Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Site Characterization Surveys Off the Coast of New Jersey, 20563-20587 [2017-08918]
Download as PDF
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
Cod, only in statistical area 521. While
fishing under the tagging EFP, the vessel
would be using a groundfish otter trawl
with a 7-inch (17.8 cm) mesh codend.
For biological sampling component,
TNC requested exemptions from the
Atlantic halibut possession limit as
described in § 648.86(c) and the Atlantic
halibut minimum size limit as described
in § 648.83(a)(1). The EFP would be
issued to 21 commercial fishing vessels,
and fish would be caught during regular
fishing operations by the exempted
vessels. A maximum of two halibut may
be biologically sampled per trip.
Atlantic halibut under the minimum
size limit may be landed and transferred
to SMAST researchers. Fish above the
minimum size limit would be sampled
at sea and landed for commercial sale.
A total of 250 halibut would be sampled
under this EFP, and approximately 165
fish would be under the minimum size
limit. Sampling would include
recording of fish length and weight, as
well as removal of gonads, otoliths, and
genetic material. The exemption from
the minimum size limit would allow for
researchers to acquire data from all sizes
of halibut, which is necessary to ensure
that results of the project are accurate
and reflective of the halibut population.
The exemption from the possession
limit is necessary to ensure that the
researchers are able to obtain sufficient
biological samples to conduct their
research. No halibut above the
possession limit or below the minimum
size limit could be landed for sale.
Fishing under the biological sampling
EFP would occur during the 2017
fishing years, from May 1, 2017 through
April 30, 2018. Multiple gear types,
including handline/jig, longline, sink
gillnet,and otter trawl would be used by
vessels fishing under the EFP. Fishing
under the biological sampling EFP
would occur throughout both the Gulf of
Maine and the Georges Bank Regulated
Mesh Areas. Statistical areas 514, 521,
522, 525, and 526 would be most
commonly fished by vessels
participating in the biological sampling
EFP.
If approved, the applicants may
request minor modifications and
extensions to the EFPs throughout the
year. EFP modifications and extensions
may be granted without further notice if
they are deemed essential to facilitate
completion of the proposed research
and have minimal impacts that do not
change the scope or impact of the
initially approved EFP request. Any
fishing activity conducted outside the
scope of the exempted fishing activity
would be prohibited.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
Dated: April 27, 2017.
Karen H. Abrams,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–08906 Filed 5–2–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN: 0648–XF286
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Site
Characterization Surveys Off the Coast
of New Jersey
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS has received an
application from Ocean Wind, LLC
(Ocean Wind), for an Incidental
Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take
marine mammals, by harassment,
incidental to high-resolution
geophysical (HRG) and geotechnical
survey investigations associated with
marine site characterization activities
off the coast of New Jersey in the area
of the Commercial Lease of Submerged
Lands for Renewable Energy
Development on the Outer Continental
Shelf (OCS–A 0498) (Lease Area).
Pursuant to the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is
requesting comments on its proposal to
issue an IHA to Ocean Wind to
incidentally take marine mammals
during the specified activities.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than June 2, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Comments on Ocean Wind’s
IHA application should be addressed to
Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The
mailbox address for providing email
comments is itp.mccue@noaa.gov.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible
for comments sent by any other method,
to any other address or individual, or
received after the end of the comment
period. Comments received
electronically, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 25megabyte file size. Attachments to
electronic comments will be accepted in
Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20563
file formats only. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted to the
Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
permits/incidental/energy_other.htm
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit confidential business
information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura McCue, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
Electronic copies of the applications
and supporting documents, as well as a
list of the references cited in this
document, may be obtained online at:
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/energy_other.htm. In case of
problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public
for review.
An authorization for incidental
takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible
impact on the species or stock(s), will
not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible
methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such takings are set
forth.
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’
means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or
attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill
any marine mammal.
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
has the potential to injure a marine
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20564
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has
the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B
harassment).
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
NOAA Administrative Order (NAO)
216–6A, NMFS must review our
proposed action with respect to
environmental consequences on the
human environment.
Summary of Request
NMFS received a request from Ocean
Wind for an IHA to take marine
mammals incidental to Spring 2017
geophysical survey investigations off the
coast of New Jersey in the OCS–A 0498
Lease Area, designated and offered by
the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM), to support the
development of an offshore wind
project. Ocean Wind’s request was for
harassment only, and NMFS concurs
that mortality is not expected to result
from this activity; therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
The proposed geophysical survey
activities would occur for 42 days
beginning in early June 2017, and
geotechnical survey activities would
take place in September 2017 and last
for approximately 12 days. The
following specific aspects of the
proposed activities are likely to result in
the take of marine mammals: Shallow
and medium-penetration sub-bottom
profilers (chirper and sparker) used
during the HRG survey, and
dynamically-positioned (DP) vessel
thruster used in support of geotechnical
survey activities. Take, by Level B
Harassment only, of individuals of five
species of marine mammals is
anticipated to result from the specified
activities. No serious injury or mortality
is expected from Ocean Wind’s HRG
and geotechnical surveys.
Detailed Description of Specific
Activities
Description of the Specified Activity
HRG Survey Activities
Overview
Marine site characterization surveys
will include the following HRG survey
activities:
• Depth sounding (multibeam depth
sounder) to determine water depths and
general bottom topography;
• Magnetic intensity measurements
for detecting local variations in regional
magnetic field from geological strata and
potential ferrous objects on and below
the bottom;
• Seafloor imaging (sidescan sonar
survey) for seabed sediment
classification purposes, to identify
natural and man-made acoustic targets
resting on the bottom as well as any
anomalous features;
• Shallow penetration sub-bottom
profiler (chirper) to map the near
surface stratigraphy (top 0–5 meter (m)
soils below seabed); and
• Medium penetration sub-bottom
profiler (sparker) to map deeper
subsurface stratigraphy as needed (soils
down to 75–100 m below seabed).
The HRG surveys are scheduled to
begin, at the earliest, on June 1, 2017.
Table 1 identifies the representative
survey equipment that is being
considered in support of the HRG
survey activities. The make and model
of the listed HRG equipment will vary
depending on availability but will be
finalized as part of the survey
preparations and contract negotiations
with the survey contractor. The final
selection of the survey equipment will
be confirmed prior to the start of the
HRG survey program. Only the make
and model of the HRG equipment may
change, not the types of equipment or
the addition of equipment with
characteristics that might have effects
beyond (i.e., resulting in larger
ensonified areas) those considered in
this proposed IHA. None of the
proposed HRG survey activities will
result in the disturbance of bottom
habitat in the Lease Area.
Ocean Wind proposes to conduct a
geophysical and geotechnical survey off
the coast of New Jersey in the Lease
Area to support the characterization of
the existing seabed and subsurface
geological conditions in the Lease Area.
This information is necessary to support
the siting, design, and deployment of up
to two meteorological data collection
buoys called floating light and detection
ranging buoys (FLIDARs) and up to two
metocean and current buoys, as well as
to obtain a baseline assessment of
seabed/sub-surface soil conditions in
the Lease Area to support the siting of
the proposed wind farm. Surveys will
include the use of the following
equipment: Multi-beam depth sounder,
side-scan sonar, sub-bottom profiler,
and cone penetration tests (CPTs).
Dates and Duration
HRG surveys are anticipated to
commence in early June 2017 and will
last for approximately 42 days,
including estimated weather down time.
Geotechnical surveys requiring the use
of the DP drill ship will take place in
September 2017, at the earliest, and will
last for approximately 12 days
excluding weather downtime.
Equipment is expected run
continuously for 24 hours per day.
Specified Geographic Region
Ocean Wind’s survey activities will
occur in the approximately 160,480-acre
Lease Area designated and offered by
the BOEM, located approximately nine
miles (mi) southeast of Atlantic City,
New Jersey, at its closest point (see
Figure 1 of the IHA application). The
Lease Area falls within the New Jersey
Wind Energy Area (NJ WEA; Figure 1–
1 of the IHA application) with water
depths ranging from 15–40 meters (m)
(49–131 feet (ft)).
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED HRG SURVEY EQUIPMENT
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
HRG equipment
Operating
frequencies
Source level
(manufacturer)
Source level
(bay state wind
survey) *
Sonardyne Ranger 2 USBL .....................
Klein 3000H Sidescan Sonar 1 .................
GeoPulse Sub-bottom Profiler (chirper) ...
Geo-Source 600/800 (sparker) ................
35–50 kHz ..............
445/900 kHz ...........
1.5 to 18 kHz ..........
50 to 5000 Hz .........
SeaBat 7125 Multibeam Sonar 2 ..............
200/400 kHz ...........
200 dBPeak ..............
245 dBPeak ..............
223.5 dBPeak ...........
222 dBPeak/ 223
dBPeak.
220 dBPeak ..............
194 dBPeak ..............
n/a ...........................
203 dBPeak ..............
2016 dBPeak/212
dBPeak.
n/a ...........................
* Gardline 2016, 2017.
1 It should be noted that only one of the representative sidescan sonars would be selected for deployment.
2 It should be noted that only one of the representative multibeam sonars would be selected for deployment.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
Beamwidth
(degree)
Pulse duration
(millisec)
180
0.2
55
110
2
1.
0.0025 to 0.4.
0.1 to 22.
1 to 10.
0.03 to .3.
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
The HRG survey activities will be
supported by a vessel approximately 98
to 180 feet (ft) in length and capable of
maintaining course and a survey speed
of approximately 4.5 knots while
transiting survey lines. HRG survey
activities across the Lease Area will
generally be conducted at 900-meter (m)
line spacing. Up to two FLIDARs and
two wave buoys would be deployed
within the Lease Area, and up to three
potential locations for FLIDAR
deployment will be investigated. At
each FLIDAR and wave buoy
deployment locations, the survey will
be conducted along a tighter 30-m line
spacing to meet the BOEM requirements
as set out in the July 2015 Guidelines for
Providing Geophysical, Geotechnical,
and Geohazard Information Pursuant
and Archeological and Historic Property
Information in 30 CFR part 585.
Given the size of the Lease Area
(160,480 acres), to minimize cost, the
duration of survey activities, and the
period of potential impact on marine
species, Ocean Wind has proposed
conducting continuous HRG survey
operations 24 hours per day. Based on
24-hour operations, the estimated
duration of the survey activities would
be approximately 42 days (including
estimated weather down time).
Both NMFS and BOEM have advised
that the deployment of HRG survey
equipment, including the use of
intermittent, impulsive soundproducing equipment operating below
200 kilohertz (kHz) (e.g., sub-bottom
profilers), has the potential to cause
acoustic harassment to marine
mammals. Based on the frequency
ranges of the equipment to be used in
support of the HRG survey activities
(Table 1) and the hearing ranges of the
marine mammals that have the potential
to occur in the Lease Area during survey
activities (Table 3), only the sub-bottom
profilers (GeoPulse Sub-bottom Profiler
and Geo-Source sparker) and Sonardyne
Ranger 2 USBL fall within the
established marine mammal hearing
ranges and have the potential to result
in Level B harassment of marine
mammals. However, since the sparker
systems and USBL will be used
concurrently, and the sparkers are
louder, only the sparkers will be used in
the take analysis.
The equipment positioning systems
use vessel-based underwater acoustic
positioning to track equipment (in this
case, the sub-bottom profiler) in very
shallow to very deep water. Equipment
positioning systems will be operational
at all times during HRG survey data
acquisition (i.e, concurrent with the
sub-bottom profiler operation). Subbottom profiling systems identify and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
measure various marine sediment layers
that exist below the sediment/water
interface. A sound source emits an
acoustic signal vertically downwards
into the water and a receiver monitors
the return signal that has been reflected
off the sea floor. Some of the acoustic
signal will penetrate the seabed and be
reflected when it encounters a boundary
between two layers that have different
acoustic impedance. The system uses
this reflected energy to provide
information on sediment layers beneath
the sediment-water interface. A shallow
penetration sub-bottom profiler will be
used to map the near surface
stratigraphy of the Lease Area. A GeoSource 200/800, or similar model,
medium-penetration sub-bottom profiler
(sparker) will be used to map deeper
subsurface stratigraphy in the Lease
Area as needed (soils down to 75–100
m below seabed). The sparker is towed
from a boom arm off the side of the
survey vessel and emits a downward
pulse with a duration of 1 to 2
millisecond (ms) at an operating
frequency of 50 to 5000 Hertz (Hz).
Geotechnical Survey Activities
Marine site characterization surveys
will involve the following geotechnical
survey activities:
• Sample boreholes to determine
geological and geotechnical
characteristics of sediments;
• Deep CPTs to determine
stratigraphy and in-situ conditions of
the deep surface sediments; and
• Shallow CPTs to determine
stratigraphy and in-situ conditions of
the near surface sediments.
It is anticipated that the geotechnical
surveys will take place no sooner than
September 2017. The geotechnical
survey program will consist of up to 8
deep sample bore holes and adjacent 8
deep CPTs both to a depth of
approximately 130 ft to 200 ft (40 m to
60 m) below the seabed, as well as 30
shallow CPTs, up to 130 ft (40 m) below
seabed.
The investigation activities are
anticipated to be conducted from a 250ft to 350-ft (76 m to 107 m) DP drill ship.
DP vessel thruster systems maintain
their precise coordinates in waters with
automatic controls. These control
systems use variable levels of power to
counter forces from current and wind.
Operations will take place over a 24hour period to ensure cost, the duration
of survey activities, and the period of
potential impact on marine species are
minimized. Based on 24-hour
operations, the estimated duration of the
geotechnical survey activities would be
approximately 12 days excluding
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20565
weather downtime. Estimated weather
downtime is approximately 10 days.
Field studies conducted off the coast
of Virginia (Tetra Tech 2014) to
determine the underwater noise
produced by borehole drilling and CPTs
confirm that these activities do not
result in underwater noise levels that
are harmful or harassing to marine
mammals (i.e., do not exceed NMFS’
current Level A and Level B harassment
thresholds for marine mammals).
However, the initial field verification
conducted for the Bay State Wind Lease
Area indicates that Level B harassment
of marine mammals is likely at
approximately 590 ft (180 m) from the
DP thruster sound source (Gardline
2016). The underwater continuous noise
produced by the thrusters associated
with the DP drill ship that will be used
to support the geotechnical activities
has the potential to result in Level B
harassment of marine mammals.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures are described in
detail later in the document (Mitigation
section and Monitoring and Reporting
section).
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
There are 35 species of marine
mammals that potentially occur in the
Northwest Atlantic OCS region (BOEM
2014) (Table 2). The majority of these
species are pelagic and/or northern
species, or are so rarely sighted that
their presence in the Lease Area is
unlikely. Five marine mammal species
are listed under the Endangered Species
Act (ESA) and are known to be present,
at least seasonally, in the waters off the
Northwest Atlantic OCS: Blue whale, fin
whale, right whale, sei whale, and
sperm whale. These species are highly
migratory and do not spend extended
periods of time in a localized area. The
waters off the Northwest Atlantic OCS
(including the Lease Area) are primarily
used as a stopover point for these
species during seasonal movements
north or south between important
feeding and breeding grounds. While fin
whales have the potential to occur
within the Lease Area, the sperm, blue,
and sei whales are more pelagic and/or
northern species, and although their
presence within the Lease Area is
possible, they are considered less
common with regards to sightings. In
particular, while sperm whales are
known to occur occasionally in the
region, their sightings are considered
rare and thus their presence in the Lease
Area at the time of the proposed
activities is considered unlikely. These
large whale species are generally
migratory and typically do not spend
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20566
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
extended periods of time in a localized
area. The waters of the Mid-Atlantic
(including the Lease Area) are primarily
used as areas where animals occur
seasonally to feed, or as habitat during
seasonal movements between the more
northward feeding areas and southern
hemisphere breeding grounds typically
used by some of the large whale species.
The mid-sized whale species (minke),
large baleen whales, and the sperm
whale are present year-round in the
continental shelf and slope waters and
may occur in the waters of the Lease
Area though movements will vary with
prey availability and other habitat
factors. North Atlantic right whales do
occur seasonally in the area; however,
we did not calculate take for this species
based on the low seasonal density and
short duration of project activities.
Because the potential for sperm whale,
blue whale, and sei whale to occur
within the Lease Area during the marine
survey period is unlikely, these species
will not be described further in this
analysis.
Because the potential for many of the
odontocete species to occur within the
Lease Area during the marine survey
period is unlikely, given that these
species are either extralimital or are
found more often offshore and do not
occur as often on the outer continental
shelf, these species will not be
described further in this analysis.
Bottlenose dolphins, short-beaked
common dolphin, and harbor porpoise,
however, do occur in the lease area, and
are described below.3
While stranding data indicate that
gray seals have the potential to occur
within the Lease Area, multiple sources
indicate that their presence would not
be likely within the Lease Area. BOEM
(2012) indicates that the presence of
gray seals would not be likely.
Furthermore, Northeast Navy
Operations Area (OPAREA) Density
Estimates indicate that data for gray
seals in the Mid-Atlantic are so lacking
that density estimates for this species
are not possible (DoN 2007). Therefore,
gray seals will not be described further
in this analysis.
We have reviewed Ocean Wind’s
species information—which
summarizes available information
regarding status and trends, distribution
and habitat preferences, behavior and
life history, and auditory capabilities of
the potentially affected species—for
accuracy and completeness and refer the
reader to Sections 3 and 4 of the
applications, as well as to NMFS’ Stock
Assessment Reports (SAR;
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/), instead of
reprinting all of the information here.
Additional general information about
these species (e.g., physical and
behavioral descriptions) may be found
on NMFS’s Web site
(www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/
mammals/). Table 2 lists all species
with expected potential for occurrence
in the NE Atlantic OCS and summarizes
information related to the population or
stock, including potential biological
removal (PBR), where known. For
taxonomy, we follow Committee on
Taxonomy (2016). PBR, defined by the
MMPA as the maximum number of
animals, not including natural
mortalities, that may be removed from a
marine mammal stock while allowing
that stock to reach or maintain its
optimum sustainable population, is
considered in concert with known
sources of ongoing anthropogenic
mortality to assess the population-level
effects of the anticipated mortality from
a specific project (as described in
NMFS’s SARs). While no mortality is
anticipated or authorized here, PBR and
annual serious injury and mortality are
included here as gross indicators of the
status of the species and other threats.
For status of species, we provide
information regarding U.S. regulatory
status under the MMPA and ESA.
Marine mammal abundance estimates
presented in this document represent
the total number of individuals that
make up a given stock or the total
number estimated within a particular
study area. NMFS’s stock abundance
estimates for most species represent the
total estimate of individuals within the
geographic area, if known, that
comprises that stock. For some species,
this geographic area may extend beyond
U.S. waters. Survey abundance (as
compared to stock or species
abundance) is the total number of
individuals estimated within the survey
area, which may or may not align
completely with a stock’s geographic
range as defined in the SARs. These
surveys may also extend beyond U.S.
waters.
Five species are considered to have
the potential to co-occur with the
proposed survey activities: Fin whale
(Balaenoptera physalus), bottlenose
dolphin (Tursiops truncatus), shortbeaked common dolphin (Delphinus
delphis), harbor porpoise (Phocoena
phocoena), and harbor seal (Phoca
vitulina) (Right Whale Consortium
2016). All managed stocks in this region
are assessed in NMFS’s U.S. 2016
Atlantic SARs and can be found here:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/.
All values presented in Table 2 are the
most recent available at the time of
publication and are available in the
draft 2016 SARs.
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE WATERS OFF THE NORTHWEST ATLANTIC OCS
Common name
NMFS
MMPA
and ESA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
Stock
Stock abundance
(CV, Nmin, most recent
abundance survey) 2
Occurrence and
seasonality in the
NW Atlantic OCS
PBR 3
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Toothed whale (Odontoceti)
Atlantic white-sided dolphin
(Lagenorhynchus acutus).
Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella
frontalis).
Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
truncatus).
Clymene Dolphin (Stenella
clymene).
Pantropical Spotted Dolphin
(Stenella attenuata).
Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
W. North Atlantic, Offshore.
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
-; N
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
48,819 (0.61; 30,403;
n/a)
44,715 (0.43; 31,610;
n/a)
77,532 (0.40; 56,053;
2011).
Unknown (unk; unk;
n/a).
3,333 (0.91; 1,733; n/a)
304
316
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
rare.
561
Common year round.
Undet
rare.
126
03MYN1
rare.
17
18,250 (0.46; 12,619;
n/a)
Sfmt 4703
rare.
rare.
20567
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE WATERS OFF THE NORTHWEST ATLANTIC OCS—Continued
NMFS
MMPA
and ESA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
Stock abundance
(CV, Nmin, most recent
abundance survey) 2
Common name
Stock
Short-beaked common dolphin
(Delphinus delphis).
Striped dolphin (Stenella
coeruleoalba).
Spinner Dolphin (Stenella
longirostris).
White-beaked dolphin
(Lagenorhynchus albirostris).
Harbor porpoise (Phocoena
phocoena).
Killer whale (Orcinus orca) ............
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
Gulf of Maine/Bay of
Fundy.
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
-; N
False killer whale (Pseudorca
crassidens).
Long-finned pilot whale
(Globicephala melas).
Short-finned pilot whale
(Globicephala macrorhynchus).
Sperm whale (Physeter
macrocephalus).
W. North Atlantic ........
-; Y
79,833 (0.32; 61,415;
2011).
Unknown (unk; unk;
n/a).
442 (1.06; 212; n/a) .......
W. North Atlantic ........
-; Y
W. North Atlantic ........
-; Y
North Atlantic ..............
Pygmy sperm whale (Kogia
breviceps).
Dwarf sperm whale (Kogia sima) ..
Cuvier’s beaked whale (Ziphius
cavirostris).
Blainville’s beaked whale
(Mesoplodon densirostris).
Gervais’ beaked whale
(Mesoplodon europaeus).
True’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon
mirus).
Sowerby’s Beaked Whale
(Mesoplodon bidens).
Melon-headed whale
(Peponocephala electra).
Occurrence and
seasonality in the
NW Atlantic OCS
PBR 3
70,184 (0.28; 55,690;
2011).
54,807 (0.3; 42,804;
n/a).
Unknown (unk; unk;
n/a).
2,003 (0.94; 1,023; n/a)
557
Common year round.
428
rare.
Undet
rare.
10
rare.
706
Common year round.
Undet
rare.
2.1
rare.
5,636 (0.63; 3,464; n/a)
35
rare.
159
rare.
E; Y
21,515 (0.37; 15,913;
n/a)
2,288 (0.28; 1,815; n/a)
3.6
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
3,785 b (0.47; 2,598; n/a)
26
Year round in continental shelf and
slope waters, occur
seasonally to forage.
rare.
W. North Atlantic ........
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
-; N
3,785 b (0.47; 2,598; n/a)
6,532 (0.32; 5,021; n/a)
26
50
rare.
rare.
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
7,092 c (0.54; 4,632; n/a)
46
rare.
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
7,092 c (0.54; 4,632; n/a)
46
rare.
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
7,092 c (0.54; 4,632; n/a)
46
rare.
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
7,092 c (0.54; 4,632; n/a)
46
rare.
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
Unknown (unk; unk;
n/a).
Undet
rare.
Baleen whales (Mysticeti)
Canadian East Coast
-; N
2,591 (0.81; 1,425; n/a)
162
Blue whale (Balaenoptera
musculus).
W. North Atlantic ........
E; Y
Unknown (unk; 440;
n/a).
0.9
Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus)
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Minke whale (Balaenoptera
acutorostrata).
W. North Atlantic ........
E; Y
1,618 (0.33; 1,234; n/a)
2.5
Humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae).
North Atlantic right whale
(Eubalaena glacialis).
Gulf of Maine ..............
-; N
823 (0; 823; n/a) ............
2.7
W. North Atlantic ........
E; Y
440 (0; 440; n/a) ............
1
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
Year round in continental shelf and
slope waters, occur
seasonally to forage.
Year round in continental shelf and
slope waters, occur
seasonally to forage.
Year round in continental shelf and
slope waters, occur
seasonally to forage.
Common year round.
Year round in continental shelf and
slope waters, occur
seasonally to forage.
20568
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE WATERS OFF THE NORTHWEST ATLANTIC OCS—Continued
NMFS
MMPA
and ESA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
Common name
Stock
Sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis)
Nova Scotia ................
E; Y
Stock abundance
(CV, Nmin, most recent
abundance survey) 2
Occurrence and
seasonality in the
NW Atlantic OCS
PBR 3
357 (0.52; 236; n/a) .......
0.5
Year round in continental shelf and
slope waters, occur
seasonally to forage.
Undet
2,006
Unlikely.
Common year round.
Undet
rare.
Undet
rare.
Earless seals (Phocidae)
Gray seals (Halichoerus grypus) ...
Harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) ........
North Atlantic ..............
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
-; N
Hooded seals (Cystophora
cristata).
Harp seal (Phoca groenlandica) ....
W. North Atlantic ........
-; N
North Atlantic ..............
-; N
505,000 (unk; unk; n/a)
75,834 (0.15; 66,884;
2012).
Unknown (unk; unk;
n/a).
Unknown (unk; unk;
n/a).
1 ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or
designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see footnote 3) or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
2 CV is coefficient of variation; N
min is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For certain stocks,
abundance estimates are actual counts of animals and there is no associated CV. The most recent abundance survey that is reflected in the
abundance estimate is presented; there may be more recent surveys that have not yet been incorporated into the estimate. All values presented
here are from the draft 2016 Pacific SARs.
3 Potential biological removal, defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population size (OSP).
Fin Whales
Fin whales are common in waters of
the U.S. Atlantic Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ), principally from Cape
Hatteras northward (Waring et al.,
2016). Fin whales are present north of
35-degree latitude in every season and
are broadly distributed throughout the
western North Atlantic for most of the
year (Waring et al., 2016). This area (east
of Montauk Point) represents a major
feeding ground for fin whales from
March through October. Fin whales are
found in small groups of up to 5
individuals (Brueggeman et al., 1987).
The current abundance estimate for
the western North Atlantic stock of fin
whales is 1,618 with PBR at 2.5 animals
(Waring et al., 2016). This stock is listed
as endangered under the ESA resulting
in strategic and depleted status under
the MMPA. The main threats to this
stock are fishery interactions and vessel
collisions (Waring et al., 2016).
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Bottlenose Dolphin
There are two distinct bottlenose
dolphin morphotypes: The coastal and
offshore forms in the western North
Atlantic (Waring et al., 2016). The
offshore form is distributed primarily
along the outer continental shelf and
continental slope in the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean from Georges Bank to
the Florida Keys, and is the only type
that may be present in the Lease Area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
The current abundance estimate for
this stock is 77,532 with PBR at 561
(Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to
this species is interactions with
fisheries. This species is not listed
under the ESA and is not considered
strategic or depleted under the MMPA.
Short-Beaked Common Dolphin
The short-beaked common dolphin is
found world-wide in temperate to
subtropical seas. In the North Atlantic,
short-beaked common dolphins are
commonly found over the continental
shelf between the 100-m and 2000-m
isobaths and over prominent
underwater topography and east to the
mid-Atlantic Ridge (Waring et al., 2016).
Only the western North Atlantic stock
may be present in the Lease Area.
The current abundance estimate for
this stock is 70,184 with PBR at 557
(Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to
this species is interactions with
fisheries. This species is not listed
under the ESA and is not considered
strategic or depleted under the MMPA.
Harbor Porpoise
In the Lease Area, only the Gulf of
Maine/Bay of Fundy stock may be
present. This stock is found in U.S. and
Canadian Atlantic waters and are
concentrated in the northern Gulf of
Maine and southern Bay of Fundy
region, generally in waters less than 150
m deep (Waring et al., 2016). They are
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
seen from the coastline to deep waters
(>1800 m; Westgate et al. 1998),
although the majority of the population
is found over the continental shelf
(Waring et al., 2016). Average group size
for this stock in the Bay of Fundy is
approximately 4 individuals (Palka
2007).
The current abundance estimate for
this stock is 79,883, with PBR at 706
(Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to
this species is interactions with
fisheries, with documented take in the
U.S. northeast sink gillnet, mid-Atlantic
gillnet, and northeast bottom trawl
fisheries and in the Canadian herring
weir fisheries (Waring et al., 2016). This
species is not listed under the ESA and
is not considered strategic or depleted
under the MMPA.
Harbor Seal
The harbor seal is found in all
nearshore waters of the North Atlantic
and North Pacific Oceans and adjoining
seas above about 30° N. (Burns 2009). In
the western North Atlantic, they are
distributed from the eastern Canadian
Arctic and Greenland south to southern
New England and New York, and
occasionally to the Carolinas (Waring et
al., 2016). Haulout and pupping sites
are located off Manomet, MA and the
Isles of Shoals, ME, but generally do not
occur in areas in southern New England
(Waring et al., 2016).
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20569
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
The current abundance estimate for
this stock is 75,834, with PBR at 2,006
(Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to
this species is interactions with
fisheries. This species is not listed
under the ESA and is not considered
strategic or depleted under the MMPA.
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and
discussion of the ways that components
of the specified activity may impact
marine mammals and their habitat. The
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment section later in this
document will include a quantitative
analysis of the number of individuals
that are expected to be taken by this
activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis
and Determination section will consider
the content of this section, the
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment section, and the Proposed
Mitigation section, to draw conclusions
regarding the likely impacts of these
activities on the reproductive success or
survivorship of individuals and how
those impacts on individuals are likely
to impact marine mammal species or
stocks.
Background on Sound
Sound is a physical phenomenon
consisting of minute vibrations that
travel through a medium, such as air or
water, and is generally characterized by
several variables. Frequency describes
the sound’s pitch and is measured in Hz
or kHz, while sound level describes the
sound’s intensity and is measured in
decibels (dB). Sound level increases or
decreases exponentially with each dB of
change. The logarithmic nature of the
scale means that each 10-dB increase is
a 10-fold increase in acoustic power
(and a 20-dB increase is then a 100-fold
increase in power). A 10-fold increase in
acoustic power does not mean that the
sound is perceived as being 10 times
louder, however. Sound levels are
compared to a reference sound pressure
(micro-Pascal) to identify the medium.
For air and water, these reference
pressures are ‘‘re: 20 mPa’’ and ‘‘re: 1
mPa,’’ respectively. Root mean square
(RMS) is the quadratic mean sound
pressure over the duration of an
impulse. RMS is calculated by squaring
all of the sound amplitudes, averaging
the squares, and then taking the square
root of the average (Urick 1975). RMS
accounts for both positive and negative
values; squaring the pressures makes all
values positive so that they may be
accounted for in the summation of
pressure levels. This measurement is
often used in the context of discussing
behavioral effects, in part because
behavioral effects, which often result
from auditory cues, may be better
expressed through averaged units rather
than by peak pressures.
Acoustic Impacts
HRG survey equipment use and use of
the DP thruster during the geophysical
and geotechnical surveys may
temporarily impact marine mammals in
the area due to elevated in-water sound
levels. Marine mammals are continually
exposed to many sources of sound.
Naturally occurring sounds such as
lightning, rain, sub-sea earthquakes, and
biological sounds (e.g., snapping
shrimp, whale songs) are widespread
throughout the world’s oceans. Marine
mammals produce sounds in various
contexts and use sound for various
biological functions including, but not
limited to: (1) Social interactions; (2)
foraging; (3) orientation; and (4)
predator detection. Interference with
producing or receiving these sounds
may result in adverse impacts. Audible
distance, or received levels of sound
depend on the nature of the sound
source, ambient noise conditions, and
the sensitivity of the receptor to the
sound (Richardson et al., 1995). Type
and significance of marine mammal
reactions to sound are likely dependent
on a variety of factors including, but not
limited to, (1) the behavioral state of the
animal (e.g., feeding, traveling, etc.); (2)
frequency of the sound; (3) distance
between the animal and the source; and
(4) the level of the sound relative to
ambient conditions (Southall et al.,
2007).
When considering the influence of
various kinds of sound on the marine
environment, it is necessary to
understand that different kinds of
marine life are sensitive to different
frequencies of sound. Current data
indicate that not all marine mammal
species have equal hearing capabilities
(Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and
Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008).
Animals are less sensitive to sounds
at the outer edges of their functional
hearing range and are more sensitive to
a range of frequencies within the middle
of their functional hearing range. For
mid-frequency cetaceans, functional
hearing estimates occur between
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz with
best hearing estimated to occur between
approximately 10 to less than 100 kHz
(Finneran et al., 2005 and 2009,
Natchtigall et al., 2005 and 2008; Yuen
et al., 2005; Popov et al., 2011; and
Schlundt et al., 2011).
On August 4, 2016, NMFS released its
Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on
Marine Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016;
81 FR 51694). This new guidance
established new thresholds for
predicting onset of temporary (TTS) and
permanent (PTS) threshold shifts for
impulsive (e.g., explosives and impact
pile drivers) and non-impulsive (e.g.,
vibratory pile drivers) sound sources.
These acoustic thresholds are presented
using dual metrics of cumulative sound
exposure level (SELcum) and peak
sound level (PK) for impulsive sounds
and SELcum for non-impulsive sounds.
The lower and/or upper frequencies for
some of these functional hearing groups
have been modified from those
designated by Southall et al. (2007), and
the revised generalized hearing ranges
are presented in the new Guidance. The
functional hearing groups and the
associated frequencies are indicated in
Table 3 below.
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS AND THEIR GENERALIZED HEARING RANGE
Generalized hearing
range *
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Hearing group
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) .................................................................................................................
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) ......................................
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger and
L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) ..............................................................................................................
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) ..........................................................................................
7 Hz to 35 kHz.
150 Hz to 160 kHz.
275 Hz to 160 kHz.
50 Hz to 86 kHz.
60 Hz to 39 kHz.
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’
hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram,
with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
20570
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
When sound travels (propagates) from
its source, its loudness decreases as the
distance traveled by the sound
increases. Thus, the loudness of a sound
at its source is higher than the loudness
of that same sound a kilometer (km)
away. Acousticians often refer to the
loudness of a sound at its source
(typically referenced to one meter from
the source) as the source level and the
loudness of sound elsewhere as the
received level (i.e., typically the
receiver). For example, a humpback
whale 3 km from a device that has a
source level of 230 dB may only be
exposed to sound that is 160 dB loud,
depending on how the sound travels
through water (e.g., spherical spreading
(6 dB reduction with doubling of
distance) was used in this example). As
a result, it is important to understand
the difference between source levels and
received levels when discussing the
loudness of sound in the ocean or its
impacts on the marine environment.
As sound travels from a source, its
propagation in water is influenced by
various physical characteristics,
including water temperature, depth,
salinity, and surface and bottom
properties that cause refraction,
reflection, absorption, and scattering of
sound waves. Oceans are not
homogeneous and the contribution of
each of these individual factors is
extremely complex and interrelated.
The physical characteristics that
determine the sound’s speed through
the water will change with depth,
season, geographic location, and with
time of day (as a result, in actual active
sonar operations, crews will measure
oceanic conditions, such as sea water
temperature and depth, to calibrate
models that determine the path the
sonar signal will take as it travels
through the ocean and how strong the
sound signal will be at a given range
along a particular transmission path). As
sound travels through the ocean, the
intensity associated with the wavefront
diminishes, or attenuates. This decrease
in intensity is referred to as propagation
loss, also commonly called transmission
loss.
As mentioned previously in this
document, five marine mammal species
(four cetaceans and one pinniped) are
likely to occur in the Lease Area. Of the
four cetacean species likely to occur in
the Lease Area, one classified as lowfrequency cetaceans (i.e., fin whale),
two are classified as mid-frequency
cetaceans (i.e., Atlantic white-sided
dolphin and bottlenose dolphin), and
one is classified as a high-frequency
cetacean (i.e., harbor porpoise) (Southall
et al., 2007). A species’ functional
hearing group is a consideration when
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
we analyze the effects of exposure to
sound on marine mammals.
Hearing Impairment
Marine mammals may experience
temporary or permanent hearing
impairment when exposed to loud
sounds. Hearing impairment is
classified by TTS and PTS. There are no
empirical data for onset of PTS in any
marine mammal; therefore, PTS-onset
must be estimated from TTS-onset
measurements and from the rate of TTS
growth with increasing exposure levels
above the level eliciting TTS-onset. PTS
is presumed to be likely if the hearing
threshold is reduced by ≥ 40 dB (that is,
40 dB of TTS). PTS is considered
auditory injury (Southall et al., 2007)
and occurs in a specific frequency range
and amount. Irreparable damage to the
inner or outer cochlear hair cells may
cause PTS; however, other mechanisms
are also involved, such as exceeding the
elastic limits of certain tissues and
membranes in the middle and inner ears
and resultant changes in the chemical
composition of the inner ear fluids
(Southall et al., 2007). Given the higher
level of sound and longer durations of
exposure necessary to cause PTS as
compared with TTS, it is considerably
less likely that PTS would occur during
the proposed HRG and geotechnical
survey.
Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS)
TTS is the mildest form of hearing
impairment that can occur during
exposure to a loud sound (Kryter 1985).
While experiencing TTS, the hearing
threshold rises and a sound must be
stronger in order to be heard. At least in
terrestrial mammals, TTS can last from
minutes or hours to (in cases of strong
TTS) days, can be limited to a particular
frequency range, and can occur to
varying degrees (i.e., a loss of a certain
number of dBs of sensitivity). For sound
exposures at or somewhat above the
TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity in
both terrestrial and marine mammals
recovers rapidly after exposure to the
noise ends.
Marine mammal hearing plays a
critical role in communication with
conspecifics and in interpretation of
environmental cues for purposes such
as predator avoidance and prey capture.
Depending on the degree (elevation of
threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery
time), and frequency range of TTS and
the context in which it is experienced,
TTS can have effects on marine
mammals ranging from discountable to
serious. For example, a marine mammal
may be able to readily compensate for
a brief, relatively small amount of TTS
in a non-critical frequency range that
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
takes place during a time when the
animals is traveling through the open
ocean, where ambient noise is lower
and there are not as many competing
sounds present. Alternatively, a larger
amount and longer duration of TTS
sustained during a time when
communication is critical for successful
mother/calf interactions could have
more serious impacts if it were in the
same frequency band as the necessary
vocalizations and of a severity that it
impeded communication. The fact that
animals exposed to levels and durations
of sound that would be expected to
result in this physiological response
would also be expected to have
behavioral responses of a comparatively
more severe or sustained nature is also
notable and potentially of more
importance than the simple existence of
a TTS.
Currently, TTS data only exist for four
species of cetaceans (bottlenose
dolphin, beluga whale (Delphinapterus
leucas), harbor porpoise, and Yangtze
finless porpoise (Neophocaena
phocaenoides)) and three species of
pinnipeds (northern elephant seal
(Mirounga angustirostris), harbor seal,
and California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus)) exposed to a limited
number of sound sources (i.e., mostly
tones and octave-band noise) in
laboratory settings (e.g., Finneran et al.,
2002 and 2010; Nachtigall et al., 2004;
Kastak et al., 2005; Lucke et al., 2009;
Mooney et al., 2009; Popov et al., 2011;
Finneran and Schlundt, 2010). In
general, harbor seals (Kastak et al., 2005;
Kastelein et al., 2012a) and harbor
porpoises (Lucke et al., 2009; Kastelein
et al., 2012b) have a lower TTS onset
than other measured pinniped or
cetacean species. However, even for
these animals, which are better able to
hear higher frequencies and may be
more sensitive to higher frequencies,
exposures on the order of approximately
170 dB rms or higher for brief transient
signals are likely required for even
temporary (recoverable) changes in
hearing sensitivity that would likely not
be categorized as physiologically
damaging (Lucke et al., 2009).
Additionally, the existing marine
mammal TTS data come from a limited
number of individuals within these
species. There are no data available on
noise-induced hearing loss for
mysticetes. For summaries of data on
TTS in marine mammals or for further
discussion of TTS onset thresholds,
please see Finneran (2016).
Scientific literature highlights the
inherent complexity of predicting TTS
onset in marine mammals, as well as the
importance of considering exposure
duration when assessing potential
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
impacts (Mooney et al., 2009a, 2009b;
Kastak et al., 2007). Generally, with
sound exposures of equal energy,
quieter sounds (lower SPL) of longer
duration were found to induce TTS
onset more than louder sounds (higher
SPL) of shorter duration (more similar to
sub-bottom profilers). For intermittent
sounds, less threshold shift will occur
than from a continuous exposure with
the same energy (some recovery will
occur between intermittent exposures)
(Kryter et al., 1966; Ward 1997). For
sound exposures at or somewhat above
the TTS-onset threshold, hearing
sensitivity recovers rapidly after
exposure to the sound ends; intermittent
exposures recover faster in comparison
with continuous exposures of the same
duration (Finneran et al., 2010). NMFS
considers TTS as Level B harassment
that is mediated by physiological effects
on the auditory system; however, NMFS
does not consider TTS-onset to be the
lowest level at which Level B
harassment may occur.
Animals in the Lease Area during the
HRG survey are unlikely to incur TTS
hearing impairment due to the
characteristics of the sound sources,
which include low source levels (208 to
221 dB re 1 mPa-m) and generally very
short pulses and duration of the sound.
Even for high-frequency cetacean
species (e.g., harbor porpoises), which
may have increased sensitivity to TTS
(Lucke et al., 2009; Kastelein et al.,
2012b), individuals would have to make
a very close approach and also remain
very close to vessels operating these
sources in order to receive multiple
exposures at relatively high levels, as
would be necessary to cause TTS.
Intermittent exposures—as would occur
due to the brief, transient signals
produced by these sources—require a
higher cumulative SEL to induce TTS
than would continuous exposures of the
same duration (i.e., intermittent
exposure results in lower levels of TTS)
(Mooney et al., 2009a; Finneran et al.,
2010). Moreover, most marine mammals
would more likely avoid a loud sound
source rather than swim in such close
proximity as to result in TTS. Kremser
et al. (2005) noted that the probability
of a cetacean swimming through the
area of exposure when a sub-bottom
profiler emits a pulse is small—because
if the animal was in the area, it would
have to pass the transducer at close
range in order to be subjected to sound
levels that could cause TTS and would
likely exhibit avoidance behavior to the
area near the transducer rather than
swim through at such a close range.
Further, the restricted beam shape of the
sub-bottom profiler and other HRG
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
survey equipment makes it unlikely that
an animal would be exposed more than
briefly during the passage of the vessel.
Boebel et al. (2005) concluded similarly
for single and multibeam echosounders
and, more recently, Lurton (2016)
conducted a modeling exercise and
concluded similarly that likely potential
for acoustic injury from these types of
systems is negligible but that behavioral
response cannot be ruled out. Animals
may avoid the area around the survey
vessels, thereby reducing exposure. Any
disturbance to marine mammals is
likely to be in the form of temporary
avoidance or alteration of opportunistic
foraging behavior near the survey
location.
For the HRG survey activities, animals
may avoid the area around the survey
vessel, thereby reducing exposure. Any
disturbance to marine mammals is more
likely to be in the form of temporary
avoidance or alteration of opportunistic
foraging behavior near the survey
location.
Masking
Masking is the obscuring of sounds of
interest to an animal by other sounds,
typically at similar frequencies. Marine
mammals are highly dependent on
sound, and their ability to recognize
sound signals amid other sound is
important in communication and
detection of both predators and prey
(Tyack 2000). Background ambient
sound may interfere with or mask the
ability of an animal to detect a sound
signal even when that signal is above its
absolute hearing threshold. Even in the
absence of anthropogenic sound, the
marine environment is often loud.
Natural ambient sound includes
contributions from wind, waves,
precipitation, other animals, and (at
frequencies above 30 kHz) thermal
sound resulting from molecular
agitation (Richardson et al., 1995).
Background sound may also include
anthropogenic sound, and masking of
natural sounds can result when human
activities produce high levels of
background sound. Conversely, if the
background level of underwater sound
is high (e.g., on a day with strong wind
and high waves), an anthropogenic
sound source would not be detectable as
far away as would be possible under
quieter conditions and would itself be
masked. Ambient sound is highly
variable on continental shelves
(Myrberg 1978; Desharnais et al., 1999).
This results in a high degree of
variability in the range at which marine
mammals can detect anthropogenic
sounds.
Although masking is a phenomenon
which may occur naturally, the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20571
introduction of loud anthropogenic
sounds into the marine environment at
frequencies important to marine
mammals increases the severity and
frequency of occurrence of masking. For
example, if a baleen whale is exposed to
continuous low-frequency sound from
an industrial source, this would reduce
the size of the area around that whale
within which it can hear the calls of
another whale. The components of
background noise that are similar in
frequency to the signal in question
primarily determine the degree of
masking of that signal. In general, little
is known about the degree to which
marine mammals rely upon detection of
sounds from conspecifics, predators,
prey, or other natural sources. In the
absence of specific information about
the importance of detecting these
natural sounds, it is not possible to
predict the impact of masking on marine
mammals (Richardson et al., 1995). In
general, masking effects are expected to
be less severe when sounds are transient
than when they are continuous.
Masking is typically of greater concern
for those marine mammals that utilize
low-frequency communications, such as
baleen whales, because of how far lowfrequency sounds propagate.
Marine mammal communications
would not likely be masked appreciably
by the sub-bottom profiler signals given
the directionality of the signal and the
brief period when an individual
mammal is likely to be within its beam.
And while continuous sound from the
DP thruster when in use is predicted to
extend 500 m to the 120 dB threshold,
the generally short duration of DP
thruster use and low source levels,
coupled with the likelihood of animals
to avoid the sound source, would result
in very little opportunity for this
activity to mask the communication of
local marine mammals for more than a
brief period of time.
Non-Auditory Physical Effects (Stress)
Classic stress responses begin when
an animal’s central nervous system
perceives a potential threat to its
homeostasis. That perception triggers
stress responses regardless of whether a
stimulus actually threatens the animal;
the mere perception of a threat is
sufficient to trigger a stress response
(Moberg 2000; Seyle 1950). Once an
animal’s central nervous system
perceives a threat, it mounts a biological
response or defense that consists of a
combination of the four general
biological defense responses: behavioral
responses, autonomic nervous system
responses, neuroendocrine responses, or
immune responses.
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
20572
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
In the case of many stressors, an
animal’s first and sometimes most
economical (in terms of biotic costs)
response is behavioral avoidance of the
potential stressor or avoidance of
continued exposure to a stressor. An
animal’s second line of defense to
stressors involves the sympathetic part
of the autonomic nervous system and
the classical ‘‘fight or flight’’ response
which includes the cardiovascular
system, the gastrointestinal system, the
exocrine glands, and the adrenal
medulla to produce changes in heart
rate, blood pressure, and gastrointestinal
activity that humans commonly
associate with ‘‘stress.’’ These responses
have a relatively short duration and may
or may not have significant long-term
effect on an animal’s welfare.
An animal’s third line of defense to
stressors involves its neuroendocrine
systems; the system that has received
the most study has been the
hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal system
(also known as the HPA axis in
mammals or the hypothalamuspituitary-interrenal axis in fish and
some reptiles). Unlike stress responses
associated with the autonomic nervous
system, virtually all neuro-endocrine
functions that are affected by stress—
including immune competence,
reproduction, metabolism, and
behavior—are regulated by pituitary
hormones. Stress-induced changes in
the secretion of pituitary hormones have
been implicated in failed reproduction
(Moberg 1987; Rivier 1995), altered
metabolism (Elasser et al., 2000),
reduced immune competence (Blecha
2000), and behavioral disturbance.
Increases in the circulation of
glucocorticosteroids (cortisol,
corticosterone, and aldosterone in
marine mammals; see Romano et al.,
2004) have been equated with stress for
many years.
The primary distinction between
stress (which is adaptive and does not
normally place an animal at risk) and
distress is the biotic cost of the
response. During a stress response, an
animal uses glycogen stores that can be
quickly replenished once the stress is
alleviated. In such circumstances, the
cost of the stress response would not
pose a risk to the animal’s welfare.
However, when an animal does not have
sufficient energy reserves to satisfy the
energetic costs of a stress response,
energy resources must be diverted from
other biotic function, which impairs
those functions that experience the
diversion. For example, when mounting
a stress response diverts energy away
from growth in young animals, those
animals may experience stunted growth.
When mounting a stress response
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
diverts energy from a fetus, an animal’s
reproductive success and its fitness will
suffer. In these cases, the animals will
have entered a pre-pathological or
pathological state which is called
‘‘distress’’ (Seyle 1950) or ‘‘allostatic
loading’’ (McEwen and Wingfield 2003).
This pathological state will last until the
animal replenishes its biotic reserves
sufficient to restore normal function.
Note that these examples involved a
long-term (days or weeks) stress
response exposure to stimuli.
Relationships between these
physiological mechanisms, animal
behavior, and the costs of stress
responses have also been documented
fairly well through controlled
experiments; because this physiology
exists in every vertebrate that has been
studied, it is not surprising that stress
responses and their costs have been
documented in both laboratory and freeliving animals (for examples see,
Holberton et al., 1996; Hood et al., 1998;
Jessop et al., 2003; Krausman et al.,
2004; Lankford et al., 2005; Reneerkens
et al., 2002; Thompson and Hamer,
2000). Information has also been
collected on the physiological responses
of marine mammals to exposure to
anthropogenic sounds (Fair and Becker
2000; Romano et al., 2002). For
example, Rolland et al. (2012) found
that noise reduction from reduced ship
traffic in the Bay of Fundy was
associated with decreased stress in
North Atlantic right whales. In a
conceptual model developed by the
Population Consequences of Acoustic
Disturbance (PCAD) working group,
serum hormones were identified as
possible indicators of behavioral effects
that are translated into altered rates of
reproduction and mortality.
Studies of other marine animals and
terrestrial animals would also lead us to
expect some marine mammals to
experience physiological stress
responses and, perhaps, physiological
responses that would be classified as
‘‘distress’’ upon exposure to high
frequency, mid-frequency and lowfrequency sounds. For example, Jansen
(1998) reported on the relationship
between acoustic exposures and
physiological responses that are
indicative of stress responses in humans
(for example, elevated respiration and
increased heart rates). Jones (1998)
reported on reductions in human
performance when faced with acute,
repetitive exposures to acoustic
disturbance. Trimper et al. (1998)
reported on the physiological stress
responses of osprey to low-level aircraft
noise while Krausman et al. (2004)
reported on the auditory and physiology
stress responses of endangered Sonoran
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
pronghorn to military overflights. Smith
et al. (2004a, 2004b), for example,
identified noise-induced physiological
transient stress responses in hearingspecialist fish (i.e., goldfish) that
accompanied short- and long-term
hearing losses. Welch and Welch (1970)
reported physiological and behavioral
stress responses that accompanied
damage to the inner ears of fish and
several mammals.
Hearing is one of the primary senses
marine mammals use to gather
information about their environment
and to communicate with conspecifics.
Although empirical information on the
relationship between sensory
impairment (TTS, PTS, and acoustic
masking) on marine mammals remains
limited, it seems reasonable to assume
that reducing an animal’s ability to
gather information about its
environment and to communicate with
other members of its species would be
stressful for animals that use hearing as
their primary sensory mechanism.
Therefore, we assume that acoustic
exposures sufficient to trigger onset PTS
or TTS would be accompanied by
physiological stress responses because
terrestrial animals exhibit those
responses under similar conditions
(NRC 2003). More importantly, marine
mammals might experience stress
responses at received levels lower than
those necessary to trigger onset TTS.
Based on empirical studies of the time
required to recover from stress
responses (Moberg 2000), we also
assume that stress responses are likely
to persist beyond the time interval
required for animals to recover from
TTS and might result in pathological
and pre-pathological states that would
be as significant as behavioral responses
to TTS.
In general, there are few data on the
potential for strong, anthropogenic
underwater sounds to cause nonauditory physical effects in marine
mammals. Such effects, if they occur at
all, would presumably be limited to
short distances and to activities that
extend over a prolonged period. The
available data do not allow
identification of a specific exposure
level above which non-auditory effects
can be expected (Southall et al., 2007).
There is no definitive evidence that any
of these effects occur even for marine
mammals in close proximity to an
anthropogenic sound source. In
addition, marine mammals that show
behavioral avoidance of survey vessels
and related sound sources are unlikely
to incur non-auditory impairment or
other physical effects. NMFS does not
expect that the generally short-term,
intermittent, and transitory HRG and
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
geotechnical activities would create
conditions of long-term, continuous
noise and chronic acoustic exposure
leading to long-term physiological stress
responses in marine mammals.
Behavioral Disturbance
Behavioral disturbance may include a
variety of effects, including subtle
changes in behavior (e.g., minor or brief
avoidance of an area or changes in
vocalizations), more conspicuous
changes in similar behavioral activities,
and more sustained and/or potentially
severe reactions, such as displacement
from or abandonment of high-quality
habitat. Behavioral responses to sound
are highly variable and context-specific
and any reactions depend on numerous
intrinsic and extrinsic factors (e.g.,
species, state of maturity, experience,
current activity, reproductive state,
auditory sensitivity, time of day), as
well as the interplay between factors
(e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok et
al., 2003; Southall et al., 2007; Weilgart,
2007; Archer et al., 2010). Behavioral
reactions can vary not only among
individuals but also within an
individual, depending on previous
experience with a sound source,
context, and numerous other factors
(Ellison et al., 2012), and can vary
depending on characteristics associated
with the sound source (e.g., whether it
is moving or stationary, number of
sources, distance from the source).
Please see Appendices B–C of Southall
et al. (2007) for a review of studies
involving marine mammal behavioral
responses to sound.
Habituation can occur when an
animal’s response to a stimulus wanes
with repeated exposure, usually in the
absence of unpleasant associated events
(Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most
likely to habituate to sounds that are
predictable and unvarying. It is
important to note that habituation is
appropriately considered as a
‘‘progressive reduction in response to
stimuli that are perceived as neither
aversive nor beneficial,’’ rather than as,
more generally, moderation in response
to human disturbance (Bejder et al.,
2009). The opposite process is
sensitization, when an unpleasant
experience leads to subsequent
responses, often in the form of
avoidance, at a lower level of exposure.
As noted, behavioral state may affect the
type of response. For example, animals
that are resting may show greater
behavioral change in response to
disturbing sound levels than animals
that are highly motivated to remain in
an area for feeding (Richardson et al.,
1995; NRC 2003; Wartzok et al., 2003).
Controlled experiments with captive
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
marine mammals have shown
pronounced behavioral reactions,
including avoidance of loud sound
sources (Ridgway et al., 1997; Finneran
et al., 2003). Observed responses of wild
marine mammals to loud, pulsed sound
sources (typically seismic airguns or
acoustic harassment devices) have been
varied but often consist of avoidance
behavior or other behavioral changes
suggesting discomfort (Morton and
Symonds, 2002; see also Richardson et
al., 1995; Nowacek et al., 2007).
Available studies show wide variation
in response to underwater sound;
therefore, it is difficult to predict
specifically how any given sound in a
particular instance might affect marine
mammals perceiving the signal. If a
marine mammal does react briefly to an
underwater sound by changing its
behavior or moving a small distance, the
impacts of the change are unlikely to be
significant to the individual, let alone
the stock or population. However, if a
sound source displaces marine
mammals from an important feeding or
breeding area for a prolonged period,
impacts on individuals and populations
could be significant (e.g., Lusseau and
Bejder, 2007; Weilgart 2007; NRC 2005).
However, there are broad categories of
potential response, which we describe
in greater detail here, that include
alteration of dive behavior, alteration of
foraging behavior, effects to breathing,
interference with or alteration of
vocalization, avoidance, and flight.
Changes in dive behavior can vary
widely and may consist of increased or
decreased dive times and surface
intervals as well as changes in the rates
of ascent and descent during a dive (e.g.,
Frankel and Clark 2000; Costa et al.,
2003; Ng and Leung 2003; Nowacek et
al., 2004; Goldbogen et al., 2013a,b).
Variations in dive behavior may reflect
interruptions in biologically significant
activities (e.g., foraging) or they may be
of little biological significance. The
impact of an alteration to dive behavior
resulting from an acoustic exposure
depends on what the animal is doing at
the time of the exposure and the type
and magnitude of the response.
Disruption of feeding behavior can be
difficult to correlate with anthropogenic
sound exposure, so it is usually inferred
by observed displacement from known
foraging areas, the appearance of
secondary indicators (e.g., bubble nets
or sediment plumes), or changes in dive
behavior. As for other types of
behavioral response, the frequency,
duration, and temporal pattern of signal
presentation, as well as differences in
species sensitivity, are likely
contributing factors to differences in
response in any given circumstance
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20573
(e.g., Croll et al., 2001; Nowacek et al.;
2004; Madsen et al., 2006; Yazvenko et
al., 2007). A determination of whether
foraging disruptions incur fitness
consequences would require
information on or estimates of the
energetic requirements of the affected
individuals and the relationship
between prey availability, foraging effort
and success, and the life history stage of
the animal.
Variations in respiration naturally
vary with different behaviors and
alterations to breathing rate as a
function of acoustic exposure can be
expected to co-occur with other
behavioral reactions, such as a flight
response or an alteration in diving.
However, respiration rates in and of
themselves may be representative of
annoyance or an acute stress response.
Various studies have shown that
respiration rates may either be
unaffected or could increase, depending
on the species and signal characteristics,
again highlighting the importance in
understanding species differences in the
tolerance of underwater noise when
determining the potential for impacts
resulting from anthropogenic sound
exposure (e.g., Kastelein et al., 2001,
2005b, 2006; Gailey et al., 2007).
Marine mammals vocalize for
different purposes and across multiple
modes, such as whistling, echolocation
click production, calling, and singing.
Changes in vocalization behavior in
response to anthropogenic noise can
occur for any of these modes and may
result from a need to compete with an
increase in background noise or may
reflect increased vigilance or a startle
response. For example, in the presence
of potentially masking signals,
humpback whales and killer whales
have been observed to increase the
length of their songs (Miller et al., 2000;
Fristrup et al., 2003; Foote et al., 2004),
while right whales have been observed
to shift the frequency content of their
calls upward while reducing the rate of
calling in areas of increased
anthropogenic noise (Parks et al.,
2007b). In some cases, animals may
cease sound production during
production of aversive signals (Bowles
et al., 1994).
Avoidance is the displacement of an
individual from an area or migration
path as a result of the presence of a
sound or other stressors, and is one of
the most obvious manifestations of
disturbance in marine mammals
(Richardson et al., 1995). For example,
gray whales are known to change
direction—deflecting from customary
migratory paths—in order to avoid noise
from seismic surveys (Malme et al.,
1984). Avoidance may be short-term,
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
20574
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
with animals returning to the area once
the noise has ceased (e.g., Bowles et al.,
1994; Goold 1996; Stone et al., 2000;
Morton and Symonds, 2002; Gailey et
al., 2007). Longer-term displacement is
possible, however, which may lead to
changes in abundance or distribution
patterns of the affected species in the
affected region if habituation to the
presence of the sound does not occur
(e.g., Blackwell et al., 2004; Bejder et al.,
2006; Teilmann et al., 2006).
A flight response is a dramatic change
in normal movement to a directed and
rapid movement away from the
perceived location of a sound source.
The flight response differs from other
avoidance responses in the intensity of
the response (e.g., directed movement,
rate of travel). Relatively little
information on flight responses of
marine mammals to anthropogenic
signals exist, although observations of
flight responses to the presence of
predators have occurred (Connor and
Heithaus, 1996). The result of a flight
response could range from brief,
temporary exertion and displacement
from the area where the signal provokes
flight to, in extreme cases, marine
mammal strandings (Evans and
England, 2001). However, it should be
noted that response to a perceived
predator does not necessarily invoke
flight (Ford and Reeves, 2008) and
whether individuals are solitary or in
groups may influence the response.
Behavioral disturbance can also
impact marine mammals in more subtle
ways. Increased vigilance may result in
costs related to diversion of focus and
attention (i.e., when a response consists
of increased vigilance, it may come at
the cost of decreased attention to other
critical behaviors such as foraging or
resting). These effects have generally not
been demonstrated for marine
mammals, but studies involving fish
and terrestrial animals have shown that
increased vigilance may substantially
reduce feeding rates (e.g., Beauchamp
and Livoreil, 1997; Fritz et al., 2002;
Purser and Radford, 2011). In addition,
chronic disturbance can cause
population declines through reduction
of fitness (e.g., decline in body
condition) and subsequent reduction in
reproductive success, survival, or both
(e.g., Harrington and Veitch, 1992; Daan
et al., 1996; Bradshaw et al., 1998).
However, Ridgway et al. (2006) reported
that increased vigilance in bottlenose
dolphins exposed to sound over a fiveday period did not cause any sleep
deprivation or stress effects.
Many animals perform vital functions,
such as feeding, resting, traveling, and
socializing, on a diel cycle (24-hour
cycle). Disruption of such functions
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
resulting from reactions to stressors
such as sound exposure 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). Note that
there is a difference between multi-day
substantive behavioral reactions and
multi-day anthropogenic activities. For
example, just because an activity lasts
for multiple days does not necessarily
mean that individual animals are either
exposed to activity-related stressors for
multiple days or, further, exposed in a
manner resulting in sustained multi-day
substantive behavioral responses.
Marine mammals are likely to avoid
the HRG survey activity, especially the
naturally shy harbor porpoise, while the
harbor seals might be attracted to them
out of curiosity. However, because the
sub-bottom profilers and other HRG
survey equipment operate from a
moving vessel, and the maximum radius
to the 160 dB harassment threshold is
less than 200 m, the area and time that
this equipment would be affecting a
given location is very small. Further,
once an area has been surveyed, it is not
likely that it will be surveyed again,
therefore reducing the likelihood of
repeated HRG-related impacts within
the survey area. And while the drill ship
using DP thrusters will generally remain
stationary during geotechnical survey
activities, the short duration (up to 12
days) of the DP thruster use would
likely result in only short-term and
temporary avoidance of the area, rather
than permanent abandonment, by
marine mammals.
We have also considered the potential
for severe behavioral responses such as
stranding and associated indirect injury
or mortality from Ocean Wind’s use of
HRG survey equipment, on the basis of
a 2008 mass stranding of approximately
one hundred melon-headed whales in a
Madagascar lagoon system. An
investigation of the event indicated that
use of a high-frequency mapping system
(12-kHz multibeam echosounder) was
the most plausible and likely initial
behavioral trigger of the event, while
providing the caveat that there is no
unequivocal and easily identifiable
single cause (Southall et al., 2013). The
investigatory panel’s conclusion was
based on (1) very close temporal and
spatial association and directed
movement of the survey with the
stranding event; (2) the unusual nature
of such an event coupled with
previously documented apparent
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
behavioral sensitivity of the species to
other sound types (Southall et al., 2006;
Brownell et al., 2009); and (3) the fact
that all other possible factors considered
were determined to be unlikely causes.
Specifically, regarding survey patterns
prior to the event and in relation to
bathymetry, the vessel transited in a
north-south direction on the shelf break
parallel to the shore, ensonifying large
areas of deep-water habitat prior to
operating intermittently in a
concentrated area offshore from the
stranding site; this may have trapped
the animals between the sound source
and the shore, thus driving them
towards the lagoon system. The
investigatory panel systematically
excluded or deemed highly unlikely
nearly all potential reasons for these
animals leaving their typical pelagic
habitat for an area extremely atypical for
the species (i.e., a shallow lagoon
system). Notably, this was the first time
that such a system has been associated
with a stranding event. The panel also
noted several site- and situation-specific
secondary factors that may have
contributed to the avoidance responses
that led to the eventual entrapment and
mortality of the whales. Specifically,
shoreward-directed surface currents and
elevated chlorophyll levels in the area
preceding the event may have played a
role (Southall et al., 2013). The report
also notes that prior use of a similar
system in the general area may have
sensitized the animals and also
concluded that, for odontocete
cetaceans that hear well in higher
frequency ranges where ambient noise is
typically quite low, high-power active
sonars operating in this range may be
more easily audible and have potential
effects over larger areas than low
frequency systems that have more
typically been considered in terms of
anthropogenic noise impacts. It is,
however, important to note that the
relatively lower output frequency,
higher output power, and complex
nature of the system implicated in this
event, in context of the other factors
noted here, likely produced a fairly
unusual set of circumstances that
indicate that such events would likely
remain rare and are not necessarily
relevant to use of lower-power, higherfrequency systems more commonly used
for HRG survey applications. The risk of
similar events recurring may be very
low, given the extensive use of active
acoustic systems used for scientific and
navigational purposes worldwide on a
daily basis and the lack of direct
evidence of such responses previously
reported.
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
Tolerance
Numerous studies have shown that
underwater sounds from industrial
activities are often readily detectable by
marine mammals in the water at
distances of many km. However, other
studies have shown that marine
mammals at distances more than a few
km away often show no apparent
response to industrial activities of
various types (Miller et al., 2005). This
is often true even in cases when the
sounds must be readily audible to the
animals based on measured received
levels and the hearing sensitivity of that
mammal group. Although various
baleen whales, toothed whales, and (less
frequently) pinnipeds have been shown
to react behaviorally to underwater
sound from sources such as airgun
pulses or vessels under some
conditions, at other times, mammals of
all three types have shown no overt
reactions (e.g., Malme et al., 1986;
Richardson et al., 1995; Madsen and
Mohl 2000; Croll et al., 2001; Jacobs and
Terhune 2002; Madsen et al., 2002;
Miller et al., 2005). In general,
pinnipeds seem to be more tolerant of
exposure to some types of underwater
sound than are baleen whales.
Richardson et al. (1995) found that
vessel sound does not seem to strongly
affect pinnipeds that are already in the
water. Richardson et al. (1995) went on
to explain that seals on haul-outs
sometimes respond strongly to the
presence of vessels and at other times
appear to show considerable tolerance
of vessels, and Brueggeman et al. (1992)
observed ringed seals (Pusa hispida)
hauled out on ice pans displaying shortterm escape reactions when a ship
approached within 0.16–0.31 mi (0.25–
0.5 km). Due to the relatively high
vessel traffic in the Lease Area it is
possible that marine mammals are
habituated to noise (e.g., DP thrusters)
from project vessels in the area.
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Vessel Strike
Ship strikes of marine mammals can
cause major wounds, which may lead to
the death of the animal. An animal at
the surface could be struck directly by
a vessel, a surfacing animal could hit
the bottom of a vessel, or a vessel’s
propeller could injure an animal just
below the surface. The severity of
injuries typically depends on the size
and speed of the vessel (Knowlton and
Kraus 2001; Laist et al., 2001;
Vanderlaan and Taggart 2007).
The most vulnerable marine mammals
are those that spend extended periods of
time at the surface in order to restore
oxygen levels within their tissues after
deep dives (e.g., the sperm whale). In
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:00 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
addition, some baleen whales, such as
the North Atlantic right whale, seem
generally unresponsive to vessel sound,
making them more susceptible to vessel
collisions (Nowacek et al., 2004). These
species are primarily large, slow moving
whales. Smaller marine mammals (e.g.,
bottlenose dolphin) move quickly
through the water column and are often
seen riding the bow wave of large ships.
Marine mammal responses to vessels
may include avoidance and changes in
dive pattern (NRC 2003).
An examination of all known ship
strikes from all shipping sources
(civilian and military) indicates vessel
speed is a principal factor in whether a
vessel strike results in death (Knowlton
and Kraus 2001; Laist et al., 2001;
Jensen and Silber 2003; Vanderlaan and
Taggart 2007). In assessing records with
known vessel speeds, Laist et al. (2001)
found a direct relationship between the
occurrence of a whale strike and the
speed of the vessel involved in the
collision. The authors concluded that
most deaths occurred when a vessel was
traveling in excess of 24.1 km/h (14.9
mph; 13 kn). Given the slow vessel
speeds and predictable course necessary
for data acquisition, ship strike is
unlikely to occur during the geophysical
and geotechnical surveys. Marine
mammals would be able to easily avoid
the applicant’s vessel due to the slow
speeds and are likely already habituated
to the presence of numerous vessels in
the area. Further, Ocean Wind shall
implement measures (e.g., vessel speed
restrictions and separation distances;
see Proposed Mitigation Measures) set
forth in the BOEM Lease to reduce the
risk of a vessel strike to marine mammal
species in the Lease Area.
There are no rookeries or mating
grounds known to be biologically
important to marine mammals within
the proposed project area. The area is an
important feeding area for fin whales.
There is no designated critical habitat
for any ESA-listed marine mammals.
NMFS’ regulations at 50 CFR part 224
designated the nearshore waters of the
Mid-Atlantic Bight as the Mid-Atlantic
U.S. Seasonal Management Area (SMA)
for right whales in 2008. Mandatory
vessel speed restrictions (less than 10
knots) are in place in that SMA from
November 1 through April 30 to reduce
the threat of collisions between ships
and right whales around their migratory
route and calving grounds.
Bottom disturbance associated with
the HRG survey activities may include
grab sampling to validate the seabed
classification obtained from the
multibeam echosounder/sidescan sonar
data. This will typically be
accomplished using a Mini-Harmon
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20575
Grab with 0.1 m2 sample area or the
slightly larger Harmon Grab with a 0.2
m2 sample area. Bottom disturbance
associated with the geotechnical survey
activities will consist of the 8 deep bore
holes of approximately 3 to 4 inches (in;
7.6 to 10.1 centimeters (cm)) diameter,
the 30 shallow CPTs of up to
approximately 2 in (5 cm) in diameter,
and the 8 deep CPTs of approximately
2 in (5 cm) in diameter. Impact on
marine mammal habitat from these
activities will be temporary,
insignificant, and discountable.
Because of the temporary nature of
the disturbance, the availability of
similar habitat and resources (e.g., prey
species) in the surrounding area, and
the lack of important or unique marine
mammal habitat, the impacts to marine
mammals and the food sources that they
utilize are not expected to cause
significant or long-term consequences
for individual marine mammals or their
populations.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes proposed
for authorization through this IHA,
which will inform both NMFS’
consideration of whether the number of
takes is ‘‘small’’ and the negligible
impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take
expected to result from these activities.
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).
Authorized takes would be by Level B
harassment only, in the form of
disruption of behavioral patterns for
individual marine mammals resulting
from exposure to HRG and geotechnical
surveys. Based on the nature of the
activity, the short duration of activities,
and the small Level A isopleths (less
than 3 m for all sources), Level A
harassment is neither anticipated nor
proposed to be authorized. The death of
a marine mammal is also a type of
incidental take. However, as described
previously, no mortality is anticipated
or proposed to be authorized for this
activity. Below we describe how the
take is estimated for this project.
Project activities that have the
potential to harass marine mammals, as
defined by the MMPA, include
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20576
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
underwater noise from operation of the
HRG survey sub-bottom profilers and
noise propagation associated with the
use of DP thrusters during geotechnical
survey activities that require the use of
a DP drill ship. NMFS anticipates that
impacts to marine mammals would be
in the form of behavioral harassment,
and no take by injury, serious injury, or
mortality is proposed.
The basis for the take estimate is the
number of marine mammals that would
be exposed to sound levels in excess of
NMFS’ Level B harassment criteria for
impulsive noise (160 dB re 1 mPa (rms)
and continuous noise (120 dB re 1 mPa
(rms)), which is generally determined by
overlaying the area ensonified above
NMFS acoustic thresholds for
harassment within a day with the
density of marine mammals, and
multiplying by the number of days.
NMFS’ current acoustic thresholds for
estimating take are shown in Table 4
below.
TABLE 4—NMFS’S ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA
Definition
Level B harassment (underwater) ...
Level B harassment (airborne) .......
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Criterion
Behavioral disruption .....................
Behavioral disruption .....................
Modeling took into consideration
sound sources using the potential
operational parameters, bathymetry,
geoacoustic properties of the Lease
Area, time of year, and marine mammal
hearing ranges. Results from the
hydroacoustic modeling and
measurements showed that estimated
maximum distance to the 160 dB re 1
mPa (rms) MMPA threshold for all water
depths for the HRG survey sub-bottom
profilers (the HRG survey equipment
with the greatest potential for effect on
marine mammal) was approximately
75.28 m from the source using practical
spreading (Subacoustech 2016), and the
estimated maximum critical distance to
the 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) MMPA
threshold for all water depths for the
drill ship DP thruster was
approximately 500 m from the source
(Subacoustech 2016). Ocean Wind and
NMFS believe that these estimates
represent the a conservative scenario
and that the actual distances to the
Level B harassment threshold may be
shorter, as practical spreading (15logR)
was used to estimate the ensonified area
here and there are some sound
measurements taken in the Northeast
that suggest a higher spreading
coefficient (which would result in a
shorter distance) may be applicable.
Ocean Wind estimated species
densities within the proposed project
area in order to estimate the number of
marine mammal exposures to sound
levels above the 120 dB Level B
harassment threshold for continuous
noise (i.e., DP thrusters) and the 160 dB
Level B harassment threshold for
intermittent, impulsive noise (i.e., subbottom profiler). Research indicates that
marine mammals generally have
extremely fine auditory temporal
resolution and can detect each signal
separately (e.g., Au et al., 1988; Dolphin
et al., 1995; Supin and Popov 1995;
Mooney et al., 2009b), especially for
species with echolocation capabilities.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
Threshold
160 dB (impulsive source)/120 dB (continuous source) (rms).
90 dB (harbor seals)/100 dB (other pinnipeds) (unweighted).
Therefore, it is likely that marine
mammals would perceive the acoustic
signals associated with the HRG survey
equipment as being intermittent rather
than continuous, and we base our takes
from these sources on exposures to the
160 dB threshold.
The data used as the basis for
estimating cetacean density (‘‘D’’) for
the Lease Area are sightings per unit
effort (SPUE) derived by Duke
University (Roberts et al., 2016). For
pinnipeds, the only available
comprehensive data for seal abundance
is the Northeast Navy Operations Area
(OPAREA) Density Estimates (DoN
2007). SPUE (or, the relative abundance
of species) is derived by using a
measure of survey effort and number of
individual cetaceans sighted. SPUE
allows for comparison between discrete
units of time (i.e. seasons) and space
within a project area (Shoop and
Kenney, 1992). The Duke University
(Roberts et al., 2016) cetacean density
data represent models derived from
aggregating line-transect surveys
conducted over 23 years by 5
institutions (NOAA NMFS Northeast
Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC), New
Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection (NJDEP), NOAA NMFS
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
(SEFSC), University of North Carolina
Wilmington (UNCW), Virginia
Aquarium & Marine Science Center
(VAMSC)), the results of which are
freely available online at the Ocean
Biogeographic Information System
Spatial Ecological Analysis of
Megavertebrate Populations (OBIS–
SEAMAP) repository. Monthly density
values were within the survey area were
averaged by season to provide seasonal
density estimates. The OPAREA Density
Estimates (DoN 2007) used for pinniped
densities were based on data collected
through NMFS NWFSC aerial surveys
conducted between 1998 and 2005.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Zone of influence (ZOI) is the
extent of the ensonified zone in a given
day. The ZOI was calculated using the
following equations:
• Stationary source (e.g. DP thruster):
pr2
• Mobile source (e.g. sparkers):
(distance/day * 2r) + pr2
Where distance is the maximum
survey trackline per day (177.6 km) and
r is the distance to the 160 dB (for
impulsive sources) and 120 dB (for nonimpulsive sources) isopleths. The
isopleths were calculated using
practical spreading.
Estimated takes were calculated by
multiplying the species density (animals
per km2) by the appropriate ZOI,
multiplied by the number of appropriate
days (e.g. 42 for HRG activities or 12 for
geotechnical activities) of the specified
activity. A detailed description of the
acoustic modeling used to calculate
zones of influence is provided in Ocean
Wind’s IHA application (also see the
discussion in the Mitigation section
below).
Ocean Wind used a ZOI of 26.757 km2
and a survey period of 42 days, which
includes estimated weather downtime,
to estimate take from use of the HRG
survey equipment during geophysical
survey activities. The ZOI is based on
the worst case (since it assumes the
higher powered GeoSource 800 sparker
will be operating all the time) and a
maximum survey trackline of 110.4 mi
(177.6 km) per day. Based on the
proposed HRG survey schedule (June
2017), take calculations were based on
the spring seasonal species density as
derived from Roberts et al. (2016) for
cetaceans and seasonal OPAREA
density estimates (DoN, 2007) for
pinnipeds. The resulting take estimates
(rounded to the nearest whole number)
are presented in Table 6.
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20577
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
TABLE 6—ESTIMATED LEVEL B HARASSMENT TAKES FOR HRG SURVEY ACTIVITIES
Density for
spring
(number/km2)
Species
North Atlantic Right Whale ......................................................................
Humpback Whale ....................................................................................
Fin Whale .................................................................................................
Sperm whale ............................................................................................
Minke Whale ............................................................................................
Bottlenose Dolphin ...................................................................................
Short beaked common Dolphin ...............................................................
Harbor Porpoise .......................................................................................
Harbor Seal ..............................................................................................
Calculated take
(number)
Requested take
authorization
(number)
0.00
0.11
0.89
0.11
0.22
284.7
31.69
1.34
0.00
0
0
*5
0
0
285
32
*4
0
.0000
.0001
.0008
.0001
.0002
.2534
.0282
.0012
0.0000
Percentage
of stock
potentially
affected
0
0
0.061
0
0
0.385
0.047
0.006
0
* Requested take authorization was increased to account for average group size of fin whales (5) and harbor porpoise (4).
Ocean Wind used a ZOI of 0.31 m2
(0.79 km2) and a maximum DP thruster
use period of 12 days to estimate take
from use of the DP thruster during
geotechnical survey activities. The ZOI
represents the field-verified distance to
the 120 dB isopleth for DP thruster use.
Based on the proposed geotechnical
survey schedule (September 2017), take
calculations were based on the fall
seasonal species density estimates
(Roberts et al., 2016; DoN, 2007) (Table
7). The resulting take estimates
(rounded to the nearest whole number)
based upon these conservative
assumptions for bottlenose dolphins
and harbor seals are presented in Table
7. These numbers are based on 12 days
and represent only 0.001 percent of the
stock for each of these 2 species. Take
estimates were increased to take into
account average group size where
needed (fin whale and harbor porpoise).
Take calculations for North Atlantic
right whale, humpback whale, sperm
whale, and minke whale are at or near
zero (refer to the Ocean Wind
application); therefore, no takes for
these species are requested or proposed
for authorization.
TABLE 7—ESTIMATED LEVEL B HARASSMENT TAKES FOR GEOTECHNICAL SURVEY ACTIVITIES
Density for fall
(number/100
km2)
Species
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Bottlenose Dolphin ...................................................................................
Harbor seal ..............................................................................................
Ocean Wind’s requested take numbers
are provided in Tables 6 and 7 and are
also the number of takes NMFS is
proposing to authorize. Ocean Wind’s
calculations do not take into account
whether a single animal is harassed
multiple times or whether each
exposure is a different animal.
Therefore, the numbers in Tables 6 and
7 are the maximum number of animals
that may be harassed during the HRG
and geotechnical surveys (i.e., Ocean
Wind assumes that each exposure event
is a different animal). These estimates
do not account for prescribed mitigation
measures that Ocean Wind would
implement during the specified
activities and the fact that shutdown/
powerdown procedures shall be
implemented if an animal enters within
200 m of the vessel during HRG
activities, and 500 m during
geotechnical activities, further reducing
the potential for any takes to occur
during these activities.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
Calculated take
(number)
Requested take
authorization
(number)
1.08
0.92
1
1
11.44
9.74
Ocean Wind used NMFS’ Guidance
(NMFS 2016) to determine sound
exposure thresholds to determine when
an activity that produces sound might
result in impacts to a marine mammal
such that a take by injury, in the form
of PTS, might occur. The functional
hearing groups and the associated PTS
onset acoustic thresholds are indicated
in Table 8 below. Ocean Wind used the
user spreadsheet to calculate the
isopleth for the loudest source (sparker,
sub-bottom profiler). The sub-bottom
profiler was calculated with the
following conditions: Source level at
172.4 rms, vessel velocity of 2.058 m/s,
repetition rate of 0.182, pulse duration
of 22 ms and a weighting factor
adjustment of 10 based on the
spectrogram for this equipment
(Gardline 2016). Isopleths were less
than 3 m for all hearing groups;
therefore, no Level A takes are
requested. The Geo-source sparker
model used the following parameters:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Percentage
of stock
potentially
affected
0.001
0.001
source level at 188.7 rms Source level,
vessel velocity of 2.058 meters per
second (m/s), repetition rate of 0.25
seconds, pulse duration of 10 ms and
weighting factor adjustment of 3 based
on the spectrograms for this equipment.
Isopleths were less than 2 m for all
hearing groups; therefore, no Level A
takes are requested. The DP thruster was
defined as non-impulsive static
continuous source with an extrapolated
source level of 150 dB rms based on far
field measurements (Subacoustech
2016), an activity duration of 4 hours
and weighting factor adjustment of 2.
The transmission loss coefficient of 11.1
was used based on the slope of best fit
from field measurements (Subacoustech
2016). Isopleths were less than 1 m for
all hearing groups; therefore, no Level A
take are requested. No level A take is
requested or proposed to be authorized
for any of the sources used during HRG
and geotechnical surveys.
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20578
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
TABLE 8—SUMMARY OF PTS ONSET ACOUSTIC THRESHOLDS 1
PTS onset acoustic thresholds *
(received level)
Hearing group
Impulsive
Low-frequency cetaceans ............................................
Mid-frequency cetaceans .............................................
High-frequency cetaceans ............................................
Phocid Pinnipeds (underwaters) ..................................
Otariid Pinnipeds (underwater) ....................................
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
1 NMFS
Cell:
Cell:
Cell:
Cell:
Cell:
1
3
5
7
9
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
219
230
202
218
232
dB;
dB;
dB;
dB;
dB;
Non-impulsive
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ..............
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB .............
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ..............
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB .............
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ............
Cell:
Cell:
Cell:
Cell:
Cell:
2 LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
4 LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
6 LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
8 LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
10 LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
2016.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible
methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, ‘‘and other means of effecting
the least practicable impact on such
species or stock and its habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of
such species or stock for taking’’ for
certain subsistence uses (latter not
applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for
incidental take authorizations to include
information about the availability and
feasibility (economic and technological)
of equipment, methods, and manner of
conducting such activity or other means
of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or
stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or
may not be appropriate to ensure the
least practicable adverse impact on
species or stocks and their habitat, as
well as subsistence uses where
applicable, we carefully balance two
primary factors: (1) The manner in
which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the
measure(s) is expected to reduce
impacts to marine mammals, marine
mammal species or stocks, and their
habitat, which considers the nature of
the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range), as
well as the likelihood that the measure
will be effective if implemented; and the
likelihood of effective implementation,
and; (2) the practicability of the
measures for applicant implementation,
which may consider such things as cost,
impact on operations, and, in the case
of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness
activity.
With NMFS’ input during the
application process, and as per the
BOEM Lease, Ocean Wind is proposing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
the following mitigation measures
during site characterization surveys
utilizing HRG survey equipment and
use of the DP thruster. The mitigation
measures outlined in this section are
based on protocols and procedures that
have been successfully implemented
and resulted in no observed take of
marine mammals for similar offshore
projects and previously approved by
NMFS (ESS 2013; Dominion 2013 and
2014).
Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones
Protected species observers (PSOs)
will monitor the following exclusion/
monitoring zones for the presence of
marine mammals:
• A 200-m exclusion zone during
HRG surveys (this exceeds the estimated
Level B harassment isopleth).
• A 500-m monitoring zone during
the use of DP thrusters during
geotechnical survey activities (this is
equal to the Level B harassment
isopleth).
The 200 m exclusion zone is the
default exclusion zone specified in
stipulation 4.4.6.1 of the New Jersey
OCS–A 0498 Lease Agreement. The 500
m exclusion zone is based on fieldverified distances established during
similar survey work conducted within
the Bay State Wind Lease Area
(Subacoustech 2016).
Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of the established
exclusion zone(s) for the HRG and
geotechnical surveys will be performed
by qualified and NMFS-approved PSOs,
the resumes of whom will be provided
to NMFS for review and approval prior
to the start of survey activities. An
observer team comprising a minimum of
four NMFS-approved PSOs and two
certified Passive Acoustic Monitoring
(PAM) operators (PAM operators will
not function as PSOs), operating in
shifts, will be stationed aboard either
the survey vessel or a dedicated PSOvessel. PSOs and PAM operators will
work in shifts such that no one monitor
will work more than 4 consecutive
hours without a 2-hour break or longer
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
than 12 hours during any 24-hour
period. During daylight hours the PSOs
will rotate in shifts of one on and three
off, while during nighttime operations
PSOs will work in pairs. The PAM
operators will also be on call as
necessary during daytime operations
should visual observations become
impaired. Each PSO will monitor 360
degrees of the field of vision.
PSOs will be responsible for visually
monitoring and identifying marine
mammals approaching or within the
established exclusion zone(s) during
survey activities. It will be the
responsibility of the Lead PSO on duty
to communicate the presence of marine
mammals as well as to communicate
and enforce the action(s) that are
necessary to ensure mitigation and
monitoring requirements are
implemented as appropriate. PAM
operators will communicate detected
vocalizations to the Lead PSO on duty,
who will then be responsible for
implementing the necessary mitigation
procedures. A mitigation and
monitoring communications flow
diagram has been included as Appendix
A in the IHA application.
PSOs will be equipped with
binoculars and have the ability to
estimate distances to marine mammals
located in proximity to the vessel and/
or exclusion zone using range finders.
Reticulated binoculars will also be
available to PSOs for use as appropriate
based on conditions and visibility to
support the siting and monitoring of
marine species. Digital single-lens reflex
camera equipment will be used to
record sightings and verify species
identification. During night operations,
PAM (see Passive Acoustic Monitoring
requirements below) and night-vision
equipment in combination with infrared
technology will be used (Additional
details and specifications are provided
in Ocean Wind’s application in
Appendix B for night-vision devices and
Appendix C for infrared video
monitoring technology). Position data
will be recorded using hand-held or
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
vessel global positioning system (GPS)
units for each sighting.
The PSOs will begin observation of
the exclusion zone(s) at least 60 minutes
prior to ramp-up of HRG survey
equipment. Use of noise-producing
equipment will not begin until the
exclusion zone is clear of all marine
mammals for at least 60 minutes, as per
the requirements of the BOEM Lease.
If a marine mammal is detected
approaching or entering the 200-m
exclusion zones during the HRG survey,
or the 500-m monitoring zone during DP
thrusters use, the vessel operator would
adhere to the shutdown (during HRG
survey) or powerdown (during DP
thruster use) procedures described
below to minimize noise impacts on the
animals.
At all times, the vessel operator will
maintain a separation distance of 500 m
from any sighted North Atlantic right
whale as stipulated in the Vessel Strike
Avoidance procedures described below.
These stated requirements will be
included in the site-specific training to
be provided to the survey team.
Vessel Strike Avoidance
The Applicant will ensure that vessel
operators and crew maintain a vigilant
watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and
slow down or stop their vessels to avoid
striking these species. Survey vessel
crew members responsible for
navigation duties will receive sitespecific training on marine mammal and
sea turtle sighting/reporting and vessel
strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike
avoidance measures will include the
following, except under extraordinary
circumstances when complying with
these requirements would put the safety
of the vessel or crew at risk:
• All vessel operators will comply
with 10 knot (<18.5 km per hour [km/
h]) speed restrictions in any Dynamic
Management Area (DMA). In addition,
all vessels operating from November 1
through July 31 will operate at speeds
of 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less.
• All survey vessels will maintain a
separation distance of 500 m or greater
from any sighted North Atlantic right
whale.
• If underway, vessels must steer a
course away from any sited North
Atlantic right whale at 10 knots (<18.5
km/h) or less until the 500 m minimum
separation distance has been
established. If a North Atlantic right
whale is sited in a vessel’s path, or
within 100 m to an underway vessel, the
underway vessel must reduce speed and
shift the engine to neutral. Engines will
not be engaged until the North Atlantic
right whale has moved outside of the
vessel’s path and beyond 100 m. If
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
stationary, the vessel must not engage
engines until the North Atlantic right
whale has moved beyond 100 m.
• All vessels will maintain a
separation distance of 100 m or greater
from any sighted non-delphinoid (i.e.,
mysticetes and sperm whales)
cetaceans. If sighted, the vessel
underway must reduce speed and shift
the engine to neutral and must not
engage the engines until the nondelphinoid cetacean has moved outside
of the vessel’s path and beyond 100 m.
If a survey vessel is stationary, the
vessel will not engage engines until the
non-delphinoid cetacean has moved out
of the vessel’s path and beyond 100 m.
• All vessels will maintain a
separation distance of 50 m or greater
from any sighted delphinoid cetacean.
Any vessel underway will remain
parallel to a sighted delphinoid
cetacean’s course whenever possible
and avoid excessive speed or abrupt
changes in direction. Any vessel
underway reduces vessel speed to 10
knots or less when pods (including
mother/calf pairs) or large assemblages
of delphinoid cetaceans are observed.
Vessels may not adjust course and speed
until the delphinoid cetaceans have
moved beyond 50 m and/or abeam (i.e.,
moving away and at a right angle to the
centerline of the vessel) of the underway
vessel.
• All vessels will maintain a
separation distance of 50 m (164 ft) or
greater from any sighted pinniped.
The training program will be provided
to NMFS for review and approval prior
to the start of surveys. Confirmation of
the training and understanding of the
requirements will be documented on a
training course log sheet. Signing the log
sheet will certify that the crew members
understand and will comply with the
necessary requirements throughout the
survey event.
Seasonal Operating Requirements
Between watch shifts, members of the
monitoring team will consult the NMFS
North Atlantic right whale reporting
systems for the presence of North
Atlantic right whales throughout survey
operations. The proposed survey
activities will, however, occur outside
of the SMA located off the coasts of
Delaware and New Jersey. The proposed
survey activities will also occur in June/
July and September, which is outside of
the seasonal mandatory speed
restriction period for this SMA
(November 1 through April 30).
Throughout all survey operations,
Ocean Wind will monitor the NMFS
North Atlantic right whale reporting
systems for the establishment of a DMA.
If NMFS should establish a DMA in the
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20579
Lease Area under survey, within 24
hours of the establishment of the DMA
Ocean Wind will work with NMFS to
shut down and/or alter the survey
activities to avoid the DMA.
Passive Acoustic Monitoring
As per the BOEM Lease, alternative
monitoring technologies (e.g., active or
passive acoustic monitoring) are
required if a Lessee intends to conduct
geophysical surveys at night or when
visual observation is otherwise
impaired. To support 24-hour HRG
survey operations, Ocean Wind will use
certified PAM operators with experience
reviewing and identifying recorded
marine mammal vocalizations, as part of
the project monitoring during nighttime
operations to provide for optimal
acquisition of species detections at
night, or as needed during periods when
visual observations may be impaired. In
addition, PAM systems shall be
employed during daylight hours to
support system calibration and PSO and
PAM team coordination, as well as in
support of efforts to evaluate the
effectiveness of the various mitigation
techniques (i.e., visual observations
during day and night, compared to the
PAM detections/operations).
Given the range of species that could
occur in the Lease Area, the PAM
system will consist of an array of
hydrophones with both broadband
(sampling mid-range frequencies of 2
kHz to 200 kHz) and at least one lowfrequency hydrophone (sampling range
frequencies of 75 Hz to 30 kHz).
Monitoring of the PAM system will be
conducted from a customized
processing station aboard the HRG
survey vessel. The on-board processing
station provides the interface between
the PAM system and the operator. The
PAM operator(s) will monitor the
hydrophone signals in real time both
aurally (using headphones) and visually
(via the monitor screen displays). Ocean
Wind proposes the use of PAMGuard
software for ‘‘target motion analysis’’ to
support localization in relation to the
identified exclusion zone. PAMGuard is
an open source and versatile software/
hardware interface to enable flexibility
in the configuration of in-sea equipment
(number of hydrophones, sensitivities,
spacing, and geometry). PAM operators
will immediately communicate
detections/vocalizations to the Lead
PSO on duty who will ensure the
implementation of the appropriate
mitigation measure (e.g., shutdown)
even if visual observations by PSOs
have not been made.
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20580
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
Ramp-Up
As per the BOEM Lease, a ramp-up
procedure will be used for HRG survey
equipment capable of adjusting energy
levels at the start or re-start of HRG
survey activities. A ramp-up procedure
will be used at the beginning of HRG
survey activities in order to provide
additional protection to marine
mammals near the Lease Area by
allowing them to vacate the area prior
to the commencement of survey
equipment use. The ramp-up procedure
will not be initiated during daytime,
night time, or periods of inclement
weather if the exclusion zone cannot be
adequately monitored by the PSOs using
the appropriate visual technology (e.g.,
reticulated binoculars, night vision
equipment) and/or PAM for a 60-minute
period. A ramp-up would begin with the
power of the smallest acoustic HRG
equipment at its lowest practical power
output appropriate for the survey. The
power would then be gradually turned
up and other acoustic sources added
such that the source level would
increase in steps not exceeding 6 dB per
5-minute period. If marine mammals are
detected within the HRG survey
exclusion zone prior to or during the
ramp-up, activities will be delayed until
the animal(s) has moved outside the
monitoring zone and no marine
mammals are detected for a period of 60
minutes.
The DP vessel thrusters will be
engaged to support the safe operation of
the vessel and crew while conducting
geotechnical survey activities and
require use as necessary. Therefore,
there is no opportunity to engage in a
ramp-up procedure.
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Shutdown and Powerdown
HRG Survey—The exclusion zone(s)
around the noise-producing activities
(HRG survey equipment) will be
monitored, as previously described, by
PSOs and at night by PAM operators for
the presence of marine mammals before,
during, and after any noise-producing
activity. The vessel operator must
comply immediately with any call for
shutdown by the Lead PSO. Any
disagreement should be discussed only
after shutdown.
As per the BOEM Lease, if a nondelphinoid (i.e., mysticetes and sperm
whales) cetacean is detected at or within
the established exclusion zone (200-m
exclusion zone), an immediate
shutdown of the HRG survey equipment
is required. Subsequent restart of the
electromechanical survey equipment
must use the ramp-up procedures
described above and may only occur
following clearance of the exclusion
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
zone for 60 minutes. These are
extremely conservative shutdown zones,
as the 200-m exclusion radii exceed the
distances to the estimated Level B
harassment isopleths (75.28 m.).
As per the BOEM Lease, if a
delphinoid cetacean or pinniped is
detected at or within the exclusion
zone, the HRG survey equipment
(including the sub-bottom profiler) must
be powered down to the lowest power
output that is technically feasible.
Subsequent power up of the survey
equipment must use the ramp-up
procedures described above and may
occur after (1) the exclusion zone is
clear of a delphinoid cetacean and/or
pinniped for 60 minutes or (2) a
determination by the PSO after a
minimum of 10 minutes of observation
that the delphinoid cetacean or
pinniped is approaching the vessel or
towed equipment at a speed and vector
that indicates voluntary approach to
bow-ride or chase towed equipment.
If the HRG sound source (including
the sub-bottom profiler) shuts down for
reasons other than encroachment into
the exclusion zone by a marine mammal
including but not limited to a
mechanical or electronic failure,
resulting in in the cessation of sound
source for a period greater than 20
minutes, a restart for the HRG survey
equipment (including the sub-bottom
profiler) is required using the full rampup procedures and clearance of the
exclusion zone of all cetaceans and
pinnipeds for 60 minutes. If the pause
is less than 20 minutes, the equipment
may be restarted as soon as practicable
at its operational level as long as visual
surveys were continued diligently
throughout the silent period and the
exclusion zone remained clear of
cetaceans and pinnipeds. If the visual
surveys were not continued diligently
during the pause of 20 minutes or less,
a restart of the HRG survey equipment
(including the sub-bottom profiler) is
required using the full ramp-up
procedures and clearance of the
exclusion zone for all cetaceans and
pinnipeds for 60 minutes.
Geotechnical Survey (DP Thrusters)—
During geotechnical survey activities, a
constant position over the drill or CPT
site must be maintained to ensure the
integrity of the survey equipment. Any
stoppage of DP thruster during the
proposed geotechnical activities has the
potential to result in significant damage
to survey equipment. Therefore, during
geotechnical survey activities, if marine
mammals enter or approach the
established exclusion and monitoring
zone, Ocean Wind shall reduce DP
thruster to the maximum extent
possible, except under circumstances
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
when reducing DP thruster use would
compromise safety (both human health
and environmental) and/or the integrity
of the equipment. Reducing thruster
energy will effectively reduce the
potential for exposure of marine
mammals to sound energy. After
decreasing thruster energy, PSOs will
continue to monitor marine mammal
behavior and determine if the animal(s)
is moving towards or away from the
established monitoring zone. If the
animal(s) continues to move towards the
sound source then DP thruster use
would remain at the reduced level.
Normal use will resume when PSOs
report that the marine mammals have
moved away from and remained clear of
the monitoring zone for a minimum of
60 minutes since the last sighting.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures, as well
as other measures considered by NMFS,
NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the proposed mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected
species or stocks and their habitat,
paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth,
‘‘requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
taking.’’ The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13)
indicate that requests for incidental take
authorizations (ITAs) must include the
suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that
will result in increased knowledge of
the species and of the level of taking or
impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be
present in the proposed action area.
Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the
most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring measures prescribed by
NMFS should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following general goals:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the action area (e.g.,
presence, abundance, distribution,
density).
• Nature, scope, or context of likely
marine mammal exposure to potential
stressors/impacts (individual or
cumulative, acute or chronic), through
better understanding of: (1) Action or
environment (e.g., source
characterization, propagation, ambient
noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the
action; or (4) biological or behavioral
context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or
feeding areas).
• Individual marine mammal
responses (behavioral or physiological)
to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
cumulative), other stressors, or
cumulative impacts from multiple
stressors.
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of individual
marine mammals; or (2) populations,
species, or stocks.
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
physical components of marine
mammal habitat).
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
Ocean Wind submitted marine
mammal monitoring and reporting
measures as part of the IHA application.
These measures may be modified or
supplemented based on comments or
new information received from the
public during the public comment
period.
Visual Monitoring—Visual monitoring
of the established Level B harassment
zones (200-m radius during HRG
surveys (note that this is the same as the
mitigation exclusion/shutdown zones
established for HRG survey sound
sources); 500-m radius during DP
thruster use (note that this is the same
as the mitigation powerdown zone
established for DP thruster sound
sources)) will be performed by qualified
and NMFS-approved PSOs (see
discussion of PSO qualifications and
requirements in Marine Mammal
Exclusion Zones above).
The PSOs will begin observation of
the monitoring zone during all HRG
survey activities and all geotechnical
operations where DP thrusters are
employed. Observations of the
monitoring zone will continue
throughout the survey activity and/or
while DP thrusters are in use. PSOs will
be responsible for visually monitoring
and identifying marine mammals
approaching or entering the established
monitoring zone during survey
activities.
Observations will take place from the
highest available vantage point on the
survey vessel. General 360-degree
scanning will occur during the
monitoring periods, and target scanning
by the PSO will occur when alerted of
a marine mammal presence.
Data on all PSO observations will be
recorded based on standard PSO
collection requirements. This will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
include dates and locations of
construction operations; time of
observation, location and weather;
details of the sightings (e.g., species, age
classification (if known), numbers,
behavior); and details of any observed
‘‘taking’’ (behavioral disturbances or
injury/mortality). The data sheet will be
provided to both NMFS and BOEM for
review and approval prior to the start of
survey activities. In addition, prior to
initiation of survey work, all crew
members will undergo environmental
training, a component of which will
focus on the procedures for sighting and
protection of marine mammals. A
briefing will also be conducted between
the survey supervisors and crews, the
PSOs, and Ocean Wind. The purpose of
the briefing will be to establish
responsibilities of each party, define the
chains of command, discuss
communication procedures, provide an
overview of monitoring purposes, and
review operational procedures.
Acoustic Field Verification—As per
the requirements of the BOEM Lease,
field verification of the exclusion/
monitoring zones will be conducted to
determine whether the proposed zones
correspond accurately to the relevant
isopleths and are adequate to minimize
impacts to marine mammals. The details
of the field verification strategy will be
provided in a Field Verification Plan no
later than 45 days prior to the
commencement of field verification
activities.
Ocean Wind must conduct field
verification of the exclusion zone (the
160 dB isopleth) for HRG survey
equipment and the powerdown zone
(the 120 dB isopleth) for DP thruster use
for all equipment operating below 200
kHz. Ocean Wind must take acoustic
measurements at a minimum of two
reference locations and in a manner that
is sufficient to establish source level
(peak at 1 meter) and distance to the 160
dB isopleth (the Level B harassment
zones for HRG surveys) and 120 dB
isopleth (the Level B harassment zone)
for DP thruster use. Sound
measurements must be taken at the
reference locations at two depths (i.e., a
depth at mid-water and a depth at
approximately 1 meter (3.28 ft) above
the seafloor).
Ocean Wind may use the results from
its field-verification efforts to request
modification of the exclusion/
monitoring zones for the HRG or
geotechnical surveys. Any new
exclusion/monitoring zone radius
proposed by Ocean Wind must be based
on the most conservative measurements
(i.e., the largest safety zone
configuration) of the target Level A or
Level B harassment acoustic threshold
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20581
zones. The modified zone must be used
for all subsequent use of field-verified
equipment. Ocean Wind must obtain
approval from NMFS and BOEM of any
new exclusion/monitoring zone before it
may be implemented and the IHA shall
be modified accordingly.
Proposed Reporting Measures
The Applicant will provide the
following reports as necessary during
survey activities:
• The Applicant will contact NMFS
and BOEM within 24 hours of the
commencement of survey activities and
again within 24 hours of the completion
of the activity.
• As per the BOEM Lease: Any
observed significant behavioral
reactions (e.g., animals departing the
area) or injury or mortality to any
marine mammals must be reported to
NMFS and BOEM within 24 hours of
observation. Dead or injured protected
species are reported to the NMFS
Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries
Office (GARFO) Stranding Hotline (800–
900–3622) within 24 hours of sighting,
regardless of whether the injury is
caused by a vessel. In addition, if the
injury of death was caused by a
collision with a project related vessel,
Ocean Wind must ensure that NMFS
and BOEM are notified of the strike
within 24 hours. Additional reporting
requirements for injured or dead
animals are described below
(Notification of Injured or Dead Marine
Mammals).
• Notification of Injured or Dead
Marine Mammals—In the unanticipated
event that the specified HRG and
geotechnical activities lead to an injury
of a marine mammal (Level A
harassment) or mortality (e.g., shipstrike, gear interaction, and/or
entanglement), Ocean Wind would
immediately cease the specified
activities and report the incident to the
Chief of the Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources
and the NOAA GARFO Stranding
Coordinator. The report would include
the following information:
• Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
• Name and type of vessel involved;
• Vessel’s speed during and leading
up to the incident;
• Description of the incident;
• Status of all sound source use in the
24 hours preceding the incident;
• Water depth;
• Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, and visibility);
• Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
20582
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
• Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the
animal(s) (if equipment is available).
Activities would not resume until
NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the event. NMFS
would work with Ocean Wind to
minimize reoccurrence of such an event
in the future. Ocean Wind would not
resume activities until notified by
NMFS.
In the event that Ocean Wind
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the cause
of the injury or death is unknown and
the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less
than a moderate state of decomposition),
Ocean Wind would immediately report
the incident to the Chief of the Permits
and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources and the GARFO
Stranding Coordinator. The report
would include the same information
identified in the paragraph above.
Activities would be able to continue
while NMFS reviews the circumstances
of the incident. NMFS would work with
Ocean Wind to determine if
modifications in the activities are
appropriate.
In the event that Ocean Wind
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the injury
or death is not associated with or related
to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal,
carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage),
Ocean Wind would report the incident
to the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
NMFS GARFO Regional Stranding
Coordinator, within 24 hours of the
discovery. Ocean Wind would provide
photographs or video footage (if
available) or other documentation of the
stranded animal sighting to NMFS.
Ocean Wind can continue its operations
under such a case.
• Within 90 days after completion of
the marine site characterization survey
activities, a technical report will be
provided to NMFS and BOEM that fully
documents the methods and monitoring
protocols, summarizes the data recorded
during monitoring, estimates the
number of marine mammals that may
have been taken during survey
activities, and provides an
interpretation of the results and
effectiveness of all monitoring tasks.
Any recommendations made by NMFS
must be addressed in the final report
prior to acceptance by NMFS.
• In addition to the Applicant’s
reporting requirements outlined above,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
Ocean Wind will provide an assessment
report of the effectiveness of the various
mitigation techniques, i.e. visual
observations during day and night,
compared to the PAM detections/
operations. This will be submitted as a
draft to NMFS and BOEM 30 days after
the completion of the HRG and
geotechnical surveys and as a final
version 60 days after completion of the
surveys.
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determinations
NMFS has defined negligible impact
as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
A negligible impact finding is based on
the lack of likely adverse effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival
(i.e., population-level effects). An
estimate of the number of takes, alone,
is not enough information on which to
base an impact determination. In
addition to considering the authorized
number of marine mammals that might
be ‘‘taken’’ through harassment, NMFS
considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g.,
intensity, duration), the context of any
responses (e.g., critical reproductive
time or location, migration, etc.), as well
as effects on habitat, the status of the
affected stocks, and the likely
effectiveness of the mitigation.
Consistent with the 1989 preamble for
NMFS’ implementing regulations (54 FR
40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts
from other past and ongoing
anthropogenic activities are
incorporated into these analyses via
their impacts on the environmental
baseline (e.g., as reflected in the
regulatory status of the species,
population size and growth rate where
known, ongoing sources of humancaused mortality, or ambient noise
levels).
As discussed in the Potential Effects
section, permanent threshold shift,
masking, non-auditory physical effects,
and vessel strike are not expected to
occur. Further, once an area has been
surveyed, it is not likely that it will be
surveyed again, thereby reducing the
likelihood of repeated impacts within
the project area.
Potential impacts to marine mammal
habitat were discussed previously in
this document (see the Potential Effects
of the Specified Activity on Marine
Mammals and their Habitat section).
Marine mammal habitat may be
impacted by elevated sound levels and
some sediment disturbance, but these
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
impacts would be temporary. Feeding
behavior is not likely to be significantly
impacted, as marine mammals appear to
be less likely to exhibit behavioral
reactions or avoidance responses while
engaged in feeding activities
(Richardson et al., 1995). Prey species
are mobile and are broadly distributed
throughout the Lease Area; therefore,
marine mammals that may be
temporarily displaced during survey
activities are expected to be able to
resume foraging once they have moved
away from areas with disturbing levels
of underwater noise. Because of the
temporary nature of the disturbance, the
availability of similar habitat and
resources in the surrounding area, and
the lack of important or unique marine
mammal habitat, the impacts to marine
mammals and the food sources that they
utilize are not expected to cause
significant or long-term consequences
for individual marine mammals or their
populations. Furthermore, there are no
rookeries or mating grounds known to
be biologically important to marine
mammals within the proposed project
area. A biologically important feeding
area for North Atlantic right whale
encompasses the Lease Area (LaBrecque
et al., 2015); however, there is no
temporal overlap between the
biologically important area (BIA)
(effective March-April; NovemberDecember) and the proposed survey
activities (May-June; October). There is
one ESA-listed species for which takes
are proposed for the fin whale. There
are currently insufficient data to
determine population trends for fin
whale (Waring et al., 2015); however,
we are proposing to authorize a single
take for this species, therefore, we do
not expect population-level impacts.
There is no designated critical habitat
for any ESA-listed marine mammals
within the Lease Area, and none of the
stocks for non-listed species proposed to
be taken are considered ‘‘depleted’’ or
‘‘strategic’’ by NMFS under the MMPA.
The proposed mitigation measures are
expected to reduce the number and/or
severity of takes by (1) giving animals
the opportunity to move away from the
sound source before HRG survey
equipment reaches full energy and (2)
reducing the intensity of exposure
within a certain distance by reducing
the DP thruster power. Additional
vessel strike avoidance requirements
will further mitigate potential impacts
to marine mammals during vessel
transit to and within the Study Area.
Ocean Wind did not request, and
NMFS is not proposing, take of marine
mammals by injury, serious injury, or
mortality. NMFS expects that most takes
would be in the form of short-term Level
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20583
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
B behavioral harassment in the form of
brief startling reaction and/or temporary
avoidance of the area or decreased
foraging (if such activity were
occurring)—reactions that are
considered to be of low severity and
with no lasting biological consequences
(e.g., Southall et al., 2007). This is
largely due to the short time scale of the
proposed activities, the low source
levels and intermittent nature of many
of the technologies proposed to be used,
as well as the required mitigation.
NMFS concludes that exposures to
marine mammal species and stocks due
to Ocean Wind’s HRG and geotechnical
survey activities would result in only
short-term (temporary and short in
duration) and relatively infrequent
effects to individuals exposed and not of
the type or severity that would be
expected to be additive for the very
small portion of the stocks and species
likely to be exposed. Given the duration
and intensity of the activities (including
the mitigation) NMFS does not
anticipate the proposed take estimates
to impact annual rates of recruitment or
survival. Animals may temporarily
avoid the immediate area, but are not
expected to permanently abandon the
area. Major shifts in habitat use,
distribution, or foraging success, are not
expected.
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
proposed monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS preliminarily finds
that the total marine mammal take from
the proposed activity will have a
negligible impact on all affected marine
mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized
under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
for specified activities other than
military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so,
in practice, NMFS compares the number
of individuals taken to the most
appropriate estimation of the relevant
species or stock size in our
determination of whether an
authorization is limited to small
numbers of marine mammals.
TABLE 9—SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL MARINE MAMMAL TAKES AND PERCENTAGE OF STOCKS AFFECTED
Requested take
authorization
(number)
Species
Fin Whale (Balaenoptera physalus) ......................................................................................
Bottlenose Dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) ...............................................................................
Short beaked common Dolphin (Delphinus delphis) .............................................................
Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) ................................................................................
Harbor Seal 1 (Phoca vitulina) ...............................................................................................
Stock
abundance
estimate
5
286
32
*4
1
1,618
77,532
70,184
79,883
75,834
Percentage
of stock
potentially
affected
0.31
0.368
0.045
0.005
0.001
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
* Modeled take of this species was increased to account for average group size.
The requested takes proposed to be
authorized for the HRG and
geotechnical surveys represent 0.31
percent of the WNA stock of fin whale,
0.045 percent of the WNA stock of
short-beaked common dolphin, 0.368
percent of the Western north Atlantic,
offshore stock of bottlenose dolphin,
0.005 percent of the Gulf of Maine/Bay
of Fundy stock of harbor porpoise, and
0.001 percent of the WNA stock of
harbor seal (Tables 9). These take
estimates represent the percentage of
each species or stock that could be taken
by Level B behavioral harassment and
are extremely small numbers (less than
1 percent) relative to the affected
species or stock sizes.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and
monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals,
NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals will be
taken relative to the population size of
the affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis
and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of the affected marine mammal stocks or
species implicated by this action.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
the total taking of affected species or
stocks would not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of
such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act
Issuance of an MMPA authorization
requires compliance with the ESA.
Within the project area, fin, humpback,
and North Atlantic right whale are listed
as endangered under the ESA. Under
section 7 of the ESA, BOEM consulted
with NMFS on commercial wind lease
issuance and site assessment activities
on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf
in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New
York and New Jersey Wind Energy
Areas. NOAA’s GARFO issued a
Biological Opinion concluding that
these activities may adversely affect but
are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of fin whale,
humpback whale, or North Atlantic
right whale. The Biological Opinion can
be found online at https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/energy_other.htm. NMFS is
also consulting internally on the
issuance of an IHA under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this
activity. Following issuance of the
Ocean Wind’s IHA, the Biological
Opinion may be amended to include an
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
incidental take exemption for these
marine mammal species, as appropriate.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
NMFS is preparing an Environmental
Assessment (EA) in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and will consider comments
submitted in response to this notice as
part of that process. The EA will be
posted at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
permits/incidental/energy_other.htm
once it is finalized.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary
determinations, NMFS proposes to issue
an IHA to Ocean Wind for conducting
HRG survey activities and use of DP
vessel thrusters during geotechnical
survey activities from June 2017 through
May 2018, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
This section contains a draft of the IHA
itself. The wording contained in this
section is proposed for inclusion in the
IHA (if issued).
Ocean Wind, LLC (Ocean Wind) is
hereby authorized under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D))
and 50 CFR 216.107, to harass marine
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20584
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
mammals incidental to high-resolution
geophysical (HRG) and geotechnical
survey investigations associated with
marine site characterization activities
off the coast of New Jersey in the area
of the Commercial Lease of Submerged
Lands for Renewable Energy
Development on the Outer Continental
Shelf (OCS–A 0498) (the Lease Area).
1. This Authorization is valid from
June 1, 2017 through May 31, 2018.
2. This Authorization is valid only for
HRG and geotechnical survey
investigations associated with marine
site characterization activities, as
described in the Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) application.
3. The holder of this authorization
(Holder) is hereby authorized to take, by
Level B harassment only, 32 shortbeaked common dolphins (Delphinus
delphis), 286 bottlenose dolphin
(Tursiops truncatus), 4 harbor porpoise
(Phocoena phocoena), 5 fin whale
(Balaenoptera physalus), and 1 harbor
seal (Phoca vitulina) incidental to HRG
survey activities and dynamic
positioning (DP) vessel thruster use
during geotechnical activities.
4. The taking of any marine mammal
in a manner prohibited under this IHA
must be reported immediately to NMFS’
Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries
Office (GARFO).
5. The Holder or designees must
notify NMFS GARFO and Office of
Protected Resources (OPR) at least 24
hours prior to the seasonal
commencement of the specified activity.
6. The holder of this Authorization
must notify the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, or her designee at
least 24 hours prior to the start of survey
activities (unless constrained by the
date of issuance of this Authorization in
which case notification shall be made as
soon as possible) at 301–427–8401 or to
laura.mccue@noaa.gov.
7. Mitigation Requirements
The Holder is required to abide by the
following mitigation conditions listed in
7(a)–(f). Failure to comply with these
conditions may result in the
modification, suspension, or revocation
of this IHA.
(a) Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones:
Protected species observers (PSOs) shall
monitor the following zones for the
presence of marine mammals:
• A 200-m exclusion zone during
HRG surveys is in operation.
• A 500-m monitoring zone during
the use of DP thrusters during
geotechnical survey.
• At all times, the vessel operator
shall maintain a separation distance of
500 m from any sighted North Atlantic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
right whale as stipulated in the Vessel
Strike Avoidance procedures described
below.
Visual monitoring of the established
exclusion zone(s) shall be performed by
qualified and NMFS-approved protected
species observers (PSOs). An observer
team comprising a minimum of four
NMFS-approved PSOs and two certified
Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM)
operators, operating in shifts, shall be
stationed aboard either the survey vessel
or a dedicated PSO-vessel. PSOs shall
be equipped with binoculars and have
the ability to estimate distances to
marine mammals located in proximity
to the vessel and/or exclusion zone
using range finders. Reticulated
binoculars will also be available to PSOs
for use as appropriate based on
conditions and visibility to support the
siting and monitoring of marine species.
Digital single-lens reflex camera
equipment shall be used to record
sightings and verify species
identification. During night operations,
PAM (see Passive Acoustic Monitoring
requirements below) and night-vision
equipment in combination with infrared
video monitoring shall be used. The
PSOs shall begin observation of the
exclusion zone(s) at least 60 minutes
prior to ramp-up of HRG survey
equipment. Use of noise-producing
equipment shall not begin until the
exclusion zone is clear of all marine
mammals for at least 60 minutes. If a
marine mammal is seen approaching or
entering the 200-m exclusion zones
during the HRG survey, or the 500-m
monitoring zone during DP thrusters
use, the vessel operator shall adhere to
the shutdown/powerdown procedures
described below to minimize noise
impacts on the animals.
(b) Ramp-Up: A ramp-up procedure
shall be used for HRG survey equipment
capable of adjusting energy levels at the
start or re-start of HRG survey activities.
The ramp-up procedure shall not be
initiated during daytime, night time, or
periods of inclement weather if the
exclusion zone cannot be adequately
monitored by the PSOs using the
appropriate visual technology (e.g.,
reticulated binoculars, night vision
equipment) and/or PAM for a 60-minute
period. A ramp-up shall begin with the
power of the smallest acoustic HRG
equipment at its lowest practical power
output appropriate for the survey. The
power shall then be gradually turned up
and other acoustic sources added such
that the source level would increase in
steps not exceeding 6 dB per 5-minute
period. If a marine mammal is sighted
within the HRG survey exclusion zone
prior to or during the ramp-up, activities
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
shall be delayed until the animal(s) has
moved outside the monitoring zone and
no marine mammals are sighted for a
period of 60 minutes.
(c) Shutdown and Powerdown
HRG Survey—The exclusion zone(s)
around the noise-producing activities
HRG survey equipment will be
monitored, as previously described, by
PSOs and at night by PAM operators for
the presence of marine mammals before,
during, and after any noise-producing
activity. The vessel operator must
comply immediately with any call for
shutdown by the Lead PSO. If a nondelphinoid (i.e., mysticetes and sperm
whales) cetacean is detected at or within
the established exclusion zone (200-m
exclusion zone during HRG surveys), an
immediate shutdown of the HRG survey
equipment is required. Subsequent
restart of the electromechanical survey
equipment must use the ramp-up
procedures described above and may
only occur following clearance of the
exclusion zone for 60 minutes. If a
delphinoid cetacean or pinniped is
detected at or within the exclusion
zone, the HRG survey equipment must
be powered down to the lowest power
output that is technically feasible.
Subsequent power up of the survey
equipment must use the ramp-up
procedures described above and may
occur after (1) the exclusion zone is
clear of a delphinoid cetacean and/or
pinniped for 60 minutes or (2) a
determination by the PSO after a
minimum of 10 minutes of observation
that the delphinoid cetacean or
pinniped is approaching the vessel or
towed equipment at a speed and vector
that indicates voluntary approach to
bow-ride or chase towed equipment. If
the HRG sound source shuts down for
reasons other than encroachment into
the exclusion zone by a marine mammal
including but not limited to a
mechanical or electronic failure,
resulting in in the cessation of sound
source for a period greater than 20
minutes, a restart for the HRG survey
equipment is required using the full
ramp-up procedures and clearance of
the exclusion zone of all cetaceans and
pinnipeds for 60 minutes. If the pause
is less than 20 minutes, the equipment
may be restarted as soon as practicable
at its operational level as long as visual
surveys were continued diligently
throughout the silent period and the
exclusion zone remained clear of
cetaceans and pinnipeds. If the visual
surveys were not continued diligently
during the pause of 20 minutes or less,
a restart of the HRG survey equipment
is required using the full ramp-up
procedures and clearance of the
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
exclusion zone for all cetaceans and
pinnipeds for 60 minutes.
Geotechnical Survey (DP Thrusters)—
During geotechnical survey activities if
marine mammals enter or approach the
established 120 dB isopleth monitoring
zone, the Holder shall reduce DP
thruster to the maximum extent
possible, except under circumstances
when reducing DP thruster use would
compromise safety (both human health
and environmental) and/or the integrity
of the equipment. After decreasing
thruster energy, PSOs shall continue to
monitor marine mammal behavior and
determine if the animal(s) is moving
towards or away from the established
monitoring zone. If the animal(s)
continues to move towards the sound
source then DP thruster use shall remain
at the reduced level. Normal use shall
resume when PSOs report that the
marine mammals have moved away
from and remained clear of the
monitoring zone for a minimum of 60
minutes since the last sighting.
(d) Vessel Strike Avoidance: The
Holder shall ensure that vessel operators
and crew maintain a vigilant watch for
cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down
or stop their vessels to avoid striking
these protected species. Survey vessel
crew members responsible for
navigation duties shall receive sitespecific training on marine mammal
sighting/reporting and vessel strike
avoidance measures. Vessel strike
avoidance measures shall include the
following, except under extraordinary
circumstances when complying with
these requirements would put the safety
of the vessel or crew at risk:
• All vessel operators shall comply
with 10 knot (<18.5 km per hour (km/
h)) speed restrictions in any Dynamic
Management Area (DMA). In addition,
all vessels operating from November 1
through July 31 shall operate at speeds
of 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less.
• All survey vessels shall maintain a
separation distance of 500 m or greater
from any sighted North Atlantic right
whale.
• If underway, vessels must steer a
course away from any sited North
Atlantic right whale at 10 knots (<18.5
km/h) or less until the 500 m minimum
separation distance has been
established. If a North Atlantic right
whale is sited in a vessel’s path, or
within 100 m to an underway vessel, the
underway vessel must reduce speed and
shift the engine to neutral. Engines shall
not be engaged until the North Atlantic
right whale has moved outside of the
vessel’s path and beyond 100 m. If
stationary, the vessel must not engage
engines until the North Atlantic right
whale has moved beyond 100 m.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
• All vessels shall maintain a
separation distance of 100 m or greater
from any sighted non-delphinoid (i.e.,
mysticetes and sperm whales) cetacean.
If sighted, the vessel underway must
reduce speed and shift the engine to
neutral, and must not engage the
engines until the non-delphinoid
cetacean has moved outside of the
vessel’s path and beyond 100 m. If a
survey vessel is stationary, the vessel
shall not engage engines until the nondelphinoid cetacean has moved out of
the vessel’s path and beyond 100 m.
• All vessels shall maintain a
separation distance of 50 m or greater
from any sighted delphinoid cetacean.
Any vessel underway shall remain
parallel to a sighted delphinoid
cetacean’s course whenever possible,
and avoid excessive speed or abrupt
changes in direction. Any vessel
underway shall reduce vessel speed to
10 knots or less when pods (including
mother/calf pairs) or large assemblages
of delphinoid cetaceans are observed.
Vessels may not adjust course and speed
until the delphinoid cetaceans have
moved beyond 50 m and/or abeam of
the underway vessel.
• All vessels shall maintain a
separation distance of 50 m (164 ft) or
greater from any sighted pinniped.
(e) Seasonal Operating Requirements:
Between watch shifts members of the
monitoring team shall consult the
NMFS North Atlantic right whale
reporting systems for the presence of
North Atlantic right whales throughout
survey operations. The proposed survey
activities shall occur outside of the
seasonal management area (SMA)
located off the coast of New Jersey and
Delaware and outside of the seasonal
mandatory speed restriction period for
this SMA (November 1 through April
30). Throughout all survey operations,
the Holder shall monitor the NMFS
North Atlantic right whale reporting
systems for the establishment of a DMA.
If NMFS should establish a DMA in the
Lease Area under survey, within 24
hours of the establishment of the DMA
the Holder shall work with NMFS to
shut down and/or alter the survey
activities to avoid the DMA.
(f) Passive Acoustic Monitoring: To
support 24-hour survey operations, the
Holder shall include PAM as part of the
project monitoring during the
geophysical survey during nighttime
operations, or as needed during periods
when visual observations may be
impaired. In addition, PAM systems
shall be employed during daylight hours
to support system calibration and PSO
and PAM team coordination, as well as
in support of efforts to evaluate the
effectiveness of the various mitigation
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20585
techniques (i.e., visual observations
during day and night, compared to the
PAM detections/operations).
The PAM system shall consist of an
array of hydrophones with both
broadband (sampling mid-range
frequencies of 2 kHz to 200 kHz) and at
least one low-frequency hydrophone
(sampling range frequencies of 75 Hz to
30 kHz). The PAM operator(s) shall
monitor the hydrophone signals in real
time both aurally (using headphones)
and visually (via the monitor screen
displays). PAM operators shall
communicate detections/vocalizations
to the Lead PSO on duty who shall
ensure the implementation of the
appropriate mitigation measure.
8. Monitoring Requirements
The Holder is required to abide by the
following monitoring conditions listed
in 8(a)–(b). Failure to comply with these
conditions may result in the
modification, suspension, or revocation
of this IHA.
(a) Visual Monitoring—Protected
species observers (refer to the PSO
qualifications and requirements for
Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones
above) shall visually monitor the
established Level B harassment zones
(200-m radius during HRG surveys; 500m radius during DP thruster use). The
observers shall be stationed on the
highest available vantage point on the
associated operating platform. PSOs
shall estimate distance to marine
mammals visually, using laser range
finders or by using reticulated
binoculars during daylight hours.
During night operations, PSOs shall use
night-vision binoculars and infrared
technology. Data on all PSO
observations will be recorded based on
standard PSO collection requirements.
This will include dates and locations of
survey operations; time of observation,
location and weather; details of the
sightings (e.g., species, age classification
(if known), numbers, behavior); and
details of any observed ‘‘taking’’
(behavioral disturbances or injury/
mortality). In addition, prior to
initiation of survey work, all crew
members will undergo environmental
training, a component of which will
focus on the procedures for sighting and
protection of marine mammals
(b) Acoustic Field Verification—Field
verification of the exclusion/monitoring
zones shall be conducted to determine
whether the proposed zones correspond
accurately to the relevant isopleths and
are adequate to minimize impacts to
marine mammals. The Holder shall
conduct field verification of the
exclusion/monitoring zone (the 160 dB
isolpleth) for HRG survey equipment
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
20586
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
and the monitoring/powerdown zone
(the 120 dB isopleth) for DP thruster use
for all equipment operating below 200
kHz. The Holder shall take acoustic
measurements at a minimum of two
reference locations and in a manner that
is sufficient to establish source level
(peak at 1 meter) and distance to the 160
dB isopleth (the Level B harassment
zones for HRG surveys) and 120 dB
isopleth (the Level B harassment zone)
for DP thruster use. Sound
measurements shall be taken at the
reference locations at two depths (i.e., a
depth at mid-water and a depth at
approximately 1 meter (3.28 ft) above
the seafloor). The Holder may use the
results from its field-verification efforts
to request modification of the exclusion/
monitoring zones for the HRG or
geotechnical surveys. Any new
exclusion/monitoring zone radius
proposed by the Holder shall be based
on the most conservative measurements
(i.e., the largest safety zone
configuration) of the target Level A or
Level B harassment acoustic threshold
zones. The modified zone shall be used
for all subsequent use of field-verified
equipment. The Holder shall obtain
approval from NMFS and BOEM of any
new exclusion/monitoring zone before it
may be implemented and the IHA shall
be modified accordingly.
9. Reporting Requirements
The Holder shall provide the
following reports as necessary during
survey activities:
(a) The Holder shall contact NMFS
(301–427–8401) and BOEM (703–787–
1300) within 24 hours of the
commencement of survey activities and
again within 24 hours of the completion
of the activity.
(b) Any observed significant
behavioral reactions (e.g., animals
departing the area) or injury or mortality
to any marine mammals shall be
reported to NMFS and BOEM within 24
hours of observation. Dead or injured
protected species shall be reported to
the NMFS GARFO Stranding Hotline
(800–900–3622) within 24 hours of
sighting, regardless of whether the
injury is caused by a vessel. In addition,
if the injury of death was caused by a
collision with a project related vessel,
the Holder shall ensure that NMFS and
BOEM are notified of the strike within
24 hours. The Holder shall use the form
included as Appendix A to Addendum
C of the Lease to report the sighting or
incident. If the Holder is responsible for
the injury or death, the vessel must
assist with any salvage effort as
requested by NMFS.
Additional reporting requirements for
injured or dead animals are described
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
below (Notification of Injured or Dead
Marine Mammals).
(c) Notification of Injured or Dead
Marine Mammals
(i) In the unanticipated event that the
specified HRG and geotechnical survey
activities lead to an injury of a marine
mammal (Level A harassment) or
mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear
interaction, and/or entanglement), the
Holder shall immediately cease the
specified activities and report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, 301–427–8401,
and the NOAA GARFO Stranding
Coordinator, 978–281–9300. The report
shall include the following information:
• Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
• Name and type of vessel involved;
• Vessel’s speed during and leading
up to the incident;
• Description of the incident;
• Status of all sound source use in the
24 hours preceding the incident;
• Water depth;
• Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, and visibility);
• Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
• Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the
animal(s) (if equipment is available).
Activities shall not resume until
NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the event. NMFS
would work with the Holder to
minimize reoccurrence of such an event
in the future. The Holder shall not
resume activities until notified by
NMFS.
(ii) In the event that the Holder
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the cause
of the injury or death is unknown and
the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less
than a moderate state of decomposition),
the Holder shall immediately report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, 301–427–8401,
and the GARFO Stranding Coordinator,
978–281–9300. The report shall include
the same information identified in the
paragraph above. Activities would be
able to continue while NMFS reviews
the circumstances of the incident.
NMFS would work with the Holder to
determine if modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
(iii) In the event that the Holder
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the injury
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
or death is not associated with or related
to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal,
carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage),
the Holder shall report the incident to
the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, 301–427–
8401, and the NMFS GARFO Regional
Stranding Coordinator, 978–281–9300,
within 24 hours of the discovery. The
Holder shall provide photographs or
video footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal
sighting.
(d) Within 90 days after completion of
the marine site characterization survey
activities, a technical report shall be
provided to NMFS and BOEM that fully
documents the methods and monitoring
protocols, summarizes the data recorded
during monitoring, estimates the
number of marine mammals that may
have been taken during survey
activities, and provides an
interpretation of the results and
effectiveness of all monitoring tasks.
Any recommendations made by NMFS
shall be addressed in the final report
prior to acceptance by NMFS.
(e) In addition to the Holder’s
reporting requirements outlined above,
the Holder shall provide an assessment
report of the effectiveness of the various
mitigation techniques, i.e. visual
observations during day and night,
compared to the PAM detections/
operations. This shall be submitted as a
draft to NMFS and BOEM 30 days after
the completion of the HRG and
geotechnical surveys and as a final
version 60 days after completion of the
surveys.
10. This Authorization may be
modified, suspended, or withdrawn if
the Holder fails to abide by the
conditions prescribed herein or if NMFS
determines the authorized taking is
having more than a negligible impact on
the species or stock of affected marine
mammals.
11. A copy of this Authorization and
the Incidental Take Statement must be
in the possession of each vessel operator
taking marine mammals under the
authority of this Incidental Harassment
Authorization.
12. The Holder is required to comply
with the Terms and Conditions of the
Incidental Take Statement
corresponding to NMFS’ Biological
Opinion.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses,
the draft authorization, and any other
aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA
for the proposed HRG and geotechnical
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 3, 2017 / Notices
survey investigation. Please include
with your comments any supporting
data or literature citations to help
inform our final decision on the request
for MMPA authorization.
Dated: April 27, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–08918 Filed 4–28–17; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Sanctuary System Business Advisory
Council: Public Meeting
Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries, National Ocean Service,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given of a
Sanctuary System Business Advisory
Council (council) meeting. The meeting
is open to the public and will be
conducted as a web-based conference
call, where participants may provide
comments at the appropriate time
during the meeting. Participants can
choose to access the meeting’s audio via
telephone, or both the meeting’s audio
and web-based visual components on a
computer.
DATES: The meeting will be held
Thursday, May 18, 2017 from 3:00 to
5:00 p.m. ET, and an opportunity for
public comment will be provided at
approximately 4:30 p.m. ET. Members
of the public that wish to participate in
the meeting must register in advance
before or by Wednesday, May 17, 2017.
Both times and agenda topics are subject
to change.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held
via web conference call. In order to
register for the meeting before or by
Wednesday, May 17, 2017, contact Kate
Spidalieri at Kate.Spidalieri@noaa.gov
or 240–533–0679. Webinar and
teleconference capacity may be limited.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate
Spidalieri, Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries, 1305 East-West Highway,
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 (Email:
Kate.Spidalieri@noaa.gov; Phone: 240–
533–0679; Fax: 301–713–0404).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ONMS
serves as the trustee for a network of
underwater parks encompassing more
than 600,000 square miles of marine and
Great Lakes waters from Washington
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:29 May 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
state to the Florida Keys, and from Lake
Huron to American Samoa. The network
includes a system of 13 national marine
¯
¯
sanctuaries and Papahanaumokuakea
and Rose Atoll marine national
monuments. National marine
sanctuaries protect our nation’s most
vital coastal and marine natural and
cultural resources, and through active
research, management, and public
engagement, sustain healthy
environments that are the foundation for
thriving communities and stable
economies. One of the many ways
ONMS ensures public participation in
the designation and management of
national marine sanctuaries is through
the formation of advisory councils. The
Sanctuary System Business Advisory
Council (council) has been formed to
provide advice and recommendations to
the Director regarding the relationship
of ONMS with the business community.
Additional information on the council
can be found at https://
sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/ac/
welcome.html.
Matters to be Considered: The
meeting will provide an opportunity for
council members to hear news from
across the National Marine Sanctuary
System and review and comment on
program initiatives. For a complete
agenda, including times and topics,
please visit https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/
management/bac/meetings.html.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. Sections 1431, et seq.
(Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog
Number 11.429 Marine Sanctuary Program)
Dated: April 24, 2017.
John Armor,
Director, Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries, National Ocean Service,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2017–08921 Filed 5–2–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
Global Intellectual Property Academy
(GIPA) Surveys
ACTION:
Proposed collection; comment
request.
The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO), as required
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), invites
comments on a proposed extension of
an existing information collection.
SUMMARY:
Written comments must be
submitted on or before July 3, 2017.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20587
You may submit any
comments by any of the following
methods:
• Email: Information
Collection@uspto.gov. Include ‘‘0651–
0065 comment’’ in the subject line of
the message.
• Mail: Marcie Lovett, Records and
Information Governance Division
Director, Office of the Chief Technology
Officer, United States Patent and
Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450,
Alexandria, VA 22313–1450.
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information
should be directed to J. David Binsted,
Program Manager, Global Intellectual
Property Academy, United States Patent
and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450,
Alexandria, VA 22313–1450; by
telephone at 571–272–1500; or by email
at james.binsted@upsto.gov. Additional
information about this collection is also
available at https://www.reginfor.gov
under ‘‘Information Collection Review.’’
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) surveys
international and domestic participants
of the USPTO’s Global Intellectual
Property Academy (GIPA) training
programs to obtain feedback from the
participants on the effectiveness of the
various services provided to them in the
training programs. GIPA was established
in 2006 to offer training programs on the
enforcement of intellectual property
rights, patents, trademarks, and
copyright. The training programs offered
by GIPA are designed to meet the
specific needs of foreign government
officials (including judges; prosecutors;
police; customs officials; patent,
trademark, and copyright officials; and
policy makers) concerning various
intellectual property topics, such as
global intellectual property rights
protection, enforcement, and strategies
to handle the protection and
enforcement issues in their respective
countries.
This collection contains three surveys
directed to separate audiences: Preprogram, post-program, and alumni. The
pre-program survey is designed to
obtain the background and experience
of a participant and is delivered to the
participant prior to their arrival for a
GIPA training program. The postprogram survey is used to analyze the
overall effectiveness of the program and
is conducted at the conclusion of the
training program. The alumni survey is
used to determine the value of the GIPA
E:\FR\FM\03MYN1.SGM
03MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20563-20587]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08918]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN: 0648-XF286
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Site Characterization Surveys Off
the Coast of New Jersey
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from Ocean Wind, LLC (Ocean
Wind), for an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take marine
mammals, by harassment, incidental to high-resolution geophysical (HRG)
and geotechnical survey investigations associated with marine site
characterization activities off the coast of New Jersey in the area of
the Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy
Development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS-A 0498) (Lease Area).
Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting
comments on its proposal to issue an IHA to Ocean Wind to incidentally
take marine mammals during the specified activities.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than June 2,
2017.
ADDRESSES: Comments on Ocean Wind's IHA application should be addressed
to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox address for providing
email comments is itp.mccue@noaa.gov.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the
end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including
all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. Attachments
to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or
Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted to the Internet at
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/energy_other.htm without
change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do
not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura McCue, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the applications
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/energy_other.htm. In case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is
provided to the public for review.
An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings
are set forth.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' as an impact resulting from
the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.
The MMPA states that the term ``take'' means to harass, hunt,
capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine
mammal.
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine
[[Page 20564]]
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii)
has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in
the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but
not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must review our proposed action with respect to environmental
consequences on the human environment.
Summary of Request
NMFS received a request from Ocean Wind for an IHA to take marine
mammals incidental to Spring 2017 geophysical survey investigations off
the coast of New Jersey in the OCS-A 0498 Lease Area, designated and
offered by the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), to
support the development of an offshore wind project. Ocean Wind's
request was for harassment only, and NMFS concurs that mortality is not
expected to result from this activity; therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
The proposed geophysical survey activities would occur for 42 days
beginning in early June 2017, and geotechnical survey activities would
take place in September 2017 and last for approximately 12 days. The
following specific aspects of the proposed activities are likely to
result in the take of marine mammals: Shallow and medium-penetration
sub-bottom profilers (chirper and sparker) used during the HRG survey,
and dynamically-positioned (DP) vessel thruster used in support of
geotechnical survey activities. Take, by Level B Harassment only, of
individuals of five species of marine mammals is anticipated to result
from the specified activities. No serious injury or mortality is
expected from Ocean Wind's HRG and geotechnical surveys.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
Ocean Wind proposes to conduct a geophysical and geotechnical
survey off the coast of New Jersey in the Lease Area to support the
characterization of the existing seabed and subsurface geological
conditions in the Lease Area. This information is necessary to support
the siting, design, and deployment of up to two meteorological data
collection buoys called floating light and detection ranging buoys
(FLIDARs) and up to two metocean and current buoys, as well as to
obtain a baseline assessment of seabed/sub-surface soil conditions in
the Lease Area to support the siting of the proposed wind farm. Surveys
will include the use of the following equipment: Multi-beam depth
sounder, side-scan sonar, sub-bottom profiler, and cone penetration
tests (CPTs).
Dates and Duration
HRG surveys are anticipated to commence in early June 2017 and will
last for approximately 42 days, including estimated weather down time.
Geotechnical surveys requiring the use of the DP drill ship will take
place in September 2017, at the earliest, and will last for
approximately 12 days excluding weather downtime. Equipment is expected
run continuously for 24 hours per day.
Specified Geographic Region
Ocean Wind's survey activities will occur in the approximately
160,480-acre Lease Area designated and offered by the BOEM, located
approximately nine miles (mi) southeast of Atlantic City, New Jersey,
at its closest point (see Figure 1 of the IHA application). The Lease
Area falls within the New Jersey Wind Energy Area (NJ WEA; Figure 1-1
of the IHA application) with water depths ranging from 15-40 meters (m)
(49-131 feet (ft)).
Detailed Description of Specific Activities
HRG Survey Activities
Marine site characterization surveys will include the following HRG
survey activities:
Depth sounding (multibeam depth sounder) to determine
water depths and general bottom topography;
Magnetic intensity measurements for detecting local
variations in regional magnetic field from geological strata and
potential ferrous objects on and below the bottom;
Seafloor imaging (sidescan sonar survey) for seabed
sediment classification purposes, to identify natural and man-made
acoustic targets resting on the bottom as well as any anomalous
features;
Shallow penetration sub-bottom profiler (chirper) to map
the near surface stratigraphy (top 0-5 meter (m) soils below seabed);
and
Medium penetration sub-bottom profiler (sparker) to map
deeper subsurface stratigraphy as needed (soils down to 75-100 m below
seabed).
The HRG surveys are scheduled to begin, at the earliest, on June 1,
2017. Table 1 identifies the representative survey equipment that is
being considered in support of the HRG survey activities. The make and
model of the listed HRG equipment will vary depending on availability
but will be finalized as part of the survey preparations and contract
negotiations with the survey contractor. The final selection of the
survey equipment will be confirmed prior to the start of the HRG survey
program. Only the make and model of the HRG equipment may change, not
the types of equipment or the addition of equipment with
characteristics that might have effects beyond (i.e., resulting in
larger ensonified areas) those considered in this proposed IHA. None of
the proposed HRG survey activities will result in the disturbance of
bottom habitat in the Lease Area.
Table 1--Summary of Proposed HRG Survey Equipment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source level Source level (bay Beamwidth Pulse duration
HRG equipment Operating frequencies (manufacturer) state wind survey) * (degree) (millisec)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonardyne Ranger 2 USBL............. 35-50 kHz.............. 200 dBPeak............ 194 dBPeak............ 180 1.
Klein 3000H Sidescan Sonar \1\...... 445/900 kHz............ 245 dBPeak............ n/a................... 0.2 0.0025 to 0.4.
GeoPulse Sub-bottom Profiler 1.5 to 18 kHz.......... 223.5 dBPeak.......... 203 dBPeak............ 55 0.1 to 22.
(chirper).
Geo-Source 600/800 (sparker)........ 50 to 5000 Hz.......... 222 dBPeak/ 223 dBPeak 2016 dBPeak/212 dBPeak 110 1 to 10.
SeaBat 7125 Multibeam Sonar \2\..... 200/400 kHz............ 220 dBPeak............ n/a................... 2 0.03 to .3.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Gardline 2016, 2017.
\1\ It should be noted that only one of the representative sidescan sonars would be selected for deployment.
\2\ It should be noted that only one of the representative multibeam sonars would be selected for deployment.
[[Page 20565]]
The HRG survey activities will be supported by a vessel
approximately 98 to 180 feet (ft) in length and capable of maintaining
course and a survey speed of approximately 4.5 knots while transiting
survey lines. HRG survey activities across the Lease Area will
generally be conducted at 900-meter (m) line spacing. Up to two FLIDARs
and two wave buoys would be deployed within the Lease Area, and up to
three potential locations for FLIDAR deployment will be investigated.
At each FLIDAR and wave buoy deployment locations, the survey will be
conducted along a tighter 30-m line spacing to meet the BOEM
requirements as set out in the July 2015 Guidelines for Providing
Geophysical, Geotechnical, and Geohazard Information Pursuant and
Archeological and Historic Property Information in 30 CFR part 585.
Given the size of the Lease Area (160,480 acres), to minimize cost,
the duration of survey activities, and the period of potential impact
on marine species, Ocean Wind has proposed conducting continuous HRG
survey operations 24 hours per day. Based on 24-hour operations, the
estimated duration of the survey activities would be approximately 42
days (including estimated weather down time).
Both NMFS and BOEM have advised that the deployment of HRG survey
equipment, including the use of intermittent, impulsive sound-producing
equipment operating below 200 kilohertz (kHz) (e.g., sub-bottom
profilers), has the potential to cause acoustic harassment to marine
mammals. Based on the frequency ranges of the equipment to be used in
support of the HRG survey activities (Table 1) and the hearing ranges
of the marine mammals that have the potential to occur in the Lease
Area during survey activities (Table 3), only the sub-bottom profilers
(GeoPulse Sub-bottom Profiler and Geo-Source sparker) and Sonardyne
Ranger 2 USBL fall within the established marine mammal hearing ranges
and have the potential to result in Level B harassment of marine
mammals. However, since the sparker systems and USBL will be used
concurrently, and the sparkers are louder, only the sparkers will be
used in the take analysis.
The equipment positioning systems use vessel-based underwater
acoustic positioning to track equipment (in this case, the sub-bottom
profiler) in very shallow to very deep water. Equipment positioning
systems will be operational at all times during HRG survey data
acquisition (i.e, concurrent with the sub-bottom profiler operation).
Sub-bottom profiling systems identify and measure various marine
sediment layers that exist below the sediment/water interface. A sound
source emits an acoustic signal vertically downwards into the water and
a receiver monitors the return signal that has been reflected off the
sea floor. Some of the acoustic signal will penetrate the seabed and be
reflected when it encounters a boundary between two layers that have
different acoustic impedance. The system uses this reflected energy to
provide information on sediment layers beneath the sediment-water
interface. A shallow penetration sub-bottom profiler will be used to
map the near surface stratigraphy of the Lease Area. A Geo-Source 200/
800, or similar model, medium-penetration sub-bottom profiler (sparker)
will be used to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy in the Lease Area as
needed (soils down to 75-100 m below seabed). The sparker is towed from
a boom arm off the side of the survey vessel and emits a downward pulse
with a duration of 1 to 2 millisecond (ms) at an operating frequency of
50 to 5000 Hertz (Hz).
Geotechnical Survey Activities
Marine site characterization surveys will involve the following
geotechnical survey activities:
Sample boreholes to determine geological and geotechnical
characteristics of sediments;
Deep CPTs to determine stratigraphy and in-situ conditions
of the deep surface sediments; and
Shallow CPTs to determine stratigraphy and in-situ
conditions of the near surface sediments.
It is anticipated that the geotechnical surveys will take place no
sooner than September 2017. The geotechnical survey program will
consist of up to 8 deep sample bore holes and adjacent 8 deep CPTs both
to a depth of approximately 130 ft to 200 ft (40 m to 60 m) below the
seabed, as well as 30 shallow CPTs, up to 130 ft (40 m) below seabed.
The investigation activities are anticipated to be conducted from a
250-ft to 350-ft (76 m to 107 m) DP drill ship. DP vessel thruster
systems maintain their precise coordinates in waters with automatic
controls. These control systems use variable levels of power to counter
forces from current and wind. Operations will take place over a 24-hour
period to ensure cost, the duration of survey activities, and the
period of potential impact on marine species are minimized. Based on
24-hour operations, the estimated duration of the geotechnical survey
activities would be approximately 12 days excluding weather downtime.
Estimated weather downtime is approximately 10 days.
Field studies conducted off the coast of Virginia (Tetra Tech 2014)
to determine the underwater noise produced by borehole drilling and
CPTs confirm that these activities do not result in underwater noise
levels that are harmful or harassing to marine mammals (i.e., do not
exceed NMFS' current Level A and Level B harassment thresholds for
marine mammals). However, the initial field verification conducted for
the Bay State Wind Lease Area indicates that Level B harassment of
marine mammals is likely at approximately 590 ft (180 m) from the DP
thruster sound source (Gardline 2016). The underwater continuous noise
produced by the thrusters associated with the DP drill ship that will
be used to support the geotechnical activities has the potential to
result in Level B harassment of marine mammals.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in detail later in the document (Mitigation section and
Monitoring and Reporting section).
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
There are 35 species of marine mammals that potentially occur in
the Northwest Atlantic OCS region (BOEM 2014) (Table 2). The majority
of these species are pelagic and/or northern species, or are so rarely
sighted that their presence in the Lease Area is unlikely. Five marine
mammal species are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and
are known to be present, at least seasonally, in the waters off the
Northwest Atlantic OCS: Blue whale, fin whale, right whale, sei whale,
and sperm whale. These species are highly migratory and do not spend
extended periods of time in a localized area. The waters off the
Northwest Atlantic OCS (including the Lease Area) are primarily used as
a stopover point for these species during seasonal movements north or
south between important feeding and breeding grounds. While fin whales
have the potential to occur within the Lease Area, the sperm, blue, and
sei whales are more pelagic and/or northern species, and although their
presence within the Lease Area is possible, they are considered less
common with regards to sightings. In particular, while sperm whales are
known to occur occasionally in the region, their sightings are
considered rare and thus their presence in the Lease Area at the time
of the proposed activities is considered unlikely. These large whale
species are generally migratory and typically do not spend
[[Page 20566]]
extended periods of time in a localized area. The waters of the Mid-
Atlantic (including the Lease Area) are primarily used as areas where
animals occur seasonally to feed, or as habitat during seasonal
movements between the more northward feeding areas and southern
hemisphere breeding grounds typically used by some of the large whale
species. The mid-sized whale species (minke), large baleen whales, and
the sperm whale are present year-round in the continental shelf and
slope waters and may occur in the waters of the Lease Area though
movements will vary with prey availability and other habitat factors.
North Atlantic right whales do occur seasonally in the area; however,
we did not calculate take for this species based on the low seasonal
density and short duration of project activities. Because the potential
for sperm whale, blue whale, and sei whale to occur within the Lease
Area during the marine survey period is unlikely, these species will
not be described further in this analysis.
Because the potential for many of the odontocete species to occur
within the Lease Area during the marine survey period is unlikely,
given that these species are either extralimital or are found more
often offshore and do not occur as often on the outer continental
shelf, these species will not be described further in this analysis.
Bottlenose dolphins, short-beaked common dolphin, and harbor porpoise,
however, do occur in the lease area, and are described below.\3\
While stranding data indicate that gray seals have the potential to
occur within the Lease Area, multiple sources indicate that their
presence would not be likely within the Lease Area. BOEM (2012)
indicates that the presence of gray seals would not be likely.
Furthermore, Northeast Navy Operations Area (OPAREA) Density Estimates
indicate that data for gray seals in the Mid-Atlantic are so lacking
that density estimates for this species are not possible (DoN 2007).
Therefore, gray seals will not be described further in this analysis.
We have reviewed Ocean Wind's species information--which summarizes
available information regarding status and trends, distribution and
habitat preferences, behavior and life history, and auditory
capabilities of the potentially affected species--for accuracy and
completeness and refer the reader to Sections 3 and 4 of the
applications, as well as to NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR;
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/), instead of reprinting all of the
information here. Additional general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's Web
site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/). Table 2 lists all species
with expected potential for occurrence in the NE Atlantic OCS and
summarizes information related to the population or stock, including
potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we
follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR, defined by the MMPA as the
maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may
be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to
reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population, is considered in
concert with known sources of ongoing anthropogenic mortality to assess
the population-level effects of the anticipated mortality from a
specific project (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is
anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and
mortality are included here as gross indicators of the status of the
species and other threats. For status of species, we provide
information regarding U.S. regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study area. NMFS's stock
abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of
individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that
stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S.
waters. Survey abundance (as compared to stock or species abundance) is
the total number of individuals estimated within the survey area, which
may or may not align completely with a stock's geographic range as
defined in the SARs. These surveys may also extend beyond U.S. waters.
Five species are considered to have the potential to co-occur with
the proposed survey activities: Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus),
bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus), short-beaked common dolphin
(Delphinus delphis), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and harbor
seal (Phoca vitulina) (Right Whale Consortium 2016). All managed stocks
in this region are assessed in NMFS's U.S. 2016 Atlantic SARs and can
be found here: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/. All values
presented in Table 2 are the most recent available at the time of
publication and are available in the draft 2016 SARs.
Table 2--Marine Mammals Known To Occur in the Waters Off the Northwest Atlantic OCS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMFS MMPA Stock abundance
and ESA (CV, Nmin, Occurrence and
Common name Stock status; most recent PBR \3\ seasonality in
strategic (Y/ abundance the NW
N) \1\ survey) \2\ Atlantic OCS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toothed whale (Odontoceti)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic white-sided dolphin W. North -; N 48,819 (0.61; 304 rare.
(Lagenorhynchus acutus). Atlantic. 30,403;
n/a)..........
Atlantic spotted dolphin W. North -; N 44,715 (0.43; 316 rare.
(Stenella frontalis). Atlantic. 31,610;
n/a)...........
Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops W. North -; N 77,532 (0.40; 561 Common year
truncatus). Atlantic, 56,053; 2011). round.
Offshore.
Clymene Dolphin (Stenella W. North -; N Unknown (unk; Undet rare.
clymene). Atlantic. unk;
n/a)..........
Pantropical Spotted Dolphin W. North -; N 3,333 (0.91; 17 rare.
(Stenella attenuata). Atlantic. 1,733; n/a).
Risso's dolphin (Grampus W. North -; N 18,250 (0.46; 126 rare.
griseus). Atlantic. 12,619;
n/a)...........
[[Page 20567]]
Short-beaked common dolphin W. North -; N 70,184 (0.28; 557 Common year
(Delphinus delphis). Atlantic. 55,690; 2011). round.
Striped dolphin (Stenella W. North -; N 54,807 (0.3; 428 rare.
coeruleoalba). Atlantic. 42,804;
n/a)..........
Spinner Dolphin (Stenella W. North -; N Unknown (unk; Undet rare.
longirostris). Atlantic. unk;
n/a)..........
White-beaked dolphin W. North -; N 2,003 (0.94; 10 rare.
(Lagenorhynchus albirostris). Atlantic. 1,023; n/a).
Harbor porpoise (Phocoena Gulf of Maine/ -; N 79,833 (0.32; 706 Common year
phocoena). Bay of Fundy. 61,415; 2011). round.
Killer whale (Orcinus orca).. W. North -; N Unknown (unk; Undet rare.
Atlantic. unk;
n/a)..........
False killer whale (Pseudorca W. North -; Y 442 (1.06; 212; 2.1 rare.
crassidens). Atlantic. n/a).
Long-finned pilot whale W. North -; Y 5,636 (0.63; 35 rare.
(Globicephala melas). Atlantic. 3,464; n/a).
Short-finned pilot whale W. North -; Y 21,515 (0.37; 159 rare.
(Globicephala macrorhynchus). Atlantic. 15,913;
n/a)...........
Sperm whale (Physeter North Atlantic. E; Y 2,288 (0.28; 3.6 Year round in
macrocephalus). 1,815; n/a). continental
shelf and
slope waters,
occur
seasonally to
forage.
Pygmy sperm whale (Kogia W. North -; N 3,785 \b\ 26 rare.
breviceps). Atlantic. (0.47; 2,598;
n/a).
Dwarf sperm whale (Kogia W. North -; N 3,785 \b\ 26 rare.
sima). Atlantic. (0.47; 2,598;
n/a).
Cuvier's beaked whale W. North -; N 6,532 (0.32; 50 rare.
(Ziphius cavirostris). Atlantic. 5,021; n/a).
Blainville's beaked whale W. North -; N 7,092 \c\ 46 rare.
(Mesoplodon densirostris). Atlantic. (0.54; 4,632;
n/a).
Gervais' beaked whale W. North -; N 7,092 \c\ 46 rare.
(Mesoplodon europaeus). Atlantic. (0.54; 4,632;
n/a).
True's beaked whale W. North -; N 7,092 \c\ 46 rare.
(Mesoplodon mirus). Atlantic. (0.54; 4,632;
n/a).
Sowerby's Beaked Whale W. North -; N 7,092 \c\ 46 rare.
(Mesoplodon bidens). Atlantic. (0.54; 4,632;
n/a).
Melon-headed whale W. North -; N Unknown (unk; Undet rare.
(Peponocephala electra). Atlantic. unk;
n/a)..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baleen whales (Mysticeti)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minke whale (Balaenoptera Canadian East -; N 2,591 (0.81; 162 Year round in
acutorostrata). Coast. 1,425; n/a). continental
shelf and
slope waters,
occur
seasonally to
forage.
Blue whale (Balaenoptera W. North E; Y Unknown (unk; 0.9 Year round in
musculus). Atlantic. 440; continental
n/a).......... shelf and
slope waters,
occur
seasonally to
forage.
Fin whale (Balaenoptera W. North E; Y 1,618 (0.33; 2.5 Year round in
physalus). Atlantic. 1,234; n/a). continental
shelf and
slope waters,
occur
seasonally to
forage.
Humpback whale (Megaptera Gulf of Maine.. -; N 823 (0; 823; n/ 2.7 Common year
novaeangliae). a). round.
North Atlantic right whale W. North E; Y 440 (0; 440; n/ 1 Year round in
(Eubalaena glacialis). Atlantic. a). continental
shelf and
slope waters,
occur
seasonally to
forage.
[[Page 20568]]
Sei whale (Balaenoptera Nova Scotia.... E; Y 357 (0.52; 236; 0.5 Year round in
borealis). n/a). continental
shelf and
slope waters,
occur
seasonally to
forage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earless seals (Phocidae)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray seals (Halichoerus North Atlantic. -; N 505,000 (unk; Undet Unlikely.
grypus). unk; n/a).
Harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) W. North -; N 75,834 (0.15; 2,006 Common year
Atlantic. 66,884; 2012). round.
Hooded seals (Cystophora W. North -; N Unknown (unk; Undet rare.
cristata). Atlantic. unk;
n/a)..........
Harp seal (Phoca North Atlantic. -; N Unknown (unk; Undet rare.
groenlandica). unk;
n/a)..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species
is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one
for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see footnote 3) or which is determined to be
declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not
applicable. For certain stocks, abundance estimates are actual counts of animals and there is no associated
CV. The most recent abundance survey that is reflected in the abundance estimate is presented; there may be
more recent surveys that have not yet been incorporated into the estimate. All values presented here are from
the draft 2016 Pacific SARs.
\3\ Potential biological removal, defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural
mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its
optimum sustainable population size (OSP).
Fin Whales
Fin whales are common in waters of the U.S. Atlantic Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ), principally from Cape Hatteras northward (Waring
et al., 2016). Fin whales are present north of 35-degree latitude in
every season and are broadly distributed throughout the western North
Atlantic for most of the year (Waring et al., 2016). This area (east of
Montauk Point) represents a major feeding ground for fin whales from
March through October. Fin whales are found in small groups of up to 5
individuals (Brueggeman et al., 1987).
The current abundance estimate for the western North Atlantic stock
of fin whales is 1,618 with PBR at 2.5 animals (Waring et al., 2016).
This stock is listed as endangered under the ESA resulting in strategic
and depleted status under the MMPA. The main threats to this stock are
fishery interactions and vessel collisions (Waring et al., 2016).
Bottlenose Dolphin
There are two distinct bottlenose dolphin morphotypes: The coastal
and offshore forms in the western North Atlantic (Waring et al., 2016).
The offshore form is distributed primarily along the outer continental
shelf and continental slope in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean from
Georges Bank to the Florida Keys, and is the only type that may be
present in the Lease Area.
The current abundance estimate for this stock is 77,532 with PBR at
561 (Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to this species is
interactions with fisheries. This species is not listed under the ESA
and is not considered strategic or depleted under the MMPA.
Short-Beaked Common Dolphin
The short-beaked common dolphin is found world-wide in temperate to
subtropical seas. In the North Atlantic, short-beaked common dolphins
are commonly found over the continental shelf between the 100-m and
2000-m isobaths and over prominent underwater topography and east to
the mid-Atlantic Ridge (Waring et al., 2016). Only the western North
Atlantic stock may be present in the Lease Area.
The current abundance estimate for this stock is 70,184 with PBR at
557 (Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to this species is
interactions with fisheries. This species is not listed under the ESA
and is not considered strategic or depleted under the MMPA.
Harbor Porpoise
In the Lease Area, only the Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy stock may be
present. This stock is found in U.S. and Canadian Atlantic waters and
are concentrated in the northern Gulf of Maine and southern Bay of
Fundy region, generally in waters less than 150 m deep (Waring et al.,
2016). They are seen from the coastline to deep waters (>1800 m;
Westgate et al. 1998), although the majority of the population is found
over the continental shelf (Waring et al., 2016). Average group size
for this stock in the Bay of Fundy is approximately 4 individuals
(Palka 2007).
The current abundance estimate for this stock is 79,883, with PBR
at 706 (Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to this species is
interactions with fisheries, with documented take in the U.S. northeast
sink gillnet, mid-Atlantic gillnet, and northeast bottom trawl
fisheries and in the Canadian herring weir fisheries (Waring et al.,
2016). This species is not listed under the ESA and is not considered
strategic or depleted under the MMPA.
Harbor Seal
The harbor seal is found in all nearshore waters of the North
Atlantic and North Pacific Oceans and adjoining seas above about
30[deg] N. (Burns 2009). In the western North Atlantic, they are
distributed from the eastern Canadian Arctic and Greenland south to
southern New England and New York, and occasionally to the Carolinas
(Waring et al., 2016). Haulout and pupping sites are located off
Manomet, MA and the Isles of Shoals, ME, but generally do not occur in
areas in southern New England (Waring et al., 2016).
[[Page 20569]]
The current abundance estimate for this stock is 75,834, with PBR
at 2,006 (Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to this species is
interactions with fisheries. This species is not listed under the ESA
and is not considered strategic or depleted under the MMPA.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that
components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and
their habitat. The Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment section
later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of the
number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity.
The Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination section will consider
the content of this section, the Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment section, and the Proposed Mitigation section, to draw
conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the
reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those
impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or
stocks.
Background on Sound
Sound is a physical phenomenon consisting of minute vibrations that
travel through a medium, such as air or water, and is generally
characterized by several variables. Frequency describes the sound's
pitch and is measured in Hz or kHz, while sound level describes the
sound's intensity and is measured in decibels (dB). Sound level
increases or decreases exponentially with each dB of change. The
logarithmic nature of the scale means that each 10-dB increase is a 10-
fold increase in acoustic power (and a 20-dB increase is then a 100-
fold increase in power). A 10-fold increase in acoustic power does not
mean that the sound is perceived as being 10 times louder, however.
Sound levels are compared to a reference sound pressure (micro-Pascal)
to identify the medium. For air and water, these reference pressures
are ``re: 20 [micro]Pa'' and ``re: 1 [micro]Pa,'' respectively. Root
mean square (RMS) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over the
duration of an impulse. RMS is calculated by squaring all of the sound
amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the square root of
the average (Urick 1975). RMS accounts for both positive and negative
values; squaring the pressures makes all values positive so that they
may be accounted for in the summation of pressure levels. This
measurement is often used in the context of discussing behavioral
effects, in part because behavioral effects, which often result from
auditory cues, may be better expressed through averaged units rather
than by peak pressures.
Acoustic Impacts
HRG survey equipment use and use of the DP thruster during the
geophysical and geotechnical surveys may temporarily impact marine
mammals in the area due to elevated in-water sound levels. Marine
mammals are continually exposed to many sources of sound. Naturally
occurring sounds such as lightning, rain, sub-sea earthquakes, and
biological sounds (e.g., snapping shrimp, whale songs) are widespread
throughout the world's oceans. Marine mammals produce sounds in various
contexts and use sound for various biological functions including, but
not limited to: (1) Social interactions; (2) foraging; (3) orientation;
and (4) predator detection. Interference with producing or receiving
these sounds may result in adverse impacts. Audible distance, or
received levels of sound depend on the nature of the sound source,
ambient noise conditions, and the sensitivity of the receptor to the
sound (Richardson et al., 1995). Type and significance of marine mammal
reactions to sound are likely dependent on a variety of factors
including, but not limited to, (1) the behavioral state of the animal
(e.g., feeding, traveling, etc.); (2) frequency of the sound; (3)
distance between the animal and the source; and (4) the level of the
sound relative to ambient conditions (Southall et al., 2007).
When considering the influence of various kinds of sound on the
marine environment, it is necessary to understand that different kinds
of marine life are sensitive to different frequencies of sound. Current
data indicate that not all marine mammal species have equal hearing
capabilities (Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and
Hastings, 2008).
Animals are less sensitive to sounds at the outer edges of their
functional hearing range and are more sensitive to a range of
frequencies within the middle of their functional hearing range. For
mid-frequency cetaceans, functional hearing estimates occur between
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz with best hearing estimated to occur
between approximately 10 to less than 100 kHz (Finneran et al., 2005
and 2009, Natchtigall et al., 2005 and 2008; Yuen et al., 2005; Popov
et al., 2011; and Schlundt et al., 2011).
On August 4, 2016, NMFS released its Technical Guidance for
Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing
(NMFS 2016; 81 FR 51694). This new guidance established new thresholds
for predicting onset of temporary (TTS) and permanent (PTS) threshold
shifts for impulsive (e.g., explosives and impact pile drivers) and
non-impulsive (e.g., vibratory pile drivers) sound sources. These
acoustic thresholds are presented using dual metrics of cumulative
sound exposure level (SELcum) and peak sound level (PK) for impulsive
sounds and SELcum for non-impulsive sounds. The lower and/or upper
frequencies for some of these functional hearing groups have been
modified from those designated by Southall et al. (2007), and the
revised generalized hearing ranges are presented in the new Guidance.
The functional hearing groups and the associated frequencies are
indicated in Table 3 below.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups and Their Generalized Hearing
Range
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
toothed whales, beaked whales,
bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger and L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
[[Page 20570]]
When sound travels (propagates) from its source, its loudness
decreases as the distance traveled by the sound increases. Thus, the
loudness of a sound at its source is higher than the loudness of that
same sound a kilometer (km) away. Acousticians often refer to the
loudness of a sound at its source (typically referenced to one meter
from the source) as the source level and the loudness of sound
elsewhere as the received level (i.e., typically the receiver). For
example, a humpback whale 3 km from a device that has a source level of
230 dB may only be exposed to sound that is 160 dB loud, depending on
how the sound travels through water (e.g., spherical spreading (6 dB
reduction with doubling of distance) was used in this example). As a
result, it is important to understand the difference between source
levels and received levels when discussing the loudness of sound in the
ocean or its impacts on the marine environment.
As sound travels from a source, its propagation in water is
influenced by various physical characteristics, including water
temperature, depth, salinity, and surface and bottom properties that
cause refraction, reflection, absorption, and scattering of sound
waves. Oceans are not homogeneous and the contribution of each of these
individual factors is extremely complex and interrelated. The physical
characteristics that determine the sound's speed through the water will
change with depth, season, geographic location, and with time of day
(as a result, in actual active sonar operations, crews will measure
oceanic conditions, such as sea water temperature and depth, to
calibrate models that determine the path the sonar signal will take as
it travels through the ocean and how strong the sound signal will be at
a given range along a particular transmission path). As sound travels
through the ocean, the intensity associated with the wavefront
diminishes, or attenuates. This decrease in intensity is referred to as
propagation loss, also commonly called transmission loss.
As mentioned previously in this document, five marine mammal
species (four cetaceans and one pinniped) are likely to occur in the
Lease Area. Of the four cetacean species likely to occur in the Lease
Area, one classified as low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., fin whale), two
are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e., Atlantic white-sided
dolphin and bottlenose dolphin), and one is classified as a high-
frequency cetacean (i.e., harbor porpoise) (Southall et al., 2007). A
species' functional hearing group is a consideration when we analyze
the effects of exposure to sound on marine mammals.
Hearing Impairment
Marine mammals may experience temporary or permanent hearing
impairment when exposed to loud sounds. Hearing impairment is
classified by TTS and PTS. There are no empirical data for onset of PTS
in any marine mammal; therefore, PTS-onset must be estimated from TTS-
onset measurements and from the rate of TTS growth with increasing
exposure levels above the level eliciting TTS-onset. PTS is presumed to
be likely if the hearing threshold is reduced by >= 40 dB (that is, 40
dB of TTS). PTS is considered auditory injury (Southall et al., 2007)
and occurs in a specific frequency range and amount. Irreparable damage
to the inner or outer cochlear hair cells may cause PTS; however, other
mechanisms are also involved, such as exceeding the elastic limits of
certain tissues and membranes in the middle and inner ears and
resultant changes in the chemical composition of the inner ear fluids
(Southall et al., 2007). Given the higher level of sound and longer
durations of exposure necessary to cause PTS as compared with TTS, it
is considerably less likely that PTS would occur during the proposed
HRG and geotechnical survey.
Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS)
TTS is the mildest form of hearing impairment that can occur during
exposure to a loud sound (Kryter 1985). While experiencing TTS, the
hearing threshold rises and a sound must be stronger in order to be
heard. At least in terrestrial mammals, TTS can last from minutes or
hours to (in cases of strong TTS) days, can be limited to a particular
frequency range, and can occur to varying degrees (i.e., a loss of a
certain number of dBs of sensitivity). For sound exposures at or
somewhat above the TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity in both
terrestrial and marine mammals recovers rapidly after exposure to the
noise ends.
Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with
conspecifics and in interpretation of environmental cues for purposes
such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree
(elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and
frequency range of TTS and the context in which it is experienced, TTS
can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to
serious. For example, a marine mammal may be able to readily compensate
for a brief, relatively small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency
range that takes place during a time when the animals is traveling
through the open ocean, where ambient noise is lower and there are not
as many competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and
longer duration of TTS sustained during a time when communication is
critical for successful mother/calf interactions could have more
serious impacts if it were in the same frequency band as the necessary
vocalizations and of a severity that it impeded communication. The fact
that animals exposed to levels and durations of sound that would be
expected to result in this physiological response would also be
expected to have behavioral responses of a comparatively more severe or
sustained nature is also notable and potentially of more importance
than the simple existence of a TTS.
Currently, TTS data only exist for four species of cetaceans
(bottlenose dolphin, beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas), harbor
porpoise, and Yangtze finless porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides)) and
three species of pinnipeds (northern elephant seal (Mirounga
angustirostris), harbor seal, and California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus)) exposed to a limited number of sound sources (i.e.,
mostly tones and octave-band noise) in laboratory settings (e.g.,
Finneran et al., 2002 and 2010; Nachtigall et al., 2004; Kastak et al.,
2005; Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009; Popov et al., 2011;
Finneran and Schlundt, 2010). In general, harbor seals (Kastak et al.,
2005; Kastelein et al., 2012a) and harbor porpoises (Lucke et al.,
2009; Kastelein et al., 2012b) have a lower TTS onset than other
measured pinniped or cetacean species. However, even for these animals,
which are better able to hear higher frequencies and may be more
sensitive to higher frequencies, exposures on the order of
approximately 170 dB rms or higher for brief transient signals are
likely required for even temporary (recoverable) changes in hearing
sensitivity that would likely not be categorized as physiologically
damaging (Lucke et al., 2009). Additionally, the existing marine mammal
TTS data come from a limited number of individuals within these
species. There are no data available on noise-induced hearing loss for
mysticetes. For summaries of data on TTS in marine mammals or for
further discussion of TTS onset thresholds, please see Finneran (2016).
Scientific literature highlights the inherent complexity of
predicting TTS onset in marine mammals, as well as the importance of
considering exposure duration when assessing potential
[[Page 20571]]
impacts (Mooney et al., 2009a, 2009b; Kastak et al., 2007). Generally,
with sound exposures of equal energy, quieter sounds (lower SPL) of
longer duration were found to induce TTS onset more than louder sounds
(higher SPL) of shorter duration (more similar to sub-bottom
profilers). For intermittent sounds, less threshold shift will occur
than from a continuous exposure with the same energy (some recovery
will occur between intermittent exposures) (Kryter et al., 1966; Ward
1997). For sound exposures at or somewhat above the TTS-onset
threshold, hearing sensitivity recovers rapidly after exposure to the
sound ends; intermittent exposures recover faster in comparison with
continuous exposures of the same duration (Finneran et al., 2010). NMFS
considers TTS as Level B harassment that is mediated by physiological
effects on the auditory system; however, NMFS does not consider TTS-
onset to be the lowest level at which Level B harassment may occur.
Animals in the Lease Area during the HRG survey are unlikely to
incur TTS hearing impairment due to the characteristics of the sound
sources, which include low source levels (208 to 221 dB re 1 [micro]Pa-
m) and generally very short pulses and duration of the sound. Even for
high-frequency cetacean species (e.g., harbor porpoises), which may
have increased sensitivity to TTS (Lucke et al., 2009; Kastelein et
al., 2012b), individuals would have to make a very close approach and
also remain very close to vessels operating these sources in order to
receive multiple exposures at relatively high levels, as would be
necessary to cause TTS. Intermittent exposures--as would occur due to
the brief, transient signals produced by these sources--require a
higher cumulative SEL to induce TTS than would continuous exposures of
the same duration (i.e., intermittent exposure results in lower levels
of TTS) (Mooney et al., 2009a; Finneran et al., 2010). Moreover, most
marine mammals would more likely avoid a loud sound source rather than
swim in such close proximity as to result in TTS. Kremser et al. (2005)
noted that the probability of a cetacean swimming through the area of
exposure when a sub-bottom profiler emits a pulse is small--because if
the animal was in the area, it would have to pass the transducer at
close range in order to be subjected to sound levels that could cause
TTS and would likely exhibit avoidance behavior to the area near the
transducer rather than swim through at such a close range. Further, the
restricted beam shape of the sub-bottom profiler and other HRG survey
equipment makes it unlikely that an animal would be exposed more than
briefly during the passage of the vessel. Boebel et al. (2005)
concluded similarly for single and multibeam echosounders and, more
recently, Lurton (2016) conducted a modeling exercise and concluded
similarly that likely potential for acoustic injury from these types of
systems is negligible but that behavioral response cannot be ruled out.
Animals may avoid the area around the survey vessels, thereby reducing
exposure. Any disturbance to marine mammals is likely to be in the form
of temporary avoidance or alteration of opportunistic foraging behavior
near the survey location.
For the HRG survey activities, animals may avoid the area around
the survey vessel, thereby reducing exposure. Any disturbance to marine
mammals is more likely to be in the form of temporary avoidance or
alteration of opportunistic foraging behavior near the survey location.
Masking
Masking is the obscuring of sounds of interest to an animal by
other sounds, typically at similar frequencies. Marine mammals are
highly dependent on sound, and their ability to recognize sound signals
amid other sound is important in communication and detection of both
predators and prey (Tyack 2000). Background ambient sound may interfere
with or mask the ability of an animal to detect a sound signal even
when that signal is above its absolute hearing threshold. Even in the
absence of anthropogenic sound, the marine environment is often loud.
Natural ambient sound includes contributions from wind, waves,
precipitation, other animals, and (at frequencies above 30 kHz) thermal
sound resulting from molecular agitation (Richardson et al., 1995).
Background sound may also include anthropogenic sound, and masking
of natural sounds can result when human activities produce high levels
of background sound. Conversely, if the background level of underwater
sound is high (e.g., on a day with strong wind and high waves), an
anthropogenic sound source would not be detectable as far away as would
be possible under quieter conditions and would itself be masked.
Ambient sound is highly variable on continental shelves (Myrberg 1978;
Desharnais et al., 1999). This results in a high degree of variability
in the range at which marine mammals can detect anthropogenic sounds.
Although masking is a phenomenon which may occur naturally, the
introduction of loud anthropogenic sounds into the marine environment
at frequencies important to marine mammals increases the severity and
frequency of occurrence of masking. For example, if a baleen whale is
exposed to continuous low-frequency sound from an industrial source,
this would reduce the size of the area around that whale within which
it can hear the calls of another whale. The components of background
noise that are similar in frequency to the signal in question primarily
determine the degree of masking of that signal. In general, little is
known about the degree to which marine mammals rely upon detection of
sounds from conspecifics, predators, prey, or other natural sources. In
the absence of specific information about the importance of detecting
these natural sounds, it is not possible to predict the impact of
masking on marine mammals (Richardson et al., 1995). In general,
masking effects are expected to be less severe when sounds are
transient than when they are continuous. Masking is typically of
greater concern for those marine mammals that utilize low-frequency
communications, such as baleen whales, because of how far low-frequency
sounds propagate.
Marine mammal communications would not likely be masked appreciably
by the sub-bottom profiler signals given the directionality of the
signal and the brief period when an individual mammal is likely to be
within its beam. And while continuous sound from the DP thruster when
in use is predicted to extend 500 m to the 120 dB threshold, the
generally short duration of DP thruster use and low source levels,
coupled with the likelihood of animals to avoid the sound source, would
result in very little opportunity for this activity to mask the
communication of local marine mammals for more than a brief period of
time.
Non-Auditory Physical Effects (Stress)
Classic stress responses begin when an animal's central nervous
system perceives a potential threat to its homeostasis. That perception
triggers stress responses regardless of whether a stimulus actually
threatens the animal; the mere perception of a threat is sufficient to
trigger a stress response (Moberg 2000; Seyle 1950). Once an animal's
central nervous system perceives a threat, it mounts a biological
response or defense that consists of a combination of the four general
biological defense responses: behavioral responses, autonomic nervous
system responses, neuroendocrine responses, or immune responses.
[[Page 20572]]
In the case of many stressors, an animal's first and sometimes most
economical (in terms of biotic costs) response is behavioral avoidance
of the potential stressor or avoidance of continued exposure to a
stressor. An animal's second line of defense to stressors involves the
sympathetic part of the autonomic nervous system and the classical
``fight or flight'' response which includes the cardiovascular system,
the gastrointestinal system, the exocrine glands, and the adrenal
medulla to produce changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and
gastrointestinal activity that humans commonly associate with
``stress.'' These responses have a relatively short duration and may or
may not have significant long-term effect on an animal's welfare.
An animal's third line of defense to stressors involves its
neuroendocrine systems; the system that has received the most study has
been the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal system (also known as the HPA
axis in mammals or the hypothalamus-pituitary-interrenal axis in fish
and some reptiles). Unlike stress responses associated with the
autonomic nervous system, virtually all neuro-endocrine functions that
are affected by stress--including immune competence, reproduction,
metabolism, and behavior--are regulated by pituitary hormones. Stress-
induced changes in the secretion of pituitary hormones have been
implicated in failed reproduction (Moberg 1987; Rivier 1995), altered
metabolism (Elasser et al., 2000), reduced immune competence (Blecha
2000), and behavioral disturbance. Increases in the circulation of
glucocorticosteroids (cortisol, corticosterone, and aldosterone in
marine mammals; see Romano et al., 2004) have been equated with stress
for many years.
The primary distinction between stress (which is adaptive and does
not normally place an animal at risk) and distress is the biotic cost
of the response. During a stress response, an animal uses glycogen
stores that can be quickly replenished once the stress is alleviated.
In such circumstances, the cost of the stress response would not pose a
risk to the animal's welfare. However, when an animal does not have
sufficient energy reserves to satisfy the energetic costs of a stress
response, energy resources must be diverted from other biotic function,
which impairs those functions that experience the diversion. For
example, when mounting a stress response diverts energy away from
growth in young animals, those animals may experience stunted growth.
When mounting a stress response diverts energy from a fetus, an
animal's reproductive success and its fitness will suffer. In these
cases, the animals will have entered a pre-pathological or pathological
state which is called ``distress'' (Seyle 1950) or ``allostatic
loading'' (McEwen and Wingfield 2003). This pathological state will
last until the animal replenishes its biotic reserves sufficient to
restore normal function. Note that these examples involved a long-term
(days or weeks) stress response exposure to stimuli.
Relationships between these physiological mechanisms, animal
behavior, and the costs of stress responses have also been documented
fairly well through controlled experiments; because this physiology
exists in every vertebrate that has been studied, it is not surprising
that stress responses and their costs have been documented in both
laboratory and free-living animals (for examples see, Holberton et al.,
1996; Hood et al., 1998; Jessop et al., 2003; Krausman et al., 2004;
Lankford et al., 2005; Reneerkens et al., 2002; Thompson and Hamer,
2000). Information has also been collected on the physiological
responses of marine mammals to exposure to anthropogenic sounds (Fair
and Becker 2000; Romano et al., 2002). For example, Rolland et al.
(2012) found that noise reduction from reduced ship traffic in the Bay
of Fundy was associated with decreased stress in North Atlantic right
whales. In a conceptual model developed by the Population Consequences
of Acoustic Disturbance (PCAD) working group, serum hormones were
identified as possible indicators of behavioral effects that are
translated into altered rates of reproduction and mortality.
Studies of other marine animals and terrestrial animals would also
lead us to expect some marine mammals to experience physiological
stress responses and, perhaps, physiological responses that would be
classified as ``distress'' upon exposure to high frequency, mid-
frequency and low-frequency sounds. For example, Jansen (1998) reported
on the relationship between acoustic exposures and physiological
responses that are indicative of stress responses in humans (for
example, elevated respiration and increased heart rates). Jones (1998)
reported on reductions in human performance when faced with acute,
repetitive exposures to acoustic disturbance. Trimper et al. (1998)
reported on the physiological stress responses of osprey to low-level
aircraft noise while Krausman et al. (2004) reported on the auditory
and physiology stress responses of endangered Sonoran pronghorn to
military overflights. Smith et al. (2004a, 2004b), for example,
identified noise-induced physiological transient stress responses in
hearing-specialist fish (i.e., goldfish) that accompanied short- and
long-term hearing losses. Welch and Welch (1970) reported physiological
and behavioral stress responses that accompanied damage to the inner
ears of fish and several mammals.
Hearing is one of the primary senses marine mammals use to gather
information about their environment and to communicate with
conspecifics. Although empirical information on the relationship
between sensory impairment (TTS, PTS, and acoustic masking) on marine
mammals remains limited, it seems reasonable to assume that reducing an
animal's ability to gather information about its environment and to
communicate with other members of its species would be stressful for
animals that use hearing as their primary sensory mechanism. Therefore,
we assume that acoustic exposures sufficient to trigger onset PTS or
TTS would be accompanied by physiological stress responses because
terrestrial animals exhibit those responses under similar conditions
(NRC 2003). More importantly, marine mammals might experience stress
responses at received levels lower than those necessary to trigger
onset TTS. Based on empirical studies of the time required to recover
from stress responses (Moberg 2000), we also assume that stress
responses are likely to persist beyond the time interval required for
animals to recover from TTS and might result in pathological and pre-
pathological states that would be as significant as behavioral
responses to TTS.
In general, there are few data on the potential for strong,
anthropogenic underwater sounds to cause non-auditory physical effects
in marine mammals. Such effects, if they occur at all, would presumably
be limited to short distances and to activities that extend over a
prolonged period. The available data do not allow identification of a
specific exposure level above which non-auditory effects can be
expected (Southall et al., 2007). There is no definitive evidence that
any of these effects occur even for marine mammals in close proximity
to an anthropogenic sound source. In addition, marine mammals that show
behavioral avoidance of survey vessels and related sound sources are
unlikely to incur non-auditory impairment or other physical effects.
NMFS does not expect that the generally short-term, intermittent, and
transitory HRG and
[[Page 20573]]
geotechnical activities would create conditions of long-term,
continuous noise and chronic acoustic exposure leading to long-term
physiological stress responses in marine mammals.
Behavioral Disturbance
Behavioral disturbance may include a variety of effects, including
subtle changes in behavior (e.g., minor or brief avoidance of an area
or changes in vocalizations), more conspicuous changes in similar
behavioral activities, and more sustained and/or potentially severe
reactions, such as displacement from or abandonment of high-quality
habitat. Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-
specific and any reactions depend on numerous intrinsic and extrinsic
factors (e.g., species, state of maturity, experience, current
activity, reproductive state, auditory sensitivity, time of day), as
well as the interplay between factors (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995;
Wartzok et al., 2003; Southall et al., 2007; Weilgart, 2007; Archer et
al., 2010). Behavioral reactions can vary not only among individuals
but also within an individual, depending on previous experience with a
sound source, context, and numerous other factors (Ellison et al.,
2012), and can vary depending on characteristics associated with the
sound source (e.g., whether it is moving or stationary, number of
sources, distance from the source). Please see Appendices B-C of
Southall et al. (2007) for a review of studies involving marine mammal
behavioral responses to sound.
Habituation can occur when an animal's response to a stimulus wanes
with repeated exposure, usually in the absence of unpleasant associated
events (Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most likely to habituate to
sounds that are predictable and unvarying. It is important to note that
habituation is appropriately considered as a ``progressive reduction in
response to stimuli that are perceived as neither aversive nor
beneficial,'' rather than as, more generally, moderation in response to
human disturbance (Bejder et al., 2009). The opposite process is
sensitization, when an unpleasant experience leads to subsequent
responses, often in the form of avoidance, at a lower level of
exposure. As noted, behavioral state may affect the type of response.
For example, animals that are resting may show greater behavioral
change in response to disturbing sound levels than animals that are
highly motivated to remain in an area for feeding (Richardson et al.,
1995; NRC 2003; Wartzok et al., 2003). Controlled experiments with
captive marine mammals have shown pronounced behavioral reactions,
including avoidance of loud sound sources (Ridgway et al., 1997;
Finneran et al., 2003). Observed responses of wild marine mammals to
loud, pulsed sound sources (typically seismic airguns or acoustic
harassment devices) have been varied but often consist of avoidance
behavior or other behavioral changes suggesting discomfort (Morton and
Symonds, 2002; see also Richardson et al., 1995; Nowacek et al., 2007).
Available studies show wide variation in response to underwater
sound; therefore, it is difficult to predict specifically how any given
sound in a particular instance might affect marine mammals perceiving
the signal. If a marine mammal does react briefly to an underwater
sound by changing its behavior or moving a small distance, the impacts
of the change are unlikely to be significant to the individual, let
alone the stock or population. However, if a sound source displaces
marine mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for a
prolonged period, impacts on individuals and populations could be
significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart 2007; NRC 2005).
However, there are broad categories of potential response, which we
describe in greater detail here, that include alteration of dive
behavior, alteration of foraging behavior, effects to breathing,
interference with or alteration of vocalization, avoidance, and flight.
Changes in dive behavior can vary widely and may consist of
increased or decreased dive times and surface intervals as well as
changes in the rates of ascent and descent during a dive (e.g., Frankel
and Clark 2000; Costa et al., 2003; Ng and Leung 2003; Nowacek et al.,
2004; Goldbogen et al., 2013a,b). Variations in dive behavior may
reflect interruptions in biologically significant activities (e.g.,
foraging) or they may be of little biological significance. The impact
of an alteration to dive behavior resulting from an acoustic exposure
depends on what the animal is doing at the time of the exposure and the
type and magnitude of the response.
Disruption of feeding behavior can be difficult to correlate with
anthropogenic sound exposure, so it is usually inferred by observed
displacement from known foraging areas, the appearance of secondary
indicators (e.g., bubble nets or sediment plumes), or changes in dive
behavior. As for other types of behavioral response, the frequency,
duration, and temporal pattern of signal presentation, as well as
differences in species sensitivity, are likely contributing factors to
differences in response in any given circumstance (e.g., Croll et al.,
2001; Nowacek et al.; 2004; Madsen et al., 2006; Yazvenko et al.,
2007). A determination of whether foraging disruptions incur fitness
consequences would require information on or estimates of the energetic
requirements of the affected individuals and the relationship between
prey availability, foraging effort and success, and the life history
stage of the animal.
Variations in respiration naturally vary with different behaviors
and alterations to breathing rate as a function of acoustic exposure
can be expected to co-occur with other behavioral reactions, such as a
flight response or an alteration in diving. However, respiration rates
in and of themselves may be representative of annoyance or an acute
stress response. Various studies have shown that respiration rates may
either be unaffected or could increase, depending on the species and
signal characteristics, again highlighting the importance in
understanding species differences in the tolerance of underwater noise
when determining the potential for impacts resulting from anthropogenic
sound exposure (e.g., Kastelein et al., 2001, 2005b, 2006; Gailey et
al., 2007).
Marine mammals vocalize for different purposes and across multiple
modes, such as whistling, echolocation click production, calling, and
singing. Changes in vocalization behavior in response to anthropogenic
noise can occur for any of these modes and may result from a need to
compete with an increase in background noise or may reflect increased
vigilance or a startle response. For example, in the presence of
potentially masking signals, humpback whales and killer whales have
been observed to increase the length of their songs (Miller et al.,
2000; Fristrup et al., 2003; Foote et al., 2004), while right whales
have been observed to shift the frequency content of their calls upward
while reducing the rate of calling in areas of increased anthropogenic
noise (Parks et al., 2007b). In some cases, animals may cease sound
production during production of aversive signals (Bowles et al., 1994).
Avoidance is the displacement of an individual from an area or
migration path as a result of the presence of a sound or other
stressors, and is one of the most obvious manifestations of disturbance
in marine mammals (Richardson et al., 1995). For example, gray whales
are known to change direction--deflecting from customary migratory
paths--in order to avoid noise from seismic surveys (Malme et al.,
1984). Avoidance may be short-term,
[[Page 20574]]
with animals returning to the area once the noise has ceased (e.g.,
Bowles et al., 1994; Goold 1996; Stone et al., 2000; Morton and
Symonds, 2002; Gailey et al., 2007). Longer-term displacement is
possible, however, which may lead to changes in abundance or
distribution patterns of the affected species in the affected region if
habituation to the presence of the sound does not occur (e.g.,
Blackwell et al., 2004; Bejder et al., 2006; Teilmann et al., 2006).
A flight response is a dramatic change in normal movement to a
directed and rapid movement away from the perceived location of a sound
source. The flight response differs from other avoidance responses in
the intensity of the response (e.g., directed movement, rate of
travel). Relatively little information on flight responses of marine
mammals to anthropogenic signals exist, although observations of flight
responses to the presence of predators have occurred (Connor and
Heithaus, 1996). The result of a flight response could range from
brief, temporary exertion and displacement from the area where the
signal provokes flight to, in extreme cases, marine mammal strandings
(Evans and England, 2001). However, it should be noted that response to
a perceived predator does not necessarily invoke flight (Ford and
Reeves, 2008) and whether individuals are solitary or in groups may
influence the response.
Behavioral disturbance can also impact marine mammals in more
subtle ways. Increased vigilance may result in costs related to
diversion of focus and attention (i.e., when a response consists of
increased vigilance, it may come at the cost of decreased attention to
other critical behaviors such as foraging or resting). These effects
have generally not been demonstrated for marine mammals, but studies
involving fish and terrestrial animals have shown that increased
vigilance may substantially reduce feeding rates (e.g., Beauchamp and
Livoreil, 1997; Fritz et al., 2002; Purser and Radford, 2011). In
addition, chronic disturbance can cause population declines through
reduction of fitness (e.g., decline in body condition) and subsequent
reduction in reproductive success, survival, or both (e.g., Harrington
and Veitch, 1992; Daan et al., 1996; Bradshaw et al., 1998). However,
Ridgway et al. (2006) reported that increased vigilance in bottlenose
dolphins exposed to sound over a five-day period did not cause any
sleep deprivation or stress effects.
Many animals perform vital functions, such as feeding, resting,
traveling, and socializing, on a diel cycle (24-hour cycle). Disruption
of such functions resulting from reactions to stressors such as sound
exposure 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). Note that there is a difference between multi-day
substantive behavioral reactions and multi-day anthropogenic
activities. For example, just because an activity lasts for multiple
days does not necessarily mean that individual animals are either
exposed to activity-related stressors for multiple days or, further,
exposed in a manner resulting in sustained multi-day substantive
behavioral responses.
Marine mammals are likely to avoid the HRG survey activity,
especially the naturally shy harbor porpoise, while the harbor seals
might be attracted to them out of curiosity. However, because the sub-
bottom profilers and other HRG survey equipment operate from a moving
vessel, and the maximum radius to the 160 dB harassment threshold is
less than 200 m, the area and time that this equipment would be
affecting a given location is very small. Further, once an area has
been surveyed, it is not likely that it will be surveyed again,
therefore reducing the likelihood of repeated HRG-related impacts
within the survey area. And while the drill ship using DP thrusters
will generally remain stationary during geotechnical survey activities,
the short duration (up to 12 days) of the DP thruster use would likely
result in only short-term and temporary avoidance of the area, rather
than permanent abandonment, by marine mammals.
We have also considered the potential for severe behavioral
responses such as stranding and associated indirect injury or mortality
from Ocean Wind's use of HRG survey equipment, on the basis of a 2008
mass stranding of approximately one hundred melon-headed whales in a
Madagascar lagoon system. An investigation of the event indicated that
use of a high-frequency mapping system (12-kHz multibeam echosounder)
was the most plausible and likely initial behavioral trigger of the
event, while providing the caveat that there is no unequivocal and
easily identifiable single cause (Southall et al., 2013). The
investigatory panel's conclusion was based on (1) very close temporal
and spatial association and directed movement of the survey with the
stranding event; (2) the unusual nature of such an event coupled with
previously documented apparent behavioral sensitivity of the species to
other sound types (Southall et al., 2006; Brownell et al., 2009); and
(3) the fact that all other possible factors considered were determined
to be unlikely causes. Specifically, regarding survey patterns prior to
the event and in relation to bathymetry, the vessel transited in a
north-south direction on the shelf break parallel to the shore,
ensonifying large areas of deep-water habitat prior to operating
intermittently in a concentrated area offshore from the stranding site;
this may have trapped the animals between the sound source and the
shore, thus driving them towards the lagoon system. The investigatory
panel systematically excluded or deemed highly unlikely nearly all
potential reasons for these animals leaving their typical pelagic
habitat for an area extremely atypical for the species (i.e., a shallow
lagoon system). Notably, this was the first time that such a system has
been associated with a stranding event. The panel also noted several
site- and situation-specific secondary factors that may have
contributed to the avoidance responses that led to the eventual
entrapment and mortality of the whales. Specifically, shoreward-
directed surface currents and elevated chlorophyll levels in the area
preceding the event may have played a role (Southall et al., 2013). The
report also notes that prior use of a similar system in the general
area may have sensitized the animals and also concluded that, for
odontocete cetaceans that hear well in higher frequency ranges where
ambient noise is typically quite low, high-power active sonars
operating in this range may be more easily audible and have potential
effects over larger areas than low frequency systems that have more
typically been considered in terms of anthropogenic noise impacts. It
is, however, important to note that the relatively lower output
frequency, higher output power, and complex nature of the system
implicated in this event, in context of the other factors noted here,
likely produced a fairly unusual set of circumstances that indicate
that such events would likely remain rare and are not necessarily
relevant to use of lower-power, higher-frequency systems more commonly
used for HRG survey applications. The risk of similar events recurring
may be very low, given the extensive use of active acoustic systems
used for scientific and navigational purposes worldwide on a daily
basis and the lack of direct evidence of such responses previously
reported.
[[Page 20575]]
Tolerance
Numerous studies have shown that underwater sounds from industrial
activities are often readily detectable by marine mammals in the water
at distances of many km. However, other studies have shown that marine
mammals at distances more than a few km away often show no apparent
response to industrial activities of various types (Miller et al.,
2005). This is often true even in cases when the sounds must be readily
audible to the animals based on measured received levels and the
hearing sensitivity of that mammal group. Although various baleen
whales, toothed whales, and (less frequently) pinnipeds have been shown
to react behaviorally to underwater sound from sources such as airgun
pulses or vessels under some conditions, at other times, mammals of all
three types have shown no overt reactions (e.g., Malme et al., 1986;
Richardson et al., 1995; Madsen and Mohl 2000; Croll et al., 2001;
Jacobs and Terhune 2002; Madsen et al., 2002; Miller et al., 2005). In
general, pinnipeds seem to be more tolerant of exposure to some types
of underwater sound than are baleen whales. Richardson et al. (1995)
found that vessel sound does not seem to strongly affect pinnipeds that
are already in the water. Richardson et al. (1995) went on to explain
that seals on haul-outs sometimes respond strongly to the presence of
vessels and at other times appear to show considerable tolerance of
vessels, and Brueggeman et al. (1992) observed ringed seals (Pusa
hispida) hauled out on ice pans displaying short-term escape reactions
when a ship approached within 0.16-0.31 mi (0.25-0.5 km). Due to the
relatively high vessel traffic in the Lease Area it is possible that
marine mammals are habituated to noise (e.g., DP thrusters) from
project vessels in the area.
Vessel Strike
Ship strikes of marine mammals can cause major wounds, which may
lead to the death of the animal. An animal at the surface could be
struck directly by a vessel, a surfacing animal could hit the bottom of
a vessel, or a vessel's propeller could injure an animal just below the
surface. The severity of injuries typically depends on the size and
speed of the vessel (Knowlton and Kraus 2001; Laist et al., 2001;
Vanderlaan and Taggart 2007).
The most vulnerable marine mammals are those that spend extended
periods of time at the surface in order to restore oxygen levels within
their tissues after deep dives (e.g., the sperm whale). In addition,
some baleen whales, such as the North Atlantic right whale, seem
generally unresponsive to vessel sound, making them more susceptible to
vessel collisions (Nowacek et al., 2004). These species are primarily
large, slow moving whales. Smaller marine mammals (e.g., bottlenose
dolphin) move quickly through the water column and are often seen
riding the bow wave of large ships. Marine mammal responses to vessels
may include avoidance and changes in dive pattern (NRC 2003).
An examination of all known ship strikes from all shipping sources
(civilian and military) indicates vessel speed is a principal factor in
whether a vessel strike results in death (Knowlton and Kraus 2001;
Laist et al., 2001; Jensen and Silber 2003; Vanderlaan and Taggart
2007). In assessing records with known vessel speeds, Laist et al.
(2001) found a direct relationship between the occurrence of a whale
strike and the speed of the vessel involved in the collision. The
authors concluded that most deaths occurred when a vessel was traveling
in excess of 24.1 km/h (14.9 mph; 13 kn). Given the slow vessel speeds
and predictable course necessary for data acquisition, ship strike is
unlikely to occur during the geophysical and geotechnical surveys.
Marine mammals would be able to easily avoid the applicant's vessel due
to the slow speeds and are likely already habituated to the presence of
numerous vessels in the area. Further, Ocean Wind shall implement
measures (e.g., vessel speed restrictions and separation distances; see
Proposed Mitigation Measures) set forth in the BOEM Lease to reduce the
risk of a vessel strike to marine mammal species in the Lease Area.
There are no rookeries or mating grounds known to be biologically
important to marine mammals within the proposed project area. The area
is an important feeding area for fin whales. There is no designated
critical habitat for any ESA-listed marine mammals. NMFS' regulations
at 50 CFR part 224 designated the nearshore waters of the Mid-Atlantic
Bight as the Mid-Atlantic U.S. Seasonal Management Area (SMA) for right
whales in 2008. Mandatory vessel speed restrictions (less than 10
knots) are in place in that SMA from November 1 through April 30 to
reduce the threat of collisions between ships and right whales around
their migratory route and calving grounds.
Bottom disturbance associated with the HRG survey activities may
include grab sampling to validate the seabed classification obtained
from the multibeam echosounder/sidescan sonar data. This will typically
be accomplished using a Mini-Harmon Grab with 0.1 m\2\ sample area or
the slightly larger Harmon Grab with a 0.2 m\2\ sample area. Bottom
disturbance associated with the geotechnical survey activities will
consist of the 8 deep bore holes of approximately 3 to 4 inches (in;
7.6 to 10.1 centimeters (cm)) diameter, the 30 shallow CPTs of up to
approximately 2 in (5 cm) in diameter, and the 8 deep CPTs of
approximately 2 in (5 cm) in diameter. Impact on marine mammal habitat
from these activities will be temporary, insignificant, and
discountable.
Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance, the
availability of similar habitat and resources (e.g., prey species) in
the surrounding area, and the lack of important or unique marine mammal
habitat, the impacts to marine mammals and the food sources that they
utilize are not expected to cause significant or long-term consequences
for individual marine mammals or their populations.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed for authorization through this IHA, which will inform both
NMFS' consideration of whether the number of takes is ``small'' and the
negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. 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).
Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to HRG and geotechnical surveys. Based on the
nature of the activity, the short duration of activities, and the small
Level A isopleths (less than 3 m for all sources), Level A harassment
is neither anticipated nor proposed to be authorized. The death of a
marine mammal is also a type of incidental take. However, as described
previously, no mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized
for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated for this
project.
Project activities that have the potential to harass marine
mammals, as defined by the MMPA, include
[[Page 20576]]
underwater noise from operation of the HRG survey sub-bottom profilers
and noise propagation associated with the use of DP thrusters during
geotechnical survey activities that require the use of a DP drill ship.
NMFS anticipates that impacts to marine mammals would be in the form of
behavioral harassment, and no take by injury, serious injury, or
mortality is proposed.
The basis for the take estimate is the number of marine mammals
that would be exposed to sound levels in excess of NMFS' Level B
harassment criteria for impulsive noise (160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) and
continuous noise (120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)), which is generally
determined by overlaying the area ensonified above NMFS acoustic
thresholds for harassment within a day with the density of marine
mammals, and multiplying by the number of days. NMFS' current acoustic
thresholds for estimating take are shown in Table 4 below.
Table 4--NMFS's Acoustic Exposure Criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Criterion Definition Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B harassment Behavioral 160 dB (impulsive
(underwater). disruption. source)/120 dB
(continuous source)
(rms).
Level B harassment (airborne). Behavioral 90 dB (harbor seals)/
disruption. 100 dB (other
pinnipeds)
(unweighted).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modeling took into consideration sound sources using the potential
operational parameters, bathymetry, geoacoustic properties of the Lease
Area, time of year, and marine mammal hearing ranges. Results from the
hydroacoustic modeling and measurements showed that estimated maximum
distance to the 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) MMPA threshold for all water
depths for the HRG survey sub-bottom profilers (the HRG survey
equipment with the greatest potential for effect on marine mammal) was
approximately 75.28 m from the source using practical spreading
(Subacoustech 2016), and the estimated maximum critical distance to the
120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) MMPA threshold for all water depths for the
drill ship DP thruster was approximately 500 m from the source
(Subacoustech 2016). Ocean Wind and NMFS believe that these estimates
represent the a conservative scenario and that the actual distances to
the Level B harassment threshold may be shorter, as practical spreading
(15logR) was used to estimate the ensonified area here and there are
some sound measurements taken in the Northeast that suggest a higher
spreading coefficient (which would result in a shorter distance) may be
applicable.
Ocean Wind estimated species densities within the proposed project
area in order to estimate the number of marine mammal exposures to
sound levels above the 120 dB Level B harassment threshold for
continuous noise (i.e., DP thrusters) and the 160 dB Level B harassment
threshold for intermittent, impulsive noise (i.e., sub-bottom
profiler). Research indicates that marine mammals generally have
extremely fine auditory temporal resolution and can detect each signal
separately (e.g., Au et al., 1988; Dolphin et al., 1995; Supin and
Popov 1995; Mooney et al., 2009b), especially for species with
echolocation capabilities. Therefore, it is likely that marine mammals
would perceive the acoustic signals associated with the HRG survey
equipment as being intermittent rather than continuous, and we base our
takes from these sources on exposures to the 160 dB threshold.
The data used as the basis for estimating cetacean density (``D'')
for the Lease Area are sightings per unit effort (SPUE) derived by Duke
University (Roberts et al., 2016). For pinnipeds, the only available
comprehensive data for seal abundance is the Northeast Navy Operations
Area (OPAREA) Density Estimates (DoN 2007). SPUE (or, the relative
abundance of species) is derived by using a measure of survey effort
and number of individual cetaceans sighted. SPUE allows for comparison
between discrete units of time (i.e. seasons) and space within a
project area (Shoop and Kenney, 1992). The Duke University (Roberts et
al., 2016) cetacean density data represent models derived from
aggregating line-transect surveys conducted over 23 years by 5
institutions (NOAA NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC), New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), NOAA NMFS
Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC), University of North
Carolina Wilmington (UNCW), Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center
(VAMSC)), the results of which are freely available online at the Ocean
Biogeographic Information System Spatial Ecological Analysis of
Megavertebrate Populations (OBIS-SEAMAP) repository. Monthly density
values were within the survey area were averaged by season to provide
seasonal density estimates. The OPAREA Density Estimates (DoN 2007)
used for pinniped densities were based on data collected through NMFS
NWFSC aerial surveys conducted between 1998 and 2005.
The Zone of influence (ZOI) is the extent of the ensonified zone in
a given day. The ZOI was calculated using the following equations:
Stationary source (e.g. DP thruster): [pi]r\2\
Mobile source (e.g. sparkers): (distance/day * 2r) + [pi]r\2\
Where distance is the maximum survey trackline per day (177.6 km)
and r is the distance to the 160 dB (for impulsive sources) and 120 dB
(for non-impulsive sources) isopleths. The isopleths were calculated
using practical spreading.
Estimated takes were calculated by multiplying the species density
(animals per km\2\) by the appropriate ZOI, multiplied by the number of
appropriate days (e.g. 42 for HRG activities or 12 for geotechnical
activities) of the specified activity. A detailed description of the
acoustic modeling used to calculate zones of influence is provided in
Ocean Wind's IHA application (also see the discussion in the Mitigation
section below).
Ocean Wind used a ZOI of 26.757 km\2\ and a survey period of 42
days, which includes estimated weather downtime, to estimate take from
use of the HRG survey equipment during geophysical survey activities.
The ZOI is based on the worst case (since it assumes the higher powered
GeoSource 800 sparker will be operating all the time) and a maximum
survey trackline of 110.4 mi (177.6 km) per day. Based on the proposed
HRG survey schedule (June 2017), take calculations were based on the
spring seasonal species density as derived from Roberts et al. (2016)
for cetaceans and seasonal OPAREA density estimates (DoN, 2007) for
pinnipeds. The resulting take estimates (rounded to the nearest whole
number) are presented in Table 6.
[[Page 20577]]
Table 6--Estimated Level B Harassment Takes for HRG Survey Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of
Density for Calculated take Requested take stock
Species spring (number/ (number) authorization potentially
km\2\) (number) affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic Right Whale.................. .0000 0.00 0 0
Humpback Whale.............................. .0001 0.11 0 0
Fin Whale................................... .0008 0.89 * 5 0.061
Sperm whale................................. .0001 0.11 0 0
Minke Whale................................. .0002 0.22 0 0
Bottlenose Dolphin.......................... .2534 284.7 285 0.385
Short beaked common Dolphin................. .0282 31.69 32 0.047
Harbor Porpoise............................. .0012 1.34 * 4 0.006
Harbor Seal................................. 0.0000 0.00 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Requested take authorization was increased to account for average group size of fin whales (5) and harbor
porpoise (4).
Ocean Wind used a ZOI of 0.31 m\2\ (0.79 km\2\) and a maximum DP
thruster use period of 12 days to estimate take from use of the DP
thruster during geotechnical survey activities. The ZOI represents the
field-verified distance to the 120 dB isopleth for DP thruster use.
Based on the proposed geotechnical survey schedule (September 2017),
take calculations were based on the fall seasonal species density
estimates (Roberts et al., 2016; DoN, 2007) (Table 7). The resulting
take estimates (rounded to the nearest whole number) based upon these
conservative assumptions for bottlenose dolphins and harbor seals are
presented in Table 7. These numbers are based on 12 days and represent
only 0.001 percent of the stock for each of these 2 species. Take
estimates were increased to take into account average group size where
needed (fin whale and harbor porpoise). Take calculations for North
Atlantic right whale, humpback whale, sperm whale, and minke whale are
at or near zero (refer to the Ocean Wind application); therefore, no
takes for these species are requested or proposed for authorization.
Table 7--Estimated Level B Harassment Takes for Geotechnical Survey Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of
Density for Calculated take Requested take stock
Species fall (number/ (number) authorization potentially
100 km\2\) (number) affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose Dolphin.......................... 11.44 1.08 1 0.001
Harbor seal................................. 9.74 0.92 1 0.001
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ocean Wind's requested take numbers are provided in Tables 6 and 7
and are also the number of takes NMFS is proposing to authorize. Ocean
Wind's calculations do not take into account whether a single animal is
harassed multiple times or whether each exposure is a different animal.
Therefore, the numbers in Tables 6 and 7 are the maximum number of
animals that may be harassed during the HRG and geotechnical surveys
(i.e., Ocean Wind assumes that each exposure event is a different
animal). These estimates do not account for prescribed mitigation
measures that Ocean Wind would implement during the specified
activities and the fact that shutdown/powerdown procedures shall be
implemented if an animal enters within 200 m of the vessel during HRG
activities, and 500 m during geotechnical activities, further reducing
the potential for any takes to occur during these activities.
Ocean Wind used NMFS' Guidance (NMFS 2016) to determine sound
exposure thresholds to determine when an activity that produces sound
might result in impacts to a marine mammal such that a take by injury,
in the form of PTS, might occur. The functional hearing groups and the
associated PTS onset acoustic thresholds are indicated in Table 8
below. Ocean Wind used the user spreadsheet to calculate the isopleth
for the loudest source (sparker, sub-bottom profiler). The sub-bottom
profiler was calculated with the following conditions: Source level at
172.4 rms, vessel velocity of 2.058 m/s, repetition rate of 0.182,
pulse duration of 22 ms and a weighting factor adjustment of 10 based
on the spectrogram for this equipment (Gardline 2016). Isopleths were
less than 3 m for all hearing groups; therefore, no Level A takes are
requested. The Geo-source sparker model used the following parameters:
source level at 188.7 rms Source level, vessel velocity of 2.058 meters
per second (m/s), repetition rate of 0.25 seconds, pulse duration of 10
ms and weighting factor adjustment of 3 based on the spectrograms for
this equipment. Isopleths were less than 2 m for all hearing groups;
therefore, no Level A takes are requested. The DP thruster was defined
as non-impulsive static continuous source with an extrapolated source
level of 150 dB rms based on far field measurements (Subacoustech
2016), an activity duration of 4 hours and weighting factor adjustment
of 2. The transmission loss coefficient of 11.1 was used based on the
slope of best fit from field measurements (Subacoustech 2016).
Isopleths were less than 1 m for all hearing groups; therefore, no
Level A take are requested. No level A take is requested or proposed to
be authorized for any of the sources used during HRG and geotechnical
surveys.
[[Page 20578]]
Table 8--Summary of PTS onset Acoustic Thresholds \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset acoustic thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency cetaceans............ Cell: 1 Lpk,flat: 219 dB; Cell: 2 LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-frequency cetaceans............ Cell: 3 Lpk,flat: 230 dB; Cell: 4 LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-frequency cetaceans........... Cell: 5 Lpk,flat: 202 dB; Cell: 6 LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (underwaters)..... Cell: 7 Lpk,flat: 218 dB; Cell: 8 LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (underwater)..... Cell: 9 Lpk,flat: 232 dB; Cell: 10 LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NMFS 2016.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, ``and other means of effecting the least practicable impact
on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention
to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking'' for certain
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully balance two primary factors: (1) The manner in which, and the
degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure(s) is
expected to reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or
stocks, and their habitat, which considers the nature of the potential
adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range), as well as
the likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented; and
the likelihood of effective implementation, and; (2) the practicability
of the measures for applicant implementation, which may consider such
things as cost, impact on operations, and, in the case of a military
readiness activity, personnel safety, practicality of implementation,
and impact on the effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
With NMFS' input during the application process, and as per the
BOEM Lease, Ocean Wind is proposing the following mitigation measures
during site characterization surveys utilizing HRG survey equipment and
use of the DP thruster. The mitigation measures outlined in this
section are based on protocols and procedures that have been
successfully implemented and resulted in no observed take of marine
mammals for similar offshore projects and previously approved by NMFS
(ESS 2013; Dominion 2013 and 2014).
Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones
Protected species observers (PSOs) will monitor the following
exclusion/monitoring zones for the presence of marine mammals:
A 200-m exclusion zone during HRG surveys (this exceeds
the estimated Level B harassment isopleth).
A 500-m monitoring zone during the use of DP thrusters
during geotechnical survey activities (this is equal to the Level B
harassment isopleth).
The 200 m exclusion zone is the default exclusion zone specified in
stipulation 4.4.6.1 of the New Jersey OCS-A 0498 Lease Agreement. The
500 m exclusion zone is based on field-verified distances established
during similar survey work conducted within the Bay State Wind Lease
Area (Subacoustech 2016).
Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of the established exclusion zone(s) for the HRG
and geotechnical surveys will be performed by qualified and NMFS-
approved PSOs, the resumes of whom will be provided to NMFS for review
and approval prior to the start of survey activities. An observer team
comprising a minimum of four NMFS-approved PSOs and two certified
Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) operators (PAM operators will not
function as PSOs), operating in shifts, will be stationed aboard either
the survey vessel or a dedicated PSO-vessel. PSOs and PAM operators
will work in shifts such that no one monitor will work more than 4
consecutive hours without a 2-hour break or longer than 12 hours during
any 24-hour period. During daylight hours the PSOs will rotate in
shifts of one on and three off, while during nighttime operations PSOs
will work in pairs. The PAM operators will also be on call as necessary
during daytime operations should visual observations become impaired.
Each PSO will monitor 360 degrees of the field of vision.
PSOs will be responsible for visually monitoring and identifying
marine mammals approaching or within the established exclusion zone(s)
during survey activities. It will be the responsibility of the Lead PSO
on duty to communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to
communicate and enforce the action(s) that are necessary to ensure
mitigation and monitoring requirements are implemented as appropriate.
PAM operators will communicate detected vocalizations to the Lead PSO
on duty, who will then be responsible for implementing the necessary
mitigation procedures. A mitigation and monitoring communications flow
diagram has been included as Appendix A in the IHA application.
PSOs will be equipped with binoculars and have the ability to
estimate distances to marine mammals located in proximity to the vessel
and/or exclusion zone using range finders. Reticulated binoculars will
also be available to PSOs for use as appropriate based on conditions
and visibility to support the siting and monitoring of marine species.
Digital single-lens reflex camera equipment will be used to record
sightings and verify species identification. During night operations,
PAM (see Passive Acoustic Monitoring requirements below) and night-
vision equipment in combination with infrared technology will be used
(Additional details and specifications are provided in Ocean Wind's
application in Appendix B for night-vision devices and Appendix C for
infrared video monitoring technology). Position data will be recorded
using hand-held or
[[Page 20579]]
vessel global positioning system (GPS) units for each sighting.
The PSOs will begin observation of the exclusion zone(s) at least
60 minutes prior to ramp-up of HRG survey equipment. Use of noise-
producing equipment will not begin until the exclusion zone is clear of
all marine mammals for at least 60 minutes, as per the requirements of
the BOEM Lease.
If a marine mammal is detected approaching or entering the 200-m
exclusion zones during the HRG survey, or the 500-m monitoring zone
during DP thrusters use, the vessel operator would adhere to the
shutdown (during HRG survey) or powerdown (during DP thruster use)
procedures described below to minimize noise impacts on the animals.
At all times, the vessel operator will maintain a separation
distance of 500 m from any sighted North Atlantic right whale as
stipulated in the Vessel Strike Avoidance procedures described below.
These stated requirements will be included in the site-specific
training to be provided to the survey team.
Vessel Strike Avoidance
The Applicant will ensure that vessel operators and crew maintain a
vigilant watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down or stop their
vessels to avoid striking these species. Survey vessel crew members
responsible for navigation duties will receive site-specific training
on marine mammal and sea turtle sighting/reporting and vessel strike
avoidance measures. Vessel strike avoidance measures will include the
following, except under extraordinary circumstances when complying with
these requirements would put the safety of the vessel or crew at risk:
All vessel operators will comply with 10 knot (<18.5 km
per hour [km/h]) speed restrictions in any Dynamic Management Area
(DMA). In addition, all vessels operating from November 1 through July
31 will operate at speeds of 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less.
All survey vessels will maintain a separation distance of
500 m or greater from any sighted North Atlantic right whale.
If underway, vessels must steer a course away from any
sited North Atlantic right whale at 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less until
the 500 m minimum separation distance has been established. If a North
Atlantic right whale is sited in a vessel's path, or within 100 m to an
underway vessel, the underway vessel must reduce speed and shift the
engine to neutral. Engines will not be engaged until the North Atlantic
right whale has moved outside of the vessel's path and beyond 100 m. If
stationary, the vessel must not engage engines until the North Atlantic
right whale has moved beyond 100 m.
All vessels will maintain a separation distance of 100 m
or greater from any sighted non-delphinoid (i.e., mysticetes and sperm
whales) cetaceans. If sighted, the vessel underway must reduce speed
and shift the engine to neutral and must not engage the engines until
the non-delphinoid cetacean has moved outside of the vessel's path and
beyond 100 m. If a survey vessel is stationary, the vessel will not
engage engines until the non-delphinoid cetacean has moved out of the
vessel's path and beyond 100 m.
All vessels will maintain a separation distance of 50 m or
greater from any sighted delphinoid cetacean. Any vessel underway will
remain parallel to a sighted delphinoid cetacean's course whenever
possible and avoid excessive speed or abrupt changes in direction. Any
vessel underway reduces vessel speed to 10 knots or less when pods
(including mother/calf pairs) or large assemblages of delphinoid
cetaceans are observed. Vessels may not adjust course and speed until
the delphinoid cetaceans have moved beyond 50 m and/or abeam (i.e.,
moving away and at a right angle to the centerline of the vessel) of
the underway vessel.
All vessels will maintain a separation distance of 50 m
(164 ft) or greater from any sighted pinniped.
The training program will be provided to NMFS for review and
approval prior to the start of surveys. Confirmation of the training
and understanding of the requirements will be documented on a training
course log sheet. Signing the log sheet will certify that the crew
members understand and will comply with the necessary requirements
throughout the survey event.
Seasonal Operating Requirements
Between watch shifts, members of the monitoring team will consult
the NMFS North Atlantic right whale reporting systems for the presence
of North Atlantic right whales throughout survey operations. The
proposed survey activities will, however, occur outside of the SMA
located off the coasts of Delaware and New Jersey. The proposed survey
activities will also occur in June/July and September, which is outside
of the seasonal mandatory speed restriction period for this SMA
(November 1 through April 30).
Throughout all survey operations, Ocean Wind will monitor the NMFS
North Atlantic right whale reporting systems for the establishment of a
DMA. If NMFS should establish a DMA in the Lease Area under survey,
within 24 hours of the establishment of the DMA Ocean Wind will work
with NMFS to shut down and/or alter the survey activities to avoid the
DMA.
Passive Acoustic Monitoring
As per the BOEM Lease, alternative monitoring technologies (e.g.,
active or passive acoustic monitoring) are required if a Lessee intends
to conduct geophysical surveys at night or when visual observation is
otherwise impaired. To support 24-hour HRG survey operations, Ocean
Wind will use certified PAM operators with experience reviewing and
identifying recorded marine mammal vocalizations, as part of the
project monitoring during nighttime operations to provide for optimal
acquisition of species detections at night, or as needed during periods
when visual observations may be impaired. In addition, PAM systems
shall be employed during daylight hours to support system calibration
and PSO and PAM team coordination, as well as in support of efforts to
evaluate the effectiveness of the various mitigation techniques (i.e.,
visual observations during day and night, compared to the PAM
detections/operations).
Given the range of species that could occur in the Lease Area, the
PAM system will consist of an array of hydrophones with both broadband
(sampling mid-range frequencies of 2 kHz to 200 kHz) and at least one
low-frequency hydrophone (sampling range frequencies of 75 Hz to 30
kHz). Monitoring of the PAM system will be conducted from a customized
processing station aboard the HRG survey vessel. The on-board
processing station provides the interface between the PAM system and
the operator. The PAM operator(s) will monitor the hydrophone signals
in real time both aurally (using headphones) and visually (via the
monitor screen displays). Ocean Wind proposes the use of PAMGuard
software for ``target motion analysis'' to support localization in
relation to the identified exclusion zone. PAMGuard is an open source
and versatile software/hardware interface to enable flexibility in the
configuration of in-sea equipment (number of hydrophones,
sensitivities, spacing, and geometry). PAM operators will immediately
communicate detections/vocalizations to the Lead PSO on duty who will
ensure the implementation of the appropriate mitigation measure (e.g.,
shutdown) even if visual observations by PSOs have not been made.
[[Page 20580]]
Ramp-Up
As per the BOEM Lease, a ramp-up procedure will be used for HRG
survey equipment capable of adjusting energy levels at the start or re-
start of HRG survey activities. A ramp-up procedure will be used at the
beginning of HRG survey activities in order to provide additional
protection to marine mammals near the Lease Area by allowing them to
vacate the area prior to the commencement of survey equipment use. The
ramp-up procedure will not be initiated during daytime, night time, or
periods of inclement weather if the exclusion zone cannot be adequately
monitored by the PSOs using the appropriate visual technology (e.g.,
reticulated binoculars, night vision equipment) and/or PAM for a 60-
minute period. A ramp-up would begin with the power of the smallest
acoustic HRG equipment at its lowest practical power output appropriate
for the survey. The power would then be gradually turned up and other
acoustic sources added such that the source level would increase in
steps not exceeding 6 dB per 5-minute period. If marine mammals are
detected within the HRG survey exclusion zone prior to or during the
ramp-up, activities will be delayed until the animal(s) has moved
outside the monitoring zone and no marine mammals are detected for a
period of 60 minutes.
The DP vessel thrusters will be engaged to support the safe
operation of the vessel and crew while conducting geotechnical survey
activities and require use as necessary. Therefore, there is no
opportunity to engage in a ramp-up procedure.
Shutdown and Powerdown
HRG Survey--The exclusion zone(s) around the noise-producing
activities (HRG survey equipment) will be monitored, as previously
described, by PSOs and at night by PAM operators for the presence of
marine mammals before, during, and after any noise-producing activity.
The vessel operator must comply immediately with any call for shutdown
by the Lead PSO. Any disagreement should be discussed only after
shutdown.
As per the BOEM Lease, if a non-delphinoid (i.e., mysticetes and
sperm whales) cetacean is detected at or within the established
exclusion zone (200-m exclusion zone), an immediate shutdown of the HRG
survey equipment is required. Subsequent restart of the
electromechanical survey equipment must use the ramp-up procedures
described above and may only occur following clearance of the exclusion
zone for 60 minutes. These are extremely conservative shutdown zones,
as the 200-m exclusion radii exceed the distances to the estimated
Level B harassment isopleths (75.28 m.).
As per the BOEM Lease, if a delphinoid cetacean or pinniped is
detected at or within the exclusion zone, the HRG survey equipment
(including the sub-bottom profiler) must be powered down to the lowest
power output that is technically feasible. Subsequent power up of the
survey equipment must use the ramp-up procedures described above and
may occur after (1) the exclusion zone is clear of a delphinoid
cetacean and/or pinniped for 60 minutes or (2) a determination by the
PSO after a minimum of 10 minutes of observation that the delphinoid
cetacean or pinniped is approaching the vessel or towed equipment at a
speed and vector that indicates voluntary approach to bow-ride or chase
towed equipment.
If the HRG sound source (including the sub-bottom profiler) shuts
down for reasons other than encroachment into the exclusion zone by a
marine mammal including but not limited to a mechanical or electronic
failure, resulting in in the cessation of sound source for a period
greater than 20 minutes, a restart for the HRG survey equipment
(including the sub-bottom profiler) is required using the full ramp-up
procedures and clearance of the exclusion zone of all cetaceans and
pinnipeds for 60 minutes. If the pause is less than 20 minutes, the
equipment may be restarted as soon as practicable at its operational
level as long as visual surveys were continued diligently throughout
the silent period and the exclusion zone remained clear of cetaceans
and pinnipeds. If the visual surveys were not continued diligently
during the pause of 20 minutes or less, a restart of the HRG survey
equipment (including the sub-bottom profiler) is required using the
full ramp-up procedures and clearance of the exclusion zone for all
cetaceans and pinnipeds for 60 minutes.
Geotechnical Survey (DP Thrusters)--During geotechnical survey
activities, a constant position over the drill or CPT site must be
maintained to ensure the integrity of the survey equipment. Any
stoppage of DP thruster during the proposed geotechnical activities has
the potential to result in significant damage to survey equipment.
Therefore, during geotechnical survey activities, if marine mammals
enter or approach the established exclusion and monitoring zone, Ocean
Wind shall reduce DP thruster to the maximum extent possible, except
under circumstances when reducing DP thruster use would compromise
safety (both human health and environmental) and/or the integrity of
the equipment. Reducing thruster energy will effectively reduce the
potential for exposure of marine mammals to sound energy. After
decreasing thruster energy, PSOs will continue to monitor marine mammal
behavior and determine if the animal(s) is moving towards or away from
the established monitoring zone. If the animal(s) continues to move
towards the sound source then DP thruster use would remain at the
reduced level. Normal use will resume when PSOs report that the marine
mammals have moved away from and remained clear of the monitoring zone
for a minimum of 60 minutes since the last sighting.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, ``requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
incidental take authorizations (ITAs) must include the suggested means
of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will
result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking
or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be
present in the proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical
both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained
from the required monitoring.
Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should contribute to
improved understanding of one or more of the following general goals:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the
action area (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density).
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life
[[Page 20581]]
history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species
with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure
(e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks.
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat).
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Ocean Wind submitted marine mammal monitoring and reporting
measures as part of the IHA application. These measures may be modified
or supplemented based on comments or new information received from the
public during the public comment period.
Visual Monitoring--Visual monitoring of the established Level B
harassment zones (200-m radius during HRG surveys (note that this is
the same as the mitigation exclusion/shutdown zones established for HRG
survey sound sources); 500-m radius during DP thruster use (note that
this is the same as the mitigation powerdown zone established for DP
thruster sound sources)) will be performed by qualified and NMFS-
approved PSOs (see discussion of PSO qualifications and requirements in
Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones above).
The PSOs will begin observation of the monitoring zone during all
HRG survey activities and all geotechnical operations where DP
thrusters are employed. Observations of the monitoring zone will
continue throughout the survey activity and/or while DP thrusters are
in use. PSOs will be responsible for visually monitoring and
identifying marine mammals approaching or entering the established
monitoring zone during survey activities.
Observations will take place from the highest available vantage
point on the survey vessel. General 360-degree scanning will occur
during the monitoring periods, and target scanning by the PSO will
occur when alerted of a marine mammal presence.
Data on all PSO observations will be recorded based on standard PSO
collection requirements. This will include dates and locations of
construction operations; time of observation, location and weather;
details of the sightings (e.g., species, age classification (if known),
numbers, behavior); and details of any observed ``taking'' (behavioral
disturbances or injury/mortality). The data sheet will be provided to
both NMFS and BOEM for review and approval prior to the start of survey
activities. In addition, prior to initiation of survey work, all crew
members will undergo environmental training, a component of which will
focus on the procedures for sighting and protection of marine mammals.
A briefing will also be conducted between the survey supervisors and
crews, the PSOs, and Ocean Wind. The purpose of the briefing will be to
establish responsibilities of each party, define the chains of command,
discuss communication procedures, provide an overview of monitoring
purposes, and review operational procedures.
Acoustic Field Verification--As per the requirements of the BOEM
Lease, field verification of the exclusion/monitoring zones will be
conducted to determine whether the proposed zones correspond accurately
to the relevant isopleths and are adequate to minimize impacts to
marine mammals. The details of the field verification strategy will be
provided in a Field Verification Plan no later than 45 days prior to
the commencement of field verification activities.
Ocean Wind must conduct field verification of the exclusion zone
(the 160 dB isopleth) for HRG survey equipment and the powerdown zone
(the 120 dB isopleth) for DP thruster use for all equipment operating
below 200 kHz. Ocean Wind must take acoustic measurements at a minimum
of two reference locations and in a manner that is sufficient to
establish source level (peak at 1 meter) and distance to the 160 dB
isopleth (the Level B harassment zones for HRG surveys) and 120 dB
isopleth (the Level B harassment zone) for DP thruster use. Sound
measurements must be taken at the reference locations at two depths
(i.e., a depth at mid-water and a depth at approximately 1 meter (3.28
ft) above the seafloor).
Ocean Wind may use the results from its field-verification efforts
to request modification of the exclusion/monitoring zones for the HRG
or geotechnical surveys. Any new exclusion/monitoring zone radius
proposed by Ocean Wind must be based on the most conservative
measurements (i.e., the largest safety zone configuration) of the
target Level A or Level B harassment acoustic threshold zones. The
modified zone must be used for all subsequent use of field-verified
equipment. Ocean Wind must obtain approval from NMFS and BOEM of any
new exclusion/monitoring zone before it may be implemented and the IHA
shall be modified accordingly.
Proposed Reporting Measures
The Applicant will provide the following reports as necessary
during survey activities:
The Applicant will contact NMFS and BOEM within 24 hours
of the commencement of survey activities and again within 24 hours of
the completion of the activity.
As per the BOEM Lease: Any observed significant behavioral
reactions (e.g., animals departing the area) or injury or mortality to
any marine mammals must be reported to NMFS and BOEM within 24 hours of
observation. Dead or injured protected species are reported to the NMFS
Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO) Stranding Hotline
(800-900-3622) within 24 hours of sighting, regardless of whether the
injury is caused by a vessel. In addition, if the injury of death was
caused by a collision with a project related vessel, Ocean Wind must
ensure that NMFS and BOEM are notified of the strike within 24 hours.
Additional reporting requirements for injured or dead animals are
described below (Notification of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals).
Notification of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals--In the
unanticipated event that the specified HRG and geotechnical activities
lead to an injury of a marine mammal (Level A harassment) or mortality
(e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement), Ocean Wind
would immediately cease the specified activities and report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office
of Protected Resources and the NOAA GARFO Stranding Coordinator. The
report would include the following information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the
incident;
Name and type of vessel involved;
Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
Description of the incident;
Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
Water depth;
Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
[[Page 20582]]
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the event. NMFS would work with Ocean Wind to minimize
reoccurrence of such an event in the future. Ocean Wind would not
resume activities until notified by NMFS.
In the event that Ocean Wind discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown
and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state
of decomposition), Ocean Wind would immediately report the incident to
the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected
Resources and the GARFO Stranding Coordinator. The report would include
the same information identified in the paragraph above. Activities
would be able to continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the
incident. NMFS would work with Ocean Wind to determine if modifications
in the activities are appropriate.
In the event that Ocean Wind discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and determines that the injury or death is not associated with
or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously
wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or
scavenger damage), Ocean Wind would report the incident to the Chief of
the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, and the NMFS GARFO Regional Stranding Coordinator, within 24
hours of the discovery. Ocean Wind would provide photographs or video
footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to NMFS. Ocean Wind can continue its operations under such a
case.
Within 90 days after completion of the marine site
characterization survey activities, a technical report will be provided
to NMFS and BOEM that fully documents the methods and monitoring
protocols, summarizes the data recorded during monitoring, estimates
the number of marine mammals that may have been taken during survey
activities, and provides an interpretation of the results and
effectiveness of all monitoring tasks. Any recommendations made by NMFS
must be addressed in the final report prior to acceptance by NMFS.
In addition to the Applicant's reporting requirements
outlined above, Ocean Wind will provide an assessment report of the
effectiveness of the various mitigation techniques, i.e. visual
observations during day and night, compared to the PAM detections/
operations. This will be submitted as a draft to NMFS and BOEM 30 days
after the completion of the HRG and geotechnical surveys and as a final
version 60 days after completion of the surveys.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determinations
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival. A negligible impact
finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates
of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An
estimate of the number of takes, alone, is not enough information on
which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering the
authorized number of marine mammals that might be ``taken'' through
harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the likely nature of
any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses
(e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as
well as effects on habitat, the status of the affected stocks, and the
likely effectiveness of the mitigation. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS' implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29,
1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities
are incorporated into these analyses via their impacts on the
environmental baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of
the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing
sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).
As discussed in the Potential Effects section, permanent threshold
shift, masking, non-auditory physical effects, and vessel strike are
not expected to occur. Further, once an area has been surveyed, it is
not likely that it will be surveyed again, thereby reducing the
likelihood of repeated impacts within the project area.
Potential impacts to marine mammal habitat were discussed
previously in this document (see the Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals and their Habitat section). Marine mammal
habitat may be impacted by elevated sound levels and some sediment
disturbance, but these impacts would be temporary. Feeding behavior is
not likely to be significantly impacted, as marine mammals appear to be
less likely to exhibit behavioral reactions or avoidance responses
while engaged in feeding activities (Richardson et al., 1995). Prey
species are mobile and are broadly distributed throughout the Lease
Area; therefore, marine mammals that may be temporarily displaced
during survey activities are expected to be able to resume foraging
once they have moved away from areas with disturbing levels of
underwater noise. Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance,
the availability of similar habitat and resources in the surrounding
area, and the lack of important or unique marine mammal habitat, the
impacts to marine mammals and the food sources that they utilize are
not expected to cause significant or long-term consequences for
individual marine mammals or their populations. Furthermore, there are
no rookeries or mating grounds known to be biologically important to
marine mammals within the proposed project area. A biologically
important feeding area for North Atlantic right whale encompasses the
Lease Area (LaBrecque et al., 2015); however, there is no temporal
overlap between the biologically important area (BIA) (effective March-
April; November-December) and the proposed survey activities (May-June;
October). There is one ESA-listed species for which takes are proposed
for the fin whale. There are currently insufficient data to determine
population trends for fin whale (Waring et al., 2015); however, we are
proposing to authorize a single take for this species, therefore, we do
not expect population-level impacts. There is no designated critical
habitat for any ESA-listed marine mammals within the Lease Area, and
none of the stocks for non-listed species proposed to be taken are
considered ``depleted'' or ``strategic'' by NMFS under the MMPA.
The proposed mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number
and/or severity of takes by (1) giving animals the opportunity to move
away from the sound source before HRG survey equipment reaches full
energy and (2) reducing the intensity of exposure within a certain
distance by reducing the DP thruster power. Additional vessel strike
avoidance requirements will further mitigate potential impacts to
marine mammals during vessel transit to and within the Study Area.
Ocean Wind did not request, and NMFS is not proposing, take of
marine mammals by injury, serious injury, or mortality. NMFS expects
that most takes would be in the form of short-term Level
[[Page 20583]]
B behavioral harassment in the form of brief startling reaction and/or
temporary avoidance of the area or decreased foraging (if such activity
were occurring)--reactions that are considered to be of low severity
and with no lasting biological consequences (e.g., Southall et al.,
2007). This is largely due to the short time scale of the proposed
activities, the low source levels and intermittent nature of many of
the technologies proposed to be used, as well as the required
mitigation.
NMFS concludes that exposures to marine mammal species and stocks
due to Ocean Wind's HRG and geotechnical survey activities would result
in only short-term (temporary and short in duration) and relatively
infrequent effects to individuals exposed and not of the type or
severity that would be expected to be additive for the very small
portion of the stocks and species likely to be exposed. Given the
duration and intensity of the activities (including the mitigation)
NMFS does not anticipate the proposed take estimates to impact annual
rates of recruitment or survival. Animals may temporarily avoid the
immediate area, but are not expected to permanently abandon the area.
Major shifts in habitat use, distribution, or foraging success, are not
expected.
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 proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not
define small numbers and so, in practice, NMFS compares the number of
individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of the relevant
species or stock size in our determination of whether an authorization
is limited to small numbers of marine mammals.
Table 9--Summary of Potential Marine Mammal Takes and Percentage of Stocks Affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of
Requested take Stock abundance stock
Species authorization estimate potentially
(number) affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fin Whale (Balaenoptera physalus)............................ 5 1,618 0.31
Bottlenose Dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)...................... 286 77,532 0.368
Short beaked common Dolphin (Delphinus delphis).............. 32 70,184 0.045
Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena).......................... * 4 79,883 0.005
Harbor Seal \1\ (Phoca vitulina)............................. 1 75,834 0.001
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Modeled take of this species was increased to account for average group size.
The requested takes proposed to be authorized for the HRG and
geotechnical surveys represent 0.31 percent of the WNA stock of fin
whale, 0.045 percent of the WNA stock of short-beaked common dolphin,
0.368 percent of the Western north Atlantic, offshore stock of
bottlenose dolphin, 0.005 percent of the Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy
stock of harbor porpoise, and 0.001 percent of the WNA stock of harbor
seal (Tables 9). These take estimates represent the percentage of each
species or stock that could be taken by Level B behavioral harassment
and are extremely small numbers (less than 1 percent) relative to the
affected species or stock sizes.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size
of the affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act
Issuance of an MMPA authorization requires compliance with the ESA.
Within the project area, fin, humpback, and North Atlantic right whale
are listed as endangered under the ESA. Under section 7 of the ESA,
BOEM consulted with NMFS on commercial wind lease issuance and site
assessment activities on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf in
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York and New Jersey Wind Energy Areas.
NOAA's GARFO issued a Biological Opinion concluding that these
activities may adversely affect but are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of fin whale, humpback whale, or North Atlantic
right whale. The Biological Opinion can be found online at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/energy_other.htm. NMFS is also
consulting internally on the issuance of an IHA under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this activity. Following issuance of the
Ocean Wind's IHA, the Biological Opinion may be amended to include an
incidental take exemption for these marine mammal species, as
appropriate.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
NMFS is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance
with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and will consider
comments submitted in response to this notice as part of that process.
The EA will be posted at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/energy_other.htm once it is finalized.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to Ocean Wind for conducting HRG survey activities and use
of DP vessel thrusters during geotechnical survey activities from June
2017 through May 2018, provided the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. This section
contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording contained in this
section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if issued).
Ocean Wind, LLC (Ocean Wind) is hereby authorized under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
1371(a)(5)(D)) and 50 CFR 216.107, to harass marine
[[Page 20584]]
mammals incidental to high-resolution geophysical (HRG) and
geotechnical survey investigations associated with marine site
characterization activities off the coast of New Jersey in the area of
the Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy
Development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS-A 0498) (the Lease
Area).
1. This Authorization is valid from June 1, 2017 through May 31,
2018.
2. This Authorization is valid only for HRG and geotechnical survey
investigations associated with marine site characterization activities,
as described in the Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA)
application.
3. The holder of this authorization (Holder) is hereby authorized
to take, by Level B harassment only, 32 short-beaked common dolphins
(Delphinus delphis), 286 bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus), 4
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), 5 fin whale (Balaenoptera
physalus), and 1 harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) incidental to HRG survey
activities and dynamic positioning (DP) vessel thruster use during
geotechnical activities.
4. The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under
this IHA must be reported immediately to NMFS' Greater Atlantic
Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO).
5. The Holder or designees must notify NMFS GARFO and Office of
Protected Resources (OPR) at least 24 hours prior to the seasonal
commencement of the specified activity.
6. The holder of this Authorization must notify the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, or
her designee at least 24 hours prior to the start of survey activities
(unless constrained by the date of issuance of this Authorization in
which case notification shall be made as soon as possible) at 301-427-
8401 or to laura.mccue@noaa.gov.
7. Mitigation Requirements
The Holder is required to abide by the following mitigation
conditions listed in 7(a)-(f). Failure to comply with these conditions
may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
(a) Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones: Protected species observers
(PSOs) shall monitor the following zones for the presence of marine
mammals:
A 200-m exclusion zone during HRG surveys is in operation.
A 500-m monitoring zone during the use of DP thrusters
during geotechnical survey.
At all times, the vessel operator shall maintain a
separation distance of 500 m from any sighted North Atlantic right
whale as stipulated in the Vessel Strike Avoidance procedures described
below.
Visual monitoring of the established exclusion zone(s) shall be
performed by qualified and NMFS-approved protected species observers
(PSOs). An observer team comprising a minimum of four NMFS-approved
PSOs and two certified Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) operators,
operating in shifts, shall be stationed aboard either the survey vessel
or a dedicated PSO-vessel. PSOs shall be equipped with binoculars and
have the ability to estimate distances to marine mammals located in
proximity to the vessel and/or exclusion zone using range finders.
Reticulated binoculars will also be available to PSOs for use as
appropriate based on conditions and visibility to support the siting
and monitoring of marine species. Digital single-lens reflex camera
equipment shall be used to record sightings and verify species
identification. During night operations, PAM (see Passive Acoustic
Monitoring requirements below) and night-vision equipment in
combination with infrared video monitoring shall be used. The PSOs
shall begin observation of the exclusion zone(s) at least 60 minutes
prior to ramp-up of HRG survey equipment. Use of noise-producing
equipment shall not begin until the exclusion zone is clear of all
marine mammals for at least 60 minutes. If a marine mammal is seen
approaching or entering the 200-m exclusion zones during the HRG
survey, or the 500-m monitoring zone during DP thrusters use, the
vessel operator shall adhere to the shutdown/powerdown procedures
described below to minimize noise impacts on the animals.
(b) Ramp-Up: A ramp-up procedure shall be used for HRG survey
equipment capable of adjusting energy levels at the start or re-start
of HRG survey activities. The ramp-up procedure shall not be initiated
during daytime, night time, or periods of inclement weather if the
exclusion zone cannot be adequately monitored by the PSOs using the
appropriate visual technology (e.g., reticulated binoculars, night
vision equipment) and/or PAM for a 60-minute period. A ramp-up shall
begin with the power of the smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its
lowest practical power output appropriate for the survey. The power
shall then be gradually turned up and other acoustic sources added such
that the source level would increase in steps not exceeding 6 dB per 5-
minute period. If a marine mammal is sighted within the HRG survey
exclusion zone prior to or during the ramp-up, activities shall be
delayed until the animal(s) has moved outside the monitoring zone and
no marine mammals are sighted for a period of 60 minutes.
(c) Shutdown and Powerdown
HRG Survey--The exclusion zone(s) around the noise-producing
activities HRG survey equipment will be monitored, as previously
described, by PSOs and at night by PAM operators for the presence of
marine mammals before, during, and after any noise-producing activity.
The vessel operator must comply immediately with any call for shutdown
by the Lead PSO. If a non-delphinoid (i.e., mysticetes and sperm
whales) cetacean is detected at or within the established exclusion
zone (200-m exclusion zone during HRG surveys), an immediate shutdown
of the HRG survey equipment is required. Subsequent restart of the
electromechanical survey equipment must use the ramp-up procedures
described above and may only occur following clearance of the exclusion
zone for 60 minutes. If a delphinoid cetacean or pinniped is detected
at or within the exclusion zone, the HRG survey equipment must be
powered down to the lowest power output that is technically feasible.
Subsequent power up of the survey equipment must use the ramp-up
procedures described above and may occur after (1) the exclusion zone
is clear of a delphinoid cetacean and/or pinniped for 60 minutes or (2)
a determination by the PSO after a minimum of 10 minutes of observation
that the delphinoid cetacean or pinniped is approaching the vessel or
towed equipment at a speed and vector that indicates voluntary approach
to bow-ride or chase towed equipment. If the HRG sound source shuts
down for reasons other than encroachment into the exclusion zone by a
marine mammal including but not limited to a mechanical or electronic
failure, resulting in in the cessation of sound source for a period
greater than 20 minutes, a restart for the HRG survey equipment is
required using the full ramp-up procedures and clearance of the
exclusion zone of all cetaceans and pinnipeds for 60 minutes. If the
pause is less than 20 minutes, the equipment may be restarted as soon
as practicable at its operational level as long as visual surveys were
continued diligently throughout the silent period and the exclusion
zone remained clear of cetaceans and pinnipeds. If the visual surveys
were not continued diligently during the pause of 20 minutes or less, a
restart of the HRG survey equipment is required using the full ramp-up
procedures and clearance of the
[[Page 20585]]
exclusion zone for all cetaceans and pinnipeds for 60 minutes.
Geotechnical Survey (DP Thrusters)--During geotechnical survey
activities if marine mammals enter or approach the established 120 dB
isopleth monitoring zone, the Holder shall reduce DP thruster to the
maximum extent possible, except under circumstances when reducing DP
thruster use would compromise safety (both human health and
environmental) and/or the integrity of the equipment. After decreasing
thruster energy, PSOs shall continue to monitor marine mammal behavior
and determine if the animal(s) is moving towards or away from the
established monitoring zone. If the animal(s) continues to move towards
the sound source then DP thruster use shall remain at the reduced
level. Normal use shall resume when PSOs report that the marine mammals
have moved away from and remained clear of the monitoring zone for a
minimum of 60 minutes since the last sighting.
(d) Vessel Strike Avoidance: The Holder shall ensure that vessel
operators and crew maintain a vigilant watch for cetaceans and
pinnipeds and slow down or stop their vessels to avoid striking these
protected species. Survey vessel crew members responsible for
navigation duties shall receive site-specific training on marine mammal
sighting/reporting and vessel strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike
avoidance measures shall include the following, except under
extraordinary circumstances when complying with these requirements
would put the safety of the vessel or crew at risk:
All vessel operators shall comply with 10 knot (<18.5 km
per hour (km/h)) speed restrictions in any Dynamic Management Area
(DMA). In addition, all vessels operating from November 1 through July
31 shall operate at speeds of 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less.
All survey vessels shall maintain a separation distance of
500 m or greater from any sighted North Atlantic right whale.
If underway, vessels must steer a course away from any
sited North Atlantic right whale at 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less until
the 500 m minimum separation distance has been established. If a North
Atlantic right whale is sited in a vessel's path, or within 100 m to an
underway vessel, the underway vessel must reduce speed and shift the
engine to neutral. Engines shall not be engaged until the North
Atlantic right whale has moved outside of the vessel's path and beyond
100 m. If stationary, the vessel must not engage engines until the
North Atlantic right whale has moved beyond 100 m.
All vessels shall maintain a separation distance of 100 m
or greater from any sighted non-delphinoid (i.e., mysticetes and sperm
whales) cetacean. If sighted, the vessel underway must reduce speed and
shift the engine to neutral, and must not engage the engines until the
non-delphinoid cetacean has moved outside of the vessel's path and
beyond 100 m. If a survey vessel is stationary, the vessel shall not
engage engines until the non-delphinoid cetacean has moved out of the
vessel's path and beyond 100 m.
All vessels shall maintain a separation distance of 50 m
or greater from any sighted delphinoid cetacean. Any vessel underway
shall remain parallel to a sighted delphinoid cetacean's course
whenever possible, and avoid excessive speed or abrupt changes in
direction. Any vessel underway shall reduce vessel speed to 10 knots or
less when pods (including mother/calf pairs) or large assemblages of
delphinoid cetaceans are observed. Vessels may not adjust course and
speed until the delphinoid cetaceans have moved beyond 50 m and/or
abeam of the underway vessel.
All vessels shall maintain a separation distance of 50 m
(164 ft) or greater from any sighted pinniped.
(e) Seasonal Operating Requirements: Between watch shifts members
of the monitoring team shall consult the NMFS North Atlantic right
whale reporting systems for the presence of North Atlantic right whales
throughout survey operations. The proposed survey activities shall
occur outside of the seasonal management area (SMA) located off the
coast of New Jersey and Delaware and outside of the seasonal mandatory
speed restriction period for this SMA (November 1 through April 30).
Throughout all survey operations, the Holder shall monitor the NMFS
North Atlantic right whale reporting systems for the establishment of a
DMA. If NMFS should establish a DMA in the Lease Area under survey,
within 24 hours of the establishment of the DMA the Holder shall work
with NMFS to shut down and/or alter the survey activities to avoid the
DMA.
(f) Passive Acoustic Monitoring: To support 24-hour survey
operations, the Holder shall include PAM as part of the project
monitoring during the geophysical survey during nighttime operations,
or as needed during periods when visual observations may be impaired.
In addition, PAM systems shall be employed during daylight hours to
support system calibration and PSO and PAM team coordination, as well
as in support of efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of the various
mitigation techniques (i.e., visual observations during day and night,
compared to the PAM detections/operations).
The PAM system shall consist of an array of hydrophones with both
broadband (sampling mid-range frequencies of 2 kHz to 200 kHz) and at
least one low-frequency hydrophone (sampling range frequencies of 75 Hz
to 30 kHz). The PAM operator(s) shall monitor the hydrophone signals in
real time both aurally (using headphones) and visually (via the monitor
screen displays). PAM operators shall communicate detections/
vocalizations to the Lead PSO on duty who shall ensure the
implementation of the appropriate mitigation measure.
8. Monitoring Requirements
The Holder is required to abide by the following monitoring
conditions listed in 8(a)-(b). Failure to comply with these conditions
may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
(a) Visual Monitoring--Protected species observers (refer to the
PSO qualifications and requirements for Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones
above) shall visually monitor the established Level B harassment zones
(200-m radius during HRG surveys; 500-m radius during DP thruster use).
The observers shall be stationed on the highest available vantage point
on the associated operating platform. PSOs shall estimate distance to
marine mammals visually, using laser range finders or by using
reticulated binoculars during daylight hours. During night operations,
PSOs shall use night-vision binoculars and infrared technology. Data on
all PSO observations will be recorded based on standard PSO collection
requirements. This will include dates and locations of survey
operations; time of observation, location and weather; details of the
sightings (e.g., species, age classification (if known), numbers,
behavior); and details of any observed ``taking'' (behavioral
disturbances or injury/mortality). In addition, prior to initiation of
survey work, all crew members will undergo environmental training, a
component of which will focus on the procedures for sighting and
protection of marine mammals
(b) Acoustic Field Verification--Field verification of the
exclusion/monitoring zones shall be conducted to determine whether the
proposed zones correspond accurately to the relevant isopleths and are
adequate to minimize impacts to marine mammals. The Holder shall
conduct field verification of the exclusion/monitoring zone (the 160 dB
isolpleth) for HRG survey equipment
[[Page 20586]]
and the monitoring/powerdown zone (the 120 dB isopleth) for DP thruster
use for all equipment operating below 200 kHz. The Holder shall take
acoustic measurements at a minimum of two reference locations and in a
manner that is sufficient to establish source level (peak at 1 meter)
and distance to the 160 dB isopleth (the Level B harassment zones for
HRG surveys) and 120 dB isopleth (the Level B harassment zone) for DP
thruster use. Sound measurements shall be taken at the reference
locations at two depths (i.e., a depth at mid-water and a depth at
approximately 1 meter (3.28 ft) above the seafloor). The Holder may use
the results from its field-verification efforts to request modification
of the exclusion/monitoring zones for the HRG or geotechnical surveys.
Any new exclusion/monitoring zone radius proposed by the Holder shall
be based on the most conservative measurements (i.e., the largest
safety zone configuration) of the target Level A or Level B harassment
acoustic threshold zones. The modified zone shall be used for all
subsequent use of field-verified equipment. The Holder shall obtain
approval from NMFS and BOEM of any new exclusion/monitoring zone before
it may be implemented and the IHA shall be modified accordingly.
9. Reporting Requirements
The Holder shall provide the following reports as necessary during
survey activities:
(a) The Holder shall contact NMFS (301-427-8401) and BOEM (703-787-
1300) within 24 hours of the commencement of survey activities and
again within 24 hours of the completion of the activity.
(b) Any observed significant behavioral reactions (e.g., animals
departing the area) or injury or mortality to any marine mammals shall
be reported to NMFS and BOEM within 24 hours of observation. Dead or
injured protected species shall be reported to the NMFS GARFO Stranding
Hotline (800-900-3622) within 24 hours of sighting, regardless of
whether the injury is caused by a vessel. In addition, if the injury of
death was caused by a collision with a project related vessel, the
Holder shall ensure that NMFS and BOEM are notified of the strike
within 24 hours. The Holder shall use the form included as Appendix A
to Addendum C of the Lease to report the sighting or incident. If the
Holder is responsible for the injury or death, the vessel must assist
with any salvage effort as requested by NMFS.
Additional reporting requirements for injured or dead animals are
described below (Notification of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals).
(c) Notification of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
(i) In the unanticipated event that the specified HRG and
geotechnical survey activities lead to an injury of a marine mammal
(Level A harassment) or mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction,
and/or entanglement), the Holder shall immediately cease the specified
activities and report the incident to the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, 301-427-8401, and
the NOAA GARFO Stranding Coordinator, 978-281-9300. The report shall
include the following information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the
incident;
Name and type of vessel involved;
Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
Description of the incident;
Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
Water depth;
Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the event. NMFS would work with the Holder to minimize
reoccurrence of such an event in the future. The Holder shall not
resume activities until notified by NMFS.
(ii) In the event that the Holder discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal and determines that the cause of the injury or death is
unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than a
moderate state of decomposition), the Holder shall immediately report
the incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, 301-427-8401, and the GARFO Stranding
Coordinator, 978-281-9300. The report shall include the same
information identified in the paragraph above. Activities would be able
to continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS
would work with the Holder to determine if modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
(iii) In the event that the Holder discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal and determines that the injury or death is not associated
with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g.,
previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), the Holder shall report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office
of Protected Resources, NMFS, 301-427-8401, and the NMFS GARFO Regional
Stranding Coordinator, 978-281-9300, within 24 hours of the discovery.
The Holder shall provide photographs or video footage (if available) or
other documentation of the stranded animal sighting.
(d) Within 90 days after completion of the marine site
characterization survey activities, a technical report shall be
provided to NMFS and BOEM that fully documents the methods and
monitoring protocols, summarizes the data recorded during monitoring,
estimates the number of marine mammals that may have been taken during
survey activities, and provides an interpretation of the results and
effectiveness of all monitoring tasks. Any recommendations made by NMFS
shall be addressed in the final report prior to acceptance by NMFS.
(e) In addition to the Holder's reporting requirements outlined
above, the Holder shall provide an assessment report of the
effectiveness of the various mitigation techniques, i.e. visual
observations during day and night, compared to the PAM detections/
operations. This shall be submitted as a draft to NMFS and BOEM 30 days
after the completion of the HRG and geotechnical surveys and as a final
version 60 days after completion of the surveys.
10. This Authorization may be modified, suspended, or withdrawn if
the Holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if
NMFS determines the authorized taking is having more than a negligible
impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals.
11. A copy of this Authorization and the Incidental Take Statement
must be in the possession of each vessel operator taking marine mammals
under the authority of this Incidental Harassment Authorization.
12. The Holder is required to comply with the Terms and Conditions
of the Incidental Take Statement corresponding to NMFS' Biological
Opinion.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses, the draft authorization, and
any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA for the proposed HRG
and geotechnical
[[Page 20587]]
survey investigation. Please include with your comments any supporting
data or literature citations to help inform our final decision on the
request for MMPA authorization.
Dated: April 27, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-08918 Filed 4-28-17; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P