Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Operations of a Liquified Natural Gas Port Facility in Massachusetts Bay, 42071-42079 [2010-17692]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and terms of an APO is a violation
which is subject to sanction.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 777(i)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19
CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Dated: July 14, 2010.
Edward C. Yang,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2010–17706 Filed 7–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
megabyte file size. A copy of the
application and a list of references used
in this document may be obtained by
writing to this address, by telephoning
the contact listed here (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT) and is also
available at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
The Maritime Administration
(MARAD) and U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
Final Environmental Impact Statement
(Final EIS) on the Northeast Gateway
Energy Bridge LNG Deepwater Port
license application is available for
viewing at https://dms.dot.gov under the
docket number 22219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 713 2289, ext
137.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
RIN 0648–XX27
Background
Taking and Importing Marine
Mammals; Operations of a Liquified
Natural Gas Port Facility in
Massachusetts Bay
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and 101(a)(5)(D)
of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary) to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional taking of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and regulations are issued or,
if the taking is limited to harassment, a
notice of a proposed authorization is
provided to the public for review.
Authorization 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,
and if the permissible methods of taking
and requirements pertaining to the
mitigation, monitoring and reporting of
such taking are set forth. NMFS has
defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 as:
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization and receipt of
application for five year regulations;
request for comments and information.
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request
from the Northeast Gateway Energy
BridgeTM L.L.C. (Northeast Gateway or
NEG) and its partner, Algonquin Gas
Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), for
authorization to take marine mammals
incidental to operating a liquified
natural gas (LNG) port facility by NEG
and Algonquin, in Massachusetts Bay
for the period of August 2010 through
August 2011. Pursuant to the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS
is requesting comments on its proposal
to issue an authorization to Northeast
Gateway and Algonquin to incidentally
take, by harassment, small numbers of
marine mammals for a period of 1 year.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than August 19,
2010.
Comments should be
addressed to P. Michael Payne, Chief,
Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315
East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910 3226. The mailbox address for
providing email comments on this
action is PR1.0648–XN24@noaa.gov.
Comments sent via email, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 10
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
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.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the United States can
apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals by harassment. 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42071
but not limited to, migration, breathing,
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering
[Level B harassment].
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45
day time limit for NMFS review of an
application followed by a 30 day public
notice and comment period on any
proposed authorizations for the
incidental harassment of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close
of the comment period, NMFS must
either issue or deny issuance of the
authorization.
Summary of Request
On June 14, 2010, NMFS received an
application from Excelerate Energy, L.P.
(Excelerate) and Tetra Tech EC, Inc., on
behalf of Northeast Gateway and
Algonquin for an authorization to take
12 species of marine mammals by Level
B harassment incidental to operations of
an LNG port facility in Massachusetts
Bay. Since LNG Port operation and
maintenance activities have the
potential to take marine mammals, a
marine mammal take authorization
under the MMPA is warranted. NMFS
has already issued a one year incidental
harassment authorization for this
activity pursuant to section 101(a)(5)(D)
of the MMPA (74 FR 45613; September
3, 2009), which expires on August 31,
2010. In order to for Northeast Gateway
and Algonquin to continue their
operations of the LNG port facility in
Massachusetts Bay, both companies are
seeking a renewal of their IHA.
Description of the Activity
The Northeast Gateway Port is located
in Massachusetts Bay and consists of a
submerged buoy system to dock
specially designed LNG carriers
approximately 13 mi (21 km) offshore of
Massachusetts in federal waters
approximately 270 to 290 ft (82 to 88 m)
in depth. This facility delivers regasified
LNG to onshore markets via a 16.06 mi
(25.8 km) long, 24 in (61 cm) outside
diameter natural gas pipeline lateral
(Pipeline Lateral) owned and operated
by Algonquin and interconnected to
Algonquin’s existing offshore natural
gas pipeline system in Massachusetts
Bay (HubLine).
The Northeast Gateway Port consists
of two subsea Submerged Turret
LoadingTM (STLTM) buoys, each with a
flexible riser assembly and a manifold
connecting the riser assembly, via a
steel flowline, to the subsea Pipeline
Lateral. Northeast Gateway utilizes
vessels from its current fleet of specially
designed Energy Bridge Regasification
VesselsJ (EBRVsTM), each capable of
transporting approximately 2.9 billion
ft3 (82 million m3) of natural gas
condensed to 4.9 million feet3 (138,000
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
42072
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
m3) of LNG. Northeast Gateway would
also be adding vessels to its fleet that
will have a cargo capacity of
approximately 151,000 cubic m3. The
mooring system installed at the
Northeast Gateway Port is designed to
handle both the existing vessels and any
of the larger capacity vessels that may
come into service in the future. The
EBRVs would dock to the STL buoys,
which would serve as both the single
point mooring system for the vessels
and the delivery conduit for natural gas.
Each of the STL buoys is secured to the
seafloor using a series of suction
anchors and a combination of chain/
cable anchor lines.
The proposed activity includes
Northeast Gateway LNG Port operations
and maintenance.
NEG Port Operations
During NEG Port operations, EBRVs
servicing the Northeast Gateway Port
will utilize the newly configured and
International Maritime Organization
(IMO) approved Boston Traffic
Separation Scheme (TSS) on their
approach to and departure from the
Northeast Gateway Port at the earliest
practicable point of transit. EBRVs will
maintain speeds of 12 knots or less
while in the TSS, unless transiting the
Off Race Point Seasonal Management
Area between the dates of March 1 and
April 30, or the Great South Channel
Seasonal Management Area between the
dates of April 1 and July 31, when they
will not exceed 10–knots or when there
have been active right whale sightings,
active acoustic detections, or both, in
the vicinity of the transiting EBRV in
the TSS or at the Northeast Gateway
Port, in which case the vessels also will
slow their speeds to 10 knots or less.
As an EBRV makes its final approach
to the Northeast Gateway Port, vessel
speed will gradually be reduced to 3
knots at 1.86 mi (3 km) out to less than
1 knot at a distance of 1,640 ft (500 m)
from the Northeast Gateway Port. When
an EBRV arrives at the Northeast
Gateway Port, it would retrieve one of
the two permanently anchored
submerged STL buoys. It would make
final connection to the buoy through a
series of engine and bow thruster
actions. The EBRV would require the
use of thrusters for dynamic positioning
during docking procedure. Typically,
the docking procedure is completed
over a 10 to 30 minute period, with the
thrusters activated as necessary for short
periods of time in second bursts, not a
continuous sound source. Once
connected to the buoy, the EBRV will
begin vaporizing the LNG into its
natural gas state using the onboard
regasification system. As the LNG is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
regasified, natural gas will be
transferred at pipeline pressures off the
EBRV through the STL buoy and
flexible riser via a steel flowline leading
to the connecting Pipeline Lateral.
When the LNG vessel is on the buoy,
wind and current effects on the vessel
would be allowed to Aweathervane@ on
the single point mooring system;
therefore, thrusters will not be used to
maintain a stationary position.
It is estimated that the NEG Port could
receive approximately 65 cargo
deliveries a year. During this time
period thrusters would be engaged in
use for docking at the NEG Port
approximately 10 to 30 minutes for each
vessel arrival and departure.
NEG Port Maintenance
The specified design life of the NEG
Port is about 40 years, with the
exception of the anchors, mooring
chain/rope, and riser/umbilical
assemblies, which are based on a
maintenance free design life of 20 years.
The buoy pick up system components
are considered consumable and would
be inspected following each buoy
connection, and replaced (from inside
the STL compartment during the normal
cargo discharge period) as deemed
necessary. The underwater components
of the NEG Port would be inspected
once yearly in accordance with
Classification Society Rules (American
Bureau of Shipping) using either divers
or remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) to
inspect and record the condition of the
various STL system components. These
activities would be conducted using the
NEG Port’s normal support vessel (125–
foot, 99 gross ton, 2,700 horsepower,
aluminum mono-hull vessel), and to the
extent possible would coincide with
planned weekly visits to the NEG Port.
Helicopters would not be used for
marker line maintenance inspections.
Detailed information on the
operations and maintenance activities
can be found in the MARAD/USCG
Final EIS on the Northeast Gateway
Project (see ADDRESSES for availability).
Detailed information on the LNG
facility’s operation and maintenance
activities, and noise generated from
operations was also published in the
Federal Register for the proposed IHA
for Northeast Gateway’s LNG Port
construction and operations on March
13, 2007 (72 FR 11328).
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activities
Marine mammal species that
potentially occur in the vicinity of the
Northeast Gateway facility include
several species of cetaceans and
pinnipeds:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena
glacialis),
humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae),
fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus),
minke whale (B. acutorostrata),
long-finned pilot whale (Globicephala
melas),
Atlantic white sided dolphin
(Lagenorhynchus acutus),
bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
truncatus),
common dolphin (Delphinus delphis),
killer whale (Orcinus orca),
harbor porpoise (Phocoena
phocoena),
harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), and
gray seal (Halichoerus grypus).
Information on those species that may
be affected by this activity is discussed
in detail in the USCG Final EIS on the
Northeast Gateway LNG proposal.
Please refer to that document for more
information on these species and
potential impacts from construction and
operation of this LNG facility. In
addition, general information on these
marine mammal species can also be
found in W?rsig et al. (2000) and in the
NMFS Stock Assessment Reports
(Waring et al., 2010). This latter
document is available at: https://
www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/tm/
tm213/. An updated summary on
several commonly sighted marine
mammal species distribution and
abundance in the vicinity of the
proposed action area is provided below.
Humpback Whale
The highest abundance for humpback
whales is distributed primarily along a
relatively narrow corridor following the
100 m (328 ft) isobath across the
southern Gulf of Maine from the
northwestern slope of Georges Bank,
south to the Great South Channel, and
northward alongside Cape Cod to
Stellwagen Bank and Jeffreys Ledge. The
relative abundance of whales increases
in the spring with the highest
occurrence along the slope waters
(between the 40- and 140–m, or 131and 459-ft, isobaths) off Cape Cod and
Davis Bank, Stellwagen Basin and
Tillies Basin and between the 50 and
200 m (164– and 656–ft) isobaths along
the inner slope of Georges Bank. High
abundance is also estimated for the
waters around Platts Bank. In the
summer months, abundance increases
markedly over the shallow waters (<50
m, or <164 ft) of Stellwagen Bank, the
waters (100–200 m, or 328–656 ft)
between Platts Bank and Jeffreys Ledge,
the steep slopes (between the 30 and
160 m isobaths) of Phelps and Davis
Bank north of the Great South Channel
towards Cape Cod, and between the 50–
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
and 100–m (164– and 328–ft) isobath for
almost the entire length of the steeply
sloping northern edge of Georges Bank.
This general distribution pattern
persists in all seasons except winter,
when humpbacks remain at high
abundance in only a few locations
including Porpoise and Neddick Basins
adjacent to Jeffreys Ledge, northern
Stellwagen Bank and Tillies Basin, and
the Great South Channel.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Fin Whale
Spatial patterns of habitat utilization
by fin whales are very similar to those
of humpback whales. Spring and
summer high use areas follow the 100–
m (328 ft) isobath along the northern
edge of Georges Bank (between the 50–
and 200–m (164 and 656 ft) isobaths),
and northward from the Great South
Channel (between the 50– and 160–m,
or 164– and 525–ft, isobaths). Waters
around Cashes Ledge, Platts Bank, and
Jeffreys Ledge are all high use areas in
the summer months. Stellwagen Bank is
a high use area for fin whales in all
seasons, with highest abundance
occurring over the southern Stellwagen
Bank in the summer months. In fact, the
southern portion of the Stellwagen Bank
National Marine Sanctuary (SBNMS) is
used more frequently than the northern
portion in all months except winter,
when high abundance is recorded over
the northern tip of Stellwagen Bank. In
addition to Stellwagen Bank, high
abundance in winter is estimated for
Jeffreys Ledge and the adjacent Porpoise
Basin (10– to 160–m, 328– to 656–ft,
isobaths), as well as Georges Basin and
northern Georges Bank.
Minke Whale
Like other piscivorous baleen whales,
highest abundance for minke whale is
strongly associated with regions
between the 50– and 100–m (164– and
328–ft) isobaths, but with a slightly
stronger preference for the shallower
waters along the slopes of Davis Bank,
Phelps Bank, Great South Channel and
Georges Shoals on Georges Bank. Minke
whales are sighted in the SBNMS in all
seasons, with highest abundance
estimated for the shallow waters
(approximately 40 m, or 131 ft) over
southern Stellwagen Bank in the
summer and fall months. Platts Bank,
Cashes Ledge, Jeffreys Ledge, and the
adjacent basins (Neddick, Porpoise and
Scantium) also support high relative
abundance. Very low densities of minke
whales remain throughout most of the
southern Gulf of Maine in winter.
North Atlantic Right Whale
North Atlantic right whales are
generally distributed widely across the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
southern Gulf of Maine in spring with
highest abundance locate over the
deeper waters (100– to 160–m, or 328–
to 525–ft, isobaths) on the northern edge
of the Great South Channel and deep
waters (100 - 300 m, 328–984 ft) parallel
to the 100–m (328–ft) isobath of
northern Georges Bank and Georges
Basin. High abundance is also found in
the shallowest waters (< 30 m, or <98 ft)
of Cape Cod Bay, over Platts Bank and
around Cashes Ledge. Lower relative
abundance is estimated over deep water
basins including Wilkinson Basin,
Rodgers Basin and Franklin Basin. In
the summer months, right whales move
almost entirely away from the coast to
deep waters over basins in the central
Gulf of Maine (Wilkinson Basin, Cashes
Basin between the 160– and 200–m, or
525– and 656–ft, isobaths) and north of
Georges Bank (Rogers, Crowell and
Georges Basins). Highest abundance is
found north of the 100–m (328–ft)
isobath at the Great South Channel and
over the deep slope waters and basins
along the northern edge of Georges
Bank. The waters between Fippennies
Ledge and Cashes Ledge are also
estimated as high use areas. In the fall
months, right whales are sighted
infrequently in the Gulf of Maine, with
highest densities over Jeffreys Ledge and
over deeper waters near Cashes Ledge
and Wilkinson Basin. In winter, Cape
Cod Bay, Scantum Basin, Jeffreys Ledge,
and Cashes Ledge were the main high
use areas. Although SBNMS does not
appear to support the highest
abundance of right whales, sightings
within SBNMS are reported for all four
seasons, albeit at low relative
abundance. Highest sighting within
SBNMS occured along the southern
edge of the Bank.
Long-finned Pilot Whale
The long finned pilot whale is more
generally found along the edge of the
continental shelf (a depth of 330 to
3,300 ft, or 100 to 1,000 m), choosing
areas of high relief or submerged banks
in cold or temperate shoreline waters.
This species is split between two
subspecies: the Northern and Southern
subspecies. The Southern subspecies is
circumpolar with northern limits of
Brazil and South Africa. The Northern
subspecies, which could be encountered
during operation of the NEG Port, ranges
from North Carolina to Greenland
(Reeves et al., 2002; Wilson and Ruff,
1999). In the western North Atlantic,
long-finned pilot whales are pelagic,
occurring in especially high densities in
winter and spring over the continental
slope, then moving inshore and onto the
shelf in summer and autumn following
squid and mackerel populations (Reeves
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42073
et al., 2002). They frequently travel into
the central and northern Georges Bank,
Great South Channel, and Gulf of Maine
areas during the summer and early fall
(May and October) (NOAA, 1993).
According to the species stock report,
the population estimate for the Western
North Atlantic long finned pilot whale
is 26,535 individuals (Waring et al.,
2010).
Atlantic White Sided Dolphin
In spring, summer and fall, Atlantic
white sided dolphins are widespread
throughout the southern Gulf of Maine,
with the high use areas widely located
either side of the 100–m (328–ft) isobath
along the northern edge of Georges
Bank, and north from the Great South
Channel to Stellwagen Bank, Jeffreys
Ledge, Platts Bank and Cashes Ledge. In
spring, high use areas exist in the Great
South Channel, northern Georges Bank,
the steeply sloping edge of Davis Bank
and Cape Cod, southern Stellwagen
Bank and the waters between Jeffreys
Ledge and Platts Bank. In summer, there
is a shift and expansion of habitat
toward the east and northeast. High use
areas are identified along most of the
northern edge of Georges Bank between
the 50– and 200–m (164– and 656–ft)
isobaths and northward from the Great
South Channel along the slopes of Davis
Bank and Cape Cod. High sightings are
also recorded over Truxton Swell,
Wilkinson Basin, Cashes Ledge and the
bathymetrically complex area northeast
of Platts Bank. High sightings of white
sided dolphin are recorded within
SBNMS in all seasons, with highest
density in summer and most
widespread distributions in spring
locate mainly over the southern end of
Stellwagen Bank. In winter, high
sightings are recorded at the northern
tip of Stellwagen Bank and Tillies
Basin.
A comparison of spatial distribution
patterns for all baleen whales
(Mysticeti) and all porpoises and
dolphins combined show that both
groups have very similar spatial patterns
of high and low use areas. The baleen
whales, whether piscivorous or
planktivorous, are more concentrated
than the dolphins and porpoises. They
utilize a corridor that extended broadly
along the most linear and steeply
sloping edges in the southern Gulf of
Maine indicated broadly by the 100 m
(328 ft) isobath. Stellwagen Bank and
Jeffreys Ledge support a high abundance
of baleen whales throughout the year.
Species richness maps indicate that
high use areas for individual whales and
dolphin species co occurr, resulting in
similar patterns of species richness
primarily along the southern portion of
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
42074
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
the 100–m (328–ft) isobath extending
northeast and northwest from the Great
South Channel. The southern edge of
Stellwagen Bank and the waters around
the northern tip of Cape Cod are also
highlighted as supporting high cetacean
species richness. Intermediate to high
numbers of species are also calculated
for the waters surrounding Jeffreys
Ledge, the entire Stellwagen Bank,
Platts Bank, Fippennies Ledge and
Cashes Ledge.
Killer Whale, Common Dolphin,
Bottlenose Dolphin, and Harbor
Porpoise
Although these four species are some
of the most widely distributed small
cetacean species in the world (Jefferson
et al., 1993), they are not commonly
seen in the vicinity of the proposed
project area in Massachusetts Bay
(Wiley et al., 1994; NCCOS, 2006;
Northeast Gateway Marine Mammal
Monitoring Weekly Reports, 2007).
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Harbor Seal and Gray Seal
In the U.S. waters of the western
North Atlantic, both harbor and gray
seals are usually found from the coast of
Maine south to southern New England
and New York (Warrings et al., 2010).
Along the southern New England and
New York coasts, harbor seals occur
seasonally from September through late
May (Schneider and Payne, 1983). In
recent years, their seasonal interval
along the southern New England to New
Jersey coasts has increased (deHart,
2002). In U.S. waters, harbor seal
breeding and pupping normally occur in
waters north of the New Hampshire/
Maine border, although breeding has
occurred as far south as Cape Cod in the
early part of the 20th century (Temte et
al., 1991; Katona et al., 1993).
Although gray seals are often seen off
the coast from New England to
Labrador, within the U.S. waters, only
small numbers of gray seals have been
observed pupping on several isolated
islands along the Maine coast and in
Nantucket Vineyard Sound,
Massachusetts (Katona et al., 1993;
Rough, 1995). In the late 1990s, a year
round breeding population of
approximately over 400 gray seals was
documented on outer Cape Cod and
Muskeget Island (Warring et al., 2007).
Potential Effects of Noise on Marine
Mammals
The effects of noise on marine
mammals are highly variable, and can
be categorized as follows (based on
Richardson et al., 1995): (1) The noise
may be too weak to be heard at the
location of the animal (i.e., lower than
the prevailing ambient noise level, the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
hearing threshold of the animal at
relevant frequencies, or both); (2) The
noise may be audible but not strong
enough to elicit any overt behavioral
response; (3) The noise may elicit
reactions of variable conspicuousness
and variable relevance to the well being
of the marine mammal; these can range
from temporary alert responses to active
avoidance reactions such as vacating an
area at least until the noise event ceases;
(4) Upon repeated exposure, a marine
mammal may exhibit diminishing
responsiveness (habituation), or
disturbance effects may persist; the
latter is most likely with sounds that are
highly variable in characteristics,
infrequent and unpredictable in
occurrence, and associated with
situations that a marine mammal
perceives as a threat; (5) Any
anthropogenic noise that is strong
enough to be heard has the potential to
reduce (mask) the ability of a marine
mammal to hear natural sounds at
similar frequencies, including calls from
conspecifics, and underwater
environmental sounds such as surf
noise; (6) If mammals remain in an area
because it is important for feeding,
breeding or some other biologically
important purpose even though there is
chronic exposure to noise, it is possible
that there could be noise induced
physiological stress; this might in turn
have negative effects on the well being
or reproduction of the animals involved;
and (7) Very strong sounds have the
potential to cause temporary or
permanent reduction in hearing
sensitivity. In terrestrial mammals, and
presumably marine mammals, received
sound levels must far exceed the
animal’s hearing threshold for there to
be any temporary threshold shift (TTS)
in its hearing ability. For transient
sounds, the sound level necessary to
cause TTS is inversely related to the
duration of the sound. Received sound
levels must be even higher for there to
be risk of permanent hearing
impairment. In addition, intense
acoustic (or explosive events) may cause
trauma to tissues associated with organs
vital for hearing, sound production,
respiration and other functions. This
trauma may include minor to severe
hemorrhage.
There are three general categories of
sounds recognized by NMFS:
continuous (such as shipping sounds),
intermittent (such as vibratory pile
driving sounds), and impulse. No
impulse noise activities, such as
blasting or standard pile driving, are
associated with this project. The noise
sources of potential concern are
regasification/offloading (which is a
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
continuous sound) and dynamic
positioning of vessels using thrusters
(an intermittent sound) from EBRVs
during docking at the NEG port facility.
Based on research by Malme et al.
(1983; 1984), for both continuous and
intermittent sound sources, Level B
harassment is presumed to begin at
received levels of 120 dB. The detailed
description of the noise that would
result from the proposed LNG Port
operations is provided in the Federal
Register for the initial construction and
operations of the NEG LNG Port facility
and Pipeline Lateral in 2007 (72 FR
27077; May 14, 2007).
NEG Port Activities
Underwater noise generated at the
NEG Port has the potential to result
from two distinct actions, including
closed-loop regasification of LNG and/or
EBRV maneuvering during coupling and
decoupling with STL buoys. To evaluate
the potential for these activities to result
in underwater noise that could harass
marine mammals, Excelerate conducted
field sound survey studies during
periods of March 21 to 25, 2005 and
August 6 to 9, 2006 while the EBRV
Excelsior was both maneuvering and
moored at the operational Gulf Gateway
Port located 116 mi (187 km) offshore in
the Gulf of Mexico (the Gulf) (see
Appendices B and C of the NEG and
Algonquin application). EBRV
maneuvering conditions included the
use of both stern and bow thrusters
required for dynamic positioning during
coupling. These data were used to
model underwater sound propagation at
the NEG Port. The pertinent results of
the field survey are provided as
underwater sound source pressure
levels as follows:
• Sound levels during closed-loop
regasification ranged from 104 to 110
decibel linear (dBL). Maximum levels
during steady state operations were 108
dBL.
• Sound levels during coupling
operations were dominated by the
periodic use of the bow and stern
thrusters and ranged from 160 to 170
dBL.
Figures 1–1 and 1–2 of the NEG and
Algonquin’s revised MMPA permit
application present the net acoustic
impact of one EBRV operating at the
NEG Port. Thrusters are operated
intermittently and only for relatively
short durations of time. The resulting
area within the 120 dB isopleth is less
than 1 km2 with the linear distance to
the isopleths extending 430 m (1,411 ft).
The area within the 180 dB isopleth is
very localized and will not extend
beyond the immediate area where EBRV
coupling operations are occurring.
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
The potential impacts to marine
mammals associated with sound
propagation from vessel movements,
anchors, chains and LNG regasification/
offloading could be the temporary and
short term displacement of seals and
whales from within the 120 dB zones
ensonified by these noise sources.
Animals would be expected to re
occupy the area once the noise ceases.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Estimates of Take by Harassment
Although Northeast Gateway stated
that the ensonified area of 120–dB
isopleths by EBRV’s decoupling would
be less than 1 km2 as measured in the
Gulf of Mexico in 2005, due to the lack
of more recent sound source verification
and the lack of source measurement in
Massachusetts Bay, NMFS uses a more
conservative spreading model to
calculate the 120 dB isopleth received
sound level. This model was also used
to establish 120–dB zone of influence
(ZOI) for the previous IHAs issued to
Northeast Gateway. In the vicinity of the
LNG Port, where the water depth is
about 80 m (262 ft), the 120 dB radius
is estimated to be 2.56 km (1.6 mi)
maximum from the sound source during
dynamic positioning for the container
ship, making a maximum ZOI of 21 km2
(8.1 mi2). For shallow water depth (40
m or 131 ft) representative of the
northern segment of the Algonquin
Pipeline Lateral, the 120–dB radius is
estimated to be 3.31 km (2.06 mi), the
associated ZOI is 34 km2 (13.1 mi2).
The basis for Northeast Gateway and
Algonquin’s ‘‘take’’ estimate is the
number of marine mammals that would
be exposed to sound levels in excess of
120 dB. For the NEG port facility
operations, the take estimates are
determined by multiplying the area of
the EBRV’s ZOI (21 km2) by local
marine mammal density estimates,
corrected to account for 50 percent more
marine mammals that may be
underwater, and then multiplying by
the estimated LNG container ship visits
per year. In the case of data gaps, a
conservative approach was used to
ensure the potential number of takes is
not underestimated, as described next.
NMFS recognizes that baleen whale
species other than North Atlantic right
whales have been sighted in the project
area from May to November. However,
the occurrence and abundance of fin,
humpback, and minke whales is not
well documented within the project
area. Nonetheless, NMFS uses the data
on cetacean distribution within
Massachusetts Bay, such as those
published by the National Centers for
Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS, 2006),
to estimate potential takes of marine
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
mammals species in the vicinity of
project area.
The NCCOS study used cetacean
sightings from two sources: (1) the
North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium
(NARWC) sightings database held at the
University of Rhode Island (Kenney,
2001); and (2) the Manomet Bird
Observatory (MBO) database, held at
NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science
Center (NEFSC). The NARWC data
contained survey efforts and sightings
data from ship and aerial surveys and
opportunistic sources between 1970 and
2005. The main data contributors
included: Cetacean and Turtles
Assessment Program (CETAP), Canadian
Department of Fisheries and Oceans,
PCCS, International Fund for Animal
Welfare, NOAA’s NEFSC, New England
Aquarium, Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution, and the University of Rhode
Island. A total of 653,725 km (406,293
mi) of survey track and 34,589 cetacean
observations were provisionally selected
for the NCCOS study in order to
minimize bias from uneven allocation of
survey effort in both time and space.
The sightings per unit effort (SPUE) was
calculated for all cetacean species by
month covering the southern Gulf of
Maine study area, which also includes
the project area (NCCOS, 2006).
The MBO’s Cetacean and Seabird
Assessment Program (CSAP) was
contracted from 1980 to 1988 by NMFS
NEFSC to provide an assessment of the
relative abundance and distribution of
cetaceans, seabirds, and marine turtles
in the shelf waters of the northeastern
United States (MBO, 1987). The CSAP
program was designed to be completely
compatible with NMFS NEFSC
databases so that marine mammal data
could be compared directly with
fisheries data throughout the time series
during which both types of information
were gathered. A total of 5,210 km
(8,383 mi) of survey distance and 636
cetacean observations from the MBO
data were included in the NCCOS
analysis. Combined valid survey effort
for the NCCOS studies included 567,955
km (913,840 mi) of survey track for
small cetaceans (dolphins and
porpoises) and 658,935 km (1,060,226
mi) for large cetaceans (whales) in the
southern Gulf of Maine. The NCCOS
study then combined these two data sets
by extracting cetacean sighting records,
updating database field names to match
the NARWC database, creating geometry
to represent survey tracklines and
applying a set of data selection criteria
designed to minimize uncertainty and
bias in the data used.
Owing to the comprehensiveness and
total coverage of the NCCOS cetacean
distribution and abundance study,
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42075
NMFS calculated the estimated take
number of marine mammals based on
the most recent NCCOS report
published in December 2006. A
summary of seasonal cetacean
distribution and abundance in the
project area is provided above, in the
Marine Mammals Affected by the
Activity section. For a detailed
description and calculation of the
cetacean abundance data and sighting
per unit effort (SPUE), please refer to the
NCCOS study (NCCOS, 2006). These
data show that the relative abundance of
North Atlantic right, fin, humpback,
minke, and pilot whales, and Atlantic
white sided dolphins for all seasons, as
calculated by SPUE in number of
animals per square kilometer, is 0.0082,
0.0097, 0.0265, 0.0059, 0.0407, and
0.1314 n/km, respectively.
In calculating the area density of these
species from these linear density data,
NMFS used 0.4 km (0.25 mi), which is
a quarter the distance of the radius for
visual monitoring (see Proposed
Monitoring, Mitigation, and Reporting
section below), as a conservative
hypothetical strip width (W). Thus the
area density (D) of these species in the
project area can be obtained by the
following formula:
D = SPUE/2W.
Based on this calculation method, the
estimated take numbers per year for
North Atlantic right, fin, humpback,
minke, sei, and pilot whales, and
Atlantic white sided dolphins by the
NEG Port facility operations, which is
an average of 65 visits by LNG container
ships to the project area per year (or
approximately 1.25 visits per week),
operating the vessels= thrusters for
dynamic positioning before offloading
natural gas, corrected for 50 percent
underwater, are 21, 25, 68, 15, 11, 104,
and 336, respectively. These numbers
represent maximum of 6.08, 1.09, 8.01,
0.46, 2.78, 0.39, and 0.53 percent of the
populations for these species,
respectively. Since it is very likely that
individual animals could be Ataken@ by
harassment multiple times, these
percentages are the upper boundary of
the animal population that could be
affected. Therefore, the actual number of
individual animals being exposed or
taken would be far less. There is no
danger of injury, death, or hearing
impairment from the exposure to these
noise levels.
In addition, bottlenose dolphins,
common dolphins, killer whales, harbor
porpoises, harbor seals, and gray seals
could also be taken by Level B
harassment as a result of deepwater
LNG port operations. The numbers of
estimated take of these species are not
available because they are rare in the
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
42076
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
project area. The population estimates
of these marine mammal species and
stock in the west North Atlantic basin
are 81,588; 120,743; 89,054; 99,340; and
195,000 for bottlenose dolphins,
common dolphins, harbor porpoises,
and harbor seals, respectively (Waring et
al., 2010). No population estimate is
available for the North Atlantic stock of
killer whales and gray seals, however,
their occurrence within the proposed
project area is rare. Since the
Massachusetts Bay represents only a
small fraction of the west North Atlantic
basin where these animals occur, and
these animals do not congregate in the
vicinity of the project area, NMFS
believes that only relatively small
numbers of these marine mammal
species would be potentially affected by
the Northeast Gateway LNG deepwater
project. From the most conservative
estimates of both marine mammal
densities in the project area and the size
of the 120 dB zone of (noise) influence,
the calculated number of individual
marine mammals for each species that
could potentially be harassed annually
is small relative to the overall
population size.
Potential Impact on Habitat
Approximately 4.8 acres of seafloor
has been converted from soft substrate
to artificial hard substrate. The softbottom benthic community may be
replaced with organisms associated with
naturally occurring hard substrate, such
as sponges, hydroids, bryozoans, and
associated species. The benthic
community in the up to 43 acres (worst
case scenario based on severe 100–year
storm with EBRVs occupying both STL
buoys) of soft bottom that may be swept
by the anchor chains while EBRVs are
docked will have limited opportunity to
recover, so this area will experience a
long-term reduction in benthic
productivity. In addition, disturbance
from anchor chain movement would
result in increased turbidity levels in
the vicinity of the buoys that could
affect prey species for marine mammals;
however, as indicated in the final EIS/
FEIR, these impacts are expected to be
short-term, indirect, and minor.
Daily removal of sea water from EBRV
intakes will reduce the food resources
available for planktivorous organisms.
Water usage would be limited to the
standard requirements of NEG’s normal
support vessel. As with all vessels
operating in Massachusetts Bay, sea
water uptake and discharge is required
to support engine cooling, typically
using a once-through system. The rate of
seawater uptake varies with the ship’s
horsepower and activity and therefore
will differ between vessels and activity
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
type. For example, the Gateway
Endeavor is a 90–foot vessel powered
with a 1,200 horsepower diesel engine
with a four-pump seawater cooling
system. This system requires seawater
intake of about 68 gallons per minute
(gpm) while idling and up to about 150
gpm at full power. Use of full power is
required generally for transit. A
conservatively high estimate of vessel
activity for the Gateway Endeavor
would be operation at idle for 75% of
the time and full power for 25% of the
time. During the routine activities this
would equate to approximately 42,480
gallons of seawater per 8–hour work
day. When compared to the engine
cooling requirements of an EBRV over
an 8–hour period (approximately 17.62
million gallons), the Gateway
Endeavour uses about 0.2% of the EBRV
requirement. To put this water use into
context, the Project’s final EIS/EIR
concluded that the impacts to fish
populations and to marine mammals
that feed on fish or plankton resulting
from water use by an EBRV during port
operations (approximately 39,780,000
gallons over each 8–day regasification
period) would be minor. Water use by
support vessels during routine port
activities would not materially add to
the overall impacts evaluated in the
final EIS/EIR. Additionally, discharges
associated with the Gateway Endeavor
and/or other support/maintenance
vessels that are 79 feet or greater in
length, are now regulated under the
Clean Water Act (CWA) and must
receive and comply with the United
States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Vessel General Permit (VGP). The
permit incorporates the USCG
mandatory ballast water management
and exchange standards, and provides
technology- and water quality-based
effluent limits for other types of
discharges, including deck runoff, bilge
water, graywater, and other pollutants.
It also establishes specific corrective
actions, inspection and monitoring
requirements, and recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for each vessel.
Massachusetts Bay circulation will not
be altered, however, so plankton will be
continuously transported into the NEG
Port area. The removal of these species
is minor and unlikely to affect in a
measurable way the food sources
available to marine mammals.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation
Measures
During the construction and
operations of the NEG LNG Port facility
in prior years, Northeast Gateway
submitted reports on marine mammal
sightings in the area. While it is difficult
to draw biological conclusions from
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
these reports, NMFS can make some
general conclusions. Data gathered by
MMOs is generally useful to indicate the
presence or absence of marine mammals
(often to a species level) within the
safety zones (and sometimes without)
and to document the implementation of
mitigation measures. Though it is by no
means conclusory, it is worth noting
that no instances of obvious behavioral
disturbance as a result of Northeast
Gateway’s activities were observed by
the MMOs.
In addition, Northeast Gateway was
required to maintain an array of Marine
Autonomous Recording Units (MARUs)
to monitor calling North Atlantic right
whales (humpback, fin, and minke
whale calls were also able to be
detected). The Bioacoustics Research
Program (BRP) of the Cornell University
analyzed the data and submitted a
report covering the operations of the
project between January and December
2008. During the operations period,
right whales were detected on only
1,982 of the 136,776 total hours sampled
(1.45% of recorded hours). Right whales
were detected hourly throughout the
year, but were more commonly detected
in the late February through June
period.
The Cornell’s BRP performed acoustic
analyses on background noise of all
recordings from the MARUs. A
comparison of the noise metrics derived
from these analyses before, during, and
after operations activities revealed
increases in noise level during
operations. A comparison of noise levels
from areas including and near areas of
known operations activities with levels
from other areas showed increased noise
levels for areas that included or were
near the known operations activities.
These increases in noise levels were
evident for each of the three frequency
bands utilized by fin, humpback, and
right whales, with the greatest increase
in the right whale band and the next
highest increase in the humpback whale
band. However, the BRP report did not
provide an interpretation of this overall
increase in noise conditions throughout
the period when operations activities
occurred. Nevertheless, NMFS does not
consider that the sporadic exposure of
marine mammals to continuous sound
received levels above 120 dB by a single
EBRV would have acute or chronicle
significant affects to these animals in
the vicinity of the LNG port facility.
These MARUs will remain deployed
during the time frame of this proposed
IHA in order to obtain information
during the operational phase of the Port
facility (see below).
For the proposed NEG LNG port
operations, NMFS proposes the
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
following monitoring and mitigation
measures.
Marine Mammal Observers
For activities related to the NEG LNG
port operations, all individuals onboard
the EBRVs responsible for the
navigation and lookout duties on the
vessel must receive training prior to
assuming navigation and lookout duties,
a component of which will be training
on marine mammal sighting/reporting
and vessel strike avoidance measures.
Crew training of EBRV personnel will
stress individual responsibility for
marine mammal awareness and
reporting.
If a marine mammal is sighted by a
crew member, an immediate notification
will be made to the Person in Charge on
board the vessel and the Northeast Port
Manager, who will ensure that the
required vessel strike avoidance
measures and reporting procedures are
followed.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Vessel Strike Avoidance
(1) All EBRVs approaching or
departing the port will comply with the
Mandatory Ship Reporting (MSR)
system to keep apprised of right whale
sightings in the vicinity. Vessel
operators will also receive active
detections from an existing passive
acoustic array prior to and during transit
through the northern leg of the Boston
TSS where the buoys are installed.
(2) In response to active right whale
sightings (detected acoustically or
reported through other means such as
the MSR or Sighting Advisory System
(SAS)), and taking into account safety
and weather conditions, EBRVs will
take appropriate actions to minimize the
risk of striking whales, including
reducing speed to 10 knots or less and
alerting personnel responsible for
navigation and lookout duties to
concentrate their efforts.
(3) EBRVs will maintain speeds of 12
knots or less while in the TSS until
reaching the vicinity of the buoys
(except during the seasons and areas
defined below, when speed will be
limited to 10 knots or less). At 1.86 mi
(3 km) from the NEG port, speed will be
reduced to 3 knots, and to less than 1
knot at 1,640 ft (500 m) from the buoy.
(4) EBRVs will reduce transit speed to
10 knots or less over ground from March
1 April 30 in all waters bounded by
straight lines connecting the following
points in the order stated below. This
area is known as the Off Race Point
Seasonal Management Area (SMA) and
tracks NMFS regulations at 50 CFR
224.105:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
42°30’00.0″ N - 069°45’00.0″ W;
thence to 42°30’00.0; N - 070°30’00.0″
W; thence to 42°12’00.0″ N 070°30’00.0″ W; thence to 42°12’00.0″ N
- 070°12’00.0″ W; thence to 42°04’56.5″
N - 070o12’00.0″ W; thence along
charted mean high water line and
inshore limits of COLREGS limit to a
latitude of 41°40’00.0″ N; thence due
east to 41°41’00.0″ N - 069°45’00.0″ W;
thence back to starting point.
(5) EBRVs will reduce transit speed to
10 knots or less over ground from April
1 July 31 in all waters bounded by
straight lines connecting the following
points in the order stated below. This
area is also known as the Great South
Channel SMA and tracks NMFS
regulations at 50 CFR 224.105:
42°30’00.0″ N–69°45’00.0″ W
41°40’00.0″ N- 69°45’00.0″ W
41°00’00.0″ N- 69°05’00.0″ W
42°09’00.0″ N- 67°08’24.0″ W
42°30’00.0″ N- 67°27’00.0″ W
42°30’00.0″ N- 69°45’00.0″ W
(6) LNGRVs are not expected to transit
Cape Cod Bay. However, in the event
transit through Cape Cod Bay is
required, LNGRVs will reduce transit
speed to 10 knots or less over ground
from January 1 May 15 in all waters in
Cape Cod Bay, extending to all
shorelines of Cape Cod Bay, with a
northern boundary of 42°12’00.0″ N
latitude.
(7) A vessel may operate at a speed
necessary to maintain safe maneuvering
speed instead of the required ten knots
only if justified because the vessel is in
an area where oceanographic,
hydrographic and/or meteorological
conditions severely restrict the
maneuverability of the vessel and the
need to operate at such speed is
confirmed by the pilot on board or,
when a vessel is not carrying a pilot, the
master of the vessel. If a deviation from
the ten knot speed limit is necessary,
the reasons for the deviation, the speed
at which the vessel is operated, the
latitude and longitude of the area, and
the time and duration of such deviation
shall be entered into the logbook of the
vessel. The master of the vessel shall
attest to the accuracy of the logbook
entry by signing and dating it.
Research Passive Acoustic Monitoring
(PAM) Program
Northeast Gateway shall monitor the
noise environment in Massachusetts
Bay in the vicinity of the NEG Port
using an array of 19 Marine
Autonomous Recording Units (MARUs)
that were deployed initially in April
2007 to collect data during the
preconstruction and active construction
phases of the NEG Port and Algonquin
Pipeline Lateral. A description of the
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42077
MARUs can be found in Appendix A of
the NEG and Algonquin application.
These 19 MARUs will remain in the
same configuration during full operation
of the NEG Port. The MARUs collect
archival noise data and are not designed
to provide real-time or near-real-time
information about vocalizing whales.
Rather, the acoustic data collected by
the MARUs shall be analyzed to
document the seasonal occurrences and
overall distributions of whales
(primarily fin, humpback, and right
whales) within approximately 10
nautical miles of the NEG Port, and
shall measure and document the noise
‘‘budget’’ of Massachusetts Bay so as to
eventually assist in determining
whether an overall increase in noise in
the Bay associated with the NEG Port
might be having a potentially negative
impact on marine mammals. The overall
intent of this system is to provide better
information for both regulators and the
general public regarding the acoustic
footprint associated with long-term
operation of the NEG Port in
Massachusetts Bay, and the distribution
of vocalizing marine mammals during
NEG Port activities. In addition to the 19
MARUs, Northeast Gateway will deploy
10 ABs within the TSS for the
operational life of the NEG Port. A
description of the ABs is provided in
Appendix A of this NEG and
Algonquin’s application. The purpose of
the ABs shall be to detect a calling
North Atlantic right whale an average of
5 nm (9.26 km) from each AB (detection
ranges will vary based on ambient
underwater conditions). The AB system
shall be the primary detection
mechanism that alerts the EBRV
captains to the occurrence of right
whales, heightens EBRV awareness, and
triggers necessary mitigation actions as
described in the Marine Mammal
Detection, Monitoring, and Response
Plan included as Appendix A of the
NEG application.
Northeast Gateway has engaged
representatives from Cornell
University’s Bioacoustics Research
Program (BRP) and the Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) as
the consultants for developing,
implementing, collecting, and analyzing
the acoustic data; reporting; and
maintaining the acoustic monitoring
system.
Further information detailing the
deployment and operation of arrays of
19 passive seafloor acoustic recording
units (MARUs) centered on the terminal
site and the 10 ABs that are to be placed
at approximately 5–m (8.0–km) intervals
within the recently modified TSS can be
found in the Marine Mammal Detection,
Monitoring, and Response Plan
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
42078
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
included as Appendix A of the NEG and
Algonquin application.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Reporting
The Project area is within the
Mandatory Ship Reporting Area
(MSRA), so all vessels entering and
exiting the MSRA will report their
activities to WHALESNORTH. During
all phases of the Northeast Gateway
LNG Port operations, sightings of any
injured or dead marine mammals will
be reported immediately to the USCG or
NMFS, regardless of whether the injury
or death is caused by project activities.
An annual report on marine mammal
monitoring and mitigation would be
submitted to NMFS Office of Protected
Resources and NMFS Northeast
Regional Office within 90 days after the
expiration of an LOA. The annual report
shall include data collected for each
distinct marine mammal species
observed in the project area in the
Massachusetts Bay during the period of
LNG facility operation. Description of
marine mammal behavior, overall
numbers of individuals observed,
frequency of observation, and any
behavioral changes and the context of
the changes relative to operation
activities shall also be included in the
annual report.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers
Analysis and Preliminary
Determination
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible impact’’
in 50 CFR 216.103 as ’’...an impact
resulting from the specified activity that
cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
not reasonably likely to, adversely affect
the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’
In making a negligible impact
determination, NMFS considers a
variety of factors, including but not
limited to: (1) the number of anticipated
mortalities; (2) the number and nature of
anticipated injuries; (3) the number,
nature, intensity, and duration of Level
B harassment; and (4) the context in
which the takes occur.
No injuries or mortalities are
anticipated to occur as a result of
Northeast Gateway’s proposed port
operation and maintenance activities,
and none are proposed to be authorized
by NMFS. Additionally, animals in the
area are not anticipated to incur any
hearing impairment (i.e., TTS or PTS),
as the modeling of source levels
indicating none of the source received
levels exceeds 180 dB (rms).
While some of the species occur in
the proposed project area year-round,
some species only occur in the area
during certain seasons. Sei whales are
only anticipated in the area during the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
spring. Therefore, if shipments and/or
maintenance activities occur in other
seasons, the likelihood of sei whales
being affected is quite low. Humpback
and minke whales are not expected in
the project area in the winter. During
the winter, a large portion of the North
Atlantic right whale population occurs
in the southeastern U.S. calving grounds
(i.e., South Carolina, Georgia, and
northern Florida). The fact that certain
activities will occur during times when
certain species are not commonly found
in the area will help reduce the amount
of Level B harassment for these species.
Many animals perform vital functions,
such as feeding, resting, traveling, and
socializing, on a diel cycle (24–hr
cycle). Behavioral reactions to noise
exposure (such as disruption of critical
life functions, displacement, or
avoidance of important habitat) are
more likely to be significant if they last
more than one diel cycle or recur on
subsequent days (Southall et al., 2007).
Consequently, a behavioral response
lasting less than one day and not
recurring on subsequent days is not
considered particularly severe unless it
could directly affect reproduction or
survival (Southall et al., 2007).
Operational activities are not
anticipated to occur at the Port on
consecutive days. In addition, Northeast
Gateway EBRVs are expected to make 65
port calls throughout the year, with
thruster use needed for a couple of
hours. Therefore, Northeast Gateway
will not be creating increased sound
levels in the marine environment for
prolonged period of time.
Of the 12 marine mammal species
likely to occur in the area, four are listed
as endangered under the ESA: North
Atlantic right, humpback, fin, and sei
whales. All of these species, as well as
the northern coastal stock of bottlenose
dolphin, are also considered depleted
under the MMPA. There is currently no
designated critical habitat or known
reproductive areas for any of these
species in or near the proposed project
area. However, there are several well
known North Atlantic right whale
feeding grounds in the Cape Cod Bay
and Great South Channel. No mortality
or injury is expected to occur and due
to the nature, degree, and context of the
Level B harassment anticipated, the
activity is not expected to impact rates
of recruitment or survival.
The population estimates for the
species that may be taken by harassment
from the most recent U.S. Atlantic Stock
Assessment Reports were provided
earlier in this document. From the most
conservative estimates of both marine
mammal densities in the project area
and the size of the 120–dB ZOI, the
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
maximum calculated number of
individual marine mammals for each
species that could potentially be
harassed annually is small relative to
the overall population sizes (8.01
percent for humpback whales and 6.08
percent for North Atlantic right whales
and no more than 2.78 percent of any
other species).
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,
NMFS preliminarily finds that
operation, including repair and
maintenance activities, of the Northeast
Gateway LNG Port will result in the
incidental take of small numbers of
marine mammals, by Level B
harassment only, and that the total
taking from Northeast Gateway’s
proposed activiites will have a
negligible impact on the affected species
or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action.
Endangered Species Act
On February 5, 2007, NMFS
concluded consultation with MARAD
and the USCG, under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA), on the
proposed construction and operation of
the Northeast Gateway LNG facility and
issued a biological opinion. The finding
of that consultation was that the
construction and operation of the
Northeast Gateway LNG terminal may
adversely affect, but is not likely to
jeopardize, the continued existence of
northern right, humpback, and fin
whales, and is not likely to adversely
affect sperm, sei, or blue whales and
Kemp’s ridley, loggerhead, green or
leatherback sea turtles. An incidental
take statement (ITS) was issued
following NMFS’ issuance of the IHA.
On November 15, 2007, Northeast
Gateway and Algonquin submitted a
letter to NMFS requesting an extension
for the LNG Port construction into
December 2007. Upon reviewing
Northeast Gateway’s weekly marine
mammal monitoring reports submitted
under the previous IHA, NMFS
recognized that the potential take of
some marine mammals resulting from
the LNG Port and Pipeline Lateral by
Level B behavioral harassment likely
had exceeded the original take
estimates. Therefore, NMFS Northeast
Region (NER) reinitiated consultation
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Notices
with MARAD and USCG on the
construction and operation of the
Northeast Gateway LNG facility. On
November 30, 2007, NMFS NER issued
a revised biological opinion, reflecting
the revised construction time period
and including a revised ITS. This
revised biological opinion concluded
that the construction and operation of
the Northeast Gateway LNG terminal
may adversely affect, but is not likely to
jeopardize, the continued existence of
northern right, humpback, and fin
whales, and is not likely to adversely
affect sperm, sei, or blue whales.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
NEPA
MARAD and the USCG released a
Final EIS/Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) for the proposed Northeast
Gateway Port and Pipeline Lateral. A
notice of availability was published by
MARAD on October 26, 2006 (71 FR
62657). The Final EIS/EIR provides
detailed information on the proposed
project facilities, construction methods
and analysis of potential impacts on
marine mammal.
NMFS was a cooperating agency (as
defined by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1501.6))
in the preparation of the Draft and Final
EISs. NMFS has reviewed the Final EIS
and has adopted it. Therefore, the
preparation of another EIS or EA is not
warranted.
Preliminary Determinations
NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the impact of operations of the
Northeast Gateway LNG Port facility
may result, at worst, in a temporary
modification in behavior of small
numbers of certain species of marine
mammals that may be in close
proximity to the Northeast Gateway
LNG facility during its operations and
maintenance. These activities are
expected to result in some local short
term displacement and will have no
more than a negligible impact on the
affected species or stocks of marine
mammals.
This preliminary determination is
supported by proposed mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting measures
described in this document on this
action.
As a result of the described proposed
mitigation and monitoring measures, no
take by injury or death would be
requested, anticipated or authorized,
and the potential for temporary or
permanent hearing impairment is very
unlikely due to the relatively low noise
levels (and consequently small zone of
impact).
While the number of marine
mammals that may be harassed will
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
depend on the distribution and
abundance of marine mammals in the
vicinity of the LNG Port facility, the
estimated numbers of marine mammals
to be harassed is small relative to the
affected species or stock sizes. Please
see Estimate of Take by Harassment
section above for the calculation of
these take numbers.
Proposed Authorization
NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to
Northeast Gateway and Algonquin for
conducting LNG Port facility operations
and maintenance in Massachusetts Bay,
provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Information Solicited
NMFS requests interested persons to
submit comments and information
concerning this proposed IHA and
Northeast Gateway and Algonquin’s
application for incidental take
regulations (see ADDRESSES). NMFS
requests interested persons to submit
comments, information, and suggestions
concerning both the request and the
structure and content of future
regulations to allow this taking. NMFS
will consider this information in
developing proposed regulations to
govern the taking.
Dated: July 13, 2010.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–17692 Filed 7–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No.: PTO–P–2010–0052]
Treatment of Letters Stating That the
USPTO’s Patent Term Adjustment
Determination Is Greater Than What
the Applicant or Patentee Believes Is
Appropriate
AGENCY: United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) is clarifying
its treatment of letters submitted by
applicants and patentees stating that the
USPTO’s patent term adjustment
determination indicated on a notice of
allowance, issue notification, or patent,
is greater than what the applicant or
patentee believes is appropriate. The
USPTO will place these letters in the
file of the application or patent without
further review. The USPTO will no
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42079
longer review these letters or issue
certificates of correction on the basis of
a review of these letters. If the applicant
or patentee wants the USPTO to
reconsider its patent term adjustment
determination, the applicant or patentee
must use the procedures set forth in 37
CFR 1.705 for requesting
reconsideration of a patent term
adjustment determination. A patentee
may also file a terminal disclaimer
disclaiming any period considered in
excess of the appropriate patent term
adjustment. However, the USPTO does
not require an applicant or patentee to
file either a request for reconsideration
under 37 CFR 1.705 or a terminal
disclaimer when the patent term
adjustment indicated on a notice of
allowance, issue notification, or patent
is greater than what the applicant or
patentee believes is appropriate.
DATES: The clarification set forth in this
notice applies to all patent term
adjustment letters and requests for a
certificate of correction filed at any time
that are pending before the USPTO on
or after July 20, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy E. Johnson, Office of Petitions:
By telephone at 571–272–3219; or by
mail addressed to: Mail Stop
Comments—Patents, Commissioner for
Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA
22313–1450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Manual of Patent Examining Procedure
(MPEP) was revised in 2004 to indicate
that if a notice of allowance indicates a
patent term adjustment that is longer
than expected, the applicant may wait
until the patent issues, and if the patent
issues with a value that is incorrect,
request a certificate of correction. See
MPEP § 2733. The MPEP does not
specify what action the USPTO will take
in response to such a request for a
certificate of correction. The USPTO is,
in this notice, clarifying when the
USPTO will change the patent term
adjustment determination indicated on
a patent via a certificate of correction
under either 35 U.S.C. 254 or 255.
The USPTO, however, has determined
that it is not appropriate to provide a
patent term adjustment recalculation via
a certificate of correction under 35
U.S.C. 254 or 255. A certificate of
correction is permissible under 35
U.S.C. 254 only for a mistake in a patent
that ‘‘is clearly disclosed by the records
of the Office.’’ See 35 U.S.C. 254. While
the applicable patent term adjustment is
ascertainable from the records of the
USPTO, a revised patent term
adjustment determination requires a
complex calculation and is not ‘‘clearly
disclosed’’ by the records of the USPTO.
E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM
20JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 138 (Tuesday, July 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42071-42079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17692]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XX27
Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Operations of a Liquified
Natural Gas Port Facility in Massachusetts Bay
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization and
receipt of application for five year regulations; request for comments
and information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the Northeast Gateway Energy
Bridge\TM\ L.L.C. (Northeast Gateway or NEG) and its partner, Algonquin
Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), for authorization to take marine
mammals incidental to operating a liquified natural gas (LNG) port
facility by NEG and Algonquin, in Massachusetts Bay for the period of
August 2010 through August 2011. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to
issue an authorization to Northeast Gateway and Algonquin to
incidentally take, by harassment, small numbers of marine mammals for a
period of 1 year.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than August
19, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to P. Michael Payne, Chief,
Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East West Highway,
Silver Spring, MD 20910 3226. The mailbox address for providing email
comments on this action is PR1.0648-XN24@noaa.gov. Comments sent via
email, including all attachments, must not exceed a 10 megabyte file
size. A copy of the application and a list of references used in this
document may be obtained by writing to this address, by telephoning the
contact listed here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) and is also
available at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
The Maritime Administration (MARAD) and U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) on the Northeast
Gateway Energy Bridge LNG Deepwater Port license application is
available for viewing at https://dms.dot.gov under the docket number
22219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 713 2289, ext 137.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to allow, upon
request, the incidental, but not intentional taking of marine mammals
by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and regulations are issued or, if the taking is
limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided
to the public for review.
Authorization 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, and if the permissible methods of taking
and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting
of such taking are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in
50 CFR 216.103 as:
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process
by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment.
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].
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45 day time limit for NMFS
review of an application followed by a 30 day public notice and comment
period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of
marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS
must either issue or deny issuance of the authorization.
Summary of Request
On June 14, 2010, NMFS received an application from Excelerate
Energy, L.P. (Excelerate) and Tetra Tech EC, Inc., on behalf of
Northeast Gateway and Algonquin for an authorization to take 12 species
of marine mammals by Level B harassment incidental to operations of an
LNG port facility in Massachusetts Bay. Since LNG Port operation and
maintenance activities have the potential to take marine mammals, a
marine mammal take authorization under the MMPA is warranted. NMFS has
already issued a one year incidental harassment authorization for this
activity pursuant to section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (74 FR 45613;
September 3, 2009), which expires on August 31, 2010. In order to for
Northeast Gateway and Algonquin to continue their operations of the LNG
port facility in Massachusetts Bay, both companies are seeking a
renewal of their IHA.
Description of the Activity
The Northeast Gateway Port is located in Massachusetts Bay and
consists of a submerged buoy system to dock specially designed LNG
carriers approximately 13 mi (21 km) offshore of Massachusetts in
federal waters approximately 270 to 290 ft (82 to 88 m) in depth. This
facility delivers regasified LNG to onshore markets via a 16.06 mi
(25.8 km) long, 24 in (61 cm) outside diameter natural gas pipeline
lateral (Pipeline Lateral) owned and operated by Algonquin and
interconnected to Algonquin's existing offshore natural gas pipeline
system in Massachusetts Bay (HubLine).
The Northeast Gateway Port consists of two subsea Submerged Turret
Loading\TM\ (STL\TM\) buoys, each with a flexible riser assembly and a
manifold connecting the riser assembly, via a steel flowline, to the
subsea Pipeline Lateral. Northeast Gateway utilizes vessels from its
current fleet of specially designed Energy Bridge Regasification
VesselsJ (EBRVs\TM\), each capable of transporting approximately 2.9
billion ft\3\ (82 million m\3\) of natural gas condensed to 4.9 million
feet\3\ (138,000
[[Page 42072]]
m\3\) of LNG. Northeast Gateway would also be adding vessels to its
fleet that will have a cargo capacity of approximately 151,000 cubic
m\3\. The mooring system installed at the Northeast Gateway Port is
designed to handle both the existing vessels and any of the larger
capacity vessels that may come into service in the future. The EBRVs
would dock to the STL buoys, which would serve as both the single point
mooring system for the vessels and the delivery conduit for natural
gas. Each of the STL buoys is secured to the seafloor using a series of
suction anchors and a combination of chain/cable anchor lines.
The proposed activity includes Northeast Gateway LNG Port
operations and maintenance.
NEG Port Operations
During NEG Port operations, EBRVs servicing the Northeast Gateway
Port will utilize the newly configured and International Maritime
Organization (IMO) approved Boston Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) on
their approach to and departure from the Northeast Gateway Port at the
earliest practicable point of transit. EBRVs will maintain speeds of 12
knots or less while in the TSS, unless transiting the Off Race Point
Seasonal Management Area between the dates of March 1 and April 30, or
the Great South Channel Seasonal Management Area between the dates of
April 1 and July 31, when they will not exceed 10-knots or when there
have been active right whale sightings, active acoustic detections, or
both, in the vicinity of the transiting EBRV in the TSS or at the
Northeast Gateway Port, in which case the vessels also will slow their
speeds to 10 knots or less.
As an EBRV makes its final approach to the Northeast Gateway Port,
vessel speed will gradually be reduced to 3 knots at 1.86 mi (3 km) out
to less than 1 knot at a distance of 1,640 ft (500 m) from the
Northeast Gateway Port. When an EBRV arrives at the Northeast Gateway
Port, it would retrieve one of the two permanently anchored submerged
STL buoys. It would make final connection to the buoy through a series
of engine and bow thruster actions. The EBRV would require the use of
thrusters for dynamic positioning during docking procedure. Typically,
the docking procedure is completed over a 10 to 30 minute period, with
the thrusters activated as necessary for short periods of time in
second bursts, not a continuous sound source. Once connected to the
buoy, the EBRV will begin vaporizing the LNG into its natural gas state
using the onboard regasification system. As the LNG is regasified,
natural gas will be transferred at pipeline pressures off the EBRV
through the STL buoy and flexible riser via a steel flowline leading to
the connecting Pipeline Lateral. When the LNG vessel is on the buoy,
wind and current effects on the vessel would be allowed to
Aweathervane@ on the single point mooring system; therefore, thrusters
will not be used to maintain a stationary position.
It is estimated that the NEG Port could receive approximately 65
cargo deliveries a year. During this time period thrusters would be
engaged in use for docking at the NEG Port approximately 10 to 30
minutes for each vessel arrival and departure.
NEG Port Maintenance
The specified design life of the NEG Port is about 40 years, with
the exception of the anchors, mooring chain/rope, and riser/umbilical
assemblies, which are based on a maintenance free design life of 20
years. The buoy pick up system components are considered consumable and
would be inspected following each buoy connection, and replaced (from
inside the STL compartment during the normal cargo discharge period) as
deemed necessary. The underwater components of the NEG Port would be
inspected once yearly in accordance with Classification Society Rules
(American Bureau of Shipping) using either divers or remotely operated
vehicles (ROVs) to inspect and record the condition of the various STL
system components. These activities would be conducted using the NEG
Port's normal support vessel (125-foot, 99 gross ton, 2,700 horsepower,
aluminum mono-hull vessel), and to the extent possible would coincide
with planned weekly visits to the NEG Port. Helicopters would not be
used for marker line maintenance inspections.
Detailed information on the operations and maintenance activities
can be found in the MARAD/USCG Final EIS on the Northeast Gateway
Project (see ADDRESSES for availability). Detailed information on the
LNG facility's operation and maintenance activities, and noise
generated from operations was also published in the Federal Register
for the proposed IHA for Northeast Gateway's LNG Port construction and
operations on March 13, 2007 (72 FR 11328).
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activities
Marine mammal species that potentially occur in the vicinity of the
Northeast Gateway facility include several species of cetaceans and
pinnipeds:
North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis),
humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae),
fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus),
minke whale (B. acutorostrata),
long-finned pilot whale (Globicephala melas),
Atlantic white sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus acutus),
bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus),
common dolphin (Delphinus delphis),
killer whale (Orcinus orca),
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena),
harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), and
gray seal (Halichoerus grypus).
Information on those species that may be affected by this activity
is discussed in detail in the USCG Final EIS on the Northeast Gateway
LNG proposal. Please refer to that document for more information on
these species and potential impacts from construction and operation of
this LNG facility. In addition, general information on these marine
mammal species can also be found in W?rsig et al. (2000) and in the
NMFS Stock Assessment Reports (Waring et al., 2010). This latter
document is available at: https://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/tm/tm213/. An updated summary on several commonly sighted marine mammal
species distribution and abundance in the vicinity of the proposed
action area is provided below.
Humpback Whale
The highest abundance for humpback whales is distributed primarily
along a relatively narrow corridor following the 100 m (328 ft) isobath
across the southern Gulf of Maine from the northwestern slope of
Georges Bank, south to the Great South Channel, and northward alongside
Cape Cod to Stellwagen Bank and Jeffreys Ledge. The relative abundance
of whales increases in the spring with the highest occurrence along the
slope waters (between the 40- and 140-m, or 131- and 459-ft, isobaths)
off Cape Cod and Davis Bank, Stellwagen Basin and Tillies Basin and
between the 50 and 200 m (164- and 656-ft) isobaths along the inner
slope of Georges Bank. High abundance is also estimated for the waters
around Platts Bank. In the summer months, abundance increases markedly
over the shallow waters (<50 m, or <164 ft) of Stellwagen Bank, the
waters (100-200 m, or 328-656 ft) between Platts Bank and Jeffreys
Ledge, the steep slopes (between the 30 and 160 m isobaths) of Phelps
and Davis Bank north of the Great South Channel towards Cape Cod, and
between the 50-
[[Page 42073]]
and 100-m (164- and 328-ft) isobath for almost the entire length of the
steeply sloping northern edge of Georges Bank. This general
distribution pattern persists in all seasons except winter, when
humpbacks remain at high abundance in only a few locations including
Porpoise and Neddick Basins adjacent to Jeffreys Ledge, northern
Stellwagen Bank and Tillies Basin, and the Great South Channel.
Fin Whale
Spatial patterns of habitat utilization by fin whales are very
similar to those of humpback whales. Spring and summer high use areas
follow the 100-m (328 ft) isobath along the northern edge of Georges
Bank (between the 50- and 200-m (164 and 656 ft) isobaths), and
northward from the Great South Channel (between the 50- and 160-m, or
164- and 525-ft, isobaths). Waters around Cashes Ledge, Platts Bank,
and Jeffreys Ledge are all high use areas in the summer months.
Stellwagen Bank is a high use area for fin whales in all seasons, with
highest abundance occurring over the southern Stellwagen Bank in the
summer months. In fact, the southern portion of the Stellwagen Bank
National Marine Sanctuary (SBNMS) is used more frequently than the
northern portion in all months except winter, when high abundance is
recorded over the northern tip of Stellwagen Bank. In addition to
Stellwagen Bank, high abundance in winter is estimated for Jeffreys
Ledge and the adjacent Porpoise Basin (10- to 160-m, 328- to 656-ft,
isobaths), as well as Georges Basin and northern Georges Bank.
Minke Whale
Like other piscivorous baleen whales, highest abundance for minke
whale is strongly associated with regions between the 50- and 100-m
(164- and 328-ft) isobaths, but with a slightly stronger preference for
the shallower waters along the slopes of Davis Bank, Phelps Bank, Great
South Channel and Georges Shoals on Georges Bank. Minke whales are
sighted in the SBNMS in all seasons, with highest abundance estimated
for the shallow waters (approximately 40 m, or 131 ft) over southern
Stellwagen Bank in the summer and fall months. Platts Bank, Cashes
Ledge, Jeffreys Ledge, and the adjacent basins (Neddick, Porpoise and
Scantium) also support high relative abundance. Very low densities of
minke whales remain throughout most of the southern Gulf of Maine in
winter.
North Atlantic Right Whale
North Atlantic right whales are generally distributed widely across
the southern Gulf of Maine in spring with highest abundance locate over
the deeper waters (100- to 160-m, or 328- to 525-ft, isobaths) on the
northern edge of the Great South Channel and deep waters (100 - 300 m,
328-984 ft) parallel to the 100-m (328-ft) isobath of northern Georges
Bank and Georges Basin. High abundance is also found in the shallowest
waters (< 30 m, or <98 ft) of Cape Cod Bay, over Platts Bank and around
Cashes Ledge. Lower relative abundance is estimated over deep water
basins including Wilkinson Basin, Rodgers Basin and Franklin Basin. In
the summer months, right whales move almost entirely away from the
coast to deep waters over basins in the central Gulf of Maine
(Wilkinson Basin, Cashes Basin between the 160- and 200-m, or 525- and
656-ft, isobaths) and north of Georges Bank (Rogers, Crowell and
Georges Basins). Highest abundance is found north of the 100-m (328-ft)
isobath at the Great South Channel and over the deep slope waters and
basins along the northern edge of Georges Bank. The waters between
Fippennies Ledge and Cashes Ledge are also estimated as high use areas.
In the fall months, right whales are sighted infrequently in the Gulf
of Maine, with highest densities over Jeffreys Ledge and over deeper
waters near Cashes Ledge and Wilkinson Basin. In winter, Cape Cod Bay,
Scantum Basin, Jeffreys Ledge, and Cashes Ledge were the main high use
areas. Although SBNMS does not appear to support the highest abundance
of right whales, sightings within SBNMS are reported for all four
seasons, albeit at low relative abundance. Highest sighting within
SBNMS occured along the southern edge of the Bank.
Long-finned Pilot Whale
The long finned pilot whale is more generally found along the edge
of the continental shelf (a depth of 330 to 3,300 ft, or 100 to 1,000
m), choosing areas of high relief or submerged banks in cold or
temperate shoreline waters. This species is split between two
subspecies: the Northern and Southern subspecies. The Southern
subspecies is circumpolar with northern limits of Brazil and South
Africa. The Northern subspecies, which could be encountered during
operation of the NEG Port, ranges from North Carolina to Greenland
(Reeves et al., 2002; Wilson and Ruff, 1999). In the western North
Atlantic, long-finned pilot whales are pelagic, occurring in especially
high densities in winter and spring over the continental slope, then
moving inshore and onto the shelf in summer and autumn following squid
and mackerel populations (Reeves et al., 2002). They frequently travel
into the central and northern Georges Bank, Great South Channel, and
Gulf of Maine areas during the summer and early fall (May and October)
(NOAA, 1993). According to the species stock report, the population
estimate for the Western North Atlantic long finned pilot whale is
26,535 individuals (Waring et al., 2010).
Atlantic White Sided Dolphin
In spring, summer and fall, Atlantic white sided dolphins are
widespread throughout the southern Gulf of Maine, with the high use
areas widely located either side of the 100-m (328-ft) isobath along
the northern edge of Georges Bank, and north from the Great South
Channel to Stellwagen Bank, Jeffreys Ledge, Platts Bank and Cashes
Ledge. In spring, high use areas exist in the Great South Channel,
northern Georges Bank, the steeply sloping edge of Davis Bank and Cape
Cod, southern Stellwagen Bank and the waters between Jeffreys Ledge and
Platts Bank. In summer, there is a shift and expansion of habitat
toward the east and northeast. High use areas are identified along most
of the northern edge of Georges Bank between the 50- and 200-m (164-
and 656-ft) isobaths and northward from the Great South Channel along
the slopes of Davis Bank and Cape Cod. High sightings are also recorded
over Truxton Swell, Wilkinson Basin, Cashes Ledge and the
bathymetrically complex area northeast of Platts Bank. High sightings
of white sided dolphin are recorded within SBNMS in all seasons, with
highest density in summer and most widespread distributions in spring
locate mainly over the southern end of Stellwagen Bank. In winter, high
sightings are recorded at the northern tip of Stellwagen Bank and
Tillies Basin.
A comparison of spatial distribution patterns for all baleen whales
(Mysticeti) and all porpoises and dolphins combined show that both
groups have very similar spatial patterns of high and low use areas.
The baleen whales, whether piscivorous or planktivorous, are more
concentrated than the dolphins and porpoises. They utilize a corridor
that extended broadly along the most linear and steeply sloping edges
in the southern Gulf of Maine indicated broadly by the 100 m (328 ft)
isobath. Stellwagen Bank and Jeffreys Ledge support a high abundance of
baleen whales throughout the year. Species richness maps indicate that
high use areas for individual whales and dolphin species co occurr,
resulting in similar patterns of species richness primarily along the
southern portion of
[[Page 42074]]
the 100-m (328-ft) isobath extending northeast and northwest from the
Great South Channel. The southern edge of Stellwagen Bank and the
waters around the northern tip of Cape Cod are also highlighted as
supporting high cetacean species richness. Intermediate to high numbers
of species are also calculated for the waters surrounding Jeffreys
Ledge, the entire Stellwagen Bank, Platts Bank, Fippennies Ledge and
Cashes Ledge.
Killer Whale, Common Dolphin, Bottlenose Dolphin, and Harbor Porpoise
Although these four species are some of the most widely distributed
small cetacean species in the world (Jefferson et al., 1993), they are
not commonly seen in the vicinity of the proposed project area in
Massachusetts Bay (Wiley et al., 1994; NCCOS, 2006; Northeast Gateway
Marine Mammal Monitoring Weekly Reports, 2007).
Harbor Seal and Gray Seal
In the U.S. waters of the western North Atlantic, both harbor and
gray seals are usually found from the coast of Maine south to southern
New England and New York (Warrings et al., 2010).
Along the southern New England and New York coasts, harbor seals
occur seasonally from September through late May (Schneider and Payne,
1983). In recent years, their seasonal interval along the southern New
England to New Jersey coasts has increased (deHart, 2002). In U.S.
waters, harbor seal breeding and pupping normally occur in waters north
of the New Hampshire/Maine border, although breeding has occurred as
far south as Cape Cod in the early part of the 20th century (Temte et
al., 1991; Katona et al., 1993).
Although gray seals are often seen off the coast from New England
to Labrador, within the U.S. waters, only small numbers of gray seals
have been observed pupping on several isolated islands along the Maine
coast and in Nantucket Vineyard Sound, Massachusetts (Katona et al.,
1993; Rough, 1995). In the late 1990s, a year round breeding population
of approximately over 400 gray seals was documented on outer Cape Cod
and Muskeget Island (Warring et al., 2007).
Potential Effects of Noise on Marine Mammals
The effects of noise on marine mammals are highly variable, and can
be categorized as follows (based on Richardson et al., 1995): (1) The
noise may be too weak to be heard at the location of the animal (i.e.,
lower than the prevailing ambient noise level, the hearing threshold of
the animal at relevant frequencies, or both); (2) The noise may be
audible but not strong enough to elicit any overt behavioral response;
(3) The noise may elicit reactions of variable conspicuousness and
variable relevance to the well being of the marine mammal; these can
range from temporary alert responses to active avoidance reactions such
as vacating an area at least until the noise event ceases; (4) Upon
repeated exposure, a marine mammal may exhibit diminishing
responsiveness (habituation), or disturbance effects may persist; the
latter is most likely with sounds that are highly variable in
characteristics, infrequent and unpredictable in occurrence, and
associated with situations that a marine mammal perceives as a threat;
(5) Any anthropogenic noise that is strong enough to be heard has the
potential to reduce (mask) the ability of a marine mammal to hear
natural sounds at similar frequencies, including calls from
conspecifics, and underwater environmental sounds such as surf noise;
(6) If mammals remain in an area because it is important for feeding,
breeding or some other biologically important purpose even though there
is chronic exposure to noise, it is possible that there could be noise
induced physiological stress; this might in turn have negative effects
on the well being or reproduction of the animals involved; and (7) Very
strong sounds have the potential to cause temporary or permanent
reduction in hearing sensitivity. In terrestrial mammals, and
presumably marine mammals, received sound levels must far exceed the
animal's hearing threshold for there to be any temporary threshold
shift (TTS) in its hearing ability. For transient sounds, the sound
level necessary to cause TTS is inversely related to the duration of
the sound. Received sound levels must be even higher for there to be
risk of permanent hearing impairment. In addition, intense acoustic (or
explosive events) may cause trauma to tissues associated with organs
vital for hearing, sound production, respiration and other functions.
This trauma may include minor to severe hemorrhage.
There are three general categories of sounds recognized by NMFS:
continuous (such as shipping sounds), intermittent (such as vibratory
pile driving sounds), and impulse. No impulse noise activities, such as
blasting or standard pile driving, are associated with this project.
The noise sources of potential concern are regasification/offloading
(which is a continuous sound) and dynamic positioning of vessels using
thrusters (an intermittent sound) from EBRVs during docking at the NEG
port facility. Based on research by Malme et al. (1983; 1984), for both
continuous and intermittent sound sources, Level B harassment is
presumed to begin at received levels of 120 dB. The detailed
description of the noise that would result from the proposed LNG Port
operations is provided in the Federal Register for the initial
construction and operations of the NEG LNG Port facility and Pipeline
Lateral in 2007 (72 FR 27077; May 14, 2007).
NEG Port Activities
Underwater noise generated at the NEG Port has the potential to
result from two distinct actions, including closed-loop regasification
of LNG and/or EBRV maneuvering during coupling and decoupling with STL
buoys. To evaluate the potential for these activities to result in
underwater noise that could harass marine mammals, Excelerate conducted
field sound survey studies during periods of March 21 to 25, 2005 and
August 6 to 9, 2006 while the EBRV Excelsior was both maneuvering and
moored at the operational Gulf Gateway Port located 116 mi (187 km)
offshore in the Gulf of Mexico (the Gulf) (see Appendices B and C of
the NEG and Algonquin application). EBRV maneuvering conditions
included the use of both stern and bow thrusters required for dynamic
positioning during coupling. These data were used to model underwater
sound propagation at the NEG Port. The pertinent results of the field
survey are provided as underwater sound source pressure levels as
follows:
Sound levels during closed-loop regasification ranged from
104 to 110 decibel linear (dBL). Maximum levels during steady state
operations were 108 dBL.
Sound levels during coupling operations were dominated by
the periodic use of the bow and stern thrusters and ranged from 160 to
170 dBL.
Figures 1-1 and 1-2 of the NEG and Algonquin's revised MMPA permit
application present the net acoustic impact of one EBRV operating at
the NEG Port. Thrusters are operated intermittently and only for
relatively short durations of time. The resulting area within the 120
dB isopleth is less than 1 km\2\ with the linear distance to the
isopleths extending 430 m (1,411 ft). The area within the 180 dB
isopleth is very localized and will not extend beyond the immediate
area where EBRV coupling operations are occurring.
[[Page 42075]]
The potential impacts to marine mammals associated with sound
propagation from vessel movements, anchors, chains and LNG
regasification/offloading could be the temporary and short term
displacement of seals and whales from within the 120 dB zones
ensonified by these noise sources. Animals would be expected to re
occupy the area once the noise ceases.
Estimates of Take by Harassment
Although Northeast Gateway stated that the ensonified area of 120-
dB isopleths by EBRV's decoupling would be less than 1 km\2\ as
measured in the Gulf of Mexico in 2005, due to the lack of more recent
sound source verification and the lack of source measurement in
Massachusetts Bay, NMFS uses a more conservative spreading model to
calculate the 120 dB isopleth received sound level. This model was also
used to establish 120-dB zone of influence (ZOI) for the previous IHAs
issued to Northeast Gateway. In the vicinity of the LNG Port, where the
water depth is about 80 m (262 ft), the 120 dB radius is estimated to
be 2.56 km (1.6 mi) maximum from the sound source during dynamic
positioning for the container ship, making a maximum ZOI of 21 km\2\
(8.1 mi\2\). For shallow water depth (40 m or 131 ft) representative of
the northern segment of the Algonquin Pipeline Lateral, the 120-dB
radius is estimated to be 3.31 km (2.06 mi), the associated ZOI is 34
km\2\ (13.1 mi\2\).
The basis for Northeast Gateway and Algonquin's ``take'' estimate
is the number of marine mammals that would be exposed to sound levels
in excess of 120 dB. For the NEG port facility operations, the take
estimates are determined by multiplying the area of the EBRV's ZOI (21
km\2\) by local marine mammal density estimates, corrected to account
for 50 percent more marine mammals that may be underwater, and then
multiplying by the estimated LNG container ship visits per year. In the
case of data gaps, a conservative approach was used to ensure the
potential number of takes is not underestimated, as described next.
NMFS recognizes that baleen whale species other than North Atlantic
right whales have been sighted in the project area from May to
November. However, the occurrence and abundance of fin, humpback, and
minke whales is not well documented within the project area.
Nonetheless, NMFS uses the data on cetacean distribution within
Massachusetts Bay, such as those published by the National Centers for
Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS, 2006), to estimate potential takes of
marine mammals species in the vicinity of project area.
The NCCOS study used cetacean sightings from two sources: (1) the
North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium (NARWC) sightings database held
at the University of Rhode Island (Kenney, 2001); and (2) the Manomet
Bird Observatory (MBO) database, held at NMFS Northeast Fisheries
Science Center (NEFSC). The NARWC data contained survey efforts and
sightings data from ship and aerial surveys and opportunistic sources
between 1970 and 2005. The main data contributors included: Cetacean
and Turtles Assessment Program (CETAP), Canadian Department of
Fisheries and Oceans, PCCS, International Fund for Animal Welfare,
NOAA's NEFSC, New England Aquarium, Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution, and the University of Rhode Island. A total of 653,725 km
(406,293 mi) of survey track and 34,589 cetacean observations were
provisionally selected for the NCCOS study in order to minimize bias
from uneven allocation of survey effort in both time and space. The
sightings per unit effort (SPUE) was calculated for all cetacean
species by month covering the southern Gulf of Maine study area, which
also includes the project area (NCCOS, 2006).
The MBO's Cetacean and Seabird Assessment Program (CSAP) was
contracted from 1980 to 1988 by NMFS NEFSC to provide an assessment of
the relative abundance and distribution of cetaceans, seabirds, and
marine turtles in the shelf waters of the northeastern United States
(MBO, 1987). The CSAP program was designed to be completely compatible
with NMFS NEFSC databases so that marine mammal data could be compared
directly with fisheries data throughout the time series during which
both types of information were gathered. A total of 5,210 km (8,383 mi)
of survey distance and 636 cetacean observations from the MBO data were
included in the NCCOS analysis. Combined valid survey effort for the
NCCOS studies included 567,955 km (913,840 mi) of survey track for
small cetaceans (dolphins and porpoises) and 658,935 km (1,060,226 mi)
for large cetaceans (whales) in the southern Gulf of Maine. The NCCOS
study then combined these two data sets by extracting cetacean sighting
records, updating database field names to match the NARWC database,
creating geometry to represent survey tracklines and applying a set of
data selection criteria designed to minimize uncertainty and bias in
the data used.
Owing to the comprehensiveness and total coverage of the NCCOS
cetacean distribution and abundance study, NMFS calculated the
estimated take number of marine mammals based on the most recent NCCOS
report published in December 2006. A summary of seasonal cetacean
distribution and abundance in the project area is provided above, in
the Marine Mammals Affected by the Activity section. For a detailed
description and calculation of the cetacean abundance data and sighting
per unit effort (SPUE), please refer to the NCCOS study (NCCOS, 2006).
These data show that the relative abundance of North Atlantic right,
fin, humpback, minke, and pilot whales, and Atlantic white sided
dolphins for all seasons, as calculated by SPUE in number of animals
per square kilometer, is 0.0082, 0.0097, 0.0265, 0.0059, 0.0407, and
0.1314 n/km, respectively.
In calculating the area density of these species from these linear
density data, NMFS used 0.4 km (0.25 mi), which is a quarter the
distance of the radius for visual monitoring (see Proposed Monitoring,
Mitigation, and Reporting section below), as a conservative
hypothetical strip width (W). Thus the area density (D) of these
species in the project area can be obtained by the following formula:
D = SPUE/2W.
Based on this calculation method, the estimated take numbers per
year for North Atlantic right, fin, humpback, minke, sei, and pilot
whales, and Atlantic white sided dolphins by the NEG Port facility
operations, which is an average of 65 visits by LNG container ships to
the project area per year (or approximately 1.25 visits per week),
operating the vessels= thrusters for dynamic positioning before
offloading natural gas, corrected for 50 percent underwater, are 21,
25, 68, 15, 11, 104, and 336, respectively. These numbers represent
maximum of 6.08, 1.09, 8.01, 0.46, 2.78, 0.39, and 0.53 percent of the
populations for these species, respectively. Since it is very likely
that individual animals could be Ataken@ by harassment multiple times,
these percentages are the upper boundary of the animal population that
could be affected. Therefore, the actual number of individual animals
being exposed or taken would be far less. There is no danger of injury,
death, or hearing impairment from the exposure to these noise levels.
In addition, bottlenose dolphins, common dolphins, killer whales,
harbor porpoises, harbor seals, and gray seals could also be taken by
Level B harassment as a result of deepwater LNG port operations. The
numbers of estimated take of these species are not available because
they are rare in the
[[Page 42076]]
project area. The population estimates of these marine mammal species
and stock in the west North Atlantic basin are 81,588; 120,743; 89,054;
99,340; and 195,000 for bottlenose dolphins, common dolphins, harbor
porpoises, and harbor seals, respectively (Waring et al., 2010). No
population estimate is available for the North Atlantic stock of killer
whales and gray seals, however, their occurrence within the proposed
project area is rare. Since the Massachusetts Bay represents only a
small fraction of the west North Atlantic basin where these animals
occur, and these animals do not congregate in the vicinity of the
project area, NMFS believes that only relatively small numbers of these
marine mammal species would be potentially affected by the Northeast
Gateway LNG deepwater project. From the most conservative estimates of
both marine mammal densities in the project area and the size of the
120 dB zone of (noise) influence, the calculated number of individual
marine mammals for each species that could potentially be harassed
annually is small relative to the overall population size.
Potential Impact on Habitat
Approximately 4.8 acres of seafloor has been converted from soft
substrate to artificial hard substrate. The soft-bottom benthic
community may be replaced with organisms associated with naturally
occurring hard substrate, such as sponges, hydroids, bryozoans, and
associated species. The benthic community in the up to 43 acres (worst
case scenario based on severe 100-year storm with EBRVs occupying both
STL buoys) of soft bottom that may be swept by the anchor chains while
EBRVs are docked will have limited opportunity to recover, so this area
will experience a long-term reduction in benthic productivity. In
addition, disturbance from anchor chain movement would result in
increased turbidity levels in the vicinity of the buoys that could
affect prey species for marine mammals; however, as indicated in the
final EIS/FEIR, these impacts are expected to be short-term, indirect,
and minor.
Daily removal of sea water from EBRV intakes will reduce the food
resources available for planktivorous organisms. Water usage would be
limited to the standard requirements of NEG's normal support vessel. As
with all vessels operating in Massachusetts Bay, sea water uptake and
discharge is required to support engine cooling, typically using a
once-through system. The rate of seawater uptake varies with the ship's
horsepower and activity and therefore will differ between vessels and
activity type. For example, the Gateway Endeavor is a 90-foot vessel
powered with a 1,200 horsepower diesel engine with a four-pump seawater
cooling system. This system requires seawater intake of about 68
gallons per minute (gpm) while idling and up to about 150 gpm at full
power. Use of full power is required generally for transit. A
conservatively high estimate of vessel activity for the Gateway
Endeavor would be operation at idle for 75% of the time and full power
for 25% of the time. During the routine activities this would equate to
approximately 42,480 gallons of seawater per 8-hour work day. When
compared to the engine cooling requirements of an EBRV over an 8-hour
period (approximately 17.62 million gallons), the Gateway Endeavour
uses about 0.2% of the EBRV requirement. To put this water use into
context, the Project's final EIS/EIR concluded that the impacts to fish
populations and to marine mammals that feed on fish or plankton
resulting from water use by an EBRV during port operations
(approximately 39,780,000 gallons over each 8-day regasification
period) would be minor. Water use by support vessels during routine
port activities would not materially add to the overall impacts
evaluated in the final EIS/EIR. Additionally, discharges associated
with the Gateway Endeavor and/or other support/maintenance vessels that
are 79 feet or greater in length, are now regulated under the Clean
Water Act (CWA) and must receive and comply with the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Vessel General Permit (VGP). The
permit incorporates the USCG mandatory ballast water management and
exchange standards, and provides technology- and water quality-based
effluent limits for other types of discharges, including deck runoff,
bilge water, graywater, and other pollutants. It also establishes
specific corrective actions, inspection and monitoring requirements,
and recordkeeping and reporting requirements for each vessel.
Massachusetts Bay circulation will not be altered, however, so plankton
will be continuously transported into the NEG Port area. The removal of
these species is minor and unlikely to affect in a measurable way the
food sources available to marine mammals.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Measures
During the construction and operations of the NEG LNG Port facility
in prior years, Northeast Gateway submitted reports on marine mammal
sightings in the area. While it is difficult to draw biological
conclusions from these reports, NMFS can make some general conclusions.
Data gathered by MMOs is generally useful to indicate the presence or
absence of marine mammals (often to a species level) within the safety
zones (and sometimes without) and to document the implementation of
mitigation measures. Though it is by no means conclusory, it is worth
noting that no instances of obvious behavioral disturbance as a result
of Northeast Gateway's activities were observed by the MMOs.
In addition, Northeast Gateway was required to maintain an array of
Marine Autonomous Recording Units (MARUs) to monitor calling North
Atlantic right whales (humpback, fin, and minke whale calls were also
able to be detected). The Bioacoustics Research Program (BRP) of the
Cornell University analyzed the data and submitted a report covering
the operations of the project between January and December 2008. During
the operations period, right whales were detected on only 1,982 of the
136,776 total hours sampled (1.45% of recorded hours). Right whales
were detected hourly throughout the year, but were more commonly
detected in the late February through June period.
The Cornell's BRP performed acoustic analyses on background noise
of all recordings from the MARUs. A comparison of the noise metrics
derived from these analyses before, during, and after operations
activities revealed increases in noise level during operations. A
comparison of noise levels from areas including and near areas of known
operations activities with levels from other areas showed increased
noise levels for areas that included or were near the known operations
activities. These increases in noise levels were evident for each of
the three frequency bands utilized by fin, humpback, and right whales,
with the greatest increase in the right whale band and the next highest
increase in the humpback whale band. However, the BRP report did not
provide an interpretation of this overall increase in noise conditions
throughout the period when operations activities occurred.
Nevertheless, NMFS does not consider that the sporadic exposure of
marine mammals to continuous sound received levels above 120 dB by a
single EBRV would have acute or chronicle significant affects to these
animals in the vicinity of the LNG port facility. These MARUs will
remain deployed during the time frame of this proposed IHA in order to
obtain information during the operational phase of the Port facility
(see below).
For the proposed NEG LNG port operations, NMFS proposes the
[[Page 42077]]
following monitoring and mitigation measures.
Marine Mammal Observers
For activities related to the NEG LNG port operations, all
individuals onboard the EBRVs responsible for the navigation and
lookout duties on the vessel must receive training prior to assuming
navigation and lookout duties, a component of which will be training on
marine mammal sighting/reporting and vessel strike avoidance measures.
Crew training of EBRV personnel will stress individual responsibility
for marine mammal awareness and reporting.
If a marine mammal is sighted by a crew member, an immediate
notification will be made to the Person in Charge on board the vessel
and the Northeast Port Manager, who will ensure that the required
vessel strike avoidance measures and reporting procedures are followed.
Vessel Strike Avoidance
(1) All EBRVs approaching or departing the port will comply with
the Mandatory Ship Reporting (MSR) system to keep apprised of right
whale sightings in the vicinity. Vessel operators will also receive
active detections from an existing passive acoustic array prior to and
during transit through the northern leg of the Boston TSS where the
buoys are installed.
(2) In response to active right whale sightings (detected
acoustically or reported through other means such as the MSR or
Sighting Advisory System (SAS)), and taking into account safety and
weather conditions, EBRVs will take appropriate actions to minimize the
risk of striking whales, including reducing speed to 10 knots or less
and alerting personnel responsible for navigation and lookout duties to
concentrate their efforts.
(3) EBRVs will maintain speeds of 12 knots or less while in the TSS
until reaching the vicinity of the buoys (except during the seasons and
areas defined below, when speed will be limited to 10 knots or less).
At 1.86 mi (3 km) from the NEG port, speed will be reduced to 3 knots,
and to less than 1 knot at 1,640 ft (500 m) from the buoy.
(4) EBRVs will reduce transit speed to 10 knots or less over ground
from March 1 April 30 in all waters bounded by straight lines
connecting the following points in the order stated below. This area is
known as the Off Race Point Seasonal Management Area (SMA) and tracks
NMFS regulations at 50 CFR 224.105:
42[deg]30'00.0'' N - 069[deg]45'00.0'' W; thence to 42[deg]30'00.0;
N - 070[deg]30'00.0'' W; thence to 42[deg]12'00.0'' N -
070[deg]30'00.0'' W; thence to 42[deg]12'00.0'' N - 070[deg]12'00.0''
W; thence to 42[deg]04'56.5'' N - 070o12'00.0'' W; thence along charted
mean high water line and inshore limits of COLREGS limit to a latitude
of 41[deg]40'00.0'' N; thence due east to 41[deg]41'00.0'' N -
069[deg]45'00.0'' W; thence back to starting point.
(5) EBRVs will reduce transit speed to 10 knots or less over ground
from April 1 July 31 in all waters bounded by straight lines connecting
the following points in the order stated below. This area is also known
as the Great South Channel SMA and tracks NMFS regulations at 50 CFR
224.105:
42[deg]30'00.0'' N-69[deg]45'00.0'' W
41[deg]40'00.0'' N- 69[deg]45'00.0'' W
41[deg]00'00.0'' N- 69[deg]05'00.0'' W
42[deg]09'00.0'' N- 67[deg]08'24.0'' W
42[deg]30'00.0'' N- 67[deg]27'00.0'' W
42[deg]30'00.0'' N- 69[deg]45'00.0'' W
(6) LNGRVs are not expected to transit Cape Cod Bay. However, in
the event transit through Cape Cod Bay is required, LNGRVs will reduce
transit speed to 10 knots or less over ground from January 1 May 15 in
all waters in Cape Cod Bay, extending to all shorelines of Cape Cod
Bay, with a northern boundary of 42[deg]12'00.0'' N latitude.
(7) A vessel may operate at a speed necessary to maintain safe
maneuvering speed instead of the required ten knots only if justified
because the vessel is in an area where oceanographic,
hydrographic and/or meteorological conditions severely restrict the
maneuverability of the vessel and the need to operate at such speed is
confirmed by the pilot on board or, when a vessel is not carrying a
pilot, the master of the vessel. If a deviation from the ten knot speed
limit is necessary, the reasons for the deviation, the speed at which
the vessel is operated, the latitude and longitude of the area, and the
time and duration of such deviation shall be entered into the logbook
of the vessel. The master of the vessel shall attest to the accuracy of
the logbook entry by signing and dating it.
Research Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) Program
Northeast Gateway shall monitor the noise environment in
Massachusetts Bay in the vicinity of the NEG Port using an array of 19
Marine Autonomous Recording Units (MARUs) that were deployed initially
in April 2007 to collect data during the preconstruction and active
construction phases of the NEG Port and Algonquin Pipeline Lateral. A
description of the MARUs can be found in Appendix A of the NEG and
Algonquin application. These 19 MARUs will remain in the same
configuration during full operation of the NEG Port. The MARUs collect
archival noise data and are not designed to provide real-time or near-
real-time information about vocalizing whales. Rather, the acoustic
data collected by the MARUs shall be analyzed to document the seasonal
occurrences and overall distributions of whales (primarily fin,
humpback, and right whales) within approximately 10 nautical miles of
the NEG Port, and shall measure and document the noise ``budget'' of
Massachusetts Bay so as to eventually assist in determining whether an
overall increase in noise in the Bay associated with the NEG Port might
be having a potentially negative impact on marine mammals. The overall
intent of this system is to provide better information for both
regulators and the general public regarding the acoustic footprint
associated with long-term operation of the NEG Port in Massachusetts
Bay, and the distribution of vocalizing marine mammals during NEG Port
activities. In addition to the 19 MARUs, Northeast Gateway will deploy
10 ABs within the TSS for the operational life of the NEG Port. A
description of the ABs is provided in Appendix A of this NEG and
Algonquin's application. The purpose of the ABs shall be to detect a
calling North Atlantic right whale an average of 5 nm (9.26 km) from
each AB (detection ranges will vary based on ambient underwater
conditions). The AB system shall be the primary detection mechanism
that alerts the EBRV captains to the occurrence of right whales,
heightens EBRV awareness, and triggers necessary mitigation actions as
described in the Marine Mammal Detection, Monitoring, and Response Plan
included as Appendix A of the NEG application.
Northeast Gateway has engaged representatives from Cornell
University's Bioacoustics Research Program (BRP) and the Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) as the consultants for developing,
implementing, collecting, and analyzing the acoustic data; reporting;
and maintaining the acoustic monitoring system.
Further information detailing the deployment and operation of
arrays of 19 passive seafloor acoustic recording units (MARUs) centered
on the terminal site and the 10 ABs that are to be placed at
approximately 5-m (8.0-km) intervals within the recently modified TSS
can be found in the Marine Mammal Detection, Monitoring, and Response
Plan
[[Page 42078]]
included as Appendix A of the NEG and Algonquin application.
Reporting
The Project area is within the Mandatory Ship Reporting Area
(MSRA), so all vessels entering and exiting the MSRA will report their
activities to WHALESNORTH. During all phases of the Northeast Gateway
LNG Port operations, sightings of any injured or dead marine mammals
will be reported immediately to the USCG or NMFS, regardless of whether
the injury or death is caused by project activities.
An annual report on marine mammal monitoring and mitigation would
be submitted to NMFS Office of Protected Resources and NMFS Northeast
Regional Office within 90 days after the expiration of an LOA. The
annual report shall include data collected for each distinct marine
mammal species observed in the project area in the Massachusetts Bay
during the period of LNG facility operation. Description of marine
mammal behavior, overall numbers of individuals observed, frequency of
observation, and any behavioral changes and the context of the changes
relative to operation activities shall also be included in the annual
report.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analysis and Preliminary
Determination
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ''...an
impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival.'' In making a negligible impact determination, NMFS considers
a variety of factors, including but not limited to: (1) the number of
anticipated mortalities; (2) the number and nature of anticipated
injuries; (3) the number, nature, intensity, and duration of Level B
harassment; and (4) the context in which the takes occur.
No injuries or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result of
Northeast Gateway's proposed port operation and maintenance activities,
and none are proposed to be authorized by NMFS. Additionally, animals
in the area are not anticipated to incur any hearing impairment (i.e.,
TTS or PTS), as the modeling of source levels indicating none of the
source received levels exceeds 180 dB (rms).
While some of the species occur in the proposed project area year-
round, some species only occur in the area during certain seasons. Sei
whales are only anticipated in the area during the spring. Therefore,
if shipments and/or maintenance activities occur in other seasons, the
likelihood of sei whales being affected is quite low. Humpback and
minke whales are not expected in the project area in the winter. During
the winter, a large portion of the North Atlantic right whale
population occurs in the southeastern U.S. calving grounds (i.e., South
Carolina, Georgia, and northern Florida). The fact that certain
activities will occur during times when certain species are not
commonly found in the area will help reduce the amount of Level B
harassment for these species.
Many animals perform vital functions, such as feeding, resting,
traveling, and socializing, on a diel cycle (24-hr cycle). Behavioral
reactions to noise exposure (such as disruption of critical life
functions, displacement, or avoidance of important habitat) are more
likely to be significant if they last more than one diel cycle or recur
on subsequent days (Southall et al., 2007). Consequently, a behavioral
response lasting less than one day and not recurring on subsequent days
is not considered particularly severe unless it could directly affect
reproduction or survival (Southall et al., 2007). Operational
activities are not anticipated to occur at the Port on consecutive
days. In addition, Northeast Gateway EBRVs are expected to make 65 port
calls throughout the year, with thruster use needed for a couple of
hours. Therefore, Northeast Gateway will not be creating increased
sound levels in the marine environment for prolonged period of time.
Of the 12 marine mammal species likely to occur in the area, four
are listed as endangered under the ESA: North Atlantic right, humpback,
fin, and sei whales. All of these species, as well as the northern
coastal stock of bottlenose dolphin, are also considered depleted under
the MMPA. There is currently no designated critical habitat or known
reproductive areas for any of these species in or near the proposed
project area. However, there are several well known North Atlantic
right whale feeding grounds in the Cape Cod Bay and Great South
Channel. No mortality or injury is expected to occur and due to the
nature, degree, and context of the Level B harassment anticipated, the
activity is not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival.
The population estimates for the species that may be taken by
harassment from the most recent U.S. Atlantic Stock Assessment Reports
were provided earlier in this document. From the most conservative
estimates of both marine mammal densities in the project area and the
size of the 120-dB ZOI, the maximum calculated number of individual
marine mammals for each species that could potentially be harassed
annually is small relative to the overall population sizes (8.01
percent for humpback whales and 6.08 percent for North Atlantic right
whales and no more than 2.78 percent of any other species).
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, NMFS preliminarily finds that operation, including repair and
maintenance activities, of the Northeast Gateway LNG Port will result
in the incidental take of small numbers of marine mammals, by Level B
harassment only, and that the total taking from Northeast Gateway's
proposed activiites will have a negligible impact on the affected
species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action.
Endangered Species Act
On February 5, 2007, NMFS concluded consultation with MARAD and the
USCG, under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), on the
proposed construction and operation of the Northeast Gateway LNG
facility and issued a biological opinion. The finding of that
consultation was that the construction and operation of the Northeast
Gateway LNG terminal may adversely affect, but is not likely to
jeopardize, the continued existence of northern right, humpback, and
fin whales, and is not likely to adversely affect sperm, sei, or blue
whales and Kemp's ridley, loggerhead, green or leatherback sea turtles.
An incidental take statement (ITS) was issued following NMFS' issuance
of the IHA.
On November 15, 2007, Northeast Gateway and Algonquin submitted a
letter to NMFS requesting an extension for the LNG Port construction
into December 2007. Upon reviewing Northeast Gateway's weekly marine
mammal monitoring reports submitted under the previous IHA, NMFS
recognized that the potential take of some marine mammals resulting
from the LNG Port and Pipeline Lateral by Level B behavioral harassment
likely had exceeded the original take estimates. Therefore, NMFS
Northeast Region (NER) reinitiated consultation
[[Page 42079]]
with MARAD and USCG on the construction and operation of the Northeast
Gateway LNG facility. On November 30, 2007, NMFS NER issued a revised
biological opinion, reflecting the revised construction time period and
including a revised ITS. This revised biological opinion concluded that
the construction and operation of the Northeast Gateway LNG terminal
may adversely affect, but is not likely to jeopardize, the continued
existence of northern right, humpback, and fin whales, and is not
likely to adversely affect sperm, sei, or blue whales.
NEPA
MARAD and the USCG released a Final EIS/Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) for the proposed Northeast Gateway Port and Pipeline Lateral. A
notice of availability was published by MARAD on October 26, 2006 (71
FR 62657). The Final EIS/EIR provides detailed information on the
proposed project facilities, construction methods and analysis of
potential impacts on marine mammal.
NMFS was a cooperating agency (as defined by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1501.6)) in the preparation of the Draft
and Final EISs. NMFS has reviewed the Final EIS and has adopted it.
Therefore, the preparation of another EIS or EA is not warranted.
Preliminary Determinations
NMFS has preliminarily determined that the impact of operations of
the Northeast Gateway LNG Port facility may result, at worst, in a
temporary modification in behavior of small numbers of certain species
of marine mammals that may be in close proximity to the Northeast
Gateway LNG facility during its operations and maintenance. These
activities are expected to result in some local short term displacement
and will have no more than a negligible impact on the affected species
or stocks of marine mammals.
This preliminary determination is supported by proposed mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting measures described in this document on this
action.
As a result of the described proposed mitigation and monitoring
measures, no take by injury or death would be requested, anticipated or
authorized, and the potential for temporary or permanent hearing
impairment is very unlikely due to the relatively low noise levels (and
consequently small zone of impact).
While the number of marine mammals that may be harassed will depend
on the distribution and abundance of marine mammals in the vicinity of
the LNG Port facility, the estimated numbers of marine mammals to be
harassed is small relative to the affected species or stock sizes.
Please see Estimate of Take by Harassment section above for the
calculation of these take numbers.
Proposed Authorization
NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to Northeast Gateway and Algonquin
for conducting LNG Port facility operations and maintenance in
Massachusetts Bay, provided the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.
Information Solicited
NMFS requests interested persons to submit comments and information
concerning this proposed IHA and Northeast Gateway and Algonquin's
application for incidental take regulations (see ADDRESSES). NMFS
requests interested persons to submit comments, information, and
suggestions concerning both the request and the structure and content
of future regulations to allow this taking. NMFS will consider this
information in developing proposed regulations to govern the taking.
Dated: July 13, 2010.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-17692 Filed 7-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S