Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Coast Boulevard Improvements Project, La Jolla, California, 29511-29520 [2017-13581]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 124 (Thursday, June 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29511-29520]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13581]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XF319


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Coast Boulevard Improvements 
Project, La Jolla, California

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 NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to 
the City of San Diego to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment 
only, marine mammals during construction and demolition activities 
associated with a public parking lot and sidewalk improvements project 
in La Jolla, California.

DATES: This Authorization is effective from June 1, 2017, through 
December 14, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jordan Carduner, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application 
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in 
this document, may be obtained online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these 
documents, please call the contact listed above.

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, the 
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine 
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than 
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain 
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking 
is limited to

[[Page 29512]]

harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the 
public for review.
    An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS 
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or 
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements 
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings 
are set forth.
    NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as an 
impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably 
expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or 
survival.
    The MMPA states that the term ``take'' means to harass, hunt, 
capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine 
mammal.
    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent 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).

National Environmental Policy Act

    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, 
NMFS must review our proposed action with respect to environmental 
consequences on the human environment.
    Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the IHA 
qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review. This 
action is consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 
of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do 
not individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant 
impacts on the quality of the human environment and for which we have 
not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this 
categorical exclusion.

Summary of Request

    NMFS received a request from the City of San Diego (City) for an 
IHA to take marine mammals incidental to Coast Boulevard improvements 
in La Jolla, California. The City's request was for harassment only and 
NMFS concurs that mortality is not expected to result from this 
activity. Therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
    The City's application for incidental take authorization was 
received on December 16, 2016. On March 1, 2017, we deemed the City's 
application for authorization to be adequate and complete. The planned 
activity is not expected to exceed one year, hence we do not expect 
subsequent MMPA incidental harassment authorizations would be issued 
for this particular activity.
    The planned activities include improvements to an existing public 
parking lot, sidewalk, and landscaping areas located on the bluff tops 
above Children's Pool, a public beach located in La Jolla, California. 
Species that are expected to be taken by the planned activity include 
harbor seal, California sea lion, and northern elephant seal. Take by 
Level B harassment only is expected; no injury or mortality of marine 
mammals is expected to result from the planned activity. This 
represents the first IHA issued for this activity. The City applied 
for, and was granted, IHAs in 2013 2014 and 2015 (NMFS 2013; 2014; 
2015) for a lifeguard station demolition and construction project at 
Children's Pool beach. NMFS published notices in the Federal Register 
announcing the issuance of these IHAs on July 8, 2013 (78 FR 40705), 
June 6, 2014 (79 FR 32699), and July 13, 2015 (80 FR 39999), 
respectively. The City also applied for, and was granted, an IHA in 
2016 (NMFS 2016) for a sand sampling project at Children's Pool beach. 
NMFS published a notice in the Federal Register announcing the issuance 
of the IHA on June 3, 2016 (81 FR 35739).

Description of Specified Activity

    A detailed description of the planned demolition and construction 
project is provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA 
(82 FR 19221, April 26, 2017). Since that time, no changes have been 
made to the planned activities. Therefore, a detailed description is 
not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the 
description of the specific activity.

Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to the City was 
published in the Federal Register on April 26, 2017 (82 FR 19221). That 
notice described, in detail, the City's activity, the marine mammal 
species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated 
effects on marine mammals. During the 30-day public comment period, 
NMFS received one comment letter from the Marine Mammal Commission. The 
Marine Mammal Commission recommended that NMFS issue the IHA, subject 
to inclusion of the proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
measures.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    Three species are considered to co-occur with the City's planned 
activities: Harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), which are, by far, the 
dominant observed marine mammal in the project area, as well as 
California sea lions (Zalophus californianus) and northern elephant 
seals (Mirounga angustirostris) which also occasionally haul out in the 
project area, in far lower numbers. A detailed description of the 
species likely to be affected by the City's planned project, including 
brief introductions to the species and relevant stocks as well as 
available information regarding population trends and threats, and 
information regarding local occurrence, were provided in the Federal 
Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 19221, April 26, 2017); 
since that time, we are not aware of any changes in the status of these 
species and stocks; therefore, detailed descriptions are not provided 
here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for these 
descriptions. Please also refer to Sections 3 and 4 of the City's IHA 
application, as well as to NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; 
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/). Additional general information about these 
species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on 
NMFS's Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/).
    Table 1 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in 
the project location and summarizes information related to the 
population or stock, including potential biological removal (PBR), 
where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). For 
status of species, we provide information regarding U.S. regulatory 
status under the MMPA and ESA. Abundance estimates presented here 
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or 
the total number estimated within a particular study area. NMFS's stock 
abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of 
individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that 
stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S. 
waters. PBR, defined by the MMPA as the maximum

[[Page 29513]]

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, is considered in 
concert with known sources of ongoing anthropogenic mortality to assess 
the population-level effects of the anticipated mortality from a 
specific project (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is 
anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and 
mortality are included here as gross indicators of the status of the 
species and other threats.
    All values presented in Table 1 are the most recent available at 
the time of publication and are available in NMFS's SARs (e.g., 
Carretta et al., 2016). Please see the SARs, available at 
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars, for more detailed accounts of these stocks' 
status and abundance.

                                         Table 1--Marine Mammal Species Potentially Present in the Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Stock abundance (CV,                         Relative occurrence in
              Species                         Stock            ESA/ MMPA status;       Nmin, most recent     PBR \3\   Annual M/   project area; season
                                                              strategic (Y/N) \1\    abundance survey) \2\               SI \4\        of occurrence
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion................  U.S...................  -; N.................  296,750 (n/a; 153,337;      9,200        389  Abundant; year-round.
                                                                                     2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Family Phocidae (earless seals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal........................  California............  -; N.................  30,968 (n/a; 27,348;        1,641         43  Rare; year-round.
                                                                                     2012).
Northern elephant seal.............  California breeding...  -; N.................  179,000 (n/a; 81,368;       4,882        8.8  Rare; year-round.
                                                                                     2010).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (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 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\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
  stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\3\ PBR, 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's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g.,
  commercial fisheries, ship strike).

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    The effects of noise from construction and demolition activities 
for the planned project have the potential to result in behavioral 
harassment of marine mammals in the vicinity of the action area. The 
Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 19221, April 26, 
2017) included a discussion of the effects of anthropogenic noise on 
marine mammals and their habitat, therefore that information is not 
repeated here; please refer to that Federal Register notice for further 
information. The main impact associated with the City's planned project 
would be temporarily elevated sound levels and the associated direct 
effects on marine mammals. No instances of hearing threshold shifts, 
injury, serious injury, or mortality are expected as a result of the 
planned activities. The project is not expected to not result in 
permanent impacts to habitats used directly by marine mammals, such as 
haulouts and rookeries, nor is expected to result in impacts to food 
sources or impacts to substrate.

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes 
authorized through this IHA, which informs both NMFS' consideration of 
whether the number of takes is ``small'' and the negligible impact 
determination.
    Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from the 
planned activities. Except with respect to certain activities not 
pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: 
Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance 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 authorized takes are expected to be by Level B harassment only, 
in the form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine 
mammals resulting from exposure to sounds associated with the planned 
construction and demolition activities. Based on the nature of the 
activity, Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor authorized. The 
death of a marine mammal is also a type of incidental take. However, in 
the case of the planned project it is unlikely that injurious or lethal 
takes would occur even in the absence of the planned mitigation and 
monitoring measures, and no mortality is anticipated or authorized for 
this activity. The current NMFS thresholds for behavioral harassment of 
pinnipeds from airborne noise are shown in Table 2.

[[Page 29514]]



  Table 2--Current NMFS Criteria for Pinniped Harassment Resulting From
                       Exposure to Airborne Sound
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Level B harassment  Level A harassment
             Species                   threshold           threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seals....................  90 dB re 20 [mu]Pa  Not defined.
Other pinniped species..........  100 dB re 20        Not defined.
                                   [mu]Pa.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NMFS currently uses a three-tiered scale to determine whether the 
response of a pinniped on land to acoustic or visual stimuli is 
considered an alert, a movement, or a flush. NMFS considers the 
behaviors that meet the definitions of both movements and flushes to 
qualify as behavioral harassment. Thus a pinniped on land is considered 
by NMFS to have been behaviorally harassed if it moves greater than two 
times its body length, or if the animal is already moving and changes 
direction and/or speed, or if the animal flushes from land into the 
water. Animals that become alert without such movements are not 
considered harassed. See Table 3 for a summary of the pinniped 
disturbance scale.

       Table 3--Levels of Pinniped Behavioral Disturbance on Land
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Level         Type of response               Definition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1................  Alert.............  Seal head orientation or brief
                                        movement in response to
                                        disturbance, which may include
                                        turning head towards the
                                        disturbance, craning head and
                                        neck while holding the body
                                        rigid in a u-shaped position,
                                        changing from a lying to a
                                        sitting position, or brief
                                        movement of less than twice the
                                        animal's body length.
2................  Movement..........  Movements in response to the
                                        source of disturbance, ranging
                                        from short withdrawals at least
                                        twice the animal's body length
                                        to longer retreats over the
                                        beach, or if already moving a
                                        change of direction of greater
                                        than 90 degrees.
3................  Flush.............  All retreats (flushes) to the
                                        water.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 such as the planned project, 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 is stronger than the deterrence presented by 
the harassing activity.
    The take calculations presented here rely on the best information 
currently available for marine mammal populations in the Children's 
Pool area. Below we describe how the take was estimated for the planned 
project.

Pacific Harbor Seal

    The take estimate for harbor seal was based on the following steps:
    (1) Estimate the total area in square meters (m\2\) of harbor seal 
haulout habitat available at Children's Pool;
    (2) Estimate the total area of available haulout habitat expected 
to be ensonified to the airborne Level B harassment threshold for 
harbor seals (90 decibels (dB) re 20 micropascals ([mu]Pa)) based on 
total haulout area and the percentage of total haulout area expected to 
be ensonified to the Level B harassment threshold;
    (3) Estimate the daily number of seals exposed to sounds above 
Level B harassment threshold by multiplying the total area of haulout 
habitat expected to be ensonified to the Level B threshold by the 
expected daily number of seals on Children's Pool;
    (4) Estimate the total number of anticipated harbor seals taken 
over the duration of the project by multiplying the daily number of 
seals exposed to noise above the Level B harassment threshold by the 
number of total project days in which project-related sounds may exceed 
the Level B harassment threshold.
    As described above, Children's Pool is designated as a shared-use 
beach. The beach and surrounding waters are used for swimming, surfing, 
kayaking, diving, tide pooling, and nature watching, thus the beach is 
shared between humans and pinnipeds. To discourage people from 
harassing pinnipeds hauled out on the beach, a guideline rope, oriented 
parallel to the water, bisects the beach into upper (western) and lower 
(eastern) beach areas; people are encouraged to stay on the western 
side of the guideline rope, allowing seals to use the eastern section 
of beach that provides access to the water. The City's estimate of 
available pinniped habitat was based on the total area of the beach 
between the guideline rope and the mean lower low water line. Thus, the 
area considered for this analysis to be available as haulout habitat is 
the total area east of the rope and west of the mean lower low water 
line, while the area west of the rope is assumed to be unavailable as 
pinniped habitat (See Figure 5 in the IHA application for the location 
of the guideline rope, and the area assumed to be available haulout 
habitat). The City estimated that there are 2,509 m\2\ east of the 
guideline rope; therefore it is assumed that there is a total of 2,509 
m\2\ of available pinniped habitat on Children's Pool (Figure 5 in IHA 
application).
    The City estimated the area of available harbor seal habitat at 
Children's Pool beach that would be ensonified to the Level B 
harassment threshold by estimating the distance to the Level B 
harassment threshold from sounds associated with the planned 
activities, then calculating the percentage of available haulout 
habitat at Children's Pool that would be ensonified to that threshold 
based on the total available habitat and the distance to the Level B 
harassment threshold.

[[Page 29515]]

    To estimate the distance to the in-air Level B harassment threshold 
for harbor seals (90 dB root mean square (rms)) for the planned 
project, the City first used a spherical spreading loss model, assuming 
average atmospheric conditions. The spreading loss model predicted that 
the 90 dB isopleth would be reached at 10 m (33 feet (ft)). However, 
data from in situ recordings conducted during the lifeguard station 
project at Children's Pool indicated that peak sound levels of 90 to 
103 dB were recorded at distances of 15 m to 20 m (49 to 66 ft) from 
the source when the loudest construction equipment (source levels 
ranging from 100 to 110 dB) was operating. The City estimated that the 
loudest potential sound sources associated with the planned project 
would be approximately 110 dB rms (See Table 2 in IHA application), 
based on manufacturer specifications and previous recordings of similar 
equipment used during the lifeguard station project at Children's Pool 
(Hanan & Associates 2014; 2015; 2016). Therefore, the City estimated 
that for the sound sources expected to result in the largest isopleths 
(those with SLs estimated at up to 110 dB), the area expected to be 
ensonified to the in-air Level B harassment threshold for harbor seals 
(90 dB rms) would extend to approximately 20 m from the sound source. 
To be conservative, the City used this distance (20 m) based on the 
data from previous site-specific monitoring, rather than the results of 
the spherical spreading loss model, to estimate the predicted distance 
to the in-air Level B harassment threshold for harbor seals.
    Based on the estimated distance to the in-air Level B harassment 
threshold for harbor seals (20 m from the sound source), the City 
estimated 647 m\2\ of total available harbor seal habitat at Children's 
Pool beach would be ensonified to the Level B harassment threshold, the 
City therefore estimated that approximately 25.8 percent (647/2,509) of 
available harbor seal haulout habitat at Children's Pool beach would be 
ensonified to the Level B harassment threshold (Figure 5 in IHA 
application). This information has been used to derive the take 
estimate only; the entire beach would be observed in order to document 
potential actual take.
    The estimated daily take of harbor seals was based on the number of 
harbor seals expected to occur daily in the area ensonified to the 
Level B harassment threshold. In their IHA application, the City 
estimated that 200 harbor seals would be present on Children's Pool 
beach per day, based on literature that reported this number as the 
maximum number of seals recorded at Children's Pool (Linder 2011). 
However, NMFS believes it is more appropriate to use the average number 
of seals observed on Children's Pool beach, as opposed to the maximum 
number of seals, to estimate the likely number of takes of harbor seals 
as a result of the planned project. During 3,376 hourly counts 
associated with monitoring for IHAs issued for construction and 
demolition at the lifeguard station at Children's Pool in 2013-14, 
2014-15, and 2015-16, there was an average of 54.5 harbor seals 
(including pups) recorded daily on Children's Pool beach (pers. comm., 
D. Hanan, Hanan & Associates, to J. Carduner, NMFS, April 4, 2017). We 
therefore estimated that 55 harbor seals would occur on Children's Pool 
per day, and used this number to estimate take of harbor seals as a 
result of the planned project. Based on an estimate of 55 total harbor 
seals on Children's Pool per day, and an estimated 25.8 percent of 
total haulout habitat ensonified to the Level B harassment threshold 
for harbor seals, we estimated that an average of 14.2 (rounded to 15) 
takes of harbor seals by Level B harassment would occur per day.
    The City estimated that the total duration of the project would be 
164 days. However, activities involving equipment that could result in 
sound source levels of 101-110 dB would occur on a maximum of 108 
project days (pers. comm., D. Langsford, Tierra Data, to J. Carduner, 
NMFS, April 3, 2017). Based on the distance of the project to 
Children's Pool and previous monitoring reports, we believe it is 
unlikely that project-related activities with expected source levels at 
or below 100 dB rms would result in sound exposure levels at or above 
90 dB among any pinnipeds at Children's Pool. Planned project-related 
activities will occur on top of a natural cliff in an area of 
increasing elevation above the beach, therefore we do not believe 
visual stimuli from the project will result in behavioral harassment of 
any marine mammals. Therefore, we do not expect that activities with 
expected source levels of 100 dB and below will result in take of 
marine mammals. Thus, our take estimate is based on the number of days 
in which source levels associated with the planned project could be 
between 100 and 110 dB rms. Based on an estimate of 15 takes of harbor 
seals per day by Level B harassment, over a total of 108 days the 
project is expected to result in a total of 1,620 takes of harbor seals 
by Level B harassment. We therefore authorize a total of 1,620 
incidental takes of harbor seals by Level B harassment only.

California Sea Lion

    As described above, California sea lions are occasional visitors to 
Children's Pool. The most reliable estimates of likely California sea 
lion occurrence in the project area come from monitoring reports 
associated with IHAs issued previously for demolition and construction 
of the lifeguard station at Children's Pool. In 2015-16 there were 71 
observations of California sea lions on Children's Pool over 209 days 
of monitoring, for an average of one California sea lion observed on 
Children's Pool approximately every three days. Based on this ratio, we 
estimate that a total of 55 observations of California sea lions on 
Children's Pool during the entire duration of the project (164 days); 
however as described above we do not think take is likely to occur on 
days in which source levels are below 100 dB. We expect one take of 
California sea lion will occur for every 3 days of the project in which 
source levels are anticipated to be between 101-110 dB (108 total 
days). We therefore authorize 36 incidental takes of California sea 
lions by Level B harassment only.

Northern Elephant Seal

    As described above, northern elephant seals are occasional visitors 
to Children's Pool. The most reliable estimates of likely northern 
elephant seal occurrence in the project area come from monitoring 
reports associated with IHAs issued previously for demolition and 
construction of the lifeguard station at Children's Pool. In 2015-16 
there were 26 observations of northern elephant seals on Children's 
Pool over 209 days of monitoring, for an average of one northern 
elephant seal observed on Children's Pool approximately every eight 
days. Based on this ratio, we estimate a total of 20 northern elephant 
seals will be observed on Children's Pool during the entire duration of 
the project (164 days); however as described above we do not think take 
is likely to occur on days in which source levels are below 100 dB. We 
expect one northern elephant seal take will occur for every eight days 
of the project in which source levels are anticipated to be between 
101-110 dB (108 total days). We therefore authorize 14 incidental takes 
of northern elephant seals by Level B harassment only.

[[Page 29516]]



Table 4--Summary of Numbers of Marine Mammals Authorized To Be Incidentally Taken by the City During the Planned
                                                     Project
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Species                               Level A takes   Level B takes       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal.....................................................               0           1,620           1,620
California sea lion.............................................               0              36              36
Northern elephant seal..........................................               0              14              14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effects of Specified Activities on Subsistence Uses of Marine Mammals

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

Mitigation Measures

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such 
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on 
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to 
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on 
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain 
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS 
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to 
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic 
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such 
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 
216.104(a)(11)).
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable impact on species or stocks and their 
habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we carefully 
balance two primary factors: (1) The manner in which, and the degree to 
which, the successful implementation of the measure(s) is expected to 
reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and 
their habitat--which considers the nature of the potential adverse 
impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range), as well as the 
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented; and the 
likelihood of effective implementation, and; (2) the practicability of 
the measures for applicant implementation, which may consider such 
things as cost, impact on operations, and, in the case of a military 
readiness activity, personnel safety, practicality of implementation, 
and impact on the effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
    Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS 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 numbers of marine mammals (total number or 
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to 
activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal 
may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes only);
    3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed 
to activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this 
goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes only);
    4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number 
or number at biologically important time or location) to activities 
expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may 
contribute to 1, above, or to reducing the severity of harassment takes 
only);
    5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal 
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that 
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas, 
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance 
of habitat during a biologically important time; and
    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.

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

    The City proposed several mitigation measures. These measures 
include the following:
     Moratorium during harbor seal pupping season: Demolition 
and construction will be prohibited during the Pacific harbor seal 
pupping season (December 15th to May 15th) and for an additional two 
weeks to accommodate lactation and weaning of late season pups. Thus 
construction will be prohibited from December 15th to May 29th. This 
measure is designed to avoid any potential adverse impacts to pups that 
may otherwise occur, such as abandonment by mothers as a result of 
harassment;
     Activities limited to daylight hours only: Construction 
and demolition will be limited to daylight hours only (7 a.m. to 7 
p.m., or 30 minutes before sunset depending on time of year). This 
measure is designed to facilitate the ability of MMOs to effectively 
monitor potential instances of harassment and to accurately document 
behavioral responses of pinnipeds to project-related activities;
     Timing constraints for very loud equipment: To minimize 
potential impacts to marine mammals, construction and demolition 
activity involving use of very loud equipment (e.g., jackhammers) will 
be scheduled during the daily period of lowest pinniped haul-out 
occurrence, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., to the maximum 
extent practical. This measure is designed to minimize the number of 
pinnipeds exposed to sounds that may result in harassment. Construction 
and demolition may be extended from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. (daylight hours 
only) to help ensure the project is completed in 2017, prior to the 
moratorium during the harbor seal pupping season starting December 
15th, so as to reduce the overall duration of the project; and
     Marine mammal observers (MMO): Trained MMOs will be used 
to detect and document project-related impacts to marine mammals, 
including any behavioral responses to the project. This measure is 
designed to facilitate the City's ability to increase the understanding 
of the effects of the action on marine mammal species and stocks. More 
information about this measure is contained in the ``Monitoring and 
Reporting'' section below.

[[Page 29517]]

    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, NMFS 
has determined that the mitigation measures described above provide the 
means effecting the least practicable impact on the affected 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 
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 
action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well 
as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required 
monitoring.
    Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should 
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
     Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area 
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, 
density);
     Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure 
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or 
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment 
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) 
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence 
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or 
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
     Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or 
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), 
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
     How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) 
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) 
populations, species, or stocks;
     Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey 
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of 
marine mammal habitat); and
     Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Monitoring

    The City has developed a Monitoring Plan specific to the project 
which establishes protocols for both acoustic and marine mammal 
monitoring. The objectives of the Monitoring Plan are to observe and 
document real-time sound levels in the project area, to document 
observed behavioral responses to project activities, and to record 
instances of marine mammal harassment. Monitoring will be conducted 
before, during, and after project activities to evaluate the impacts of 
the project on marine mammals. The Monitoring Plan can be found in 
Appendix C of the City's IHA application.
    The Monitoring Plan encompasses both acoustic monitoring and marine 
mammal monitoring. Marine mammal monitoring will be conducted to assess 
the number and species, behavior, and responses of marine mammals to 
project-related activities as well as other sources of disturbance, as 
applicable. Acoustic monitoring will measure in-air sound pressure 
levels during ambient conditions and during project activities to 
measure sound levels associated with the project and to determine 
distances within which Level B acoustic harassment disturbance are 
expected to occur. More details are provided below.

Acoustic Monitoring

    Monitors will collect real-time acoustic data of construction 
activities to determine sound pressure levels (SPL) values during 
demolition and construction activities, and to determine distances to 
zones within which SPLs are expected to meet or exceed airborne Level B 
harassment thresholds for harbor seals and other pinnipeds. 
Environmental data will also be collected to provide information on the 
weather, visibility, sea state, and tide conditions during monitoring 
surveys.
    Sound level meters will be used to document SPLs at near-field and 
far-field locations during all surveys, and to determine the distances 
to Level B harassment thresholds. Far-field locations will include the 
western end of the beach, the middle of the guideline rope and the 
eastern edge of the beach. The total number and locations of the 
monitoring stations will be determined during each survey based on the 
location of construction activities and likelihood for sound levels to 
meet or exceed in-air SPL harassment thresholds in areas where marine 
mammals are observed at Children's Pool. Refer to Section 3 of the 
Monitoring Plan for further details on the acoustic monitoring plan.

Marine Mammal Monitoring

    Marine mammal monitoring will be conducted by qualified MMOs to 
document behavioral responses of marine mammals to the planned project. 
Monitors will document the behavior of marine mammals, the number and 
types of responses to disturbance, and the apparent cause of any 
reactions. Marine mammals displaying behavioral responses to 
disturbance will be assessed for the apparent cause of disturbance. All 
responses to stimuli related to the project will be documented; 
responses that rise to the level of behavioral harassment (Table 4) 
will be documented as takes.
    Marine mammal observations may be made from vantage points on the 
beach or from overlook areas that provide an unobstructed view of the 
beach. Monitoring on the beach will be behind the guideline rope to 
minimize potential disturbance to hauled out marine mammals.
    The following data will be collected during the marine mammal 
monitoring surveys:
     Dates and times of marine mammal observations;
     Location of observations;
     Construction activities occurring during each observation 
period. Any substantial change in construction activities (especially 
cessation) during observation periods should be noted;
     Human activity in the area; number of people on the beach, 
adjacent overlooks, and in the water;
     Counts by species of pinnipeds, and if possible sex and 
age class;
     Number and type of responses to disturbance, such as 
alert, flush, vocalization, or other with a description; and
     Apparent cause of reaction.
    In the Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA (82 FR 19221, 
April 26, 2017) we proposed that the extent of marine mammal monitoring 
would depend on recorded sound levels of the activities performed. 
However, since that time, the City has agreed that marine mammal 
monitoring will be carried out every day during construction and 
demolition. Monitoring will include a Pre-Construction Activity Survey, 
hourly Construction Activity Surveys, and a Post-Construction Activity 
Survey. Pre-Construction Activity Surveys will include recordings of 
the times of observations, environmental conditions, and maximum 
ambient SPLs at the recording location at the top of the bluff adjacent 
to the project site, and at the

[[Page 29518]]

three far-field locations, and will occur at least 30 minutes prior to 
the start of construction activities. Hourly Construction Activity 
Surveys will record times of observations, environmental conditions, 
and maximum SPLs at near-field and far-field locations. Post-
Construction Activity Surveys will record times of observations, 
environmental conditions, and maximum ambient SPLs at all monitoring 
locations surveyed during the Construction Activity Surveys. Marine 
mammal monitoring data will be collected, as noted above.
    Marine mammal monitoring will be conducted by a qualified marine 
mammal observer (MMO) 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 the ability to estimate target size and distance; use of 
binoculars may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
     A minimum of a Bachelor's degree in biological science, 
wildlife management, mammalogy, or related field;
     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, and identification of marine mammal behavior;
     Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the 
construction operation to provide for personal safety during 
observations;
     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 needed; and
     Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of 
observations.
    Guadalupe and northern fur seals would be considered extralimital 
to the project area, however, as fur seals have been occasionally 
observed in the area, the MMO will ensure that take of fur seals is 
avoided. In the event that a fur seal or another species of marine 
mammal for which take is not authorized in the IHA are observed either 
on the rocks, beach, or in the water at Children's Pool prior to 
commencement of activities or during project activities, the MMO will 
alert the stranding network, as the occurrence of these species would 
typically indicate a sick/injured animal, and activities will be 
postponed until coordination with the stranding network is complete 
(including any potential 24-hour or 48-hour wait/observation period) 
and the animal either leaves or is collected by the stranding network.
    Marine mammal monitoring protocols are described in greater detail 
in Section 4 of the City's Monitoring Plan.

Reporting

    A final monitoring report will include data collected during marine 
mammal monitoring and acoustic and environmental monitoring as 
described above. The monitoring report will include a narrative 
description of project related activities, counts of marine mammals by 
species, sex and age class, a summary of marine mammal species/count 
data, a summary of marine mammal responses to project-related 
disturbance, and responses to other types of disturbances. The 
monitoring report will also include a discussion of seasonal and daily 
variations in the abundance of marine mammals at Children's Pool, the 
relative percentage of marine mammals observed to react to construction 
activities and their observed reactions, and the number of marine 
mammals taken as a result of the project based on the criteria shown in 
Table 3.
    A draft report will be submitted to NMFS within 60 calendar days of 
the completion of acoustic measurements and marine mammal monitoring. 
The results will be summarized in tabular/graphical forms and include 
descriptions of acoustic sound levels and marine mammal observations 
according to type of construction activity and equipment. A final 
report will be prepared and submitted to NMFS within 30 days following 
receipt of comments on the draft report from NMFS. Reporting measures 
are described in greater detail in Section 6 of the City's Monitoring 
Plan.
    Monitoring reports from IHAs issued to the City in 2013, 2014, and 
2015 for the lifeguard station construction project at Children's Pool 
reported that pinniped responses to that project ranged from no 
response to heads-up alerts, from startle responses to some movements 
on land, and some movements into the water (Hanan & Associates 2014; 
2015; 2016). There were no documented occurrences of Level A takes 
throughout the three years of monitoring (Hanan & Associates 2014; 
2015; 2016). Data from the three years of monitoring indicates no site 
abandonment by harbor seals a result of the project (Hanan & Associates 
2014; 2015; 2016). Monitoring reports from previous IHAs issued to the 
City for lifeguard tower construction at Children's Pool can be found 
on our Web site at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. The monitoring report from the previous IHA issued to 
the City for a sand quality study at Children's Pool can be found on 
our Web site at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm.

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

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

[[Page 29519]]

mammals considered here. Pinnipeds will likely become alert or, at 
most, flush into the water in response to sounds from the planned 
project. Disturbance is not expected to occur during particularly 
sensitive times for any marine mammal species, as mitigation measures 
have been specifically designed to avoid project-related activity 
during harbor seal pupping season to eliminate the possibility for pup 
injury or mother-pup separation. No injury, serious injury, or 
mortality is anticipated, nor is the planned action likely to result in 
long-term impacts such as permanent abandonment of the haulout (Hanan & 
Associates 2016).
    Children's Pool is not known as an important feeding area for 
harbor seals, but does serve as a harbor seal rookery. Therefore, if 
displacement of seals or adverse effects to pups were an expected 
outcome of the planned activity, impacts to the stock could potentially 
result. However, site abandonment is not expected to occur as a result 
of the planned project. We base this expectation on results of previous 
monitoring reports from the three consecutive IHAs issued to the City 
for construction and demolition of the lifeguard station at Children's 
Pool. Over three-plus years of consecutive monitoring (2013-2016) there 
was no site abandonment by harbor seals a result of the project (Hanan 
& Associates 2014; 2015; 2016). Adverse effects to pups are not 
expected to occur. The moratorium on project-related activity during 
the harbor seal pupping season (December 15-May 15) is expected to 
minimize any potential adverse effects to pups such as mother-pup 
separation. Takes of harbor seal as a result of the project are 
expected to be low relative to stock size (approximately five percent). 
Additionally, as there are an estimated 600 harbor seals using 
Children's Pool beach during a year (Linder 2011), authorized takes of 
harbor seals (Table 4) are expected to be repeated incidences of take 
to a smaller number of individuals, and not individuals taken, as 
described above. These takes are not expected to interfere with 
breeding, sheltering or feeding. For the reasons stated above, we do 
not expect the planned project to affect annual rates of recruitment or 
survival for harbor seals.
    Children's Pool does not represent an important feeding or breeding 
area for either northern elephant seals or California sea lion, and 
neither species uses the project location as a pupping site. Takes of 
both species are expected to be very low relative to the stock sizes 
(less than one percent of the stock for each species) and no take by 
Level A harassment is anticipated to occur as a result of the project 
for either northern elephant seals or California sea lions. Takes that 
occur are expected to be in the form of behavioral harassment, 
specifically changes in direction or possibly flushing to the water. 
These takes are not expected to interfere with breeding, sheltering or 
feeding. For the reasons stated above, we do not expect the planned 
project to affect annual rates of recruitment or survival for northern 
elephant seals or California sea lions.
    In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily 
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity 
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.
     No mortality is anticipated or authorized.
     No injury is expected. Over the course of 3,376 hourly 
counts associated with monitoring for IHAs issued to the City for 
construction and demolition of the lifeguard station at Children's Pool 
in 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16, no takes by Level A harassment were 
documented. As the planned project will entail equipment with similar 
expected sound levels to those that occurred during the lifeguard 
station project at Children's Pool, but will occur further from the 
haulout location than the lifeguard station project, we do not expect 
take by Level A harassment to occur as a result of the planned project.
     Behavioral disturbance--Takes are expected to be in the 
form of behavioral disturbance only. Based on the sound levels 
anticipated and based on the monitoring reports from previous IHAs 
issued for similar activities at the same location, behavioral 
responses are expected to range from no response to alerts, to 
movements or changes in direction, to possible movements into the water 
(flushes). Mitigation as described above is expected to limit the 
number and/or severity of behavioral responses, and those that occur 
are not expected to be severe.
     Important Areas--As described above, there are no 
important feeding, breeding or pupping areas that will be affected by 
the planned project for northern elephant seals and California sea 
lions. For harbor seal, Children's Pool represents a pupping location. 
However, as described above, mitigation measures including the 
moratorium during pupping season (December 15 to May 15) are expected 
to avoid any potential impacts to pups, such as mother-pup separation. 
Data from the three years of monitoring suggests that despite 
documented instances of harassment resulting from the lifeguard station 
project, there was no site abandonment a result of the project (Hanan & 
Associates 2014; 2015; 2016). Therefore, the planned project is not 
expected to negatively affect pups of any species, and is not expected 
to result in any impacts to annual rates of recruitment or survival.
     Species/Stock scale--As described above, the planned 
project will impact only a very small percentage of the stocks 
(approximately five percent for harbor seal, less than one percent for 
northern elephant seal and California sea lion) and will only impact 
all marine mammal stocks over a very small portion of their ranges.
     Species/stock status--No marine mammal species for which 
take is authorized are listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA 
and no marine mammal stocks for which take is authorized are determined 
to be strategic or depleted under the MMPA.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into 
consideration the implementation of the monitoring and mitigation 
measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the planned 
activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal 
species or stocks.

Small Numbers

    As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be 
authorized under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified 
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not 
define small numbers and so, in practice, NMFS compares the number of 
individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of 
the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an 
authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals.
    The numbers of marine mammals authorized to be taken for harbor 
seal, California sea lion, and northern elephant seal, are considered 
small relative to the relevant stocks or populations (approximately 
five percent for harbor seal and less than one percent for northern 
elephant seal and California sea lion) even if each estimated take 
occurred to a new individual. However, we believe it is extremely 
unlikely that each estimated take will occur to a new individual, and 
more likely that multiple takes will accrue to the same individuals.
    As described above, depending on the amount of information 
available to

[[Page 29520]]

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 this can 
result in a take estimate that overestimates the number of individuals 
harassed. In particular, for stationary activities, such as the planned 
project, 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. This is especially true 
for those individuals display some degree of residency or site fidelity 
and the impetus to use the site is stronger than the deterrence 
presented by the harassing activity, as is the case with harbor seals 
that use Children's Pool as a haulout.
    For the reasons described above, we expect that there will almost 
certainly be some overlap in individuals present day-to-day at the 
project site, and the total numbers of authorized takes are expected to 
occur only within a small portion of the overall regional stocks. Thus 
while we authorize the instances of incidental take shown in Table 5, 
we believe that the number of individual marine mammals that will be 
incidentally taken by the project will be substantially lower than 
these numbers.

          Table 5--Estimated Numbers of Take and Percentages of Marine Mammal Stocks That May Be Taken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Stock       Percentage of
                             Species                               Level B take      abundance       stock or
                                                                    authorized     estimate \1\     population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal.....................................................           1,620          30,968               5
California sea lion.............................................              36         296,750              <1
Northern elephant seal..........................................              14         179,000             <1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NMFS 2015 marine mammal stock assessment reports (Carretta et al., 2016) available online at:
  www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/.

    Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity 
(including the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated 
take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals 
will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species 
or stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

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

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

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

Authorization

    NMFS has issued an IHA to the City of San Diego for the take of 
small numbers of three marine mammal species incidental to conducting 
demolition and construction activities at Coast Boulevard, La Jolla, 
California, from June 1, 2017 through December 14, 2017, provided the 
previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
requirements.

    Dated: June 23, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-13581 Filed 6-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P