Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Wharf Recapitalization Project, 55598-55606 [2015-23174]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 179 (Wednesday, September 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55598-55606]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23174]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XE056


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Wharf Recapitalization Project

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

ACTION: Notice; 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 marine mammals during 
construction activities associated with a wharf recapitalization 
project at Naval Station Mayport, FL.

DATES: This authorization is effective from September 8, 2015, through 
September 7, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability

    An electronic copy of the Navy's application and supporting 
documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, 
may be obtained by visiting the Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. 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. 
In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact 
listed above (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Background

    Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) 
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request by U.S. 
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial 
fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional, 
taking of small numbers of marine mammals, providing that certain 
findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established.
    The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals may be 
allowed only if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary) 
finds that the total taking by the specified activity during the 
specified time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species 
or stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 
relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking and requirements 
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking 
must be set forth, either in specific regulations or in an 
authorization.
    The allowance of such incidental taking under section 101(a)(5)(A), 
by harassment, serious injury, death, or a combination thereof, 
requires that regulations be established. Subsequently, a Letter of 
Authorization may be issued pursuant to the prescriptions established 
in such regulations, providing that the level of taking will be 
consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under 
the specific regulations. Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may 
authorize such incidental taking by harassment only, for periods of not 
more than one year, pursuant to requirements and conditions contained 
within an IHA. The establishment of prescriptions through either 
specific regulations or an authorization requires notice and 
opportunity for public comment.
    NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``. . . 
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be 
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely 
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of 
recruitment or survival.'' Except with respect to certain activities 
not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' 
as: ``. . . any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the 
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 
[Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine 
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of 
behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, 
breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B 
harassment].''

Summary of Request

    On January 28, 2015, we received a request from the Navy for 
authorization to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving in 
association with the Wharf C-2 recapitalization project at Naval 
Station Mayport, Florida (NSM). That request was modified on April 17 
and the Navy submitted a revised version of the request on July 24, 
2015, which we deemed adequate and complete. In-water work associated 
with the project is expected to be completed within the one-year 
timeframe of the IHA.
    The use of both vibratory and impact pile driving is expected to 
produce underwater sound at levels that have the potential to result in 
behavioral harassment of marine mammals. Two species of marine mammal 
have the potential to be affected by the specified activities: 
Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus truncatus) and Atlantic spotted 
dolphin (Stenella frontalis). These species may occur year-round in the 
action area. However, we have determined that incidental take of 
spotted dolphins is not reasonably likely and do not authorize such 
take.
    This is expected to be the second and final year of in-water work 
associated with the Wharf C-2 project. This is the second such IHA, 
following the IHA issued effective from September 1, 2014, through 
August 31, 2015 (78 FR 71566; November 29, 2013). Please note that the 
previous IHA was initially issued with effective dates from December 1, 
2013, through November 30, 2014. However, no work was conducted during 
this period and the effective dates were changed to those stated above 
(79 FR 27863; May 15, 2014).

Description of the Specified Activity

Overview

    Wharf C-2 is a single level, general purpose berthing wharf 
constructed in 1960. The wharf is one of NSM's two primary deep-draft 
berths and is one of the primary ordnance handling wharfs. The wharf is 
a diaphragm steel sheet pile cell structure with a concrete apron, 
partial concrete encasement of the piling and an asphalt paved deck. 
The wharf is currently in poor condition due to advanced deterioration 
of the steel

[[Page 55599]]

sheeting and lack of corrosion protection, and this structural 
deterioration has resulted in the institution of load restrictions 
within 60 ft of the wharf face. The purpose of this project is to 
complete necessary repairs to Wharf C-2. Please refer to Appendix A of 
the Navy's application for photos of existing damage and deterioration 
at the wharf, and to Appendix B for a contractor schematic of the 
project plan.

Dates and Duration

    The total project was expected to require a maximum of fifty days 
of in-water vibratory pile driving work over a twelve-month period, 
with an additional twenty days of impact pile driving included in the 
specified activity as a contingency for a total of seventy days in-
water pile driving. Based on work completed to date and in 
consideration of the number of piles yet to be driven and pile 
production rates to date, the Navy estimates that remaining work may 
require 47 days in total.

Specific Geographic Region

    NSM is located in northeastern Florida, at the mouth of the St. 
Johns River and adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean (see Figures 2-1 and 2-2 
of the Navy's application). The St. Johns River is the longest river in 
Florida, with the final 35 mi flowing through the city of Jacksonville. 
This portion of the river is significant for commercial shipping and 
military use. At the mouth of the river, near the action area, the 
Atlantic Ocean is the dominant influence and typical salinities are 
above 30 ppm. Outside the river mouth, in nearshore waters, moderate 
oceanic currents tend to flow southward parallel to the coast. Sea 
surface temperatures range from around 16 [deg]C in winter to 28 [deg]C 
in summer.
    The specific action area consists of the NSM turning basin, an area 
of approximately 2,000 by 3,000 ft containing ship berthing facilities 
at sixteen locations along wharves around the basin perimeter. The 
basin was constructed during the early 1940s by dredging the eastern 
part of Ribault Bay (at the mouth of the St. Johns River), with dredge 
material from the basin used to fill parts of the bay and other low-
lying areas in order to elevate the land surface. The basin is 
currently maintained through regular dredging at a depth of 50 ft, with 
depths at the berths ranging from 30-50 ft. The turning basin, 
connected to the St. Johns River by a 500-ft-wide entrance channel, 
will largely contain sound produced by project activities, with the 
exception of sound propagating east into nearshore Atlantic waters 
through the entrance channel (see Figure 2-2 of the Navy's 
application). Wharf C-2 is located in the northeastern corner of the 
Mayport turning basin.

Detailed Description of Activities

    In order to rehabilitate Wharf C-2, the Navy plans to install a new 
steel king pile/sheet pile (SSP) bulkhead, consisting of large vertical 
king piles with paired steel sheet piles driven between and connected 
to the ends of the king piles. Over the course of the entire project, 
the Navy will install approximately 120 single sheet piles and 119 king 
piles (all steel) to support the bulkhead wall, as well as fifty 
polymeric (plastic) fender piles. The SSP wall is anchored at the top 
and filled behind the wall before a concrete cap is formed along the 
top and outside face to tie the entire structure together and provide a 
berthing surface for vessels. The new bulkhead will be designed for a 
fifty-year service life.
    The most recent project update indicated that installation of 
approximately seventy percent of steel piles (84 of 120 sheet piles and 
81 of 119 king piles) has been completed. We include here as a 
contingency the installation of 25 percent of steel piles. All fifty 
plastic fender piles will be installed during the period of validity of 
the IHA.
    All piles will be driven by vibratory hammer, although impact pile 
driving may be used as a contingency in cases when vibratory driving is 
not sufficient to reach the necessary depth. In the unlikely event that 
impact driving is required, either impact or vibratory driving could 
occur on a given day, but concurrent use of vibratory and impact 
drivers will not occur. Including the installation of 25 percent of 
steel piles as a contingency, the Navy estimates that 47 in-water work 
days may be required to complete pile driving activity, including ten 
days for vibratory driving of plastic piles, seventeen days for 
contingency vibratory driving of steel piles, and twenty days for 
contingency impact driving, if necessary.

Comments and Responses

    We published a notice of receipt of the Navy's application and 
proposed IHA in the Federal Register on August 5, 2015 (80 FR 46545). 
We received a letter from the Marine Mammal Commission, which provided 
the following recommendation. In addition, we received a letter from 
the U.S. Department of the Interior, stating they had no comments on 
the proposed authorization.
    Comment: The Commission recommends that we require the Navy to 
conduct empirical sound measurements of installation of the polymeric 
piles using a vibratory hammer and, opportunistically, of installation 
of any other piles that are driven with an impact hammer on those days 
that sound measurements of the polymeric piles are made.
    Response: In the previous incidental harassment authorization, we 
required the Navy to conduct empirical in-water and in-air sound 
measurements of (1) installation of the various types of piles using a 
vibratory and impact hammer and (2) ambient underwater sound. The Navy 
collected empirical in-water and in-air data during vibratory pile 
driving of the king and sheet piles. The polymeric piles have yet to be 
installed, and impact driving was not necessary during the first year 
of activities. The initial requirement was made under the expectation 
that all work would be conducted within the one-year timeframe of that 
IHA; however, project delays have forced the extension of work into a 
second year, necessitating the Navy's request for a second IHA.
    Both NMFS and the Navy place great value on site-specific acoustic 
measurements to facilitate more accurate analyses of future projects. 
However, the Navy's allocated funds for acoustic measurements at Wharf 
C2 were necessarily spent in fulfillment of obligations under the Year 
1 IHA. As described, all pile driving (including polymeric piles) was 
intended to be accomplished during one year, but delays have resulted 
in the extension of the project timeline. It is the Navy's intention to 
gather acoustic measurements during polymeric pile driving for this 
project and acoustic measurements of polymeric pile driving in Year 2 
will be accomplished as circumstances permit. However, due to the 
aforementioned funding limitations, we cannot include this as an IHA 
requirement.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    There are four marine mammal species which may inhabit or transit 
through the waters nearby NSM at the mouth of the St. Johns River and 
in nearby nearshore Atlantic waters. These include the bottlenose 
dolphin, Atlantic spotted dolphin, North Atlantic right whale 
(Eubalaena glacialis), and humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). 
Multiple additional cetacean species occur in South Atlantic waters but 
would not be expected to occur in shallow nearshore waters of the 
action area. Table 1 lists the marine

[[Page 55600]]

mammal species with expected potential for occurrence in the vicinity 
of NSM during the project timeframe and summarizes key information 
regarding stock status and abundance. Taxonomically, we follow 
Committee on Taxonomy (2014). Please see NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports 
(SAR), available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars, for more detailed 
accounts of these stocks' status and abundance. Please also refer to 
NMFS' Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals) for generalized 
species accounts and to the Navy's Marine Resource Assessment for the 
Charleston/Jacksonville Operating Area, which documents and describes 
the marine resources that occur in Navy operating areas of the 
Southeast (DoN, 2008). The document is publicly available at 
www.navfac.navy.mil/products_and_services/ev/products_and_services/marine_resources/marine_resource_assessments.html (accessed July 16, 
2015). We provided additional information for marine mammals with 
potential for occurrence in the area of the specified activity in our 
Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (August 5, 2015; 80 
FR 46545). For reasons discussed in detail in the notice of proposed 
authorization, right whales and humpback whales are unlikely to occur 
in the project area and are not considered further.

                                           Table 1--Marine Mammals Potentially Present in the Vicinity of NSM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Stock abundance (CV,
              Species                         Stock             ESA/MMPA status;       Nmin, most recent     PBR \3\   Annual  M/  Relative occurrence;
                                                              Strategic  (Y/N) \1\   abundance survey) \2\               SI \4\    season of  occurrence
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
                                                                    Family Balaenidae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale.........  Western North Atlantic  E/D; Y                 465 (n/a; 2013).......        0.9       4.75  Rare inshore, regular
                                                                                                                                   near/offshore; Nov-
                                                                                                                                   Apr.
Humpback whale.....................  Gulf of Maine.........  E/D; Y                 823 (n/a; 2008).......        2.7      10.15  Rare; Fall-Spring.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
                                                                   Family Delphinidae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common bottlenose dolphin..........  Western North Atlantic  -; N                   77,532 (0.4; 56,053;          561       45.1  Rare; year-round.
                                      Offshore.                                      2011).
Common bottlenose dolphin..........  Western North Atlantic  -/D; Y                 9,173 (0.46; 6,326;            63   2.6-16.5  Possibly common \7\;
                                      Coastal, Southern                              2010-11).                                     Jan-Mar.
                                      Migratory.
Common bottlenose dolphin..........  Western North Atlantic  -/D; Y                 1,219 (0.67; 730; 2010-         7        unk  Possibly common \7\;
                                      Coastal, Northern                              11).                                          year-round.
                                      Florida.
Common bottlenose dolphin..........  Jacksonville Estuarine  -; Y                   412 \6\ (0.06; unk;        undet.        unk  Possibly common \7\;
                                      System \5\.                                    1994-97).                                     year-round.
Atlantic spotted dolphin...........  Western North Atlantic  -; N                   44,715 (0.43; 31,610;         316          0  Rare; year-round.
                                                                                     2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or
  designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see
  footnote 3) or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
  under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For killer whales, the
  abundance values represent direct counts of individually identifiable animals; therefore there is only a single abundance estimate with no associated
  CV. For certain stocks, abundance estimates are actual counts of animals and there is no associated CV. The most recent abundance survey that is
  reflected in the abundance estimate is presented; there may be more recent surveys that have not yet been incorporated into the estimate.
\3\ Potential biological removal, defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a
  marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population size (OSP).
\4\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
  fisheries, subsistence hunting, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value.
\5\ Abundance estimates for these stocks are greater than eight years old and are therefore not considered current. PBR is considered undetermined for
  these stocks, as there is no current minimum abundance estimate for use in calculation. We nevertheless present the most recent abundance estimates
  and PBR values, as these represent the best available information for use in this document.
\6\ This abundance estimate is considered an overestimate because it includes non- and seasonally-resident animals.
\7\ Bottlenose dolphins in general are common in the project area, but it is not possible to readily identify them to stock. Therefore, these three
  stocks are listed as possibly common as we have no information about which stock commonly only occurs.

Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    Our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (August 5, 
2015; 80 FR 46545) provides a general background on sound relevant to 
the specified activity as well as a detailed description of marine 
mammal hearing and of the potential effects of these construction 
activities on marine mammals and their habitat.

Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such 
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on 
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to 
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on 
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain 
subsistence uses.
    Measurements from similar pile driving events were coupled with 
practical spreading loss to estimate zones of influence (ZOI; see 
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment); these

[[Page 55601]]

values were used to develop mitigation measures for pile driving 
activities at NSM. The ZOIs effectively represent the mitigation zone 
that will 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 will apply to the Navy's mitigation through 
shutdown and disturbance zones:
    Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving activities, the Navy will 
establish a shutdown zone intended to contain the area in which SPLs 
equal or exceed the 180 dB rms acoustic injury criteria. The purpose of 
a shutdown zone is to define an area within which shutdown of activity 
will occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an 
animal entering the defined area), thus preventing injury of marine 
mammals (as described previously, serious injury or death are unlikely 
outcomes even in the absence of mitigation measures). Modeled radial 
distances for shutdown zones are shown in Table 2. However, a minimum 
shutdown zone of 15 m (which is larger than the maximum predicted 
injury zone) will be established during all pile driving activities, 
regardless of the estimated zone. Vibratory pile driving activities are 
not predicted to produce sound exceeding the 180-dB Level A harassment 
threshold, but these precautionary measures are intended to prevent the 
already unlikely possibility of physical interaction with construction 
equipment and to further reduce any possibility of acoustic injury. For 
impact driving of steel piles, if necessary, the radial distance of the 
shutdown will be established at 40 m.
    Disturbance Zone--Disturbance zones are the areas in which SPLs 
equal or exceed 160 and 120 dB rms (for impulse and continuous sound, 
respectively). Disturbance zones provide utility for monitoring 
conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone monitoring) by 
establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown 
zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones enables observers to be aware of 
and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area but 
outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of 
activity. However, the primary purpose of disturbance zone monitoring 
is for documenting incidents of Level B harassment; disturbance zone 
monitoring is discussed in greater detail later (see Monitoring and 
Reporting). Nominal radial distances for disturbance zones are shown in 
Table 2. Given the size of the disturbance zone for vibratory pile 
driving, it is impossible to guarantee that all animals would be 
observed or to make comprehensive observations of fine-scale behavioral 
reactions to sound, and only a portion of the zone (e.g., what may be 
reasonably observed by visual observers stationed within the turning 
basin) will be observed.
    In order to document observed incidents of harassment, monitors 
record all marine mammal observations, regardless of location. The 
observer's location, as well as the location of the pile being driven, 
is known from a GPS. The location of the animal is estimated as a 
distance from the observer, which is then compared to the location from 
the pile. It may then be estimated whether the animal was exposed to 
sound levels constituting incidental harassment on the basis of 
predicted distances to relevant thresholds in post-processing of 
observational and acoustic data, and a precise accounting of observed 
incidences of harassment created. This information may then be used to 
extrapolate observed takes to reach an approximate understanding of 
actual total takes.
    Monitoring Protocols--Monitoring will be conducted before, during, 
and after pile driving activities. In addition, observers shall record 
all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from 
activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with 
distance from piles being driven. Observations made outside the 
shutdown zone will not result in shutdown; that pile segment will be 
completed without cessation, unless the animal approaches or enters the 
shutdown zone, at which point all pile driving activities will be 
halted. Monitoring will take place from fifteen minutes prior to 
initiation through thirty minutes post-completion of pile driving 
activities. Pile driving activities include the time to install or 
remove a single pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed 
between uses of the pile driving equipment is no more than thirty 
minutes. Please see the Monitoring Plan (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm), developed by the Navy in agreement with 
NMFS, for full details of the monitoring protocols.
    The following additional measures apply to visual monitoring:
    (1) Monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will 
be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for 
marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable 
by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. Qualified observers 
are typically trained biologists, with the following minimum 
qualifications:
     Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) 
sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface 
with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars 
may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
     Advanced education in biological science, wildlife 
management, mammalogy, or related fields (bachelor's degree or higher 
is required);
     Experience and ability to conduct field observations and 
collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic 
experience);
     Experience or training in the field identification of 
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
     Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations;
     Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of 
observations including but not limited to the number and species of 
marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction 
activities were conducted; dates and times when in-water construction 
activities were suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from 
construction sound of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown 
zone; and marine mammal behavior; and
     Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with 
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals 
observed in the area as necessary.
    For this project, we waive the requirement for advanced education, 
as the observers will be personnel hired by the engineering contractor 
that may not have backgrounds in biological science or related fields. 
These observers will be required to watch the Navy's Marine Species 
Awareness Training video and shall receive training sufficient to 
achieve all other qualifications listed above (where relevant).
    (2) Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone 
will be

[[Page 55602]]

monitored for fifteen minutes to ensure that it is clear of marine 
mammals. Pile driving will only commence once observers have declared 
the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals; animals will be allowed to 
remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition) 
and their behavior will be monitored and documented. The shutdown zone 
may only be declared clear, and pile driving started, when the entire 
shutdown zone is visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog, 
etc.). In addition, if such conditions should arise during impact pile 
driving that is already underway, the activity 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 fifteen minutes have 
passed without re-detection of the animal. Monitoring will be conducted 
throughout the time required to drive a pile.

Soft Start

    The use of a soft start procedure is believed to provide additional 
protection to marine mammals by warning or providing a chance to leave 
the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity, and typically 
involves a requirement to initiate sound from the hammer at reduced 
energy followed by a waiting period. This procedure is repeated two 
additional times. It is difficult to specify the reduction in energy 
for any given hammer because of variation across drivers and, for 
impact hammers, the actual number of strikes at reduced energy will 
vary because operating the hammer at less than full power results in 
``bouncing'' of the hammer as it strikes the pile, resulting in 
multiple ``strikes.'' For impact driving, we require an initial set of 
three strikes from the impact hammer at reduced energy, followed by a 
thirty-second waiting period, then two subsequent three strike sets. 
Soft start will be required at the beginning of each day's impact pile 
driving work and at any time following a cessation of impact pile 
driving of thirty minutes or longer.
    We have carefully evaluated the Navy's proposed mitigation measures 
and considered their effectiveness in past implementation to determine 
whether they are likely to effect the least practicable impact on the 
affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our 
evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the 
following factors in relation to one another: (1) The manner in which, 
and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure 
is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2) the 
proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse 
impacts as planned; and (3) the practicability of the measure for 
applicant implementation.
    Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe should be able to 
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on 
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of 
the general goals listed below:
    (1) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals 
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).
    (2) A reduction in the number (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) of individual marine mammals 
exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may 
contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment 
only).
    (3) A reduction in the number (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine 
mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental 
take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by 
behavioral harassment only).
    (4) A reduction in the intensity of exposure to stimuli expected to 
result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to 
reducing the severity of behavioral harassment only).
    (5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal 
habitat, paying particular attention to the prey base, blockage or 
limitation of passage to or from biologically important areas, 
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary disturbance of habitat 
during a biologically important time.
    (6) For monitoring directly related to mitigation, an increase in 
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more 
effective implementation of the mitigation.
    Based on our evaluation of the Navy's proposed measures, as well as 
any other potential measures that may be relevant to the specified 
activity, we have determined that the planned 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 IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to 
the monitoring and reporting of such taking''. The MMPA implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for 
incidental take authorizations must include the suggested means of 
accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result 
in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or 
impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be 
present in the proposed action area.
    Any monitoring requirement we prescribe should improve our 
understanding of one or more of the following:
     Occurrence of marine mammal species in action area (e.g., 
presence, abundance, distribution, density).
     Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure 
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or 
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment 
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) 
Affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) Co-occurrence 
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) Biological or 
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).
     Individual responses to acute stressors, or impacts of 
chronic exposures (behavioral or physiological).
     How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) 
Long-term fitness and survival of an individual; or (2) Population, 
species, or stock.
     Effects on marine mammal habitat and resultant impacts to 
marine mammals.
     Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
    The Navy's planned monitoring and reporting is also described in 
their Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, on the Internet at 
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.

Visual Marine Mammal Observations

    The Navy will collect sighting data and behavioral responses to 
construction for marine mammal species observed in the region of 
activity during the period of activity. All observers will be trained 
in marine mammal identification and behaviors and are required to have 
no other construction-related tasks while conducting monitoring. The 
Navy will monitor the shutdown zone and disturbance zone before, 
during, and

[[Page 55603]]

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 will be halted.
     The shutdown and disturbance zones around the pile will be 
monitored for the presence of marine mammals before, during, and after 
any pile driving or removal activity.
    Individuals implementing the monitoring protocol will assess its 
effectiveness using an adaptive approach. Monitoring biologists will 
use their best professional judgment throughout implementation and seek 
improvements to these methods when deemed appropriate. Any 
modifications to protocol will be coordinated between NMFS and the 
Navy.

Data Collection

    We require that observers use approved data forms. Among other 
pieces of information, the Navy will record detailed information about 
any implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to 
the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting 
behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, the Navy will attempt to 
distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the 
number of incidences of take. We require that, at a minimum, the 
following information be collected on the sighting forms:
     Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
     Construction activities occurring during each observation 
period;
     Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
     Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
     Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of 
marine mammals;
     Description of any observable marine mammal behavior 
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel, and if possible, 
the correlation to SPLs;
     Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals 
and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
     Description of implementation of mitigation measures 
(e.g., shutdown or delay);
     Locations of all marine mammal observations; and
     Other human activity in the area.

Reporting

    A draft report will be submitted to NMFS within ninety days of the 
completion of marine mammal monitoring, or sixty days prior to the 
requested date of issuance of any future IHA for projects at the same 
location, whichever comes first. The report will include marine mammal 
observations pre-activity, during-activity, and post-activity during 
pile driving days, and will also provide descriptions of any behavioral 
responses to construction activities by marine mammals and a complete 
description of all mitigation shutdowns and the results of those 
actions and an extrapolated total take estimate based on the number of 
marine mammals observed during the course of construction. A final 
report must be submitted within thirty days following resolution of 
comments on the draft report.

Monitoring Results From Previously Authorized Activities

    The Navy complied with the mitigation and monitoring required under 
the previous authorization for the Wharf C-2 project. Marine mammal 
monitoring occurred before, during, and after each pile driving event. 
During the course of these activities, the Navy did not exceed the take 
levels authorized under the IHA. The Navy has summarized monitoring 
results to date in their application, and the required monitoring 
report is available to the public on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, 
section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: ``. . .any act of 
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a 
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; 
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal 
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, 
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 
feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].''
    All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment resulting from 
vibratory and impact pile driving and involving temporary changes in 
behavior. The 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 planned mitigation and 
monitoring measures.
    If a marine mammal responds to a stimulus by changing its behavior 
(e.g., through relatively minor changes in locomotion direction/speed 
or vocalization behavior), the response may or may not constitute 
taking at the individual level, and is unlikely to affect the stock or 
the species as a whole. However, if a sound source displaces marine 
mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for a prolonged 
period, impacts on animals or on the stock or species could potentially 
be significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007). Given 
the many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types of impacts 
of sound on marine mammals, it is common practice to estimate how many 
animals are likely to be present within a particular distance of a 
given activity, or exposed to a particular level of sound. In practice, 
depending on the amount of information available to characterize daily 
and seasonal movement and distribution of affected marine mammals, it 
can be difficult to distinguish between the number of individuals 
harassed and the instances of harassment and, when duration of the 
activity is considered, it can result in a take estimate that 
overestimates the number of individuals harassed. In particular, for 
stationary activities, it is more likely that some smaller number of 
individuals may accrue a number of incidences of harassment per 
individual than for each incidence to accrue to a new individual, 
especially if those individuals display some degree of residency or 
site fidelity and the impetus to use the site (e.g., because of 
foraging opportunities) is stronger than the deterrence presented by 
the harassing activity.
    The turning basin is not important habitat for marine mammals, as 
it is a man-made, semi-enclosed basin with frequent industrial activity 
and regular maintenance dredging. The small area of ensonification 
extending out of the turning basin into nearshore waters is also not 
believed to be of any particular importance, nor is it considered an 
area frequented by marine mammals.

[[Page 55604]]

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 in the Mayport turning basin and associated 
nearshore waters that may result from pile driving during construction 
activities associated with the project described previously in this 
document.
    In order to estimate the potential incidents of take that may occur 
incidental to the specified activity, we must first estimate the extent 
of the sound field that may be produced by the activity and then 
consider in combination with information about marine mammal density or 
abundance in the project area. We described applicable sound thresholds 
for determining effects to marine mammals before describing the 
information used in estimating the sound fields, the available marine 
mammal density or abundance information, and the method of estimating 
potential incidents of take in detail in our Federal Register notice of 
proposed authorization (August 5, 2015; 80 FR 46545). All calculated 
distances to and the total area encompassed by the marine mammal sound 
thresholds are provided in Table 2.

             Table 2--Distances to Relevant Underwater Sound Thresholds and Areas of Ensonification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Area (sq km)
             Pile type                      Method               Threshold         Distance (m)         \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steel (sheet and king piles)......  Vibratory............  Level A harassment                n/a               0
                                                            (180 dB).
                                                           Level B harassment              7,356             2.9
                                                            (120 dB).
                                    Impact...............  Level A harassment                 40           0.004
                                                            (180 dB).
                                                           Level B harassment                858            0.67
                                                            (160 dB).
Polymeric (plastic fender piles)..  Vibratory............  Level A harassment                n/a               0
                                                            (180 dB).
                                                           Level B harassment              1,585            0.88
                                                            (120 dB).
                                    Impact...............  Level A harassment                n/a               0
                                                            (180 dB).
                                                           Level B harassment                3.4         0.00004
                                                            (160 dB).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Areas presented take into account attenuation and/or shadowing by land. Calculated distances to relevant
  thresholds cannot be reached in most directions form source piles. Please see Figures 6-1 through 6-3 in the
  Navy's application.

    The Mayport turning basin does not represent open water, or free 
field, conditions. Therefore, sounds would attenuate as per the 
confines of the basin, and may only reach the full estimated distances 
to the harassment thresholds via the narrow, east-facing entrance 
channel. Distances shown in Table 2 are estimated for free-field 
conditions, but areas are calculated per the actual conditions of the 
action area. See Figures 6-1 through 6-3 of the Navy's application for 
a depiction of areas in which each underwater sound threshold is 
predicted to occur at the project area due to pile driving.

Marine Mammal Densities and Take Calculation

    For all species, the best scientific information available was 
considered for use in the marine mammal take assessment calculations. 
Density value for the Atlantic spotted dolphin is from recent density 
estimates produced by Roberts et al. (2015); we use the highest 
relevant seasonal density value (spring). Density for bottlenose 
dolphins is derived from site-specific surveys conducted by the Navy; 
it is not currently possible to identify observed individuals to stock.
    The following assumptions are made when estimating potential 
incidents of take:
     All marine mammal individuals potentially available are 
assumed to be present within the relevant area, and thus incidentally 
taken;
     An individual can only be taken once during a 24-h period; 
and,
     There will be 27 total days of vibratory driving 
(seventeen days for steel piles and ten days for plastic piles) and 
twenty days of impact pile driving.
     Exposures to sound levels at or above the relevant 
thresholds equate to take, as defined by the MMPA.
    The estimation of marine mammal takes typically uses the following 
calculation:

    Exposure estimate = (n * ZOI) * days of total activity

Where:

n = density estimate used for each species/season
ZOI = sound threshold ZOI area; the area encompassed by all 
locations where the SPLs equal or exceed the threshold being 
evaluated

    n * ZOI produces an estimate of the abundance of animals that could 
be present in the area for exposure, and is rounded to the nearest 
whole number before multiplying by days of total activity.
    The ZOI impact area is estimated using the relevant distances in 
Table 2, taking into consideration the possible affected area with 
attenuation due to the constraints of the basin. Because the basin 
restricts sound from propagating outward, with the exception of the 
east-facing entrance channel, the radial distances to thresholds are 
not generally reached.
    There are a number of reasons why estimates of potential incidents 
of take may be conservative, assuming that available density or 
abundance estimates and estimated ZOI areas are accurate. We assume, in 
the absence of information supporting a more refined conclusion, that 
the output of the calculation represents the number of individuals that 
may be taken by the specified activity. In fact, in the context of 
stationary activities such as pile driving and in areas where resident 
animals may be present, this number more realistically represents the 
number of incidents of take that may accrue to a smaller number of 
individuals. While pile driving can occur any day throughout the in-
water work window, and the analysis is conducted on a per day basis, 
only a fraction of that time (typically a matter of hours on any given 
day) is actually spent pile driving. The potential effectiveness of 
mitigation measures in reducing the number of takes is typically not 
quantified in the take estimation process. For these reasons, these 
take estimates may be conservative.
    The quantitative exercise described above indicates that no 
incidents of Level A harassment would be expected, independent of the 
implementation of required mitigation measures. The

[[Page 55605]]

twenty days of contingency impact driving considered here could include 
either steel or plastic piles on any of the days; because the ZOI for 
impact driving of steel piles subsumes the ZOI for impact driving of 
plastic piles, we consider only the former here. See Table 3 for total 
estimated incidents of take.

                              Table 3--Calculations for Incidental Take Estimation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                       Total
           Species               n (animals/km       Activity       n * ZOI \1\     Authorized      authorized
                                     \2\)                                            takes \2\         takes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin...........  4.15366.........  Impact driving                3              60         304 \3\
                                                  (steel).
                                                 Vibratory                    12             204
                                                  driving
                                                  (steel).
                                                 Vibratory                     4              40
                                                  driving
                                                  (plastic).
Atlantic spotted dolphin.....  0.005402          Impact driving                0               0               0
                                (spring).         (steel).
                                                 Vibratory                     0               0
                                                  driving
                                                  (steel).
                                                 Vibratory                     0               0
                                                  driving
                                                  (plastic).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Table 2 for relevant ZOIs. The product of this calculation is rounded to the nearest whole number.
\2\ The product of n * ZOI is multiplied by the total number of activity-specific days to estimate the number of
  takes.
\3\ It is impossible to estimate from available information which stock these takes may accrue to.

Analyses and Determinations

Negligible Impact Analysis

    NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``. . . 
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be 
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely 
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of 
recruitment or survival.'' A negligible impact finding is based on the 
lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or 
survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of 
Level B harassment takes alone is not enough information on which to 
base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of 
the number of marine mammals that might be ``taken'' through behavioral 
harassment, we consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any 
responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses 
(e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as 
the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number 
of estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.
    Pile driving activities associated with the wharf construction 
project, as outlined previously, have the potential to disturb or 
displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may 
result in take, in the form of Level B harassment (behavioral 
disturbance) only, from underwater sounds generated from pile driving. 
Potential takes could occur if individuals of these species are present 
in the ensonified zone when pile driving is happening.
    No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated given the 
nature of the activities and measures designed to minimize the 
possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for these 
outcomes is minimized through the construction method and the 
implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Specifically, 
vibratory hammers will be the primary method of installation (impact 
driving is included only as a contingency and is not expected to be 
required), and this activity does not have the potential to cause 
injury to marine mammals due to the relatively low source levels 
produced (less than 180 dB) and the lack of potentially injurious 
source characteristics. Impact pile driving produces short, sharp 
pulses with higher peak levels and much sharper rise time to reach 
those peaks. If impact driving is necessary, implementation of soft 
start and shutdown zones significantly reduces any possibility of 
injury. Given sufficient ``notice'' through use of soft start (for 
impact driving), marine mammals are expected to move away from a sound 
source that is annoying prior to its becoming potentially injurious. 
Environmental conditions in the confined and protected Mayport turning 
basin mean that marine mammal detection ability by trained observers is 
high, enabling a high rate of success in implementation of shutdowns to 
avoid injury.
    Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the 
basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other 
similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as 
increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased 
foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 
2006; HDR, Inc., 2012). Most likely, individuals will simply move away 
from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the areas of 
pile driving, although even this reaction has been observed primarily 
only in association with impact pile driving. The pile driving 
activities analyzed here are similar to, or less impactful than, 
numerous other construction activities conducted in San Francisco Bay 
and in the Puget Sound region, which have taken place with no reported 
injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long-term adverse 
consequences from behavioral harassment. Repeated exposures of 
individuals to levels of sound that may cause Level B harassment are 
unlikely to result in hearing impairment or to significantly disrupt 
foraging behavior. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small 
subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant 
realized decrease in viability for the affected individuals, and thus 
would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B 
harassment will be reduced to the level of least practicable impact 
through use of mitigation measures described herein and, if sound 
produced by project activities is sufficiently disturbing, animals are 
likely to simply avoid the turning basin while the activity is 
occurring.
    In summary, this negligible impact analysis is founded on the 
following factors: (1) The possibility of injury, serious injury, or 
mortality may reasonably be considered discountable; (2) the 
anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at worst, 
temporary modifications in behavior; (3) the absence of any significant 
habitat within the project area, including known areas or features of 
special significance for foraging or reproduction; (4) the presumed 
efficacy of the planned mitigation measures in reducing the effects of 
the specified activity to the level of least practicable impact. In 
addition, these stocks are not listed under the ESA, although coastal 
bottlenose dolphins are designated as depleted under the MMPA. In 
combination, we believe that these factors, as well as the available 
body of evidence from other similar activities, demonstrate that the 
potential effects of the specified activity will have only short-term 
effects on individuals. The specified activity is not expected to

[[Page 55606]]

impact rates of recruitment or survival and will therefore not result 
in population-level impacts.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into 
consideration the implementation of the planned monitoring and 
mitigation measures, we find that the total marine mammal take from the 
Navy's wharf construction activities will have a negligible impact on 
the affected marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers Analysis

    As described previously, of the 304 incidents of behavioral 
harassment predicted to occur for bottlenose dolphin, we have no 
information allowing us to parse those predicted incidents amongst the 
three stocks of bottlenose dolphin that may occur in the project area. 
Therefore, we assessed the total number of predicted incidents of take 
against the best abundance estimate for each stock, as though the total 
would occur for the stock in question. For two of the bottlenose 
dolphin stocks, the total predicted number of incidents of take 
authorized would be considered small--approximately three percent for 
the southern migratory stock and less than 25 percent for the northern 
Florida coastal stock--even if each estimated taking occurred to a new 
individual. This is an extremely unlikely scenario as, for bottlenose 
dolphins in estuarine and nearshore waters, there is likely to be some 
overlap in individuals present day-to-day.
    The total number of authorized takes for bottlenose dolphins, if 
assumed to accrue solely to new individuals of the JES stock, is higher 
relative to the total stock abundance, which is currently considered 
unknown. However, these numbers represent the estimated incidents of 
take, not the number of individuals taken. That is, it is highly likely 
that a relatively small subset of JES bottlenose dolphins would be 
harassed by project activities. JES bottlenose dolphins range from 
Cumberland Sound at the Georgia-Florida border south to approximately 
Palm Coast, Florida, an area spanning over 120 linear km of coastline 
and including habitat consisting of complex inshore and estuarine 
waterways. JES dolphins, divided by Caldwell (2001) into Northern and 
Southern groups, show strong site fidelity and, although members of 
both groups have been observed outside their preferred areas, it is 
likely that the majority of JES dolphins would not occur within waters 
ensonified by project activities. Further, although the largest area of 
ensonification is predicted to extend up to 7.5 km offshore from NSM, 
estuarine dolphins are generally considered as restricted to inshore 
waters and only 1-2 km offshore. In summary, JES dolphins are (1) known 
to form two groups and exhibit strong site fidelity (i.e., individuals 
do not generally range throughout the recognized overall JES stock 
range); (2) would not occur at all in a significant portion of the 
larger ZOI extending offshore from NSM; and (3) the specified activity 
will be stationary within an enclosed basin not recognized as an area 
of any special significance that would serve to attract or aggregate 
dolphins. We therefore believe that the estimated numbers of takes, 
were they to occur, likely represent repeated exposures of a much 
smaller number of bottlenose dolphins and that these estimated 
incidents of take represent small numbers of bottlenose dolphins.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into 
consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring 
measures, we find that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken 
relative to the populations of the affected species or stocks.

Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence 
Uses

    There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated 
by this action. Therefore, we have determined that the total taking of 
affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact 
on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for 
subsistence purposes.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    No marine mammal species listed under the ESA are expected to be 
affected by these activities. Therefore, we have determined that 
section 7 consultation under the ESA are not required.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published 
by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the 
Navy prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) to consider the direct, 
indirect and cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from 
the pier maintenance project. NMFS made the Navy's EA available to the 
public for review and comment, in relation to its suitability for 
adoption by NMFS in order to assess the impacts to the human 
environment of issuance of an IHA to the Navy. Also in compliance with 
NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well as NOAA Administrative Order 216-
6, NMFS has reviewed the Navy's EA, determined it to be sufficient, and 
adopted that EA and signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) 
on November 20, 2013.
    We have reviewed the Navy's application for a renewed IHA for 
ongoing construction activities for 2015-16 and results of required 
marine mammal monitoring. Based on that review, we have determined that 
the proposed action is very similar to that considered in the previous 
IHA. In addition, no significant new circumstances or information 
relevant to environmental concerns have been identified. Thus, we have 
determined that the preparation of a new or supplemental NEPA document 
is not necessary, and, after review of public comments, reaffirm our 
2013 FONSI. The 2013 NEPA documents are available for review at 
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.

Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to the 
Navy for conducting the described construction activities in Mayport, 
FL, for one year from the date of issuance, provided the previously 
described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are 
incorporated.

    Dated: September 9, 2015.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-23174 Filed 9-15-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P