Notice2022-13668
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Site Characterization Surveys Off New Jersey and New York in the Area of the Atlantic Shores Lease Area (OCS-A 0541)
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
June 27, 2022
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
NMFS has received a request from Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind Bight, LLC (Atlantic Shores Bight) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to site characterization surveys off New Jersey and New York in the area of Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area (OCS-A 0541). Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to incidentally take marine mammals during the specified activities. NMFS is also requesting comments on a possible one-time, one-year renewal that could be issued under certain circumstances and if all requirements are met, as described in Request for Public Comments at the end of this notice. NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested MMPA authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final notice of our decision.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 122 (Monday, June 27, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 122 (Monday, June 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38067-38094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13668]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XC058]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Site Characterization Surveys Off
New Jersey and New York in the Area of the Atlantic Shores Lease Area
(OCS-A 0541)
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments on proposed authorization and possible renewal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind
Bight, LLC (Atlantic Shores Bight) for authorization to take marine
mammals incidental to site characterization surveys off New Jersey and
New York in the area of Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for
Renewable Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area
(OCS-A 0541). 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
[[Page 38068]]
marine mammals during the specified activities. NMFS is also requesting
comments on a possible one-time, one-year renewal that could be issued
under certain circumstances and if all requirements are met, as
described in Request for Public Comments at the end of this notice.
NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any final decision
on the issuance of the requested MMPA authorization and agency
responses will be summarized in the final notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than July 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#bbf2efeb95cfdac2d7d4c9fbd5d4dada95dcd4cd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="501904007e2431293c3f22103e3f31317e373f26">[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: Jessica Taylor, 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">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities</a>-renewable. In case of
problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed
above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations
are proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed incidental harassment authorization is provided to the public
for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth. The definitions
of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the
relevant sections below.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an IHA)
with respect to potential impacts on the human environment.
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or
mortality) of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-
6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for
significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for
which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would
preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has
preliminarily determined that the issuance of the proposed IHA
qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice
prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the
IHA request.
Summary of Request
On April 8, 2022, NMFS received a request from Atlantic Shores
Bight for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to marine site
characterization survey activities off New Jersey and New York. The
application was deemed adequate and complete on May 23, 2022. Atlantic
Shores Bight's request is for take of 15 species of marine mammals by
Level B harassment only. Neither Atlantic Shores Bight nor NMFS expect
serious injury or mortality to result from this activity and,
therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
NMFS previously issued three IHAs to Atlantic Shores, the parent
company of Atlantic Shores Bight, for similar work in a comparable
geographic region (85 FR 21198, April 16, 2020; 86 FR 21289, April 22,
2021; 87 FR 24103, April 20, 2022). The 2020 monitoring report
confirmed that Atlantic Shores had previously implemented the required
mitigation and monitoring, and demonstrated that no impacts of a scale
or nature not previously analyzed or authorized had occurred as a
result of the activities conducted under the 2020 IHA. At the time of
developing this proposed IHA for Atlantic Shores Bight, the Atlantic
Shores 2021 (Renewal) monitoring report was not available as the
renewal IHA expired on April 19, 2022 (86 FR 21289; April 22, 2021).
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
As part of its overall marine site characterization survey
operations, Atlantic Shores Bight proposes to conduct high-resolution
geophysical (HRG) surveys in the Lease Area (OCS)-A 0451 and along
potential submarine export cable routes (ECR) to a landfall location in
either New York or New Jersey. These two areas are collectively
referred to as the survey area. The survey area is approximately
1,375,710 acres (5,567.3 km\2\) and extends from 11 nautical miles (20
km) offshore of New Jersey and New York out to a maximum distance of
approximately 40 nautical miles (74 km).
The purpose of the proposed surveys are to support the site
characterization, siting, and engineering design of offshore wind
project facilities including wind turbine generators, offshore
substations, and submarine cables within the Lease Area and along ECRs.
A maximum of three survey vessels may operate at any one time during
the proposed surveys. Underwater sound resulting from Atlantic Shores
Bight's proposed site characterization survey activities, specifically
HRG surveys, has the potential to result in incidental take of marine
mammals in the form of behavioral harassment. Atlantic Shores Bight
intends to conduct HRG surveys
[[Page 38069]]
within the lease area and ECR survey areas over a period of up to 12
months.
Dates and Duration
Survey activities are proposed to initiate on August 1, 2022. The
estimated duration of the in-water activities is expected to be up to
360 total survey days over the course of a single year within the two
survey areas (Table 1). As multiple vessels (i.e., a maximum of three
survey vessels) may be operating at any one time across the Lease Area
and ECR Survey Area, each day that a survey vessel is operating counts
as a single survey day. For example, if three vessels are operating in
the ECR and Lease Areas concurrently, this counts as three survey days.
This schedule is based on 24-hours of operations throughout 12 months.
The schedule presented here for this proposed project has accounted for
potential down time due to inclement weather or other project-related
delays.
Table 1--Number of Survey Days for Proposed HRG Activities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Survey areas active survey
days expected
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease Survey Area (OCS-A 541)........................... 180
ECR Survey Area......................................... 180
---------------
Total............................................... 360
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specific Geographic Region
Atlantic Shores Bight's proposed activities would occur in the
Northwest Atlantic Ocean within Federal and state waters (Figure 1).
Surveys would occur in the Lease Area and along potential ECRs to
landfall in either New York or New Jersey. Proposed activities would
occur within the Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable
Energy Development Lease Area OCS-A 0541. The survey area is
approximately 1,375,710 acres (5,567.3 square kilometers (km\2\)) and
extends from 11 nautical miles (20 kilometers (km)) offshore to
approximately 40 nautical miles (nm; 74 kilometers (km)) offshore. In
general, the survey area spans from Sandy Hook Bay to Ocean City, New
Jersey. No nearshore surveys are proposed for this project.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 38070]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN22.003
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
Atlantic Shores Bight proposes to conduct both geotechnical and HRG
survey activities. The proposed geotechnical activities would include
the drilling of sample boreholes, deep cone penetration tests (CPTs),
and shallow CPTs. Such proposed activities have been performed before
by Atlantic Shores and considerations of the impacts produced from
geotechnical activities have been previously analyzed and included in
the proposed 2020 Federal Register notice for Atlantic Shores' HRG
activities (85 FR 7926; February 12, 2020). In that notification, NMFS
determined that the likelihood of the proposed geotechnical surveys
resulting in harassment of marine mammals was so low as to be
discountable. As this information remains applicable and NMFS'
determination has not changed, these activities will not be discussed
further in this proposed notification.
[[Page 38071]]
Atlantic Shores Bight has proposed that HRG survey operations would
be conducted continuously 24 hours a day. Based on 24-hour operations,
the estimated total duration of the proposed activities would be
approximately 360 survey days. This includes 180 days of survey
activities in the Lease Survey Area and 180 days in ECR Survey Area
(refer back to Table 1). As previously discussed above, this schedule
includes potential downtime due to inclement weather or other project-
related delays.
The HRG survey equipment to be used in the identified survey area
will be similar to the HRG survey equipment used to support previous
surveys conducted by Atlantic Shores and other offshore wind
development projects along the Atlantic Coast. The HRG survey
activities will be supported by vessels of sufficient size to
accomplish the survey goals in each of the specified survey areas.
There will be a maximum of three geophysical survey vessels working at
any one time across the survey areas. HRG equipment will either be
mounted to or towed behind the survey vessel at a typical survey speed
of approximately 3.5 knots (6.5 km) per hour. The geophysical survey
activities proposed by Atlantic Shores Bight would include the
following:
<bullet> Depth sounding (multibeam depth sounder and single beam
echosounder) to determine water depths and general bottom topography
(currently estimated to range from approximately 16 feet (ft) (5 meters
[m] to 131 ft [40 m] in depth);
<bullet> Magnetic intensity measurements (gradiometer) for
detecting local variations in regional magnetic field from geological
strata and potential ferrous objects on and below the bottom;
<bullet> Seafloor imaging (side scan sonar survey) for seabed
sediment classification purposes to identify natural and man-made
acoustic targets resting on the bottom as well as any anomalous
features;
<bullet> Shallow penetration sub-bottom profiler (pinger/chirp) to
map the near surface stratigraphy (top 0 ft to 16 ft [0 m to 5 m] soils
below seabed); and
<bullet> Medium penetration sub-bottom profiler (chirps/parametric
profilers/sparkers) to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy as needed
(soils down to 246 ft [75 m] to 328 ft [100 m] below seabed). Based
upon three years of previous survey experience (i.e., 2019--2021
surveys), Atlantic Shores Bight anticipates that it will operate the
Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark and/or the Geo Marine Geo-Source to map
deeper stratigraphy in the survey areas.
<bullet> Grab sampling to validate seabed classification using
typical sample sizes between 0.1 m\2\ and 0.2 m\2\.
Table 2 identifies the representative survey equipment that may be
used in support of planned geophysical survey activities. Operational
parameters presented in Table 2 were obtained from the following
sources: Crocker and Fratantonio (2016); manufacturer specifications;
personal communication with manufacturers; agency correspondence; and
Atlantic Shores/Atlantic Shores Bight. The make and model of the listed
geophysical equipment may vary depending on availability and the final
equipment choices will vary depending upon the final survey design,
vessel availability, and survey contractor selection. Geophysical
surveys are expected to use several equipment types concurrently in
order to collect multiple aspects of geophysical data along one
transect. Selection of equipment combinations is based on specific
survey objectives. All categories of representative HRG survey
equipment shown in Table 2 work with operating frequencies <180 kHz.
Table 2--Summary of Representative Equipment Specifications With Operating Frequencies Below 180 kHz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Typical pulse
Operating frequency ranges Operational Beamwidth durations Pulse
HRG survey equipment Representative equipment (kHz) source level ranges RMS90 repetition
(dBRMS) (degrees) (millisecond) rate (Hz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sparker...................... Applied Acoustics Dura- 0.01 to 1.9.................. 203 180 3.4 2
Spark 240 [supcaret].
Geo Marine Geo-Source..... 0.2 to 5..................... 195 180 7.2 0.41
CHIRPs....................... Edgetech 2000-DSS......... 2 to 16...................... 195 24 6.3 10
Edgetech 216.............. 2 to 16...................... 179 17, 20, 0r 24 10 10
Edgetech 424.............. 4 to 24...................... 180 71 4 2
Edgetech 512i............. 0.7 to 12.................... 179 80 9 8
Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom 4 to 12.5.................... 190 120 4.5 44
ImagerTM.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[supcaret] The operational source level for the Dura-Spark 240 is assigned based on the value closest to the field operational history of the Dura-Spark
240 [operating between 500-600 J] found in Table 10 in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), which reports a 203 dBRMS for 500 J source setting and 400
tips. Because Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) did not provide other source levels for the Dura-Spark 240 near the known operational range, the SIG ELC
820 @750 J at 5m depth assuming an omnidirectional beam width was considered as a proxy or comparison to the Dura-Spark 240. The corresponding 203
dBRMS level is considered a realistic and conservative value that aligns with the history of operations of the Dura-Spark 240 over three years of
survey by Atlantic Shores.
The deployment of HRG survey equipment, including the equipment
planned for use during Atlantic Shores Bight's proposed activities,
produces sound in the marine environment that has the potential to
result in harassment of marine mammals. Proposed mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting measures are described in detail later in
this document (please see Proposed Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring
and Reporting).
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history of the potentially affected species. NMFS
fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader to
these descriptions, incorporated here by reference, instead of
reprinting the information. 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="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>).
Table 3 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
proposed to be authorized for this action, and summarizes information
related to the population or stock, including regulatory status under
the MMPA and Endangered Species Act (ESA) and
[[Page 38072]]
potential biological removal (PBR), where known. PBR is defined by the
MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural
mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while
allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable
population (as described in NMFS' SARs). While no serious injury or
mortality is anticipated or authorized, PBR and annual serious injury
and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as gross
indicators of the status of the species or stocks 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. draft 2021 U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico SARs. All values
presented in Table 3 are the most recent available at the time of
publication and are available in the draft 2021 SARs (available online
at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports</a>).
Table 3--Species Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale.......... Eubalaena glacialis.... Western Atlantic....... E/D, Y 368 (0; 364; 2019) \5\ 0.7 7.7
Humpback whale...................... Megaptera novaeangliae. Gulf of Maine.......... -/-, Y 1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016) 22 12.15
Fin whale........................... Balaenoptera physalus.. Western North Atlantic. E/D, Y 6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 11 1.8
2016).
Sei whale........................... Balaenoptera borealis.. Nova Scotia............ E/D, Y 6,292 (1.02; 3,098; 6.2 0.8
2016).
Minke whale......................... Balaenoptera Canadian East Coastal.. -/-, N 21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 170 10.6
acutorostrata. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale......................... Physeter macrocephalus. North Atlantic......... E/D, Y 4,349 (0.28; 3,451; 3.9 0
2016).
Long-finned pilot whale............. Globicephala melas..... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 39,215 (0.3; 30,627; 306 29
2016).
Atlantic white-sided dolphin........ Lagenorhynchus acutus.. Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 93,233 (0.71; 54,443; 544 27
2016).
Bottlenose dolphin.................. Tursiops truncatus..... Western North Atlantic -/-, N 62,851 (0.23; 51,914; 519 28
Offshore. 2016).
Common dolphin...................... Delphinus delphis...... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 172,974 (0.21, 1,452 390
145,216, 2016).
Atlantic spotted dolphin............ Stenella frontalis..... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 320 0
2016).
Risso's dolphin..................... Grampus griseus........ Western North Atlantic -/-, N 35,215 (0.19; 30,051; 301 34
Sock. 2016).
Harbor porpoise..................... Phocoena phocoena...... Gulf of Maine/Bay of -/-, N 95,543 (0.31; 74,034; 851 164
Fundy. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal......................... Phoca vitulina......... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 61,336 (0.08; 57,637; 1,729 339
2018).
Gray seal \4\....................... Halichoerus grypus..... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 27,300 (0.22; 22,785; 1,389 4,453
2018).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or
designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or
which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is
automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: <a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>. CV
is the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
fisheries, ship strike).
\4\ NMFS' stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. populations only. Total stock abundance (including animals in Canada) is
approximately 451,431. The annual M/SI value given is for the total stock.
\5\ The draft 2022 SARs have yet to be released; however, NMFS has updated its species web page to recognize the population estimate for NARWs is now
below 350 animals (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale</a>).
As indicated above, all 15 species (with 15 managed stocks) in
Table 3 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur. Four marine mammal
species that are listed under the ESA may be present in the survey area
and are included in the take request: The North Atlantic right, fin,
sei, and sperm whale. The temporal and/or spatial occurrence of several
cetacean and pinniped species listed in Table 3-1 of Atlantic Shores
Bight's 2022 IHA application is such that take of these species is not
expected to occur either because they have very low densities in the
survey area or are known to occur further offshore than the survey
area. These include: The blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus), Cuvier's
beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), four species of Mesoplodont beaked
whale (Mesoplodon spp.), dwarf and pygmy sperm whale (Kogia sima and
Kogia breviceps), killer whale (Orcinus orca), false killer whale
(Pseudorca crassidens), short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala
macrorhynchus), striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba), white-beaked
dolphin (Lagenorhynchus albirostris), northern migratory stock of
bottlenose dolphins, pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata),
hooded seal (Cystophora cristata), and harp seal (Pagophilus
groenlandicus). As harassment and subsequent take of these species is
not anticipated as a result of the proposed activities, these species
are not analyzed or discussed further.
In addition, the Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus; a sub-species
of the West Indian manatee) has been previously documented as an
occasional visitor to the Northeast region during summer months (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2019). However, manatees are managed
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and are not considered
further in this document.
For the majority of species potentially present in the specific
geographic region, NMFS has designated only a single generic stock
(e.g., ``western
[[Page 38073]]
North Atlantic'') for management purposes. This includes the ``Canadian
east coast'' stock of minke whales, which includes all minke whales
found in U.S. waters. For humpback whales, NMFS defines stocks on the
basis of feeding locations, i.e., Gulf of Maine. However, references to
humpback whales in this document refer to any individuals of the
species that are found in the specific geographic region. Additional
information on these animals can be found in Sections 3 and 4 of
Atlantic Shores' IHA application, the draft 2021 SARs (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>), and NMFS' website.
Below is a description of the species that have the highest
likelihood of occurring in the survey area and are thus expected to
potentially be taken by the proposed activities as well as further
detail on the baseline for select species (i.e., information regarding
current Unusual Mortality Events (UMEs) and important habitat areas).
North Atlantic Right Whale
The North Atlantic right whale (NARW) ranges from calving grounds
in the southeastern United States to feeding grounds in New England
waters and into Canadian waters (Hayes et al., 2021). Surveys identify
seven areas in which NARWs congregate seasonally, including north and
east of the proposed survey area in Georges Bank, off Cape Cod, and in
Massachusetts Bay (Hayes et al., 2020). In the late fall months (e.g.,
October), right whales are generally thought to depart from the feeding
grounds in the North Atlantic and move south to their calving grounds
off Georgia and Florida. Migrating NARWs have been acoustically
detected in the New York Bight from February to May, likely migrating
north to their feeding grounds (Biedron et al., 2009). However, recent
research indicates that our understanding of NARW movement patterns
remains incomplete (Davis et al., 2017). For example, there has been an
apparent shift in habitat use patterns (Davis et al., 2017), which
includes an increased use of Cape Cod Bay (Mayo et al., 2018) and
decreased use of the Great South Channel. A review of passive acoustic
monitoring data from 2004 to 2014 throughout the western North Atlantic
demonstrated nearly continuous year-round right whale presence across
their entire habitat range (for at least some individuals), including
in locations previously thought of as migratory corridors, suggesting
that not all of the population undergoes a consistent annual migration
(Davis et al., 2017). Observations of NARWs feeding in winter in the
Mid-Atlantic region and recorded off the coast of New Jersey in all
months of the year (Whitt et al., 2013) support the theory that not all
NARWs undergo consistent annual migrations. However, given that
Atlantic Shores Bight's surveys would be concentrated offshore New
Jersey and New York, any right whales in the vicinity of the survey
area are expected to be transient and would most likely migrate through
the region.
The western North Atlantic population demonstrated overall growth
of 2.8 percent per year between 1990 to 2010, despite a decline in 1993
and no growth between 1997 and 2000 (Pace et al., 2017). However, since
2010 the population has been in decline, with a 99.99 percent
probability of a decline of just under 1 percent per year (Pace et al.,
2017). Between 1990 and 2015, calving rates varied substantially, with
low calving rates coinciding with all three periods of decline or no
growth (Pace et al., 2017). On average, North Atlantic right whale
calving rates are estimated to be roughly half that of southern right
whales (Eubalaena australis) (Pace et al., 2017), which are increasing
in abundance (NMFS, 2015). In 2018, no new NARW calves were documented
in their calving grounds; this represented the first time since annual
NOAA aerial surveys began in 1989 that no new right whale calves were
observed. Eighteen right whale calves were documented in 2021. As of
May 9, 2022 and the writing of this proposed Notification, fifteen NARW
calves were documented to have been born during this calving season.
Presently, the best available population estimate for NARWs is 386 per
the draft 2021 SARs (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>). As noted in
footnote to Table 2, NMFS has acknowledged that the population estimate
of North Atlantic right whales is now under 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>). However,
NMFS has determined that this change in abundance estimate would not
change the estimated take of North Atlantic right whales or authorized
take numbers, nor affect our ability to make the required findings
under the MMPA for Atlantic Shores Bight's survey activities. The
status and trends of the NARW population remain unchanged.
NMFS has designated two critical habitat areas for the NARW under
the ESA: The Gulf of Atlantic Shores Bight Maine/Georges Bank region,
and the southeast calving grounds from North Carolina to Florida. Two
additional critical habitat areas in Canadian waters, Grand Manan Basin
and Roseway Basin, were identified in Canada's final recovery strategy
for the NARW (Brown et al., 2009).
The proposed survey area is part of a migratory corridor
Biologically Important Area (BIA) for NARWs (effective March-April and
November-December) that extends from Massachusetts to Florida
(LeBrecque et al., 2015). Off the coast of New Jersey, the migratory
BIA extends from the coast to beyond the shelf break. This important
migratory area is approximately 269,488 km\2\ in size (compared with
the approximately 11,134.6 km\2\ of total estimated Level B harassment
ensonified area associated with the 360 planned survey days) and is
comprised of the waters of the continental shelf offshore the East
Coast of the United States, extending from Florida through
Massachusetts. NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR 224.105 designated nearshore
waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as Mid-Atlantic U.S. Seasonal
Management Areas (SMA) for North Atlantic right whales in 2008. SMAs
were developed to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and
right whales around their migratory route and calving grounds. A
portion of one SMA, which occurs off the ports of New York and New
Jersey, overlaps spatially with a section of the proposed survey area,
as shown by Figure 4-1 in the application. The SMA is active from
November 1 through April 30 of each year. Within SMAs, the regulations
require a mandatory vessel speed (less than 10 knots) for all vessels
greater than 65 ft. (19.8 m).
Historically, there have been several documented sightings of NARWs
off the coast of New Jersey and surrounding waters (CETAP, 1982;
Knowlton and Kraus, 2001; Biedron et al., 2009). Satellite-monitored
radio tags on a NARW cow and calf documented the migratory route of
this pair from the Bay of Fundy to New Jersey and back during a six-
week period (Knowlton et al., 2002). A few NARW sightings were
documented west of the south of the Lease Survey Area near the Delaware
Bay in October, December, May, and July (Knowlton et al., 2002). Other
visual recordings of NARWs were found in New Jersey waters during the
spring and fall seasons (CETAP, 1982). It has been noted, however, that
NARW sightings in several traditional feeding habitats has been
declining, supporting speculation that a shift in NARW habitat usage
may be occurring (Pettis et al., 2017).
[[Page 38074]]
Elevated NARW mortalities have occurred since June 7, 2017, along
the U.S. and Canadian coasts. This event has been declared an Unusual
Mortality Event (UME), with human interactions, including entanglement
in fixed fishing gear and vessel strikes, implicated in at least 15 of
the mortalities. As of May 9, 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="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event</a>.
Humpback Whale
Prior to 2016, humpback whales were listed under the ESA as an
endangered species worldwide. Following a 2015 global status review
(Bettridge et al., 2015), NMFS delineated 14 distinct population
segments (DPS) with different listing statuses (81 FR 62259; September
8, 2016) pursuant to the ESA. The West Indies DPS, which is not listed
under the ESA, is the only DPS of humpback whales 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.
Humpback whales are known to occur regularly throughout the Mid-
Atlantic Bight, including New Jersey waters (Geo-Marine, 2010). The
occurrence of this population is strongly seasonal with most
observations occurring during the spring and fall, with a peak from
April to June (Geo-Marine, 2010; Curtice et al., 2019). Group size
tends to be single animals or pairs with a mean distance from shore of
11.4 mi (18.4 km) and a mean depth of 67 ft (20.5 m) (Geo-Marine,
2010). Acoustic data indicate that this species may be present within
the surrounding areas year-round, with the highest rates of acoustic
detections in adjacent waters in winter and spring (Kraus et al.,
2016). Since acoustic detections do not differentiate between
individuals, detections on multiple days could be the same or different
individuals.
Humpback whales utilize the mid-Atlantic region mainly as a
migration pathway between calving/mating grounds to the south and
feeding grounds in the north (Waring et al., 2007a; Waring et al.,
2007b). However, Barco et al., (2002) suggests that the mid-Atlantic
region also represents a supplemental winter-feeding ground for
humpbacks. Humpback whales belonging to the West Indies DPS typically
feed in the waters between the Gulf of Maine and Newfoundland during
spring, summer, and fall, but they have been observed feeding in other
areas, such as off the coast of New York (Sieswerda et al., 2015). A
biologically important area (BIA) for humpback whales for feeding from
March to December has been designated in the Gulf of Maine, Stellwagen
Bank, and the Great South Channel; all of which are north of the survey
area (LaBrecque et al., 2015).
Despite the seasonality of occurrence, there have been some
wintertime humpback sightings in coastal waters of the eastern U.S.,
including 46 sightings of humpbacks in the New York-New Jersey Harbor
Estuary documented between 2011 and 2016 (Brown et al., 2017). There
have also been documented strandings from the New Jersey coast (Barco
et al., 2002). Humpback whales have been observed feeding off the coast
of New Jersey with juveniles exhibiting feeding behavior south of the
study area near the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay (Swingle et al., 2006).
Additionally, a cow-calf pair was seen north of the study area boundary
supporting the theory that the nearshore waters off of New Jersey may
provide important feeding and nursery habitats for humpback whales
(Geo-Marine, 2010). In addition, recent research by King et al. (2021)
has demonstrated a higher occurrence and foraging use of the New York
Bight area by humpback whales than previously known.
The most significant anthropogenic causes of mortality of humpback
whales include incidental fishery entanglements, responsible for
roughly eight whale mortalities, and vessel collisions, responsible for
four mortalities both on average annually from 2013 to 2017 (Hayes et
al., 2020). Furthermore, King et al. (2021) highlights important
concerns for humpback whales found specifically in the nearshore
environment (<10 km from shore) from various anthropogenic impacts.
Since January 2016, elevated humpback whale mortalities have
occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida. A total of 159
humpback whale mortalities have occurred along the east coast of the
U.S. since 2016 with 4 mortalities occurring in 2022 (NOAA Fisheries
2022a). Partial or full necropsy examinations have been conducted on
approximately half of the 159 known cases (as of May 6, 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. Three
previous UMEs involving humpback whales have occurred since 2000, in
2003, 2005, and 2006. More information is available at:
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2021-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2021-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast</a>.
Fin Whale
Fin whales are common in waters of the U.S. Atlantic Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ), principally from Cape Hatteras northward (Hayes et
al., 2020). There is evidence that fin whales are present year-round
throughout much of the U.S. EEZ north of 35[deg] N, but the density of
individuals in any one area changes seasonally (NOAA Fisheries 2022b,
Hayes et al., 2020). Fin whales have a high multi-seasonal relative
abundance in U.S. Mid-Atlantic waters, and surrounding areas. During
the Geo-Marine (2010) surveys, most of the sightings off southern New
Jersey were observed during winter and summer. There were mixed
aggregations of feeding humpbacks during fin whale sightings, and with
the presence of known prey species, it is possible that fin whales use
the area off southern New Jersey to feed (Geo-Marine, 2010). Within the
southern New Jersey study area, group size ranged from one to four
animals with a mean distance from shore of 20 km and a mean water depth
of 21.5 m (Geo-Marine, 2010). Acoustic data also indicate that this
species is present off New Jersey in all seasons (CETAP, 1982).
[[Page 38075]]
While the typical feeding grounds of fin whales include the Gulf of
Maine and the waters surrounding New England, their mating, calving,
and general wintering areas are largely unknown (Hain et al., 1992;
Hayes et al., 2020). Recordings from Massachusetts Bay, New York Bight,
and deep-ocean areas have detected some level of fin whale singing from
September through June (Watkins et al., 1987; Clark and Gagnon, 2002;
Morano et al., 2012). These acoustic observations from both coastal and
deep-ocean regions support the conclusion that male fin whales are
broadly distributed throughout the western North Atlantic for most of
the year (Hayes et al., 2020). Based on an analysis of neonate
stranding data, Hain et al. (1992) suggest that calving occurs during
October to January in latitudes of the U.S. Mid-Atlantic region.
The fin whale is federally listed under the ESA as an endangered
marine mammal and are designated as a strategic stock under the MMPA
due to their endangered status under the ESA, uncertain human-caused
mortality, and incomplete survey coverage of the stock's defined range.
The main threats to fin whales are fishery interactions and vessel
collisions (Hayes et al., 2021). A fin whale feeding BIA is located
northeast of the study area near Rhode Island Sound (LaBrecque et al.,
2015).
Sei Whale
Sei whales present within the study area belong to the Nova Scotia
stock, which occurs within the U.S. Atlantic EEZ and ranges along the
continental shelf waters of the northeastern U.S. to Newfoundland
(Hayes et al., 2020). The southern portion of the stock's range during
spring and summer includes the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank, an area
also identified as a sei whale feeding BIA (LaBrecque et al., 2015).
Spring is the period of greatest abundance in U.S. waters, with
sightings concentrated along the eastern margin of Georges Bank and
into the Northeast Channel area, and along the southwestern edge of
Georges Bank in the area of Hydrographer Canyon (Hayes et al., 2020).
Sei whales occur in shallower waters to feed. The wintering habitat for
sei whales remains largely unknown (Hayes et al., 2020).
There has been little detection of sei whales within New Jersey and
surrounding waters (Kenney et al., 1985; Geo-Marine, 2010). According
to the New Jersey Endangered and Nongame Species Program (NJ ENSP),
there have been no sightings of this species documented within state
waters. On the continental shelf offshore of New Jersey, sei whales
have been detected in spring. Approximately 200 sei whale vocalizations
were detected in mid-September 2006 on the mid-Atlantic continental
shelf, in waters ranging from 13 m to 80 m in depth (Newhall et al.,
2009).
Sei whales are listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Nova
Scotia stock is considered strategic and depleted under the MMPA. The
main threats to this stock are interactions with fisheries and vessel
collisions. Impacts from environmental contaminants also present a
concern as well as potential spatial shifts in distribution related to
climate change (Hayes et al., 2020; Sousa et al., 2019).
Minke Whale
Minke whales can be found in temperate, tropical, and high-latitude
waters. The Canadian East Coast stock can be found in the area from the
western half of the Davis Strait (45[deg] W) to the Gulf of Mexico
(Hayes et al., 2021). This species generally occupies waters less than
100-m deep on the continental shelf. There appears to be a strong
seasonal component to minke whale distribution on the continental shelf
and in deeper off-shelf waters, in which spring to fall are times of
relatively widespread and common acoustic occurrence (e.g., Risch et
al., 2013). September through April is the period of highest acoustic
occurrence in deep-ocean waters throughout most of the western North
Atlantic (Clark and Gagnon, 2002; Risch et al., 2014).
Minke whales are primarily documented near the continental shelf
offshore of New Jersey (Schwartz, 1962; Mead, 1975; Potter, 1979;
Rowlett, 1980; Potter, 1984; Winn et al., 1985, DoN, 2005). Acoustic
recordings of minke whales have been detected north of the Lease survey
area within the New York Bight during the fall (August to December) and
winter (February to May) (Biedron et al., 2009). Minke whales are most
common off New Jersey in coastal waters in the spring and early summer
as they move north to feeding ground in New England and fall as they
migrate south (Geo-Marine, 2010). Geo-Marine (2010) observed four minke
whales near the survey area and surrounding waters during winter and
spring. A juvenile minke whale was sighted northwest of the Lease
survey area near the New York Harbor in April 2007 (Hamazaki, 2002).
Minke whale sightings off the coast of New Jersey were within water
depths of 36 ft to 79 ft (11 m to 24 m) and temperatures ranging from
5.4 to 11.5 [deg]C (47 [deg]F) (Geo-Marine, 2010).
Based on habitat information and predictive habitat models,
Hamazaki (2002) determined that minke whales are likely to occur in
nearshore waters off New Jersey.
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 May 9, 2022). This event has been
declared a UME. Full or partial necropsy examinations were conducted on
more than 60 percent of the whales. Preliminary findings in several of
the whales have shown evidence of human interactions or infectious
disease, but these findings are not consistent across all of the whales
examined, so more research is needed. More information is available at:
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast</a>.
Sperm Whale
The distribution of the sperm whale in the U.S. EEZ occurs on the
continental shelf edge, over the continental slope, and into mid-ocean
regions (Hayes et al., 2020). The basic social unit of the sperm whale
appears to be a mixed school of adult females, their calves and some
juveniles of both sexes, normally numbering 20-40 animals. There is
evidence that some social bonds persist for many years (Christal et
al., 1998). This species forms stable social groups, site fidelity, and
latitudinal range limitations in groups of females and juveniles
(Whitehead, 2002). In contrast, males migrate to the Polar Regions to
feed and move among populations to breed (Whitehead, 2002; Englehaupt
et al., 2009).
Within U.S. Atlantic EEZ waters, sperm whales appear to exhibit
seasonal movement patterns (CETAP, 1982, Scott and Sadove, 1997). In
winter, sperm whales are concentrated east and northeast of Cape
Hatteras. This distribution shifts northward in spring, when sperm
whales are most abundant in the central portion of the Mid-Atlantic
Bight to the southern region of Georges Bank. In summer, this
distribution continues to move northward, including the area east and
north of Georges Bank and the continental shelf to the Mid-Atlantic
region. In fall, sperm whales are most abundant on the continental
shelf to the south of New England and remain abundant along the
continental shelf edge in the Mid-Atlantic Bight (Hayes et al., 2020).
No sperm whale sightings were made during the Ocean Wind Power
Ecological Baseline Study off New Jersey (Geo-Marine, 2010); however,
approximately nine individuals were
[[Page 38076]]
observed offshore of New Jersey near the OCS during shipboard surveys
in summer 2011 (Palka, 2012). There is substantial information on sperm
whale occurrence offshore of New Jersey, exclusively near the OCS
(CETAP, 1982; Waring et al., 2007a) and are therefore likely to be
present within the survey area.
Sperm whales are listed as engendered under the ESA, and the North
Atlantic stock is considered strategic under the MMPA. The greatest
threats to sperm whales include ship strikes ((McGillivary et al.,
2009; Carrillo and Ritter, 2010), anthropogenic sound (Nowacek et al.,
2015), and the potential for climate change to influence variations in
spatial distribution and abundance of prey (Hayes et al., 2020).
Long-Finned Pilot Whale
Long-finned pilot whales are found from North Carolina to North
Africa and the Mediterranean, and north to Iceland, Greenland and the
Barents Sea (Hayes et al., 2020). In U.S. Atlantic waters the species
is distributed principally along the continental shelf edge off the
northeastern U.S. coast in winter, early spring, and in late spring,
long-finned pilot whales move onto Georges Bank and into the Gulf of
Maine and more northern waters and remain in these areas through late
autumn (CETAP, 1982; Hayes et al., 2020).
Long-finned pilot whales have been known to occur offshore of New
Jersey (Abend and Smith, 1999; Tyler, 2008; Hayes et al., 2020). It is
likely that the species can be found along the shelf break between New
Jersey and Georges Bank, however, there is limited information on the
spatial and temporal distribution of long-finned pilot whales near the
survey area (Hayes et al., 2020). For instance, pilot whales were not
detected during the Geo-Marine (2010) study. The limited information of
the presence of long-finned pilot whales within the survey area is
likely based on the habitat preference and the pelagic nature of pilot
whales (Hayes et al., 2020) that would suggest pilot whales have a rare
presence in New Jersey waters (Bowers-Altman and NJ Division of Fish
and Wildlife, 2009).
Bottlenose Dolphin
There are two distinct bottlenose dolphin ecotypes in the western
North Atlantic: coastal and offshore (Hersh and Duffield, 1990; Mead
and Potter, 1995; Curry and Smith, 1997; Rosel et al., 2009). The
coastal ecotype is morphologically and genetically distinct from the
larger, more robust offshore ecotype that occupies habitats further
offshore. The offshore ecotype is distributed primarily along the outer
continental shelf and continental slope in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean
from Georges Bank to the Florida Keys (CETAP, 1982; Kenney, 1990).
North of Cape Hatteras, there is separation of the two ecotypes across
bathymetry during summer months. Based upon genetic analyses,
bottlenose dolphins concentrated close to shore were of the coastal
ecotype, while those in waters >25 m depth were from the offshore
ecotype (Garrison et al., 2003).
Off the coast of New Jersey, bottlenose dolphins, likely from the
coastal migratory and offshore stocks, can occur throughout the year
and were the most frequently detected species in an ecological baseline
survey conducted in coastal New Jersey waters (Geo-Marine, 2010; BOEM,
2012). Seasonal movements of bottlenose dolphins north along the coast
during the warmer months are likely directed by the presence of prey
(Barco et al., 1999; Hayes et al., 2018). Targeted prey species vary by
area, season, and stock; however, sciaenid fishes, such as Atlantic
croaker and weakfish, and squid, are common (Gannon and Waples, 2004).
Bottlenose dolphins were the most frequently observed species during
the Geo-Marine (2010) study period. A total of 319 bottlenose dolphins
with group sizes averaging at 15.3 animals were detected offshore of
New Jersey (Geo-Marine 2010). Several other monitoring efforts recorded
sightings of this species during geophysical surveys in the potential
windfarm sites (including the survey area) southeast of Atlantic City
(Geo-Marine 2009a, 2009b). Bottlenose dolphins have been present
annually near and offshore of New Jersey, with greater sightings during
spring and summer months (Geo-Marine, 2010). Given the northern
migratory coastal stock propensity to be found shallower than the 65.6
ft (20 m) depth isobath between Assateague, Virginia and Long Island,
New York (Reeves et al., 2002; Hayes et al., 2020), the northern
migratory coastal stock is not expected to occur in the survey area
which is located beyond the 65.6 ft (20 m) depth isobath. Only the
offshore ecotype is expected to occur within the study area.
Common Dolphin
Common dolphins within the U.S. Atlantic EEZ belong to the Western
North Atlantic stock, generally occurring from Cape Hatteras to the
Scotian Shelf (Hayes et al., 2021). Common dolphins are a highly
seasonal, migratory species. Within the U.S. Atlantic EEZ, this species
is distributed along the continental shelf and typically associated
with Gulf Stream features (CETAP, 1982; Selzer and Payne, 1988;
Hamazaki, 2002; Hayes et al., 2021). Common dolphins occur from Cape
Hatteras northeast to Georges Bank (35[deg] to 42[deg] N) during mid-
January to May and move as far north as the Scotian Shelf from mid-
summer to fall (Selzer and Payne, 1988). Migration onto the Scotian
Shelf and continental shelf off Newfoundland occurs when water
temperatures exceed 51.8 [deg]F (11 [deg]Celsius) (Sergeant et al.,
1970, Gowans and Whitehead 1995). Breeding usually takes place between
June and September (Hayes et al., 2019).
There have been numerous sightings of common dolphins along the New
Jersey coastline (Ulmer, 1981; Hamazaki, 2002). Generally, this species
has been documented 20 nm (>37 km) near the shelf break within the
months of February, May, and July, however, they have been sighted
year-round (Geo-Marine 2010). Geo-Marine (2010) recorded a total of 32
common dolphin sightings off the coast of New Jersey in waters ranging
from 33 ft to 102 ft (10 m to 21 m). Approximately 26% of the shipboard
sightings of common dolphins were calves (Geo-Marine, 2010) study.
Common dolphins are regularly observed in large groups consisting of
hundreds of animals (NOAA Fisheries, 2022a). Multiple strandings of the
common dolphins have occurred within the New Jersey coasts across
multiple seasons (Hayes et al., 2021).
Atlantic White-Sided Dolphin
Atlantic white-sided dolphins observed off the U.S. Atlantic coast
are part of the Western North Atlantic Stock (Hayes et al., 2020). This
stock inhabits waters from central West Greenland to North Carolina
(about 35[deg] N), primarily in continental shelf waters to the 328 ft
(100 m) depth contour (Doks[aelig]ter et al., 2008). Sighting data
indicate seasonal shifts in distribution (Northridge et al., 1997).
From January to May, low numbers of Atlantic white-sided dolphins are
found from Georges Bank to Jeffrey's Ledge off New Hampshire. From June
through September, large numbers of Atlantic white-sided dolphins are
found from Georges Bank to the lower Bay of Fundy. From October to
December, they occur at intermediate densities from southern Georges
Bank to the southern Gulf of Maine (Payne and Heinemann, 1990).
Atlantic white-sided dolphins were not observed in the Geo-Marine
(2010) study off New Jersey, suggesting that Atlantic white-sided
dolphins occur infrequently in the survey area and surrounding areas.
The NJ ENSP noted
[[Page 38077]]
that there is little information on the sightings of this species and
more information is needed to accurately assess the abundance of
Atlantic white-sided dolphins within New Jersey waters (see CETAP,
1982; Selzer and Payne, 1988; Waring et al., 2007a; Bowers-Altman and
NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife, 2009). A shallow water (~188 ft [36
m]) marine mammal survey off of New Jersey found no presence of
Atlantic white-sided dolphins across each season (Kenney et al., 1985),
which further implies that it is unlikely for this species to be
present within the survey area. Although regional surveys found very
limited presence of this species near the survey area, data adapted
from Roberts et al. (2016b; 2017; 2018) via the MDAT (Curtice et al.,
2019) indicate abundance in this region increases in the spring so
although unlikely, Atlantic white-sided dolphins may be present during
HRG activities.
Atlantic Spotted Dolphin
Atlantic spotted dolphins are found in tropical and warm temperate
waters ranging from southern New England, south to Gulf of Mexico and
the Caribbean to Venezuela (Hayes et al., 2020). The Western North
Atlantic stock regularly occurs in continental shelf waters south of
Cape Hatteras and in continental shelf edge and continental slope
waters north of this region (Hayes et al., 2020). There are two forms
of this species, with the larger ecotype inhabiting the continental
shelf and usually occurring inside or near the 200-m isobaths (Hayes et
al., 2020). Though the waters off the coast of New Jersey are located
within the distributional range of the Atlantic spotted dolphin, the
species was not observed in the Geo-marine (2010) study. It has been
suggested that the species may move inshore seasonally during the
spring, but data to support this theory is limited (Caldwell and
Caldwell, 1966; Fritts et al., 1983).
Risso's Dolphin
Risso's dolphins occur worldwide in both tropical and temperate
waters (Jefferson et al., 2008, Jefferson et al., 2014). Risso's
dolphins within the U.S. Atlantic EEZ are part of the Western North
Atlantic stock. The Western North Atlantic stock of Risso's dolphins
inhabits waters from Florida to eastern Newfoundland (Leatherwood et
al., 1976; Baird and Stacey, 1991). During spring, summer, and fall,
Risso's dolphins are distributed along the continental shelf edge from
Cape Hatteras northward to Georges Bank (CETAP, 1982; Payne et al.,
1984). During the winter, the distribution extends outward into oceanic
waters (Payne et al., 1984) within the Mid-Atlantic Bight, however,
little is known about movement and migration patterns and Risso's
dolphins are infrequently observed in continental shelf waters.
There is limited data regarding Risso's dolphins offshore of New
Jersey. Increased strandings of this species were recorded from 2003 to
2004 on New York, New Jersey, and Delaware coasts (DiGiovanni et al.,
2005). This species has also been primarily documented on the shelf
break off of New Jersey (DiGiovanni et al., 2005). There were no
Risso's dolphins documented during the Geo-Marine (2010) study,
however, one Risso's dolphin observation was recorded during Atlantic
Shores 2020 geophysical campaign in the vicinity of the survey area.
Harbor Porpoise
The harbor porpoise occupies U.S. and Canadian waters. During
summer (July to September), harbor porpoises are generally concentrated
along the continental shelf within the northern Gulf of Maine, southern
Bay of Fundy region, and around the southern tip of Nova Scotia,
generally in waters less than 150 m deep (Gaskin, 1977; Kraus et al.,
1983; Palka, 1995). During fall (October to December) and spring (April
to June), they are more widely dispersed from New Jersey to Maine with
lower densities farther north and south. In winter (January to March),
intermediate densities of harbor porpoises can be found in waters off
New Jersey to North Carolina with lower densities found in waters off
New York to New Brunswick, Canada (Hayes et al., 2020).
There are four distinct populations of harbor porpoise in the
western Atlantic: Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy, Gulf of St. Lawrence,
Newfoundland, and Greenland (Gaskin, 1984, 1992; Hayes et al., 2020).
Harbor porpoises observed within the U.S. Atlantic EEZ are considered
part of the Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy stock. Harbor porpoises are a
frequently sighted cetacean offshore of New Jersey (Geo-Marine, 2010).
During the Geo-Marine (2010) study off New Jersey, 51 harbor porpoise
sightings were documented approximately 0.8 to 19.8 nm (1.5 to 36.6 km)
from shore. These sightings were primarily during winter months
(February to March). It is therefore likely that this marine mammal
will be present within the survey area.
The main threat to harbor porpoises is interactions with fisheries,
with documented take in the U.S. northeast sink gillnet, mid-Atlantic
gillnet, and northeast bottom trawl fisheries (Hayes et al., 2020).
Harbor Seal
Harbor seals are found throughout coastal waters of the Atlantic
Ocean and adjoining seas above 30[deg] N (Hayes et al., 2020). In the
western North Atlantic, they are distributed from eastern Canada to
southern New England and New York, and occasionally as far south as the
Carolinas (Payne and Selzer, 1989). Harbor seals are year-round
inhabitants of the coastal waters of eastern Canada and Maine
(Richardson and Rough, 1993), and occur seasonally from southern New
England to New Jersey between September and late May (Schneider and
Payne, 1983; Barlas, 1999; Schroeder, 2000). The western North Atlantic
stock may occupy southern waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight during
seasonal migrations from the Bay of Fundy in the late autumn and winter
(Palka et al., 2017). A general southward movement from the Bay of
Fundy to southern New England occurs in fall and early winter
(Rosenfeld et al., 1988, Whitman and Payne, 1990, Barlas 1999). A
northward movement from southern New England to Maine and eastern
Canada takes place prior to the pupping season, which occurs from mid-
May through June along the Maine coast (Richardson, 1976; Wilson, 1978;
Whitman and Payne, 1990; Kenney, 1994). Geo-Marine (2010) observed one
harbor seal offshore of New Jersey during their survey effort.
In addition to coastal waters, harbor seals use terrestrial habitat
as haul-out sites throughout the year, but primarily during the pupping
and molting periods, which occur from late spring to late summer in the
northern portion of their range. There are three major haul-out sites
along the New Jersey coast, located in Great Bay, Sandy Hook, and
Barnegat Inlet (CWFNJ, 2015).
Gray Seal
Gray seals are the second most common pinniped along the U.S.
Atlantic coast (Jefferson et al., 2008). Gray seals in the survey area
belong to the Western North Atlantic stock. The range for this stock is
thought to be from New Jersey to Labrador, and is centered at Sable
Island, Nova Scotia (Davies, 1957; Mansfield, 1966; Katona et al.,
1993). This species inhabits temperate and sub-arctic waters and lives
on remote, exposed islands, shoals, and unstable sandbars (Jefferson et
al., 2008). Gray seals range from Canada to New Jersey; however,
stranding records as far south as Cape Hatteras (Gilbert et al., 2005)
have been recorded.
[[Page 38078]]
In U.S. waters, gray seals primarily pup at four established
colonies: Muskeget and Monomoy islands in Massachusetts, and Green and
Seal Islands in Maine. Since 2010, pupping has also been observed at
Noman's Island in Massachusetts and Wooden Ball and Matinicus Rock in
Maine (Hayes et al., 2020). Although white-coated pups have stranded on
eastern Long Island beaches in New York, no pupping colonies have been
detected in that region. Following the breeding season, gray seals may
spend several weeks ashore in late spring and early summer while
undergoing a yearly molt.
Geo-Marine (2010) did not observe gray seals offshore of New
Jersey. However, the Marine Mammal Stranding Center (2022) documented
25 gray seal strandings in New Jersey in 2019. Other reported sightings
of gray seal in waters off of New Jersey were found as bycatch in
gillnets (Hatch and Orphanides, 2017; Orphanides, 2019). Gray seals are
less likely than harbor seals to occur around the survey area (Hayes et
al., 2020).
Since July 2018, elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal
mortalities have occurred across Maine, New Hampshire and
Massachusetts. This event has been declared a UME. Additionally,
stranded seals have shown clinical signs as far south as Virginia,
although not in elevated numbers, therefore the UME investigation now
encompasses all seal strandings from Maine to Virginia. Ice seals (harp
and hooded seals) have also started stranding with clinical signs,
again not in elevated numbers, and those two seal species have also
been added to the UME investigation. A total of 3,152 reported
strandings (of all species) 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 other factors that may be involved in this UME. Presently,
this UME is non-active and is pending closure by NMFS. 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. 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, 2019) recommended that marine mammals be divided into hearing
groups based on directly measured (behavioral or auditory evoked
potential techniques) or estimated hearing ranges (behavioral response
data, anatomical modeling, etc.). Note that no direct measurements of
hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e.,
low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with
the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the
lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower
bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing
groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 4.
Table 4--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose
whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger
& L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section provides a discussion of the ways in which components
of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat.
The Estimated Take section, later in this document, includes a
quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to
be taken by this activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination section considers the content of this section, the
Estimated Take section, and the Proposed Mitigation section, to draw
conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the
reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those
impacts on individuals may or may not impact marine mammal species or
stocks.
Background on Active Acoustic Sound Sources and Acoustic Terminology
This subsection provides relevant technical background information
on sound, the characteristics of certain sound types, and the metrics
used the proposed activity. The focused discussion also includes
analysis of the potential effects of the specified activity on marine
mammals. For general information on sound and its interaction with the
marine environment, please
[[Page 38079]]
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 higher frequency sounds 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 they may be accounted for in the summation of
pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often
used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because
behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be
better expressed through averaged units than by peak pressures.
Sound exposure level (SEL; represented as dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\ -s)
represents the total energy in a stated frequency band over a stated
time interval or event and considers both intensity and duration of
exposure. The per-pulse SEL is calculated over the time window
containing the entire pulse (i.e., 100 percent of the acoustic energy).
SEL is a cumulative metric; it can be accumulated over a single pulse,
or calculated over periods containing multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL
represents the total energy accumulated by a receiver over a defined
time window or during an event. Peak sound pressure (also referred to
as zero-to-peak sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum instantaneous
sound pressure measurable in the water at a specified distance from the
source and is represented in the same units as the rms sound pressure.
When underwater objects vibrate or activity occurs, sound-pressure
waves are created. These waves alternately compress and decompress the
water as the sound wave travels. Underwater sound waves radiate in a
manner similar to ripples on the surface of a pond and may be directed
either in a single beam or in multiple 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. Many sources contribute
to ambient sound, including wind and waves, which are a main source of
naturally occurring ambient sound for frequencies between 200 Hz and 50
kHz (Mitson, 1995). In general, ambient sound levels tend to increase
with increasing wind speed and wave height. Precipitation can become an
important component of total sound at frequencies above 500 Hz, and
possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet times. Marine mammals can
contribute significantly to ambient sound levels, as can some fish and
snapping shrimp. The frequency band for biological contributions is
from approximately 12 Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient sound
related to human activity include transportation (surface vessels),
dredging and construction, oil and gas drilling and production,
geophysical surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel noise typically
dominates the total ambient sound for frequencies between 20 and 300
Hz. In general, the frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are below 1 kHz
and, if higher frequency sound levels are created, they attenuate
rapidly.
The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources that
comprise ambient sound at any given location and time depends not only
on the source levels (as determined by current weather conditions and
levels of biological and human activity) but on the ability of sound to
propagate through the environment. In turn, sound propagation is
dependent on the spatially and temporally varying properties of the
water column and sea floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of
the dependence on a large number of varying factors, ambient sound
levels can be expected to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial
and temporal scales. Sound levels at a given frequency and location can
vary by 10-20 dB from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result
is that, depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from the
specified activity may be a negligible addition to the local
environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect marine
mammals. Details of source types are described in the following text.
Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types:
Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction
between these two sound types is important because each sound type has
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 the signal moves farther from the source, the
signal duration becomes longer (e.g., Greene and Richardson, 1988).
Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic
booms, impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically
considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients
(ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998) and occur either as
isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed sounds are all
characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient pressure to a
maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period that may
include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and minimal
pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce physical
injury as compared with sounds that lack these features.
Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or
[[Page 38080]]
prolonged, and may be either continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995;
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals
of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses (e.g.,
rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced
by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or
dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems. The
duration of such sounds, as received at a distance, can be greatly
extended in a highly reverberant environment.
Sparkers produce pulsed signals with energy in the frequency ranges
specified in Table 2. The amplitude of the acoustic wave emitted from
sparker sources is equal in all directions (i.e., omnidirectional),
while other sources planned for use during the proposed surveys have
some degree of directionality to the beam, as specified in Table 2.
Other sources planned for use during the proposed survey activity
(e.g., CHIRPs) should be considered non-pulsed, intermittent sources.
Summary on Specific Potential Effects of Acoustic Sound Sources
Underwater sound from active acoustic sources can include one or
more of the following: Temporary or permanent hearing impairment,
behavioral disturbance, masking, stress, and non-auditory physical
effects. The degree of effect is intrinsically related to the signal
characteristics, received level, distance from the source, and duration
of the sound exposure. Marine mammals exposed to high-intensity sound,
or to lower-intensity sound for prolonged periods, can experience
hearing threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing sensitivity
at certain frequency ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS can be permanent (PTS;
permanent threshold shift), in which case the loss of hearing
sensitivity is not fully recoverable, or temporary (TTS; temporary
threshold shift), in which case the animal's hearing threshold recovers
over time (Southall et al., 2007).
Animals in the vicinity of Atlantic Shores Bight's proposed HRG
survey activity are unlikely to incur even TTS due to the
characteristics of the sound sources, which include relatively low
source levels (176 to 205 dB re 1 [mu]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 the cumulative
duration of exposure would be insufficient to exceed cumulative sound
exposure level (SEL) criteria. Regarding instantaneous exposure, high-
frequency cetacean species (e.g., harbor porpoises) have the greatest
sensitivity to potential TTS, and individuals would have to make an
approach within 5 m of the vessel (the estimated isopleth distance to
the peak threshold). 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 loud sound
sources rather than approach within close proximity to the vessel, and
also remain within this distance to the vessel operating these sources
in order to receive multiple exposures at relatively high levels, as
would be necessary to cause 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 some of the HRG survey devices planned for use (Table 2)
makes it unlikely that an animal would be exposed more than briefly
during the passage of the vessel.
Behavioral disturbance may include a variety of effects, including
subtle changes in behavior (e.g., minor or brief avoidance of an area
or changes in vocalizations), more conspicuous changes in similar
behavioral activities, and more sustained and/or potentially severe
reactions, such as displacement from or abandonment of high-quality
habitat. Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-
specific and any reactions depend on numerous intrinsic and extrinsic
factors (e.g., species, state of maturity, experience, current
activity, reproductive state, auditory sensitivity, time of day), as
well as the interplay between factors. Available studies show wide
variation in response to underwater sound; therefore, it is difficult
to predict specifically how any given sound in a particular instance
might affect marine mammals perceiving the signal.
In addition, sound can disrupt behavior through masking, or
interfering with, an animal's ability to detect, recognize, or
discriminate between acoustic signals of interest (e.g., those used for
intraspecific communication and social interactions, prey detection,
predator avoidance, navigation). Masking occurs when the receipt of a
sound is interfered with by another coincident sound at similar
frequencies and at similar or higher intensity, and may occur whether
the sound is natural (e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves,
precipitation) or anthropogenic (e.g., shipping, sonar, seismic
exploration) in origin. Marine mammal communications would not likely
be masked appreciably by the acoustic signals given the directionality
of the signals for most HRG survey equipment types planned for use
(Table 2) and the brief period when an individual mammal is likely to
be exposed.
Classic stress responses begin when an animal's central nervous
system perceives a potential threat to its homeostasis. That perception
triggers stress responses regardless of whether a stimulus actually
threatens the animal; the mere perception of a threat is sufficient to
trigger a stress response (Moberg, 2000; Seyle, 1950). Once an animal's
central nervous system perceives a threat, it mounts a biological
response or defense that consists of a combination of the four general
biological defense responses: Behavioral responses, autonomic nervous
system responses, neuroendocrine responses, or immune responses. In the
case of many stressors, an animal's first and sometimes most economical
(in terms of biotic costs) response is behavioral avoidance of the
potential stressor or avoidance of continued exposure to a stressor. An
animal's second line of defense to stressors involves the sympathetic
part of the autonomic nervous system and the classical ``fight or
flight'' response which includes the cardiovascular system, the
gastrointestinal system, the exocrine glands, and the adrenal medulla
to produce changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and gastrointestinal
activity that humans commonly associate with ``stress.'' These
responses have a relatively short duration and may or may not have
significant long-term effect on an animal's welfare. An animal's third
line of defense to stressors involves its neuroendocrine systems; the
system that has received the most study has been the hypothalamus-
pituitary-adrenal system (also known as the HPA axis in mammals).
Unlike stress responses associated with the autonomic nervous system,
virtually all neuro-endocrine functions that are affected by stress--
including immune competence, reproduction, metabolism, and
[[Page 38081]]
behavior--are regulated by pituitary hormones. Stress-induced changes
in the secretion of pituitary hormones have been implicated in failed
reproduction (Moberg, 1987; Rivier, 1995), reduced immune competence
(Blecha, 2000), and behavioral disturbance. Increases in the
circulation of glucocorticosteroids (cortisol, corticosterone, and
aldosterone in marine mammals; see Romano et al., 2004) have long been
equated with stress. The primary distinction between stress (which is
adaptive and does not normally place an animal at risk) and distress is
the biotic cost of the response. In general, there is little data on
the potential for strong, anthropogenic underwater sounds to cause non-
auditory physical effects in marine mammals. The available data does
not allow identification of a specific exposure level above which non-
auditory effects can be expected (Southall et al., 2007). There is
currently no definitive evidence that any of these effects occur even
for marine mammals in close proximity to an anthropogenic sound source.
In addition, marine mammals that show behavioral avoidance of survey
vessels and related sound sources are unlikely to incur non-auditory
impairment or other physical effects. NMFS does not expect that the
generally short-term, intermittent, and transitory HRG and geotechnical
survey activities would create conditions of long-term, continuous
noise and chronic acoustic exposure leading to long-term physiological
stress responses in marine mammals.
Sound may affect marine mammals through impacts on the abundance,
behavior, or distribution of prey species (e.g., crustaceans,
cephalopods, fish, and zooplankton) (i.e., effects to marine mammal
habitat). Prey species exposed to sound might move away from the sound
source, experience TTS, experience masking of biologically relevant
sounds, or show no obvious direct effects. The most likely impacts (if
any) for most prey species in a given area would be temporary avoidance
of the area. Surveys using active acoustic sound sources move through
an area, limiting exposure to multiple pulses. In all cases, sound
levels would return to ambient once a survey ends and the noise source
is shut down and, when exposure to sound ends, behavioral and/or
physiological responses are expected to end relatively quickly.
Ship Strikes
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 smaller cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to large vessels. Ship
strikes often involve commercial shipping vessels, which are generally
larger (e.g., 40,000 ton container ship) and less able to notice
collisions, or potential collisions, than smaller 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). Atlantic Shores Bight vessels planned for use in the
proposed activities range in length from 40 ft (12.2 m) to 292 ft (89
m). Vessel speed while towing gear will be approximately 3.5 knots. At
these speeds, both the possibility of striking a marine mammal and the
possibility of a strike resulting in serious injury or mortality are so
low as to be discountable. At average transit speed for geophysical
survey vessels, the probability of serious injury or mortality
resulting from a strike is less than 50 percent. However, the
likelihood of a strike actually happening is again low given the
smaller size of these vessels and generally slower speeds. Notably in
the Jensen and Silber study, no strike incidents were reported for
geophysical survey vessels during that time period.
Marine Mammal Habitat
The HRG survey equipment will not contact the seafloor and does not
represent a source of pollution. We are not aware of any available
literature on impacts to marine mammal prey from sound produced by HRG
survey equipment. However, as the HRG survey equipment introduces noise
to the marine environment, there is the potential for it to result in
avoidance of the area around the HRG survey activities on the part of
marine mammal prey. Any avoidance of the area on the part of marine
mammal prey would be expected to be short term and temporary.
Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance, and the
availability of similar habitat and resources (e.g., prey species) in
the surrounding area, the impacts to marine mammals and the food
sources that they utilize are not expected to cause significant or
long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or their
populations. Impacts on marine mammal habitat from the proposed
activities will be temporary, insignificant, and discountable.
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
determinations.
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 HRG acoustic sources. Based on the nature of
the activity, Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor proposed to
be authorized. Level A harassment (injury) is considered unlikely based
on the characteristics of the signals produced by the acoustic sources
planned for use. Implementation of required mitigation detailed in the
Proposed Mitigation section below further reduces the potential for
Level A harassment.
As described previously, no serious injury or mortality is
anticipated or proposed to be authorized for this activity. Below we
describe how the proposed take numbers are estimated.
For acoustic impacts, generally speaking, we estimate take by
considering: (1) acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best
available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally
harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the
area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a
day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these
ensonified areas; and, (4) the number of days of activities. We note
that while these factors can contribute to a basic calculation to
provide an initial prediction of potential 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 recommends the use of acoustic thresholds that identify the
received level of underwater sound
[[Page 38082]]
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 or exposure context (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty
cycle, duration of the exposure, signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the
source), the environment (e.g., bathymetry, other noises in the area,
predators in the area), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography, life stage, depth) and can be difficult to
predict (e.g., Southall et al., 2007, 2021, Ellison et al., 2012).
Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to
use a threshold based on a metric that is both predictable and
measurable for most activities, NMFS typically uses a generalized
acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of
behavioral harassment. NMFS generally predicts that marine mammals are
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner considered to be Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above root-
mean-squared pressure received levels (RMS SPL) of 120 dB (referenced
to 1 micropascal (re 1 [mu]Pa)) when exposed to underwater
anthropogenic noise above received levels of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
for the impulsive sources (i.e., sparkers) and non-impulsive,
intermittent sources (e.g., CHIRPs) evaluated here for Atlantic Shores
Bight's proposed activity.
Atlantic Shores Bight's proposed HRG surveys include the use of
non-impulsive, intermittent (CHIRPs) and impulsive (sparkers) sources,
and therefore the RMS SPL threshold of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa is
applicable.
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). Atlantic
Shores Bight's proposed HRG survey activities include the use of
impulsive (sparkers) and non-impulsive (CHIRPs) sources.
These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at:
<a href="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>.
Table 5--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 1: L,0-pk,flat: 219 Cell 2: LE,, LF,24h: 199 dB.
dB; LE,, LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 3: L,0-pk,flat: 230 Cell 4: LE,, MF,24h: 198 dB.
dB; LE,, MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans......... Cell 5: L,0-pk,flat: 202 Cell 6: LE,, HF,24h: 173 dB.
dB; LE,,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater).... Cell 7: L,0-pk.flat: 218 Cell 8: LE,,PW,24h: 201 dB.
dB; LE,,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater)... Cell 9: L,0-pk,flat: 232 Cell 10: LE,,OW,24h: 219 dB.
dB; LE,,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS
onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds
associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds are recommended for consideration.
Note: Peak sound pressure level (L,0-pk) has a reference value of 1 [mu]Pa, and weighted cumulative sound
exposure level (LE,) has a reference value of 1[mu]Pa\2\s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to be
more reflective of International Organization for Standardization standards (ISO 2017). The subscript ``flat''
is being included to indicate peak sound pressure are flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized
hearing range of marine mammals (i.e., 7 Hz to 160 kHz). The subscript associated with cumulative sound
exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF
cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The weighted
cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure
levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the
conditions under which these thresholds will be exceeded.
The 2020 Federal Register notice of proposed IHA for Atlantic
Shores' HRG surveys (85 FR 7926; February 12, 2020) previously analyzed
the potential for Level A harassment (refer to Table 5 in that
notification and additional discussion therein).
Similar to the past IHAs issued to Atlantic Shores, the proposed
activities for 2022-2023 include the use of impulsive (i.e., sparkers)
and non-impulsive (e.g., CHIRPs) sources, and Atlantic Shores Bight did
not request authorization of take by Level A harassment. The locations,
species, survey durations, equipment used, and source levels proposed
are all of a similar scope previously analyzed for Atlantic Shores'
surveys. NMFS concluded for past surveys that Level A harassment was
not a reasonably likely outcome for marine mammals exposed to noise
through use of similar impulsive and non-impulsive HRG sources,
therefore, the same conclusion applies to the sources proposed for use
here. Therefore, the potential for Level A harassment is not evaluated
further in this document and no take by Level A harassment is proposed
for authorization by NMFS. [Note that the proposed mitigation measures
would further reduce the potential for Level A harassment.]
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that are used in estimating the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, including source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
NMFS has developed a user-friendly methodology for estimating the
extent of the Level B harassment isopleths associated with relevant HRG
survey equipment (NMFS, 2020). This methodology incorporates frequency
and directionality to refine estimated ensonified zones. For acoustic
sources that operate with different beamwidths, the maximum beamwidth
was used, and the lowest frequency of the source was used when
calculating the frequency-dependent absorption coefficient (Table 2).
NMFS considers the data provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)
to represent the best available scientific information on source levels
associated
[[Page 38083]]
with HRG survey equipment and, therefore, recommends that source levels
provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be incorporated in the
method described above to estimate isopleth distances to harassment
thresholds. In cases where 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) may be used instead. Table 2 shows the HRG equipment
types that may be used during the proposed surveys and the source
levels associated with those HRG equipment types. The computations and
results from the Level B harassment ensonified area analysis are
displayed in Table 6.
Table 6--Information Inputs and Resulting Distances to Level B Threshold (m) for Representative Acoustic Sources
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source information Input values into spreadsheet Computed values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slant Horizontal
Operating Operational Beamwidth threshold threshold
HRG survey equipment type Representative equipment frequencies source level ranges Water depth range to Level range to Level
ranges (kHz) ranges (dBRMS) (degree) (m) B threshold B threshold
(m) (m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sparker...................... SIG ELC 820 sparker at 0.01 203 180 5 141 141
750J *.
Geo Marine Survey System 0.2 195 180 5 56 56
2D SUHRS.
CHIRPs....................... Edgetech 2000-DSS........ 2 195 24 5 56 1.1
Edgetech 216............. 2 179 24 5 9 1.1
Edgetech 424............. 4 180 71 10 10 5.8
Edgetech 512i............ 0.7 179 80 10 9 5.8
Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom 4 190 120 5 32 8.7
ImagerTM.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Used as a proxy for the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 because the specific energy setting isn't described in Crocker and Franantonio (2016).
Results of modeling using the methodology described and shown above
indicated that, of the HRG survey equipment planned for use by Atlantic
Shores Bight that has the potential to result in Level B harassment of
marine mammals, the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 would produce the
largest Level B harassment isopleth (141 m; please refer to Table 6).
Although Atlantic Shores Bight does not expect to use sparker
sources on all planned survey days and during the entire duration that
surveys are likely to occur, Atlantic Shores Bight proposes to assume
for purposes of analysis that the sparker would be used on all survey
days. This is a conservative approach, as the actual sources used on
individual survey days may produce smaller harassment distances.
The Level B harassment isopleth distance of 141 m generated for the
Dura-Spark 240 was used as the ``r'' input to calculate the zone of
influence (ZOI) around the survey vessel, which is the maximum
ensonified area around the sound source over a 24 hour period. The
following formula for a mobile source was used to calculate the ZOI:
Mobile Source ZOI = (Distance/day x 2r) + [pi]r2
Where: Distance/day = the maximum distance a survey vessel could travel
in a 24-hour period; r = the maximum radial distance from a given sound
source to the NOAA Level A or Level B harassment thresholds. For the
purpose of the Atlantic Shores Bight HRG surveys, the total distance/
day has been estimated to be approximately 55.0 km in the survey area.
Based upon a daily survey distance of 55 km/day and a maximum radial
distance to the Level B harassment threshold (141 m, see Tables 6, 7),
an area of 15.57 km\2\ would be ensonified to the Level B harassment
threshold across both survey sites during Atlantic Shores Bight's
proposed surveys (Table 7).
Table 7--Maximum HRG Survey Area Distances and Daily Ensonified Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Survey Maximum radial Calculated Total annual
Survey area active survey distances per distance (r) Isopleth per ensonified
days day in km in m day (km\2\) area (km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease Area...................... 180 55 141 15.57 2,802.6
ECR Survey Area................. 180 .............. .............. .............. 2,802.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described above, this is a conservative estimate as it assumes
the HRG source that results in the greatest isopleth distance to the
Level B harassment threshold would be operated at all times during the
entire survey, which is not expected to ultimately occur.
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide information about the occurrence of
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information that
will inform the take calculations.
Habitat-based density models produced by the Duke University Marine
Geospatial Ecology Laboratory and the Marine-life Data and Analysis
Team, based on the best available marine mammal data from 1992-2019
obtained in a collaboration between Duke University, the Northeast
Regional Planning Body, the University of North Carolina Wilmington,
the Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center, and NOAA (Roberts et
al., 2016a; Curtice et al., 2018), represent the best available
scientific information regarding marine mammal densities in the survey
area. More recently, these data have been updated with new modeling
results and include density estimates for pinnipeds (Roberts et al.,
2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020).
The density data presented by Roberts et al., (2016b, 2017, 2018,
2020) incorporates aerial and shipboard line-transect survey data from
NMFS and other organizations and incorporates data from eight
physiographic and 16
[[Page 38084]]
dynamic oceanographic and biological covariates, and controls for the
influence of sea state, group size, availability bias, and perception
bias on the probability of making a sighting. These density models were
originally developed for all cetacean taxa in the U.S. Atlantic
(Roberts et al., 2016a). In subsequent years, certain models have been
updated based on additional data as well as certain methodological
improvements. More information is available online at <a href="https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke/EC/">https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke/EC/</a> EC/. Marine mammal density estimates
in the survey area (animals/km\2\) were obtained using the most recent
model results for all taxa (Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020).
The updated models incorporate additional sighting data, including
sightings from NOAA's Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Protected
Species (AMAPPS) surveys.
For the exposure analysis, density data from Roberts et al.,
(2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020) were mapped using a geographic information
system (GIS). For each of the survey areas (i.e., Lease Survey Area,
ECR Survey Area), the densities of each species as reported by Roberts
et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020) were averaged by season; thus, a
density was calculated for each species for spring, summer, fall and
winter. The seasons were defined as follows: Spring (March-May); summer
(June-August); fall (September-November); winter (December-February).
To be conservative, the greatest seasonal density calculated for each
species was then carried forward in the exposure analysis. Estimated
seasonal densities (animals per km\2\) of all marine mammal species
that may be taken by the proposed survey, for all survey areas are
shown in Tables C-1, C-2 and C-3 in Appendix C of Atlantic Shores
Bight's IHA application. The maximum seasonal density values used to
estimate take numbers are shown in Table 9 below. Below, we discuss how
densities were assumed to apply to specific species for which the
Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020) models provide results at the
genus or guild level.
For bottlenose dolphin densities, Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017,
2018) does not differentiate by individual stock. As the northern
migratory coastal stock is not expected to occur in the survey area,
densities and takes were only analyzed for the offshore stock.
Pilot whale density models from Duke University (Roberts et al.
2016a, 2016b, 2017) represent pilot whales as a `guild' rather than by
species. However, since the survey area is only expected to contain
long-finned pilot whales, it is assumed that pilot whale densities
modeled by Roberts et al. (2016a, 2016b, 2017) in the survey area only
reflect the presence of long-finned pilot whales.
Recently, the Duke University density data have been updated with
new modeling results, including updated NARW density data and density
estimates for pinnipeds (Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020).
Updated density estimates for the NARW are due to the inclusion of
three new datasets: 2011-2015 Northeast Large Pelagic Survey
Cooperative, 2017-2018 Marine Mammal Surveys of the Wind Energy Areas
conducted by the New England Aquarium, and 2017-2018 New York Bight
Whale Monitoring Program surveys conducted by the New York State
Department of Environmental conservation (NYSDEC). This new density
data shows distribution changes that are likely influenced by
oceanographic and prey covariates in the whale density model (Roberts
et al., 2021).
Pinniped density data (as presented in Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017,
2018) were used to estimate pinniped densities within the identified
survey area. Since pinniped density models (Roberts et al., 2016b,
2017, 2018) represent seals as a ``guild'' rather than by species, seal
densities were apportioned for gray and harbor seals as 50% for each
stock. These estimates were then applied to the average seasonal
density values which were analyzed using the Roberts et al. (2018)
data.
Seasonal marine mammal densities across survey areas are shown in
Table 8. Maximum densities used in exposure analysis are shown in Table
9.
Table 8--Marine Mammal Seasonal Densities Across Survey Sites
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Averaged seasonal densities (number of animals per 100 km\2\)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Spring Summer Fall Winter
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease area ECR Lease area ECR Lease area ECR Lease area ECR
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale...................... 0.386 0.475 0.003 0.003 0.011 0.012 0.273 0.373
Humpback whale.................................. 0.068 0.045 0.021 0.023 0.055 0.058 0.021 0.040
Fin whale....................................... 0.230 0.193 0.295 0.216 0.237 0.170 0.167 0.120
Sei whale....................................... 0.012 0.013 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001
Minke whale..................................... 0.168 0.112 0.062 0.037 0.045 0.027 0.057 0.039
Sperm whale..................................... 0.003 0.003 0.030 0.042 0.021 0.023 0.002 0.001
Long-finned pilot whale......................... 0.354 0.256 0.354 0.256 0.354 0.256 0.354 0.256
Bottlenose dolphin (offshore stock)............. 1.622 0.776 2.309 3.028 5.011 3.231 2.786 1.347
Common dolphin.................................. 7.017 3.326 6.138 3.753 7.235 6.611 19.246 13.251
Atlantic white-sided dolphin.................... 2.213 1.611 0.972 0.802 0.855 0.726 1.461 0.890
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................ 0.062 0.036 0.513 0.327 0.409 0.267 0.026 0.015
Risso's dolphin................................. 0.012 0.005 0.089 0.038 0.024 0.012 0.032 0.015
Harbor porpoise................................. 6.657 6.059 0.034 0.049 0.215 0.556 3.927 5.635
Harbor seal..................................... 3.544 5.799 0.052 0.077 0.055 0.109 3.262 5.479
Gray seal....................................... 3.544 5.799 0.052 0.077 0.055 0.109 3.262 5.479
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 9--Maximum Seasonal Densities of Marine Mammals Used in Exposure
Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum seasonal density used
(number of animals per 100
km\2\)
Species -------------------------------
ECR survey
Lease area area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale.............. 0.386 0.475
Humpback whale.......................... 0.068 0.058
Fin whale............................... 0.295 0.216
[[Page 38085]]
Sei whale............................... 0.012 0.013
Minke whale............................. 0.168 0.112
Sperm whale............................. 0.030 0.042
Long-finned pilot whale................. 0.354 0.256
Bottlenose dolphin...................... 5.011 3.231
Common dolphin.......................... 19.246 13.251
Atlantic white-sided dolphin............ 2.213 1.611
Atlantic spotted dolphin................ 0.062 0.036
Risso's dolphin......................... 0.089 0.038
Harbor porpoise......................... 6.657 6.059
Harbor seal............................. 3.544 5.799
Gray seal............................... 3.544 5.799
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is synthesized
to produce a quantitative estimate of the take that is reasonably
likely to occur and proposed for authorization.
The number of marine mammals expected to be incidentally taken per
day is calculated by estimating the number of each species predicted to
occur within the daily ensonified area (animals/km\2\), incorporating
the maximum seasonal estimated marine mammal densities as described
above. Estimated numbers of each species taken per day across all
survey sites are then multiplied by the total number of survey days
(i.e., 360). The product is then rounded, to generate an estimate of
the total number of instances of harassment expected for each species
over the duration of the survey. A summary of this method is
illustrated in the following formula with the resulting proposed take
of marine mammals is shown below in Table 10:
Estimated Take = D x ZOI x # of days
Where:
D = average species density (per km\2\); and
ZOI = maximum daily ensonified area to relevant thresholds.
Table 10--Total Estimated and Requested Take Numbers
[By Level B harassment only]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calculated take estimate Proposed
-------------------------------- Combined take Total adjusted percent of
Species ECR survey estimate proposed take population to
Lease area area estimate * be taken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale...... 11 13 24 24 6.5
Humpback whale *................ 2 2 4 8 0.6
Fin whale....................... 9 7 16 16 0.2
Sei whale [supcaret]............ 0.3 0.4 0.7 2 0.03
Minke whale..................... 5 3 8 8 0.04
Sperm whale..................... 0.9 2 2.9 3 0.07
Long-finned pilot whale *....... 10 8 18 20 0.07
Bottlenose dolphin (Offshore 141 91 232 232 0.4
stock).........................
Common dolphin.................. 539 372 911 911 0.2
Atlantic white-sided dolphin.... 62 46 108 108 0.5
Atlantic spotted dolphin *...... 2 1 3 100 0.3
Risso's dolphin *............... 3 2 5 30 0.1
Harbor porpoise................. 187 170 357 357 0.4
Harbor seal..................... 100 163 263 263 0.4
Gray seal....................... 100 163 263 263 1.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Requested take adjusted for group size.
[supcaret] Based upon previous IHAs.
NMFS proposes to round decimal estimates to the nearest whole
number in the event that a decimal was calculated for take. Therefore,
take estimates for the sperm whale and sei whale were rounded up to
three whales and two whales, respectively (Table 10). Requested take
estimates were also adjusted to account for typical group sizes of
humpback whale (King et al., 2021), Risso's dolphin (NOAA 2022b),
Atlantic spotted dolphin (Jefferson et al., 2008), and long-finned
pilot whale (NOAA 2022b). A total of 30 takes of Risso's dolphin, 100
takes of Atlantic spotted dolphin, and 20 takes of long-finned pilot
whales are requested. Adding these additional takes ensures the number
of takes authorized is at least equal to the average group size, and
NMFS agrees with this approach.
Based on recent information from King et al. (2021) that
demonstrated that the humpback whale is commonly sighted along the New
York Bight area, NMFS determined that the humpback whale take request
may be too low given the occurrence of animals near the survey area.
Because of this, NMFS proposes to double the requested take to account
for underestimates to the actual occurrence of this species within the
density data.
Previously, 100 takes of Atlantic spotted dolphins, by Level B
harassment, were authorized to Atlantic
[[Page 38086]]
Shores during their 2020 IHA surveys (85 FR 7926; February 12, 2020).
Early into the 2021 field season, Atlantic Shores observed large
numbers of Atlantic spotted dolphins. A take of 100 Atlantic spotted
dolphins was authorized for the Atlantic Shores 2022 IHA (87 FR 4200,
January 27, 2022) to account for these numerous sightings. Based upon
takes authorized for prior IHAs, NMFS proposes to adjust the take
estimate, by Level B harassment, from 3 to 100 Atlantic spotted
dolphins.
One sei whale take was calculated (Table 10), however, Atlantic
Shores Bight has requested to increase sei whale takes to two whales.
This increase is based on the average group size of sei whales (NOAA
2022b). Therefore, NMFS proposes to adjust the take estimate, by Level
B harassment, from 1 sei whale to 2 sei whales.
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, NMFS
considers 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.
NMFS proposes the following mitigation measures be implemented
during Atlantic Shores Bight's planned marine site characterization
surveys. Pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, Atlantic Shores Bight is
also 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
Marine mammal shutdown zones would be established around specified
HRG survey equipment and monitored by protected species observers
(PSOs). These PSOs will be NMFS-approved visual PSOs. Based upon the
acoustic source in use (impulsive: Sparkers; non-impulsive: Non-
parametric sub-bottom profilers), a minimum of one PSO must be on duty,
per source vessel, during daylight hours and two PSOs must be on duty,
per source vessel, during nighttime hours. These PSO will monitor
shutdown zones based upon the radial distance from the acoustic source
rather than being based around the vessel itself. The shutdown zone
distances are as follows:
<bullet> A 500-m shutdown zone for North Atlantic right whales
during use of specified acoustic sources (impulsive: Sparkers; non-
impulsive: Non-parametric sub-bottom profilers).
<bullet> A 100-m shutdown zone for all other marine mammals
(excluding NARWs and delphinids from the genera Delphinus,
Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or Tursiops that are visually detected as
voluntarily approaching the vessel or towed equipment) during use of
specified acoustic sources (as specified below). All visual monitoring
must begin no less than 30 minutes prior to the initiation of the
specified acoustic source and must continue until 30 minutes after use
of specified acoustic sources ceases.
If a marine mammal is detected approaching or entering the shutdown
zones during the HRG survey, the vessel operator would adhere to the
shutdown procedures described below to minimize noise impacts on the
animals. If a shutdown is required, a PSO will notify the survey crew
immediately. Vessel operators and crews will comply immediately with
any call for shutdown. Shutdown will remain in effect until the minimum
separation distances (detailed above) between the animal and noise
source are re-established. These stated requirements will be included
in the site-specific training to be provided to the survey team.
Ramp Up of Survey Equipment and Pre-Clearance of the Shutdown Zones
When technically feasible, a ramp-up procedure would be used for
HRG survey equipment capable of adjusting energy levels at the start or
restart of survey activities. A ramp-up would begin with the powering
up of the smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its lowest practical power
output appropriate for the survey. The ramp-up procedure would be used
in order to provide additional protection to marine mammals near the
survey area by allowing them to vacate the area prior to the
commencement of survey equipment operation at full power. When
technically feasible, the power would then be gradually turned up and
other acoustic sources would be added. All ramp-ups shall be scheduled
so as to minimize the time spent with the source being activated.
Ramp-up activities will be delayed if a marine mammal(s) enters its
respective shutdown zone. Ramp-up will continue if the animal has been
observed exiting its respective shutdown zone or until an additional
time period has elapsed with no further sighting (i.e., 15 minutes for
small odontocetes and seals and 30 minutes for all other species).
Atlantic Shores Bight would implement a 30 minute pre-clearance
period of the shutdown zones prior to the initiation of ramp-up of HRG
equipment. The operator must notify a designated PSO of the planned
start of ramp-up where the notification time should not be less than 60
minutes prior to the planned ramp-up. This would allow the PSOs to
monitor the shutdown zones for 30 minutes prior to the initiation of
ramp-up. Prior to ramp-up beginning, Atlantic Shores Bight must receive
confirmation from the PSO that the shutdown zone is clear prior to
proceeding. During this 30 minute pre-start clearance period, the
entire applicable shutdown zones must be visible. The exception to this
would be in situations where ramp-up may occur during periods of poor
visibility (inclusive of nighttime) as long as appropriate visual
monitoring has occurred with no detections of marine
[[Page 38087]]
mammals in 30 minutes prior to the beginning of ramp-up. Acoustic
source activation may only occur at night where operational planning
cannot reasonably avoid such circumstances.
During this period, the shutdown zone will be monitored by the
PSOs, using the appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up may not be
initiated if any marine mammal(s) is within its respective shutdown
zone. If a marine mammal is observed within a shutdown zone during the
pre-clearance period, ramp-up may not begin until the animal(s) has
been observed exiting its respective shutdown zone or until an
additional time period has elapsed with no further sighting (i.e., 15
minutes for small odontocetes and pinnipeds and 30 minutes for all
other species). If a marine mammal enters the shutdown zone during
ramp-up, ramp-up activities must cease and the source must be shut
down. Any PSO on duty has the authority to delay the start of survey
operations if a marine mammal is detected within the applicable pre-
start clearance zones.
The pre-clearance zones would be:
<bullet> 500-m for all ESA-listed species (North Atlantic right,
sei, fin, sperm whales); and
<bullet> 100-m for all other marine mammals.
If any marine mammal species that are listed under the ESA are
observed within the clearance zones, the presence of the animal will be
recorded and the 30 minute clock must be paused. If the PSO confirms
the animal has exited the zone and headed away from the survey vessel,
the 30 minute clock that was paused may resume. The pre-clearance clock
will reset to 30 minutes if the animal dives or visual contact is
otherwise lost.
If the acoustic source is shut down for brief periods (i.e., less
than 30 minutes) for reasons other than implementation of prescribed
mitigation (e.g., mechanical difficulty), the acoustic source may be
reactivated without ramp-up if PSOs have maintained constant visual
observation and no detection of marine mammals occurs within the
applicable shutdown zone. For any longer shutdown, pre-start clearance
observation and ramp-up are required.
Activation of survey equipment through ramp-up procedures may not
occur when visual detection of marine mammals within the pre-clearance
zone is not expected to be effective (e.g., during inclement conditions
such as heavy rain or fog).
The acoustic source(s) must be deactivated when not acquiring data
or preparing to acquire data, except as necessary for testing.
Unnecessary use of the acoustic source shall be avoided.
Shutdown Procedures
An immediate shutdown of the impulsive HRG survey equipment (Table
2) would be required if a marine mammal is sighted entering or within
its respective shutdown zone(s). Any PSO on duty has the authority to
call for a shutdown of the acoustic source if a marine mammal is
detected within the applicable shutdown zones. Any disagreement between
the PSO and vessel operator should be discussed only after shutdown has
occurred. The vessel operator would establish and maintain clear lines
of communication directly between PSOs on duty and crew controlling the
HRG source(s) to ensure that shutdown commands are conveyed swiftly
while allowing PSOs to maintain watch.
The shutdown requirement is waived for small delphinids (belonging
to the genera of the Family Delphinidae: Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus,
Stenella, or Tursiops) and pinnipeds if they are visually detected
within the applicable shutdown zones. If a species for which
authorization has not been granted, or, a species for which
authorization has been granted but the authorized number of takes have
been met, approaches or is observed within the applicable Level B
harassment zone, shutdown would occur. In the event of uncertainty
regarding the identification of a marine mammal species (i.e., such as
whether the observed marine mammal belongs to Delphinus,
Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or Tursiops for which shutdown is waived,
PSOs must use their best professional judgment in making the decision
to call for a shutdown.
Specifically, if a delphinid from the specified genera or a
pinniped is visually detected approaching the vessel (i.e., to bow
ride) or towed equipment, shutdown is not required.
Upon implementation of a shutdown, the source may be reactivated
after the marine mammal has been observed exiting the applicable
shutdown zone or following a clearance period of 15 minutes for harbor
porpoises and 30 minutes for all other species where there are no
further detections of the marine mammal.
Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and ramp-up procedures are not
required during HRG survey operations using only non-impulsive sources
(e.g., parametric sub-bottom profilers) other than non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers (e.g., CHIRPs). Pre-clearance and ramp-up, but not
shutdown, are required when using non-impulsive, non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers.
Seasonal Operating Requirements
A section of the proposed survey area overlaps with approximately
2% of a North Atlantic right whale SMA. This SMA is active from
November 1 through April 30 of each year. All survey vessels,
regardless of length, would be required to adhere to vessel speed
restrictions (<10 knots) when operating within the SMA during times
when the SMA is active. In addition, between watch shifts, members of
the monitoring team would consult NMFS' North Atlantic right whale
reporting systems for the presence of North Atlantic right whales
throughout survey operations. Members of the monitoring team would also
monitor the NMFS North Atlantic right whale reporting systems for the
establishment of Dynamic Management Areas (DMA). NMFS may also
establish voluntary right whale Slow Zones any time a right whale (or
whales) is acoustically detected. Atlantic Shores Bight should be aware
of this possibility and remain attentive in the event a Slow Zone is
established nearby or overlapping the survey area (Table 11).
Table 11--North Atlantic Right Whale Dynamic Management Area (DMA) and Seasonal Management Area (SMA)
Restrictions Within Survey Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Survey area Species DMA restrictions Slow zones SMA restrictions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease Area...................... North Atlantic If established by NMFS, all of N/A.
Right Whale Atlantic Shores Bight's vessels will
(Eubalaena abide by the described restrictions.
glacialis).
ECR Survey Area................. November 1-April
30 (ports of New
York/New Jersey).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 38088]]
There are no known marine mammal rookeries or mating or calving
grounds in the survey area that would otherwise potentially warrant
increased mitigation measures for marine mammals or their habitat (or
both). The proposed survey activities would occur in an area that has
been identified as a biologically important area (BIA) for migration
for North Atlantic right whales. However, given the small spatial
extent of the survey area relative to the substantially larger spatial
extent of the right whale migratory area and the relatively low amount
of noise generated by the survey, the survey is not expected to
appreciably reduce the quality of migratory habitat nor to negatively
impact the migration of North Atlantic right whales.
Vessel Strike Avoidance Procedures
Vessel operators must comply with the below measures except under
extraordinary circumstances when the safety of the vessel or crew is in
doubt or the safety of life at sea is in question. These requirements
do not apply in any case where compliance would create an imminent and
serious threat to a person or vessel or to the extent that a vessel is
restricted in its ability to maneuver and, because of the restriction,
cannot comply.
<bullet> A Vessel Strike Avoidance Zone(s) will be maintained, as
defined as 1,640 ft (500 m) or greater from any sighted ESA-listed
whale species or other unidentified large marine mammal;
[cir] If a large whale is identified within 1,640 ft (500 m) of the
forward path of any vessel, the vessel operator must steer a course
away from the whale at 10 knots (18.5 km/hr) or less until the 1,640 ft
(500 m) minimum separation distance has been established. Vessels may
also shift to idle if feasible.
[cir] If a large whale is sighted within 656 ft (200 m) of the
forward path of a vessel, the vessel operator must reduce speed and
shift the engine to neutral. Engines must not be engaged until the
whale has moved outside of the vessel's path and beyond 1,640 ft (500
m). If stationary, the vessel must not engage engines until the large
whale has moved beyond 1,640 ft (500 m).
<bullet> All vessel operators and crew will maintain vigilant watch
for all marine mammals, and slow down, stop their vessel, or alter
course, as appropriate and regardless of vessel size, to avoid striking
any marine mammals. Unless a required PSO is aboard and on duty, then a
designated and trained vessel crew member on all vessels associated
with survey activities (transiting [i.e., traveling between a port and
survey site] or actively surveying) will be assigned as a lookout for
marine mammals;
<bullet> Members of the monitoring team will consult NMFS North
Atlantic right whale reporting system and Whale Alert, daily and as
able, for the presence of North Atlantic right whales throughout survey
operations, and for the establishment of a DMA. If NMFS should
establish a DMA in the survey area during the survey, the vessels will
abide by speed restrictions in the DMA. All survey vessels, regardless
of size, will observe a 10 knot (less than 18.5 km per hour [km/h])
speed restriction in the specific areas designated by NOAA Fisheries
for the protection of NARWs from vessel strikes including seasonal
management areas (SMAs), Right Whale Slow Zones, and dynamic management
areas (DMAs), when in effect. See <a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales</a> for specific detail regarding these areas.
<bullet> All vessels greater than or equal to 65 ft (19.8 m) in
overall length operating from November 1 through April 30 will operate
at speeds of 10 knots or less while transiting to and from the survey
area.
<bullet> All vessels, regardless of size, will reduce vessel speed
to 10 knots or less when mother/calf pairs, pods, or large assemblages
of cetaceans are observed near (within 330 ft [100 m]) of an underway
vessel.
<bullet> All vessels will, to the maximum extent practicable,
attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 164 ft (50 m) from
all other marine mammals than ESA-listed and large whales, 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 will 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). Engines will not be
engaged until the animals are clear of the area. This will not apply to
any vessel towing gear or any vessel that is navigationally
constrained.
Training
All PSOs must have completed a PSO training program and received
NMFS approval to act as a PSO for geophysical surveys. Documentation of
NMFS approval and most recent training certificates of individual PSOs'
successful completion of a commercial PSO training course must be
provided upon request. Further information can be found at
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/protected-species-observers">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/protected-species-observers</a>. In the event where third-party PSOs are
not required, crew members serving as lookouts must receive training on
protected species identification, vessel strike minimization
procedures, how and when to communicate with the vessel captain, and
reporting requirements.
Atlantic Shores Bight shall instruct relevant vessel personnel with
regard to the authority of the marine mammal monitoring team, and shall
ensure that relevant vessel personnel and the marine mammal monitoring
team participate in a joint onboard briefing (hereafter PSO briefing),
led by the vessel operator and lead PSO, prior to beginning survey
activities to ensure that responsibilities, communication procedures,
marine mammal monitoring protocols, safety and operational procedures,
and IHA requirements are clearly understood. This PSO briefing must be
repeated when relevant new personnel (e.g., PSOs, acoustic source
operator) join the survey operations before their responsibilities and
work commences.
Project-specific training will be conducted for all vessel crew
prior to the start of a survey and during any changes in crew such that
all survey personnel are fully aware and understand the mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements. All vessel crew members must be
briefed in the identification of protected species that may occur in
the survey area and in regulations and best practices for avoiding
vessel collisions. Reference materials must be available aboard all
project vessels for identification of listed species. The expectation
and process for reporting of protected species sighted during surveys
must be clearly communicated and posted in highly visible locations
aboard all project vessels, so that there is an expectation for
reporting to the designated vessel contact (such as the lookout or the
vessel captain), as well as a communication channel and process for
crew members to do so. Prior to implementation with vessel crews, the
training program will be provided to NMFS for review and approval.
Confirmation of the training and understanding of the requirements will
be documented on a training course log sheet. Signing the log sheet
will certify that the crew member understands and will comply with the
necessary requirements throughout the survey activities.
[[Page 38089]]
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, NMFS
has preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on the
affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
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 while
conducting the activities. 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
Atlantic Shores Bight must use independent, dedicated, trained
PSOs, meaning that the PSOs must be employed by a third-party observer
provider, must have no tasks other than to conduct observational
effort, collect data, and communicate with and instruct relevant vessel
crew with regard to the presence of marine mammal and mitigation
requirements (including brief alerts regarding maritime hazards), and
must have successfully completed an approved PSO training course for
geophysical surveys. Visual monitoring must be performed by qualified,
NMFS-approved PSOs. PSO resumes must be provided to NMFS for review and
approval prior to the start of survey activities.
PSO names must be provided to NMFS by the operator for review and
confirmation of their approval for specific roles prior to commencement
of the survey. For prospective PSOs not previously approved, or for
PSOs whose approval is not current, NMFS must review and approve PSO
qualifications. Resumes should include information related to relevant
education, experience, and training, including dates, duration,
location, and description of prior PSO experience. Resumes must be
accompanied by relevant documentation of successful completion of
necessary training.
NMFS may approve PSOs as conditional or unconditional. A
conditionally-approved PSO may be one who is trained but has not yet
attained the requisite experience. An unconditionally-approved PSO is
one who has attained the necessary experience. For unconditional
approval, the PSO must have a minimum of 90 days at sea performing the
role during a geophysical survey, with the conclusion of the most
recent relevant experience not more than 18 months previous.
At least one of the visual PSOs aboard the vessel must be
unconditionally-approved. One unconditionally-approved visual PSO shall
be designated as the lead for the entire PSO team. This lead should
typically be the PSO with the most experience, would coordinate duty
schedules and roles for the PSO team, and serve as primary point of
contact for the vessel operator. To the maximum extent practicable, the
duty schedule shall be planned such that unconditionally-approved PSOs
are on duty with conditionally-approved PSOs.
PSOs must have successfully attained a bachelor's degree from an
accredited college or university with a major in one of the natural
sciences, a minimum of 30 semester hours or equivalent in the
biological sciences, and at least one undergraduate course in math or
statistics. The educational requirements may be waived if the PSO has
acquired the relevant skills through alternate experience. Requests for
such a waiver shall be submitted to NMFS and must include written
justification. Alternate experience that may be considered includes,
but is not limited to (1) secondary education and/or experience
comparable to PSO duties; (2) previous work experience conducting
academic, commercial, or government-sponsored marine mammal surveys;
and (3) previous work experience as a PSO (PSO must be in good standing
and demonstrate good performance of PSO duties).
PSOs must successfully complete relevant training, including
completion of all required coursework and passing (80 percent or
greater) a written and/or oral examination developed for the training
program.
PSOs must coordinate to ensure 360[deg] visual coverage around the
vessel from the most appropriate observation posts and shall conduct
visual observations using binoculars or night-vision equipment and the
naked eye while free from distractions and in a consistent, systematic,
and diligent manner.
PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of four consecutive hours
followed by a break of at least two hours between watches and may
conduct a maximum of 12 hours of observation per 24-hour period.
Any observations of marine mammal by crew members aboard any vessel
associated with the survey shall be relayed to the PSO team.
Atlantic Shores Bight must work with the selected third-party PSO
provider to ensure PSOs have all equipment (including backup equipment)
needed to adequately perform necessary tasks, including accurate
determination of distance and bearing to observed marine mammals, and
to ensure that PSOs are capable of calibrating equipment as necessary
for accurate distance estimates and species identification. Such
equipment, at a minimum, shall include:
<bullet> At least one thermal (infrared) imagine device suited for
the marine environment;
<bullet> Reticle binoculars (e.g., 7 x 50) of appropriate quality
(at least one per PSO, plus backups);
<bullet> Global Positioning Units (GPS) (at least one plus
backups);
[[Page 38090]]
<bullet> Digital cameras with a telephoto lens that is at least
300-mm or equivalent on a full-frame single lens reflex (SLR) (at least
one plus backups). The camera or lens should also have an image
stabilization system;
<bullet> Equipment necessary for accurate measurement of distances
to marine mammal;
<bullet> Compasses (at least one plus backups);
<bullet> Means of communication among vessel crew and PSOs; and
<bullet> Any other tools deemed necessary to adequately and
effectively perform PSO tasks.
The equipment specified above may be provided by an individual PSO,
the third-part PSO provider, or the operator, but Atlantic Shores Bight
is responsible for ensuring PSOs have the proper equipment required to
perform the duties specified in the IHA.
During good conditions (e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort sea state 3
or less), PSOs shall conduct observations when the specified acoustic
sources are not operating for comparison of sighting rates and behavior
with and without use of the specified acoustic sources and between
acquisition periods, to the maximum extent practicable.
The PSOs will be responsible for monitoring the waters surrounding
each survey vessel to the farthest extent permitted by sighting
conditions, including shutdown zones, during all HRG survey operations.
PSOs will visually monitor and identify shutdown zones during survey
activities. It will be the responsibility of the PSO(s) on duty to
communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to communicate
the action(s) that are necessary to ensure mitigation and monitoring
requirements are implemented as appropriate.
In cases when pre-clearance has begun in conditions with good
visibility, including via the use of night-vision equipment, and the
lead PSO has determined that the pre-start clearance zones are clear of
marine mammals, survey operations may commence (i.e., no delay is
required) despite brief periods of inclement weather and/or loss of
daylight.
Atlantic Shores Bight plans to utilize six PSOs across each vessel
to account for shift changes, with a total of 18 during this project
(six PSOs per vessel x three vessels). At a minimum, during all HRG
survey operations (e.g., any day on which use of an HRG source is
planned to occur), one PSO must be on duty during daylight operations
on each survey vessel, conducting visual observations at all times on
all active survey vessels during daylight hours (i.e., from 30 minutes
prior to sunrise through 30 minutes following sunset) and two PSOs will
be on watch during nighttime operations. The PSO(s) would ensure
360[deg] visual coverage around the vessel from the most appropriate
observation posts and would conduct visual observations using
binoculars and/or night vision goggles and the naked eye while free
from distractions and in a consistent, systematic, and diligent manner.
PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of four consecutive hours followed
by a break of at least two hours between watches and may conduct a
maximum of 12 hours of observation per 24-hr period. In cases where
multiple vessels are surveying concurrently, any observations of marine
mammals would be communicated to PSOs on all nearby survey vessels.
PSOs must be equipped with binoculars and have the ability to
estimate distance and bearing to detect marine mammals, particularly in
proximity to Exclusion Zones. Reticulated binoculars must also be
available to PSOs for use as appropriate based on conditions and
visibility to support the sighting and monitoring of marine mammals.
During nighttime operations, night-vision goggles with thermal clip-ons
and infrared technology would be used. Position data would be recorded
using hand-held or vessel GPS units for each sighting.
During good conditions (e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort sea state
(BSS) 3 or less), to the maximum extent practicable, PSOs would also
conduct observations when the acoustic source is not operating for
comparison of sighting rates and behavior with and without use of the
active acoustic sources. Any observations of marine mammals by crew
members aboard any vessel associated with the survey would be relayed
to the PSO team. Data on all PSO observations would be recorded based
on standard PSO collection requirements (see Proposed Reporting
Measures). This would include dates, times, and locations of survey
operations; dates and times of observations, location and weather;
details of marine mammal sightings (e.g., species, numbers, behavior);
and details of any observed marine mammal behavior that occurs (e.g.,
noted behavioral disturbances).
Proposed Reporting Measures
Atlantic Shores Bight shall submit a draft comprehensive report on
all activities and monitoring results within 90 days of the completion
of the survey or expiration of the IHA, whichever comes sooner. The
report must describe all activities conducted and sightings of marine
mammals, must provide full documentation of methods, results, and
interpretation pertaining to all monitoring, and must summarize the
dates and locations of survey operations and all marine mammals
sightings (dates, times, locations, activities, associated survey
activities). The draft report shall also include geo-referenced, time-
stamped vessel tracklines for all time periods during which acoustic
sources were operating. Tracklines should include points recording any
change in acoustic source status (e.g., when the sources began
operating, when they were turned off, or when they changed operational
status such as from full array to single gun or vice versa). GIS files
shall be provided in ESRI shapefile format and include the UTC date and
time, latitude in decimal degrees, and longitude in decimal degrees.
All coordinates shall be referenced to the WGS84 geographic coordinate
system. In addition to the report, all raw observational data shall be
made available. The report must summarize the information submitted in
interim monthly reports (if required) as well as additional data
collected. A final report must be submitted within 30 days following
resolution of any comments on the draft report. All draft and final
marine mammal reports must be submitted to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4c1c1e6205181c620123222538233e25222b1e293c233e383f0c22232d2d622b233a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fdadafd3b4a9add3b092939489928f94939aaf988d928f898ebd93929c9cd39a928b">[email protected]</span></a>, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="29607d79077d485045465b6947464848074e465f">[email protected]</a>, and
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#abc5c6cdd885cccad985c2c5c8c2cfcec5dfcac786dfcac0ceebc5c4caca85ccc4dd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2b45464d58054c4a5905424548424f4e455f4a47065f4a404e6b45444a4a054c445d">[email protected]</span></a>.
PSOs must use standardized electronic data forms to record data.
PSOs shall record detailed information about any implementation of
mitigation requirements, including the distance of marine mammal to the
acoustic source and description of specific actions that ensued, the
behavior of the animal(s), any observed changes in behavior before and
after implementation of mitigation, and if shutdown was implemented,
the length of time before any subsequent ramp-up of the acoustic
source. If required mitigation was not implemented, PSOs should record
a description of the circumstances.
At a minimum, the following information must be recorded:
1. Vessel names (source vessel and other vessels associated with
survey), vessel size and type, maximum speed capability of vessel;
2. Dates of departures and returns to port with port name;
3. The lease number;
4. PSO names and affiliations;
5. Date and participants of PSO briefings;
6. Visual monitoring equipment used;
[[Page 38091]]
7. PSO location on vessel and height of observation location above
water surface;
8. Dates and times (Greenwich Mean Time) of survey on/off effort
and times corresponding with PSO on/off effort;
9. Vessel location (decimal degrees) when survey effort begins and
ends and vessel location at beginning and end of visual PSO duty
shifts;
10. Vessel location at 30-second intervals if obtainable from data
collection software, otherwise at practical regular interval
11. Vessel heading and speed at beginning and end of visual PSO
duty shifts and upon any change;
12. Water depth (if obtainable from data collection software);
13. Environmental conditions while on visual survey (at beginning
and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change significantly),
including BSS and any other relevant weather conditions including cloud
cover, fog, sun glare, and overall visibility to the horizon;
14. Factors that may contribute to impaired observations during
each PSO shift change or as needed as environmental conditions change
(e.g., vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); and
15. Survey activity information (and changes thereof), such as
acoustic source power output while in operation, number and volume of
airguns operating in an array, tow depth of an acoustic source, and any
other notes of significance (i.e., pre-start clearance, ramp-up,
shutdown, testing, shooting, ramp-up completion, end of operations,
streamers, etc.).
Upon visual observation of any marine mammal, the following
information must be recorded:
1. Watch status (sighting made by PSO on/off effort, opportunistic,
crew, alternate vessel/platform);
2. Vessel/survey activity at time of sighting (e.g., deploying,
recovering, testing, shooting, data acquisition, other);
3. PSO who sighted the animal;
4. Time of sighting;
5. Initial detection method;
6. Sightings cue;
7. Vessel location at time of sighting (decimal degrees);
8. Direction of vessel's travel (compass direction);
9. Speed of the vessel(s) from which the observation was made;
10. Identification of the animal (e.g., genus/species, lowest
possible taxonomic level or unidentified); also note the composition of
the group if there is a mix of species;
11. Species reliability (an indicator of confidence in
identification);
12. Estimated distance to the animal and method of estimating
distance;
13. Estimated number of animals (high/low/best);
14. Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, yearlings,
juveniles, calves, group composition, etc.);
15. Description (as many distinguishing features as possible of
each individual seen, including length, shape, color, pattern, scars,
or markings, shape and size of dorsal fin, shape of head, and blow
characteristics);
16. Detailed behavior observations (e.g., number of blows/breaths,
number of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, traveling;
as explicit and detailed as possible; note any observed changes in
behavior before and after point of closest approach);
17. Mitigation actions; description of any actions implemented in
response to the sighting (e.g., delays, shutdowns, ramp-up, speed or
course alteration, etc.) and time and location of the action;
18. Equipment operating during sighting;
19. Animal's closest point of approach and/or closest distance from
the center point of the acoustic source; and
20. Description of any actions implemented in response to the
sighting (e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up) and time and location of the
action.
If a North Atlantic right whale is observed at any time by PSOs or
personnel on any project vessels, during surveys or during vessel
transit, Atlantic Shores Bight must report the sighting information to
the NMFS North Atlantic Right Whale Sighting Advisory System (866-755-
6622) within two hours of occurrence, when practicable, or no later
than 24 hours after occurrence. North Atlantic right whale sightings in
any location may also be reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via channel
16 and through the WhaleAlert app (<a href="http://www.whalealert.org">http://www.whalealert.org</a>).
In the event that Atlantic Shores Bight personnel discover an
injured or dead marine mammal, regardless of the cause of injury or
death, Atlantic Shores Bight must report the incident to NMFS as soon
as feasible by phone (866-755-6622) and by email
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#88e6e5eefba6efe9faa6fbfcfae9e6ece1e6efc8e6e7e9e9a6efe7fe"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b6d8dbd0c598d1d7c498c5c2c4d7d8d2dfd8d1f6d8d9d7d798d1d9c0">[email protected]</span></a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1f4f4d31564b4f31527071766b706d7671784d7a6f706d6b6c5f71707e7e31787069"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="82d2d0accbd6d2accfedecebf6edf0ebece5d0e7f2edf0f6f1c2ecede3e3ace5edf4">[email protected]</span></a>) as
soon as feasible. The report must include the following information:
1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
2. Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
3. Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the
animal is dead);
4. Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
5. If available, photographs or video footage of the animal(s); and
6. General circumstances under which the animal was discovered.
In the unanticipated event of a ship strike of a marine mammal by
any vessel involved in the activities covered by the IHA, Atlantic
Shores Bight must report the incident to NMFS by phone (866-755-6622)
and by email (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#355b5853461b5254471b464147545b515c5b52755b5a54541b525a43"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7b15161d08551c1a0955080f091a151f12151c3b15141a1a551c140d">[email protected]</span></a> and
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5303017d1a07037d1e3c3d3a273c213a3d340136233c212720133d3c32327d343c25"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="164644385f4246385b79787f6279647f787144736679646265567879777738717960">[email protected]</span></a>) as soon as feasible. The report
would include the following information:
1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
2. Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
3. Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
4. Vessel's course/heading and what operations were being conducted
(if applicable);
5. Status of all sound sources in use;
6. Description of avoidance measures/requirements that were in
place at the time of the strike and what additional measures were
taken, if any, to avoid strike;
7. Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility) immediately preceding the
strike;
8. Estimated size and length of animal that was struck;
9. Description of the behavior of the marine mammal immediately
preceding and/or following the strike;
10. If available, description of the presence and behavior of any
other marine mammals immediately preceding the strike;
11. Estimated fate of the animal (e.g., dead, injured but alive,
injured and moving, blood or tissue observed in the water, status
unknown, disappeared); and
12. To the extent practicable, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s).
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact
[[Page 38092]]
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 impacts or
responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any impacts or
responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, foraging
impacts affecting energetics), as well as effects on habitat, and the
likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We also assess the number,
intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating this
information relative to population status. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS' 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 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, the discussion of our analysis applies to all
the species listed in Table 3, given that the anticipated effects of
this activity on these different marine mammal stocks are expected to
be similar. Where there are meaningful differences between species or
stocks--as is the case of the North Atlantic right whale--they are
included as separate subsections below. NMFS does not anticipate that
serious injury or mortality would occur as a result from HRG surveys,
even in the absence of mitigation, and no serious injury or mortality
is proposed to be authorized. As discussed in the Potential Effects
section, non-auditory physical effects and vessel strike are not
expected to occur. NMFS expects that all potential takes would be in
the form of short-term Level B behavioral harassment in the form of
temporary avoidance of the area or decreased foraging (if such activity
was occurring), reactions that are considered to be of low severity and
with no lasting biological consequences (e.g., Southall et al., 2007).
Even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of an overall
stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in
viability for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in
any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. As described above, Level A
harassment is not expected to occur given the nature of the operations,
the estimated size of the Level A harassment zones, and the required
shutdown zones for certain activities.
In addition to HRG activities being temporary, the maximum expected
harassment zone around a survey vessel is 141 m. Although this distance
is assumed for all survey activity in estimating take numbers proposed
for authorization and evaluated here, in reality, the Applied Acoustics
Dura-Spark 240 would likely not be used across the entire 24-hour
period and across all 360 days. As noted in Table 6, the other acoustic
sources Atlantic Shores Bight has included in their application produce
Level B harassment zones below 60-m. Therefore, the ensonified area
surrounding each vessel is relatively small compared to the overall
distribution of the animals in the area and their 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. Due to 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 known mating or calving grounds nor feeding areas
known to be biologically important to marine mammals within the
proposed survey area. There is no designated critical habitat for any
ESA-listed marine mammals in the proposed survey area.
North Atlantic Right Whales
The status of the North Atlantic right whale population is of
heightened concern and, therefore, merits additional analysis. As noted
previously, elevated North Atlantic right whale mortalities began in
June 2017 and there is an active UME. Overall, preliminary findings
support human interactions, specifically vessel strikes and
entanglements, as the cause of death for the majority of right whales.
As noted previously, the proposed survey area overlaps a migratory
corridor BIA for North Atlantic right whales. Due to the fact that the
proposed survey activities are temporary and the spatial extent of
sound produced by the survey would be very small relative to the
spatial extent of the available migratory habitat in the BIA, right
whale migration is not expected to be impacted by the proposed survey
activities. Required vessel strike avoidance measures will also
decrease risk of ship strike during migration; no ship strike is
expected to occur during Atlantic Shores Bight's proposed activities.
The 500-m shutdown zone for right whales is conservative, considering
the Level B harassment isopleth for the most impactful acoustic source
(i.e., sparker) is estimated to be 141-m, and thereby minimizes the
potential for behavioral harassment of this species.
As noted previously, Level A harassment is not expected due to the
small PTS zones associated with HRG equipment types proposed for use.
The proposed authorizations for Level B harassment takes of North
Atlantic right whale are not expected to exacerbate or compound upon
the ongoing UME. The limited North Atlantic right whale Level B
harassment takes proposed for authorization are expected to be of a
short duration, and given the number of estimated takes, repeated
exposures of the same individual are not expected. Further, given the
relatively small size of the ensonified area during Atlantic Shores
Bight's proposed activities, it is unlikely that North Atlantic right
whale prey availability would be adversely affected. Accordingly, NMFS
does not anticipate that any North Atlantic right whales takes
resulting from Atlantic Shores Bight'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 Atlantic Shores Bight's proposed survey area. Elevated
humpback whale mortalities have occurred along the Atlantic coast from
Maine through Florida since January 2016. Of the cases examined,
approximately half had evidence of human interaction (ship strike or
entanglement). The UME does not yet provide cause for concern regarding
population-level impacts. Despite the UME, the relevant population of
humpback whales (the West Indies breeding population, or DPS) remains
stable at approximately 12,000 individuals.
Beginning in January 2017, elevated minke whale strandings have
occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina,
with highest numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and New York. This event
does not provide cause for concern regarding population level impacts,
as the likely population abundance is greater than 20,000 whales.
The required mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number
and/or
[[Page 38093]]
severity of proposed takes for all species listed in Table 3, including
those with active UMEs, to the level of least practicable adverse
impact. In particular, they would provide animals the opportunity to
move away from the sound source throughout the survey area before HRG
survey equipment reaches full energy, thus preventing them from being
exposed to sound levels that have the potential to cause injury (Level
A harassment) or more severe Level B harassment. As discussed
previously, take by Level A harassment (injury) is considered unlikely,
even absent mitigation, based on the characteristics of the signals
produced by the acoustic sources planned for use, and is not proposed
for authorization. Implementation of required mitigation would further
reduce this potential. Therefore, NMFS is not proposing any Level A
harassment for authorization.
NMFS expects that takes would be in the form of short-term Level B
behavioral harassment by way of brief startling reactions, temporarily
vacating the area, or decreased foraging (if such activity was
occurring)--reactions that (at the scale and intensity anticipated
here) are considered to be of low severity, with no lasting biological
consequences. Since both the sources and marine mammals are mobile,
animals would only be exposed briefly to a small ensonified area that
might result in take. Additionally, required mitigation measures would
further reduce exposure to sound that could result in more severe
behavioral harassment.
Biologically Important Areas for Other Species
As previously discussed, impacts from the proposed project are
expected to be localized to the specific area of activity and only
during periods of time where Atlantic Shores Bight's acoustic sources
are active. While BIAs for feeding for fin and humpback whales as well
as haul out sites for harbor seals can be found off the coast of New
Jersey and New York, NMFS does not expect this proposed action to
affect these areas. This is due to the combination of the mitigation
and monitoring measures being required of Atlantic Shores Bight as well
as the location of these biologically important areas. All of these
important areas are found outside of the range of this survey area, as
is the case with fin whales and humpback whales (BIAs found further
north), and, therefore, not expected to be impacted by Atlantic Shores
Bight's proposed survey activities.
Three major haul-out sites exist for harbor seals, inshore of the
ECR Survey Area along New Jersey, at Great Bay, Sand Hook, and Barnegat
Inlet (CWFNJ, 2015). As hauled outs are inshore and seals would be out
of the water, no in-water effects are expected.
Preliminary Determinations
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from
this activity are not expected to adversely affect any of the species
or stocks through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
<bullet> No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or
authorized;
<bullet> No Level A harassment (PTS) is anticipated, even in the
absence of mitigation measures, or proposed for authorization;
<bullet> Foraging success is not likely to be impacted as effects
on prey species for marine mammals from the proposed activities are
expected to be minimal;
<bullet> Alternate areas of similar habitat value are available for
marine mammals to temporarily vacate the survey area during the planned
activities to avoid exposure to sounds generated by surveys;
<bullet> Take is anticipated to be by Level B behavioral harassment
only consisting of brief startling reactions and/or temporary avoidance
of the survey area;
<bullet> While the survey area is within a noted migratory BIA for
North Atlantic right whales, the activities would occur in such a
comparatively small area such that any avoidance of the survey area due
to activities would not affect migration; and
<bullet> The proposed mitigation measures, including effective
visual monitoring, and shutdowns are expected to minimize potential
impacts to marine mammals.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activities 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 (by Level B harassment
only) of 15 marine mammal species (with 15 managed stocks). The total
amount of takes proposed for authorization relative to the best
available population abundance is less than 7 percent for all stocks
(Table 11). Therefore, NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of
marine mammals may be taken relative to the estimated overall
population abundances for those stocks.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals would 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 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 consults internally whenever
we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species, in
this case with the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office.
NMFS OPR is proposing to authorize the incidental take of four
species of marine mammals which are listed under the ESA, including the
North Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has determined
that this activity falls within
[[Page 38094]]
the scope of activities analyzed in NMFS GARFO's programmatic
consultation regarding geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic
coast in the three Atlantic Renewable Energy Regions (completed June
29, 2021; revised September 2021).
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to Atlantic Shores Bight for conducting site
characterization surveys off New Jersey and New York from August 1,
2022 through July 31, 2023, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. A
draft of the proposed IHA can be found at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities</a>.-
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and
any other aspect of this notice of proposed IHA for the proposed site
characterization surveys. We also request comment on the potential
renewal of this proposed IHA as described in the paragraph below.
Please include with your comments any supporting data or literature
citations to help inform decisions on the request for this IHA or a
subsequent renewal IHA.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-time, one-year
renewal IHA following notice to the public providing an additional 15
days for public comments when (1) up to another year of identical or
nearly identical activities as described in the Description of Proposed
Activities section of this notice is planned or (2) the activities as
described in the Description of Proposed Activities section of this
notice would not be completed by the time the IHA expires and a renewal
would allow for completion of the activities beyond that described in
the Dates and Duration section of this notice, provided all of the
following conditions are met:
<bullet> A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days
prior to the needed renewal IHA effective date (recognizing that the
renewal IHA expiration date cannot extend beyond one year from
expiration of the initial IHA).
<bullet> The request for renewal must include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the
requested renewal IHA are identical to the activities analyzed under
the initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so
minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) that the changes do not affect the
previous analyses, mitigation and monitoring requirements, or take
estimates (with the exception of reducing the type or amount of take).
(2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the
required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the
monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not
previously analyzed or authorized.
Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the affected
species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS determines
that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, the
mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and
appropriate, and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid.
Dated: June 22, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-13668 Filed 6-24-22; 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 June 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.