones with good environmental conditions).
Rather, the primary purpose of soft start under such conditions is to
reduce the intensity of potential behavioral reactions to underwater
sound in the disturbance zone.
As noted above, there are multiple reasons why marine mammals may
remain in a shutdown zone and yet be undetected by observers. Animals
are missed because they are underwater (availability bias) or because
they are available to be seen, but are missed by observers (perception
and detection biases) (e.g., Marsh and Sinclair, 1989). Negative bias
on perception or detection of an available animal may result from
environmental conditions, limitations inherent to the observation
platform, or observer ability. While missed detections are possible in
theory, this would require that an animal would either (a) remain
submerged (i.e., be unavailable) for periods of time approaching or
exceeding 15 minutes and/or (b) remain undetected while at the surface.
We provide further site-specific detail below.
First, the Mayport turning basin is an enclosed area, and provides
a relatively sheltered environment and circumscribed area of
observation. We would therefore expect a high probability of detection
given an animal at the surface and multiple well-positioned observers.
Unlike the moving aerial or vessel-based observation platforms for
which detectability bias is often a concern, the observers here will be
positioned in the most suitable locations to ensure high detectability
(randomness of observations is not a concern, as it is for abundance
sampling). Regarding availability, the only species likely to be
present in the turning basin is the bottlenose dolphin.
For bottlenose dolphins, while a significant proportion of time is
typically spent submerged, dive intervals are also typically very
short, meaning that surfacing occurs frequently. Mate et al. (1995)
report a typical dive duration from another shallow bay (Tampa Bay) of
only 25 seconds. While bottlenose dolphins may display deeper dive
times in other contexts (e.g., deep-water foraging), there is no
conceivable reason why a dolphin would remain submerged for durations
approaching 15 minutes in the turning basin (i.e., a shallow
environment of no particular significance for foraging). Short dive
duration means high availability, providing additional confidence in
the ability of observers to detect marine mammals in the shutdown zones
estimated for this project.
Comment 2: The Commission recommends that we require the Navy to
monitor the extent of the Level B harassment zones by strategically
positioning the observers (e.g., one monitoring the immediate shutdown
zone and portions of the turning basin and the other monitoring
portions of the turning basin, the entrance to that basin, and portions
of the Atlantic Ocean) to (1) determine more accurately the numbers of
marine mammals taken during pile driving activities and (2)
characterize the effects on those marine mammals.
Response: We support the Commission's recommendation, and agree
that the recommended changes to the Navy's Monitoring Plan could be
useful in achieving a more accurate (1) determination of the numbers of
marine mammals taken during pile driving activities and (2)
characterization of the effects on those marine mammals. One existing
observer will be required to observe the turning basin, the entrance to
that basin, and portions of the Atlantic Ocean, to the extent possible.
In addition, we will require a third shore-based observer be present
for three days of vibratory driving, to be focused solely on the
entrance to the turning basin and surrounding, observable portions of
the Atlantic Ocean that may be ensonified by project activities.
[[Page 71570]]
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
There are four marine mammal species which may inhabit or transit
through the waters nearby NSM at the mouth of the St. Johns River and
in nearby nearshore Atlantic waters. These include the bottlenose
dolphin, Atlantic spotted dolphin, North Atlantic right whale
(Eubalaena glacialis), and humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae).
Multiple stocks of bottlenose dolphins may be present in the action
area, either seasonally or year-round. Multiple additional cetacean
species occur in South Atlantic waters but would not be expected to
occur in shallow nearshore waters of the action area. The right and
humpback whales are both listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
as endangered; however, for reasons described in the FR notice (78 FR
52148; August 22, 2013), the humpback whale and right whale are not
expected to be harassed by project activities and are therefore
excluded from further analysis and not discussed further in this
document. Table 2 lists the marine mammal species with potential for
occurrence in the vicinity of NSM during the project timeframe. The FR
notice (78 FR 52148; August 22, 2013) summarizes the population status
and abundance of these species, and the Navy's application provides
detailed life history information.
Table 2--Marine Mammals Potentially Present in the Vicinity Of NSM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance \1\ Relative occurrence
Species (CV, Nmin) in action area Season of occurrence
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale........ 444 (n/a, 444)....... Rare inshore, November to April.
Western North Atlantic stock...... regular near/
offshore.
Humpback whale.................... 823 (n/a, 823)....... Rare................ Fall-Spring.
Gulf of Maine stock...............
Atlantic spotted dolphin.......... 26,798 (0.66, 16,151) Rare................ Year-round.
Western North Atlantic stock......
Bottlenose dolphin................ 81,588 (0.17, 70,775) Rare................ Year-round.
Western North Atlantic offshore
stock.
Bottlenose dolphin................ 12,482 (0.32, 9,591). Possibly common January to March.
Western North Atlantic coastal, (seasonal).
southern migratory stock.
Bottlenose dolphin................ 3,064 (0.24, 2,511).. Possibly common..... Year-round.
Western North Atlantic coastal,
northern Florida stock.
Bottlenose dolphin................ 412\2\ (0.06, Possibly common..... Year-round.
Jacksonville Estuarine System unknown).
stock.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm. CV is
coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
\2\ This abundance estimate is considered an overestimate because it includes non- and seasonally-resident
animals.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals
We have determined that pile driving, as outlined in the project
description, has the potential to result in behavioral harassment of
marine mammals that may be present in the project vicinity while
construction activity is being conducted. The FR notice (78 FR 52148;
August 22, 2013) provides a detailed description of marine mammal
hearing and of the potential effects of these construction activities
on marine mammals.
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The proposed activities at NSM would not result in permanent
impacts to habitats used directly by marine mammals, but may have
potential short-term impacts to food sources such as forage fish and
may affect acoustic habitat (see masking discussion in proposed IHA FR
notice). There are no known foraging hotspots or other ocean bottom
structure of significant biological importance to marine mammals
present in the marine waters in the vicinity of the project area.
Therefore, the main impact issue associated with the proposed activity
would be temporarily elevated sound levels and the associated direct
effects on marine mammals, as discussed previously in this document.
The most likely impact to marine mammal habitat occurs from pile
driving effects on likely marine mammal prey (i.e., fish) near NSM and
minor impacts to the immediate substrate during installation and
removal of piles during the wharf construction project. The FR notice
(78 FR 52148; August 22, 2013) describes these potential impacts in
greater detail.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, we 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 (where relevant).
Measurements from proxy pile driving events were coupled with
practical spreading loss to estimate zones of influence (ZOIs; see
``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment''); these values were used to
develop mitigation measures for pile driving activities at NSM. The
ZOIs effectively represent the mitigation zone that would be
established around each pile to prevent Level A harassment to marine
mammals, while providing estimates of the areas within which Level B
harassment might occur. In addition to the specific measures described
later in this section, the Navy will conduct briefings between
construction supervisors and crews, marine mammal monitoring team, and
Navy staff prior to the start of all pile driving activity, and when
new personnel join the work, in order to explain responsibilities,
communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and
operational procedures.
Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile Driving
The following measures apply to the Navy's mitigation through
shutdown and disturbance zones:
Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving and removal activities, the
Navy will establish a shutdown zone intended to contain the area in
which SPLs equal or exceed the 180 dB rms acoustic injury criteria. The
purpose of a shutdown zone is to define an area within which shutdown
of activity would occur upon
[[Page 71571]]
sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering
the defined area), thus preventing injury, serious injury, or death of
marine mammals. Radial distances for shutdown zones are shown in Table
1. However, for this project, a minimum shutdown zone of 15 m will be
established during all pile driving activities, regardless of the
estimated zone. Vibratory pile driving activities are not predicted to
produce sound exceeding the Level A standard, but these precautionary
measures are intended to prevent the already unlikely possibility of
physical interaction with construction equipment and to further reduce
any possibility of acoustic injury. For impact driving of steel piles,
the radial distance of the shutdown would be established at 40 m (Table
1).
Disturbance Zone--Disturbance zones are the areas in which SPLs
equal or exceed 160 and 120 dB rms (for pulsed and non-pulsed sound,
respectively). Disturbance zones provide utility for monitoring
conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone monitoring) by
establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown
zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones enables observers to be aware of
and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area but
outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of
activity. However, the primary purpose of disturbance zone monitoring
is for documenting incidents of Level B harassment; disturbance zone
monitoring is discussed in greater detail later (see ``Monitoring and
Reporting''). Nominal radial distances for disturbance zones are shown
in Table 1. Given the size of the disturbance zone for vibratory pile
driving, it is impossible to guarantee that all animals would be
observed or to make comprehensive observations of fine-scale behavioral
reactions to sound, and only a portion of the zone (e.g., what may be
reasonably observed by visual observers stationed on land in the
vicinity of the turning basin) will be observed.
In order to document observed incidences of harassment, monitors
record all marine mammal observations, regardless of location. The
observer's location, as well as the location of the pile being driven,
is known from a GPS. The location of the animal is estimated as a
distance from the observer, which is then compared to the location from
the pile. If acoustic monitoring is being conducted for that pile, a
received SPL may be estimated, or the received level may be estimated
on the basis of past or subsequent acoustic monitoring. It may then be
determined whether the animal was exposed to sound levels constituting
incidental harassment in post-processing of observational and acoustic
data, and a precise accounting of observed incidences of harassment
created. Therefore, although the predicted distances to behavioral
harassment thresholds are useful for estimating incidental harassment
for purposes of authorizing levels of incidental take, actual take may
be determined in part through the use of empirical data. That
information may then be used to extrapolate observed takes to reach an
approximate understanding of actual total takes.
Monitoring Protocols--Monitoring will be conducted before, during,
and after pile driving activities. In addition, observers shall record
all incidences of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from
activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with
distance from piles being driven. Observations made outside the
shutdown zone will not result in shutdown; that pile segment would be
completed without cessation, unless the animal approaches or enters the
shutdown zone, at which point all pile driving activities would be
halted. Please see the Monitoring Plan (available at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm), developed by the Navy in
agreement with NMFS, for full details of the monitoring protocols.
Monitoring will take place from 15 minutes prior to initiation through
30 minutes post-completion of pile driving activities. Pile driving
activities include the time to remove a single pile or series of piles,
as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile driving equipment
is no more than 30 minutes.
The following additional measures apply to visual monitoring:
(1) Monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will
be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for
marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable
by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. Qualified observers
are typically trained biologists, with the following minimum
qualifications:
Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible)
sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface
with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars
may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
Advanced education in biological science, wildlife
management, mammalogy, or related fields (bachelor's degree or higher
is required);
Experience and ability to conduct field observations and
collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic
experience);
Experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of
observations including but not limited to the number and species of
marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates and times when in-water construction
activities were suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from
construction sound of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown
zone; and marine mammal behavior; and
Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary. For this project, we waive the
requirement for advanced education, as the observers will be personnel
hired by the engineering contractor that may not have backgrounds in
biological science or related fields. These observers will be required
to watch the Navy's Marine Species Awareness Training video and shall
receive training sufficient to achieve all other qualifications listed
above (where relevant).
(2) Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone
will be monitored for 15 minutes to ensure that it is clear of marine
mammals. Pile driving will only commence once observers have declared
the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals; animals will be allowed to
remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition)
and their behavior will be monitored and documented. The shutdown zone
may only be declared clear, and pile driving started, when the entire
shutdown zone is visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog,
etc.). In addition, if such conditions should arise during impact pile
driving that is already underway, the activity will be halted.
(3) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone
during the course of pile driving operations, activity will be halted
and delayed until either the animal has voluntarily left and been
visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone or 15 minutes have passed
without re-detection of the animal. Monitoring will be conducted
[[Page 71572]]
throughout the time required to drive a pile.
Soft Start
The use of a soft-start procedure is believed to provide additional
protection to marine mammals by warning or providing a chance to leave
the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity, and typically
involves a requirement to initiate sound from vibratory hammers for
fifteen seconds at reduced energy followed by a 30-second waiting
period. This procedure is repeated two additional times. However,
implementation of soft start for vibratory pile driving during previous
pile driving work conducted by the Navy at another location has led to
equipment failure and serious human safety concerns. Therefore,
vibratory soft start is not required as a mitigation measure for this
project, as we have determined it not to be practicable. We have
further determined this measure unnecessary to providing the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals and their
habitat. Prior to issuing any further IHAs to the Navy for pile driving
activities in 2014 and beyond, we plan to facilitate consultation
between the Navy and other practitioners (e.g., Washington State
Department of Transportation and/or the California Department of
Transportation) in order to determine whether the potentially
significant human safety issue is inherent to implementation of the
measure or is due to operator error. For impact driving, soft start
will be required, and contractors will provide an initial set of three
strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a 30-
second waiting period, then two subsequent three-strike sets.
We have carefully evaluated the applicant's planned mitigation
measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of
ensuring that we prescribe the means of effecting the least practicable
impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their
habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of
the following factors in relation to one another: (1) the manner in
which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the
measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals; (2)
the proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize
adverse impacts as planned; and (3) the practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's planned measures, as
well as any other potential measures that may be relevant to the
specified activity, we have determined that these mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine
mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention
to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that we 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 ITAs
must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary
monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the
species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area.
The Navy's planned monitoring and reporting is also described in their
Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan.
Acoustic Monitoring
The Navy will implement a sound source level verification study
during the specified activities. Data would be collected in order to
estimate airborne and underwater source levels. Monitoring will include
two underwater positions and one airborne monitoring position. These
exact positions will be determined in the field during consultation
with Navy personnel, subject to constraints related to logistics and
security requirements. Underwater sound monitoring will include the
measurement of peak and rms sound pressure levels during pile driving
activities at Wharf C-2. Typical ambient levels will be measured during
lulls in the pile installation and reported in terms of rms sound
pressure levels. Frequency spectra will be provided for pile driving
sounds.
Visual Marine Mammal Observations
The Navy will collect sighting data and behavioral responses to
construction for marine mammal species observed in the region of
activity during the period of activity. All observers will be trained
in marine mammal identification and behaviors and are required to have
no other construction-related tasks while conducting monitoring. The
Navy will monitor the shutdown zone and disturbance zone before,
during, and after pile driving, with observers located at the best
practicable vantage points. Based on our requirements, the Navy will
implement the following procedures for pile driving:
MMOs will be located at the best vantage point(s) in order
to properly see the entire shutdown zone and as much of the disturbance
zone as possible.
During all observation periods, observers will use
binoculars and the naked eye to search continuously for marine mammals.
If the shutdown zones are obscured by fog or poor lighting
conditions, pile driving at that location will not be initiated until
that zone is visible. Should such conditions arise while impact driving
is underway, the activity would be halted.
The shutdown and disturbance zones around the pile will be
monitored for the presence of marine mammals before, during, and after
any pile driving or removal activity.
Individuals implementing the monitoring protocol will assess its
effectiveness using an adaptive approach. Monitoring biologists will
use their best professional judgment throughout implementation and seek
improvements to these methods when deemed appropriate. Any
modifications to protocol will be coordinated between NMFS and the
Navy.
Data Collection
We require that observers use approved data forms. Among other
pieces of information, the Navy will record detailed information about
any implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to
the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting
behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, the Navy will attempt to
distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the
number of incidences of take. We require that, at a minimum, the
following information be collected on the sighting forms:
Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel, and if possible,
the correlation to SPLs;
Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
[[Page 71573]]
Locations of all marine mammal observations; and
Other human activity in the area.
Reporting
A draft report will be submitted to NMFS within 90 days of the
completion of marine mammal monitoring. The report will include marine
mammal observations pre-activity, during-activity, and post-activity
during pile driving days, and will also provide descriptions of any
adverse responses to construction activities by marine mammals and a
complete description of all mitigation shutdowns and the results of
those actions and a refined take estimate based on the number of marine
mammals observed during the course of construction. A final report will
be prepared and submitted within 30 days following resolution of
comments on the draft report. A technical report summarizing the
acoustic monitoring data collected will be prepared within 75 days of
completion of monitoring.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
With respect to the activities described here, the MMPA defines
``harassment'' as: ``any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which
(i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock
in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb
a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level
B harassment].'' All anticipated takes will be by Level B harassment,
involving temporary changes in behavior. The planned mitigation and
monitoring measures are expected to minimize the possibility of
injurious or lethal takes such that take by Level A harassment, serious
injury, or mortality is considered discountable. However, it is
unlikely that injurious or lethal takes would occur even in the absence
of the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures.
If a marine mammal responds to a stimulus by changing its behavior
(e.g., through relatively minor changes in locomotion direction/speed
or vocalization behavior), the response may or may not constitute
taking at the individual level, and is unlikely to affect the stock or
the species as a whole. However, if a sound source displaces marine
mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for a prolonged
period, impacts on animals or on the stock or species could potentially
be significant (Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007). Given the
many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types of impacts of
sound on marine mammals, it is common practice to estimate how many
animals are likely to be present within a particular distance of a
given activity, or exposed to a particular level of sound. This
practice potentially overestimates the numbers of marine mammals taken.
In addition, it is often difficult to distinguish between the number of
individuals harassed and incidences of harassment. In particular, for
stationary activities, it is more likely that some smaller number of
individuals may accrue a number of incidences of harassment per
individual than for each incidence to accrue to a new individual,
especially if those individuals display some degree of residency or
site fidelity and the impetus to use the site (e.g., because of
foraging opportunities) is stronger than the deterrence presented by
the harassing activity.
The turning basin is not important habitat for marine mammals, as
it is a man-made, semi-enclosed basin with frequent industrial activity
and regular maintenance dredging. The small area of ensonification
extending out of the turning basin into nearshore waters is also not
believed to be of any particular importance, nor is it considered an
area frequented by marine mammals. Bottlenose dolphins may be observed
at any time of year in estuarine and nearshore waters of the action
area, but sightings of other species are rare. Therefore, behavioral
disturbances that could result from anthropogenic sound associated with
these activities are expected to affect only a relatively small number
of individual marine mammals, although those effects could be recurring
over the life of the project if the same individuals remain in the
project vicinity. The Navy has requested authorization for the
incidental taking of small numbers of bottlenose dolphins and Atlantic
spotted dolphins in the Mayport turning basin and associated nearshore
waters that may be ensonified by project activities.
Marine Mammal Densities
For all species, the best scientific information available was used
to derive density estimates and the maximum appropriate density value
for each species was used in the marine mammal take assessment
calculation. Density values for the Atlantic spotted dolphin were
derived from global density estimates produced by Sea Mammal Research
Unit, Ltd. (SMRU), as presented in DoN (2012), and the highest seasonal
density (spring; 0.6803/km\2\) was used for take estimation. Density
for bottlenose dolphin is derived from site-specific surveys conducted
by the Navy. Only bottlenose dolphins have been observed in the turning
basin; it is not currently possible to identify observed individuals to
stock. This survey effort consists of twelve half-day observation
periods covering mornings and afternoons during December 10-13, 2012,
and March 4-7, 2013. During each observation period, two observers (one
at ground level and one positioned at a fourth-floor observation point)
monitored for the presence of marine mammals in the turning basin
(0.712 km\2\) and tracked their movements and behavior while inside the
basin, with observations recorded for five-minute intervals every half-
hour. Morning sessions typically ran from 7:00-11:30 and afternoon
sessions from 1:00 to 5:30. Most observations were of individuals or
pairs (mode of 1) although a maximum group size of six was observed. It
was assumed that the average observed group size (1.8) could occur in
the action area each day, and was thus used to calculate a density of
2.53/km\2\. For comparison, the maximum density value available from
the NMSDD for bottlenose dolphins in inshore areas is significantly
lower (winter, 0.217/km\2\, SMRU estimate) and would likely
underestimate the occurrence of bottlenose dolphins in the turning
basin.
Description of Take Calculation
The take calculations presented here rely on the best data
currently available for marine mammal populations in the vicinity of
Mayport. The methodology for estimating take was described in detail in
the FR notice (78 FR 52148; August 22, 2013). The ZOI impact area is
the estimated range of impact to the sound criteria. The distances
specified in Table 1 were used to calculate ZOIs around each pile. The
ZOI impact area calculations took into consideration the possible
affected area with attenuation due to the constraints of the basin.
Because the basin restricts sound from propagating outward, with the
exception of the east-facing entrance channel, the radial distances to
thresholds cannot generally be reached.
While pile driving can occur any day, and the analysis is conducted
on a per day basis, only a fraction of that time (typically a matter of
hours on any given day) is actually spent pile driving. The exposure
assessment methodology is an estimate of the numbers of individuals
exposed to the effects of pile driving activities exceeding NMFS-
established thresholds. Of note in these exposure estimates, mitigation
methods (i.e., visual monitoring and the use of
[[Page 71574]]
shutdown zones; soft start for impact pile driving) were not quantified
within the assessment and successful implementation of mitigation is
not reflected in exposure estimates. In addition, equating exposure
with response (i.e., a behavioral response meeting the definition of
take under the MMPA) is simplistic and conservative assumption. For
these reasons, results from this acoustic exposure assessment likely
overestimate take estimates to some degree.
Table 3--Number of Potential Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals Within Various Acoustic Threshold Zones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated incidences of take
\1\
Species Activity -------------------------------- Total
Level A Level B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin \2\................ Impact driving (steel 0 40 365
piles).
Vibratory driving (steel 0 315 ..............
piles).
Vibratory driving 0 10 ..............
(plastic piles).
Atlantic spotted dolphin.............. Impact driving (steel 0 0 95
piles).
Vibratory driving (steel 0 90 ..............
piles).
Vibratory driving 0 5 ..............
(plastic piles).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Acoustic injury threshold is 180 dB for cetaceans; behavioral harassment threshold applicable to impact pile
driving is 160 dB and to vibratory driving is 120 dB.
\2\ It is impossible to estimate from available information which stock these takes may accrue to.
Only bottlenose dolphins are likely to occur inside the turning
basin; therefore, the estimates for spotted dolphin are likely
overestimates because the ZOI areas include the turning basin.
Bottlenose dolphins are likely to be exposed to sound levels that could
cause behavioral harassment if they enter the turning basin while pile
driving activity is occurring. Outside the turning basin, potential
takes could occur if individuals of these species move through the
ensonified area when pile driving is occurring. It is not possible to
determine, from available information, how many of the estimated
incidences of take for bottlenose dolphins may accrue to the different
stocks that may occur in the action area. Similarly, animals observed
in the ensonified areas will not be able to be identified to stock on
the basis of visual observation.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analyses and Determinations
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.'' In making a negligible impact determination,
we consider a variety of factors, including but not limited to: (1) The
number of anticipated mortalities; (2) the number and nature of
anticipated injuries; (3) the number, nature, intensity, and duration
of Level B harassment; and (4) the context in which the take occurs.
Small Numbers Analysis
The number of incidences of take authorized for Atlantic spotted
dolphins is small relative to the relevant stock--less than one
percent. As described previously, of the 365 incidences of behavioral
harassment predicted to occur for bottlenose dolphin, we have no
information allowing us to parse those predicted incidences amongst the
three stocks of bottlenose dolphin that may occur in the ensonified
area. Therefore, we assessed the total number of predicted incidences
of take against the best abundance estimate for each stock, as though
the total would occur for the stock in question. For two of the
bottlenose dolphin stocks, the total predicted number of incidences of
take authorized would be considered small--less than three percent for
the southern migratory stock and less than twelve percent for the
northern Florida coastal stock--even if each estimated taking occurred
to a new individual. This is an extremely unlikely scenario as, for
bottlenose dolphins in estuarine and nearshore waters, there is likely
to be some overlap in individuals present day-to-day.
The total number of authorized takes proposed for bottlenose
dolphins, if assumed to accrue solely to new individuals of the JES
stock, is higher relative to the total stock abundance, which is
currently considered unknown. However, these numbers represent the
estimated incidences of take, not the number of individuals taken. That
is, it is highly likely that a relatively small subset of JES
bottlenose dolphins would be harassed by project activities. JES
bottlenose dolphins range from Cumberland Sound at the Georgia-Florida
border south to approximately Palm Coast, Florida, an area spanning
over 120 linear km of coastline and including habitat consisting of
complex inshore and estuarine waterways. JES dolphins, divided by
Caldwell (2001) into Northern and Southern groups, show strong site
fidelity and, although members of both groups have been observed
outside their preferred areas, it is likely that the majority of JES
dolphins would not occur within waters ensonified by project
activities. Further, although the largest area of ensonification is
predicted to extend up to 7.5 km offshore from NSM, estuarine dolphins
are generally considered as restricted to inshore waters and only 1-2
km offshore. In summary, JES dolphins are (1) known to form two groups
and exhibit strong site fidelity (i.e., individuals do not generally
range throughout the recognized overall JES stock range); (2) would not
occur at all in a significant portion of the larger ZOI extending
offshore from NSM; and (3) the specified activity will be stationary
within an enclosed basin not recognized as an area of any special
significance that would serve to attract or aggregate dolphins. We
therefore believe that the estimated numbers of takes, were they to
occur, likely represent repeated exposures of a much smaller number of
bottlenose dolphins and that these estimated incidences of take
represent small numbers of bottlenose dolphins.
Negligible Impact Analysis
Pile driving activities associated with the Navy's wharf project,
as outlined previously, have the potential to disturb or displace
marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may result in
take, in the form of Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) only,
from underwater sounds generated from pile driving. Potential takes
could occur if individuals of these species are present in the
ensonified zone when pile driving is happening.
[[Page 71575]]
No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated given the
likely methods of installation and measures designed to minimize the
possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for these
outcomes is minimized through the construction method and the
implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Specifically,
vibratory hammers will be the primary method of installation, and this
activity does not have significant potential to cause injury to marine
mammals due to the relatively low source levels produced (less than 180
dB) and the lack of potentially injurious source characteristics.
Impact pile driving produces short, sharp pulses with higher peak
levels and much sharper rise time to reach those peaks. If impact
driving is necessary, implementation of soft start and shutdown zones
significantly reduces any possibility of injury. Given sufficient
``notice'' through use of soft start (for impact driving), marine
mammals are expected to move away from a sound source that is annoying
prior to its becoming potentially injurious. Environmental conditions
in the confined and protected Mayport turning basin mean that marine
mammal detection ability by trained observers is high, enabling a high
rate of success in implementation of shutdowns to avoid injury, serious
injury, or mortality.
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). Most likely, individuals
will simply move away from the sound source and be temporarily
displaced from the areas of pile driving, although even this reaction
has been observed primarily only in association with impact pile
driving. The pile driving activities analyzed here are similar to
numerous other construction activities conducted in San Francisco Bay
and in the Puget Sound region, which have taken place with no reported
injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long-term adverse
consequences from behavioral harassment. Repeated exposures of
individuals to levels of sound that may cause Level B harassment are
unlikely to result in hearing impairment or to significantly disrupt
foraging behavior. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small
subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant
realized decrease in viability for bottlenose dolphins, and thus would
not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B
harassment will be reduced to the level of least practicable impact
through use of mitigation measures described herein and, if sound
produced by project activities is sufficiently disturbing, animals are
likely to simply avoid the turning basin while the activity is
occurring.
In summary, this negligible impact analysis is founded on the
following factors: (1) The possibility of injury, serious injury, or
mortality may reasonably be considered discountable; (2) the
anticipated incidences of Level B harassment consist of, at worst,
temporary modifications in behavior; (3) the absence of any significant
habitat within the project area, including known areas or features of
special significance for foraging or reproduction; (4) the presumed
efficacy of the planned mitigation measures in reducing the effects of
the specified activity to the level of least practicable impact. In
addition, none of these stocks are listed under the ESA, although
coastal bottlenose dolphins are considered depleted under the MMPA. In
combination, we believe that these factors, as well as the available
body of evidence from other similar activities, demonstrate that the
potential effects of the specified activity will have only short-term
effects on individuals. The specified activity is not expected to
impact rates of recruitment or survival and will therefore not result
in population-level impacts.
Determinations
The number of marine mammals actually incidentally harassed by the
project will depend on the distribution and abundance of marine mammals
in the vicinity of the survey activity. However, we find that the
number of potential takings authorized (by level B harassment only),
which we consider to be a conservative, maximum estimate, is small
relative to the relevant regional stock or population numbers, and that
the effect of the activity will be mitigated to the level of least
practicable impact through implementation of the mitigation and
monitoring measures described previously. Based on the analysis
contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on
marine mammals and their habitat, we find that the total taking from
the activity will have a negligible impact on the affected species or
stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action. Therefore, we have determined that the total taking of
affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are no ESA-listed marine mammals expected to occur in the
action area. Therefore, the Navy has not requested authorization of the
incidental take of ESA-listed species and no such authorization is
issued; therefore, no consultation under the ESA is required.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published
by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the
Navy prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) to consider the direct,
indirect and cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from
the wharf recapitalization project. NMFS made the Navy's EA available
to the public for review and comment, in relation to its suitability
for adoption by NMFS in order to assess the impacts to the human
environment of issuance of an IHA to the Navy. Also in compliance with
NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well as NOAA Administrative Order 216-
6, NMFS has reviewed the Navy's EA, determined it to be sufficient, and
adopted that EA and signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
on November 20, 2013. The Navy's EA and NMFS' FONSI for this action may
be found at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to the
Navy to conduct the specified activities in Naval Station Mayport, FL
for one year, from December 1, 2013, through November 30, 2014,
provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Dated: November 25, 2013.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-28650 Filed 11-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P