Notice2022-11485
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to New England Wind, Phase 1 Park City Wind Marine Site Characterization Surveys
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 27, 2022
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
NMFS has received a request from Park City Wind LLC (PCW) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to marine site characterization surveys for Phase 1 of the New England Wind Project located in the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Lease Area OCS- A0534 (Lease Area) in waters offshore of Massachusetts south through Long Island, New York. 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 authorizations and agency responses will be summarized in the final notice of our decision.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 103 (Friday, May 27, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 103 (Friday, May 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32123-32141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11485]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XB758]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to New England Wind, Phase 1 Park City
Wind Marine Site Characterization Surveys
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 Park City Wind LLC (PCW) for
authorization to take marine mammals incidental to marine site
characterization surveys for Phase 1 of the New England Wind Project
located in the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Lease Area OCS-
A0534 (Lease Area) in waters offshore of Massachusetts south through
Long Island, New York. 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
[[Page 32124]]
prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested
MMPA authorizations and agency responses will be summarized in the
final notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than June 27,
2022.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service, and should be submitted via email to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ce879a9ee09ea1baa2a1ada58ea0a1afafe0a9a1b8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f5bca1a5dba59a81999a969eb59b9a9494db929a83">[email protected]</span></a>.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the
end of the comment period. Comments, including all attachments, must
not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. All comments received are a part of
the public record and will generally be posted online at
<a href="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/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable</a>. In case of
problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed
above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations
are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed incidental take authorization may be provided to the public
for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (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.
NMFS 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 December 17, 2021, NMFS received a request from PCW for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to marine site characterization
surveys for Phase 1 of the New England Wind Project located in the
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Lease Area OCS-A0534 (Lease
Area) in waters offshore of Massachusetts south through Long Island,
New York. Following NMFS' review of the draft application, revised
versions were submitted on February 14, 2022 and March 25, 2022. The
March 2022 revised version was deemed adequate and complete March 25,
2022. PCW's request is for take of 16 species of marine mammals, by
Level B harassment only. Neither PCW nor NMFS expects serious injury or
mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate. The proposed IHA would be effective for one year upon
issuance.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
New England Wind is located in the BOEM Lease Area OCS-A0534 and is
comprised of Phase 1 PCW and Phase 2 Commonwealth Wind (CW), along with
associated offshore and onshore cabling, onshore substations, and
onshore operations and maintenance (O&M) facilities (Figure1). Phase 2
is not part of this application. As part of its overall marine site
characterization survey operations, PCW proposes to conduct high-
resolution geophysical (HRG) surveys in the Lease Area.
The purpose of the marine site characterization surveys are to
obtain an assessment of seabed (geophysical, geotechnical, and
geohazard), ecological, and archeological conditions within the
footprint of a planned offshore wind facility development area.
Underwater sound resulting from PCW's proposed site characterization
survey activities, specifically HRG surveys, has the potential to
result in incidental take of marine mammals in the form of Level B
harassment.
Dates and Duration
PCW anticipates that HRG survey activities would occur on
approximately 636 vessel days, with an assumed daily survey distance of
80 km per vessel. This schedule is based on assumed 24-hour operations.
Each day that a vessel surveys approximately 80 km within 24 hours
would count as a single survey day, e.g., two survey vessels operating
on the same day would count as two survey days. The use of concurrently
surveying vessels would facilitate completion of all 636 vessel days
within one year. PCW proposes to begin survey activities upon receipt
of an IHA and continue for up to one year (though the actual duration
will likely be shorter, particularly given the use of multiple
vessels). The IHA would be effective for one year from the date of
issuance. Site characterization activities within the Potential Survey
Area are anticipated to begin May 2022 and will last up to one year
with a total of 636 active sound source days. The number of active
sound source days was calculated by dividing the total survey trackline
[[Page 32125]]
(50,880 kilometers (km)) by the approximate survey distance per day (80
km) anticipated to be achieved. Survey operations are proposed to be
conducted 24 hours per day to minimize the overall duration of survey
activities and the associated period of potential impact on marine
species. While the HRG survey activities are estimated to occur over
the course of a full year, the actual survey duration will be shorter
given the use of multiple vessels.
Specific Geographic Region
HRG survey activities are proposed to occur in both Federal
offshore waters (including Lease Area OCS-A 0534) and along potential
OECCs in both Federal and State nearshore waters of Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York. The proposed survey will be
acquired within the area illustrated in Figure 1. Water depths in the
lease area range from about 35 to 60 meters (m) (115 to 197 feet (ft)).
Water depths along the potential OECCs range from 2.5 m to >35 m (8 to
>115 ft).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27MY22.005
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
PCW proposes to conduct HRG survey operations, which may include
single and multibeam depth sounding, seafloor imaging, and shallow and
medium penetration sub-bottom profiling. The HRG surveys may be
conducted using any or all of the following equipment types: Side scan
sonar, multibeam echosounder, magnetometers and gradiometers,
parametric sub-bottom profiler (SBP), compressed high intensity radar
pulse (CHIRP) SBP, boomers, or sparkers. Vessels would generally
conduct survey effort at a transit speed of approximately 4 knots (kn;
2.1 meters per sec, m/s), which equates to 110 km per 24-hr period.
However, based on past survey experience (i.e., knowledge of typical
daily downtime due to weather, system malfunctions, etc.), PCW assumes
80 km as the average distance surveyed per 24 hours. On this basis (and
as mentioned previously), a total of 636 survey days are expected.
To facilitate completion of all 636 survey days across the survey
area (see Figure 1) within one year, PCW proposes to use multiple
vessels to acquire the HRG survey data. Up to three HRG vessels are
currently proposed to operate concurrently within the survey area. HRG
survey activities will be conducted by vessels that can accomplish the
survey goals in specific survey areas. Each vessel will maintain both
the required course and a survey speed required to cover approximately
80 km (43 nm) per day during line acquisition, with consideration to
weather delays, equipment maintenance, and crew availability. Vessel
survey speed is anticipated to be approximately 4 knots (2.1 m/s).
Acoustic sources planned for use during the proposed HRG survey
activities include the following (operating frequencies are presented
in hertz (Hz) and kilohertz (kHz):
[ssquf] Shallow penetration non-impulsive, non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers (i.e., CHIRP SBPs) are used to map the near-surface
stratigraphy (top 0 to 5 m (0 to 16 feet (ft))) of sediment below
[[Page 32126]]
seabed). A CHIRP system emits sonar pulses that increase in frequency
from about 2 to 20 kHz over time. The frequency range can be adjusted
to meet project variables. Rather than being towed, these sources are
typically mounted on a pole or the hull of the vessel, reducing the
likelihood that an animal would be exposed to the signal; and,
[ssquf] Medium penetration, impulsive sources (i.e., boomers and
sparker) are used to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy. A boomer is a
broadband source operating in the 3.5 Hz to 10 kHz frequency range.
Sparkers create omnidirectional acoustic pulses from 50 Hz to 4 kHz
that can penetrate several hundred meters into the seafloor. These
sources are typically towed behind the vessel.
Operation of the following survey equipment types is not expected
to present reasonable risk of marine mammal take, and will not be
discussed further beyond the brief summaries provided below.
<bullet> Non-impulsive, parametric SBPs are used for providing high
density data in sub-bottom profiles that are typically required for
cable routes, very shallow water, and archaeological surveys. These
sources generate short, very narrow-beam (1[deg] to 3.5[deg]) signals
at high frequencies (generally around 85-100 kHz). The narrow beamwidth
significantly reduces the potential that a marine mammal could be
exposed to the signal, while the high frequency of operation means that
the signal is rapidly attenuated in seawater. These sources are
typically mounted on the hull of the vessel or deployed from a side
pole rather than towed behind the vessel.
<bullet> Ultra-short baseline (USBL) positioning systems are used
to provide high accuracy ranges by measuring the time between the
acoustic pulses transmitted by the vessel transceiver and a transponder
(or beacon) necessary to produce the acoustic profile. It is a two-
component system with a pole-mounted transceiver and one or several
transponders mounted on other survey equipment. USBLs are expected to
produce extremely small acoustic propagation distances in their typical
operating configuration.
<bullet> Single and Multibeam echosounders (MBESs) are used to
determine water depths and general bottom topography. The proposed
MBESs all have operating frequencies >180kHz and are therefore outside
the general hearing range of marine mammals.
<bullet> Side scan sonar (SSS) is used for seabed sediment
classification purposes and to identify natural and man-made acoustic
targets on the seafloor. The proposed SSSs all have operating
frequencies >180 kHz and are therefore outside the general hearing
range of marine mammals.
HRG survey activities will occur in discrete segments corresponding
to the following general areas:
<bullet> Lease Area OCS-A 0534--Inclusive of potential wind turbine
generator (WTG) locations, electrical service platform (ESP)
location(s), and inter-array cable corridors; and
<bullet> OECC route--One or more potential OECC routes through
Federal and State waters located within the Potential Survey Area from
northern Massachusetts to Long Island as shown in Figure 1.
The maximum survey area has been selected to provide operational
flexibility and to cover the possibility of multiple landfall locations
associated with the OECC. Track line spacing for HRG survey activities
will align with BOEM Guidelines for Providing Archaeological and
Historic Property Information pursuant to 30 CFR part 585 (March 2017)
and for Providing Geophysical, Geotechnical, and Geohazard Information
pursuant to 30 CFR part 585 (July 2015) (BOEM 2015). Surveys are
planned to support standard geophysical, geotechnical, and geohazard
investigations as well as potential unexploded ordnance (UXO) and
benthic habitat studies.
Table 1--Summary of Representative HRG Equipment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In-beam Out-of-beam
---------------------- ---------------------
Beam Pulse Peak Peak
Equipment System Frequency width duration Repetition Source source Correction Source source
(kHz) ([deg]) (ms) rate (Hz) level (dB level (dB (dB) level (dB level (dB
re 1 re 1 re 1 re 1
[mu]Pa m) [mu]Pa m) [mu]Pa m) [mu]Pa m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow subbottom profiler..... EdgeTech Chirp 2-16 65 2 3.75 178 182 -8.1 169.9 173.9
216.
Deep seismic profiler.......... Applied Acoustics 0.2-15 180 0.8 2 205 212 0.0 205.0 212.0
AA251 Boomer.
GeoMarine Geo 0.05-3 180 3.4 1 203 213 0.0 203.0 213.0
Spark 2000 (400
tip).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Edge Tech Chirp 512i used as proxy source for Edge Tech 216, as Chirp 512i has similar operation settings as Chirp 216. SIG ELC 820 Sparker used
as proxy for GeoMarine Geo Spark 2000 (400 tip), as SIG ELC 820 has similar operation settings as Geo Spark 2000. See Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)
and Appendix A of PCW's application for more information.
dB--decibel, RMS--Root mean square, 1 [mu]Pa-1 microPascal.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in detail later in this document (please see Proposed
Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring and Reporting).
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species.
Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be
found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; <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>) and
more general information about these species (e.g., physical and
behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS' website
(<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>).
Table 2 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, NMFS follows the 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'
[[Page 32127]]
SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or would be authorized here,
PBR and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources
are included 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' 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' U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico SARs. All values presented in
Table 2 are the most recent available at the time of publication and
are available in the Draft 2021 SARs (Hayes et al., 2021), available
at: <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>.
Table 2--Marine Mammal Species Likely To Occur Near the Project Area That May Be Affected by PCW'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)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenidae:
North Atlantic right whale \4\.. Eubalaena glacialis.... Western North Atlantic E/D; Y 368 (0; 364; 2019).... 0.7 7.7
(WNA).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Humpback whale.................. Megaptera novaeangliae. Gulf of Maine.......... -/-; Y 1,393 (0.15; 1,375; 22 58
2016).
Fin whale....................... Balaenoptera physalus.. WNA.................... E/D; Y 6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 11 2.35
2016).
Sei whale....................... Balaenoptera borealis.. Nova Scotia............ E/D; Y 6,292 (1.02; 3,098; 6.2 1.2
2016).
Minke whale..................... Balaenoptera Canadian East Coast.... -/-; N 21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 170 10.6
acutorostrata. 2016).
Blue whale...................... Balaenoptera musculus.. WNA.................... E/D; Y Unknown (unknown; 402; 0.8 0
2019).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Physeteridae:
Sperm whale..................... Physeter macrocephalus. North Atlantic......... E/D; Y 4,349 (0.28;3,451; 3.9 0
2016).
Family Delphinidae:
Long-finned pilot whale......... Globicephala melas..... WNA.................... -/-; N 39,215 (0.30; 30,627; 306 29
2016).
Short finned pilot whale........ Globicephala WNA.................... -/-; N 28,924 (0.24; 23,637; 236 136
macrorhynchus. 2016).
Bottlenose dolphin.............. Tursiops truncatus..... WNA Offshore........... -/-; N 62,851 (0.23; 51,914; 519 28
2016).
WNA Northern Migratory -/D;Y 6,639 (0.41, 4,759, 48 12.2-21.5
Coastal. 2016).
Common dolphin.................. Delphinus delphis...... WNA.................... -/-; N 172,974 (0.21; 1,452 390
145,216; 2016).
Atlantic white-sided dolphin.... Lagenorhynchus acutus.. WNA.................... -/-; N 93,233 (0.71; 54,443; 544 27
2016).
Atlantic spotted dolphin........ Stenella frontalis..... WNA.................... -/-; N 39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 320 0
2016).
Risso's dolphin................. Grampus griseus........ WNA.................... -/-; N 35,215 (0.19; 30,051; 303 54.3
2016).
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise................. Phocoena phocoena...... Gulf of Maine/Bay of -/-; N 95,543 (0.31; 74,034; 851 164
Fundy. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Gray seal \5\................... Halichoerus grypus..... WNA.................... -/-; N 27,300 (0.22; 22,785, 1,458 4,453
2029).
Harbor seal..................... Phoca vitulina......... WNA.................... -/-; N 61,336 (0.08; 57,637, 1,729 339
2020).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
fisheries, ship strike).
\4\ 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>).
\5\ NMFS' gray seal stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in
Canada) is approximately 450,000. The annual M/SI value given is for the total stock.
As indicated above, all 16 species in Table 2 temporally and
spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that take is
reasonably likely to occur. In addition to what is included in Sections
3 and 4 of the application, the SARs,
[[Page 32128]]
and NMFS' website, further detail informing the baseline for select
species (i.e., information regarding current Unusual Mortality Events
(UME) and important habitat areas) is provided below.
North Atlantic Right Whale
The North Atlantic right whale (NARW) is considered one of the most
critically endangered populations of large whales in the world and has
been listed as a Federal endangered species since 1970. The Western
Atlantic stock is considered depleted under the MMPA (Hayes et al.
2021). There is a recovery plan (NOAA Fisheries 2017) for the NARW and
recently there was a five-year review of the species (NOAA Fisheries
2017). The NARW had a 2.8 percent recovery rate between 1990 and 2011
(Hayes et al. 2021).
Elevated NARW mortalities have occurred since June 7, 2017, along
the U.S. and Canadian coast with the leading category for the cause of
death for this UME as ``human interaction,'' specifically from
entanglements or vessel strikes. As of April 11, 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
NARW UME has been updated to 50 individuals to include both the
confirmed mortalities (dead stranded or floaters) (n=34) and seriously
injured free-swimming whales (n=16) 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="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event</a>.
NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR part 224.105 designated nearshore
waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as Mid-Atlantic U.S. Seasonal
Management Areas (SMAs) for North Atlantic right whales in 2008. SMAs
were developed to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and
North Atlantic right whales around their migratory route and calving
grounds. The survey area overlaps with the Cape Cod Bay (active between
January 1 and May 15), Off Race Point (active between March 1 and April
30), Great South Channel (active between April 1 and July 31), and Mid-
Atlantic Migratory (active between November 1 and April 30) SMAs.
The proposed survey area also partially overlaps with the North
Atlantic right whale feeding Biologically Important Areas (BIAs). One
feeding BIA is located north of the HRG Survey Area at Cape Cod Bay and
Massachusetts Bay and occurs from February-April, and another is
located northeast of the HRG Survey Area in the Great South Channel,
from April-June. The proposed survey also overlaps with part of the
migratory corridor BIA for North Atlantic right whales (March-April and
November-December) that extends from the coast to the continental shelf
break, and from Massachusetts to Florida (LeBrecque et al., 2015). A
map showing designated BIAs is available at: <a href="https://cetsound.noaa.gov/biologically-important-area-map">https://cetsound.noaa.gov/biologically-important-area-map</a>. In addition to currently designated
feeding BIAs, Oleson et al. (2020) identified the area south of
Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket, referred to as ``South of the
Islands,'' as a newer, year-round, core North Atlantic right whale
foraging habitat. The South of the Islands area is also within the
bounds of the proposed survey area.
There are two designated critical habitat areas for the NARW, one
of which overlaps the project area: The Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank
region is located northeast of the HRG survey area, but parts of it
overlap the proposed survey area, and the southeast calving grounds
from North Carolina to Florida (NMFS 2016a) which does not overlap the
survey area. All vessels greater than 19.8 m (65 ft) in overall length
must operate at speeds of 10 knots (5.1 meters per second (m/s)) or
less within these areas during specific time periods.
Humpback Whale
NMFS recently evaluated the status of the species, and on September
8, 2016, NMFS divided the species into 14 distinct population segments
(DPS), removed the species-level listing, and in its place listed four
DPSs as endangered and one DPS as threatened (81 FR 62260; 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. Bettridge et al. (2015)
estimated the size of this population at 12,312 (95 percent CI 8,688-
15,954) whales in 2004-05, which is consistent with previous population
estimates of approximately 10,000-11,000 whales (Stevick et al., 2003;
Smith et al., 1999) and the increasing trend for the West Indies DPS
(Bettridge et al., 2015). Whales occurring in the survey area are
considered to be from the West Indies DPS, but 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. The northern and
most eastern portions of the proposed survey area partially overlap
with the humpback whale feeding BIA (March through December), which
extends throughout the Gulf of Maine, Stellwagen Bank, and Great South
Channel (LeBrecque et al., 2015).
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 11, 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="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2022-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2022-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast</a>.
Minke Whale
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 11, 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="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast</a>.
The northern and most eastern portions of the proposed survey area
partially overlap with one of the minke whale feeding BIAs (March
through November), which includes the southern and southwestern section
of the Gulf of Maine, including Georges Bank, the Great South Channel,
Cape Cod Bay and Massachusetts Bay,
[[Page 32129]]
Stellwagen Bank, Cape Anne, and Jeffreys Ledge (LeBrecque et al.,
2015).
Other Biologically Important Areas for Large Whales
The survey area is flanked by two BIAs for feeding fin whales, the
area to the northeast of Cape Cod is considered a BIA year-round, while
the area off the tip of Long Island overlapping with the southwest area
of the HRG survey area is a BIA from March to October (LaBrecque et al.
2015). Both of these BIAs are located within the proposed survey area.
For sei whales, a BIA for feeding occurs both to the north and to the
east of the HRG survey area from May through November (LaBrecque et al.
2015). A portion of the BIA is located within the proposed survey area.
Seals
Since July 2018, elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal
mortalities have occurred across Maine, New Hampshire and
Massachusetts. This event was 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 been 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. Closure of this UME is
pending. 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 3.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
(dolphins, toothed whales, beaked
whales, bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
(true seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
(sea lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Sixteen marine mammal species (14 cetacean and 2 pinniped (both phocid)
species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the proposed
survey activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean species
that may be present, six are classified as low-frequency cetaceans
(i.e., all mysticete species), seven are classified as mid-frequency
cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid species and the sperm whale), and one is
classified as a high-frequency cetacean (i.e., harbor porpoise).
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that
PCW's 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 Federal Register notices,
including for survey activities using the same methodology, over a
similar amount of time, in Atlantic waters. (e.g., 82 FR 20563, May 3,
2017; 85 FR 36537, June 17, 2020; 85 FR 37848, June 24, 2020; 85 FR
48179, August 10, 2020, 86 FR 11239, February 24, 2021; 86 FR 28061,
May 25, 2021). No significant new information is available, and we
refer the reader to these documents rather than repeating the details
here. The Estimated Take section includes a quantitative analysis of
the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by PCW's
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
[[Page 32130]]
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 either
directed in a beam or 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 also on the ability of
sound to propagate through the environment. In turn, sound propagation
is dependent on the spatially and temporally varying properties of the
water column and sea floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of
the dependence on a large number of varying factors, ambient sound
levels can be expected to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial
and temporal scales. Sound levels at a given frequency and location can
vary by 10-20 dB from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result
is that, depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from the
specified activity may be a negligible addition to the local
environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect marine
mammals. Details of source types are described in the following text.
Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types:
Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction
between these two sound types is important because they have differing
potential to cause physical effects, particularly with regard to
hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see
Southall et al. (2007) for an in-depth discussion of these concepts.
The distinction between these two sound types is not always obvious, as
certain signals share properties of both pulsed and non-pulsed sounds.
A signal near a source could be categorized as a pulse, but due to
propagation effects as it moves farther from the source, the signal
duration becomes longer (e.g., Greene and Richardson, 1988).
Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic
booms, impact pile driving) produce signals
[[Page 32131]]
that are brief (typically considered to be less than one second),
broadband, atonal transients (ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH,
1998; ISO, 2003) 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 1. 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 1. 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, non-
auditory physical or physiological effects, behavioral disturbance,
stress, and masking. 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), in which case the loss of hearing sensitivity is not
fully recoverable, or temporary (TTS), in which case the animal's
hearing threshold would recover over time (Southall et al., 2007).
Animals in the vicinity of PCW'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 (178 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 1) 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 proposed for use
(Table 1) and the brief period when an individual mammal is likely to
be exposed.
Sound may affect marine mammals through impacts on the abundance,
behavior, or distribution of prey species (e.g., crustaceans,
cephalopods, fish, 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 relatively quickly, 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
[[Page 32132]]
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 knots (4.6 mph). 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 PCW'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.
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 authorized.
Consideration of the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation
measures (i.e., pre-start clearance 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)
and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the
factors considered here in more detail and present the proposed take
estimates.
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). Based on what
the available science indicates and the practical need to use a
threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for
most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on
received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS
predicts that marine mammals may be behaviorally harassed (i.e., Level
B harassment) when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for the impulsive sources
(i.e., boomers, sparkers) and non-impulsive, intermittent sources
(e.g., CHIRP SBPs) evaluated here for PCW'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>.
PCW's proposed activity includes the use of impulsive (i.e.,
sparkers and boomers) and non-impulsive (e.g., CHIRP SBP) sources.
However, as discussed above, NMFS has concluded that Level A harassment
is not a reasonably likely outcome for marine mammals exposed to noise
through use of the sources proposed for use here, and the potential for
Level A harassment is not evaluated further in this document. Please
see PCW's application for details of a quantitative exposure analysis
exercise, i.e., calculated Level A harassment isopleths and estimated
Level A harassment exposures. Maximum estimated Level A harassment
isopleths were less than 4 m for all sources and hearing groups with
the exception of an estimated 53 m zone calculated for high-frequency
cetaceans during use of the Boomer, respectively. PCW did not request
authorization of take by Level A harassment, and no take by Level A
harassment is proposed for authorization by NMFS.
Ensonified Area
NMFS has developed a user-friendly methodology for estimating the
extent of the Level B harassment isopleths associated with relevant HRG
survey equipment (NMFS, 2020). This methodology incorporates frequency
and directionality to refine estimated ensonified zones. For acoustic
sources that operate with different beamwidths, the maximum beamwidth
was used, and the lowest frequency of the source was used when
calculating the frequency-dependent absorption coefficient (Table 1).
[[Page 32133]]
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 1 shows the HRG equipment
types that may be used during the proposed surveys and the source
parameters 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 PCW that has the
potential to result in Level B harassment of marine mammals, the
Applied Acoustics AA251 Boomer would produce the largest Level B
harassment isopleth (178 m). Estimated Level B harassment isopleths for
all sources evaluated here are provided in Table 4. Although PCW does
not expect to use the AA251 Boomer source on all planned survey days,
it proposes to assume, for purposes of analysis, that the boomer
sources would be used on all survey days and across all hours within a
given survey day. This is a conservative approach, as the actual
sources used on individual survey days, or during a portion of a survey
day, may produce smaller distances to the Level B harassment isopleth.
Table 4--Distances to Level B Harassment Threshold
[160 dB rms]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B
Source level harassment
Equipment System Frequency Beam width (dB re 1 horizontal
(kHz) ([deg]) [mu]Pa m) impact
distance (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow subbottom profiler.... EdgeTech Chirp 2-16 65 178 4
216.
Deep seismic profiler......... Applied 0.2-15 180 205 178
Acoustics AA251
Boomer.
GeoMarine Geo 0.05-3 180 203 141
Spark 2000 (400
tip).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section, NMFS provides information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that informs the take
calculations.
Habitat-based density models produced by the Duke University Marine
Geospatial Ecology Laboratory (Roberts et al., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2021)
represent the best available information regarding marine mammal
densities in the survey area. The density data presented by Roberts et
al. (2016, 2017, 2018, 2021) incorporates aerial and shipboard line-
transect survey data from NMFS and other organizations and incorporates
data from 8 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., 2016). 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="http://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke-EC/">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., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2021). The updated models incorporate
additional sighting data, including sightings from NOAA's Atlantic
Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (AMAPPS) surveys. Those
data provide abundance estimates for species or species guilds within
10 km x 10 km grid cells (100 km\2\), or in the case of NARW densities
within 5 km x 5 km grid cells, on a monthly or annual basis, depending
on the species. Using geographic information system (GIS) (ESRI 2017),
the proposed survey area and the NARW SMA polygons were used to select
grid cells from the Roberts et al. (2016; 2017; 2018; 2021) data that
contain the most recent monthly or annual estimates for each species
for the months of May through December. For the months of January
through April, only the proposed survey area polygon was used to select
density grid cells since it excludes waters within Cape Cod Bay where
no surveys will occur from January 1 through May 15. The average
monthly abundance for each species was calculated as the mean value of
all grid cells within the survey area and then converted to density
(individuals/km\2\) by dividing by 100 km\2\. Finally, an average
annual density was calculated by taking the mean across all 12 months
for each species (see Table 8 of the application).
The estimated monthly density of seals provided in Roberts et al.
(2018) includes all seal species present in the region as a single
guild. To split the resulting ``seal'' density-based exposure estimate
by species, the estimate was multiplied by the proportion of the
combined abundance attributable to each species. Specifically, the SAR
abundance estimates (Hayes et al. 2021) were summed for the two species
(gray seal = 27,300, harbor seal = 61,336; total = 88,636) and the
total divided by the estimate for each species to get the proportion of
the total for each species (gray seal = 0.308; harbor seal = 0.692).
The total estimated exposure from the ``seal'' density provide by
Roberts et al. (2018) was then multiplied by these proportions to get
the species specific exposure estimates.
Densities from each of the selected density blocks were averaged
for each month available to provide monthly density estimates for each
species (when available based on the temporal resolution of the model
products), along with the average annual density. Please see Tables 8
and 9 of PCW's application 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 (see Table 10 of the application).
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here NMFS describes how the information provided above is brought
[[Page 32134]]
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., 178 m
distance associated with the boomer) to the Level B harassment
criterion and the estimated trackline distance traveled per day by a
given survey vessel (i.e., 80 km) was used to calculate the daily
ensonified area, or zone of influence (ZOI) around the survey vessel.
This distance was multiplied by two times the average daily survey
distance (80 km) and the area of a circle with radius 178 m was added
to the result to calculate the daily ZOI (28.6 km\2\). The daily ZOI
was then multiplied by the total number of expected survey days (636)
to estimate the total ZOI for the proposed surveys (18,177 km\2\).
Potential Level B harassment exposures are estimated by multiplying
the average annual density of each species within either the Lease Area
or potential ECR area by the total ZOI for the planned surveys. Those
results are shown in Table 5.
The larger of the two estimates from the approaches described
above: Density-based exposure estimates or mean group size was then
selected as the requested take as shown in Table 5. In cases where the
calculations resulted in a non-integer, the result was rounded up to
the nearest whole number since it is not logical to request a partial
take. Additionally, based on observational data collected during prior
HRG surveys in this area, the density of common dolphins predicted by
the Roberts et al. (2018) model does not appear to adequately reflect
the number of dolphins that may be encountered during the planned
surveys. Data collected by Protected Species Observers (PSOs) on survey
vessels operating in 2020-2021 showed an average of approximately 16
common dolphins may be observed within 200 m of a vessel (the
approximate Level B harassment distance) per survey day. Multiplying
the anticipated 636 survey days by 16 common dolphins per day results
in a potential estimated take of 10,176 common dolphins so this has
been used as the requested take of common dolphins shown in Table 5.
For the ``seal'' guild in the Roberts et al. (2018) densities, the
exposure estimate was split by species using the relative abundance for
the two species to produce the species-specific requested take.
For Bottlenose dolphins, the offshore morphotype inhabits the outer
continental slope and shelf edge regions from Georges Bank to the
Florida Keys, while the coastal morphotype is continuously distributed
along the Atlantic Coast from south of New York to the Florida
Peninsula (Hayes et al. 2020)). Offshore common bottlenose dolphin
sightings occur from Cape Hatteras to the eastern end of Georges Bank
(Kenney 1990). The western North Atlantic offshore stock is distributed
primarily along the OCS and continental slope, from Georges Bank to
Cape Hatteras during spring and summer (CeTAP 1982). Bottlenose
dolphins encountered in the survey area would likely belong to the
Western North Atlantic Offshore stock, so all takes are being requested
from this stock. However, it is possible that a few animals encountered
during the surveys could be from the North Atlantic Northern Migratory
Coastal stock, but chance of occurrence is low, and no take from this
species is proposed. Similarly, based on the distributions described in
Hayes et al. (2020, 2021b), pilot whale sightings in the Lease Area
would most likely be long-finned pilot whales, so all pilot whale takes
being requested are for long-finned pilot whales.
For NARWs, the implementation of a 500 m acoustic shutdown zone and
the 500 m vessel separation distance identified in the vessel strike
avoidance measures means that the likelihood of an exposure to received
sound levels greater than 160 dB SPLrms is very low. As a precautionary
measure, takes by Level B harassment are requested for the proposed
survey.
Table 5--Proposed Takes by Level B Harassment and Percentages of Each Species or Stock Abundance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed take
Taxonomic group Common name Stock (NEST) \a\ Density based Mean group by level B Percent of stock
exposures size harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cetacean (Mysticete).......... North Atlantic Western Atlantic 29 2.4 30 8.2.
right whale. Stock (368).
Blue whale....... Western North 0 1.0 1 Less than 1 percent.
Atlantic Stock
(402).
Fin whale........ Western North 59 1.8 60 Less than 1 percent.
Atlantic Stock
(6,802).
Sei whale........ Nova Scotia Stock 5 1.6 5 Less than 1 percent.
(6,292).
Minke whale...... Canadian East 37 1.2 37 Less than 1 percent.
Coastal Stock
(21,968).
Humpback whale... West Indies DPS 45 2.0 46 3.3.
(1,396).
Cetacean (Odontocete)......... Sperm whale...... North Atlantic 2 1.5 5 Less than 1 percent.
Stock (4,349).
Atlantic white- Western North 1,014 27.9 1,014 Less than 2 percent.
sided dolphin. Atlantic Stock
(93,233).
Atlantic spotted Western North 4 29.0 29 Less than 1 percent.
dolphin. Atlantic Stock
(39,921).
Common bottlenose Western North 398 7.8 399 Less than 1 percent.
dolphin. Atlantic
Offshore Stock
(62,851).
Long-finned pilot Western North 86 8.4 86 Less than 1 percent.
whale. Atlantic Stock
(68,139).
Risso's dolphin.. Western North 4 5.4 30 Less than 1 percent.
Atlantic Stock
(35,215).
Common dolphin Western North 1,081 34.9 10,176 5.9.
(short-beaked). Atlantic Stock
(172,974).
Harbor porpoise.. Western North 759 2.7 759 Less than 1 percent.
Atlantic Stock
(95,543).
Pinniped (Phocid)............. Gray seal........ Western North 399 0.4 400 Less than 2 percent.
Atlantic Stock
(27,300).
[[Page 32135]]
Harbor seal...... Western North 897 1.0 897 Less than 2 percent
Atlantic Stock
(61,336).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source--(Hayes et al. 2021).
Rare Species
Species considered to be rare or not expected to occur in the area
were not included in the previous exposure estimates because the
densities would be too low to provide meaningful density-based
exposures. Nonetheless, species considered to be rare are occasionally
encountered. For example, white-beaked dolphins were recorded in both
2019 and 2020 during HRG surveys in this area (Vineyard-Wind 2019,
2020) with the sighting of White-beaked dolphins in 2019 consisting of
30 animals. Other rare species encountered in the survey area during
previous HRG surveys include false killer whale in 2019 (five
individuals) and 2021 (one individual) (Vineyard-Wind 2019, 2021) and
orca (killer whale) in 2022 (two individuals; data not yet submitted).
When species not listed in an IHA are encountered and may be taken, it
is necessary to cease survey operations to avoid unauthorized take. To
avoid this potential disruption to survey operations, PCW is requesting
and NMFS is proposing take by Level B harassment for these three rare
species based on the largest number of individuals observed within one
year: 30 white-beaked dolphins, 5 false killer whales, and 2 killer
whales.
The take numbers shown in Table 5 are those requested by PCW. NMFS
concurs with the requested take numbers and proposes to authorize them.
Previous monitoring data compiled by PCW (available online at:
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-ocean-wind-marine-site-characterization-surveys-offshore-new">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-ocean-wind-marine-site-characterization-surveys-offshore-new</a>) suggests that the
proposed take numbers for authorization are sufficient.
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.
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
NMFS proposes the following mitigation measures be implemented
during PCW's proposed marine site characterization surveys. Pursuant to
section 7 of the ESA, PCW 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 Shutdown Zones and Level B Harassment Zone
Marine mammal shutdown zones (SZs) would be established around the
HRG survey equipment and monitored by PSOs:
<bullet> 500-m SZ for North Atlantic right whales
<bullet> 100-m SZ for all other marine mammals
If a marine mammal is detected approaching or entering the SZs
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 provided to the survey team.
Pre-Start Clearance
Marine mammal clearance zones (CZs) would be established around the
HRG survey equipment and monitored by PSOs:
<bullet> 500-m CZ for all ESA-listed marine mammals; and
<bullet> 100-m CZ for all other marine mammals
Vineyard Northeast would implement a 30-minute pre-start clearance
period prior to initiation of ramp-up of specified HRG equipment.
During this period, CZs would be monitored by PSOs, using the
appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up may not be initiated if any
marine mammal(s) is within its respective CZ. If a marine mammal is
observed within its CZ during the pre-start clearance period, ramp-up
may not begin until the animal(s) has been observed exiting its
respective CZ or until an additional time 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
When technically feasible, a ramp-up procedure would be used for
HRG survey equipment capable of adjustment of energy levels at the
start or restart of survey activities. The ramp-up
[[Page 32136]]
procedure would be used at the beginning of HRG survey activities to
provide additional protection to marine mammals in or near the Survey
Area by allowing them to vacate the area prior to the commencement of
survey equipment operation at full power. A ramp-up would begin with
the powering up of the smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its lowest
practical power output appropriate for the survey. When technically
feasible, the power would then be gradually turned up and other
acoustic sources would be added.
Ramp-up activities will be delayed if a marine mammal(s) enters its
respective CZ. Ramp-up will continue if the animal has been observed
exiting its respective CZ or until an additional period has elapsed
with no additional sightings (i.e., 15 minutes for small odontocetes
and seals, and 30 minutes for all other species).
Activation of survey equipment through ramp-up procedures may not
occur when visual observation of the pre-start clearance/shutdown zone
is not expected to be effective using the appropriate visual technology
(i.e., during inclement conditions such as heavy rain or fog).
Shutdown Procedures
An immediate shutdown of the specified HRG survey equipment would
be required if a marine mammal is sighted entering or within its
respective SZ. The vessel operator must comply immediately with any
call for shutdown by the PSO. Any disagreement between the 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 SZ or until an
additional time 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
applicable Level B harassment zone (Table 4), 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 SZs. If the acoustic source is shut down for a period
longer than 30 minutes, then pre-start 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 detected
in the shutdown zone and belongs to a genus other than those specified.
Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and ramp-up procedures would not be
required during HRG survey operations using only non-impulsive sources
(e.g., echosounders), other than non-parametric sub-bottom profilers
(e.g., CHIRP SBPs).
Vessel Strike Avoidance
Vineyard Northeast must ensure that vessel operators and crew
maintain a vigilant watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down or
stop their vessels to avoid striking these species. Survey vessel crew
members responsible for navigation duties will receive site-specific
training on marine mammals sighting/reporting and vessel strike
avoidance measures. Vessel strike avoidance measures include the
following, except under circumstances when complying with these
requirements would put the safety of the vessel or crew at risk:
<bullet> Vessel operators and crews must maintain a vigilant watch
for all protected species and slow down, stop their vessel(s), 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 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 North Atlantic right whale, other whale
(defined in this context as sperm whales or baleen whales other than
North Atlantic right whales), or other marine mammal.
<bullet> Members of the monitoring team will consult NMFS North
Atlantic right whale reporting system and Whale Alert at the start of
every PSO shift, for situational awareness regarding the presence of
North Atlantic right whales throughout the Survey Area, and for the
establishment of Slow Zones (including visual-detection-triggered
dynamic management areas (DMAs) and acoustically-triggered slow zones)
within or near the Survey Area.
<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 SMAs and 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 North Atlantic right whales and other ESA-listed species. If
an ESA-listed species is sighted within the relevant separation
distance, the vessel must steer a course away at 10 knots or less until
the 500-m separation distance has been established. If a whale is
observed but cannot be confirmed as a species that is not ESA-listed,
the vessel operator must assume that it is an ESA-listed species and
take appropriate action.
<bullet> All vessels must, to the maximum extent practicable,
attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 100 m from all
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 must 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
[[Page 32137]]
or any vessel that is navigationally constrained.
Seasonal Restrictions
Vineyard Northeast proposes to refrain from conducting survey
activities using HRG equipment operating at or below 180 kHz from
January 1 through May 15 within the North Atlantic right whale SMA in
Cape Cod Bay.
Crew Training
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, NMFS has 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. PCW 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 shutdown zones, during all HRG survey operations.
PSOs will visually monitor and identify marine mammals, including those
approaching or entering the established shutdown 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 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 and during periods of poor visibility. 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, infared cameras 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 shutdown 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
[[Page 32138]]
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 final technical 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#aafaf884e3fefa84e7c5c4c3dec5d8c3c4cdf8cfdac5d8ded9eac4c5cbcb84cdc5dc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e1b1b3cfa8b5b1cfac8e8f88958e93888f86b384918e939592a18f8e8080cf868e97">[email protected]</span></a>, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9ef0f3f8edb0f9ffecb0f7f0fdf7fafbf0eafff2b3eafff5fbdef0f1ffffb0f9f1e8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="91fffcf7e2bff6f0e3bff8fff2f8f5f4ffe5f0fdbce5f0faf4d1fffef0f0bff6fee7">[email protected]</span></a>, and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#521b06027c023d263e3d3139123c3d33337c353d24"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="18514c483648776c74777b735876777979367f776e">[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; 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 NARW is observed at any time by PSOs or personnel on any
project vessels, during surveys or during vessel transit, PCW must
immediately report sighting information to the NMFS NARW Sighting
Advisory System: (866) 755-6622. NARW sightings in any location may
also be reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via channel 16.
In the event that PCW personnel discover an injured or dead marine
mammal, PCW will report the incident to the NMFS Office of Protected
Resources (OPR) and the NMFS New England/Mid-Atlantic Stranding
Coordinator 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);
<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, PCW would
report the incident to the NMFS OPR and the NMFS New England/Mid-
Atlantic Stranding Coordinator 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).
[[Page 32139]]
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 5 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 NARW--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 178 m. Although this distance is assumed
for all survey activity in estimating take numbers proposed for
authorization and evaluated here, other survey activity would involve
use of acoustic sources with a reduced acoustic harassment zone
producing expected effects of particularly low(er) 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. However, there are BIAs for large whales, which overlap with the
survey area. As discussed earlier in this document, there are two BIAs
for feeding fin whales that flank the survey area, a BIA for feeding
humpback whales northeast of the survey area, and a portion of the
minke and sei whale feeding BIAs within the survey area. Migration and
feeding BIAs for NARW are present in the survey area, but are discussed
in the NARW subsection below.
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 feeding habitat
in the BIAs for large whales (as previously discussed), feeding for
large whales 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.
NARWs
The status of the NARW population is of heightened concern and,
therefore, merits additional analysis. As noted previously, elevated
NARW 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 NARWs. As noted previously, the proposed survey area
overlaps migratory and feeding BIAs and critical habitat for NARW.
Because 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 and feeding habitats in
the BIAs and critical habitat, NARW 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 for NARW 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 PCW's proposed
activities. Additionally, only very limited take by Level B harassment
of NARW 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 NARW is sighted at or within the EZ. The 500 m shutdown
zone for NARWs is conservative, considering the Level B harassment
isopleth for the most impactful acoustic source (i.e., boomer) is
estimated to be 178 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 NARWs
takes that would result from PCW'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 PCW's proposed survey area. Elevated humpback whale
mortalities have
[[Page 32140]]
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 5,
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.
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 (PTS) 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 primarily Level B behavioral
harassment consisting of brief startling reactions and/or temporary
avoidance of the survey area;
<bullet> While the survey area is within areas noted as migratory
and feeding area BIAs and designated critical habitat for NARWs, 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 or feeding. In addition, mitigation measures to shut down at
500 m to minimize potential for Level B behavioral harassment would
limit the severity of any take that occurs;
<bullet> While the survey area is within areas noted as feeding
area BIAs for large 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 prey availability or foraging
activities.
<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 monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to
small numbers of marine mammals. When the predicted number of
individuals to be taken is 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 16 marine mammal
species. The total amount of takes proposed for authorization relative
to the best available population abundance is less than 9 percent for
NARW, less than 6 percent for common dolphin, less than 4 percent for
humpback whales, and less than 2 percent for all other species and
stocks, which NMFS preliminarily finds are small numbers of marine
mammals relative to the estimated overall population abundances for
those stocks. Please see Table 5.
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, in
this case with NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO).
NMFS is proposing to authorize the incidental take of five species
of marine mammals which are listed under the ESA, including the North
Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has
[[Page 32141]]
determined that these activities fall within the scope of activities
analyzed 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). The
consultation concluded that NMFS' issuance of incidental take
authorization related to these activities are not likely to adversely
affect ESA-listed marine mammals.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to PCW for conducting marine site characterization surveys
off the coast of Massachusetts south to Long Island, New York 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="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>.
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, or nearly identical, activities as described in the
Description of Proposed Activity section of this notice is planned or
(2) the activities as described in the Description of Proposed Activity
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 24, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-11485 Filed 5-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on May 27, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.