Notice2022-09917
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Marine Site Characterization Surveys Off New Jersey by NextEra Energy Transmission MidAtlantic Holdings, 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
May 9, 2022
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
NMFS has received a request from NextEra Energy Transmission MidAtlantic Holdings, LLC (NEETMA) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to high-resolution geophysical (HRG) site characterization surveys off the coast of New Jersey. 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 notice. NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested MMPA authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final notice of our decision.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 89 (Monday, May 9, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 89 (Monday, May 9, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27575-27597]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-09917]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XB832]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Marine Site Characterization
Surveys Off New Jersey by NextEra Energy Transmission MidAtlantic
Holdings, 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 NextEra Energy Transmission
MidAtlantic Holdings, LLC (NEETMA) for authorization to take marine
mammals incidental to high-resolution geophysical (HRG) site
characterization surveys off the coast of New Jersey. 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 notice. NMFS will consider public comments prior to
making any final decision on the issuance of the requested MMPA
authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final
notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than June 8,
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#f6bfa2a6d8a699829a99959db698999797d8919980"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bcf5e8ec92ecd3c8d0d3dfd7fcd2d3dddd92dbd3ca">[email protected]</span></a>.
[[Page 27576]]
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="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act</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/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act</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 proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed incidental harassment authorization is 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 (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 notice
prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the
IHA request.
Summary of Request
On February 4, 2022, NMFS received a request from NextEra Energy
Transmission MidAtlantic Holdings, LLC (NEETMA) for an IHA to take
marine mammals incidental to marine site characterization surveys
occurring in two locations (Northern and Southern survey areas) off the
coast of New Jersey in the New Jersey Offshore Transmission Facilities
Project (NJOTF or Project). The application was deemed adequate and
complete on April 1, 2022. NEETMA's request is for take of a small
number of 15 marine mammal species (consisting of 16 stocks) by Level B
harassment only. Neither NEETMA nor NMFS expects serious injury or
mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
NEETMA proposes to conduct HRG and geotechnical surveys as part of
the New Jersey Offshore Transmission Facilities Project NJOTF off the
coast of New Jersey. The surveys will take place along proposed
submarine export cable routes and at locations for potential offshore
platforms. Geotechnical survey activities would include the use of
vibracores and/or cone penetration tests (CPTs), to identify and
characterize the seabed conditions vertically for project planning and
design, and to collect data to identify paleolandscapes.
The purpose of the proposed surveys are to support the siting and
design of offshore facilities, including offshore platforms for
converter stations and offshore submarine transmission cables. As many
as three survey vessels may operate concurrently as part of the
proposed surveys. Underwater sound resulting from NEETMA's 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 activity is expected to consist of up
to 320 total survey days over the course of a single year within the
two survey areas (Table 1). As multiple vessels (i.e., three survey
vessels) may be operating concurrently across both survey areas, each
day that a single survey vessel is operating constitutes a single
survey day. Therefore, it is expected that the anticipated 320 survey
days would occur over a shorter aggregate duration. This schedule is
based on 24-hour operations that may be conducted at any time
throughout the year. The schedule presented here for this proposed
project has accounted for potential down time due to inclement weather
or other project-related delays. The IHA would be effective for a
period of one year.
Table 1--Number of Survey Days That NEETMA Plans To Perform the
Described HRG Survey Activities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of active
Survey area survey days
expected \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern............................................. 248
Southern............................................. 72
------------------
Total............................................ 320
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Up to three total survey vessels may be operating within both of the
survey areas concurrently.
Specific Geographic Region
NEETMA's proposed activities would occur in the Northwest Atlantic
Ocean within Federal and state waters (Figure 1). Surveys would occur
in both the Northern and Southern survey areas along potential areas
for future offshore
[[Page 27577]]
platforms used for converter stations and potential offshore submarine
transmission cable routes. NEETMA's proposed activities would occur
within the NJOTF. The total site area is approximately 1,861,198 acres
(2,908.121 square miles (mi\2\); 7,532 square kilometers (km\2\)) and
extends approximately 51 nautical miles (nm; 59.03 miles (mi); 95
kilometers (km)) offshore at its furthest point with some coastal
surveys planned. However, the expected area to be surveyed is much
smaller than the total site area, consisting of 6,254 km\2\ in the
Northern survey area and 1,278 km\2\ in the Southern. This equates to
approximately 5,183.97 km\2\ of ensonified area over the duration of
the activities.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 27578]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN09MY22.032
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
NEETMA's proposed marine site characterization surveys include HRG
and geotechnical survey activities. These surveys would occur within
both the Northern and Southern areas off New Jersey, as specified in
Figure 1. The Northern and Southern Project areas are
[[Page 27579]]
approximately 7,532 km\2\ (1,861,197.73 acres) and are located
approximately 95 kilometers offshore of New Jersey at the furthest
point. For the purposes of this proposed IHA, both the Northern and
Southern areas are collectively referred to as the survey sites.
NEETMA's survey activities are anticipated to be supported by vessels,
which will maintain a speed of approximately to 4 knots (kn; 7.4
kilometer per hour (km/h)) while transiting survey lines. The proposed
HRG and geotechnical survey activities are described below.
Proposed Geotechnical Survey Activities
NEETMA's proposed geotechnical activities would include the
drilling of vibracores and/or CPTs. Similar proposed activities have
been previously analyzed, e.g., see the proposed 2020 Federal Register
notice (85 FR 7926; February 12, 2020) and the proposed 2022 Federal
Register notice (87 FR 4200; January 27, 2022) for Atlantic Shores'
site characterization surveys. The same discussion by NMFS to not
analyze the geotechnical activities further that was included in that
notice (i.e., as they do not constitute take of marine mammals) was
determined to apply to this proposed project. In these notifications,
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
NEETMA 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 320
survey days. This includes 248 days of survey activities in the
Northern area and 72 days in the Southern area (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 both of the identified survey areas will be
executed by a total of three vessels during any given campaign (i.e.,
up to three vessels operating collectively across the 320 days of the
proposed project but each vessel may operate concurrently in either the
Northern or Southern survey areas). HRG survey equipment will either be
mounted to or towed behind the survey at a typical survey speed of
approximately 4 knot (7.4 km per hour).
The geophysical survey activities proposed by NEETMA may include
the use of the following equipment:
<bullet> Shallow Penetration Sub-bottom Profilers (SBPs; Compressed
High- Intensity Radiated Pulses [CHIRPs]);
<bullet> Medium penetration SBPs (Boomers);
<bullet> Medium penetration SBPs (Sparkers);
<bullet> Parametric SBPs, also called sediment echosounders;
<bullet> Ultra-short Baseline (USBL) Positioning and Global
Acoustic Positioning System (GAPS);
<bullet> Multibeam echosounder (MBES); and
<bullet> Seafloor imaging (sidescan sonar).
However, not all of the equipment described above has the potential
to harass marine mammals. The MBES and sidescan sonar are known to
produce sounds outside the hearing range of marine mammals (>180 kHz);
therefore these are not discussed further in this notice as they are
not expected to cause harassment. Specifically due to its functionality
and source characteristics as USBLs are primarily used to locate the
position(s) of other HRG equipment, USBLs are not expected to have the
reasonable potential to cause harassment of marine mammals. Lastly,
parametric SBPs tend to operate at high frequencies with very narrow
beamwidth, which results in small harassment zones (<4 m). Further, due
to the size of the Level B harassment zones produced by these acoustic
sources, both NMFS and NEETMA do not expect harassment to occur.
Therefore, and as noted in the IHA application, NMFS concurs that the
shallow and medium SBPs (Sparkers, Boomers, and CHIRPs) have the
potential to cause harassment to marine mammals.
Table 2 identifies the representative survey equipment that may be
used in support of planned geophysical survey activities that may also
cause the take of marine mammals. The make and model of the listed
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 Source level0- Pulse
Operating source level peak (dB re 1 Beamwidth ranges Typical pulse repetition
Equipment category HRG survey equipment type frequency ranges (dB re [mu]Pa m) (degrees) durations rate
ranges (kHZ) 1 [mu]Pa m) (millisecond) (Hz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Parametric Shallow Penetration SBPS (Non-Impulsive)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHIRPs............... ET 216 (2000DS or 3200 top 2-16 195 ............... 24.................... 20 6
unit).
2-8
ET 424...................... 4-24 176 ............... 71.................... 3.4 2
ET 512...................... 0.7-12 179 ............... 80.................... 9 8
GeoPulse 5430A.............. 2-17 196 ............... 55.................... 50 10
Teledyne Benthose Chirp III-- 2-7 197 ............... 100................... 60 15
TTV 170.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medium Penetration SBPs (Impulsive)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sparker.............. AA, Dura-spark UHD (400 0.3-1.2 203 211 Omnidirectional....... 1.1 4
tips, 500 J) \1\.
GeoMarine Geo Spark 2000 0.05-3 203 213 Omnidirectional....... 3.4 1
(400 tip) \1\.
Boomer............... AA, triple plate S-Boom (700- 0.1-5 205 211 80.................... 0.6 4
1,000 J) \2\.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: --= not applicable; [mu]Pa = micropascal; AA = Applied Acoustics; dB = decibel; ET = EdgeTech; J = joule; Omni = omnidirectional source; re =
referenced to; SL = source level; 0-PK = zero-to-peak; RMS = root mean squared; UHD = ultra-high definition.
[[Page 27580]]
\1\ The Dura-spark measurements and specifications provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) were used for all sparker systems proposed for the survey.
These include variants of the Dura-spark sparker system and various configurations of the GeoMarine Geo-Source sparker system. The data provided in
Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) represent the most applicable data for similar sparker systems with comparable operating methods and settings when
manufacturer or other reliable measurements are not available.
\2\ Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) provide S-Boom measurements using two different power sources (CSP-D700 and CSP-N). The CSP-D700 power source was
used in the 700 J measurements but not in the 1,000 J measurements. The CSP-N source was measured for both 700 J and 1,000 J operations but resulted
in a lower SL; therefore, the single maximum SL value was used for both operational levels of the S-Boom.
The deployment of HRG survey equipment, including the equipment
planned for use during NEETMA's 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 NEETMA's 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' 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' 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' draft 2021 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 Project Area That May Be Affected by NEETMA's Activity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 North Atlantic E/D, Y 368 (0; 356; 2020) \5\ 0.8 18.6
\6\.
Fin whale........................... Balaenoptera physalus.. Western North Atlantic E/D, Y 6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 11 2.35
2016).
Humpback whale...................... Megaptera novaengliae.. Gulf of Maine......... -/-, Y 1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016) 22 12.15
Minke whale......................... Balaenoptera Canadian East Coastal. -/-, N 21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 170 10.6
acutorostrata. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale......................... Physeter macrocephalus. North Atlantic........ E/D, Y 4,349 (0.28; 3,451; 3.9 0
2016).
Risso's dolphin..................... Grampus griseus........ Western North Atlantic -/-, N 35,493 (0.19; 30,289; 303 54.3
2016).
Long-finned pilot whale............. Globicephala melas..... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 39,215 (0.3; 30,627; 306 21
2016).
Short-finned pilot whale............ Globicephala Western North Atlantic -/-, Y 28,924 (0.24; 23,637, 236 136
macrorhynchus. 2016).
Atlantic white-sided dolphin........ Lagenorhynchus acutus.. Western North Atlantic -/-, N 93,233 (0.71; 54,443; 544 26
2016).
Common dolphin...................... Delphinus delphis...... Western North Atlantic -/-, Y 172,897 (0.21, 526 399
145,216, 2016).
Common bottlenose dolphin........... Tursiops truncatus..... Western North -/-, N 62,851 (0.23; 51,914; 519 28
Atlantic--Offshore. 2016).
Western North -/D, Y 6,639 (0.41; 4,759; 48 12.2-21.5
Atlantic--Coastal 2016).
Migratory.
Atlantic spotted dolphin............ Stenella frontalis..... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 320 0
2016).
Harbor porpoise..................... Phocoena phocoena...... Gulf of Maine/Bay of -/-, N 95,543 (0.31; 74,034; 851 217
Fundy. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal......................... Phoca vitulina......... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 75,834 (0.15; 66,884; 2006 350
2012).
Gray seal........................... Halichoerus grypus..... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 27,131 (0.19; 23,158; 1389 4,729
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.
[[Page 27581]]
\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 M/SI value given is for the total stock.
\5\ Abundance source is Pace et al. (2021). PBR and annual M/SI source is final 2020 SAR (Hayes et al. 2020). Because PBR is based on the minimum
population estimate, we anticipate it will be slightly lower than what is presented here given the Pace et al. (2021) abundance. Regardless of final
numbers, NMFS recognizes the NARW stock is critically endangered with a low PRB and high annual M/SI rate due primarily to ship strikes and
entanglement
\6\ The draft 2022 SARs have yet to be released; however, NMFS has updated its species web page to recognize the population estimate for NARWs is now
below 350 animals (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale</a>).
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.
The temporal and/or spatial occurrence of several cetacean and
pinniped species 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: Cuvier's beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), four species of
Mesoplodont beaked whale (Mesoplodon spp.), dwarf and pygmy sperm whale
(Kogia sima and Kogia breviceps), 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).
Furthermore, based on the density data presented in NEETMA's
application, NMFS considers it unlikely for sei whales (Balaenoptera
borealis) and blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus) to occur in the
project area due to the near-zero density estimates for both cetacean
species. 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 manatee (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 USFWS and are not considered further in this document.
Recently, NMFS has updated its species web page to recognize the
population estimate for NARWs is now below 350 animals (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale</a>). We
anticipate this to be more formalized in the draft 2022 SAR.
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 species can be found in Sections 3 and
4 of NEETMA's 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 (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>).
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
NEETMA's 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 March 16, 2022 and the writing of this
proposed Notice, 15 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 368
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,
[[Page 27582]]
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 5,183.97 km\2\ of total estimated
Level B harassment ensonified area associated with the 320 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.
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 April 14,
2022, 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>.
Right Whale Slow Zones are areas where mariners are encouraged to
avoid areas and/or reduce speeds to 10 kn to avoid vessel collisions
with North Atlantic right whales. Slow Zones typically persist for 15
days. 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. Whales occurring in the survey
area 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 the West
Indies DPS 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). 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 higher occurrence and use
(foraging) of the New York Bight area by humpback whales than
previously known.
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 158 known cases (as of April 14, 2022). 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 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).
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 122 strandings (as of April 14, 2022). 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>.
[[Page 27583]]
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 to Iceland,
Greenland and the Barents Sea (Hayes et al., 2021). In the 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 northward, and remain in these areas through
late fall (Hayes et al., 2021). Long-finned and short-finned pilot
whales overlap spatially along the mid-Atlantic shelf break between
Delaware and the southern flank of Georges Bank. Long-finned pilot
whales have occasionally been observed stranded as far south as South
Carolina, but sightings of long-finned pilot whales south of Cape
Hatteras would be considered unusual (Hayes et al., 2021). The main
threats to this species include interactions with fisheries and habitat
issues including exposure to high levels of polychlorinated biphenyls
and chlorinated pesticides, and toxic metals including mercury, lead,
and cadmium, and selenium (Hayes et al., 2021).
Short-Finned Pilot Whale
As described above, long-finned and short-finned pilot whales
overlap spatially with the survey area and along the mid-Atlantic
shelf. There is limited information on the distribution of short-finned
pilot whales. They prefer warmer tropical waters and deeper waters
offshore, and in the northeastern United States they are often sighted
near the Gulf Stream (Hayes et al., 2021). Short-finned pilot whales
have occasionally been observed stranded as far north as Massachusetts
but north of ~42[deg] N short-finned pilot whale sightings would be
considered unusual while south of Cape Hatteras most pilot whales would
expected to be short-finned pilot whales (Hayes et al., 2021). As with
long-finned pilot whales, the main threats to this species include
interactions with fisheries and habitat issues including exposure to
high levels of polychlorinated biphenyls and chlorinated pesticides,
and toxic metals including mercury, lead, cadmium, and selenium (Hayes
et al., 2021).
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 common dolphin is found worldwide in temperate to subtropical
seas. In the North Atlantic, 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 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
[[Page 27584]]
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 \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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 and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Fifteen marine mammal species (thirteen cetacean and two 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, four are classified as low-
frequency cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete species), eight are classified
as mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid and the sperm whale),
and one is classified as a high-frequency cetaceans (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 notices, including for survey activities using
similar HRG methodologies, over similar amounts of time, and occurring
within the Mid-Atlantic region,
[[Page 27585]]
including waters off New Jersey (e.g., 82 FR 20563, May 3, 2017; 85 FR
7926, February 12, 2020; 85 FR 37848, June 24, 2020; 86 FR 16327, March
29, 2021; and 87 FR 14823, March 16, 2022). 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 this activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination section considers the potential effects of the specified
activity, 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 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
[[Page 27586]]
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 and boomers 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., CHIRP SBPs) 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 NEETMA's proposed HRG survey activity
are unlikely to incur even TTS due to the characteristics of the sound
sources, which include relatively low source levels (176 to 205 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 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
[[Page 27587]]
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 NEETMA's 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. 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.
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, Level A harassment is neither
anticipated (even absent mitigation), nor proposed to be
[[Page 27588]]
authorized. Consideration of the anticipated effectiveness of the
measures (i.e., exclusion zones and shutdown measures), discussed in
detail below in the Proposed Mitigation section, further strengthens
the conclusion that Level A harassment is not a reasonably anticipated
outcome of the survey activity. As described previously, 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)
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 uses 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). 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., boomers, sparkers) and
non-impulsive, intermittent sources (e.g., CHIRP SBPs) evaluated here
for NEETMA's proposed activity.
Level A Harassment--NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0)
(Technical Guidance, 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). For more
information, see NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed
at <a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance</a>.
NEETMA's proposed activity includes the use of impulsive (i.e.,
sparkers and boomers) and non-impulsive, intermittent (e.g., CHIRP SBP)
sources. These can be found in Table 2.
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.
NMFS considers the data provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)
to represent the best available information on source levels associated
with HRG 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.
Results of modeling using the methodology described above indicated
that, of the HRG survey equipment planned for use by NEETMA that has
the potential to result in Level B harassment of marine mammals, the
Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark UHD and GeoMarine Geo-Source sparkers
would produce the largest Level B harassment isopleth (141 m).
Estimated Level B harassment isopleths for all sources evaluated here,
including the sparkers, are provided in Table 5. Although NEETMA does
not expect to use sparker sources on all planned survey days, it
proposes to assume for purposes of analysis that the sparker would be
used on all survey days. This is a conservative approach, as the actual
sources used on individual survey days may produce smaller harassment
distances.
Table 5--Distances to Level B Harassment Threshold
[160 dB rms]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance to
level B
Equipment category HRG equipment harassment
threshold in
meters (m)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow SBPs................... ET 216 CHIRP........... 9
ET 424 CHIRP........... 4
GeoPulse 5430.......... 21
TB CHIRP III........... 48
Medium SBPs.................... AA, triple plate S-Boom 34
(700-1,000 J).
AA, Dura-spark UHD (500 141
J/400 tip.
[[Page 27589]]
AA, Dura-spark UHD 141
400+400.
GeoMarine Geo Spark 141
2000 (400 tip).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide the information about the 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, marine mammal density data from Roberts
et al. (2016a; 2016b; 2017; 2018; 2020; 2021a; 2021b) were mapped for
the survey area using a geographic information system (GIS). NEETMA
used all 10 x 10 km (6.2 x 6.2 mile) grid cells (5 x 5 km (3.1 x 3.1
mile) for the North Atlantic right whale) where the centroid was within
each survey area in developing estimated density values for each
species. For data in which the Roberts et al. data does not provide
outputs at the species level (i.e., pilot whale spp. and pinnipeds) the
single annual density was used. For all other species, the monthly
densities were used to yield the average annual density. Bottlenose
dolphin density estimates were also divided based on the specified
stock.
In the Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018) models, species-specific
delineations were not made for some marine mammals, including some
pinniped species' (harbor seal and gray seal) and for pilot whale spp.
(long-finned and short-finned). For pilot whales, both species are
known to share similar habitat in the project area, feed on similar
prey, and have overlapping distributions (Mintzer et al., 2008; Rone
and Pace, 2012). Hayes et al. (2017) noted a particular overlap between
the two species between New Jersey and George's Bank. Furthermore, due
to their similar appearances at sea and difficulty in distinguishing
species-specific characteristics, observers are likely to combine
sightings of pilot whales (Waring, 1993; Rone and Pace, 2012; Stepanuk
et al., 2018).
Regarding the pinniped species, 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.
As discussed in the application, the single annual density for each
marine mammal group (pilot whale spp. and pinnipeds) was applied and
the results were divided between each species, resulting in an equal
split.
For the 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). Both of these stocks have the potential
to occur in the Northern and Southern survey areas. To account for the
potential for mixed stocks within the survey areas, the densities of
the two stocks were apportioned based on the 20-m isobaths contour. Any
grid cells in the Roberts et al. data that feel entirely inshore of the
20-m isobaths were assigned to the coastal migratory stock. Any grid
cells that fell outside this 20-m isobaths were apportioned to the
offshore stock.
Densities from both of the survey sites were averaged annually to
provide a density estimate for each species (Table 6). Please see Table
6 for density values used in the exposure estimation process.
Additional data regarding average group sizes from survey effort in the
region was considered to ensure adequate take estimates are evaluated.
[[Page 27590]]
Table 6--Maximum Seasonal Marine Mammal Densities (Number of Animals per 100 km\2\) in the Northern and Southern
Survey Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mean annual density (number of
animals/100km\2\) \a\
Species groups Marine mammal species Stock -------------------------------
Northern Southern
survey area survey area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cetaceans......................... North Atlantic right Western North 0.169 0.102
whale. Atlantic.
Fin whale............ Western North 0.154 0.058
Atlantic.
Sperm whale.......... North Atlantic....... 0.017 0.002
Humpback whale....... Gulf of Maine........ 0.042 0.040
Common minke whale... Canadian East Coast.. 0.044 0.010
Risso's dolphin...... Western North 0.014 0.001
Atlantic.
Long-finned pilot Western North 0.108 0.005
whale. Atlantic.
Short-finned pilot Western North 0.108 0.005
whale. Atlantic.
Atlantic white-sided Western North 0.836 0.092
dolphin. Atlantic.
Common dolphin (short- Western North 5.692 0.739
beaked). Atlantic.
Common bottlenose Western North 2.616 8.158
dolphin. Atlantic--Offshore.
Western North 14.203 33.409
Atlantic--Coastal
Migratory.
Atlantic spotted Western North 0.129 0.004
dolphin. Atlantic.
Harbor porpoise...... Gulf of Maine/Bay of 3.012 0.874
Fundy.
Pinnipeds......................... Harbor seal.......... Western North 1.690 1.226
Atlantic.
Gray seal............ Western North 1.690 1.226
Atlantic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ All density data was derived from Roberts et al. (2016a, 2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021a, and 2021b)
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 Medium SBPs) to the Level B
harassment criterion and the estimated distance traveled per day by a
given survey vessel (i.e., 62-km (38.5-mi)) are then used to calculate
the daily ensonified area, or zone of influence (ZOI) around the survey
vessel.
NEETMA estimates that proposed surveys will achieve a maximum daily
track line distance of 62 km per day (24-hour period) during proposed
HRG surveys. This distance accounts for the vessel traveling at
approximately 4-knots and accounts for non-active survey periods. Based
on the maximum estimated distance to the Level B harassment threshold
of 141-m (refer back to Table 5) and the maximum estimated daily track
line distance of 62-km across both survey sites, an area of 5,183.97-
km\2\ would be ensonified to the Level B harassment threshold during
NEETMA's proposed surveys (Table 7) based on the following formula:
Mobile Source ZOI = (Distance/day x 2r) + [pi]r2
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 B harassment thresholds.
Table 7--ZOI for Each Type of Representative HRG Survey Equipment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Largest
harassment Distance/ day in
Equipment type isopleth in km km ZOI (km\2\)
(m); r
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow SBP............................................ 0.048 (48) 62 5.98
Medium SBP (sparker)................................... 0.141 (141) 17.61
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These calculated ZOIs were than input to yield the total ensonified
area per day (in km\2\), as shown in Table 8 below.
Table 8--HRG Survey Area Distances for NEETMA's Proposed Project
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HRG survey equipment type Specific equipment used Largest Survey Calculated ZOI
harassment distances per per day
isopleth; r day (km\2\)
(km) (km)\1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow SBP........................ TB CHIRP III 0.048 62 5.98
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Medium (SBP)....................... AA, Dura-spark UHD AA, Dura-spark UHD GeoMarine Geo Spark 0.141 17.61
(500 J/400 tip). 400+400. 2000 (400 tip).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Assumes 24-hours of survey activity during the proposed project.
[[Page 27591]]
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
both survey sites are then multiplied by the total number of survey
days (i.e., 320). 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 11:
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.
Table 11--Total Estimated Takes by Level B Harassment and Percent of Population/Stock Proposed for NEETMA's
Project
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calculated Level B take Proposed Level B take
---------------------------------------------------------------
Marine mammal species Stock Northern Southern
survey area survey area Proposed \a\ % stock \c\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale.... Western North 7.40 0.83 8 2.17
Atlantic.
Fin whale..................... Western North 6.73 0.47 7 0.10
Atlantic.
Sperm whale................... North Atlantic.. 0.73 0.02 3 0.07
Humpback whale................ Gulf of Maine... 1.83 0.33 \b\ 3 (6) \b\ 0.21
(0.43)
Common minke whale............ Canadian East 1.92 0.08 2 0.01
Coast.
Risso's dolphin............... Western North 0.62 0.01 30 0.09
Atlantic.
Long-finned pilot whale....... Western North 4.72 0.04 20 0.05
Atlantic.
Short-finned pilot whale...... Western North 4.72 0.04 20 0.07
Atlantic.
Atlantic white-sided dolphin.. Western North 36.52 0.76 37 0.04
Atlantic.
Common dolphin (short-beaked). Western North 248.52 6.04 255 0.15
Atlantic.
Common bottlenose dolphin..... Western North 53.88 9.27 63 0.10
Atlantic--Offsh
ore.
Western North 325.25 235.27 561 8.45
Atlantic--Coast
al Migratory.
Atlantic spotted dolphin...... Western North 5.61 0.03 100 0.25
Atlantic.
Harbor porpoise............... Gulf of Maine/ 131.51 7.15 139 0.15
Bay of Fundy.
Harbor seal................... Western North 73.77 10.02 84 0.14
Atlantic.
Gray seal..................... Western North 73.77 10.02 84 0.31
Atlantic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ All of these values were requested by NEETMA, with exception for the value in parenthesis found for humpback
whales.
\b\ The values in parenthesis were a proposed adjustment by NMFS based on a proposed adjustment to account for
higher recorded occurrences of humpback whales in the New York Bight area (see King et al., 2021).
\c\ 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>).
Adjustments have been made for sperm whales (Barkaszi and Kelly,
2019), Risso's dolphin (Baird et al., 1991; Barkaszi and Kelly, 2019),
pilot whales spp.(CETAP, 1982), and Atlantic spotted dolphins
(Jefferson et al., 2008) based on typical group sizes due to estimated
takes lower than the predicted group size. The take numbers shown in
Table 11 represent those originally calculated and requested by NEETMA
with minor modifications proposed by NMFS for one species.
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 increase the requested take to
account for underestimates to the actual occurrence of this species
within the density data.
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 and impact on
operations.
[[Page 27592]]
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
NMFS proposes the following mitigation measures be implemented
during NEETMA's proposed marine site characterization surveys. Pursuant
to section 7 of the ESA, NEETMA would also be required to adhere to
relevant Project Design Criteria (PDC) of the NMFS' Greater Atlantic
Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO) programmatic consultation
(specifically PDCs 4, 5, and 7) regarding geophysical surveys along the
U.S. Atlantic coast (<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 Harassment Zones
Marine mammal exclusion zones (EZ) would be established around the
HRG survey equipment and monitored by NMFS-approved protected species
observers (PSOs):
<bullet> 500 m EZ for North Atlantic right whales during use of
specified acoustic sources (sparkers, boomers, and non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers).
<bullet> 100 m EZ for all other marine mammals, with certain
exceptions specified below, during operation of impulsive acoustic
sources (boomer and/or sparker).
If a marine mammal is detected approaching or entering the EZs
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.
Pre-Start Clearance
Marine mammal clearance zones would be established around the HRG
survey equipment and monitored by protected species observers (PSOs):
<bullet> 500 m for all ESA-listed marine mammals; and,
<bullet> 100 m for all other marine mammals.
NEETMA would implement a 30-minute pre-start clearance period prior
to the initiation of ramp-up of specified HRG equipment (see exception
to this requirement in the Shutdown Procedures section below). During
this period, clearance zones 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 clearance zone. If a marine
mammal is observed within a clearance zone during the pre-start
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 seals, and 30 minutes for all other species).
Ramp-Up of Survey Equipment
A ramp-up procedure, involving a gradual increase in source level
output, is required at all times as part of the activation of the
acoustic source when technically feasible. The ramp-up procedure would
be used at the beginning of HRG survey activities in order to provide
additional protection to marine mammals near the survey area by
allowing them to vacate the area prior to the commencement of survey
equipment operation at full power. Operators should ramp up sources to
half power for 5 minutes and then proceed to full power.
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).
Ramp-up may occur at times of poor visibility, including nighttime,
if appropriate visual monitoring has occurred with no detections of
marine mammals in the 30 minutes prior to beginning ramp-up. Acoustic
source activation may only occur at night where operational planning
cannot reasonably avoid such circumstances.
Shutdown Procedures
An immediate shutdown of the impulsive HRG survey equipment would
be required if a marine mammal is sighted entering or within its
respective exclusion zone. The vessel operator must comply immediately
with any call for shutdown by the Lead PSO. Any disagreement between
the Lead PSO and vessel operator should be discussed only after
shutdown has occurred. Subsequent restart of the survey equipment can
be initiated if the animal has been observed exiting its respective
exclusion zone or until an additional time period has elapsed (i.e., 15
minutes for harbor porpoise, 30 minutes for all other species).
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
Level B harassment zone (refer back to Table 5), shutdown would occur.
If the acoustic source is shut down for reasons other than
mitigation (e.g., mechanical difficulty) for less than 30 minutes, it
may be activated again without ramp-up if PSOs have maintained constant
observation and no detections of any marine mammal have occurred within
the respective exclusion zones. If the acoustic source is shut down for
a period longer than 30 minutes, then pre-clearance and ramp-up
procedures will be initiated as described in the previous section.
The shutdown requirement would be waived for pinnipeds and for
small delphinids of the following genera: Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus,
Stenella, and Tursiops. 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. Furthermore,
if there is uncertainty regarding identification of a marine mammal
species (i.e., whether the observed marine mammal(s) belongs to one of
the delphinid genera for which shutdown is waived), PSOs must use best
professional judgement in making the decision to call for a shutdown.
Additionally, shutdown is required if a delphinid or pinniped is
detected in the exclusion zone and belongs to a genus other than those
specified.
Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and ramp-up procedures are not
required during HRG survey operations using only non-impulsive sources
(e.g., echosounders) other than non-parametric sub-bottom profilers
(e.g., CHIRPs).
Vessel Strike Avoidance
NEETMA must adhere to the following measures except in the 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.
<bullet> Vessel operators and crews must maintain a vigilant watch
for all protected species and slow down, stop their vessel, or alter
course, as appropriate and regardless of vessel size, to avoid striking
any protected species. A visual observer aboard the vessel must monitor
a vessel strike avoidance zone based on the appropriate separation
distance around the vessel (distances stated below). Visual observers
monitoring the vessel strike avoidance zone may be third-party
observers (i.e., PSOs) or crew members, but crew members
[[Page 27593]]
responsible for these duties must be provided sufficient training to
(1) distinguish protected species 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 mammal.
<bullet> Members of the monitoring team will consult NMFS North
Atlantic right whale reporting system and WhaleAlert (<a href="http://www.whalealert.org">http://www.whalealert.org</a>), 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.
<bullet> All survey 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;
<bullet> All vessels greater than or equal to 19.8 m in overall
length operating from November 1 through April 30 will operate at
speeds of 10 knots or less at all times;
<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 from right whales and other ESA-listed large whales;
<bullet> If a whale is observed but cannot be confirmed as a
species other than a right whale or other ESA-listed large whale, the
vessel operator must assume that it is a right whale and take
appropriate action;
<bullet> All vessels must maintain a minimum separation distance of
100 m from non-ESA listed whales;
<bullet> All vessels must, to the maximum extent practicable,
attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 50 m from all
other marine mammals, with an understanding that at times this may not
be possible (e.g., for animals that approach the vessel).
<bullet> When marine mammals 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). If marine mammals are
sighted within the relevant separation distance, the vessel must reduce
speed and shift the engine to neutral, not engaging the engines until
animals are clear of the area. This does not apply to any vessel towing
gear or any vessel that is navigationally constrained.
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. 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 the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, we have preliminarily
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal 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 both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
<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); and,
<bullet> Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
Visual monitoring will be performed by qualified, NMFS-approved
PSOs, the resumes of whom will be provided to NMFS for review and
approval prior to the start of survey activities. NEETMA would employ
independent, dedicated, trained PSOs, meaning that the PSOs must 1) be
employed by a third-party observer provider, 2) 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 mammals and mitigation requirements (including brief alerts
regarding maritime hazards), and 3) have successfully completed an
approved PSO training course appropriate for their designated task. On
a case-by-case basis, non-independent observers may be approved by NMFS
for limited, specific duties in support of approved, independent PSOs
on smaller vessels with limited crew capacity operating in nearshore
waters. Section 5 of the draft IHA contains further details regarding
PSO approval.
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 Lead PSO
on duty to communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to
communicate the action(s) that are necessary to ensure mitigation and
[[Page 27594]]
monitoring requirements are implemented as appropriate.
During all HRG survey operations (e.g., any day on which use of an
HRG source is planned to occur), a minimum of 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). 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
4 consecutive hours followed by a break of at least 2 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. 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
Within 90 days after completion of survey activities or expiration
of this IHA, whichever comes sooner, a draft report will be provided to
NMFS that fully documents the methods and monitoring protocols,
summarizes the data recorded during monitoring, summarizes the number
of marine mammals observed during survey activities (by species, when
known), summarizes the mitigation actions taken during surveys
(including what type of mitigation and the species and number of
animals that prompted the mitigation action, when known), and provides
an interpretation of the results and effectiveness of all mitigation
and monitoring. 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#ebbbb9c5a2bfbbc5a68485829f849982858cb98e9b84999f98ab85848a8ac58c849d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dd8d8ff394898df390b2b3b4a9b2afb4b3ba8fb8adb2afa9ae9db3b2bcbcf3bab2ab">[email protected]</span></a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8ac3dedaa4dae5fee6e5e9e1cae4e5ebeba4ede5fc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b4fde0e49ae4dbc0d8dbd7dff4dadbd5d59ad3dbc2">[email protected]</span></a>. The
report must contain at minimum, the following:
<bullet> PSO names and affiliations;
<bullet> Dates of departures and returns to port with port name;
<bullet> Dates and times (Greenwich Mean Time) of survey effort and
times corresponding with PSO effort;
<bullet> Vessel location (latitude/longitude) when survey effort
begins and ends;
<bullet> Vessel location at beginning and end of visual PSO duty
shifts;
<bullet> Vessel heading and speed at beginning and end of visual
PSO duty shifts and upon any line change;
<bullet> Environmental conditions while on visual survey (at
beginning and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change
significantly), including wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea state,
Beaufort wind force, swell height, weather conditions, cloud cover, sun
glare, and overall visibility to the horizon;
<bullet> Factors that may be contributing to impaired observations
during each PSO shift change or as needed as environmental conditions
change (e.g., vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); and
<bullet> Survey activity information, such as type of survey
equipment in operation, acoustic source power output while in
operation, and any other notes of significance (i.e., pre-start
clearance survey, ramp-up, shutdown, end of operations, etc.).
If a marine mammal is sighted, the following information should be
recorded:
<bullet> Watch status (sighting made by PSO on/off effort,
opportunistic, crew, alternate vessel/platform);
<bullet> PSO who sighted the animal;
<bullet> Time of sighting;
<bullet> Vessel location at time of sighting;
<bullet> Water depth;
<bullet> Direction of vessel's travel (compass direction);
<bullet> Direction of animal's travel relative to the vessel;
<bullet> Pace of the animal;
<bullet> Estimated distance to the animal and its heading relative
to vessel at initial sighting;
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> Estimated number of animals (high/low/best);
<bullet> Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, yearlings,
juveniles, calves, group composition, etc.);
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Detailed behavior observations (e.g., number of blows,
number of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, traveling;
as explicit and detailed as possible; note any observed changes in
behavior);
<bullet> Animal's closest point of approach and/or closest distance
from the center point of the acoustic source;
<bullet> Platform activity at time of sighting (e.g., deploying,
recovering, testing, data acquisition, other); and
<bullet> Description of any actions implemented in response to the
sighting (e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up, speed or course alteration,
etc.) 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, NEETMA must immediately report sighting information to the
NMFS North Atlantic Right Whale Sighting Advisory System: (866) 755-
6622. North Atlantic right whale sightings in any location may also be
reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via Channel 16.
In the event that NEETMA personnel discover an injured or dead
marine mammal, NEETMA will report the incident to the NMFS Office of
Protected Resources (OPR) and the NMFS New England/Mid-Atlantic
Stranding Coordinator (978-282-8478 or 978-281-9291) as soon as
feasible. The report would include the following information:
<bullet> Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
[[Page 27595]]
<bullet> Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
<bullet> Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if
the animal is dead);
<bullet> Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
<bullet> If available, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s); and
<bullet> 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, NEETMA would
report the incident to the NMFS OPR and the NMFS New England/Mid-
Atlantic Stranding Coordinator (978-282-8478 or 978-281-9291) as soon
as feasible. The report would include the following information:
<bullet> Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the
incident;
<bullet> Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
<bullet> Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
<bullet> Vessel's course/heading and what operations were being
conducted (if applicable);
<bullet> Status of all sound sources in use;
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility) immediately preceding the
strike;
<bullet> Estimated size and length of animal that was struck;
<bullet> Description of the behavior of the marine mammal
immediately preceding and following the strike;
<bullet> If available, description of the presence and behavior of
any other marine mammals immediately preceding the strike;
<bullet> 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
<bullet> 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. NMFS also assesses 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 3 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 of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and
their Habitat 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 and the estimated size of the Level A harassment zones.
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 activities in estimating take numbers proposed for
authorization and evaluated here, in reality much of the survey
activity would involve use of non-impulsive acoustic sources with a
reduced acoustic harassment zone of 48 m, producing expected effects of
particularly low severity. 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
[[Page 27596]]
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 NEETMA's proposed activities. Additionally,
only very limited take by Level B harassment of North Atlantic right
whales has been requested and is being proposed for authorization by
NMFS as HRG survey operations are required to maintain a 500 m EZ and
shutdown if a North Atlantic right whale is sighted at or within the
EZ. 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. NMFS
does not anticipate North Atlantic right whales takes that would result
from NEETMA's 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 NEETMA's 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.
The required mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number
and/or severity of proposed takes for all species listed in Table 3,
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. No
Level A harassment is anticipated, even in the absence of mitigation
measures, or proposed 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 NEETMA's 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. 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 NEETMA's
proposed survey activities.
There are three major haul-out sites exist for harbor seals 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
for authorization;
<bullet> No Level A harassment is anticipated, even in the absence
of mitigation measures, or proposed for authorization;
<bullet> Foraging success is not likely to be significantly
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. In addition, mitigation
measures require shutdown at 500 m (almost four times the size of the
Level B harassment isopleth (141 m)), which minimizes the effects of
the take on the species; and,
<bullet> The proposed mitigation measures, including 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 mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the
total marine mammal take from the proposed activity will have a
negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under 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
[[Page 27597]]
taken is fewer 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 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 8.5 percent for all stocks which NMFS preliminarily finds
are small numbers of marine mammals relative to the estimated overall
population abundances for those stocks. Refer back to Table 3.
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
is authorizing the incidental take of four species of marine mammals
which are listed under the ESA, including the North Atlantic right,
fin, and sperm whale, and has determined that these activities fall
within the scope of activities analyzed 107 in 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).
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to NEETMA for conducting high-resolution site
characterization surveys off New Jersey for one year from the date of
issuance, 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 marine
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 IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-time, one-year
Renewal IHA following notice to the public providing an additional 15
days for public comments when (1) up to another year of identical or
nearly identical activities as described in the Description of Proposed
Activities section of this notice is planned or (2) the activities as
described in the Description of Proposed Activities section of this
notice 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 notice, 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).
(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: May 4, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-09917 Filed 5-6-22; 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>Indexed from Federal Register on May 9, 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.