Home/Federal/Federal Register/2022-01557

Notice2022-01557

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

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published

January 27, 2022

Issuing agencies

Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Abstract

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.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4200-4225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2a637e7a047a455e464549416a44454b4b044d455c">[email&#160;protected]</a>.
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 <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable</a> 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: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable</a>. 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
<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-atlantic-shores-offshore-wind-llc-marine-site-characterization">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-atlantic-shores-offshore-wind-llc-marine-site-characterization</a>).
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:
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Magnetic intensity measurements (gradiometer) for
detecting local variations in regional magnetic field from geological
strata and potential ferrous objects on and below the bottom;
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> 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,
<bullet> 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 (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable</a>).
\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; <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>) and more general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's
website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>).
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: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>.

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: <a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>. 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 (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>), 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 (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>).
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:
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event</a>. 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 (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales</a>).

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: <a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2021-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2021-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast</a>.

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:
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast</a>.

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:
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/marine-life-distress/2018-2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-event-along">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/marine-life-distress/2018-2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-event-along</a>.

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 <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance</a>.

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
<a href="https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke/EC/">https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke/EC/</a>. 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 (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports</a>).
\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;
<a href="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">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</a>).
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:
<bullet> 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).
<bullet> 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:
<bullet> 500-m for all ESA-listed species (North Atlantic right,
sei, fin, sperm whales); and
<bullet> 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:
<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales</a>.

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:
<bullet> 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 <a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales</a>
for specific detail regarding these areas.
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> All vessels must maintain a minimum separation distance of
100-m (328-ft) from non-ESA-listed baleen whales.
<bullet> 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).
<bullet> 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
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/protected-species-observers">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/protected-species-observers</a>. 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:
<bullet> Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density).
<bullet> 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).
<bullet> Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
<bullet> How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks.
<bullet> Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat).
<bullet> 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:
<bullet> At least one thermal (infrared) imagine device suited for
the marine environment;
<bullet> Reticle binoculars (e.g., 7 x 50) of appropriate quality
(at least one per PSO, plus backups);
<bullet> Global Positioning Units (GPS) (at least one plus
backups);
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> Equipment necessary for accurate measurement of distances
to marine mammal;
<bullet> Compasses (at least one plus backups);
<bullet> Means of communication among vessel crew and PSOs; and
<bullet> 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
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a6f6f488eff2f688ebc9c8cfd2c9d4cfc8c1f4c3d6c9d4d2d5e6c8c9c7c788c1c9d0">[email&#160;protected]</a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#82cbd6d2acd2edf6eeede1e9c2ecede3e3ace5edf4">[email&#160;protected]</a>.
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 (<a href="http://www.whalealert.org">http://www.whalealert.org</a>).
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
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aec0c3c8dd80c9cfdc80dddadccfc0cac7c0c9eec0c1cfcf80c9c1d8">[email&#160;protected]</a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6131334f2835314f2c0e0f08150e13080f063304110e131512210f0e00004f060e17">[email&#160;protected]</a>) 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 (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b2dcdfd4c19cd5d3c09cc1c6c0d3dcd6dbdcd5f2dcddd3d39cd5ddc4">[email&#160;protected]</a> and
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c8989ae6819c98e685a7a6a1bca7baa1a6af9aadb8a7babcbb88a6a7a9a9e6afa7be">[email&#160;protected]</a>) 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:
<bullet> No mortality or serious injury is anticipated or proposed
to be authorized;
<bullet> No Level A harassment (PTS) is anticipated, even in the
absence of mitigation measures, or proposed for authorization;
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> Take is anticipated to be by Level B behavioral harassment
only consisting of brief startling reactions and/or temporary avoidance
of the survey area;
<bullet> 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
<bullet> 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 <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable</a>.

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:
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> 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

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on January 27, 2022.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.