Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Marine Site Characterization Surveys off New Jersey and New York for Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind, LLC, 4200-4225 [2022-01557]
Download as PDF
4200
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
bigger issue. Specifically, scenarios are
stories about possible future
developments. This approach is
designed to help stakeholders and
managers think broadly about the future
implications of climate change to help
define what changes can potentially be
made now to be better prepared.
Three introductory ‘‘kick-off’’
webinars were held in 2021 to explain
the overall initiative and share draft
objectives and possible outcomes of the
work with the public. The next phase of
this initiative, the exploration phase,
includes another series of webinars
outlined in this notice. The primary
objective of these meetings is to share
information about and discuss the key
drivers of change that could shape East
Coast fisheries over the next 20 years—
which will then become the ‘‘building
blocks’’ for scenario creation. Three
separate webinars are planned, each
dealing with a different area of driving
forces/uncertainties that are shaped by
climate change. The first on February
14, 2022, will cover oceanographic
drivers of change (e.g., ocean
temperature, sea level rise, acidification,
ocean currents). The second on
February 23, 2022, will focus on
biological drivers of change (e.g.,
changing spatial distributions, health of
stocks, habitat loss, rate of ecosystem
change). And the last webinar on March
2, 2022, will focus on social and
economic drivers of change (e.g.,
competing ocean uses, community
impacts, consumer demand). During
each webinar a brief overview and
status of the initiative will be presented
followed by a more detailed
presentation by a lead presenter
outlining the current and future trends
for each topic. Next, a small panel of
experts will join the lead presenter to
provide additional perspectives. Finally,
there will be an opportunity for
questions of the panelists and presenters
as well as limited public comments at
the end of each webinar.
Additional details about the webinars
will be posted to this page once
available: https://www.mafmc.org/
climate-change-scenario-planning.
The public also should be aware that
the meeting will be recorded. Consistent
with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the
recording is available upon request.
Special Accommodations
These meetings are physically
accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language
interpretation or other auxiliary aids
should be directed to: Thomas A. Nies,
Executive Director, at (978) 465–0492, at
least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
Dated: January 24, 2022.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2022–01658 Filed 1–26–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XB392]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Marine Site
Characterization Surveys off New
Jersey and New York for Atlantic
Shores Offshore Wind, LLC
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for
comments on proposed authorization
and possible renewal.
AGENCY:
NMFS has received a request
from Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind,
LLC (Atlantic Shores) for authorization
to take marine mammals incidental to
marine site characterization surveys off
New Jersey and New York in the area of
Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands
for Renewable Energy Development on
the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area
OCS–A 0499. Pursuant to the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS
is requesting comments on its proposal
to issue an incidental harassment
authorization (IHA) to incidentally take
marine mammals during the specified
activities. NMFS is also requesting
comments on a possible one-time, oneyear Renewal that could be issued under
certain circumstances and if all
requirements are met, as described in
Request for Public Comments at the end
of this notification. NMFS will consider
public comments prior to making any
final decision on the issuance of the
requested MMPA authorizations and
agency responses will be summarized in
the final notification of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than February 28,
2022.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service. Written
comments should be submitted via
email to ITP.Potlock@noaa.gov.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible
for comments sent by any other method,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to any other address or individual, or
received after the end of the comment
period. Comments, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 25
megabyte file size. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted online at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/marine-mammal-protection/
incidental-take-authorizations-otherenergy-activities-renewable 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:
Kelsey Potlock, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
Electronic copies of the application and
supporting documents, as well as a list
of the references cited in this document,
may be obtained online at: https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-other-energyactivities-renewable. In case of problems
accessing these documents, please call
the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of
marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D)
of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce (as
delegated to NMFS) 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
incidental take authorization may be
provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings
shall be granted if NMFS finds that the
taking will have a negligible impact on
the species or stock(s) and will not have
an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
taking for subsistence uses (where
relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe
the permissible methods of taking and
other ‘‘means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact’’ on the
affected species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance, and on the
availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
(referred to in shorthand as
‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of the takings are set forth.
The definitions of all applicable
MMPA statutory terms cited above are
included in the relevant sections below.
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 (i.e., the issuance of an
IHA) with respect to potential impacts
on the human environment. This action
is consistent with categories of activities
identified in Categorical Exclusion B4
(IHAs with no anticipated serious injury
or mortality) of the Companion Manual
for NOAA Administrative Order 216–
6A, which do not individually or
cumulatively have the potential for
significant impacts on the quality of the
human environment and for which we
have not identified any extraordinary
circumstances that would preclude this
categorical exclusion. Accordingly,
NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the issuance of the proposed IHA
qualifies to be categorically excluded
from further NEPA review.
We will review all comments
submitted in response to this
notification prior to concluding our
NEPA process or making a final
decision on the IHA request.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Summary of Request
On August 16, 2021, NMFS received
a request from Atlantic Shores for an
IHA to take marine mammals incidental
to marine site characterization surveys
occurring in three locations (Lease Area
and Export Cable Routes (ECR) North
and South) off of New Jersey and New
York in the area of Commercial Lease of
Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy
Development on the Outer Continental
Shelf Lease Area (OCS)–A 0499. NMFS
deemed the application adequate and
complete on December 13, 2021.
Atlantic Shores’ request is for take of a
small number of 15 species of marine
mammals (comprised of 16 stocks) by
Level B harassment only. Neither
Atlantic Shores nor NMFS expects
serious injury or mortality to result from
this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:59 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
NMFS previously issued two IHAs to
Atlantic Shores for similar work (85 FR
21198, April 16, 2020; 86 FR 21289,
April 22, 2021 (Renewal)). As required,
Atlantic Shores provided a monitoring
report for the work performed under the
2020 IHA (85 FR 21198, April 16, 2020;
available at https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/
incidental-take-authorization-atlanticshores-offshore-wind-llc-marine-sitecharacterization).
At the time of developing this
proposed IHA for Atlantic Shores’ 2022
project, the 2021 (Renewal) monitoring
report was not available as the renewed
project is ongoing until its expiration
date on April 19, 2022 (86 FR 21289;
April 22, 2021). However, the 2020
monitoring report confirmed that
Atlantic Shores had previously
implemented the required mitigation
and monitoring, and demonstrated that
no impacts of a scale or nature not
previously analyzed or authorized had
occurred as a result of the activities
conducted under the 2020 IHA.
days over the course of a single year
within the three survey areas (Table 1).
As multiple vessels (i.e., three survey
vessels) may be operating concurrently
across the Lease Area and two ECRs,
each day that a survey vessel is
operating counts as a single survey day.
For example, if three vessels are
operating in the two ECRs and Lease
Area concurrently, this counts as three
survey days. This schedule is based on
24-hours of operations throughout 12
months. The schedule presented here
for this proposed project has accounted
for potential down time due to
inclement weather or other projectrelated delays. Proposed activities
would occur from April 20, 2022
through April 19, 2023 as to not overlap
the Renewal IHA that expires after April
19, 2022.
TABLE 1—NUMBER OF SURVEY DAYS
THAT ATLANTIC SHORES PLANS TO
PERFORM THE DESCRIBED HRG
SURVEY ACTIVITIES
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
Survey area
As part of its overall marine site
characterization survey operations,
Atlantic Shores proposes to conduct
high-resolution geophysical (HRG)
surveys in the Lease Area (OCS)-A 0499
and along potential submarine cable
routes (ECRs North and South) to a
landfall location in either New York or
New Jersey.
The purpose of the proposed surveys
are to support the site characterization,
siting, and engineering design of
offshore wind project facilities
including wind turbine generators,
offshore substations, and submarine
cables within the Lease Area and along
export cable routes (ECRs). As many as
three survey vessels may operate
concurrently as part of the proposed
surveys. Underwater sound resulting
from Atlantic Shores’ proposed site
characterization survey activities,
specifically HRG surveys, has the
potential to result in incidental take of
marine mammals in the form of
behavioral harassment.
Dates and Duration
The estimated duration of the surveys
is expected to be up to 360 total survey
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4201
Number of
active survey
days
expected 1
Lease Area ...........................
ECR North ............................
ECR South ............................
120
180
60
Total ...............................
360
1 Surveys in each area may temporally overlap; therefore, actual number of days of activity in a given year would be less than 360.
Specific Geographic Region
Atlantic Shores’ proposed activities
would occur in the Northwest Atlantic
Ocean within Federal and state waters
(Figure 1). Surveys would occur in the
Lease Area and along potential
submarine cable routes to landfall in
either New York or New Jersey.
Proposed activities would occur within
the Commercial Lease of Submerged
Lands for Renewable Energy
Development in OCS–A 0499. The
survey area is approximately 1,450,006
acres (2,265.6 square miles (mi2); 5,868
square kilometers (km2)) and extends
approximately 24 nautical miles (nm; 28
miles (mi); 44 kilometers (km)) offshore.
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
Figure 1-- Map of the Three Sites (Lease Area and Export Cable Routes North and
South) that Atlantic Shores Proposes to Perform Site Characterization Surveys
(HRG).
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
EN27JA22.006
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4202
4203
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
Atlantic Shores’ proposed marine site
characterization surveys include HRG
and geotechnical survey activities.
These survey activities would occur
within the both the Lease Area and
within ECRs between the Lease Area
and the coasts of New York and New
Jersey. The Lease Area is approximately
5,867.97 km2 (1,450,006 acres) and is
located approximately 24 nm (44 km)
from the coastline (see Figure 1). The
proposed survey area is approximately
from Long Island, New York to Atlantic
City, New Jersey. For the purpose of this
proposed IHA, the Lease Area and ECRs
are collectively referred to as the survey
area.
Atlantic Shores’ survey activities are
anticipated to be supported by vessels,
which will maintain a speed of
approximately to 3.5 knots (kn; 6.5
kilometer per hour (km/h)) while
transiting survey lines. The proposed
HRG and geotechnical survey activities
are described below.
Proposed Geotechnical Survey
Activities
Atlantic Shores’ proposed
geotechnical activities would include
the drilling of sample boreholes, deep
cone penetration tests (CPTs), and
shallow CPTs. Such proposed activities
have been performed before by Atlantic
Shores and considerations of the
impacts produced from geotechnical
activities have been previously analyzed
and included in the proposed 2020
Federal Register notice for Atlantic
Shores’ HRG activities (85 FR 7926;
February 12, 2020). The same
discussion by NMFS to not analyze the
geotechnical activities further that was
included in that notification applies to
this proposed project. In that
notification, NMFS determined that the
likelihood of the proposed geotechnical
surveys resulting in harassment of
marine mammals was to be so low as to
be discountable. As this information
remains applicable and NMFS’
determination has not changed, these
activities will not be discussed further
in this proposed notification.
Proposed Geophysical Survey Activities
Atlantic Shores has proposed that
HRG survey operations would be
conducted continuously 24 hours a day.
Based on 24-hour operations, the
estimated total duration of the proposed
activities would be approximately 360
survey days. This includes 120 days of
survey activities in the Lease Area, 180
days in ECR North, and 60 days in ECR
South (refer back to Table 1). As
previously discussed above, this
schedule does include potential down
time due to inclement weather or other
project-related delays.
The HRG survey activities will be
supported by vessels of sufficient size to
accomplish the survey goals in each of
the specified survey areas. It is assumed
surveys in each of the identified survey
areas will be executed by a single vessel
during any given campaign (i.e., no
more than one survey vessel would
operate in the Lease Area at any given
time, but there may be one survey vessel
operating in the Lease Area and one
vessel operating each of the ECR areas
concurrently, i.e., three vessels). HRG
equipment will either be mounted to or
towed behind the survey vessel at a
typical survey speed of approximately
3.5 knot (6.5 km) per hour. The
geophysical survey activities proposed
by Atlantic Shores would include the
following:
• Depth sounding (multibeam depth
sounder and single beam echosounder)
to determine water depths and general
bottom topography (currently estimated
to range from approximately 16-feet (ft;
5-m to 131-ft (40-m) in depth);
• Magnetic intensity measurements
(gradiometer) for detecting local
variations in regional magnetic field
from geological strata and potential
ferrous objects on and below the bottom;
• Seafloor imaging (side scan 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 (pinger/chirp) to map the near
surface stratigraphy (top 0-ft to 16-ft (0m to 5-m) soils below seabed); and,
• Medium penetration sub-bottom
profiler (chirps/parametric profilers/
sparkers) to map deeper subsurface
stratigraphy as needed (soils down to
246-ft (75-m) to 328-ft (100-m) below
seabed).
Table 2 identifies the representative
survey equipment that may be used in
support of planned geophysical survey
activities. The make and model of the
listed geophysical equipment may vary
depending on availability and the final
equipment choices will vary depending
upon the final survey design, vessel
availability, and survey contractor
selection. Geophysical surveys are
expected to use several equipment types
concurrently in order to collect multiple
aspects of geophysical data along one
transect. Selection of equipment
combinations is based on specific
survey objectives. All categories of
representative HRG survey equipment
shown in Table 2 work with operating
frequencies <180 kHz.
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIVE EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS WITH OPERATING FREQUENCIES BELOW 180 kHz
Representative equipment type
Sparker (impulsive) .............
Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 a .............................
Geo Marine Geo-Source ...............................................
Edgetech 2000–DSS .....................................................
Edgetech 216 .................................................................
Edgetech 424 .................................................................
Edgetech 512i ................................................................
Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom ImagerTM ..........................
CHIRPs (non-impulsive) .....
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Operating
frequency
ranges
(kHz)
HRG survey equipment
(sub-bottom profiler)
0.01 to 1.9
0.2 to 5
2 to 16
2 to 16
4 to 24
0.7 to 12
4 to 12.5
Operational
source level
ranges
(dBRMS) b
203
195
195
179
180
179
190
Beamwidth
ranges
(degrees)
180
180
24
17, 20, or 24
71
80
120
Typical pulse
durations
RMS
(millisecond)
Pulse
repetition rate
(Hz)
3.4
7.2
6.3
10
4
9
4.5
2
0.41
10
10
2
8
44
Note: Two sources proposed for use by Atlantic Shores (i.e., the INNOMAR SES–2000 Medium-100 Parametric and the INNOMAR deep-36 Parametric) are not
expected to result in take due to their higher frequencies and extremely narrow beamwidths. Because of this, these sources were not considered when calculating the
Level B harassment isopleths and are not discussed further in this notification. Acoustic parameters on these parametric sub-bottom profilers can be found in Atlantic
Shores’ IHA application on NMFS’ website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable).
a Atlantic Shores discussed with NMFS and include information in their application that while the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 is planned to be used during
project activities, the equipment specifications and subsequent analysis are based on the SIG ELC 820 with a power level of 750 joules (J) at a 5-meter depth (Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)). However, Atlantic Shores expects a more reasonable power level to be 500–600 J based on prior experience with HRG surveys; 750 J
was used as a worst-case scenario to conservatively account for take of marine mammals as these higher electrical outputs would only be used in areas with denser
substrates (700–800 J).
b Root mean square (RMS) = 1 microPa.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4204
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
Atlantic Shores has indicated to
NMFS that the expected energy levels of
the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark
would range between 500–600 joules (J)
in most cases. However, in their IHA
application, Atlantic Shores includes a
discussion that, based on their previous
experiences and survey efforts using the
Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark, Atlantic
Shores do not expect the electrical
output to exceed 700–800 J, except in
situations where denser substrates are
present.
The deployment of HRG survey
equipment, including the equipment
planned for use during Atlantic Shores’
proposed activities produces sound in
the marine environment that has the
potential to result in harassment of
marine mammals. Proposed mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in detail later in this
document (please see Proposed
Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring
and Reporting).
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application
summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution
and habitat preferences, and behavior
and life history, of the potentially
affected species. Additional information
regarding population trends and threats
may be found in NMFS’s Stock
Assessment Reports (SARs; https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments) and more
general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral
descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s
website (https://www.fisheries.
noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 3 lists all species or stocks for
which take is expected and proposed to
be authorized for this action, and
summarizes information related to the
population or stock, including
regulatory status under the MMPA and
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and
potential biological removal (PBR),
where known. For taxonomy, we follow
Committee on Taxonomy (2021). PBR is
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 (as
described in NMFS’s SARs). While no
mortality is anticipated or authorized
here, PBR and annual serious injury and
mortality from anthropogenic sources
are included here as gross indicators of
the status of the species and other
threats.
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 or survey 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. All managed
stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS’s draft 2021 U.S. Atlantic and
Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock
Assessment (SARs). All values
presented in Table 3 are the most recent
available at the time of publication and
are available in the draft 2021 SARs
available online at: https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments.
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES LIKELY TO OCCUR NEAR THE SURVEY AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY ATLANTIC
SHORES’ PROPOSED HRG ACTIVITIES
Common name
Scientific name
Stock
I
ESA/
MMPA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
I
Stock abundance
(CV, Nmin, most recent abundance survey) 2
Annual
M/SI 3
PBR
I
I
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
North Atlantic right whale ..........
Humpback whale .......................
Fin whale ...................................
Sei whale ...................................
Minke whale ...............................
Eubalaena glacialis ........
Megaptera novaeangliae
Balaenoptera physalus ...
Balaenoptera borealis ....
Balaenoptera
acutorostrata.
Western Atlantic Stock .............
Gulf of Maine ............................
Western North Atlantic Stock ...
Nova Scotia Stock ....................
Canadian East Coastal Stock ...
E/D, Y
-/-; Y
E/D, Y
E/D, Y
-/-, N
I
368 (0; 364; 2019) ....................
1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016) ..............
6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 2016) .........
6,292 (1.02; 3,098; 2016) .........
21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 2016) .....
I
0.7
22
11
6.2
170
I
7.7
12.15
1.8
0.8
10.6
I
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Sperm whale ..............................
Long-finned pilot whale ..............
Atlantic white-sided dolphin .......
Bottlenose dolphin .....................
Common dolphin ........................
Atlantic spotted dolphin .............
Risso’s dolphin ...........................
Harbor porpoise .........................
Physeter macrocephalus
Globicephala melas ........
Lagenorhynchus acutus
Tursiops truncatus ..........
Delphinus delphis ...........
Stenella frontalis .............
Grampus griseus ............
Phocoena phocoena ......
North Atlantic Stock ..................
Western North Atlantic Stock ...
Western North Atlantic Stock ...
Western North Atlantic Northern
Migratory Coastal Stock.
Western North Atlantic Offshore
Stock.
Western North Atlantic Stock ...
Western North Atlantic Stock ...
Western North Atlantic Stock ...
Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy
Stock.
E/D, Y
-/-, N
-/-, N
-/D, Y
4,349 (0.28; 3,451; 2016) .........
39,215 (0.3; 30,627; 2016) .......
93,233 (0.71; 54,443; 2016) .....
6,639 (0.41; 4,759; 2016) .........
3.9
306
544
48
0
29
227
12.2–21.5
-/-, N
62,851 (0.23; 51,914; 2016) .....
519
28
-/-,
-/-,
-/-,
-/-,
172,974 (0.21, 145,216, 2016)
39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 2016) .....
35,215 (0.19; 30,051; 2016) .....
95,543 (0.31; 74,034; 2016) .....
1,452
320
301
851
390
0
34
164
61,336 (0.08; 57,637; 2018) .....
27,300 (0.22; 22,785; 2016) .....
1,729
1,389
339
4,453
N
N
N
N
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Harbor seal ................................
Gray seal 4 .................................
Phoca vitulina .................
Halichoerus grypus .........
Western North Atlantic Stock ...
Western North Atlantic Stock ...
-/-, N
-/-, N
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 or which is determined to be
declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA
as depleted and as a strategic stock.
2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments. CV is
the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
3 These values, found in NMFS’ SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries,
ship strike).
4 NMFS’ stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in Canada) is approximately 451,431. The annual mortality and serious injury (M/SI) value given is for the total stock.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
As indicated above, all 15 species
(with 16 managed stocks) in Table 3
temporally and spatially co-occur with
the activity to the degree that take is
reasonably likely to occur, and we have
proposed authorizing it. Four marine
mammal species that are listed under
the ESA may be present in the survey
area and are included in the take
request: The North Atlantic right, fin,
sei, and sperm whale.
The temporal and/or spatial
occurrence of several cetacean and
pinniped species listed in Table 3–1 of
Atlantic Shores’ 2022 IHA application is
such that take of these species is not
expected to occur either because they
have very low densities in the survey
area or are known to occur further
offshore than the survey area. These
include: The blue whale (Balaenoptera
musculus), Cuvier’s beaked whale
(Ziphius cavirostris), four species of
Mesoplodont beaked whale
(Mesoplodon spp.), dwarf and pygmy
sperm whale (Kogia sima and Kogia
breviceps), short-finned pilot whale
(Globicephala macrorhynchus),
northern bottlenose whale (Hyperoodon
ampullatus), killer whale (Orcinus
orca), pygmy killer whale (Feresa
attenuata), false killer whale (Pseudorca
crassidens), melon-headed whale
(Peponocephala electra), striped
dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba), whitebeaked dolphin (Lagenorhynchus
albirostris), pantropical spotted dolphin
(Stenella attenuata), Fraser’s dolphin
(Lagenodelphis hosei), rough-toothed
dolphin (Steno bredanensis), Clymene
dolphin (Stenella clymene), spinner
dolphin (Stenella longirostris), hooded
seal (Cystophora cristata), and harp seal
(Pagophilus groenlandicus). As
harassment and subsequent take of these
species is not anticipated as a result of
the proposed activities, these species are
not analyzed or discussed further.
In addition, the Florida manatees
(Trichechus manatus; a sub-species of
the West Indian manatee) has been
previously documented as an occasional
visitor the Northeast region during
summer months (U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) 2019). However,
manatees are managed by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and are
not considered further in this document.
For the majority of species potentially
present in the specific geographic
region, NMFS has designated only a
single generic stock (e.g., ‘‘western
North Atlantic’’) for management
purposes. This includes the ‘‘Canadian
east coast’’ stock of minke whales,
which includes all minke whales found
in U.S. waters and is also a generic stock
for management purposes. For
humpback whales, NMFS defines stocks
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
on the basis of feeding locations, i.e.,
Gulf of Maine. However, references to
humpback whales in this document
refer to any individuals of the species
that are found in the specific geographic
region. Additional information on these
animals can be found in Sections 3 and
4 of Atlantic Shores’ IHA application,
the draft 2021 SARs (https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments), and
NMFS’ website.
Below is a description of the species
that have the highest likelihood of
occurring in the survey area and are
thus expected to potentially be taken by
the proposed activities as well as further
detail informing the baseline for select
species (i.e., information regarding
current Unusual Mortality Events
(UMEs) and important habitat areas).
North Atlantic Right Whale
The North Atlantic right whale ranges
from calving grounds in the
southeastern United States to feeding
grounds in New England waters and
into Canadian waters (Hayes et al.,
2018). Surveys have demonstrated the
existence of seven areas where North
Atlantic right whales congregate
seasonally, including north and east of
the proposed survey area in Georges
Bank, off Cape Cod, and in
Massachusetts Bay (Hayes et al., 2018).
In the late fall months (e.g., October),
right whales are generally thought to
depart from the feeding grounds in the
North Atlantic and move south to their
calving grounds off Georgia and Florida.
However, recent research indicates our
understanding of their movement
patterns remains incomplete (Davis et
al., 2017). A review of passive acoustic
monitoring data from 2004 to 2014
throughout the western North Atlantic
demonstrated nearly continuous yearround right whale presence across their
entire habitat range (for at least some
individuals), including in locations
previously thought of as migratory
corridors, suggesting that not all of the
population undergoes a consistent
annual migration (Davis et al., 2017).
However, given that Atlantic Shores’
surveys would be concentrated offshore
New Jersey, any right whales in the
vicinity of the survey areas are expected
to be transient, most likely migrating
through the area.
The western North Atlantic
population demonstrated overall growth
of 2.8 percent per year between 1990 to
2010, despite a decline in 1993 and no
growth between 1997 and 2000 (Pace et
al., 2017). However, since 2010 the
population has been in decline, with a
99.99 percent probability of a decline of
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4205
just under 1 percent per year (Pace et
al., 2017). Between 1990 and 2015,
calving rates varied substantially, with
low calving rates coinciding with all
three periods of decline or no growth
(Pace et al., 2017). On average, North
Atlantic right whale calving rates are
estimated to be roughly half that of
southern right whales (Eubalaena
australis) (Pace et al., 2017), which are
increasing in abundance (NMFS, 2015).
In 2018, no new North Atlantic right
whale calves were documented in their
calving grounds; this represented the
first time since annual NOAA aerial
surveys began in 1989 that no new right
whale calves were observed. Eighteen
right whale calves were documented in
2021. As of December 8, 2021 and the
writing of this proposed Notification,
two North Atlantic right whale calves
have documented to have been born
during this calving season. Presently,
the best available population estimate
for North Atlantic right whales is 386
per the draft 2021 SARs (https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments).
The proposed survey area is part of a
migratory corridor Biologically
Important Area (BIA) for North Atlantic
right whales (effective March–April and
November–December) that extends from
Massachusetts to Florida (LeBrecque et
al., 2015). Off the coast of New Jersey,
the migratory BIA extends from the
coast to beyond the shelf break. This
important migratory area is
approximately 269,488 km2 in size
(compared with the approximately
5,605.2 km2 of total estimated Level B
harassment ensonified area associated
with the 360 planned survey days) and
is comprised of the waters of the
continental shelf offshore the East Coast
of the United States, extending from
Florida through Massachusetts. NMFS’
regulations at 50 CFR part 224.105
designated nearshore waters of the MidAtlantic Bight as Mid-Atlantic U.S.
Seasonal Management Areas (SMA) for
right whales in 2008. SMAs were
developed to reduce the threat of
collisions between ships and right
whales around their migratory route and
calving grounds. A portion of one SMA,
which occurs off the mouth of Delaware
Bay, overlaps spatially with a section of
the proposed survey area. The SMA,
which occurs off the mouth of Delaware
Bay, is active from November 1 through
April 30 of each year. Within SMAs, the
regulations require a mandatory vessel
speed (less than 10 kn) for all vessels
greater than 65 ft. A portion of one SMA
overlaps spatially with the northern
section of the proposed survey area. All
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4206
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
Atlantic Shores survey vessels,
regardless of length, would be required
to adhere to a 10 knot vessel speed
restriction when operating within this
SMA. In addition, all Atlantic Shores
survey vessels, regardless of length,
would be required to adhere to a 10 knot
vessel speed restriction when operating
in any Dynamic Management Area
(DMA) declared by NMFS.
Elevated North Atlantic right whale
mortalities have occurred since June 7,
2017, along the U.S. and Canadian
coast. This event has been declared an
Unusual Mortality Event (UME), with
human interactions, including
entanglement in fixed fishing gear and
vessel strikes, implicated in at least 15
of the mortalities thus far. As of October
13, 2021, a total of 34 confirmed dead
stranded whales (21 in Canada; 13 in
the United States) have been
documented. The cumulative total
number of animals in the North Atlantic
right whale UME has been updated to
49 individuals to include both the
confirmed mortalities (dead stranded or
floaters) (n=34) and seriously injured
free-swimming whales (n=15) to better
reflect the confirmed number of whales
likely removed from the population
during the UME and more accurately
reflect the population impacts. More
information is available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-life-distress/2017-2021-northatlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortalityevent. Furthermore, we continue to
evaluate our North Atlantic right whale
vessel strike reduction programs, both
regulatory and non-regulatory. NMFS
anticipates releasing a proposed rule
modifying the right whale speed
regulations in Spring 2022 to further
address the risk of mortality and serious
injury from vessel collisions in U.S.
waters.
During the development of this
proposed notification, several Slow
Zones were implemented off New Jersey
and New York that are worth
mentioning. On November 11, 2021,
December 11, 2021, and December 20,
2021, the Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution’s Ocean City buoy detected
the presence of right whales east of
Ocean City, Maryland. In response,
NMFS implemented two right whale
Slow Zones for the area with expiration
dates of November 26, 2021, December
26, 2021, and January 4, 2022,
respectively. Additionally, as of
November 8, 2021, NMFS extended a
voluntary right whale Slow Zone (via
acoustic trigger) located south of
Nantucket, Massachusetts. This is due
to expire on November 19, 2021. Four
other voluntary right whale Slow Zones
were announced by NMFS on November
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
20, 2021, November 30, 2021, December
13, 2021, and December 21, 2021, via an
acoustic trigger of a right whale detected
off New York City, New York. These, at
the time of the development of this
notification, expired after December 5,
2021, December 14, 2021, December 26,
2021, and January 5, 2022, respectively.
Lastly, four more Slow Zones were
implemented on November 30, 2021,
December 2, 2021, December 13, 2021,
and December 20, 2021 after the
acoustic detection of right whales
southeast of Atlantic City, New Jersey.
These zones were active through
December 8, 2021, December 17, 2021,
December 26, 2021, and January 4, 2022,
respectively. More information on these
right whale Slow Zones can be found on
NMFS’ website (https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
endangered-species-conservation/
reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlanticright-whales).
Humpback Whale
Humpback whales are found
worldwide in all oceans. Humpback
whales were listed as endangered under
the Endangered Species Conservation
Act (ESCA) in June 1970. In 1973, the
ESA replaced the ESCA, and
humpbacks continued to be listed as
endangered. On September 8, 2016,
NMFS divided the species into 14
distinct population segments (DPS),
removed the current species-level
listing, and in its place listed four DPSs
as endangered and one DPS as
threatened (81 FR 62259; September 8,
2016). The remaining nine DPSs were
not listed. The West Indies DPS, which
is not listed under the ESA, is the only
DPS of humpback whale that is
expected to occur in the survey area,
although are not necessarily from the
Gulf of Maine feeding population
managed as a stock by NMFS. Barco et
al., (2002) estimated that, based on
photo-identification, only 39 percent of
individual humpback whales observed
along the mid- and south Atlantic U.S.
coast are from the Gulf of Maine stock.
Bettridge et al., (2015) estimated the size
of this population at 12,312 (95 percent
CI 8,688–15,954) whales in 2004–05,
which is consistent with previous
population estimates of approximately
10,000–11,000 whales (Stevick et al.,
2003; Smith et al., 1999) and the
increasing trend for the West Indies DPS
(Bettridge et al., 2015).
Humpback whales utilize the midAtlantic as a migration pathway
between calving/mating grounds to the
south and feeding grounds in the north
(Waring et al., 2007a; Waring et al.,
2007b). A key question with regard to
humpback whales off the mid-Atlantic
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
states is their stock identity. Using fluke
photographs of living and dead whales
observed in the region, Barco et al.,
(2002) reported that 43 percent of 21
live whales matched to the Gulf of
Maine, 19 percent to Newfoundland,
and 4.8 percent to the Gulf of St
Lawrence, while 31.6 percent of 19 dead
humpbacks were known Gulf of Maine
whales. Although Gulf of Maine whales
apparently dominate the population
composition of the mid-Atlantic, lack of
photographic effort in Newfoundland
makes it likely that the observed match
rates under-represent the true presence
of Canadian whales in the region
(Waring et al., 2016). Barco et al., (2002)
suggested that the mid-Atlantic region
primarily represents a supplemental
winter-feeding ground used by
humpbacks. Recent research by King et
al., (2021) has demonstrated a high
occurrence and use (foraging) of the
New York Bight area by humpback
whales than previously known.
Furthermore, King et al., (2021)
highlights important concerns for
humpback whales found specifically in
the nearshore environment (<10 km
from shore) from various anthropogenic
impacts.
Three previous UMEs involving
humpback whales have occurred since
2000, in 2003, 2005, and 2006. Since
January 2016, elevated humpback whale
mortalities have occurred along the
Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida.
Partial or full necropsy examinations
have been conducted on approximately
half of the 154 known cases (as of
October 13, 2021). Of the whales
examined, about 50 percent had
evidence of human interaction, either
ship strike or entanglement. While a
portion of the whales have shown
evidence of pre-mortem vessel strike,
this finding is not consistent across all
whales examined and more research is
needed. NOAA is consulting with
researchers that are conducting studies
on the humpback whale populations,
and these efforts may provide
information on changes in whale
distribution and habitat use that could
provide additional insight into how
these vessel interactions occurred. More
information is available at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-life-distress/2016-2021humpback-whale-unusual-mortalityevent-along-atlantic-coast.
Fin Whale
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
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
are broadly distributed throughout the
western North Atlantic for most of the
year (Waring et al., 2016). They are
typically found in small groups of up to
five individuals (Brueggeman et al.,
1987). The main threats to fin whales
are fishery interactions and vessel
collisions (Waring et al., 2016).
Sei Whale
The Nova Scotia stock of sei whales
can be found in deeper waters of the
continental shelf edge waters of the
northeastern U.S. and northeastward to
south of Newfoundland. The southern
portion of the stock’s range during
spring and summer includes the Gulf of
Maine and Georges Bank. Spring is the
period of greatest abundance in U.S.
waters, with sightings concentrated
along the eastern margin of Georges
Bank and into the Northeast Channel
area, and along the southwestern edge of
Georges Bank in the area of
Hydrographer Canyon (Waring et al.,
2015). Sei whales occur in shallower
waters to feed. Sei whales are listed as
engendered under the ESA, and the
Nova Scotia stock is considered strategic
and depleted under the MMPA. The
main threats to this stock are
interactions with fisheries and vessel
collisions.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Minke Whale
Minke whales can be found in
temperate, tropical, and high-latitude
waters. The Canadian East Coast stock
can be found in the area from the
western half of the Davis Strait (45 °W)
to the Gulf of Mexico (Waring et al.,
2016). This species generally occupies
waters less than 100-m deep on the
continental shelf. There appears to be a
strong seasonal component to minke
whale distribution in the survey areas,
in which spring to fall are times of
relatively widespread and common
occurrence while during winter the
species appears to be largely absent
(Waring et al., 2016).
Since January 2017, elevated minke
whale mortalities have occurred along
the Atlantic coast from Maine through
South Carolina, with a total of 118
strandings (as of October 13, 2021). This
event has been declared a UME. Full or
partial necropsy examinations were
conducted on more than 60 percent of
the whales. Preliminary findings in
several of the whales have shown
evidence of human interactions or
infectious disease, but these findings are
not consistent across all of the whales
examined, so more research is needed.
More information is available at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-life-distress/2017-2021-minke-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
whale-unusual-mortality-event-alongatlantic-coast.
Sperm Whale
The distribution of the sperm whale
in the U.S. EEZ occurs on the
continental shelf edge, over the
continental slope, and into mid-ocean
regions (Waring et al., 2014). The basic
social unit of the sperm whale appears
to be the mixed school of adult females
plus their calves and some juveniles of
both sexes, normally numbering 20–40
animals in all. There is evidence that
some social bonds persist for many
years (Christal et al., 1998). This species
forms stable social groups, site fidelity,
and latitudinal range limitations in
groups of females and juveniles
(Whitehead, 2002). In summer, the
distribution of sperm whales includes
the area east and north of Georges Bank
and into the Northeast Channel region,
as well as the continental shelf (inshore
of the 100-m isobath) south of New
England. In the fall, sperm whale
occurrence south of New England on the
continental shelf is at its highest level,
and there remains a continental shelf
edge occurrence in the mid-Atlantic
bight. In winter, sperm whales are
concentrated east and northeast of Cape
Hatteras.
Long-Finned Pilot Whale
Long-finned pilot whales are found
from North Carolina and north to
Iceland, Greenland and the Barents Sea
(Waring et al., 2016). In U.S. Atlantic
waters the species is distributed
principally along the continental shelf
edge off the northeastern U.S. coast in
winter and early spring and in late
spring, pilot whales move onto Georges
Bank and into the Gulf of Maine and
more northern waters and remain in
these areas through late autumn (Waring
et al., 2016). Long-finned pilot whales
are not listed under the ESA. The
Western North Atlantic stock is
considered strategic under the MMPA.
Atlantic White-Sided Dolphin
White-sided dolphins are found in
temperate and sub-polar waters of the
North Atlantic, primarily in continental
shelf waters to the 100m depth contour
from central West Greenland to North
Carolina (Waring et al., 2016). The Gulf
of Maine stock is most common in
continental shelf waters from Hudson
Canyon to Georges Bank, and in the Gulf
of Maine and lower Bay of Fundy.
Sighting data indicate seasonal shifts in
distribution (Northridge et al., 1997).
During January to May, low numbers of
white-sided dolphins are found from
Georges Bank to Jeffreys Ledge (off New
Hampshire), with even lower numbers
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4207
south of Georges Bank, as documented
by a few strandings collected on beaches
of Virginia to South Carolina. From June
through September, large numbers of
white-sided dolphins are found from
Georges Bank to the lower Bay of
Fundy. From October to December,
white-sided dolphins occur at
intermediate densities from southern
Georges Bank to southern Gulf of Maine
(Payne and Heinemann, 1990). Sightings
south of Georges Bank, particularly
around Hudson Canyon, occur year
round but at low densities.
Atlantic Spotted Dolphin
Atlantic spotted dolphins are found in
tropical and warm temperate waters
ranging from southern New England,
south to Gulf of Mexico and the
Caribbean to Venezuela (Waring et al.,
2014). This stock regularly occurs in
continental shelf waters south of Cape
Hatteras and in continental shelf edge
and continental slope waters north of
this region (Waring et al., 2014). There
are two forms of this species, with the
larger ecotype inhabiting the continental
shelf and is usually found inside or near
the 200-m isobaths (Waring et al., 2014).
Common Dolphin
The short-beaked common dolphin is
found worldwide 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 2,000-m
isobaths and over prominent
underwater topography and east to the
mid-Atlantic Ridge (Waring et al., 2016).
Bottlenose Dolphin
There are two distinct bottlenose
dolphin morphotypes in the western
North Atlantic: The coastal and offshore
forms (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.
The coastal morphotype is
morphologically and genetically distinct
from the larger, more robust
morphotype that occupies habitats
further offshore. Spatial distribution
data, tag-telemetry studies, photo-ID
studies and genetic studies demonstrate
the existence of a distinct Northern
Migratory stock of coastal bottlenose
dolphins (Waring et al., 2014). During
summer months (July–August), this
stock occupies coastal waters from the
shoreline to approximately the 25-m
isobath between the Chesapeake Bay
mouth and Long Island, New York;
during winter months (January–March),
the stock occupies coastal waters from
Cape Lookout, North Carolina, to the
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4208
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
North Carolina/Virginia border (Waring
et al., 2014). The Western North
Atlantic northern migratory coastal
stock and the Western North Atlantic
offshore stock may be encountered by
the proposed survey.
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 is
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 (>1,800-m; Westgate et al., 1998),
although the majority of the population
is found over the continental shelf
(Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to
the 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).
Pinninpeds (Harbor Seal and Gray 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, harbor seals
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). Haul-out 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).
There are three major populations of
gray seals found in the world; eastern
Canada (western North Atlantic stock),
northwestern Europe and the Baltic Sea.
Gray seals in the survey area belong to
the western North Atlantic stock. The
range for this stock is thought to be from
New Jersey to Labrador. Current
population trends show that gray seal
abundance is likely increasing in the
U.S. Atlantic EEZ (Waring et al., 2016).
Although the rate of increase is
unknown, surveys conducted since their
arrival in the 1980s indicate a steady
increase in abundance in both Maine
and Massachusetts (Waring et al., 2016).
It is believed that recolonization by
Canadian gray seals is the source of the
U.S. population (Waring et al., 2016).
Since July 2018, elevated numbers of
harbor seal and gray seal mortalities
have occurred across Maine, New
Hampshire and Massachusetts. This
event has been declared a UME.
Additionally, stranded seals have
shown clinical signs as far south as
Virginia, although not in elevated
numbers, therefore the UME
investigation now encompasses all seal
strandings from Maine to Virginia. Ice
seals (harp and hooded seals) have also
started stranding with clinical signs,
again not in elevated numbers, and
those two seal species have also been
added to the UME investigation. A total
of 3,152 reported strandings (of all
species) had occurred from July 1, 2018,
through March 13, 2020. Full or partial
necropsy examinations have been
conducted on some of the seals and
samples have been collected for testing.
Based on tests conducted thus far, the
main pathogen found in the seals is
phocine distemper virus. NMFS is
performing additional testing to identify
any other factors that may be involved
in this UME. Presently, this UME is
non-active and is pending closure by
NMFS as of March 2020. Information on
this UME is available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-englandmid-atlantic/marine-life-distress/20182020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-eventalong.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory
modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to
anthropogenic sound can have
deleterious effects. To appropriately
assess the potential effects of exposure
to sound, it is necessary to understand
the frequency ranges marine mammals
are able to hear. Current data indicate
that not all marine mammal species
have equal hearing capabilities (e.g.,
Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and
Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008).
To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007)
recommended that marine mammals be
divided into functional hearing groups
based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available
behavioral response data, audiograms
derived using auditory evoked potential
techniques, anatomical modeling, and
other data. Note that no direct
measurements of hearing ability have
been successfully completed for
mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency
cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018)
described generalized hearing ranges for
these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen
based on the approximately 65 decibel
(dB) threshold from the normalized
composite audiograms, with the
exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower
bound was deemed to be biologically
implausible and the lower bound from
Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine
mammal hearing groups and their
associated hearing ranges are provided
in Table 4.
TABLE 4—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
[NMFS, 2018]
Hearing group
Generalized hearing
range *
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 & 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).
The pinniped functional hearing
group was modified from Southall et al.,
(2007) on the basis of data indicating
that phocid species have consistently
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
demonstrated an extended frequency
range of hearing compared to otariids,
especially in the higher frequency range
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(Hemila¨ et al., 2006; Kastelein et al.,
2009; Reichmuth, 2013).
For more detail concerning these
groups and associated frequency ranges,
please see NMFS (2018) for a review of
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
available information. Fifteen marine
mammal species (13 cetacean and 2
pinniped (both phocid) species) have
the reasonable potential to co-occur
with the proposed survey activities.
Please refer back to Table 3. Of the
cetacean species that may be present,
five are classified as low-frequency
cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete species),
seven are classified as mid-frequency
cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid species and
the sperm whale), and one is classified
as a high-frequency cetacean (i.e.,
harbor porpoise).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Potential Effects of Specified Activities
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.
Detailed descriptions of the potential
effects of similar specified activities
have been provided in other recent and
related Federal Register notifications,
including for survey activities using
similar HRG methodologies, over
similar amounts of time, and occurring
within the same specified geographical
region (e.g., 82 FR 20563, May 3, 2017;
85 FR 36537, June 17, 2020; 85 FR 7926,
February 12, 2020; 85 FR 37848, June
24, 2020; 85 FR 48179, August 10, 2020;
86 FR 16327, March 29, 2021; 86 FR
17782, April 6, 2021). No significant
new information is available, and we
refer the reader to these documents
rather than repeating the details here.
The Estimated Take section later in
this document includes a quantitative
analysis of the number of individuals
that are expected to be taken by Atlantic
Shores’ activities. The Negligible Impact
Analysis and Determination section
considers the content of this section, the
Estimated Take 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 Active Acoustic Sound
Sources and Acoustic Terminology
This subsection contains a brief
technical background on sound, on the
characteristics of certain sound types,
and on metrics used in this proposal
inasmuch as the information is relevant
to the specified activity and to the
summary of the potential effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals.
For general information on sound and
its interaction with the marine
environment, please see, e.g., Au and
Hastings (2008); Richardson et al.,
(1995); Urick (1983).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
Sound travels in waves, the basic
components of which are frequency,
wavelength, velocity, and amplitude.
Frequency is the number of pressure
waves that pass by a reference point per
unit of time and is measured in hertz or
cycles per second. Wavelength is the
distance between two peaks or
corresponding points of a sound wave
(length of one cycle). Higher frequency
sounds have shorter wavelengths than
lower frequency sounds, and typically
attenuate (decrease) more rapidly,
except in certain cases in shallower
water. Amplitude is the height of the
sound pressure wave or the ‘‘loudness’’
of a sound and is typically described
using the relative unit of the decibel. A
sound pressure level (SPL) in dB is
described as the ratio between a
measured pressure and a reference
pressure (for underwater sound, this is
1 microPascal (mPa)), and is a
logarithmic unit that accounts for large
variations in amplitude. Therefore, a
relatively small change in dB
corresponds to large changes in sound
pressure. The source level (SL)
represents the SPL referenced at a
distance of 1-m from the source
(referenced to 1 mPa), while the received
level is the SPL at the listener’s position
(referenced to 1 mPa).
Root mean square (rms) is the
quadratic mean sound pressure over the
duration of an impulse. Root mean
square is calculated by squaring all of
the sound amplitudes, averaging the
squares, and then taking the square root
of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean
square 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 (Hastings and Popper,
2005). 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 than by peak pressures.
Sound exposure level (SEL;
represented as dB re 1 mPa2-s) represents
the total energy in a stated frequency
band over a stated time interval or event
and considers both intensity and
duration of exposure. The per-pulse SEL
is calculated over the time window
containing the entire pulse (i.e., 100
percent of the acoustic energy). SEL is
a cumulative metric; it can be
accumulated over a single pulse, or
calculated over periods containing
multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL
represents the total energy accumulated
by a receiver over a defined time
window or during an event. Peak sound
pressure (also referred to as zero-to-peak
sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4209
instantaneous sound pressure
measurable in the water at a specified
distance from the source and is
represented in the same units as the rms
sound pressure.
When underwater objects vibrate or
activity occurs, sound-pressure waves
are created. These waves alternately
compress and decompress the water as
the sound wave travels. Underwater
sound waves radiate in a manner similar
to ripples on the surface of a pond and
may be directed either in a beam or in
beams or may radiate in all directions
(omnidirectional sources). The
compressions and decompressions
associated with sound waves are
detected as changes in pressure by
aquatic life and man-made sound
receptors such as hydrophones.
Even in the absence of sound from the
specified activity, the underwater
environment is typically loud due to
ambient sound, which is defined as
environmental background sound levels
lacking a single source or point
(Richardson et al., 1995). The sound
level of a region is defined by the total
acoustical energy being generated by
known and unknown sources. These
sources may include physical (e.g.,
wind and waves, earthquakes, ice,
atmospheric sound), biological (e.g.,
sounds produced by marine mammals,
fish, and invertebrates), and
anthropogenic (e.g., vessels, dredging,
construction) sound. A number of
sources contribute to ambient sound,
including wind and waves, which are a
main source of naturally occurring
ambient sound for frequencies between
200 Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In
general, ambient sound levels tend to
increase with increasing wind speed
and wave height. Precipitation can
become an important component of total
sound at frequencies above 500 Hz, and
possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet
times. Marine mammals can contribute
significantly to ambient sound levels, as
can some fish and snapping shrimp. The
frequency band for biological
contributions is from approximately 12
Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient
sound related to human activity include
transportation (surface vessels),
dredging and construction, oil and gas
drilling and production, geophysical
surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel
noise typically dominates the total
ambient sound for frequencies between
20 and 300 Hz. In general, the
frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are
below 1 kHz and, if higher frequency
sound levels are created, they attenuate
rapidly.
The sum of the various natural and
anthropogenic sound sources that
comprise ambient sound at any given
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4210
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
location and time depends not only on
the source levels (as determined by
current weather conditions and levels of
biological and human activity) but on
the ability of sound to propagate
through the environment. In turn, sound
propagation is dependent on the
spatially and temporally varying
properties of the water column and sea
floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a
result of the dependence on a large
number of varying factors, ambient
sound levels can be expected to vary
widely over both coarse and fine spatial
and temporal scales. Sound levels at a
given frequency and location can vary
by 10–20 dB from day to day
(Richardson et al., 1995). The result is
that, depending on the source type and
its intensity, sound from the specified
activity may be a negligible addition to
the local environment or could form a
distinctive signal that may affect marine
mammals. Details of source types are
described in the following text.
Sounds are often considered to fall
into one of two general types: Pulsed
and non-pulsed (defined in the
following). The distinction between
these two sound types is important
because they have differing potential to
cause physical effects, particularly with
regard to hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in
Southall et al., 2007). Please see
Southall et al., (2007) for an in-depth
discussion of these concepts. The
distinction between these two sound
types is not always obvious, as certain
signals share properties of both pulsed
and non-pulsed sounds. A signal near a
source could be categorized as a pulse,
but due to propagation effects as it
moves farther from the source, the
signal duration becomes longer (e.g.,
Greene and Richardson, 1988).
Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns,
explosions, gunshots, sonic booms,
impact pile driving) produce signals
that are brief (typically considered to be
less than one second), broadband, atonal
transients (ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris,
1998; NIOSH, 1998) and occur either as
isolated events or repeated in some
succession. Pulsed sounds are all
characterized by a relatively rapid rise
from ambient pressure to a maximal
pressure value followed by a rapid
decay period that may include a period
of diminishing, oscillating maximal and
minimal pressures, and generally have
an increased capacity to induce physical
injury as compared with sounds that
lack these features.
Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal,
narrowband, or broadband, brief or
prolonged, and may be either
continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995;
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these nonpulsed sounds can be transient signals
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
of short duration but without the
essential properties of pulses (e.g., rapid
rise time). Examples of non-pulsed
sounds include those produced by
vessels, aircraft, machinery operations
such as drilling or dredging, vibratory
pile driving, and active sonar systems.
The duration of such sounds, as
received at a distance, can be greatly
extended in a highly reverberant
environment.
Sparkers produce pulsed signals with
energy in the frequency ranges specified
in Table 2. The amplitude of the
acoustic wave emitted from sparker
sources is equal in all directions (i.e.,
omnidirectional), while other sources
planned for use during the proposed
surveys have some degree of
directionality to the beam, as specified
in Table 2. Other sources planned for
use during the proposed survey activity
(e.g., CHIRPs) should be considered
non-pulsed, intermittent sources.
Summary on Specific Potential Effects
of Acoustic Sound Sources
Underwater sound from active
acoustic sources can include one or
more of the following: Temporary or
permanent hearing impairment,
behavioral disturbance, masking, stress,
and non-auditory physical effects. The
degree of effect is intrinsically related to
the signal characteristics, received level,
distance from the source, and duration
of the sound exposure. Marine
mammals exposed to high-intensity
sound, or to lower-intensity sound for
prolonged periods, can experience
hearing threshold shift (TS), which is
the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain
frequency ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS
can be permanent (PTS; permanent
threshold shift), in which case the loss
of hearing sensitivity is not fully
recoverable, or temporary (TTS;
temporary threshold shift), in which
case the animal’s hearing threshold
would recover over time (Southall et al.,
2007).
Animals in the vicinity of Atlantic
Shores’ proposed HRG survey activity
are unlikely to incur even TTS due to
the characteristics of the sound sources,
which include relatively low source
levels (179 to 245 dB re 1 mPa m), and
generally very short pulses and
potential duration of exposure. These
characteristics mean that instantaneous
exposure is unlikely to cause TTS, as it
is unlikely that exposure would occur
close enough to the vessel for received
levels to exceed peak pressure TTS
criteria, and that the cumulative
duration of exposure would be
insufficient to exceed cumulative sound
exposure level (SEL) criteria. Even for
high-frequency cetacean species (e.g.,
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
harbor porpoises), which have the
greatest sensitivity to potential TTS,
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).
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
many of HRG survey devices planned
for use (Table 2) makes it unlikely that
an animal would be exposed more than
briefly during the passage of the vessel.
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.
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.
In addition, sound can disrupt
behavior through masking, or interfering
with, an animal’s ability to detect,
recognize, or discriminate between
acoustic signals of interest (e.g., those
used for intraspecific communication
and social interactions, prey detection,
predator avoidance, navigation).
Masking occurs when the receipt of a
sound is interfered with by another
coincident sound at similar frequencies
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
and at similar or higher intensity, and
may occur whether the sound is natural
(e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves,
precipitation) or anthropogenic (e.g.,
shipping, sonar, seismic exploration) in
origin. Marine mammal
communications would not likely be
masked appreciably by the acoustic
signals given the directionality of the
signals for most HRG survey equipment
types planned for use (Table 2) and the
brief period when an individual
mammal is likely to be exposed.
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. 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). 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), reduced
immune competence (Blecha 2000), and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
behavioral disturbance. Increases in the
circulation of glucocorticosteroids
(cortisol, corticosterone, and
aldosterone in marine mammals; see
Romano et al., 2004) have been long
been equated with stress. 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. In general, there
are few data on the potential for strong,
anthropogenic underwater sounds to
cause non-auditory physical effects in
marine mammals. The available data do
not allow identification of a specific
exposure level above which nonauditory effects can be expected
(Southall et al., 2007). There is currently
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 nonauditory impairment or other physical
effects. NMFS does not expect that the
generally short-term, intermittent, and
transitory HRG and geotechnical survey
activities would create conditions of
long-term, continuous noise and chronic
acoustic exposure leading to long-term
physiological stress responses in marine
mammals.
Sound may affect marine mammals
through impacts on the abundance,
behavior, or distribution of prey species
(e.g., crustaceans, cephalopods, fish,
and zooplankton) (i.e., effects to marine
mammal habitat). Prey species exposed
to sound might move away from the
sound source, experience TTS,
experience masking of biologically
relevant sounds, or show no obvious
direct effects. The most likely impacts
(if any) for most prey species in a given
area would be temporary avoidance of
the area. Surveys using active acoustic
sound sources move through an area,
limiting exposure to multiple pulses. In
all cases, sound levels would return to
ambient once a survey ends and the
noise source is shut down and, when
exposure to sound ends, behavioral and/
or physiological responses are expected
to end relatively quickly. Finally, the
HRG survey equipment will not have
significant impacts to the seafloor and
does not represent a source of pollution.
Vessel Strike
Vessel collisions with marine
mammals, or ship strikes, can result in
death or serious injury of the animal.
These interactions are typically
associated with large whales, which are
less maneuverable than are smaller
cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to
large vessels. Ship strikes generally
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4211
involve commercial shipping vessels,
which are generally larger and of which
there is much more traffic in the ocean
than geophysical survey vessels. Jensen
and Silber (2004) summarized ship
strikes of large whales worldwide from
1975–2003 and found that most
collisions occurred in the open ocean
and involved large vessels (e.g.,
commercial shipping). For vessels used
in geophysical survey activities, vessel
speed while towing gear is typically
only 4–5 knots. At these speeds, both
the possibility of striking a marine
mammal and the possibility of a strike
resulting in serious injury or mortality
are so low as to be discountable. At
average transit speed for geophysical
survey vessels, the probability of serious
injury or mortality resulting from a
strike is less than 50 percent. However,
the likelihood of a strike actually
happening is again low given the
smaller size of these vessels and
generally slower speeds. Notably in the
Jensen and Silber study, no strike
incidents were reported for geophysical
survey vessels during that time period.
The potential effects of Atlantic
Shores’ specified survey activity are
expected to be limited to Level B
behavioral harassment. No permanent or
temporary auditory effects, or
significant impacts to marine mammal
habitat, including prey, are expected.
Marine Mammal Habitat
The HRG survey equipment will not
contact the seafloor and does not
represent a source of pollution. We are
not aware of any available literature on
impacts to marine mammal prey from
sound produced by HRG survey
equipment. However, as the HRG survey
equipment introduces noise to the
marine environment, there is the
potential for it to result in avoidance of
the area around the HRG survey
activities on the part of marine mammal
prey. Any avoidance of the area on the
part of marine mammal prey would be
expected to be short term and
temporary.
Because of the temporary nature of
the disturbance, and the availability of
similar habitat and resources (e.g., prey
species) in the surrounding area, the
impacts to marine mammals and the
food sources that they utilize are not
expected to cause significant or longterm consequences for individual
marine mammals or their populations.
Impacts on marine mammal habitat
from the proposed activities will be
temporary, insignificant, and
discountable.
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4212
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
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 ‘‘small numbers’’ 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, section 3(18) of the
MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act
of pursuit, torment, or annoyance,
which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a
marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption
of behavioral patterns, including, but
not limited to, migration, breathing,
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering
(Level B harassment).
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 noise from certain
HRG acoustic sources. Based primarily
on the characteristics of the signals
produced by the acoustic sources
planned for use and the proposed
mitigation measures, Level A
harassment is neither anticipated, nor
proposed to be authorized. Take by
Level A harassment (injury) is
considered unlikely, even absent
mitigation, based on the characteristics
of the signals produced by the acoustic
sources planned for use, and is not
proposed for authorization.
Implementation of required mitigation
further reduces this potential.
Furthermore and as previously
described, no serious injury or mortality
is anticipated or proposed to be
authorized for this activity. Below we
describe how the take is estimated.
Generally speaking, we estimate take
by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds
above which NMFS believes the best
available science indicates marine
mammals will be behaviorally harassed
or incur some degree of permanent
hearing impairment; (2) the area or
volume of water that will be ensonified
above these levels in a day; (3) the
density or occurrence of marine
mammals within these ensonified areas;
and, (4) and the number of days of
activities. We note that while these
basic factors can contribute to a basic
calculation to provide an initial
prediction of takes, additional
information that can qualitatively
inform take estimates is also sometimes
available (e.g., previous monitoring
results or average group size). Below, we
describe the factors considered here in
more detail and present the proposed
take estimate.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends the use of
acoustic thresholds that identify the
received level of underwater sound
above which exposed marine mammals
would be reasonably expected to be
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level
B harassment) or to incur PTS of some
degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment—Though
significantly driven by received level,
the onset of behavioral disturbance from
anthropogenic noise exposure is also
informed to varying degrees by other
factors related to the source (e.g.,
frequency, predictability, duty cycle),
the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and
the receiving animals (hearing,
motivation, experience, demography,
behavioral context) and can be difficult
to predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison
et al., 2012). Based on what the
available science indicates and the
practical need to use a threshold based
on a factor that is both predictable and
measurable for most activities, NMFS
uses a generalized acoustic threshold
based on received level to estimate the
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS
predicts that marine mammals may be
behaviorally harassed (i.e., Level B
harassment) when exposed to
underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms)
for the impulsive sources (i.e., sparkers)
and non-impulsive, intermittent sources
(e.g., CHIRPs) evaluated here for
Atlantic Shores’ proposed activity.
Level A harassment—NMFS’
Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on
Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0)
(NMFS, 2018) identifies dual criteria to
assess auditory injury (Level A
harassment) to five different marine
mammal groups (based on hearing
sensitivity) as a result of exposure to
noise from two different types of
sources (impulsive or non-impulsive).
These thresholds are provided in the
table below (Table 5). The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the
development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS (2018) Technical
Guidance, which may be accessed at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/marine-mammal-protection/
marine-mammal-acoustic-technicalguidance.
TABLE 5—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT
PTS onset acoustic thresholds *
(received level)
Hearing group
Impulsive
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ......................................
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ......................................
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans .....................................
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) .............................
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) .............................
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.
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should
also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s.
In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI, 2013). However, ANSI defines peak
sound pressure as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated
with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF
cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level
thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for
action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4213
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
The 2020 proposed notification for
Atlantic Shores’ HRG surveys (85 FR
7926; February 12, 2020) previously
analyzed the potential for Level A
harassment (refer to Table 5 in that
notification and additional discussion
therein).
Similar to the past IHAs issued to
Atlantic Shores, the proposed activities
for 2022 include the use of impulsive
(i.e.,) and non-impulsive (e.g., CHIRPs)
sources. Carrying through the same logic
as the locations, species, survey
durations, equipment used, and source
levels are all of a similar scope
previously analyzed for Atlantic Shores’
surveys, and as discussed above, NMFS
has concluded that Level A harassment
is not a reasonably likely outcome for
marine mammals exposed to noise
through use of the sources proposed for
use here due to the mitigation measures
Atlantic Shores has proposed, and the
potential for Level A harassment is not
evaluated further in this document.
Atlantic Shores did not request
authorization of take by Level A
harassment, and no take by Level A
harassment is proposed for
authorization by NMFS.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and
environmental parameters of the activity
that will feed into identifying the area
ensonified above the acoustic
thresholds, which include source levels
and transmission loss coefficient.
NMFS has developed a user-friendly
methodology for estimating the extent of
the Level B harassment isopleths
associated with relevant HRG survey
equipment (NMFS, 2020). This
methodology incorporates frequency
and directionality to refine estimated
ensonified zones. For acoustic sources
that operate with different beamwidths,
the maximum beamwidth was used, and
the lowest frequency of the source was
used when calculating the frequencydependent absorption coefficient (Table
2).
NMFS considers the data provided by
Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) to
represent the best available information
on source levels associated with HRG
survey equipment and, therefore,
recommends that source levels provided
by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be
incorporated in the method described
above to estimate isopleth distances to
harassment thresholds. In cases when
the source level for a specific type of
HRG equipment is not provided in
Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS
recommends that either the source
levels provided by the manufacturer be
used, or, in instances where source
levels provided by the manufacturer are
unavailable or unreliable, a proxy from
Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be used
instead. Table 2 shows the HRG
equipment types that may be used
during the proposed surveys and the
source levels associated with those HRG
equipment types. The computations and
results from the Level B ensonified area
analysis are displayed in Tables 6 and
7 below.
TABLE 6—INPUTS INTO THE LEVEL B HARASSMENT SPREADSHEET FOR HIGH RESOLUTION GEOPHYSICAL SOURCES USING
A TRANSMISSION LOSS COEFFICIENT OF 20
Input values in spreadsheet
Source name
Threshold
level
SIG ELC 820 Sparker
at 750J * ....................
Geo Marine Survey
System 2D SUHRS
at 400J ......................
Edgetech 2000–DSS ...
Edgetech 216 ...............
Edgetech 424 ...............
Edgetech 512i ..............
Pangeosubsea SubBottom Imager TM .....
Source level
(dBrms)
Frequency
(kH)
Computed
values
(meters)
Beamwidth
(degrees)
Water depth
(m)
Slant
distance of
threshold
Horizontal
threshold
range (m)
160
203
0.01
180
5
141
141
160
160
160
160
160
195
195
179
180
179
0.2
2
2
4
0.7
180
24
24
71
80
5
5
5
10
10
56
56
9
10
9
56
1
1
6
6
160
190
4
120
5
32
9
* Used as a proxy for the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 because the specific energy setting is not described in Crocker and Franantonio
(2016).
TABLE 7—MAXIMUM DISTANCES TO LEVEL B 160 dBRMS THRESHOLD BY EQUIPMENT TYPE OPERATING BELOW 180 kHz
Representative equipment type
Sparker ............................
Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 ............................................................................................................
Geo Marine Survey System 2D SUHRS ...................................................................................................
Edgetech 2000–DSS .................................................................................................................................
Edgetech 216 .............................................................................................................................................
Edgetech 424 .............................................................................................................................................
Edgetech 512i ............................................................................................................................................
Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom ImagerTM ......................................................................................................
CHIRP .............................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Distances
to level B
threshold
(m)
HRG survey equipment
(sub-bottom profiler)
Results of modeling using the
methodology described and shown
above indicated that, of the HRG survey
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
equipment planned for use by Atlantic
Shores that has the potential to result in
Level B harassment of marine mammals,
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
141
56
56
9
10
9
32
the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240
would produce the largest Level B
harassment isopleth (141-m; please refer
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4214
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
back to Tables 6 and 7 above, as well as
Table 6–1 in Atlantic Shores’ IHA
application). Estimated Level B
harassment isopleths associated with
the CHIRP equipment planned for use
are also found in Tables 6 and 7. All
CHIRPs equipment produced Level B
harassment isopleths much smaller than
the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240
sparker did.
Although Atlantic Shores does not
expect to use sparker sources on all
planned survey days and during the
entire duration that surveys are likely to
occur, Atlantic Shores proposes to
assume for purposes of analysis that the
sparker would be used on all survey
days and across all hours. This is a
conservative approach, as the actual
sources used on individual survey days
may produce smaller harassment
distances.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section, we provide the
information about presence, density, or
group dynamics of marine mammals
that will inform the take calculations.
Habitat-based density models
produced by the Duke University
Marine Geospatial Ecology Laboratory
and the Marine-life Data and Analysis
Team, based on the best available
marine mammal data from 1992–201
obtained in a collaboration between
Duke University, the Northeast Regional
Planning Body, the University of North
Carolina Wilmington, the Virginia
Aquarium and Marine Science Center,
and NOAA (Roberts et al., 2016a;
Curtice et al., 2018), represent the best
available information regarding marine
mammal densities in the survey area.
More recently, these data have been
updated with new modeling results and
include density estimates for pinnipeds
(Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017, 2018).
The density data presented by Roberts
et al., (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020)
incorporates aerial and shipboard linetransect survey data from NMFS and
other organizations and incorporates
data from eight physiographic and 16
dynamic oceanographic and biological
covariates, and controls for the
influence of sea state, group size,
availability bias, and perception bias on
the probability of making a sighting.
These density models were originally
developed for all cetacean taxa in the
U.S. Atlantic (Roberts et al., 2016a). In
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
subsequent years, certain models have
been updated based on additional data
as well as certain methodological
improvements. More information is
available online at https://seamap.env.
duke.edu/models/Duke/EC/. Marine
mammal density estimates in the survey
area (animals/km2) were obtained using
the most recent model results for all
taxa (Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017, 2018,
2020). The updated models incorporate
additional sighting data, including
sightings from NOAA’s Atlantic Marine
Assessment Program for Protected
Species (AMAPPS) surveys.
For the exposure analysis, density
data from Roberts et al., (2016b, 2017,
2018, 2021) were mapped using a
geographic information system (GIS).
For each of the survey areas (i.e., Lease
Area, ECR North, ECR South), the
densities of each species as reported by
Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021)
were averaged by season; thus, a density
was calculated for each species for
spring, summer, fall and winter. To be
conservative, the greatest seasonal
density calculated for each species was
then carried forward in the exposure
analysis. Estimated seasonal densities
(animals per km2) of all marine mammal
species that may be taken by the
proposed survey, for all survey areas are
shown in Tables C–1, C–2 and C–3 in
Appendix C of Atlantic Shores’ IHA
application. The maximum seasonal
density values used to estimate take
numbers are shown in Table 8 below.
Below, we discuss how densities were
assumed to apply to specific species for
which the Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017,
2018, 2021) models provide results at
the genus or guild level.
For bottlenose dolphin densities,
Roberts et al., (2016b, 2017, 2018) does
not differentiate by stock. The Western
North Atlantic northern migratory
coastal stock is generally expected to
occur only in coastal waters from the
shoreline to approximately the 20-m
(65-ft) isobath (Hayes et al., 2018). As
the Lease Area is located within depths
exceeding 20-m, where the offshore
stock would generally be expected to
occur, all calculated bottlenose dolphin
exposures within the Lease Area were
assigned to the offshore stock. However,
both stocks have the potential to occur
in the ECR North and ECR South survey
areas. To account for the potential for
mixed stocks within ECR North and
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
South, the survey areas ECR North and
South were divided approximately
along the 20-m depth isobath, which
roughly corresponds to the 10-fathom
contour on NOAA navigation charts. As
approximately 33 percent of ECR North
and ECR South are 20-m or less in
depth, 33 percent of the estimated take
calculation for bottlenose dolphins was
applied to the Western North Atlantic
northern migratory coastal stock and the
remaining 67 percent was applied to the
offshore stock.
For this proposed project, Atlantic
Shores has used the same pilot whale
densities that were previously used in
the 2020 and subsequent 2021
(Renewal) IHAs. To better estimate the
number of pilot whales that could
potentially be impacted by the proposed
project, although exposure is noted as
unlikely to occur in the IHA
application, Atlantic Shores adjusted
the take estimate by average group size.
Because the seasonality, feeding
preferences, and habitat use by gray
seals often overlaps with that of harbor
seals in the survey areas, it was assumed
that modeled takes of seals could occur
to either of the respective species.
Furthermore, as the density models
produced by Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017,
2018) do not differentiate between the
different pinniped species, the same
density estimates were applied to both
seal species. Because of this, pinniped
density values reported in Atlantic
Shores’ IHA application are described as
‘‘seals’’ and not species-specific.
Since Atlantic Shores’ 2020 and 2021
(Renewal) IHAs for HRG surveys were
completed, the North Atlantic right
whale density data has been updated for
this proposed project. This is due to the
inclusion of three new datasets: 2011–
2015 Northeast Large Pelagic Survey
Cooperative, 2017–2018 Marine
Mammal Surveys of the Wind Energy
Areas conducted by the New England
Aquarium, and 2017–2018 New York
Bight Whale Monitoring Program
surveys conducted by the New York
State Department of Environmental
conservation (NYSDEC). This new
density data shows distribution changes
that are likely influenced by
oceanographic and prey covariates in
the whale density model (Roberts et al.,
2021).
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4215
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
TABLE 8—MAXIMUM SEASONAL MARINE MAMMAL DENSITIES (NUMBER OF ANIMALS PER 100 km2) IN THE SURVEY AREAS
(APPENDIX C OF ATLANTIC SHORES’ IHA APPLICATION)
Maximum seasonal densities
Species groups
Species
Lease area
ECR north
ECR south
Cetaceans ...........
North Atlantic right whale ...........................................................................
Humpback whale ........................................................................................
Fin whale ....................................................................................................
Sei whale ....................................................................................................
Minke whale ...............................................................................................
Sperm whale ..............................................................................................
Long-finned pilot whale ..............................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin (Western North Atlantic coastal migratory) .................
Bottlenose dolphin (Western North Atlantic offshore) ...............................
Common dolphin ........................................................................................
Atlantic white-sided dolphin .......................................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ..............................................................................
Risso’s dolphin ...........................................................................................
Harbor porpoise .........................................................................................
0.499
0.076
0.100
0.004
0.055
0.013
0.036
........................
21.752
3.120
0.487
0.076
0.010
2.904
0.182
0.082
0.080
0.004
0.017
0.005
0.012
21.675
21.675
1.644
0.213
0.059
0.001
7.357
0.179
0.103
0.057
0.002
0.019
0.003
0.009
58.524
58.524
1.114
0.152
0.021
0.002
2.209
Pinnipeds ............
Gray seal ....................................................................................................
Harbor seal .................................................................................................
4.918
4.918
9.737
9.737
6.539
6.539
Note—Many of the densities provided in this table have been previously used and applied during the 2020 IHA to Atlantic Shores and its subsequent Renewal and remain applicable.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information
provided above is brought together to
produce a quantitative take estimate.
In order to estimate the number of
marine mammals predicted to be
exposed to sound levels that would
result in harassment, radial distances to
predicted isopleths corresponding to
Level B harassment thresholds are
calculated, as described above. The
maximum distance (i.e., 141-m distance
associated with the Applied Acoustics
Dura-Spark 240) to the Level B
harassment criterion and the estimated
distance traveled per day by a given
survey vessel (i.e., 55-km (34.2-mi)) are
then used to calculate the daily
ensonified area, or zone of influence
(ZOI) around the survey vessel.
Atlantic Shores estimates that
proposed surveys will achieve a
maximum daily track line distance of 55
km per day (24-hour period) during
proposed HRG surveys. This distance
accounts for the vessel traveling at
approximately 3.5 knots and accounts
for non-active survey periods. Based on
the maximum estimated distance to the
Level B harassment threshold of 141-m
(Table 7) and the maximum estimated
daily track line distance of 55 km across
all survey sites, an area of 15.57 km2
would be ensonified to the Level B
harassment threshold per day across all
survey sites during Atlantic Shores’
proposed surveys (Table 9) based on the
following formula:
Mobile Source ZOI = (Distance/day × 2r)
+ pr 2
Where:
Distance/day = the maximum distance a
survey vessel could travel in a 24-hour
period; and
r = the maximum radial distance from a given
sound source to the NOAA Level A or
Level B harassment thresholds.
TABLE 9—MAXIMUM HRG SURVEY AREA DISTANCES FOR ATLANTIC SHORES’ PROPOSED PROJECT
Number of
active
survey days
Survey area
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Lease Area ...........................................................................
ECR North ............................................................................
ECR South ...........................................................................
As described above, this is a
conservative estimate as it assumes the
HRG source that results in the greatest
isopleth distance to the Level B
harassment threshold would be
operated at all times during the entire
survey, which may not ultimately occur.
The number of marine mammals
expected to be incidentally taken per
day is then calculated by estimating the
number of each species predicted to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
Survey
distances
per day
in km (mi)
120
180
60
55 (34.2)
occur within the daily ensonified area
(animals/km2), incorporating the
maximum seasonal estimated marine
mammal densities as described above.
Estimated numbers of each species
taken per day across all survey sites are
then multiplied by the total number of
survey days (i.e., 360). The product is
then rounded, to generate an estimate of
the total number of instances of
harassment expected for each species
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Maximum
radial
distance
(r) in m (ft)
141 (463)
Calculated
ZOI per day
(km2)
15.57
Total
annual
ensonified
area (km2)
1,868.4
2,802.6
934.2
over the duration of the survey. A
summary of this method is illustrated in
the following formula with the resulting
proposed take of marine mammals is
shown below in Table 10:
Estimated Take = D × ZOI × # of days
Where:
D = average species density (per km2); and
ZOI = maximum daily ensonified area to
relevant thresholds.
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4216
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
TABLE 10—NUMBERS OF POTENTIAL INCIDENTAL TAKE OF MARINE MAMMALS PROPOSED FOR AUTHORIZATION AND
PROPOSED TAKES AS A PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION
Total
Calculated
takes by
Level B
harassment e
Species
North Atlantic right whale ................................................................................
Humpback whale .............................................................................................
Fin whale .........................................................................................................
Sei whale .........................................................................................................
Minke whale .....................................................................................................
Sperm whale ....................................................................................................
Long-finned pilot whale ....................................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin (W.N. Atlantic Coastal Migratory) .....................................
Bottlenose dolphin (W.N. Atlantic Offshore) ....................................................
Common dolphin (short-beaked) .....................................................................
Atlantic white-sided dolphin .............................................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ...................................................................................
Risso’s dolphin .................................................................................................
Harbor porpoise ...............................................................................................
Harbor seal ......................................................................................................
Gray seal .........................................................................................................
Takes
proposed for
Level B
harassment
to be
authorized f
17
4
5
2
2
1
20
385
1,175
406
17
50
30
282
426
426
17
c8
5
2
2
1
20
385
1,175
b 560
17
d 100
30
282
426
426
Proposed
takes (Level
B Harassment)
to be
authorized f
Proposed
takes (Level B
Harassment)
as a
percentage of
population/
stock a f
17
8
5
2
2
1
20
385
1,175
560
17
100
30
282
426
426
4.62
0.57
0.07
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.05
5.80
1.87
0.32
0.02
0.25
0.08
0.30
0.56
1.56
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
a Calculated percentages of population/stock were based on the population estimates (Nest) found in the NMFS’s draft 2021 U.S. Atlantic and
Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessment on NMFS’s website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).
b Based on information obtained from the monitoring report provided to NMFS after the completion of the 2020 project, as well as information
provided by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal communication, October 29, 2021), NMFS has proposed to increase the number of authorized
takes (by Level B harassment only) for common dolphins.
c Based on recent data from King et al. (2021) where humpback whales were the most commonly sighted species in the New York Bight,
NMFS has proposed to increase the take of humpback whales by assuming that Atlantic Shores’ four modeled exposures would be of groups
rather than individuals, and therefore multiplied by an average group size of two to yield eight.
d Based on information obtained from the monitoring report provided to NMFS after the completion of the 2020 project, as well as information
provided by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal communication, October 29, 2021), NMFS has proposed to increase the number of authorized
takes (by Level B harassment only) for Atlantic spotted dolphins.
e These values were proposed by Atlantic Shores.
f These values were proposed by NMFS.
The take numbers shown in Table 10
represent those originally calculated
and requested by Atlantic Shores with
minor modifications by NMFS for
humpback whales, common dolphins,
and Atlantic spotted dolphins, which
are discussed below.
As noted within Atlantic Shores’ IHA
application and discussed within the
Renewal IHA application (see Atlantic
Shores Offshore Wind, 2021), there was
an adjustment made for Risso’s
dolphins, common dolphins, and longfinned pilot whales based on typical
pod and group sizes, which yielded the
values described above in Table 10.
NMFS agrees with these approaches, as
described in the IHA applications, with
exception for three cetacean species
described below.
Estimated takes of common dolphins
were increased from the density-based
estimate based on information provided
by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal
communication, October 29, 2021) and
sightings described in the 2020
monitoring report. Based on these
previous observations, exposures of
common dolphins above the 160-dB
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
harassment threshold were estimated at
1.55 per day. Assuming that this same
exposure rate continues for the
presently planned activity yields the
estimate provided in Table 10.
Based on recent information from
King et al. (2021) that demonstrated that
the humpback whale is commonly
sighted along the New York Bight area,
NMFS determined that the humpback
whale take request may be too low given
the occurrence of animals near the
survey area. Because of this, NMFS
proposes to double the requested take to
account for underestimates to the actual
occurrence of this species within the
density data.
Previously, 100 takes of Atlantic
spotted dolphins, by Level B
harassment, were authorized to Atlantic
Shores during their 2020 IHA. Based on
a lack of sightings in the 2020 field
season per the submitted monitoring
report, Atlantic Shores had requested
and been authorized half of these takes
(50 Level B harassment) during their
2021 field season for their Renewal IHA.
However, based on information
provided by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer,
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
personal communication, October 29,
2021) as the monitoring report for the
2021 field season is not yet available,
NMFS has proposed to increase the take
previously requested by Atlantic Shores
from 50 to 100 to account for the
numerous sightings of Atlantic spotted
dolphins that had already occurred
early into Atlantic Shores’ 2021 field
season (17 takes out of 50 authorized for
the Renewal IHA).
As described above, Roberts et al.
(2018) produced density models for all
seals and did not differentiate by seal
species. The take calculation
methodology as described above
resulted in an estimate of 852 total seal
takes for both species. Based on this
estimate, Atlantic Shores has requested
852 takes total for pinnipeds (426 each
species), based on the use of the same
density for both species as they are
known to overlap in habitat use,
foraging, and spatial scale. Furthermore,
as the density estimates were not split
by species in Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017,
2018) this approach assumes that the
likelihood of either species occurring
during the survey is equal. We think
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4217
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
this is a reasonable approach and
therefore propose to authorize the
requested amount of take, as shown in
Table 10.
Worth noting is the proposed
authorized take of North Atlantic right
whales, which stems from an increase in
the density of North Atlantic right
whales at the survey site. Atlantic
Shores used information from Roberts et
al., (2020) that demonstrated that the
density of North Atlantic right whales
has increased by approximately 40
percent in some portions of the survey
area compared to the 2020 IHA (see
Table 11), which justifies the total
proposed take number presented above
in Table 10. While past monitoring
reports (see the 2020 report on NMFS’
website) have reported no observations
of North Atlantic right whales during
the 2020 surveys, NMFS agrees with the
approach taken by Atlantic Shores as
using the best available science to be
conservative and proposes to authorize
17 takes by Level B harassment only of
North Atlantic right whales during the
proposed project.
TABLE 11—CHANGES IN NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE DENSITIES IN THE PROJECT SITE FROM THE 2020 IHA TO THIS
PROPOSED 2022 IHA PER DATA FROM ROBERTS ET AL., (2020)
Winter
2020
IHA
Lease Area .......................
Northern ECR ..................
Southern ECR ..................
2022
IHA
0.087
0.068
0.073
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
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 the activity, and
other means of effecting the least
practicable impact on the species or
stock and its habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds,
and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the 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 the 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 consider 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. This considers
the nature of the potential adverse
impact being mitigated (likelihood,
scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be
effective if implemented (probability of
accomplishing the mitigating result if
implemented as planned), the
likelihood of effective implementation
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
2020
IHA
0.499
0.182
0.179
Proposed Mitigation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Spring
0.060
0.056
0.055
Summer
2022
IHA
2020
IHA
0.426
0.149
0.097
Proposed Mitigation Measures
NMFS proposes the following
proposed mitigation measures be
implemented during Atlantic Shores’
proposed marine site characterization
surveys, in compliance with the
proposed IHA and with the NOAA
Fisheries Greater Atlantic Regional
Office (GARFO) programmatic
consultation (specifically Project Design
Criteria (PDC) 4, 5, and 7) regarding
geophysical surveys along the U.S.
Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic
Renewable Energy Regions (NOAA
GARFO, 2021; https://www.fisheries.
noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/
consultations/section-7-take-reportingprogrammatics-greateratlantic#offshore-wind-site-assessmentand-site-characterization-activitiesprogrammatic-consultation).
Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones and
Level B Harassment Zones
Marine mammal Exclusion Zones
would be established around the HRG
survey equipment and monitored by
protected species observers (PSOs).
These PSOs will be NMFS-approved
visual PSOs. Based upon the acoustic
source in use (impulsive: Sparkers; nonimpulsive: Non-parametric sub-bottom
profilers), a minimum of one PSO must
be on duty, per source vessel, during
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2022
IHA
0.008
0.008
0.007
(probability implemented as planned),
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.
Fall
0.002
0.001
0.000
2020
IHA
0.006
0.006
0.006
2022
IHA
0.009
0.011
0.005
daylight hours and two PSOs must be
on duty, per source vessel, during
nighttime hours. These PSO will
monitor Exclusion Zones based upon
the radial distance from the acoustic
source rather than being based around
the vessel itself. The Exclusion Zone
distances are as follows:
• A 500-m Exclusion Zone for North
Atlantic right whales during use of
specified acoustic sources (impulsive:
Sparkers; non-impulsive: Nonparametric sub-bottom profilers).
• A 100-m Exclusion Zone for all
other marine mammals (excluding
NARWs) during use of specified
acoustic sources (except as specified
below). All visual monitoring must
begin no less than 30 minutes prior to
the initiation of the specified acoustic
source and must continue until 30
minutes after use of specified acoustic
sources ceases.
If a marine mammal were detected
approaching or entering the Exclusion
Zones during the HRG survey, the vessel
operator would adhere to the shutdown
procedures described below to
minimize noise impacts on the animals.
These stated requirements will be
included in the site-specific training to
be provided to the survey team.
Ramp-Up of Survey Equipment and PreClearance of the Exclusion Zones
When technically feasible, a ramp-up
procedure would be used for HRG
survey equipment capable of adjusting
energy levels at the start or restart of
survey activities. A ramp-up would
begin with the powering up of the
smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its
lowest practical power output
appropriate for the survey. The ramp-up
procedure would be used in order to
provide additional protection to marine
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4218
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
mammals near the survey area by
allowing them to vacate the area prior
to the commencement of survey
equipment operation at full power.
When technically feasible, the power
would then be gradually turned up and
other acoustic sources would be added.
All ramp-ups shall be scheduled so as
to minimize the time spent with the
source being activated.
Ramp-up activities will be delayed if
a marine mammal(s) enters its
respective Exclusion Zone. Ramp-up
will continue if the animal has been
observed exiting its respective
Exclusion Zone or until an additional
time period has elapsed with no further
sighting (i.e., 15 minutes for small
odontocetes and seals and 30 minutes
for all other species).
Atlantic Shores would implement a
30 minute pre-clearance period of the
Exclusion Zones prior to the initiation
of ramp-up of HRG equipment. The
operator must notify a designated PSO
of the planned start of ramp-up where
the notification time should not be less
than 60 minutes prior to the planned
ramp-up. This would allow the PSOs to
monitor the Exclusion Zones for 30
minutes prior to the initiation of rampup. Prior to ramp-up beginning, Atlantic
Shores must receive confirmation from
the PSO that the Exclusion Zone is clear
prior to proceeding. During this 30
minute pre-start clearance period, the
entire applicable Exclusion Zones must
be visible. The exception to this would
be in situations where ramp-up may
occur during periods of poor visibility
(inclusive of nighttime) as long as
appropriate visual monitoring has
occurred with no detections of marine
mammals in 30 minutes prior to the
beginning of ramp-up. Acoustic source
activation may only occur at night
where operational planning cannot
reasonably avoid such circumstances.
During this period, the Exclusion
Zone will be monitored by the PSOs,
using the appropriate visual technology.
Ramp-up may not be initiated if any
marine mammal(s) is within its
respective Exclusion Zone. If a marine
mammal is observed within an
Exclusion Zone during the pre-clearance
period, ramp-up may not begin until the
animal(s) has been observed exiting its
respective Exclusion Zone or until an
additional time period has elapsed with
no further sighting (i.e., 15 minutes for
small odontocetes and pinnipeds and 30
minutes for all other species). If a
marine mammal enters the Exclusion
Zone during ramp-up, ramp-up
activities must cease and the source
must be shut down. Any PSO on duty
has the authority to delay the start of
survey operations if a marine mammal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
is detected within the applicable prestart clearance zones.
The pre-clearance zones would be:
• 500-m for all ESA-listed species
(North Atlantic right, sei, fin, sperm
whales); and
• 100-m for all other marine
mammals.
If any marine mammal species that
are listed under the ESA are observed
within the clearance zones, the 30
minute clock must be paused. If the PSO
confirms the animal has exited the zone
and headed away from the survey
vessel, the 30 minute clock that was
paused may resume. The pre-clearance
clock will reset to 30 minutes if the
animal dives or visual contact is
otherwise lost.
If the acoustic source is shut down for
brief periods (i.e., less than 30 minutes)
for reasons other than implementation
of prescribed mitigation (e.g.,
mechanical difficulty), it may be
activated again without ramp-up if PSOs
have maintained constant visual
observation and no detections of marine
mammals have occurred within the
applicable Exclusion Zone. For any
longer shutdown, pre-start clearance
observation and ramp-up are required.
Activation of survey equipment
through ramp-up procedures may not
occur when visual detection of marine
mammals within the pre-clearance zone
is not expected to be effective (e.g.,
during inclement conditions such as
heavy rain or fog).
The acoustic source(s) must be
deactivated when not acquiring data or
preparing to acquire data, except as
necessary for testing. Unnecessary use
of the acoustic source shall be avoided.
Shutdown Procedures
An immediate shutdown of the
impulsive HRG survey equipment
(Table 7) would be required if a marine
mammal is sighted entering or within its
respective Exclusion Zone(s). Any PSO
on duty has the authority to call for a
shutdown of the acoustic source if a
marine mammal is detected within the
applicable Exclusion Zones. Any
disagreement between the PSO and
vessel operator should be discussed
only after shutdown has occurred. The
vessel operator would establish and
maintain clear lines of communication
directly between PSOs on duty and
crew controlling the HRG source(s) to
ensure that shutdown commands are
conveyed swiftly while allowing PSOs
to maintain watch.
The shutdown requirement is waived
for small delphinids (belonging to the
genera of the Family Delpinidae:
Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or
Tursiops) and pinnipeds if they are
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
visually detected within the applicable
Exclusion Zones. If a species for which
authorization has not been granted, or,
a species for which authorization has
been granted but the authorized number
of takes have been met, approaches or
is observed within the applicable Level
B harassment zone, shutdown would
occur. In the event of uncertainty
regarding the identification of a marine
mammal species (i.e., such as whether
the observed marine mammal belongs to
Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or
Tursiops for which shutdown is waived,
PSOs must use their best professional
judgement in making the decision to
call for a shutdown.
Specifically, if a delphinid from the
specified genera or a pinniped is
visually detected approaching the vessel
(i.e., to bow ride) or towed equipment,
shutdown is not required.
Upon implementation of a shutdown,
the source may be reactivated after the
marine mammal has been observed
exiting the applicable Exclusion Zone or
following a clearance period of 15
minutes for harbor porpoises and 30
minutes for all other species where
there are no further detections of the
marine mammal.
Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and
ramp-up procedures are not required
during HRG survey operations using
only non-impulsive sources (e.g.,
parametric sub-bottom profilers) other
than non-parametric sub-bottom
profilers (e.g., CHIRPs). Pre-clearance
and ramp-up, but not shutdown, are
required when using non-impulsive,
non-parametric sub-bottom profilers.
Seasonal Operating Requirements
As described above, the section of the
proposed survey area partially overlaps
with a portion of a North Atlantic right
whale SMA off the port of New York/
New Jersey. This SMA is active from
November 1 through April 30 of each
year. All survey vessels, regardless of
length, would be required to adhere to
vessel speed restrictions (<10 knots)
when operating within the SMA during
times when the SMA is active. In
addition, between watch shifts,
members of the monitoring team would
consult NMFS’ North Atlantic right
whale reporting systems for the
presence of North Atlantic right whales
throughout survey operations. Members
of the monitoring team would also
monitor the NMFS North Atlantic right
whale reporting systems for the
establishment of Dynamic Management
Areas (DMA). NMFS may also establish
voluntary right whale Slow Zones any
time a right whale (or whales) is
acoustically detected. Atlantic Shores
should be aware of this possibility and
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4219
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
remain attentive in the event a Slow
Zone is established nearby or
overlapping the survey area (Table 12).
TABLE 12—NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT AREA (DMA) AND SEASONAL MANAGEMENT AREA
(SMA) RESTRICTIONS WITHIN THE SURVEY AREAS
Survey area
Lease Area ......................
Species
DMA restrictions
North Atlantic right
(Eubalaena glacialis).
whale
I
Slow zones
If established by NMFS, all of Atlantic Shores’ vessels will abide by
the described restrictions
ECR North .......................
SMA restrictions
N/A.
November 1 through July 31
(Raritan Bay).
N/A.
ECR South .......................
More information on Ship Strike Reduction for the North Atlantic right whale can be found at NMFS’ website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangeredspecies-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
There are no known marine mammal
rookeries or mating or calving grounds
in the survey area that would otherwise
potentially warrant increased mitigation
measures for marine mammals or their
habitat (or both). The proposed survey
would occur in an area that has been
identified as a biologically important
area for migration for North Atlantic
right whales. However, given the small
spatial extent of the survey area relative
to the substantially larger spatial extent
of the right whale migratory area and
the relatively low amount of noise
generated by the survey, the survey is
not expected to appreciably reduce the
quality of migratory habitat nor to
negatively impact the migration of
North Atlantic right whales, thus
mitigation to address the proposed
survey’s occurrence in North Atlantic
right whale migratory habitat is not
warranted.
Vessel Strike Avoidance
Vessel operators must comply with
the below measures except under
extraordinary circumstances when the
safety of the vessel or crew is in doubt
or the safety of life at sea is in question.
These requirements do not apply in any
case where compliance would create an
imminent and serious threat to a person
or vessel or to the extent that a vessel
is restricted in its ability to maneuver
and, because of the restriction, cannot
comply.
Survey vessel crewmembers
responsible for navigation duties will
receive site-specific training on marine
mammals sighting/reporting and vessel
strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike
avoidance measures would include the
following, except under circumstances
when complying with these
requirements would put the safety of the
vessel or crew at risk:
• Atlantic Shores will ensure that
vessel operators and crew maintain a
vigilant watch for cetaceans and
pinnipeds and slow down, stop their
vessels, or alter course, as appropriate
and regardless of vessel size, to avoid
striking any marine mammal. A single
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:59 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
marine mammal at the surface may
indicate the presence of additional
submerged animals in the vicinity of the
vessel; therefore, precautionary
measures should always be exercised. A
visual observer aboard the vessel must
monitor a vessel strike avoidance zone
around the vessel (species-specific
distances detailed below). Visual
observers monitoring the vessel strike
avoidance zone may be third-party
observers (i.e., PSOs) or crew members,
but crew members responsible for these
duties must be provided sufficient
training to (1) distinguish marine
mammal from other phenomena, and (2)
broadly to identify a marine mammal as
a right whale, other whale (defined in
this context as sperm whales or baleen
whales other than right whales), or other
marine mammals. All vessels, regardless
of size, must observe a 10-knot speed
restriction in specific areas designated
by NMFS for the protection of North
Atlantic right whales from vessel
strikes, including seasonal management
areas (SMAs) and dynamic management
areas (DMAs) when in effect. See
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
endangered-species-conservation/
reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlanticright-whales for specific detail regarding
these areas.
• All vessels must reduce their speed
to 10-knots or less when mother/calf
pairs, pods, or large assemblages of
cetaceans are observed near a vessel;
• All vessels must maintain a
minimum separation distance of 500-m
(1,640-ft) from right whales and other
ESA-listed species. If an ESA-listed
species is sighted within the relevant
separation distance, the vessel must
steer a course away at 10-knots or less
until the 500-m separation distance has
been established. If a whale is observed
but cannot be confirmed as a species
that is not ESA-listed, the vessel
operator must assume that it is an ESAlisted species and take appropriate
action.
• All vessels must maintain a
minimum separation distance of 100-m
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(328-ft) from non-ESA-listed baleen
whales.
• All vessels must, to the maximum
extent practicable, attempt to maintain a
minimum separation distance of 50-m
(164-ft) from all other marine mammals,
with an understanding that, at times,
this may not be possible (e.g., for
animals that approach the vessel, bowriding species).
• When marine mammal are sighted
while a vessel is underway, the vessel
shall take action as necessary to avoid
violating the relevant separation
distance (e.g., attempt to remain parallel
to the animal’s course, avoid excessive
speed or abrupt changes in direction
until the animal has left the area, reduce
speed and shift the engine to neutral).
This does not apply to any vessel
towing gear or any vessel that is
navigationally constrained.
Members of the monitoring team will
consult NMFS North Atlantic right
whale reporting system and Whale
Alert, daily and as able, for the presence
of North Atlantic right whales
throughout survey operations, and for
the establishment of a DMA. If NMFS
should establish a DMA in the survey
area during the survey, the vessels will
abide by speed restrictions in the DMA.
Training
All PSOs must have completed a PSO
training program and received NMFS
approval to act as a PSO for geophysical
surveys. Documentation of NMFS
approval and most recent training
certificates of individual PSOs’
successful completion of a commercial
PSO training course must be provided
upon request. Further information can
be found at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/endangered-speciesconservation/protected-speciesobservers. In the event where third-party
PSOs are not required, crew members
serving as lookouts must receive
training on protected species
identification, vessel strike
minimization procedures, how and
when to communicate with the vessel
captain, and reporting requirements.
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4220
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
Atlantic Shores shall instruct relevant
vessel personnel with regard to the
authority of the marine mammal
monitoring team, and shall ensure that
relevant vessel personnel and the
marine mammal monitoring team
participate in a joint onboard briefing
(hereafter PSO briefing), led by the
vessel operator and lead PSO, prior to
beginning survey activities to ensure
that responsibilities, communication
procedures, marine mammal monitoring
protocols, safety and operational
procedures, and IHA requirements are
clearly understood. This PSO briefing
must be repeated when relevant new
personnel (e.g., PSOs, acoustic source
operator) join the survey operations
before their responsibilities and work
commences.
Project-specific training will be
conducted for all vessel crew prior to
the start of a survey and during any
changes in crew such that all survey
personnel are fully aware and
understand the mitigation, monitoring,
and reporting requirements. All vessel
crew members must be briefed in the
identification of protected species that
may occur in the survey area and in
regulations and best practices for
avoiding vessel collisions. Reference
materials must be available aboard all
project vessels for identification of
listed species. The expectation and
process for reporting of protected
species sighted during surveys must be
clearly communicated and posted in
highly visible locations aboard all
project vessels, so that there is an
expectation for reporting to the
designated vessel contact (such as the
lookout or the vessel captain), as well as
a communication channel and process
for crew members to do so. Prior to
implementation with vessel crews, the
training program will be provided to
NMFS for review and approval.
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 member understands and
will comply with the necessary
requirements throughout the survey
activities.
Based on our evaluation of Atlantic
Shores’ proposed measures, as well as
other measures considered by NMFS,
NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the proposed mitigation measures
provide the means effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected
species or stocks and their habitat,
paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
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 authorizations must include
the suggested means of accomplishing
the necessary monitoring and reporting
that will result in increased knowledge
of the species and of the level of taking
or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be
present in the proposed action area.
Effective reporting is critical to both
compliance as well as ensuring that the
most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the area in which
take is anticipated (e.g., presence,
abundance, distribution, density).
• Nature, scope, or context of likely
marine mammal exposure to potential
stressors/impacts (individual or
cumulative, acute or chronic), through
better understanding of: (1) Action or
environment (e.g., source
characterization, propagation, ambient
noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life
history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the
action; or (4) biological or behavioral
context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or
feeding areas).
• Individual marine mammal
responses (behavioral or physiological)
to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
cumulative), other stressors, or
cumulative impacts from multiple
stressors.
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of individual
marine mammals; or (2) populations,
species, or stocks.
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
physical components of marine
mammal habitat).
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
Atlantic Shores must use
independent, dedicated, trained PSOs,
meaning that the PSOs must be
employed by a third-party observer
provider, must have no tasks other than
to conduct observational effort, collect
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
data, and communicate with and
instruct relevant vessel crew with regard
to the presence of marine mammal and
mitigation requirements (including brief
alerts regarding maritime hazards), and
must have successfully completed an
approved PSO training course for
geophysical surveys. Visual monitoring
must be performed by qualified, NMFSapproved PSOs. PSO resumes must be
provided to NMFS for review and
approval prior to the start of survey
activities.
PSO names must be provided to
NMFS by the operator for review and
confirmation of their approval for
specific roles prior to commencement of
the survey. For prospective PSOs not
previously approved, or for PSOs whose
approval is not current, NMFS must
review and approve PSO qualifications.
Resumes should include information
related to relevant education,
experience, and training, including
dates, duration, location, and
description of prior PSO experience.
Resumes must be accompanied by
relevant documentation of successful
completion of necessary training.
NMFS may approve PSOs as
conditional or unconditional. A
conditionally-approved PSO may be one
who is trained but has not yet attained
the requisite experience. An
unconditionally-approved PSO is one
who has attained the necessary
experience. For unconditional approval,
the PSO must have a minimum of 90
days at sea performing the role during
a geophysical survey, with the
conclusion of the most recent relevant
experience not more than 18 months
previous.
At least one of the visual PSOs aboard
the vessel must be unconditionallyapproved. One unconditionallyapproved visual PSO shall be
designated as the lead for the entire PSO
team. This lead should typically be the
PSO with the most experience, would
coordinate duty schedules and roles for
the PSO team, and serve as primary
point of contact for the vessel operator.
To the maximum extent practicable, the
duty schedule shall be planned such
that unconditionally-approved PSOs are
on duty with conditionally-approved
PSOs.
PSOs must have successfully attained
a bachelor’s degree from an accredited
college or university with a major in one
of the natural sciences, a minimum of
30 semester hours or equivalent in the
biological sciences, and at least one
undergraduate course in math or
statistics. The educational requirements
may be waived if the PSO has acquired
the relevant skills through alternate
experience. Requests for such a waiver
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
shall be submitted to NMFS and must
include written justification. Alternate
experience that may be considered
includes, but is not limited to (1)
secondary education and/or experience
comparable to PSO duties; (2) previous
work experience conducting academic,
commercial, or government-sponsored
marine mammal surveys; and (3)
previous work experience as a PSO
(PSO must be in good standing and
demonstrate good performance of PSO
duties).
PSOs must successfully complete
relevant training, including completion
of all required coursework and passing
(80 percent or greater) a written and/or
oral examination developed for the
training program.
PSOs must coordinate to ensure 360°
visual coverage around the vessel from
the most appropriate observation posts
and shall conduct visual observations
using binoculars or night-vision
equipment and the naked eye while free
from distractions and in a consistent,
systematic, and diligent manner.
PSOs may be on watch for a
maximum of four consecutive hours
followed by a break of at least two hours
between watches and may conduct a
maximum of 12 hours of observation per
24-hour period.
Any observations of marine mammal
by crew members aboard any vessel
associated with the survey shall be
relayed to the PSO team.
Atlantic Shores must work with the
selected third-party PSO provider to
ensure PSOs have all equipment
(including backup equipment) needed
to adequately perform necessary tasks,
including accurate determination of
distance and bearing to observed marine
mammals, and to ensure that PSOs are
capable of calibrating equipment as
necessary for accurate distance
estimates and species identification.
Such equipment, at a minimum, shall
include:
• At least one thermal (infrared)
imagine device suited for the marine
environment;
• Reticle binoculars (e.g., 7 × 50) of
appropriate quality (at least one per
PSO, plus backups);
• Global Positioning Units (GPS) (at
least one plus backups);
• Digital cameras with a telephoto
lens that is at least 300-mm or
equivalent on a full-frame single lens
reflex (SLR) (at least one plus backups).
The camera or lens should also have an
image stabilization system;
• Equipment necessary for accurate
measurement of distances to marine
mammal;
• Compasses (at least one plus
backups);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
• Means of communication among
vessel crew and PSOs; and
• Any other tools deemed necessary
to adequately and effectively perform
PSO tasks.
The equipment specified above may
be provided by an individual PSO, the
third-part PSO provider, or the operator,
but Atlantic Shores is responsible for
ensuring PSOs have the proper
equipment required to perform the
duties specified in the IHA.
During good conditions (e.g., daylight
hours; Beaufort sea state 3 or less), PSOs
shall conduct observations when the
specified acoustic sources are not
operating for comparison of sighting
rates and behavior with and without use
of the specified acoustic sources and
between acquisition periods, to the
maximum extent practicable.
The PSOs will be responsible for
monitoring the waters surrounding each
survey vessel to the farthest extent
permitted by sighting conditions,
including Exclusion Zones, during all
HRG survey operations. PSOs will
visually monitor and identify marine
mammals, including those approaching
or entering the established Exclusion
Zones during survey activities. It will be
the responsibility of the PSO(s) on duty
to communicate the presence of marine
mammals as well as to communicate the
action(s) that are necessary to ensure
mitigation and monitoring requirements
are implemented as appropriate.
Atlantic Shores plans to utilize six
PSOs across each vessel to account for
shift changes, with a total of 18 during
this project (six PSOs per vessel x three
vessels). At a minimum, during all HRG
survey operations (e.g., any day on
which use of an HRG source is planned
to occur), one PSO must be on duty
during daylight operations on each
survey vessel, conducting visual
observations at all times on all active
survey vessels during daylight hours
(i.e., from 30 minutes prior to sunrise
through 30 minutes following sunset)
and two PSOs will be on watch during
nighttime operations. The PSO(s) would
ensure 360° visual coverage around the
vessel from the most appropriate
observation posts and would conduct
visual observations using binoculars
and/or night vision goggles and the
naked eye while free from distractions
and in a consistent, systematic, and
diligent manner. PSOs may be on watch
for a maximum of four consecutive
hours followed by a break of at least two
hours between watches and may
conduct a maximum of 12 hours of
observation per 24-hr period. In cases
where multiple vessels are surveying
concurrently, any observations of
marine mammals would be
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4221
communicated to PSOs on all nearby
survey vessels.
PSOs must be equipped with
binoculars and have the ability to
estimate distance and bearing to detect
marine mammals, particularly in
proximity to Exclusion Zones.
Reticulated binoculars must also be
available to PSOs for use as appropriate
based on conditions and visibility to
support the sighting and monitoring of
marine mammals. During nighttime
operations, night-vision goggles with
thermal clip-ons and infrared
technology would be used. Position data
would be recorded using hand-held or
vessel GPS units for each sighting.
During good conditions (e.g., daylight
hours; Beaufort sea state (BSS) 3 or less),
to the maximum extent practicable,
PSOs would also conduct observations
when the acoustic source is not
operating for comparison of sighting
rates and behavior with and without use
of the active acoustic sources. Any
observations of marine mammals by
crew members aboard any vessel
associated with the survey would be
relayed to the PSO team. Data on all
PSO observations would be recorded
based on standard PSO collection
requirements (see Proposed Reporting
Measures). This would include dates,
times, and locations of survey
operations; dates and times of
observations, location and weather;
details of marine mammal sightings
(e.g., species, numbers, behavior); and
details of any observed marine mammal
behavior that occurs (e.g., noted
behavioral disturbances).
Proposed Reporting Measures
Atlantic Shores shall submit a draft
comprehensive report on all activities
and monitoring results within 90 days
of the completion of the survey or
expiration of the IHA, whichever comes
sooner. The report must describe all
activities conducted and sightings of
marine mammals, must provide full
documentation of methods, results, and
interpretation pertaining to all
monitoring, and must summarize the
dates and locations of survey operations
and all marine mammals sightings
(dates, times, locations, activities,
associated survey activities). The draft
report shall also include geo-referenced,
time-stamped vessel tracklines for all
time periods during which acoustic
sources were operating. Tracklines
should include points recording any
change in acoustic source status (e.g.,
when the sources began operating, when
they were turned off, or when they
changed operational status such as from
full array to single gun or vice versa).
GIS files shall be provided in ESRI
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4222
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
shapefile format and include the UTC
date and time, latitude in decimal
degrees, and longitude in decimal
degrees. All coordinates shall be
referenced to the WGS84 geographic
coordinate system. In addition to the
report, all raw observational data shall
be made available. The report must
summarize the information submitted in
interim monthly reports (if required) as
well as additional data collected. A final
report must be submitted within 30 days
following resolution of any comments
on the draft report. All draft and final
marine mammal and acoustic
monitoring reports must be submitted to
PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov
and ITP.Potlock@noaa.gov.
PSOs must use standardized
electronic data forms to record data.
PSOs shall record detailed information
about any implementation of mitigation
requirements, including the distance of
marine mammal to the acoustic source
and description of specific actions that
ensued, the behavior of the animal(s),
any observed changes in behavior before
and after implementation of mitigation,
and if shutdown was implemented, the
length of time before any subsequent
ramp-up of the acoustic source. If
required mitigation was not
implemented, PSOs should record a
description of the circumstances. At a
minimum, the following information
must be recorded:
1. Vessel names (source vessel and
other vessels associated with survey),
vessel size and type, maximum speed
capability of vessel;
2. Dates of departures and returns to
port with port name;
3. The lease number;
4. PSO names and affiliations;
5. Date and participants of PSO
briefings;
6. Visual monitoring equipment used;
7. PSO location on vessel and height
of observation location above water
surface;
8. Dates and times (Greenwich Mean
Time) of survey on/off effort and times
corresponding with PSO on/off effort;
9. Vessel location (decimal degrees)
when survey effort begins and ends and
vessel location at beginning and end of
visual PSO duty shifts;
10. Vessel location at 30-second
intervals if obtainable from data
collection software, otherwise at
practical regular interval
11. Vessel heading and speed at
beginning and end of visual PSO duty
shifts and upon any change;
12. Water depth (if obtainable from
data collection software);
13. Environmental conditions while
on visual survey (at beginning and end
of PSO shift and whenever conditions
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
change significantly), including BSS
and any other relevant weather
conditions including cloud cover, fog,
sun glare, and overall visibility to the
horizon;
14. Factors that may contribute to
impaired observations during each PSO
shift change or as needed as
environmental conditions change (e.g.,
vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions);
and
15. Survey activity information (and
changes thereof), such as acoustic
source power output while in operation,
number and volume of airguns
operating in an array, tow depth of an
acoustic source, and any other notes of
significance (i.e., pre-start clearance,
ramp-up, shutdown, testing, shooting,
ramp-up completion, end of operations,
streamers, etc.).
Upon visual observation of any
marine mammal, the following
information must be recorded:
1. Watch status (sighting made by
PSO on/off effort, opportunistic, crew,
alternate vessel/platform);
2. Vessel/survey activity at time of
sighting (e.g., deploying, recovering,
testing, shooting, data acquisition,
other);
3. PSO who sighted the animal;
4. Time of sighting;
5. Initial detection method;
6. Sightings cue;
7. Vessel location at time of sighting
(decimal degrees);
8. Direction of vessel’s travel
(compass direction);
9. Speed of the vessel(s) from which
the observation was made;
10. Identification of the animal (e.g.,
genus/species, lowest possible
taxonomic level or unidentified); also
note the composition of the group if
there is a mix of species;
11. Species reliability (an indicator of
confidence in identification);
12. Estimated distance to the animal
and method of estimating distance;
13. Estimated number of animals
(high/low/best);
14. Estimated number of animals by
cohort (adults, yearlings, juveniles,
calves, group composition, etc.);
15. Description (as many
distinguishing features as possible of
each individual seen, including length,
shape, color, pattern, scars, or markings,
shape and size of dorsal fin, shape of
head, and blow characteristics);
16. Detailed behavior observations
(e.g., number of blows/breaths, number
of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping,
diving, feeding, traveling; as explicit
and detailed as possible; note any
observed changes in behavior before and
after point of closest approach);
17. Mitigation actions; description of
any actions implemented in response to
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the sighting (e.g., delays, shutdowns,
ramp-up, speed or course alteration,
etc.) and time and location of the action;
18. Equipment operating during
sighting;
19. Animal’s closest point of approach
and/or closest distance from the center
point of the acoustic source; and
20. Description of any actions
implemented in response to the sighting
(e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up) and
time and location of the action.
If a North Atlantic right whale is
observed at any time by PSOs or
personnel on any project vessels, during
surveys or during vessel transit, Atlantic
Shores must report the sighting
information to the NMFS North Atlantic
Right Whale Sighting Advisory System
(866–755–6622) within two hours of
occurrence, when practicable, or no
later than 24 hours after occurrence.
North Atlantic right whale sightings in
any location may also be reported to the
U.S. Coast Guard via channel 16 and
through the WhaleAlert app (https://
www.whalealert.org).
In the event that Atlantic Shores
personnel discover an injured or dead
marine mammal, regardless of the cause
of injury or death. In the event that
personnel involved in the survey
activities discover an injured or dead
marine mammal, Atlantic Shores must
report the incident to NMFS as soon as
feasible by phone (866–755–6622) and
by email (nmfs.gar.stranding@noaa.gov
and PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@
noaa.gov) as soon as feasible. The report
must include the following information:
1. Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the first discovery (and
updated location information if known
and applicable);
2. Species identification (if known) or
description of the animal(s) involved;
3. Condition of the animal(s)
(including carcass condition if the
animal is dead);
4. Observed behaviors of the
animal(s), if alive;
5. If available, photographs or video
footage of the animal(s); and
6. General circumstances under which
the animal was discovered.
In the unanticipated event of a ship
strike of a marine mammal by any vessel
involved in the activities covered by the
IHA, Atlantic Shores must report the
incident to NMFS by phone (866–755–
6622) and by email
(nmfs.gar.stranding@noaa.gov and
PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov) as
soon as feasible. The report would
include the following information:
1. Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
2. Species identification (if known) or
description of the animal(s) involved;
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
3. Vessel’s speed during and leading
up to the incident;
4. Vessel’s course/heading and what
operations were being conducted (if
applicable);
5. Status of all sound sources in use;
6. Description of avoidance measures/
requirements that were in place at the
time of the strike and what additional
measures were taken, if any, to avoid
strike;
7. Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, visibility)
immediately preceding the strike;
8. Estimated size and length of animal
that was struck;
9. Description of the behavior of the
marine mammal immediately preceding
and/or following the strike;
10. If available, description of the
presence and behavior of any other
marine mammals immediately
preceding the strike;
11. Estimated fate of the animal (e.g.,
dead, injured but alive, injured and
moving, blood or tissue observed in the
water, status unknown, disappeared);
and
12. To the extent practicable,
photographs or video footage of the
animal(s).
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact
as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival
(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact
finding is based on the lack of likely
adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of takes alone is not enough information
on which to base an impact
determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of
marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’
through harassment, NMFS considers
other factors, such as the likely nature
of any responses (e.g., intensity,
duration), the context of any responses
(e.g., critical reproductive time or
location, migration), as well as effects
on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the
number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this
information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS’s implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29,
1989), the impacts from other past and
ongoing anthropogenic activities are
incorporated into this analysis via their
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
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).
To avoid repetition, our analysis
applies to all the species listed in Table
4, given that NMFS expects the
anticipated effects of the proposed
survey to be similar in nature. Where
there are meaningful differences
between species or stocks—as is the
case of the North Atlantic right whale—
they are included as separate
subsections below. NMFS does not
anticipate that serious injury or
mortality would occur as a result from
HRG surveys, even in the absence of
mitigation, and no serious injury or
mortality is proposed to be authorized.
As discussed in the Potential Effects
section, non-auditory physical effects
and vessel strike are not expected to
occur. NMFS expects that all potential
takes would be in the form of short-term
Level B behavioral harassment in the
form of temporary avoidance of the area
or decreased foraging (if such activity
was occurring), reactions that are
considered to be of low severity and
with no lasting biological consequences
(e.g., Southall et al., 2007). Even
repeated Level B harassment of some
small subset of an overall stock is
unlikely to result in any significant
realized decrease in viability for the
affected individuals, and thus would
not result in any adverse impact to the
stock as a whole. As described above,
Level A harassment is not expected to
occur given the nature of the operations,
the estimated size of the Level A
harassment zones, and the required
shutdown zones for certain activities.
In addition to being temporary, the
maximum expected harassment zone
around a survey vessel is 141 m.
Although this distance is assumed for
all survey activity in estimating take
numbers proposed for authorization and
evaluated here, in reality, the Applied
Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 would likely
not be used across the entire 24-hour
period and across all 360 days. As noted
in Table 7, the other acoustic sources
Atlantic Shores has included in their
application produce Level B harassment
zones below 60-m. Therefore, the
ensonified area surrounding each vessel
is relatively small compared to the
overall distribution of the animals in the
area and their use of the habitat.
Feeding behavior is not likely to be
significantly impacted as prey species
are mobile and are broadly distributed
throughout the survey area; therefore,
marine mammals that may be
temporarily displaced during survey
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4223
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 and
the availability of similar habitat and
resources in the surrounding area, the
impacts to marine mammals and the
food sources that they utilize are not
expected to cause significant or longterm consequences for individual
marine mammals or their populations.
There are no rookeries, mating or
calving grounds known to be
biologically important to marine
mammals within the proposed survey
area and there are no feeding areas
known to be biologically important to
marine mammals within the proposed
survey area. There is no designated
critical habitat for any ESA-listed
marine mammals in the proposed
survey area.
North Atlantic Right Whales
The status of the North Atlantic right
whale population is of heightened
concern and, therefore, merits
additional analysis. As noted
previously, elevated North Atlantic right
whale mortalities began in June 2017
and there is an active UME. Overall,
preliminary findings support human
interactions, specifically vessel strikes
and entanglements, as the cause of
death for the majority of right whales.
As noted previously, the proposed
survey area overlaps a migratory
corridor BIA for North Atlantic right
whales. Due to the fact that the
proposed survey activities are
temporary and the spatial extent of
sound produced by the survey would be
very small relative to the spatial extent
of the available migratory habitat in the
BIA, right whale migration is not
expected to be impacted by the
proposed survey. Given the relatively
small size of the ensonified area, it is
unlikely that prey availability would be
adversely affected by HRG survey
operations. Required vessel strike
avoidance measures will also decrease
risk of ship strike during migration; no
ship strike is expected to occur during
Atlantic Shores’ proposed activities.
The 500-m shutdown zone for right
whales is conservative, considering the
Level B harassment isopleth for the
most impactful acoustic source (i.e.,
sparker) is estimated to be 141-m, and
thereby minimizes the potential for
behavioral harassment of this species.
As noted previously, Level A
harassment is not expected due to the
small PTS zones associated with HRG
equipment types proposed for use. The
proposed authorizations for Level B
harassment takes of North Atlantic right
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
4224
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
whale are not expected to exacerbate or
compound upon the ongoing UME. The
limited North Atlantic right whale Level
B harassment takes proposed for
authorization are expected to be of a
short duration, and given the number of
estimated takes, repeated exposures of
the same individual are not expected.
Further, given the relatively small size
of the ensonified area during Atlantic
Shores’ proposed activities, it is
unlikely that North Atlantic right whale
prey availability would be adversely
affected. Accordingly, NMFS does not
anticipate North Atlantic right whales
takes that would result from Atlantic
Shores’ proposed activities would
impact annual rates of recruitment or
survival. Thus, any takes that occur
would not result in population level
impacts.
Other Marine Mammal Species With
Active UMEs
As noted previously, there are several
active UMEs occurring in the vicinity of
Atlantic Shores’ proposed survey area.
Elevated humpback whale mortalities
have occurred along the Atlantic coast
from Maine through Florida since
January 2016. Of the cases examined,
approximately half had evidence of
human interaction (ship strike or
entanglement). The UME does not yet
provide cause for concern regarding
population-level impacts. Despite the
UME, the relevant population of
humpback whales (the West Indies
breeding population, or DPS) remains
stable at approximately 12,000
individuals.
Beginning in January 2017, elevated
minke whale strandings have occurred
along the Atlantic coast from Maine
through South Carolina, with highest
numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and
New York. This event does not provide
cause for concern regarding population
level impacts, as the likely population
abundance is greater than 20,000
whales.
Elevated numbers of harbor seal and
gray seal mortalities were first observed
in July 2018 and have occurred across
Maine, New Hampshire, and
Massachusetts. Based on tests
conducted so far, the main pathogen
found in the seals is phocine distemper
virus, although additional testing to
identify other factors that may be
involved in this UME are underway.
The UME does not yet provide cause for
concern regarding population-level
impacts to any of these stocks. For
harbor seals, the population abundance
is over 75,000 and annual M/SI (350) is
well below PBR (2,006) (Hayes et al.,
2020). The population abundance for
gray seals in the United States is over
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
27,000, with an estimated abundance,
including seals in Canada, of
approximately 450,000. In addition, the
abundance of gray seals is likely
increasing in the U.S. Atlantic as well
as in Canada (Hayes et al., 2020).
The required mitigation measures are
expected to reduce the number and/or
severity of proposed takes for all species
listed in Table 4, including those with
active UMEs, to the level of least
practicable adverse impact. In
particular, they would provide animals
the opportunity to move away from the
sound source throughout the survey
area before HRG survey equipment
reaches full energy, thus preventing
them from being exposed to sound
levels that have the potential to cause
injury (Level A harassment) or more
severe Level B harassment. As discussed
previously, take by Level A harassment
(injury) is considered unlikely, even
absent mitigation, based on the
characteristics of the signals produced
by the acoustic sources planned for use,
and is not proposed for authorization.
Implementation of required mitigation
would further reduce this potential.
Therefore, NMFS is not proposing any
Level A harassment for authorization.
NMFS expects that takes would be in
the form of short-term Level B
behavioral harassment by way of brief
startling reactions and/or temporary
vacating of the area, or decreased
foraging (if such activity was
occurring)—reactions that (at the scale
and intensity anticipated here) are
considered to be of low severity, with
no lasting biological consequences.
Since both the sources and marine
mammals are mobile, animals would
only be exposed briefly to a small
ensonified area that might result in take.
Additionally, required mitigation
measures would further reduce
exposure to sound that could result in
more severe behavioral harassment.
Biologically Important Areas for Other
Species
As previously discussed, impacts
from the proposed project are expected
to be localized to the specific area of
activity and only during periods of time
where Atlantic Shores’ acoustic sources
are active. While areas of biological
importance to fin whales, humpback
whales, and harbor seals can be found
off the coast of New Jersey and New
York, NMFS does not expect this
proposed action to affect these areas.
This is due to the combination of the
mitigation and monitoring measures
being required of Atlantic Shores as
well as the location of these biologically
important areas. All of these important
areas are found outside of the range of
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
this survey area, as is the case with fin
whales and humpback whales (BIAs
found further north), and, therefore, not
expected to be impacted by Atlantic
Shores’ proposed survey activities.
Three major haul-out sites exist for
harbor seals within ECR North along
New Jersey, including at Great Bay,
Sand Hook, and Barnegat Inlet (CWFNJ,
2015). As hauled out seals would be out
of the water, no in-water effects are
expected.
Preliminary Determinations
In summary and as described above,
the following factors primarily support
our preliminary determination that the
impacts resulting from this activity are
not expected to adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival:
• No mortality or serious injury is
anticipated or proposed to be
authorized;
• No Level A harassment (PTS) is
anticipated, even in the absence of
mitigation measures, or proposed for
authorization;
• Foraging success is not likely to be
impacted as effects on species that serve
as prey species for marine mammals
from the survey are expected to be
minimal;
• The availability of alternate areas of
similar habitat value for marine
mammals to temporarily vacate the
survey area during the planned survey
to avoid exposure to sounds from the
activity;
• Take is anticipated to be by Level
B behavioral harassment only consisting
of brief startling reactions and/or
temporary avoidance of the survey area;
• While the survey area is within
areas noted as a migratory BIA for North
Atlantic right whales, the activities
would occur in such a comparatively
small area such that any avoidance of
the survey area due to activities would
not affect migration; and
• The proposed mitigation measures,
including effective visual monitoring,
and shutdowns are expected to
minimize potential impacts to marine
mammals.
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.
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized
under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of
the MMPA for specified activities other
than military readiness activities. The
MMPA does not define small numbers
and so, in practice, where estimated
numbers are available, NMFS compares
the number of individuals taken to the
most appropriate estimation of
abundance of the relevant species or
stock in our determination of whether
an authorization is limited to small
numbers of marine mammals. When the
predicted number of individuals to be
taken is less than one third of the
species or stock abundance, the take is
considered to be of small numbers.
Additionally, other qualitative factors
may be considered in the analysis, such
as the temporal or spatial scale of the
activities.
NMFS proposes to authorize
incidental take (by Level B harassment
only) of 15 marine mammal species
(with 16 managed stocks). The total
amount of takes proposed for
authorization relative to the best
available population abundance is less
than 6 percent for all stocks (Table 9).
Therefore, NMFS preliminarily finds
that small numbers of marine mammals
may be taken relative to the estimated
overall population abundances for those
stocks.
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.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal
agency insure that any action it
authorizes, funds, or carries out is not
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any endangered or
threatened species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Jan 26, 2022
Jkt 256001
designated critical habitat. To ensure
ESA compliance for the issuance of
IHAs, NMFS Office of Protected
Resources (OPR) consults internally
whenever we propose to authorize take
for endangered or threatened species.
NMFS OPR is proposing to authorize
the incidental take of four species of
marine mammals which are listed under
the ESA, including the North Atlantic
right, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has
determined that this activity falls within
the scope of activities analyzed in
NMFS GARFO’s programmatic
consultation regarding geophysical
surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast in
the three Atlantic Renewable Energy
Regions (completed June 29, 2021;
revised September 2021). NMFS GARFO
concurred with this determination.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary
determinations, NMFS proposes to issue
an IHA to Atlantic Shores authorizing
take, by Level B harassment incidental
to conducting marine site
characterization surveys off of New
Jersey and New York from April 20,
2022 through April 19, 2023, provided
the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements
are incorporated. A draft of the
proposed IHA can be found at https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-other-energyactivities-renewable.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses,
the proposed authorization, and any
other aspect of this notice of proposed
IHA for the proposed site
characterization surveys. We also
request at this time comment on the
potential Renewal of this proposed IHA
as described in the paragraph below.
Please include with your comments any
supporting data or literature citations to
help inform decisions on the request for
this proposed IHA or a subsequent
Renewal IHA.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may
issue a one-time, one-year Renewal IHA
following notification to the public
providing an additional 15 days for
public comments when (1) up to
another year of identical or nearly
identical, or nearly identical, activities
as described in the Description of
Proposed Activities section of this
notification is planned or (2) the
activities as described in the Description
of Proposed Activities section of this
notification would not be completed by
the time the IHA expires and a Renewal
would allow for completion of the
activities beyond that described in the
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4225
Dates and Duration section of this
notification, provided all of the
following conditions are met:
• A request for Renewal is received
no later than 60 days prior to the needed
Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing
that the Renewal IHA expiration date
cannot extend beyond one year from
expiration of the initial IHA);
• The request for Renewal must
include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities
to be conducted under the requested
Renewal IHA are identical to the
activities analyzed under the initial
IHA, are a subset of the activities, or
include changes so minor (e.g.,
reduction in pile size) that the changes
do not affect the previous analyses,
mitigation and monitoring
requirements, or take estimates (with
the exception of reducing the type or
amount of take); and
(2) A preliminary monitoring report
showing the results of the required
monitoring to date and an explanation
showing that the monitoring results do
not indicate impacts of a scale or nature
not previously analyzed or authorized.
Upon review of the request for
Renewal, the status of the affected
species or stocks, and any other
pertinent information, NMFS
determines that there are no more than
minor changes in the activities, the
mitigation and monitoring measures
will remain the same and appropriate,
and the findings in the initial IHA
remain valid.
Dated: January 21, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2022–01557 Filed 1–26–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XB749]
North Pacific Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of web conference.
AGENCY:
The North Pacific Fishery
Management Council’s (Council)
Scallop Plan Team will meet February
16, 2022.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
Wednesday, February 16, 2022, from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., Alaska Time.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM
27JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4200-4225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01557]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XB392]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Marine Site Characterization
Surveys off New Jersey and New York for Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind,
LLC
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments on proposed authorization and possible renewal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Atlantic Shores Offshore
Wind, LLC (Atlantic Shores) for authorization to take marine mammals
incidental to marine site characterization surveys off New Jersey and
New York in the area of Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for
Renewable Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area
OCS-A 0499. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS
is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to incidentally take marine mammals
during the specified activities. NMFS is also requesting comments on a
possible one-time, one-year Renewal that could be issued under certain
circumstances and if all requirements are met, as described in Request
for Public Comments at the end of this notification. NMFS will consider
public comments prior to making any final decision on the issuance of
the requested MMPA authorizations and agency responses will be
summarized in the final notification of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than February
28, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service. Written comments should be submitted
via email to [email protected].
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, including all attachments, must
not exceed a 25 megabyte file size. All comments received are a part of
the public record and will generally be posted online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable 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: Kelsey Potlock, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable. In case of
problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed
above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) 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 incidental take authorization may be provided to the public
for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses
[[Page 4201]]
(referred to in shorthand as ``mitigation''); and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of the takings
are set forth.
The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above
are included in the relevant sections below.
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 (i.e., the issuance of an IHA)
with respect to potential impacts on the human environment. This action
is consistent with categories of activities identified in Categorical
Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of
the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not
individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts
on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not
identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this
categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies to be categorically
excluded from further NEPA review.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this
notification prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final
decision on the IHA request.
Summary of Request
On August 16, 2021, NMFS received a request from Atlantic Shores
for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to marine site
characterization surveys occurring in three locations (Lease Area and
Export Cable Routes (ECR) North and South) off of New Jersey and New
York in the area of Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable
Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area (OCS)-A
0499. NMFS deemed the application adequate and complete on December 13,
2021. Atlantic Shores' request is for take of a small number of 15
species of marine mammals (comprised of 16 stocks) by Level B
harassment only. Neither Atlantic Shores nor NMFS expects serious
injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA
is appropriate.
NMFS previously issued two IHAs to Atlantic Shores for similar work
(85 FR 21198, April 16, 2020; 86 FR 21289, April 22, 2021 (Renewal)).
As required, Atlantic Shores provided a monitoring report for the work
performed under the 2020 IHA (85 FR 21198, April 16, 2020; available at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-atlantic-shores-offshore-wind-llc-marine-site-characterization).
At the time of developing this proposed IHA for Atlantic Shores'
2022 project, the 2021 (Renewal) monitoring report was not available as
the renewed project is ongoing until its expiration date on April 19,
2022 (86 FR 21289; April 22, 2021). However, the 2020 monitoring report
confirmed that Atlantic Shores had previously implemented the required
mitigation and monitoring, and demonstrated that no impacts of a scale
or nature not previously analyzed or authorized had occurred as a
result of the activities conducted under the 2020 IHA.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
As part of its overall marine site characterization survey
operations, Atlantic Shores proposes to conduct high-resolution
geophysical (HRG) surveys in the Lease Area (OCS)-A 0499 and along
potential submarine cable routes (ECRs North and South) to a landfall
location in either New York or New Jersey.
The purpose of the proposed surveys are to support the site
characterization, siting, and engineering design of offshore wind
project facilities including wind turbine generators, offshore
substations, and submarine cables within the Lease Area and along
export cable routes (ECRs). As many as three survey vessels may operate
concurrently as part of the proposed surveys. Underwater sound
resulting from Atlantic Shores' proposed site characterization survey
activities, specifically HRG surveys, has the potential to result in
incidental take of marine mammals in the form of behavioral harassment.
Dates and Duration
The estimated duration of the surveys is expected to be up to 360
total survey days over the course of a single year within the three
survey areas (Table 1). As multiple vessels (i.e., three survey
vessels) may be operating concurrently across the Lease Area and two
ECRs, each day that a survey vessel is operating counts as a single
survey day. For example, if three vessels are operating in the two ECRs
and Lease Area concurrently, this counts as three survey days. This
schedule is based on 24-hours of operations throughout 12 months. The
schedule presented here for this proposed project has accounted for
potential down time due to inclement weather or other project-related
delays. Proposed activities would occur from April 20, 2022 through
April 19, 2023 as to not overlap the Renewal IHA that expires after
April 19, 2022.
Table 1--Number of Survey Days That Atlantic Shores Plans To Perform the
Described HRG Survey Activities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
active survey
Survey area days expected
\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease Area.............................................. 120
ECR North............................................... 180
ECR South............................................... 60
---------------
Total............................................... 360
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Surveys in each area may temporally overlap; therefore, actual
number of days of activity in a given year would be less than 360.
Specific Geographic Region
Atlantic Shores' proposed activities would occur in the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean within Federal and state waters (Figure 1). Surveys
would occur in the Lease Area and along potential submarine cable
routes to landfall in either New York or New Jersey. Proposed
activities would occur within the Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands
for Renewable Energy Development in OCS-A 0499. The survey area is
approximately 1,450,006 acres (2,265.6 square miles (mi\2\); 5,868
square kilometers (km\2\)) and extends approximately 24 nautical miles
(nm; 28 miles (mi); 44 kilometers (km)) offshore.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 4202]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JA22.006
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
[[Page 4203]]
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
Atlantic Shores' proposed marine site characterization surveys
include HRG and geotechnical survey activities. These survey activities
would occur within the both the Lease Area and within ECRs between the
Lease Area and the coasts of New York and New Jersey. The Lease Area is
approximately 5,867.97 km\2\ (1,450,006 acres) and is located
approximately 24 nm (44 km) from the coastline (see Figure 1). The
proposed survey area is approximately from Long Island, New York to
Atlantic City, New Jersey. For the purpose of this proposed IHA, the
Lease Area and ECRs are collectively referred to as the survey area.
Atlantic Shores' survey activities are anticipated to be supported
by vessels, which will maintain a speed of approximately to 3.5 knots
(kn; 6.5 kilometer per hour (km/h)) while transiting survey lines. The
proposed HRG and geotechnical survey activities are described below.
Proposed Geotechnical Survey Activities
Atlantic Shores' proposed geotechnical activities would include the
drilling of sample boreholes, deep cone penetration tests (CPTs), and
shallow CPTs. Such proposed activities have been performed before by
Atlantic Shores and considerations of the impacts produced from
geotechnical activities have been previously analyzed and included in
the proposed 2020 Federal Register notice for Atlantic Shores' HRG
activities (85 FR 7926; February 12, 2020). The same discussion by NMFS
to not analyze the geotechnical activities further that was included in
that notification applies to this proposed project. In that
notification, NMFS determined that the likelihood of the proposed
geotechnical surveys resulting in harassment of marine mammals was to
be so low as to be discountable. As this information remains applicable
and NMFS' determination has not changed, these activities will not be
discussed further in this proposed notification.
Proposed Geophysical Survey Activities
Atlantic Shores has proposed that HRG survey operations would be
conducted continuously 24 hours a day. Based on 24-hour operations, the
estimated total duration of the proposed activities would be
approximately 360 survey days. This includes 120 days of survey
activities in the Lease Area, 180 days in ECR North, and 60 days in ECR
South (refer back to Table 1). As previously discussed above, this
schedule does include potential down time due to inclement weather or
other project-related delays.
The HRG survey activities will be supported by vessels of
sufficient size to accomplish the survey goals in each of the specified
survey areas. It is assumed surveys in each of the identified survey
areas will be executed by a single vessel during any given campaign
(i.e., no more than one survey vessel would operate in the Lease Area
at any given time, but there may be one survey vessel operating in the
Lease Area and one vessel operating each of the ECR areas concurrently,
i.e., three vessels). HRG equipment will either be mounted to or towed
behind the survey vessel at a typical survey speed of approximately 3.5
knot (6.5 km) per hour. The geophysical survey activities proposed by
Atlantic Shores would include the following:
Depth sounding (multibeam depth sounder and single beam
echosounder) to determine water depths and general bottom topography
(currently estimated to range from approximately 16-feet (ft; 5-m to
131-ft (40-m) in depth);
Magnetic intensity measurements (gradiometer) for
detecting local variations in regional magnetic field from geological
strata and potential ferrous objects on and below the bottom;
Seafloor imaging (side scan 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 (pinger/chirp) to
map the near surface stratigraphy (top 0-ft to 16-ft (0-m to 5-m) soils
below seabed); and,
Medium penetration sub-bottom profiler (chirps/parametric
profilers/sparkers) to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy as needed
(soils down to 246-ft (75-m) to 328-ft (100-m) below seabed).
Table 2 identifies the representative survey equipment that may be
used in support of planned geophysical survey activities. The make and
model of the listed geophysical equipment may vary depending on
availability and the final equipment choices will vary depending upon
the final survey design, vessel availability, and survey contractor
selection. Geophysical surveys are expected to use several equipment
types concurrently in order to collect multiple aspects of geophysical
data along one transect. Selection of equipment combinations is based
on specific survey objectives. All categories of representative HRG
survey equipment shown in Table 2 work with operating frequencies <180
kHz.
Table 2--Summary of Representative Equipment Specifications With Operating Frequencies Below 180 kHz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operational
Operating source level Beamwidth Typical pulse Pulse
HRG survey equipment (sub-bottom profiler) Representative equipment type frequency ranges ranges durations RMS repetition
ranges (kHz) (dBRMS) \b\ (degrees) (millisecond) rate (Hz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sparker (impulsive)......................... Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 0.01 to 1.9 203 180 3.4 2
\a\.
Geo Marine Geo-Source.............. 0.2 to 5 195 180 7.2 0.41
CHIRPs (non-impulsive)...................... Edgetech 2000-DSS.................. 2 to 16 195 24 6.3 10
Edgetech 216....................... 2 to 16 179 17, 20, or 10 10
24
Edgetech 424....................... 4 to 24 180 71 4 2
Edgetech 512i...................... 0.7 to 12 179 80 9 8
Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom Imager\TM\. 4 to 12.5 190 120 4.5 44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Two sources proposed for use by Atlantic Shores (i.e., the INNOMAR SES-2000 Medium-100 Parametric and the INNOMAR deep-36 Parametric) are not
expected to result in take due to their higher frequencies and extremely narrow beamwidths. Because of this, these sources were not considered when
calculating the Level B harassment isopleths and are not discussed further in this notification. Acoustic parameters on these parametric sub-bottom
profilers can be found in Atlantic Shores' IHA application on NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable).
\a\ Atlantic Shores discussed with NMFS and include information in their application that while the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 is planned to be
used during project activities, the equipment specifications and subsequent analysis are based on the SIG ELC 820 with a power level of 750 joules (J)
at a 5-meter depth (Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)). However, Atlantic Shores expects a more reasonable power level to be 500-600 J based on prior
experience with HRG surveys; 750 J was used as a worst-case scenario to conservatively account for take of marine mammals as these higher electrical
outputs would only be used in areas with denser substrates (700-800 J).
\b\ Root mean square (RMS) = 1 microPa.
[[Page 4204]]
Atlantic Shores has indicated to NMFS that the expected energy
levels of the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark would range between 500-600
joules (J) in most cases. However, in their IHA application, Atlantic
Shores includes a discussion that, based on their previous experiences
and survey efforts using the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark, Atlantic
Shores do not expect the electrical output to exceed 700-800 J, except
in situations where denser substrates are present.
The deployment of HRG survey equipment, including the equipment
planned for use during Atlantic Shores' proposed activities produces
sound in the marine environment that has the potential to result in
harassment of marine mammals. Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures are described in detail later in this document
(please see Proposed Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring and Reporting).
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species.
Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be
found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's
website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 3 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
proposed to be authorized for this action, and summarizes information
related to the population or stock, including regulatory status under
the MMPA and Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological
removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on
Taxonomy (2021). PBR is 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 (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no
mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious
injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as
gross indicators of the status of the species and other threats.
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 or survey 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. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS's draft 2021 U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock
Assessment (SARs). All values presented in Table 3 are the most recent
available at the time of publication and are available in the draft
2021 SARs available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Species Likely To Occur Near the Survey Area That May Be Affected by Atlantic Shores' Proposed HRG Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale.......... Eubalaena glacialis.... Western Atlantic Stock. E/D, Y 368 (0; 364; 2019).... 0.7 7.7
Humpback whale...................... Megaptera novaeangliae. Gulf of Maine.......... -/-; Y 1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016) 22 12.15
Fin whale........................... Balaenoptera physalus.. Western North Atlantic E/D, Y 6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 11 1.8
Stock. 2016).
Sei whale........................... Balaenoptera borealis.. Nova Scotia Stock...... E/D, Y 6,292 (1.02; 3,098; 6.2 0.8
2016).
Minke whale......................... Balaenoptera Canadian East Coastal -/-, N 21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 170 10.6
acutorostrata. Stock. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale......................... Physeter macrocephalus. North Atlantic Stock... E/D, Y 4,349 (0.28; 3,451; 3.9 0
2016).
Long-finned pilot whale............. Globicephala melas..... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 39,215 (0.3; 30,627; 306 29
Stock. 2016).
Atlantic white-sided dolphin........ Lagenorhynchus acutus.. Western North Atlantic -/-, N 93,233 (0.71; 54,443; 544 227
Stock. 2016).
Bottlenose dolphin.................. Tursiops truncatus..... Western North Atlantic -/D, Y 6,639 (0.41; 4,759; 48 12.2-21.5
Northern Migratory 2016).
Coastal Stock.
Western North Atlantic -/-, N 62,851 (0.23; 51,914; 519 28
Offshore Stock. 2016).
Common dolphin...................... Delphinus delphis...... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 172,974 (0.21, 1,452 390
Stock. 145,216, 2016).
Atlantic spotted dolphin............ Stenella frontalis..... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 320 0
Stock. 2016).
Risso's dolphin..................... Grampus griseus........ Western North Atlantic -/-, N 35,215 (0.19; 30,051; 301 34
Stock. 2016).
Harbor porpoise..................... Phocoena phocoena...... Gulf of Maine/Bay of -/-, N 95,543 (0.31; 74,034; 851 164
Fundy Stock. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal......................... Phoca vitulina......... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 61,336 (0.08; 57,637; 1,729 339
Stock. 2018).
Gray seal \4\....................... Halichoerus grypus..... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 27,300 (0.22; 22,785; 1,389 4,453
Stock. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 or
which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is
automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments. CV
is the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
fisheries, ship strike).
\4\ NMFS' stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in Canada) is
approximately 451,431. The annual mortality and serious injury (M/SI) value given is for the total stock.
[[Page 4205]]
As indicated above, all 15 species (with 16 managed stocks) in
Table 3 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur, and we have proposed
authorizing it. Four marine mammal species that are listed under the
ESA may be present in the survey area and are included in the take
request: The North Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm whale.
The temporal and/or spatial occurrence of several cetacean and
pinniped species listed in Table 3-1 of Atlantic Shores' 2022 IHA
application is such that take of these species is not expected to occur
either because they have very low densities in the survey area or are
known to occur further offshore than the survey area. These include:
The blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus), Cuvier's beaked whale (Ziphius
cavirostris), four species of Mesoplodont beaked whale (Mesoplodon
spp.), dwarf and pygmy sperm whale (Kogia sima and Kogia breviceps),
short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus), northern
bottlenose whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), killer whale (Orcinus orca),
pygmy killer whale (Feresa attenuata), false killer whale (Pseudorca
crassidens), melon-headed whale (Peponocephala electra), striped
dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba), white-beaked dolphin (Lagenorhynchus
albirostris), pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata),
Fraser's dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei), rough-toothed dolphin (Steno
bredanensis), Clymene dolphin (Stenella clymene), spinner dolphin
(Stenella longirostris), hooded seal (Cystophora cristata), and harp
seal (Pagophilus groenlandicus). As harassment and subsequent take of
these species is not anticipated as a result of the proposed
activities, these species are not analyzed or discussed further.
In addition, the Florida manatees (Trichechus manatus; a sub-
species of the West Indian manatee) has been previously documented as
an occasional visitor the Northeast region during summer months (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2019). However, manatees are managed
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and are not considered
further in this document.
For the majority of species potentially present in the specific
geographic region, NMFS has designated only a single generic stock
(e.g., ``western North Atlantic'') for management purposes. This
includes the ``Canadian east coast'' stock of minke whales, which
includes all minke whales found in U.S. waters and is also a generic
stock for management purposes. For humpback whales, NMFS defines stocks
on the basis of feeding locations, i.e., Gulf of Maine. However,
references to humpback whales in this document refer to any individuals
of the species that are found in the specific geographic region.
Additional information on these animals can be found in Sections 3 and
4 of Atlantic Shores' IHA application, the draft 2021 SARs (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments), and NMFS' website.
Below is a description of the species that have the highest
likelihood of occurring in the survey area and are thus expected to
potentially be taken by the proposed activities as well as further
detail informing the baseline for select species (i.e., information
regarding current Unusual Mortality Events (UMEs) and important habitat
areas).
North Atlantic Right Whale
The North Atlantic right whale ranges from calving grounds in the
southeastern United States to feeding grounds in New England waters and
into Canadian waters (Hayes et al., 2018). Surveys have demonstrated
the existence of seven areas where North Atlantic right whales
congregate seasonally, including north and east of the proposed survey
area in Georges Bank, off Cape Cod, and in Massachusetts Bay (Hayes et
al., 2018). In the late fall months (e.g., October), right whales are
generally thought to depart from the feeding grounds in the North
Atlantic and move south to their calving grounds off Georgia and
Florida. However, recent research indicates our understanding of their
movement patterns remains incomplete (Davis et al., 2017). A review of
passive acoustic monitoring data from 2004 to 2014 throughout the
western North Atlantic demonstrated nearly continuous year-round right
whale presence across their entire habitat range (for at least some
individuals), including in locations previously thought of as migratory
corridors, suggesting that not all of the population undergoes a
consistent annual migration (Davis et al., 2017). However, given that
Atlantic Shores' surveys would be concentrated offshore New Jersey, any
right whales in the vicinity of the survey areas are expected to be
transient, most likely migrating through the area.
The western North Atlantic population demonstrated overall growth
of 2.8 percent per year between 1990 to 2010, despite a decline in 1993
and no growth between 1997 and 2000 (Pace et al., 2017). However, since
2010 the population has been in decline, with a 99.99 percent
probability of a decline of just under 1 percent per year (Pace et al.,
2017). Between 1990 and 2015, calving rates varied substantially, with
low calving rates coinciding with all three periods of decline or no
growth (Pace et al., 2017). On average, North Atlantic right whale
calving rates are estimated to be roughly half that of southern right
whales (Eubalaena australis) (Pace et al., 2017), which are increasing
in abundance (NMFS, 2015). In 2018, no new North Atlantic right whale
calves were documented in their calving grounds; this represented the
first time since annual NOAA aerial surveys began in 1989 that no new
right whale calves were observed. Eighteen right whale calves were
documented in 2021. As of December 8, 2021 and the writing of this
proposed Notification, two North Atlantic right whale calves have
documented to have been born during this calving season. Presently, the
best available population estimate for North Atlantic right whales is
386 per the draft 2021 SARs (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments).
The proposed survey area is part of a migratory corridor
Biologically Important Area (BIA) for North Atlantic right whales
(effective March-April and November-December) that extends from
Massachusetts to Florida (LeBrecque et al., 2015). Off the coast of New
Jersey, the migratory BIA extends from the coast to beyond the shelf
break. This important migratory area is approximately 269,488 km\2\ in
size (compared with the approximately 5,605.2 km\2\ of total estimated
Level B harassment ensonified area associated with the 360 planned
survey days) and is comprised of the waters of the continental shelf
offshore the East Coast of the United States, extending from Florida
through Massachusetts. NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR part 224.105
designated nearshore waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as Mid-Atlantic
U.S. Seasonal Management Areas (SMA) for right whales in 2008. SMAs
were developed to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and
right whales around their migratory route and calving grounds. A
portion of one SMA, which occurs off the mouth of Delaware Bay,
overlaps spatially with a section of the proposed survey area. The SMA,
which occurs off the mouth of Delaware Bay, is active from November 1
through April 30 of each year. Within SMAs, the regulations require a
mandatory vessel speed (less than 10 kn) for all vessels greater than
65 ft. A portion of one SMA overlaps spatially with the northern
section of the proposed survey area. All
[[Page 4206]]
Atlantic Shores survey vessels, regardless of length, would be required
to adhere to a 10 knot vessel speed restriction when operating within
this SMA. In addition, all Atlantic Shores survey vessels, regardless
of length, would be required to adhere to a 10 knot vessel speed
restriction when operating in any Dynamic Management Area (DMA)
declared by NMFS.
Elevated North Atlantic right whale mortalities have occurred since
June 7, 2017, along the U.S. and Canadian coast. This event has been
declared an Unusual Mortality Event (UME), with human interactions,
including entanglement in fixed fishing gear and vessel strikes,
implicated in at least 15 of the mortalities thus far. As of October
13, 2021, a total of 34 confirmed dead stranded whales (21 in Canada;
13 in the United States) have been documented. The cumulative total
number of animals in the North Atlantic right whale UME has been
updated to 49 individuals to include both the confirmed mortalities
(dead stranded or floaters) (n=34) and seriously injured free-swimming
whales (n=15) to better reflect the confirmed number of whales likely
removed from the population during the UME and more accurately reflect
the population impacts. More information is available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event. Furthermore, we continue
to evaluate our North Atlantic right whale vessel strike reduction
programs, both regulatory and non-regulatory. NMFS anticipates
releasing a proposed rule modifying the right whale speed regulations
in Spring 2022 to further address the risk of mortality and serious
injury from vessel collisions in U.S. waters.
During the development of this proposed notification, several Slow
Zones were implemented off New Jersey and New York that are worth
mentioning. On November 11, 2021, December 11, 2021, and December 20,
2021, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution's Ocean City buoy
detected the presence of right whales east of Ocean City, Maryland. In
response, NMFS implemented two right whale Slow Zones for the area with
expiration dates of November 26, 2021, December 26, 2021, and January
4, 2022, respectively. Additionally, as of November 8, 2021, NMFS
extended a voluntary right whale Slow Zone (via acoustic trigger)
located south of Nantucket, Massachusetts. This is due to expire on
November 19, 2021. Four other voluntary right whale Slow Zones were
announced by NMFS on November 20, 2021, November 30, 2021, December 13,
2021, and December 21, 2021, via an acoustic trigger of a right whale
detected off New York City, New York. These, at the time of the
development of this notification, expired after December 5, 2021,
December 14, 2021, December 26, 2021, and January 5, 2022,
respectively. Lastly, four more Slow Zones were implemented on November
30, 2021, December 2, 2021, December 13, 2021, and December 20, 2021
after the acoustic detection of right whales southeast of Atlantic
City, New Jersey. These zones were active through December 8, 2021,
December 17, 2021, December 26, 2021, and January 4, 2022,
respectively. More information on these right whale Slow Zones can be
found on NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales).
Humpback Whale
Humpback whales are found worldwide in all oceans. Humpback whales
were listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Conservation Act
(ESCA) in June 1970. In 1973, the ESA replaced the ESCA, and humpbacks
continued to be listed as endangered. On September 8, 2016, NMFS
divided the species into 14 distinct population segments (DPS), removed
the current species-level listing, and in its place listed four DPSs as
endangered and one DPS as threatened (81 FR 62259; September 8, 2016).
The remaining nine DPSs were not listed. The West Indies DPS, which is
not listed under the ESA, is the only DPS of humpback whale that is
expected to occur in the survey area, although are not necessarily from
the Gulf of Maine feeding population managed as a stock by NMFS. Barco
et al., (2002) estimated that, based on photo-identification, only 39
percent of individual humpback whales observed along the mid- and south
Atlantic U.S. coast are from the Gulf of Maine stock. Bettridge et al.,
(2015) estimated the size of this population at 12,312 (95 percent CI
8,688-15,954) whales in 2004-05, which is consistent with previous
population estimates of approximately 10,000-11,000 whales (Stevick et
al., 2003; Smith et al., 1999) and the increasing trend for the West
Indies DPS (Bettridge et al., 2015).
Humpback whales utilize the mid-Atlantic as a migration pathway
between calving/mating grounds to the south and feeding grounds in the
north (Waring et al., 2007a; Waring et al., 2007b). A key question with
regard to humpback whales off the mid-Atlantic states is their stock
identity. Using fluke photographs of living and dead whales observed in
the region, Barco et al., (2002) reported that 43 percent of 21 live
whales matched to the Gulf of Maine, 19 percent to Newfoundland, and
4.8 percent to the Gulf of St Lawrence, while 31.6 percent of 19 dead
humpbacks were known Gulf of Maine whales. Although Gulf of Maine
whales apparently dominate the population composition of the mid-
Atlantic, lack of photographic effort in Newfoundland makes it likely
that the observed match rates under-represent the true presence of
Canadian whales in the region (Waring et al., 2016). Barco et al.,
(2002) suggested that the mid-Atlantic region primarily represents a
supplemental winter-feeding ground used by humpbacks. Recent research
by King et al., (2021) has demonstrated a high occurrence and use
(foraging) of the New York Bight area by humpback whales than
previously known. Furthermore, King et al., (2021) highlights important
concerns for humpback whales found specifically in the nearshore
environment (<10 km from shore) from various anthropogenic impacts.
Three previous UMEs involving humpback whales have occurred since
2000, in 2003, 2005, and 2006. Since January 2016, elevated humpback
whale mortalities have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine to
Florida. Partial or full necropsy examinations have been conducted on
approximately half of the 154 known cases (as of October 13, 2021). Of
the whales examined, about 50 percent had evidence of human
interaction, either ship strike or entanglement. While a portion of the
whales have shown evidence of pre-mortem vessel strike, this finding is
not consistent across all whales examined and more research is needed.
NOAA is consulting with researchers that are conducting studies on the
humpback whale populations, and these efforts may provide information
on changes in whale distribution and habitat use that could provide
additional insight into how these vessel interactions occurred. More
information is available at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2021-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.
Fin Whale
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
[[Page 4207]]
are broadly distributed throughout the western North Atlantic for most
of the year (Waring et al., 2016). They are typically found in small
groups of up to five individuals (Brueggeman et al., 1987). The main
threats to fin whales are fishery interactions and vessel collisions
(Waring et al., 2016).
Sei Whale
The Nova Scotia stock of sei whales can be found in deeper waters
of the continental shelf edge waters of the northeastern U.S. and
northeastward to south of Newfoundland. The southern portion of the
stock's range during spring and summer includes the Gulf of Maine and
Georges Bank. Spring is the period of greatest abundance in U.S.
waters, with sightings concentrated along the eastern margin of Georges
Bank and into the Northeast Channel area, and along the southwestern
edge of Georges Bank in the area of Hydrographer Canyon (Waring et al.,
2015). Sei whales occur in shallower waters to feed. Sei whales are
listed as engendered under the ESA, and the Nova Scotia stock is
considered strategic and depleted under the MMPA. The main threats to
this stock are interactions with fisheries and vessel collisions.
Minke Whale
Minke whales can be found in temperate, tropical, and high-latitude
waters. The Canadian East Coast stock can be found in the area from the
western half of the Davis Strait (45 [deg]W) to the Gulf of Mexico
(Waring et al., 2016). This species generally occupies waters less than
100-m deep on the continental shelf. There appears to be a strong
seasonal component to minke whale distribution in the survey areas, in
which spring to fall are times of relatively widespread and common
occurrence while during winter the species appears to be largely absent
(Waring et al., 2016).
Since January 2017, elevated minke whale mortalities have occurred
along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, with a
total of 118 strandings (as of October 13, 2021). This event has been
declared a UME. Full or partial necropsy examinations were conducted on
more than 60 percent of the whales. Preliminary findings in several of
the whales have shown evidence of human interactions or infectious
disease, but these findings are not consistent across all of the whales
examined, so more research is needed. More information is available at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.
Sperm Whale
The distribution of the sperm whale in the U.S. EEZ occurs on the
continental shelf edge, over the continental slope, and into mid-ocean
regions (Waring et al., 2014). The basic social unit of the sperm whale
appears to be the mixed school of adult females plus their calves and
some juveniles of both sexes, normally numbering 20-40 animals in all.
There is evidence that some social bonds persist for many years
(Christal et al., 1998). This species forms stable social groups, site
fidelity, and latitudinal range limitations in groups of females and
juveniles (Whitehead, 2002). In summer, the distribution of sperm
whales includes the area east and north of Georges Bank and into the
Northeast Channel region, as well as the continental shelf (inshore of
the 100-m isobath) south of New England. In the fall, sperm whale
occurrence south of New England on the continental shelf is at its
highest level, and there remains a continental shelf edge occurrence in
the mid-Atlantic bight. In winter, sperm whales are concentrated east
and northeast of Cape Hatteras.
Long-Finned Pilot Whale
Long-finned pilot whales are found from North Carolina and north to
Iceland, Greenland and the Barents Sea (Waring et al., 2016). In U.S.
Atlantic waters the species is distributed principally along the
continental shelf edge off the northeastern U.S. coast in winter and
early spring and in late spring, pilot whales move onto Georges Bank
and into the Gulf of Maine and more northern waters and remain in these
areas through late autumn (Waring et al., 2016). Long-finned pilot
whales are not listed under the ESA. The Western North Atlantic stock
is considered strategic under the MMPA.
Atlantic White-Sided Dolphin
White-sided dolphins are found in temperate and sub-polar waters of
the North Atlantic, primarily in continental shelf waters to the 100m
depth contour from central West Greenland to North Carolina (Waring et
al., 2016). The Gulf of Maine stock is most common in continental shelf
waters from Hudson Canyon to Georges Bank, and in the Gulf of Maine and
lower Bay of Fundy. Sighting data indicate seasonal shifts in
distribution (Northridge et al., 1997). During January to May, low
numbers of white-sided dolphins are found from Georges Bank to Jeffreys
Ledge (off New Hampshire), with even lower numbers south of Georges
Bank, as documented by a few strandings collected on beaches of
Virginia to South Carolina. From June through September, large numbers
of white-sided dolphins are found from Georges Bank to the lower Bay of
Fundy. From October to December, white-sided dolphins occur at
intermediate densities from southern Georges Bank to southern Gulf of
Maine (Payne and Heinemann, 1990). Sightings south of Georges Bank,
particularly around Hudson Canyon, occur year round but at low
densities.
Atlantic Spotted Dolphin
Atlantic spotted dolphins are found in tropical and warm temperate
waters ranging from southern New England, south to Gulf of Mexico and
the Caribbean to Venezuela (Waring et al., 2014). This stock regularly
occurs in continental shelf waters south of Cape Hatteras and in
continental shelf edge and continental slope waters north of this
region (Waring et al., 2014). There are two forms of this species, with
the larger ecotype inhabiting the continental shelf and is usually
found inside or near the 200-m isobaths (Waring et al., 2014).
Common Dolphin
The short-beaked common dolphin is found worldwide 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
2,000-m isobaths and over prominent underwater topography and east to
the mid-Atlantic Ridge (Waring et al., 2016).
Bottlenose Dolphin
There are two distinct bottlenose dolphin morphotypes in the
western North Atlantic: The coastal and offshore forms (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. The coastal morphotype is
morphologically and genetically distinct from the larger, more robust
morphotype that occupies habitats further offshore. Spatial
distribution data, tag-telemetry studies, photo-ID studies and genetic
studies demonstrate the existence of a distinct Northern Migratory
stock of coastal bottlenose dolphins (Waring et al., 2014). During
summer months (July-August), this stock occupies coastal waters from
the shoreline to approximately the 25-m isobath between the Chesapeake
Bay mouth and Long Island, New York; during winter months (January-
March), the stock occupies coastal waters from Cape Lookout, North
Carolina, to the
[[Page 4208]]
North Carolina/Virginia border (Waring et al., 2014). The Western North
Atlantic northern migratory coastal stock and the Western North
Atlantic offshore stock may be encountered by the proposed survey.
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
is 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 (>1,800-m; Westgate et
al., 1998), although the majority of the population is found over the
continental shelf (Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to the 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).
Pinninpeds (Harbor Seal and Gray 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, harbor seals 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). Haul-out 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).
There are three major populations of gray seals found in the world;
eastern Canada (western North Atlantic stock), northwestern Europe and
the Baltic Sea. Gray seals in the survey area belong to the western
North Atlantic stock. The range for this stock is thought to be from
New Jersey to Labrador. Current population trends show that gray seal
abundance is likely increasing in the U.S. Atlantic EEZ (Waring et al.,
2016). Although the rate of increase is unknown, surveys conducted
since their arrival in the 1980s indicate a steady increase in
abundance in both Maine and Massachusetts (Waring et al., 2016). It is
believed that recolonization by Canadian gray seals is the source of
the U.S. population (Waring et al., 2016).
Since July 2018, elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal
mortalities have occurred across Maine, New Hampshire and
Massachusetts. This event has been declared a UME. Additionally,
stranded seals have shown clinical signs as far south as Virginia,
although not in elevated numbers, therefore the UME investigation now
encompasses all seal strandings from Maine to Virginia. Ice seals (harp
and hooded seals) have also started stranding with clinical signs,
again not in elevated numbers, and those two seal species have also
been added to the UME investigation. A total of 3,152 reported
strandings (of all species) had occurred from July 1, 2018, through
March 13, 2020. Full or partial necropsy examinations have been
conducted on some of the seals and samples have been collected for
testing. Based on tests conducted thus far, the main pathogen found in
the seals is phocine distemper virus. NMFS is performing additional
testing to identify any other factors that may be involved in this UME.
Presently, this UME is non-active and is pending closure by NMFS as of
March 2020. Information on this UME is available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/marine-life-distress/2018-2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-event-along.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine
mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et
al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect
this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided
into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data,
audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques,
anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements
of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes
(i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with
the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the
lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower
bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing
groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 4.
Table 4--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
(dolphins, toothed whales, beaked
whales, bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
(true seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
(sea 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).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al., (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth, 2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of
[[Page 4209]]
available information. Fifteen marine mammal species (13 cetacean and 2
pinniped (both phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-
occur with the proposed survey activities. Please refer back to Table
3. Of the cetacean species that may be present, five are classified as
low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete species), seven are
classified as mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid species and
the sperm whale), and one is classified as a high-frequency cetacean
(i.e., harbor porpoise).
Potential Effects of Specified Activities 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. Detailed descriptions of the potential effects of
similar specified activities have been provided in other recent and
related Federal Register notifications, including for survey activities
using similar HRG methodologies, over similar amounts of time, and
occurring within the same specified geographical region (e.g., 82 FR
20563, May 3, 2017; 85 FR 36537, June 17, 2020; 85 FR 7926, February
12, 2020; 85 FR 37848, June 24, 2020; 85 FR 48179, August 10, 2020; 86
FR 16327, March 29, 2021; 86 FR 17782, April 6, 2021). No significant
new information is available, and we refer the reader to these
documents rather than repeating the details here.
The Estimated Take section later in this document includes a
quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to
be taken by Atlantic Shores' activities. The Negligible Impact Analysis
and Determination section considers the content of this section, the
Estimated Take 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 Active Acoustic Sound Sources and Acoustic Terminology
This subsection contains a brief technical background on sound, on
the characteristics of certain sound types, and on metrics used in this
proposal inasmuch as the information is relevant to the specified
activity and to the summary of the potential effects of the specified
activity on marine mammals. For general information on sound and its
interaction with the marine environment, please see, e.g., Au and
Hastings (2008); Richardson et al., (1995); Urick (1983).
Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are
frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number
of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and
is measured in hertz or cycles per second. Wavelength is the distance
between two peaks or corresponding points of a sound wave (length of
one cycle). Higher frequency sounds have shorter wavelengths than lower
frequency sounds, and typically attenuate (decrease) more rapidly,
except in certain cases in shallower water. Amplitude is the height of
the sound pressure wave or the ``loudness'' of a sound and is typically
described using the relative unit of the decibel. A sound pressure
level (SPL) in dB is described as the ratio between a measured pressure
and a reference pressure (for underwater sound, this is 1 microPascal
([mu]Pa)), and is a logarithmic unit that accounts for large variations
in amplitude. Therefore, a relatively small change in dB corresponds to
large changes in sound pressure. The source level (SL) represents the
SPL referenced at a distance of 1-m from the source (referenced to 1
[mu]Pa), while the received level is the SPL at the listener's position
(referenced to 1 [mu]Pa).
Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over
the duration of an impulse. Root mean square is calculated by squaring
all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the
square root of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean square 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 (Hastings and Popper, 2005). 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 than by peak pressures.
Sound exposure level (SEL; represented as dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s)
represents the total energy in a stated frequency band over a stated
time interval or event and considers both intensity and duration of
exposure. The per-pulse SEL is calculated over the time window
containing the entire pulse (i.e., 100 percent of the acoustic energy).
SEL is a cumulative metric; it can be accumulated over a single pulse,
or calculated over periods containing multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL
represents the total energy accumulated by a receiver over a defined
time window or during an event. Peak sound pressure (also referred to
as zero-to-peak sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum instantaneous
sound pressure measurable in the water at a specified distance from the
source and is represented in the same units as the rms sound pressure.
When underwater objects vibrate or activity occurs, sound-pressure
waves are created. These waves alternately compress and decompress the
water as the sound wave travels. Underwater sound waves radiate in a
manner similar to ripples on the surface of a pond and may be directed
either in a beam or in beams or may radiate in all directions
(omnidirectional sources). The compressions and decompressions
associated with sound waves are detected as changes in pressure by
aquatic life and man-made sound receptors such as hydrophones.
Even in the absence of sound from the specified activity, the
underwater environment is typically loud due to ambient sound, which is
defined as environmental background sound levels lacking a single
source or point (Richardson et al., 1995). The sound level of a region
is defined by the total acoustical energy being generated by known and
unknown sources. These sources may include physical (e.g., wind and
waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric sound), biological (e.g., sounds
produced by marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates), and anthropogenic
(e.g., vessels, dredging, construction) sound. A number of sources
contribute to ambient sound, including wind and waves, which are a main
source of naturally occurring ambient sound for frequencies between 200
Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In general, ambient sound levels tend to
increase with increasing wind speed and wave height. Precipitation can
become an important component of total sound at frequencies above 500
Hz, and possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet times. Marine mammals can
contribute significantly to ambient sound levels, as can some fish and
snapping shrimp. The frequency band for biological contributions is
from approximately 12 Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient sound
related to human activity include transportation (surface vessels),
dredging and construction, oil and gas drilling and production,
geophysical surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel noise typically
dominates the total ambient sound for frequencies between 20 and 300
Hz. In general, the frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are below 1 kHz
and, if higher frequency sound levels are created, they attenuate
rapidly.
The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources that
comprise ambient sound at any given
[[Page 4210]]
location and time depends not only on the source levels (as determined
by current weather conditions and levels of biological and human
activity) but on the ability of sound to propagate through the
environment. In turn, sound propagation is dependent on the spatially
and temporally varying properties of the water column and sea floor,
and is frequency-dependent. As a result of the dependence on a large
number of varying factors, ambient sound levels can be expected to vary
widely over both coarse and fine spatial and temporal scales. Sound
levels at a given frequency and location can vary by 10-20 dB from day
to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result is that, depending on the
source type and its intensity, sound from the specified activity may be
a negligible addition to the local environment or could form a
distinctive signal that may affect marine mammals. Details of source
types are described in the following text.
Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types:
Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction
between these two sound types is important because they have differing
potential to cause physical effects, particularly with regard to
hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see
Southall et al., (2007) for an in-depth discussion of these concepts.
The distinction between these two sound types is not always obvious, as
certain signals share properties of both pulsed and non-pulsed sounds.
A signal near a source could be categorized as a pulse, but due to
propagation effects as it moves farther from the source, the signal
duration becomes longer (e.g., Greene and Richardson, 1988).
Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic
booms, impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically
considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients
(ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998) and occur either as
isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed sounds are all
characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient pressure to a
maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period that may
include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and minimal
pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce physical
injury as compared with sounds that lack these features.
Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or
prolonged, and may be either continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995;
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals
of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses (e.g.,
rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced
by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or
dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems. The
duration of such sounds, as received at a distance, can be greatly
extended in a highly reverberant environment.
Sparkers produce pulsed signals with energy in the frequency ranges
specified in Table 2. The amplitude of the acoustic wave emitted from
sparker sources is equal in all directions (i.e., omnidirectional),
while other sources planned for use during the proposed surveys have
some degree of directionality to the beam, as specified in Table 2.
Other sources planned for use during the proposed survey activity
(e.g., CHIRPs) should be considered non-pulsed, intermittent sources.
Summary on Specific Potential Effects of Acoustic Sound Sources
Underwater sound from active acoustic sources can include one or
more of the following: Temporary or permanent hearing impairment,
behavioral disturbance, masking, stress, and non-auditory physical
effects. The degree of effect is intrinsically related to the signal
characteristics, received level, distance from the source, and duration
of the sound exposure. Marine mammals exposed to high-intensity sound,
or to lower-intensity sound for prolonged periods, can experience
hearing threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing sensitivity
at certain frequency ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS can be permanent (PTS;
permanent threshold shift), in which case the loss of hearing
sensitivity is not fully recoverable, or temporary (TTS; temporary
threshold shift), in which case the animal's hearing threshold would
recover over time (Southall et al., 2007).
Animals in the vicinity of Atlantic Shores' proposed HRG survey
activity are unlikely to incur even TTS due to the characteristics of
the sound sources, which include relatively low source levels (179 to
245 dB re 1 [micro]Pa m), and generally very short pulses and potential
duration of exposure. These characteristics mean that instantaneous
exposure is unlikely to cause TTS, as it is unlikely that exposure
would occur close enough to the vessel for received levels to exceed
peak pressure TTS criteria, and that the cumulative duration of
exposure would be insufficient to exceed cumulative sound exposure
level (SEL) criteria. Even for high-frequency cetacean species (e.g.,
harbor porpoises), which have the greatest sensitivity to potential
TTS, 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). 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 many of HRG survey
devices planned for use (Table 2) makes it unlikely that an animal
would be exposed more than briefly during the passage of the vessel.
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. 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.
In addition, sound can disrupt behavior through masking, or
interfering with, an animal's ability to detect, recognize, or
discriminate between acoustic signals of interest (e.g., those used for
intraspecific communication and social interactions, prey detection,
predator avoidance, navigation). Masking occurs when the receipt of a
sound is interfered with by another coincident sound at similar
frequencies
[[Page 4211]]
and at similar or higher intensity, and may occur whether the sound is
natural (e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves, precipitation) or
anthropogenic (e.g., shipping, sonar, seismic exploration) in origin.
Marine mammal communications would not likely be masked appreciably by
the acoustic signals given the directionality of the signals for most
HRG survey equipment types planned for use (Table 2) and the brief
period when an individual mammal is likely to be exposed.
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. 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).
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), 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 long been equated
with stress. 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. In general, there are few data on the
potential for strong, anthropogenic underwater sounds to cause non-
auditory physical effects in marine mammals. 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
currently 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 geotechnical
survey activities would create conditions of long-term, continuous
noise and chronic acoustic exposure leading to long-term physiological
stress responses in marine mammals.
Sound may affect marine mammals through impacts on the abundance,
behavior, or distribution of prey species (e.g., crustaceans,
cephalopods, fish, and zooplankton) (i.e., effects to marine mammal
habitat). Prey species exposed to sound might move away from the sound
source, experience TTS, experience masking of biologically relevant
sounds, or show no obvious direct effects. The most likely impacts (if
any) for most prey species in a given area would be temporary avoidance
of the area. Surveys using active acoustic sound sources move through
an area, limiting exposure to multiple pulses. In all cases, sound
levels would return to ambient once a survey ends and the noise source
is shut down and, when exposure to sound ends, behavioral and/or
physiological responses are expected to end relatively quickly.
Finally, the HRG survey equipment will not have significant impacts to
the seafloor and does not represent a source of pollution.
Vessel Strike
Vessel collisions with marine mammals, or ship strikes, can result
in death or serious injury of the animal. These interactions are
typically associated with large whales, which are less maneuverable
than are smaller cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to large vessels.
Ship strikes generally involve commercial shipping vessels, which are
generally larger and of which there is much more traffic in the ocean
than geophysical survey vessels. Jensen and Silber (2004) summarized
ship strikes of large whales worldwide from 1975-2003 and found that
most collisions occurred in the open ocean and involved large vessels
(e.g., commercial shipping). For vessels used in geophysical survey
activities, vessel speed while towing gear is typically only 4-5 knots.
At these speeds, both the possibility of striking a marine mammal and
the possibility of a strike resulting in serious injury or mortality
are so low as to be discountable. At average transit speed for
geophysical survey vessels, the probability of serious injury or
mortality resulting from a strike is less than 50 percent. However, the
likelihood of a strike actually happening is again low given the
smaller size of these vessels and generally slower speeds. Notably in
the Jensen and Silber study, no strike incidents were reported for
geophysical survey vessels during that time period.
The potential effects of Atlantic Shores' specified survey activity
are expected to be limited to Level B behavioral harassment. No
permanent or temporary auditory effects, or significant impacts to
marine mammal habitat, including prey, are expected.
Marine Mammal Habitat
The HRG survey equipment will not contact the seafloor and does not
represent a source of pollution. We are not aware of any available
literature on impacts to marine mammal prey from sound produced by HRG
survey equipment. However, as the HRG survey equipment introduces noise
to the marine environment, there is the potential for it to result in
avoidance of the area around the HRG survey activities on the part of
marine mammal prey. Any avoidance of the area on the part of marine
mammal prey would be expected to be short term and temporary.
Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance, and the
availability of similar habitat and resources (e.g., prey species) in
the surrounding area, 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. Impacts on marine mammal habitat from the proposed
activities will be temporary, insignificant, and discountable.
[[Page 4212]]
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 ``small numbers'' 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, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
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 noise from certain HRG acoustic sources.
Based primarily on the characteristics of the signals produced by the
acoustic sources planned for use and the proposed mitigation measures,
Level A harassment is neither anticipated, nor proposed to be
authorized. Take by Level A harassment (injury) is considered unlikely,
even absent mitigation, based on the characteristics of the signals
produced by the acoustic sources planned for use, and is not proposed
for authorization. Implementation of required mitigation further
reduces this potential. Furthermore and as previously described, no
serious injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized
for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic
thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science
indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some
degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water
that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or
occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4)
and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the
factors considered here in more detail and present the proposed take
estimate.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends the use of acoustic thresholds that identify the
received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals
would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to
Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A
harassment).
Level B Harassment--Though significantly driven by received level,
the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure
is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the
source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment
(e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to
predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what
the available science indicates and the practical need to use a
threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for
most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on
received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS
predicts that marine mammals may be behaviorally harassed (i.e., Level
B harassment) when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for the impulsive sources
(i.e., sparkers) and non-impulsive, intermittent sources (e.g., CHIRPs)
evaluated here for Atlantic Shores' proposed activity.
Level A harassment--NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0)
(NMFS, 2018) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory injury (Level
A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups (based on hearing
sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from two different types
of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). These thresholds are provided
in the table below (Table 5). The references, analysis, and methodology
used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS (2018)
Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
Table 5--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset acoustic thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans........... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans........... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater)..... Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater).... Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for
calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level
thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE)
has a reference value of 1[micro]Pa\2\s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American
National Standards Institute standards (ANSI, 2013). However, ANSI defines peak sound pressure as
incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript
``flat'' is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the
generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates
the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds)
and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could
be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible,
it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
exceeded.
[[Page 4213]]
The 2020 proposed notification for Atlantic Shores' HRG surveys (85
FR 7926; February 12, 2020) previously analyzed the potential for Level
A harassment (refer to Table 5 in that notification and additional
discussion therein).
Similar to the past IHAs issued to Atlantic Shores, the proposed
activities for 2022 include the use of impulsive (i.e.,) and non-
impulsive (e.g., CHIRPs) sources. Carrying through the same logic as
the locations, species, survey durations, equipment used, and source
levels are all of a similar scope previously analyzed for Atlantic
Shores' surveys, and as discussed above, NMFS has concluded that Level
A harassment is not a reasonably likely outcome for marine mammals
exposed to noise through use of the sources proposed for use here due
to the mitigation measures Atlantic Shores has proposed, and the
potential for Level A harassment is not evaluated further in this
document. Atlantic Shores did not request authorization of take by
Level A harassment, and no take by Level A harassment is proposed for
authorization by NMFS.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
NMFS has developed a user-friendly methodology for estimating the
extent of the Level B harassment isopleths associated with relevant HRG
survey equipment (NMFS, 2020). This methodology incorporates frequency
and directionality to refine estimated ensonified zones. For acoustic
sources that operate with different beamwidths, the maximum beamwidth
was used, and the lowest frequency of the source was used when
calculating the frequency-dependent absorption coefficient (Table 2).
NMFS considers the data provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)
to represent the best available information on source levels associated
with HRG survey equipment and, therefore, recommends that source levels
provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be incorporated in the
method described above to estimate isopleth distances to harassment
thresholds. In cases when the source level for a specific type of HRG
equipment is not provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS
recommends that either the source levels provided by the manufacturer
be used, or, in instances where source levels provided by the
manufacturer are unavailable or unreliable, a proxy from Crocker and
Fratantonio (2016) be used instead. Table 2 shows the HRG equipment
types that may be used during the proposed surveys and the source
levels associated with those HRG equipment types. The computations and
results from the Level B ensonified area analysis are displayed in
Tables 6 and 7 below.
Table 6--Inputs Into the Level B Harassment Spreadsheet for High Resolution Geophysical Sources Using a Transmission Loss Coefficient of 20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Input values in spreadsheet Computed values (meters)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source name Horizontal
Threshold Source level Frequency (kH) Beamwidth Water depth Slant distance threshold
level (dBrms) (degrees) (m) of threshold range (m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIG ELC 820 Sparker at 750J *........... 160 203 0.01 180 5 141 141
Geo Marine Survey System 2D SUHRS at 160 195 0.2 180 5 56 56
400J...................................
Edgetech 2000-DSS....................... 160 195 2 24 5 56 1
Edgetech 216............................ 160 179 2 24 5 9 1
Edgetech 424............................ 160 180 4 71 10 10 6
Edgetech 512i........................... 160 179 0.7 80 10 9 6
Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom Imager TM....... 160 190 4 120 5 32 9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Used as a proxy for the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 because the specific energy setting is not described in Crocker and Franantonio (2016).
Table 7--Maximum Distances to Level B 160 dBRMS Threshold by Equipment
Type Operating Below 180 kHz
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distances
HRG survey equipment (sub-bottom Representative equipment to level B
profiler) type threshold
(m)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sparker.......................... Applied Acoustics Dura- 141
Spark 240.
Geo Marine Survey System 56
2D SUHRS.
CHIRP............................ Edgetech 2000-DSS....... 56
Edgetech 216............ 9
Edgetech 424............ 10
Edgetech 512i........... 9
Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom 32
ImagerTM.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Results of modeling using the methodology described and shown above
indicated that, of the HRG survey equipment planned for use by Atlantic
Shores that has the potential to result in Level B harassment of marine
mammals, the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 would produce the largest
Level B harassment isopleth (141-m; please refer
[[Page 4214]]
back to Tables 6 and 7 above, as well as Table 6-1 in Atlantic Shores'
IHA application). Estimated Level B harassment isopleths associated
with the CHIRP equipment planned for use are also found in Tables 6 and
7. All CHIRPs equipment produced Level B harassment isopleths much
smaller than the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 sparker did.
Although Atlantic Shores does not expect to use sparker sources on
all planned survey days and during the entire duration that surveys are
likely to occur, Atlantic Shores proposes to assume for purposes of
analysis that the sparker would be used on all survey days and across
all hours. This is a conservative approach, as the actual sources used
on individual survey days may produce smaller harassment distances.
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section, we provide the information about presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations.
Habitat-based density models produced by the Duke University Marine
Geospatial Ecology Laboratory and the Marine-life Data and Analysis
Team, based on the best available marine mammal data from 1992-201
obtained in a collaboration between Duke University, the Northeast
Regional Planning Body, the University of North Carolina Wilmington,
the Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center, and NOAA (Roberts et
al., 2016a; Curtice et al., 2018), represent the best available
information regarding marine mammal densities in the survey area. More
recently, these data have been updated with new modeling results and
include density estimates for pinnipeds (Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017,
2018).
The density data presented by Roberts et al., (2016b, 2017, 2018,
2020) incorporates aerial and shipboard line-transect survey data from
NMFS and other organizations and incorporates data from eight
physiographic and 16 dynamic oceanographic and biological covariates,
and controls for the influence of sea state, group size, availability
bias, and perception bias on the probability of making a sighting.
These density models were originally developed for all cetacean taxa in
the U.S. Atlantic (Roberts et al., 2016a). In subsequent years, certain
models have been updated based on additional data as well as certain
methodological improvements. More information is available online at
https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke/EC/. Marine mammal density
estimates in the survey area (animals/km\2\) were obtained using the
most recent model results for all taxa (Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017,
2018, 2020). The updated models incorporate additional sighting data,
including sightings from NOAA's Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for
Protected Species (AMAPPS) surveys.
For the exposure analysis, density data from Roberts et al.,
(2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021) were mapped using a geographic information
system (GIS). For each of the survey areas (i.e., Lease Area, ECR
North, ECR South), the densities of each species as reported by Roberts
et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021) were averaged by season; thus, a
density was calculated for each species for spring, summer, fall and
winter. To be conservative, the greatest seasonal density calculated
for each species was then carried forward in the exposure analysis.
Estimated seasonal densities (animals per km\2\) of all marine mammal
species that may be taken by the proposed survey, for all survey areas
are shown in Tables C-1, C-2 and C-3 in Appendix C of Atlantic Shores'
IHA application. The maximum seasonal density values used to estimate
take numbers are shown in Table 8 below. Below, we discuss how
densities were assumed to apply to specific species for which the
Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021) models provide results at the
genus or guild level.
For bottlenose dolphin densities, Roberts et al., (2016b, 2017,
2018) does not differentiate by stock. The Western North Atlantic
northern migratory coastal stock is generally expected to occur only in
coastal waters from the shoreline to approximately the 20-m (65-ft)
isobath (Hayes et al., 2018). As the Lease Area is located within
depths exceeding 20-m, where the offshore stock would generally be
expected to occur, all calculated bottlenose dolphin exposures within
the Lease Area were assigned to the offshore stock. However, both
stocks have the potential to occur in the ECR North and ECR South
survey areas. To account for the potential for mixed stocks within ECR
North and South, the survey areas ECR North and South were divided
approximately along the 20-m depth isobath, which roughly corresponds
to the 10-fathom contour on NOAA navigation charts. As approximately 33
percent of ECR North and ECR South are 20-m or less in depth, 33
percent of the estimated take calculation for bottlenose dolphins was
applied to the Western North Atlantic northern migratory coastal stock
and the remaining 67 percent was applied to the offshore stock.
For this proposed project, Atlantic Shores has used the same pilot
whale densities that were previously used in the 2020 and subsequent
2021 (Renewal) IHAs. To better estimate the number of pilot whales that
could potentially be impacted by the proposed project, although
exposure is noted as unlikely to occur in the IHA application, Atlantic
Shores adjusted the take estimate by average group size.
Because the seasonality, feeding preferences, and habitat use by
gray seals often overlaps with that of harbor seals in the survey
areas, it was assumed that modeled takes of seals could occur to either
of the respective species. Furthermore, as the density models produced
by Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018) do not differentiate between the
different pinniped species, the same density estimates were applied to
both seal species. Because of this, pinniped density values reported in
Atlantic Shores' IHA application are described as ``seals'' and not
species-specific.
Since Atlantic Shores' 2020 and 2021 (Renewal) IHAs for HRG surveys
were completed, the North Atlantic right whale density data has been
updated for this proposed project. This is due to the inclusion of
three new datasets: 2011-2015 Northeast Large Pelagic Survey
Cooperative, 2017-2018 Marine Mammal Surveys of the Wind Energy Areas
conducted by the New England Aquarium, and 2017-2018 New York Bight
Whale Monitoring Program surveys conducted by the New York State
Department of Environmental conservation (NYSDEC). This new density
data shows distribution changes that are likely influenced by
oceanographic and prey covariates in the whale density model (Roberts
et al., 2021).
[[Page 4215]]
Table 8--Maximum Seasonal Marine Mammal Densities (Number of Animals per 100 km\2\) in the Survey Areas
(Appendix C of Atlantic Shores' IHA Application)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum seasonal densities
Species groups Species -----------------------------------------------
Lease area ECR north ECR south
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cetaceans.......................... North Atlantic right whale. 0.499 0.182 0.179
Humpback whale............. 0.076 0.082 0.103
Fin whale.................. 0.100 0.080 0.057
Sei whale.................. 0.004 0.004 0.002
Minke whale................ 0.055 0.017 0.019
Sperm whale................ 0.013 0.005 0.003
Long-finned pilot whale.... 0.036 0.012 0.009
Bottlenose dolphin (Western .............. 21.675 58.524
North Atlantic coastal
migratory).
Bottlenose dolphin (Western 21.752 21.675 58.524
North Atlantic offshore).
Common dolphin............. 3.120 1.644 1.114
Atlantic white-sided 0.487 0.213 0.152
dolphin.
Atlantic spotted dolphin... 0.076 0.059 0.021
Risso's dolphin............ 0.010 0.001 0.002
Harbor porpoise............ 2.904 7.357 2.209
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinnipeds.......................... Gray seal.................. 4.918 9.737 6.539
Harbor seal................ 4.918 9.737 6.539
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note--Many of the densities provided in this table have been previously used and applied during the 2020 IHA to
Atlantic Shores and its subsequent Renewal and remain applicable.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
In order to estimate the number of marine mammals predicted to be
exposed to sound levels that would result in harassment, radial
distances to predicted isopleths corresponding to Level B harassment
thresholds are calculated, as described above. The maximum distance
(i.e., 141-m distance associated with the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark
240) to the Level B harassment criterion and the estimated distance
traveled per day by a given survey vessel (i.e., 55-km (34.2-mi)) are
then used to calculate the daily ensonified area, or zone of influence
(ZOI) around the survey vessel.
Atlantic Shores estimates that proposed surveys will achieve a
maximum daily track line distance of 55 km per day (24-hour period)
during proposed HRG surveys. This distance accounts for the vessel
traveling at approximately 3.5 knots and accounts for non-active survey
periods. Based on the maximum estimated distance to the Level B
harassment threshold of 141-m (Table 7) and the maximum estimated daily
track line distance of 55 km across all survey sites, an area of 15.57
km\2\ would be ensonified to the Level B harassment threshold per day
across all survey sites during Atlantic Shores' proposed surveys (Table
9) based on the following formula:
Mobile Source ZOI = (Distance/day x 2r) + [pi]r[hairsp]\2\
Where:
Distance/day = the maximum distance a survey vessel could travel in
a 24-hour period; and
r = the maximum radial distance from a given sound source to the
NOAA Level A or Level B harassment thresholds.
Table 9--Maximum HRG Survey Area Distances for Atlantic Shores' Proposed Project
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Survey Maximum radial Calculated ZOI Total annual
Survey area active survey distances per distance (r) per day ensonified
days day in km (mi) in m (ft) (km\2\) area (km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease Area...................... 120 55 (34.2) 141 (463) 15.57 1,868.4
ECR North....................... 180 2,802.6
ECR South....................... 60 934.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described above, this is a conservative estimate as it assumes
the HRG source that results in the greatest isopleth distance to the
Level B harassment threshold would be operated at all times during the
entire survey, which may not ultimately occur.
The number of marine mammals expected to be incidentally taken per
day is then calculated by estimating the number of each species
predicted to occur within the daily ensonified area (animals/km\2\),
incorporating the maximum seasonal estimated marine mammal densities as
described above. Estimated numbers of each species taken per day across
all survey sites are then multiplied by the total number of survey days
(i.e., 360). The product is then rounded, to generate an estimate of
the total number of instances of harassment expected for each species
over the duration of the survey. A summary of this method is
illustrated in the following formula with the resulting proposed take
of marine mammals is shown below in Table 10:
Estimated Take = D x ZOI x # of days
Where:
D = average species density (per km\2\); and
ZOI = maximum daily ensonified area to relevant thresholds.
[[Page 4216]]
Table 10--Numbers of Potential Incidental Take of Marine Mammals Proposed for Authorization and Proposed Takes
as a Percentage of Population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
-------------------------------
Calculated Takes proposed Proposed takes
takes by Level for Level B Proposed takes (Level B
Species B harassment harassment to (Level B Harassment) as
\e\ be authorized Harassment) to a percentage
\f\ be authorized of population/
\f\ stock \a\ \f\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale...................... 17 17 17 4.62
Humpback whale.................................. 4 \c\ 8 8 0.57
Fin whale....................................... 5 5 5 0.07
Sei whale....................................... 2 2 2 0.03
Minke whale..................................... 2 2 2 0.01
Sperm whale..................................... 1 1 1 0.03
Long-finned pilot whale......................... 20 20 20 0.05
Bottlenose dolphin (W.N. Atlantic Coastal 385 385 385 5.80
Migratory).....................................
Bottlenose dolphin (W.N. Atlantic Offshore)..... 1,175 1,175 1,175 1.87
Common dolphin (short-beaked)................... 406 \b\ 560 560 0.32
Atlantic white-sided dolphin.................... 17 17 17 0.02
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................ 50 \d\ 100 100 0.25
Risso's dolphin................................. 30 30 30 0.08
Harbor porpoise................................. 282 282 282 0.30
Harbor seal..................................... 426 426 426 0.56
Gray seal....................................... 426 426 426 1.56
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Calculated percentages of population/stock were based on the population estimates (Nest) found in the NMFS's
draft 2021 U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessment on NMFS's website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).
\b\ Based on information obtained from the monitoring report provided to NMFS after the completion of the 2020
project, as well as information provided by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal communication, October 29,
2021), NMFS has proposed to increase the number of authorized takes (by Level B harassment only) for common
dolphins.
\c\ Based on recent data from King et al. (2021) where humpback whales were the most commonly sighted species in
the New York Bight, NMFS has proposed to increase the take of humpback whales by assuming that Atlantic
Shores' four modeled exposures would be of groups rather than individuals, and therefore multiplied by an
average group size of two to yield eight.
\d\ Based on information obtained from the monitoring report provided to NMFS after the completion of the 2020
project, as well as information provided by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal communication, October 29,
2021), NMFS has proposed to increase the number of authorized takes (by Level B harassment only) for Atlantic
spotted dolphins.
\e\ These values were proposed by Atlantic Shores.
\f\ These values were proposed by NMFS.
The take numbers shown in Table 10 represent those originally
calculated and requested by Atlantic Shores with minor modifications by
NMFS for humpback whales, common dolphins, and Atlantic spotted
dolphins, which are discussed below.
As noted within Atlantic Shores' IHA application and discussed
within the Renewal IHA application (see Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind,
2021), there was an adjustment made for Risso's dolphins, common
dolphins, and long-finned pilot whales based on typical pod and group
sizes, which yielded the values described above in Table 10. NMFS
agrees with these approaches, as described in the IHA applications,
with exception for three cetacean species described below.
Estimated takes of common dolphins were increased from the density-
based estimate based on information provided by Atlantic Shores (P.
Phifer, personal communication, October 29, 2021) and sightings
described in the 2020 monitoring report. Based on these previous
observations, exposures of common dolphins above the 160-dB harassment
threshold were estimated at 1.55 per day. Assuming that this same
exposure rate continues for the presently planned activity yields the
estimate provided in Table 10.
Based on recent information from King et al. (2021) that
demonstrated that the humpback whale is commonly sighted along the New
York Bight area, NMFS determined that the humpback whale take request
may be too low given the occurrence of animals near the survey area.
Because of this, NMFS proposes to double the requested take to account
for underestimates to the actual occurrence of this species within the
density data.
Previously, 100 takes of Atlantic spotted dolphins, by Level B
harassment, were authorized to Atlantic Shores during their 2020 IHA.
Based on a lack of sightings in the 2020 field season per the submitted
monitoring report, Atlantic Shores had requested and been authorized
half of these takes (50 Level B harassment) during their 2021 field
season for their Renewal IHA. However, based on information provided by
Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal communication, October 29, 2021)
as the monitoring report for the 2021 field season is not yet
available, NMFS has proposed to increase the take previously requested
by Atlantic Shores from 50 to 100 to account for the numerous sightings
of Atlantic spotted dolphins that had already occurred early into
Atlantic Shores' 2021 field season (17 takes out of 50 authorized for
the Renewal IHA).
As described above, Roberts et al. (2018) produced density models
for all seals and did not differentiate by seal species. The take
calculation methodology as described above resulted in an estimate of
852 total seal takes for both species. Based on this estimate, Atlantic
Shores has requested 852 takes total for pinnipeds (426 each species),
based on the use of the same density for both species as they are known
to overlap in habitat use, foraging, and spatial scale. Furthermore, as
the density estimates were not split by species in Roberts et al.
(2016b, 2017, 2018) this approach assumes that the likelihood of either
species occurring during the survey is equal. We think
[[Page 4217]]
this is a reasonable approach and therefore propose to authorize the
requested amount of take, as shown in Table 10.
Worth noting is the proposed authorized take of North Atlantic
right whales, which stems from an increase in the density of North
Atlantic right whales at the survey site. Atlantic Shores used
information from Roberts et al., (2020) that demonstrated that the
density of North Atlantic right whales has increased by approximately
40 percent in some portions of the survey area compared to the 2020 IHA
(see Table 11), which justifies the total proposed take number
presented above in Table 10. While past monitoring reports (see the
2020 report on NMFS' website) have reported no observations of North
Atlantic right whales during the 2020 surveys, NMFS agrees with the
approach taken by Atlantic Shores as using the best available science
to be conservative and proposes to authorize 17 takes by Level B
harassment only of North Atlantic right whales during the proposed
project.
Table 11--Changes in North Atlantic Right Whale Densities in the Project Site From the 2020 IHA to This Proposed 2022 IHA per Data From Roberts et al.,
(2020)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winter Spring Summer Fall
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020 IHA 2022 IHA 2020 IHA 2022 IHA 2020 IHA 2022 IHA 2020 IHA 2022 IHA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease Area...................................... 0.087 0.499 0.060 0.426 0.008 0.002 0.006 0.009
Northern ECR.................................... 0.068 0.182 0.056 0.149 0.008 0.001 0.006 0.011
Southern ECR.................................... 0.073 0.179 0.055 0.097 0.007 0.000 0.006 0.005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the 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 the
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 consider 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.
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned), 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.
Proposed Mitigation Measures
NMFS proposes the following proposed mitigation measures be
implemented during Atlantic Shores' proposed marine site
characterization surveys, in compliance with the proposed IHA and with
the NOAA Fisheries Greater Atlantic Regional Office (GARFO)
programmatic consultation (specifically Project Design Criteria (PDC)
4, 5, and 7) regarding geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic
coast in the three Atlantic Renewable Energy Regions (NOAA GARFO, 2021;
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/consultations/section-7-take-reporting-programmatics-greater-atlantic#offshore-wind-site-assessment-and-site-characterization-activities-programmatic-consultation).
Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones and Level B Harassment Zones
Marine mammal Exclusion Zones would be established around the HRG
survey equipment and monitored by protected species observers (PSOs).
These PSOs will be NMFS-approved visual PSOs. Based upon the acoustic
source in use (impulsive: Sparkers; non-impulsive: Non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers), a minimum of one PSO must be on duty, per source
vessel, during daylight hours and two PSOs must be on duty, per source
vessel, during nighttime hours. These PSO will monitor Exclusion Zones
based upon the radial distance from the acoustic source rather than
being based around the vessel itself. The Exclusion Zone distances are
as follows:
A 500-m Exclusion Zone for North Atlantic right whales
during use of specified acoustic sources (impulsive: Sparkers; non-
impulsive: Non-parametric sub-bottom profilers).
A 100-m Exclusion Zone for all other marine mammals
(excluding NARWs) during use of specified acoustic sources (except as
specified below). All visual monitoring must begin no less than 30
minutes prior to the initiation of the specified acoustic source and
must continue until 30 minutes after use of specified acoustic sources
ceases.
If a marine mammal were detected approaching or entering the
Exclusion Zones during the HRG survey, the vessel operator would adhere
to the shutdown procedures described below to minimize noise impacts on
the animals. These stated requirements will be included in the site-
specific training to be provided to the survey team.
Ramp-Up of Survey Equipment and Pre-Clearance of the Exclusion Zones
When technically feasible, a ramp-up procedure would be used for
HRG survey equipment capable of adjusting energy levels at the start or
restart of survey activities. A ramp-up would begin with the powering
up of the smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its lowest practical power
output appropriate for the survey. The ramp-up procedure would be used
in order to provide additional protection to marine
[[Page 4218]]
mammals near the survey area by allowing them to vacate the area prior
to the commencement of survey equipment operation at full power. When
technically feasible, the power would then be gradually turned up and
other acoustic sources would be added. All ramp-ups shall be scheduled
so as to minimize the time spent with the source being activated.
Ramp-up activities will be delayed if a marine mammal(s) enters its
respective Exclusion Zone. Ramp-up will continue if the animal has been
observed exiting its respective Exclusion Zone or until an additional
time period has elapsed with no further sighting (i.e., 15 minutes for
small odontocetes and seals and 30 minutes for all other species).
Atlantic Shores would implement a 30 minute pre-clearance period of
the Exclusion Zones prior to the initiation of ramp-up of HRG
equipment. The operator must notify a designated PSO of the planned
start of ramp-up where the notification time should not be less than 60
minutes prior to the planned ramp-up. This would allow the PSOs to
monitor the Exclusion Zones for 30 minutes prior to the initiation of
ramp-up. Prior to ramp-up beginning, Atlantic Shores must receive
confirmation from the PSO that the Exclusion Zone is clear prior to
proceeding. During this 30 minute pre-start clearance period, the
entire applicable Exclusion Zones must be visible. The exception to
this would be in situations where ramp-up may occur during periods of
poor visibility (inclusive of nighttime) as long as appropriate visual
monitoring has occurred with no detections of marine mammals in 30
minutes prior to the beginning of ramp-up. Acoustic source activation
may only occur at night where operational planning cannot reasonably
avoid such circumstances.
During this period, the Exclusion Zone will be monitored by the
PSOs, using the appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up may not be
initiated if any marine mammal(s) is within its respective Exclusion
Zone. If a marine mammal is observed within an Exclusion Zone during
the pre-clearance period, ramp-up may not begin until the animal(s) has
been observed exiting its respective Exclusion Zone or until an
additional time period has elapsed with no further sighting (i.e., 15
minutes for small odontocetes and pinnipeds and 30 minutes for all
other species). If a marine mammal enters the Exclusion Zone during
ramp-up, ramp-up activities must cease and the source must be shut
down. Any PSO on duty has the authority to delay the start of survey
operations if a marine mammal is detected within the applicable pre-
start clearance zones.
The pre-clearance zones would be:
500-m for all ESA-listed species (North Atlantic right,
sei, fin, sperm whales); and
100-m for all other marine mammals.
If any marine mammal species that are listed under the ESA are
observed within the clearance zones, the 30 minute clock must be
paused. If the PSO confirms the animal has exited the zone and headed
away from the survey vessel, the 30 minute clock that was paused may
resume. The pre-clearance clock will reset to 30 minutes if the animal
dives or visual contact is otherwise lost.
If the acoustic source is shut down for brief periods (i.e., less
than 30 minutes) for reasons other than implementation of prescribed
mitigation (e.g., mechanical difficulty), it may be activated again
without ramp-up if PSOs have maintained constant visual observation and
no detections of marine mammals have occurred within the applicable
Exclusion Zone. For any longer shutdown, pre-start clearance
observation and ramp-up are required.
Activation of survey equipment through ramp-up procedures may not
occur when visual detection of marine mammals within the pre-clearance
zone is not expected to be effective (e.g., during inclement conditions
such as heavy rain or fog).
The acoustic source(s) must be deactivated when not acquiring data
or preparing to acquire data, except as necessary for testing.
Unnecessary use of the acoustic source shall be avoided.
Shutdown Procedures
An immediate shutdown of the impulsive HRG survey equipment (Table
7) would be required if a marine mammal is sighted entering or within
its respective Exclusion Zone(s). Any PSO on duty has the authority to
call for a shutdown of the acoustic source if a marine mammal is
detected within the applicable Exclusion Zones. Any disagreement
between the PSO and vessel operator should be discussed only after
shutdown has occurred. The vessel operator would establish and maintain
clear lines of communication directly between PSOs on duty and crew
controlling the HRG source(s) to ensure that shutdown commands are
conveyed swiftly while allowing PSOs to maintain watch.
The shutdown requirement is waived for small delphinids (belonging
to the genera of the Family Delpinidae: Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus,
Stenella, or Tursiops) and pinnipeds if they are visually detected
within the applicable Exclusion Zones. If a species for which
authorization has not been granted, or, a species for which
authorization has been granted but the authorized number of takes have
been met, approaches or is observed within the applicable Level B
harassment zone, shutdown would occur. In the event of uncertainty
regarding the identification of a marine mammal species (i.e., such as
whether the observed marine mammal belongs to Delphinus,
Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or Tursiops for which shutdown is waived,
PSOs must use their best professional judgement in making the decision
to call for a shutdown.
Specifically, if a delphinid from the specified genera or a
pinniped is visually detected approaching the vessel (i.e., to bow
ride) or towed equipment, shutdown is not required.
Upon implementation of a shutdown, the source may be reactivated
after the marine mammal has been observed exiting the applicable
Exclusion Zone or following a clearance period of 15 minutes for harbor
porpoises and 30 minutes for all other species where there are no
further detections of the marine mammal.
Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and ramp-up procedures are not
required during HRG survey operations using only non-impulsive sources
(e.g., parametric sub-bottom profilers) other than non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers (e.g., CHIRPs). Pre-clearance and ramp-up, but not
shutdown, are required when using non-impulsive, non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers.
Seasonal Operating Requirements
As described above, the section of the proposed survey area
partially overlaps with a portion of a North Atlantic right whale SMA
off the port of New York/New Jersey. This SMA is active from November 1
through April 30 of each year. All survey vessels, regardless of
length, would be required to adhere to vessel speed restrictions (<10
knots) when operating within the SMA during times when the SMA is
active. In addition, between watch shifts, members of the monitoring
team would consult NMFS' North Atlantic right whale reporting systems
for the presence of North Atlantic right whales throughout survey
operations. Members of the monitoring team would also monitor the NMFS
North Atlantic right whale reporting systems for the establishment of
Dynamic Management Areas (DMA). NMFS may also establish voluntary right
whale Slow Zones any time a right whale (or whales) is acoustically
detected. Atlantic Shores should be aware of this possibility and
[[Page 4219]]
remain attentive in the event a Slow Zone is established nearby or
overlapping the survey area (Table 12).
Table 12--North Atlantic Right Whale Dynamic Management Area (DMA) and Seasonal Management Area (SMA)
Restrictions Within the Survey Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Survey area Species DMA restrictions Slow zones SMA restrictions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease Area...................... North Atlantic If established by NMFS, all of N/A.
right whale Atlantic Shores' vessels will abide
(Eubalaena by the described restrictions
glacialis).
ECR North....................... November 1 through
July 31 (Raritan
Bay).
ECR South....................... N/A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information on Ship Strike Reduction for the North Atlantic right whale can be found at NMFS' website:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales.
There are no known marine mammal rookeries or mating or calving
grounds in the survey area that would otherwise potentially warrant
increased mitigation measures for marine mammals or their habitat (or
both). The proposed survey would occur in an area that has been
identified as a biologically important area for migration for North
Atlantic right whales. However, given the small spatial extent of the
survey area relative to the substantially larger spatial extent of the
right whale migratory area and the relatively low amount of noise
generated by the survey, the survey is not expected to appreciably
reduce the quality of migratory habitat nor to negatively impact the
migration of North Atlantic right whales, thus mitigation to address
the proposed survey's occurrence in North Atlantic right whale
migratory habitat is not warranted.
Vessel Strike Avoidance
Vessel operators must comply with the below measures except under
extraordinary circumstances when the safety of the vessel or crew is in
doubt or the safety of life at sea is in question. These requirements
do not apply in any case where compliance would create an imminent and
serious threat to a person or vessel or to the extent that a vessel is
restricted in its ability to maneuver and, because of the restriction,
cannot comply.
Survey vessel crewmembers responsible for navigation duties will
receive site-specific training on marine mammals sighting/reporting and
vessel strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike avoidance measures
would include the following, except under circumstances when complying
with these requirements would put the safety of the vessel or crew at
risk:
Atlantic Shores will ensure that vessel operators and crew
maintain a vigilant watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down,
stop their vessels, or alter course, as appropriate and regardless of
vessel size, to avoid striking any marine mammal. A single marine
mammal at the surface may indicate the presence of additional submerged
animals in the vicinity of the vessel; therefore, precautionary
measures should always be exercised. A visual observer aboard the
vessel must monitor a vessel strike avoidance zone around the vessel
(species-specific distances detailed below). Visual observers
monitoring the vessel strike avoidance zone may be third-party
observers (i.e., PSOs) or crew members, but crew members responsible
for these duties must be provided sufficient training to (1)
distinguish marine mammal from other phenomena, and (2) broadly to
identify a marine mammal as a right whale, other whale (defined in this
context as sperm whales or baleen whales other than right whales), or
other marine mammals. All vessels, regardless of size, must observe a
10-knot speed restriction in specific areas designated by NMFS for the
protection of North Atlantic right whales from vessel strikes,
including seasonal management areas (SMAs) and dynamic management areas
(DMAs) when in effect. See www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales
for specific detail regarding these areas.
All vessels must reduce their speed to 10-knots or less
when mother/calf pairs, pods, or large assemblages of cetaceans are
observed near a vessel;
All vessels must maintain a minimum separation distance of
500-m (1,640-ft) from right whales and other ESA-listed species. If an
ESA-listed species is sighted within the relevant separation distance,
the vessel must steer a course away at 10-knots or less until the 500-m
separation distance has been established. If a whale is observed but
cannot be confirmed as a species that is not ESA-listed, the vessel
operator must assume that it is an ESA-listed species and take
appropriate action.
All vessels must maintain a minimum separation distance of
100-m (328-ft) from non-ESA-listed baleen whales.
All vessels must, to the maximum extent practicable,
attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 50-m (164-ft) from
all other marine mammals, with an understanding that, at times, this
may not be possible (e.g., for animals that approach the vessel, bow-
riding species).
When marine mammal are sighted while a vessel is underway,
the vessel shall take action as necessary to avoid violating the
relevant separation distance (e.g., attempt to remain parallel to the
animal's course, avoid excessive speed or abrupt changes in direction
until the animal has left the area, reduce speed and shift the engine
to neutral). This does not apply to any vessel towing gear or any
vessel that is navigationally constrained.
Members of the monitoring team will consult NMFS North Atlantic
right whale reporting system and Whale Alert, daily and as able, for
the presence of North Atlantic right whales throughout survey
operations, and for the establishment of a DMA. If NMFS should
establish a DMA in the survey area during the survey, the vessels will
abide by speed restrictions in the DMA.
Training
All PSOs must have completed a PSO training program and received
NMFS approval to act as a PSO for geophysical surveys. Documentation of
NMFS approval and most recent training certificates of individual PSOs'
successful completion of a commercial PSO training course must be
provided upon request. Further information can be found at
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/protected-species-observers. In the event where third-party PSOs are
not required, crew members serving as lookouts must receive training on
protected species identification, vessel strike minimization
procedures, how and when to communicate with the vessel captain, and
reporting requirements.
[[Page 4220]]
Atlantic Shores shall instruct relevant vessel personnel with
regard to the authority of the marine mammal monitoring team, and shall
ensure that relevant vessel personnel and the marine mammal monitoring
team participate in a joint onboard briefing (hereafter PSO briefing),
led by the vessel operator and lead PSO, prior to beginning survey
activities to ensure that responsibilities, communication procedures,
marine mammal monitoring protocols, safety and operational procedures,
and IHA requirements are clearly understood. This PSO briefing must be
repeated when relevant new personnel (e.g., PSOs, acoustic source
operator) join the survey operations before their responsibilities and
work commences.
Project-specific training will be conducted for all vessel crew
prior to the start of a survey and during any changes in crew such that
all survey personnel are fully aware and understand the mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements. All vessel crew members must be
briefed in the identification of protected species that may occur in
the survey area and in regulations and best practices for avoiding
vessel collisions. Reference materials must be available aboard all
project vessels for identification of listed species. The expectation
and process for reporting of protected species sighted during surveys
must be clearly communicated and posted in highly visible locations
aboard all project vessels, so that there is an expectation for
reporting to the designated vessel contact (such as the lookout or the
vessel captain), as well as a communication channel and process for
crew members to do so. Prior to implementation with vessel crews, the
training program will be provided to NMFS for review and approval.
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 member understands and will comply with the
necessary requirements throughout the survey activities.
Based on our evaluation of Atlantic Shores' proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means
effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
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
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical to both
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density).
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks.
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat).
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
Atlantic Shores must use independent, dedicated, trained PSOs,
meaning that the PSOs must be employed by a third-party observer
provider, must have no tasks other than to conduct observational
effort, collect data, and communicate with and instruct relevant vessel
crew with regard to the presence of marine mammal and mitigation
requirements (including brief alerts regarding maritime hazards), and
must have successfully completed an approved PSO training course for
geophysical surveys. Visual monitoring must be performed by qualified,
NMFS-approved PSOs. PSO resumes must be provided to NMFS for review and
approval prior to the start of survey activities.
PSO names must be provided to NMFS by the operator for review and
confirmation of their approval for specific roles prior to commencement
of the survey. For prospective PSOs not previously approved, or for
PSOs whose approval is not current, NMFS must review and approve PSO
qualifications. Resumes should include information related to relevant
education, experience, and training, including dates, duration,
location, and description of prior PSO experience. Resumes must be
accompanied by relevant documentation of successful completion of
necessary training.
NMFS may approve PSOs as conditional or unconditional. A
conditionally-approved PSO may be one who is trained but has not yet
attained the requisite experience. An unconditionally-approved PSO is
one who has attained the necessary experience. For unconditional
approval, the PSO must have a minimum of 90 days at sea performing the
role during a geophysical survey, with the conclusion of the most
recent relevant experience not more than 18 months previous.
At least one of the visual PSOs aboard the vessel must be
unconditionally-approved. One unconditionally-approved visual PSO shall
be designated as the lead for the entire PSO team. This lead should
typically be the PSO with the most experience, would coordinate duty
schedules and roles for the PSO team, and serve as primary point of
contact for the vessel operator. To the maximum extent practicable, the
duty schedule shall be planned such that unconditionally-approved PSOs
are on duty with conditionally-approved PSOs.
PSOs must have successfully attained a bachelor's degree from an
accredited college or university with a major in one of the natural
sciences, a minimum of 30 semester hours or equivalent in the
biological sciences, and at least one undergraduate course in math or
statistics. The educational requirements may be waived if the PSO has
acquired the relevant skills through alternate experience. Requests for
such a waiver
[[Page 4221]]
shall be submitted to NMFS and must include written justification.
Alternate experience that may be considered includes, but is not
limited to (1) secondary education and/or experience comparable to PSO
duties; (2) previous work experience conducting academic, commercial,
or government-sponsored marine mammal surveys; and (3) previous work
experience as a PSO (PSO must be in good standing and demonstrate good
performance of PSO duties).
PSOs must successfully complete relevant training, including
completion of all required coursework and passing (80 percent or
greater) a written and/or oral examination developed for the training
program.
PSOs must coordinate to ensure 360[deg] visual coverage around the
vessel from the most appropriate observation posts and shall conduct
visual observations using binoculars or night-vision equipment and the
naked eye while free from distractions and in a consistent, systematic,
and diligent manner.
PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of four consecutive hours
followed by a break of at least two hours between watches and may
conduct a maximum of 12 hours of observation per 24-hour period.
Any observations of marine mammal by crew members aboard any vessel
associated with the survey shall be relayed to the PSO team.
Atlantic Shores must work with the selected third-party PSO
provider to ensure PSOs have all equipment (including backup equipment)
needed to adequately perform necessary tasks, including accurate
determination of distance and bearing to observed marine mammals, and
to ensure that PSOs are capable of calibrating equipment as necessary
for accurate distance estimates and species identification. Such
equipment, at a minimum, shall include:
At least one thermal (infrared) imagine device suited for
the marine environment;
Reticle binoculars (e.g., 7 x 50) of appropriate quality
(at least one per PSO, plus backups);
Global Positioning Units (GPS) (at least one plus
backups);
Digital cameras with a telephoto lens that is at least
300-mm or equivalent on a full-frame single lens reflex (SLR) (at least
one plus backups). The camera or lens should also have an image
stabilization system;
Equipment necessary for accurate measurement of distances
to marine mammal;
Compasses (at least one plus backups);
Means of communication among vessel crew and PSOs; and
Any other tools deemed necessary to adequately and
effectively perform PSO tasks.
The equipment specified above may be provided by an individual PSO,
the third-part PSO provider, or the operator, but Atlantic Shores is
responsible for ensuring PSOs have the proper equipment required to
perform the duties specified in the IHA.
During good conditions (e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort sea state 3
or less), PSOs shall conduct observations when the specified acoustic
sources are not operating for comparison of sighting rates and behavior
with and without use of the specified acoustic sources and between
acquisition periods, to the maximum extent practicable.
The PSOs will be responsible for monitoring the waters surrounding
each survey vessel to the farthest extent permitted by sighting
conditions, including Exclusion Zones, during all HRG survey
operations. PSOs will visually monitor and identify marine mammals,
including those approaching or entering the established Exclusion Zones
during survey activities. It will be the responsibility of the PSO(s)
on duty to communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to
communicate the action(s) that are necessary to ensure mitigation and
monitoring requirements are implemented as appropriate.
Atlantic Shores plans to utilize six PSOs across each vessel to
account for shift changes, with a total of 18 during this project (six
PSOs per vessel x three vessels). At a minimum, during all HRG survey
operations (e.g., any day on which use of an HRG source is planned to
occur), one PSO must be on duty during daylight operations on each
survey vessel, conducting visual observations at all times on all
active survey vessels during daylight hours (i.e., from 30 minutes
prior to sunrise through 30 minutes following sunset) and two PSOs will
be on watch during nighttime operations. The PSO(s) would ensure
360[deg] visual coverage around the vessel from the most appropriate
observation posts and would conduct visual observations using
binoculars and/or night vision goggles and the naked eye while free
from distractions and in a consistent, systematic, and diligent manner.
PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of four consecutive hours followed
by a break of at least two hours between watches and may conduct a
maximum of 12 hours of observation per 24-hr period. In cases where
multiple vessels are surveying concurrently, any observations of marine
mammals would be communicated to PSOs on all nearby survey vessels.
PSOs must be equipped with binoculars and have the ability to
estimate distance and bearing to detect marine mammals, particularly in
proximity to Exclusion Zones. Reticulated binoculars must also be
available to PSOs for use as appropriate based on conditions and
visibility to support the sighting and monitoring of marine mammals.
During nighttime operations, night-vision goggles with thermal clip-ons
and infrared technology would be used. Position data would be recorded
using hand-held or vessel GPS units for each sighting.
During good conditions (e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort sea state
(BSS) 3 or less), to the maximum extent practicable, PSOs would also
conduct observations when the acoustic source is not operating for
comparison of sighting rates and behavior with and without use of the
active acoustic sources. Any observations of marine mammals by crew
members aboard any vessel associated with the survey would be relayed
to the PSO team. Data on all PSO observations would be recorded based
on standard PSO collection requirements (see Proposed Reporting
Measures). This would include dates, times, and locations of survey
operations; dates and times of observations, location and weather;
details of marine mammal sightings (e.g., species, numbers, behavior);
and details of any observed marine mammal behavior that occurs (e.g.,
noted behavioral disturbances).
Proposed Reporting Measures
Atlantic Shores shall submit a draft comprehensive report on all
activities and monitoring results within 90 days of the completion of
the survey or expiration of the IHA, whichever comes sooner. The report
must describe all activities conducted and sightings of marine mammals,
must provide full documentation of methods, results, and interpretation
pertaining to all monitoring, and must summarize the dates and
locations of survey operations and all marine mammals sightings (dates,
times, locations, activities, associated survey activities). The draft
report shall also include geo-referenced, time-stamped vessel
tracklines for all time periods during which acoustic sources were
operating. Tracklines should include points recording any change in
acoustic source status (e.g., when the sources began operating, when
they were turned off, or when they changed operational status such as
from full array to single gun or vice versa). GIS files shall be
provided in ESRI
[[Page 4222]]
shapefile format and include the UTC date and time, latitude in decimal
degrees, and longitude in decimal degrees. All coordinates shall be
referenced to the WGS84 geographic coordinate system. In addition to
the report, all raw observational data shall be made available. The
report must summarize the information submitted in interim monthly
reports (if required) as well as additional data collected. A final
report must be submitted within 30 days following resolution of any
comments on the draft report. All draft and final marine mammal and
acoustic monitoring reports must be submitted to
[email protected] and [email protected].
PSOs must use standardized electronic data forms to record data.
PSOs shall record detailed information about any implementation of
mitigation requirements, including the distance of marine mammal to the
acoustic source and description of specific actions that ensued, the
behavior of the animal(s), any observed changes in behavior before and
after implementation of mitigation, and if shutdown was implemented,
the length of time before any subsequent ramp-up of the acoustic
source. If required mitigation was not implemented, PSOs should record
a description of the circumstances. At a minimum, the following
information must be recorded:
1. Vessel names (source vessel and other vessels associated with
survey), vessel size and type, maximum speed capability of vessel;
2. Dates of departures and returns to port with port name;
3. The lease number;
4. PSO names and affiliations;
5. Date and participants of PSO briefings;
6. Visual monitoring equipment used;
7. PSO location on vessel and height of observation location above
water surface;
8. Dates and times (Greenwich Mean Time) of survey on/off effort
and times corresponding with PSO on/off effort;
9. Vessel location (decimal degrees) when survey effort begins and
ends and vessel location at beginning and end of visual PSO duty
shifts;
10. Vessel location at 30-second intervals if obtainable from data
collection software, otherwise at practical regular interval
11. Vessel heading and speed at beginning and end of visual PSO
duty shifts and upon any change;
12. Water depth (if obtainable from data collection software);
13. Environmental conditions while on visual survey (at beginning
and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change significantly),
including BSS and any other relevant weather conditions including cloud
cover, fog, sun glare, and overall visibility to the horizon;
14. Factors that may contribute to impaired observations during
each PSO shift change or as needed as environmental conditions change
(e.g., vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); and
15. Survey activity information (and changes thereof), such as
acoustic source power output while in operation, number and volume of
airguns operating in an array, tow depth of an acoustic source, and any
other notes of significance (i.e., pre-start clearance, ramp-up,
shutdown, testing, shooting, ramp-up completion, end of operations,
streamers, etc.).
Upon visual observation of any marine mammal, the following
information must be recorded:
1. Watch status (sighting made by PSO on/off effort, opportunistic,
crew, alternate vessel/platform);
2. Vessel/survey activity at time of sighting (e.g., deploying,
recovering, testing, shooting, data acquisition, other);
3. PSO who sighted the animal;
4. Time of sighting;
5. Initial detection method;
6. Sightings cue;
7. Vessel location at time of sighting (decimal degrees);
8. Direction of vessel's travel (compass direction);
9. Speed of the vessel(s) from which the observation was made;
10. Identification of the animal (e.g., genus/species, lowest
possible taxonomic level or unidentified); also note the composition of
the group if there is a mix of species;
11. Species reliability (an indicator of confidence in
identification);
12. Estimated distance to the animal and method of estimating
distance;
13. Estimated number of animals (high/low/best);
14. Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, yearlings,
juveniles, calves, group composition, etc.);
15. Description (as many distinguishing features as possible of
each individual seen, including length, shape, color, pattern, scars,
or markings, shape and size of dorsal fin, shape of head, and blow
characteristics);
16. Detailed behavior observations (e.g., number of blows/breaths,
number of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, traveling;
as explicit and detailed as possible; note any observed changes in
behavior before and after point of closest approach);
17. Mitigation actions; description of any actions implemented in
response to the sighting (e.g., delays, shutdowns, ramp-up, speed or
course alteration, etc.) and time and location of the action;
18. Equipment operating during sighting;
19. Animal's closest point of approach and/or closest distance from
the center point of the acoustic source; and
20. Description of any actions implemented in response to the
sighting (e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up) and time and location of the
action.
If a North Atlantic right whale is observed at any time by PSOs or
personnel on any project vessels, during surveys or during vessel
transit, Atlantic Shores must report the sighting information to the
NMFS North Atlantic Right Whale Sighting Advisory System (866-755-6622)
within two hours of occurrence, when practicable, or no later than 24
hours after occurrence. North Atlantic right whale sightings in any
location may also be reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via channel 16
and through the WhaleAlert app (https://www.whalealert.org).
In the event that Atlantic Shores personnel discover an injured or
dead marine mammal, regardless of the cause of injury or death. In the
event that personnel involved in the survey activities discover an
injured or dead marine mammal, Atlantic Shores must report the incident
to NMFS as soon as feasible by phone (866-755-6622) and by email
([email protected] and [email protected]) as
soon as feasible. The report must include the following information:
1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
2. Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
3. Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the
animal is dead);
4. Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
5. If available, photographs or video footage of the animal(s); and
6. General circumstances under which the animal was discovered.
In the unanticipated event of a ship strike of a marine mammal by
any vessel involved in the activities covered by the IHA, Atlantic
Shores must report the incident to NMFS by phone (866-755-6622) and by
email ([email protected] and
[email protected]) as soon as feasible. The report
would include the following information:
1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
2. Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
[[Page 4223]]
3. Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
4. Vessel's course/heading and what operations were being conducted
(if applicable);
5. Status of all sound sources in use;
6. Description of avoidance measures/requirements that were in
place at the time of the strike and what additional measures were
taken, if any, to avoid strike;
7. Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility) immediately preceding the
strike;
8. Estimated size and length of animal that was struck;
9. Description of the behavior of the marine mammal immediately
preceding and/or following the strike;
10. If available, description of the presence and behavior of any
other marine mammals immediately preceding the strike;
11. Estimated fate of the animal (e.g., dead, injured but alive,
injured and moving, blood or tissue observed in the water, status
unknown, disappeared); and
12. To the extent practicable, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s).
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, our analysis applies to all the species listed
in Table 4, given that NMFS expects the anticipated effects of the
proposed survey to be similar in nature. Where there are meaningful
differences between species or stocks--as is the case of the North
Atlantic right whale--they are included as separate subsections below.
NMFS does not anticipate that serious injury or mortality would occur
as a result from HRG surveys, even in the absence of mitigation, and no
serious injury or mortality is proposed to be authorized. As discussed
in the Potential Effects section, non-auditory physical effects and
vessel strike are not expected to occur. NMFS expects that all
potential takes would be in the form of short-term Level B behavioral
harassment in the form of temporary avoidance of the area or decreased
foraging (if such activity was occurring), reactions that are
considered to be of low severity and with no lasting biological
consequences (e.g., Southall et al., 2007). Even repeated Level B
harassment of some small subset of an overall stock is unlikely to
result in any significant realized decrease in viability for the
affected individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse impact
to the stock as a whole. As described above, Level A harassment is not
expected to occur given the nature of the operations, the estimated
size of the Level A harassment zones, and the required shutdown zones
for certain activities.
In addition to being temporary, the maximum expected harassment
zone around a survey vessel is 141 m. Although this distance is assumed
for all survey activity in estimating take numbers proposed for
authorization and evaluated here, in reality, the Applied Acoustics
Dura-Spark 240 would likely not be used across the entire 24-hour
period and across all 360 days. As noted in Table 7, the other acoustic
sources Atlantic Shores has included in their application produce Level
B harassment zones below 60-m. Therefore, the ensonified area
surrounding each vessel is relatively small compared to the overall
distribution of the animals in the area and their use of the habitat.
Feeding behavior is not likely to be significantly impacted as prey
species are mobile and are broadly distributed throughout the survey
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
and the availability of similar habitat and resources in the
surrounding area, 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.
There are no rookeries, mating or calving grounds known to be
biologically important to marine mammals within the proposed survey
area and there are no feeding areas known to be biologically important
to marine mammals within the proposed survey area. There is no
designated critical habitat for any ESA-listed marine mammals in the
proposed survey area.
North Atlantic Right Whales
The status of the North Atlantic right whale population is of
heightened concern and, therefore, merits additional analysis. As noted
previously, elevated North Atlantic right whale mortalities began in
June 2017 and there is an active UME. Overall, preliminary findings
support human interactions, specifically vessel strikes and
entanglements, as the cause of death for the majority of right whales.
As noted previously, the proposed survey area overlaps a migratory
corridor BIA for North Atlantic right whales. Due to the fact that the
proposed survey activities are temporary and the spatial extent of
sound produced by the survey would be very small relative to the
spatial extent of the available migratory habitat in the BIA, right
whale migration is not expected to be impacted by the proposed survey.
Given the relatively small size of the ensonified area, it is unlikely
that prey availability would be adversely affected by HRG survey
operations. Required vessel strike avoidance measures will also
decrease risk of ship strike during migration; no ship strike is
expected to occur during Atlantic Shores' proposed activities. The 500-
m shutdown zone for right whales is conservative, considering the Level
B harassment isopleth for the most impactful acoustic source (i.e.,
sparker) is estimated to be 141-m, and thereby minimizes the potential
for behavioral harassment of this species.
As noted previously, Level A harassment is not expected due to the
small PTS zones associated with HRG equipment types proposed for use.
The proposed authorizations for Level B harassment takes of North
Atlantic right
[[Page 4224]]
whale are not expected to exacerbate or compound upon the ongoing UME.
The limited North Atlantic right whale Level B harassment takes
proposed for authorization are expected to be of a short duration, and
given the number of estimated takes, repeated exposures of the same
individual are not expected. Further, given the relatively small size
of the ensonified area during Atlantic Shores' proposed activities, it
is unlikely that North Atlantic right whale prey availability would be
adversely affected. Accordingly, NMFS does not anticipate North
Atlantic right whales takes that would result from Atlantic Shores'
proposed activities would impact annual rates of recruitment or
survival. Thus, any takes that occur would not result in population
level impacts.
Other Marine Mammal Species With Active UMEs
As noted previously, there are several active UMEs occurring in the
vicinity of Atlantic Shores' proposed survey area. Elevated humpback
whale mortalities have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine
through Florida since January 2016. Of the cases examined,
approximately half had evidence of human interaction (ship strike or
entanglement). The UME does not yet provide cause for concern regarding
population-level impacts. Despite the UME, the relevant population of
humpback whales (the West Indies breeding population, or DPS) remains
stable at approximately 12,000 individuals.
Beginning in January 2017, elevated minke whale strandings have
occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina,
with highest numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and New York. This event
does not provide cause for concern regarding population level impacts,
as the likely population abundance is greater than 20,000 whales.
Elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal mortalities were
first observed in July 2018 and have occurred across Maine, New
Hampshire, and Massachusetts. Based on tests conducted so far, the main
pathogen found in the seals is phocine distemper virus, although
additional testing to identify other factors that may be involved in
this UME are underway. The UME does not yet provide cause for concern
regarding population-level impacts to any of these stocks. For harbor
seals, the population abundance is over 75,000 and annual M/SI (350) is
well below PBR (2,006) (Hayes et al., 2020). The population abundance
for gray seals in the United States is over 27,000, with an estimated
abundance, including seals in Canada, of approximately 450,000. In
addition, the abundance of gray seals is likely increasing in the U.S.
Atlantic as well as in Canada (Hayes et al., 2020).
The required mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number
and/or severity of proposed takes for all species listed in Table 4,
including those with active UMEs, to the level of least practicable
adverse impact. In particular, they would provide animals the
opportunity to move away from the sound source throughout the survey
area before HRG survey equipment reaches full energy, thus preventing
them from being exposed to sound levels that have the potential to
cause injury (Level A harassment) or more severe Level B harassment. As
discussed previously, take by Level A harassment (injury) is considered
unlikely, even absent mitigation, based on the characteristics of the
signals produced by the acoustic sources planned for use, and is not
proposed for authorization. Implementation of required mitigation would
further reduce this potential. Therefore, NMFS is not proposing any
Level A harassment for authorization.
NMFS expects that takes would be in the form of short-term Level B
behavioral harassment by way of brief startling reactions and/or
temporary vacating of the area, or decreased foraging (if such activity
was occurring)--reactions that (at the scale and intensity anticipated
here) are considered to be of low severity, with no lasting biological
consequences. Since both the sources and marine mammals are mobile,
animals would only be exposed briefly to a small ensonified area that
might result in take. Additionally, required mitigation measures would
further reduce exposure to sound that could result in more severe
behavioral harassment.
Biologically Important Areas for Other Species
As previously discussed, impacts from the proposed project are
expected to be localized to the specific area of activity and only
during periods of time where Atlantic Shores' acoustic sources are
active. While areas of biological importance to fin whales, humpback
whales, and harbor seals can be found off the coast of New Jersey and
New York, NMFS does not expect this proposed action to affect these
areas. This is due to the combination of the mitigation and monitoring
measures being required of Atlantic Shores as well as the location of
these biologically important areas. All of these important areas are
found outside of the range of this survey area, as is the case with fin
whales and humpback whales (BIAs found further north), and, therefore,
not expected to be impacted by Atlantic Shores' proposed survey
activities.
Three major haul-out sites exist for harbor seals within ECR North
along New Jersey, including at Great Bay, Sand Hook, and Barnegat Inlet
(CWFNJ, 2015). As hauled out seals would be out of the water, no in-
water effects are expected.
Preliminary Determinations
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from
this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No mortality or serious injury is anticipated or proposed
to be authorized;
No Level A harassment (PTS) is anticipated, even in the
absence of mitigation measures, or proposed for authorization;
Foraging success is not likely to be impacted as effects
on species that serve as prey species for marine mammals from the
survey are expected to be minimal;
The availability of alternate areas of similar habitat
value for marine mammals to temporarily vacate the survey area during
the planned survey to avoid exposure to sounds from the activity;
Take is anticipated to be by Level B behavioral harassment
only consisting of brief startling reactions and/or temporary avoidance
of the survey area;
While the survey area is within areas noted as a migratory
BIA for North Atlantic right whales, the activities would occur in such
a comparatively small area such that any avoidance of the survey area
due to activities would not affect migration; and
The proposed mitigation measures, including effective
visual monitoring, and shutdowns are expected to minimize potential
impacts to marine mammals.
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.
[[Page 4225]]
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to
small numbers of marine mammals. When the predicted number of
individuals to be taken is less than one third of the species or stock
abundance, the take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally,
other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as
the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.
NMFS proposes to authorize incidental take (by Level B harassment
only) of 15 marine mammal species (with 16 managed stocks). The total
amount of takes proposed for authorization relative to the best
available population abundance is less than 6 percent for all stocks
(Table 9). Therefore, NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of
marine mammals may be taken relative to the estimated overall
population abundances for those stocks.
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
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR) consults internally whenever
we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species.
NMFS OPR is proposing to authorize the incidental take of four
species of marine mammals which are listed under the ESA, including the
North Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has determined
that this activity falls within the scope of activities analyzed in
NMFS GARFO's programmatic consultation regarding geophysical surveys
along the U.S. Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic Renewable Energy
Regions (completed June 29, 2021; revised September 2021). NMFS GARFO
concurred with this determination.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to Atlantic Shores authorizing take, by Level B harassment
incidental to conducting marine site characterization surveys off of
New Jersey and New York from April 20, 2022 through April 19, 2023,
provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated. A draft of the proposed IHA can be found
at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and
any other aspect of this notice of proposed IHA for the proposed site
characterization surveys. We also request at this time comment on the
potential Renewal of this proposed IHA as described in the paragraph
below. Please include with your comments any supporting data or
literature citations to help inform decisions on the request for this
proposed IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-time, one-year
Renewal IHA following notification to the public providing an
additional 15 days for public comments when (1) up to another year of
identical or nearly identical, or nearly identical, activities as
described in the Description of Proposed Activities section of this
notification is planned or (2) the activities as described in the
Description of Proposed Activities section of this notification would
not be completed by the time the IHA expires and a Renewal would allow
for completion of the activities beyond that described in the Dates and
Duration section of this notification, provided all of the following
conditions are met:
A request for Renewal is received no later than 60 days
prior to the needed Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing that the
Renewal IHA expiration date cannot extend beyond one year from
expiration of the initial IHA);
The request for Renewal must include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the
requested Renewal IHA are identical to the activities analyzed under
the initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so
minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) that the changes do not affect the
previous analyses, mitigation and monitoring requirements, or take
estimates (with the exception of reducing the type or amount of take);
and
(2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the
required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the
monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not
previously analyzed or authorized.
Upon review of the request for Renewal, the status of the affected
species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS determines
that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, the
mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and
appropriate, and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid.
Dated: January 21, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-01557 Filed 1-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P