[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30872-30890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10928]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XC010]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Site Characterization Surveys
Offshore From Massachusetts to New Jersey for Vineyard Northeast, LLC
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments on proposed authorization and possible Renewal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Vineyard Northeast, LLC
(Vineyard Northeast) for authorization to take marine mammals
incidental to marine site characterization surveys offshore from
Massachusetts to New Jersey, including the area of Commercial Lease of
Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy Development on the Outer
Continental Shelf Lease Areas OCS-A 0522 and OCS-A 0544 (Lease Areas)
and potential offshore export cable corridor (OECC) routes to landfall
locations. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is
requesting comments on its proposal to issue an incidental harassment
authorization (IHA) to incidentally take marine mammals during the
specified activities. NMFS is also requesting comments on a possible
one-time, one-year renewal that could be issued under certain
circumstances and if all requirements are met, as described in Request
for Public Comments at the end of this notice. NMFS will consider
public comments prior to making any final decision on the issuance of
the requested MMPA authorizations and agency responses will be
summarized in the final notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than June 21,
2022.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service. Written comments should be submitted
via email to [email protected].
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the
end of the comment period. Comments, including all attachments, must
not exceed a 25 megabyte file size. All comments received are a part of
the public record and will generally be posted online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable without change.
All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit
confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carter Esch, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8421. 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: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act. 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
[[Page 30873]]
engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a
specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either
regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a
notice of a proposed incidental take authorization may be provided to
the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth. The definitions
of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the
relevant sections below.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an IHA)
with respect to potential impacts on the human environment. This action
is consistent with categories of activities identified in Categorical
Shutdown B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of
the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not
individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts
on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not
identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this
categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies to be categorically
excluded from further NEPA review. NMFS will review all comments
submitted in response to this notice prior to concluding our NEPA
process or making a final decision on the IHA request.
Summary of Request
On December 17, 2021, NMFS received a request from Vineyard
Northeast for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to marine site
characterization surveys offshore from Massachusetts to New Jersey, in
the area of Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy
Development on the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Areas OCS-A 0522 and
OCS-A 0544 (Lease Areas) and potential offshore export cable corridor
(OECC) routes to landfall locations. Following NMFS' review of the
draft application, a revised version was submitted on February 15,
2022, and again on April 4, 2022. The April 4, 2022, revised version
was deemed adequate and complete on April 18, 2022. Vineyard
Northeast's request is for take of 19 species (with 20 managed stocks)
of marine mammals, by Level B harassment only. Neither Vineyard
Northeast nor NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to result from
this activity and, therefore, and IHA is appropriate.
NMFS previously issued an IHA (85 FR 42357; July 14, 2020) and a
renewal of that IHA (86 FR 38296; July 20, 2021) to Vineyard Wind, LLC
(Vineyard Wind) for similar marine site characterization surveys.
Vineyard Wind has split into several corporate entities which now
include Vineyard Wind, Vineyard Wind 1, LLC (Vineyard Wind 1), and
Vineyard Northeast. NMFS issued an IHA for similar surveys to Vineyard
Wind 1 on July 28, 2021 (86 FR 40469). Although the surveys analyzed in
this proposed IHA to Vineyard Northeast would occur in an area that
overlaps with a portion of the project areas included in the previous
Vineyard Wind IHA and Renewal IHA, and Vineyard Wind 1 IHA (and
potentially a renewal, if appropriate), this proposed IHA would be
issued to a separate corporate entity (Vineyard Northeast). The
proposed IHA would be effective June 22, 2022, through June 21, 2023.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
As part of its overall marine site characterization survey
operations, Vineyard Northeast proposes to conduct high-resolution
geophysical (HRG) surveys in the Lease Areas and along potential OECC's
from northern Massachusetts to southern New Jersey. (Figure 1)
The purpose of the marine site characterization surveys is to
obtain an assessment of seabed (geophysical, geotechnical, and
geohazard), ecological, and archeological conditions within the
footprint of planned offshore wind facility development areas. Surveys
are also conducted to inform and support engineering design and to map
unexploded ordnance. Underwater sound resulting from Vineyard
Northeast's proposed site characterization survey activities,
specifically HRG surveys, has the potential to result in incidental
take of marine mammals in the form of behavioral harassment.
Dates and Duration
Vineyard Northeast anticipates that HRG survey activities would
occur on approximately 869 vessel days, with an assumed daily survey
distance of 80 km per vessel. This schedule is based on assumed 24-hour
operations. Each day that a vessel surveys approximately 80 km within
24 hours would count as a single survey day, e.g., two survey vessels
operating on the same day would count as two survey days. The use of
concurrently surveying vessels would facilitate completion of all 869
vessel days within one year. Vineyard Northeast proposes to begin
survey activities upon receipt of an IHA and continue for up to one
year (though the actual duration will likely be shorter, particularly
given the use of multiple vessels). The IHA would be effective for one
year from the date of issuance.
Specific Geographic Region
Vineyard Northeast's proposed HRG survey activities are planned to
occur in both Federal offshore waters (including Lease Areas OCS-A 0522
and OCS-A 0544) and along potential OECCs in both Federal and State
nearshore waters of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York,
and New Jersey, as shown in Figure 1. The 536 square kilometer (km\2\)
(132,370 acre) Lease Area OCS-A 0522 is located approximately 24
kilometers (km) (15 miles; mi) from the southeast corner of Martha's
Vineyard, within the Massachusetts Wind Energy Area (WEA). The 174
km\2\ (43,056 acre) Lease Area OCS-A 0544 is located approximately 38
km (24 mi) from Long Island, New York, within BOEM's Mid-Atlantic
planning area. Surveys outside of the Lease Areas would extend from
northern Massachusetts to southern New Jersey, including the
Massachusetts/Rhode Island WEA as well as the northern portion of the
Mid-Atlantic planning area. Water depths across the proposed Survey
Area range from approximately 35 to 60 meters (m) (115 to 197 feet
[ft]) in the Lease Areas, and from 2.5 m to >35 m (8 to >115 ft) along
the proposed OECCs.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 30874]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY22.000
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
Vineyard Northeast proposes to conduct HRG survey operations,
including single and multibeam depth sounding, seafloor imaging, and
shallow and medium penetration sub-bottom profiling. The HRG surveys
may be conducted using any or all of the following equipment types:
Side scan sonar, multibeam echosounder, magnetometers and gradiometers,
parametric sub-bottom profiler (SBP), compressed high intensity radar
pulse (CHIRP) SBP, boomers, or sparkers. Vessels would generally
conduct survey effort at a transit speed of approximately 4 knots (kn;
2.1 meters per sec, m/s), which equates to 110 km per 24-hr period.
However, based on past survey experience (i.e., knowledge of typical
daily downtime due to weather, system malfunctions, etc.), Vineyard
Northeast assumes 80 km as the average distance surveyed per 24 hours.
On this basis (and as mentioned previously), a total of 869 survey days
are expected. However, in nearshore waters (i.e., <30 m), vessels may
survey during daylight hours only, with a corresponding assumption that
the daily survey distance would be halved (i.e., 40 km). Approximately
35 survey days (i.e., 70 12-hr survey days) are planned for nearshore
(i.e., <30 m water depth) waters; surveys conducted on the remaining
834 vessel days in waters >30 m will operate 24 hours per day.
To facilitate completion of all 869 survey days across the large
Survey Area (see Figure 1) within one year, Vineyard Northeast
anticipates operating multiple vessels simultaneously (i.e., up to two
in a Lease Area and up to two along OECC routes, including nearshore
Survey Areas). The number of vessels operating at the same time may
increase or decrease as the survey campaign progresses.
Acoustic sources planned for use during the proposed HRG survey
activities include the following (operating frequencies are presented
in hertz (Hz) and kilohertz (kHz)):
Shallow penetration non-impulsive, non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers (i.e., CHIRP SBPs) are used to map the near-surface
stratigraphy (top 0 to 5 m [0 to 16 feet (ft)]) of sediment below
seabed). A CHIRP system emits sonar pulses that increase in frequency
from about 2 to 20 kHz over time. The frequency range can be adjusted
to meet project variables. Rather than being towed, these sources are
typically mounted on a pole or the hull of the vessel, reducing the
likelihood that an animal would be exposed to the signal.
Medium penetration, impulsive sources (i.e., boomers and
sparker) are used to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy. A boomer is a
broadband source operating in the 3.5 Hz to 10 kHz frequency range.
Sparkers create omnidirectional acoustic pulses from 50 Hz to 4 kHz
that can penetrate several hundred meters into the seafloor. These
sources are typically towed behind the vessel.
Operation of the following survey equipment types is not expected
to present reasonable risk of marine mammal take, and will not be
discussed further beyond the brief summaries provided below.
Non-impulsive, parametric SBPs are used for providing high
density data in sub-bottom profiles that are typically required for
cable routes, very shallow water, and archaeological surveys. These
sources generate short, very narrow-beam (1[deg] to 3.5[deg]) signals
at high frequencies (generally around 85-100 kHz). The narrow beamwidth
[[Page 30875]]
significantly reduces the potential that a marine mammal could be
exposed to the signal, while the high frequency of operation means that
the signal is rapidly attenuated in seawater. These sources are
typically mounted on the hull of the vessel or deployed from a side
pole rather than towed behind the vessel.
Ultra-short baseline (USBL) positioning systems are used
to provide high accuracy ranges by measuring the time between the
acoustic pulses transmitted by the vessel transceiver and a transponder
(or beacon) necessary to produce the acoustic profile. It is a two-
component system with a pole-mounted transceiver and one or several
transponders mounted on other survey equipment. USBLs are expected to
produce extremely small acoustic propagation distances in their typical
operating configuration.
Single and Multibeam echosounders (MBESs) are used to
determine water depths and general bottom topography. The proposed
MBESs all have operating frequencies >180 kHz and are therefore outside
the general hearing range of marine mammals.
Side scan sonar (SSS) is used for seabed sediment
classification purposes and to identify natural and man-made acoustic
targets on the seafloor. The proposed SSSs all have operating
frequencies >180 kHz and are therefore outside the general hearing
range of marine mammals.
Table 1 identifies all representative proposed survey equipment
that has the potential to result in harassment of marine mammals (i.e.,
expected to operate at or below 180 kHz). 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. Please
see Table A-3 in Appendix A of the IHA application for specifications
on all active acoustic equipment with the potential for use during
Vineyard Northeast's site characterization surveys.
Table 1--Summary of Representative HRG Equipment \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In-beam source level (dB)
System Frequency Beam width Pulse duration Repetition -------------------------------
(kHz) ([deg]) (ms) rate (Hz) RMS Pk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow subbottom profiler (non-impulsive):
EdgeTech Chirp 216.................................. 2-16 65 2 3.75 178 182
Deep seismic profiler (impulsive):
Applied Acoustics AA251 Boomer...................... 0.2-15 180 0.8 2 205 212
GeoMarine Geo Spark 2000 (400 tip).................. 0.05-3 180 3.4 1 203 213
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Edge Tech Chirp 512i used as proxy source for Edge Tech 216, as Chirp 512i has similar operation settings as Chirp 216. SIG ELC 820 Sparker used as
proxy for GeoMarine Geo Spark 2000 (400 tip), as SIG ELC 820 has similar operation settings as Geo Spark 2000. See Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) and
Table A-3 in Appendix A of Vineyard Northeast's application for more information.
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 Vineyard Northeast's application summarize
available information regarding status and trends, distribution and
habitat preferences, and behavior and life history, of the potentially
affected species. Additional information regarding population trends
and threats may be found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SARs;
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about
these species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found
on NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 2 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
proposed to be authorized for this action, and summarizes information
related to the population or stock, including regulatory status under
the MMPA and Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological
removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, NMFS follows Committee on
Taxonomy (2021). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of
animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a
marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its
optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS' SARs). While no
mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR, and annual serious
injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as
gross indicators of the status of the species and other threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area.
NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represents the total
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS' U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Stock Assessment (SARs). All
values presented in Table 2 are the most recent available at the time
of publication and are available in the Draft 2021 SARs (Hayes et al.,
2021), available at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).
[[Page 30876]]
Table 2--Marine Mammals Likely To Occur in the Project Area That May Be Affected by Vineyard Northeast's Proposed Activity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue whale \4\...................... Balaenoptera musculus.. Western North Atlantic. E/D, Y 402 (unk, 402; 2008... 0.8 0
North Atlantic right whale.......... Eubalaena glacialis.... Western North Atlantic. E/D, Y 368 (0; 364; 2019).... 0.7 7.7
Humpback whale...................... Megaptera novaeangliae. Gulf of Maine.......... -/-; Y 1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016) 22 12.15
Fin whale........................... Balaenoptera physalus.. Western North Atlantic. E/D, Y 6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 11 1.8
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 Eastern -/-, N 21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 170 10.6
acutorostrata. Coastal. 2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale......................... Physeter macrocephalus. North Atlantic......... E/D, Y 4,349 (0.28; 3,451; 3.9 0
2016).
Long-finned pilot whale............. Globicephala melas..... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 39,215 (0.3; 30,627; 306 29
2016).
Orca (killer whale) \4\............. Orcinus Orca........... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N unk (unk; unk; 2016).. unk 0
False killer whale \4\.............. Pseudorca crassidens... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 1,791 (0.56; 1,154; 12 0
2016).
Atlantic spotted dolphin............ Stenella frontalis..... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 320 0
2016).
Atlantic white-sided dolphin........ Lagenorhynchus acutus.. Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 93,233 (0.71; 54,443; 544 227
2016).
Bottlenose dolphin.................. Tursiops truncatus..... Western North Atlantic -/D, Y 6,639 (0.41; 4,759; 48 12.2-21.5
Northern Migratory 2016).
Coastal.
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).
Risso's dolphin..................... Grampus griseus........ Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 35,215 (0.19; 30,051; 301 34
2016).
White-beaked dolphin \4\............ Lagenorhynchus Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 536,016 (0.31; 4,153 0
albirostris. 415,344; 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 \5\....................... Halichoerus grypus..... Western North Atlantic. -/-, N 27,300 (0.22; 22,785; 1,389 4,453
2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or
designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or
which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is
automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments. CV
is the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
fisheries, ship strike).
\4\ Rare (or not likely to occur) species.
\5\ NMFS' gray seal stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in
Canada) is approximately 451,431. The annual mortality and serious injury (M/SI) value given is for the total stock.
Table 2 includes 15 species (with 16 managed stocks) that
temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that
take is reasonably likely to occur. Vineyard Northeast is also
requesting take of four species that are considered rare (or not likely
to occur) in the Survey Area (i.e., blue whale, killer whale, false
killer whale, and white-beaked dolphin), based on recent detections
(acoustic and/or visual) of those species in the Survey Area. In total,
Vineyard Northeast is requesting take of 19 species (with 20 managed
stocks). In addition to what is included in Sections 3 and 4 of the
application, the SARS, and NMFS' website, further detail informing the
baseline for select species (i.e., information regarding current
Unusual Mortality Events (UME) and important habitat areas) is provided
below.
North Atlantic Right Whale
The North Atlantic right whale is considered one of the most
critically endangered populations of large whales in the world and has
been listed as a Federal endangered species since 1970. The Western
Atlantic stock is considered depleted under the MMPA (Hayes et al.
2021). There is a recovery plan (NOAA Fisheries 2017) for the North
Atlantic right whale, and relatively recently there was a five-year
review of the species (NOAA Fisheries 2017). The North Atlantic right
whale had only a 2.8 percent recovery rate between 1990 and 2011 (Hayes
et al. 2021).
Elevated North Atlantic right whale mortalities have occurred since
June 7, 2017, along the U.S. and Canadian coast with the leading
category for the cause of death for this UME determined to be ``human
interaction,'' specifically from entanglements or vessel strikes. As of
May X, 2022, a total of 34 confirmed dead stranded whales (21 in
Canada; 13 in the United States) have been documented. The cumulative
total number of animals in the North Atlantic right whale UME has been
updated to 50 individuals to include both the confirmed mortalities
(dead stranded or floaters) (n=34) and seriously injured free-swimming
whales (n=16) to better
[[Page 30877]]
reflect the confirmed number of whales likely removed from the
population during the UME, and more accurately reflect the population
impacts. More information about this UME is available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event.
NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR part 224.105 designated nearshore
waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as Mid-Atlantic U.S. Seasonal
Management Areas (SMAs) for North Atlantic right whales in 2008. SMAs
were developed to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and
North Atlantic right whales around their migratory route and calving
grounds. The Survey Area overlaps with the Cape Cod Bay (active between
January 1 and May 15), Off Race Point (active between March 1 and April
30), Great South Channel (active between April 1 and July 31), and Mid-
Atlantic Migratory (active between November 1 and April 30) SMAs.
The proposed Survey Area also partially overlaps with previously
identified North Atlantic right whale feeding Biologically Important
Areas (BIAs) and part of the migratory corridor BIA for North Atlantic
right whales (March-April and November-December) that extends from the
coast to the continental shelf break, and from Massachusetts to Florida
(LeBrecque et al., 2015). A map showing designated BIAs is available
at: https://cetsound.noaa.gov/biologically-important-area-map. In
addition to currently designated feeding BIAs, Oleson et al. (2020)
identified the area south of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket, referred
to as ``South of the Islands,'' as a newer, year-round, core North
Atlantic right whale foraging habitat. The South of the Islands area is
also within the bounds of Vineyard Northeast's Survey Area.
Humpback Whale
NMFS recently evaluated the status of the species, and on September
8, 2016, NMFS divided the species into 14 distinct population segments
(DPS), removed the species-level listing, and in its place listed four
DPSs as endangered and one DPS as threatened (81 FR 62260; September 8,
2016). The remaining nine DPSs were not listed. The West Indies DPS,
which is not listed under the ESA, is the only DPS of humpback whale
that is expected to occur in the Survey Area. Bettridge et al. (2015)
estimated the size of this population at 12,312 (95 percent CI 8,688-
15,954) whales in 2004-05, which is consistent with previous population
estimates of approximately 10,000-11,000 whales (Stevick et al., 2003;
Smith et al., 1999) and the increasing trend for the West Indies DPS
(Bettridge et al., 2015). Whales occurring in the Survey Area are
considered to be from the West Indies DPS but are not necessarily from
the Gulf of Maine feeding population managed as a stock by NMFS. Barco
et al., 2002 estimated that, based on photo-identification, only 39
percent of individual humpback whales observed along the mid- and south
Atlantic U.S. coast are from the Gulf of Maine stock.
Since January 2016, elevated humpback whale mortalities have
occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida. Partial or
full necropsy examinations have been conducted on approximately half of
the 156 known cases (as of May X, 2022). Of the whales examined, about
50 percent had evidence of human interaction, either ship strike or
entanglement. While a portion of the whales have shown evidence of pre-
mortem vessel strike, this finding is not consistent across all whales
examined and more research is needed. NOAA is consulting with
researchers that are conducting studies on the humpback whale
populations, and these efforts may provide information on changes in
whale distribution and habitat use that could provide additional
insight into how these vessel interactions occurred. More information
is available at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2021-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.
The northern and most eastern portions of the proposed Survey Area
partially overlap with the humpback whale feeding BIA (March through
December), which extends throughout the Gulf of Maine, Stellwagen Bank,
and Great South Channel (LeBrecque et al., 2015).
Minke Whale
Since January 2017, elevated minke whale mortalities have occurred
along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, with a
total of 122 strandings (as of May X, 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:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2021-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.
The northern and most eastern portions of the proposed Survey Area
partially overlap with one of the minke whale feeding BIAs (March
through November), which includes the southern and southwestern section
of the Gulf of Maine, including Georges Bank, the Great South Channel,
Cape Cod Bay and Massachusetts Bay, Stellwagen Bank, Cape Anne, and
Jeffreys Ledge (LeBrecque et al., 2015).
Seals
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 been stranding with clinical signs, again
not in elevated numbers, and those two seal species have also been
added to the UME investigation. A total of 3,152 reported strandings
(of all species) had occurred from July 1, 2018, through March 13,
2020. Full or partial necropsy examinations have been conducted on some
of the seals and samples have been collected for testing. Based on
tests conducted thus far, the main pathogen found in the seals is
phocine distemper virus. NMFS is performing additional testing to
identify any other factors that may be involved in this UME. Closure of
this UME is pending. Information on this UME is available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/marine-life-distress/2018-2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-event-along.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine
mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et
al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect
this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided
into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data,
audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques,
anatomical modeling, and
[[Page 30878]]
other data. Note that no direct measurements of hearing ability have
been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency
cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described generalized hearing
ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized hearing
ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold
from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception for lower
limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to
be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al.
(2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing groups and their associated
hearing ranges are provided in Table 3.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
(dolphins, toothed whales, beaked
whales, bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
(true seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth, 2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Fifteen species of marine mammal species (13 cetacean and 2 pinniped
(both phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with
the proposed survey activities and four rare, or not likely to occur,
species (all cetacean) may be encountered during the proposed survey
activities. Please refer back to Table 2. Of the cetacean species that
may be present, six are classified as low-frequency cetaceans (i.e.,
all mysticete species), ten are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans
(i.e., all delphinid species and the sperm whale), and one is
classified as a high-frequency cetacean (i.e., harbor porpoise).
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that
components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and
their habitat. Detailed descriptions of the potential effects of
similar specified activities have been provided in other Federal
Register notices, including for survey activities using the same
methodology, over a similar amount of time, and occurring within the
same specified geographical region (e.g., 85 FR 21198, April 16, 2020;
85 FR 42357, July 14, 2020; 85 FR 63508, October 8, 2020; 85 FR 71058,
November 6, 2020; 86 FR 21289, April 22, 2021; 86 FR 38296, July 20,
2021; 86 FR 40469, July 28, 2021; 87 FR 13975, March 11, 2022; 87 FR
24103, April 22, 2022). No significant new information is available,
and we refer the reader to these documents rather than repeating the
details here.
The Estimated Take section includes a quantitative analysis of the
number of individuals that are expected to be taken by Vineyard
Northeast's activities. The Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination section considers the potential effects of the specified
activity, the Estimated Take section, and the Proposed Mitigation
section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these
activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals
and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal
species or stocks.
Background on Active Acoustic Sound Sources and Acoustic Terminology
This subsection contains a brief technical background on sound, on
the characteristics of certain sound types, and on metrics used in this
proposal inasmuch as the information is relevant to the specified
activity and to the summary of the potential effects of the specified
activity on marine mammals. For general information on sound and its
interaction with the marine environment, please see, e.g., Au and
Hastings (2008); Richardson et al. (1995); Urick (1983).
Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are
frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number
of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and
is measured in hertz or cycles per second. Wavelength is the distance
between two peaks or corresponding points of a sound wave (length of
one cycle). Higher frequency sounds have shorter wavelengths than lower
frequency sounds, and typically attenuate (decrease) more rapidly,
except in certain cases in shallower water. Amplitude is the height of
the sound pressure wave or the ``loudness'' of a sound and is typically
described using the relative unit of the decibel. A sound pressure
level (SPL) in dB is described as the ratio between a measured pressure
and a reference pressure (for underwater sound, this is 1 microPascal
([mu]Pa)), and is a logarithmic unit that accounts for large variations
in amplitude. Therefore, a relatively small change in dB corresponds to
large changes in sound pressure. The source level (SL) represents the
SPL referenced at a distance of 1-m from the source (referenced to 1
[mu]Pa), while the received level is the SPL at the listener's position
(referenced to 1 [mu]Pa).
Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over
the duration of an impulse. Root mean square is calculated by squaring
all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the
square root of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean square accounts for
both positive and negative values; squaring the pressures makes all
values positive so that they may be accounted for in the summation of
pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often
used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because
behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be
better expressed through averaged units than by peak pressures.
[[Page 30879]]
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 like ripples on the surface of a pond and may be directed either
in a beam or in beams or may radiate in all directions (omnidirectional
sources). The compressions and decompressions associated with sound
waves are detected as changes in pressure by aquatic life and man-made
sound receptors such as hydrophones.
Even in the absence of sound from the specified activity, the
underwater environment is typically loud due to ambient sound, which is
defined as environmental background sound levels lacking a single
source or point (Richardson et al., 1995). The sound level of a region
is defined by the total acoustical energy being generated by known and
unknown sources. These sources may include physical (e.g., wind and
waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric sound), biological (e.g., sounds
produced by marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates), and anthropogenic
(e.g., vessels, dredging, construction) sound. Several 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 many varying factors, ambient sound levels can be
expected to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial and temporal
scales. Sound levels at a given frequency and location can vary by 10-
20 dB from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result is that,
depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from the
specified activity may be a negligible addition to the local
environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect marine
mammals. Details of source types are described in the following text.
Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types:
Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction
between these two sound types is important because they have differing
potential to cause physical effects, particularly regarding hearing
(e.g., Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see Southall et al.
(2007) for an in-depth discussion of these concepts. The distinction
between these two sound types is not always obvious, as certain signals
share properties of both pulsed and non-pulsed sounds. A signal near a
source could be categorized as a pulse, but due to propagation effects
as it moves farther from the source, the signal duration becomes longer
(e.g., Greene and Richardson, 1988).
Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic
booms, impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically
considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients
(ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998) and occur either as
isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed sounds are all
characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient pressure to a
maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period that may
include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and minimal
pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce physical
injury as compared with sounds that lack these features.
Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or
prolonged, and may be either continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995;
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals
of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses (e.g.,
rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced
by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or
dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems. The
duration of such sounds, as received at a distance, can be greatly
extended in a highly reverberant environment.
Sparkers and boomers produce pulsed signals with energy in the
frequency ranges specified in Table 1. The amplitude of the acoustic
wave emitted from sparker sources is equal in all directions (i.e.,
omnidirectional), while other sources planned for use during the
proposed surveys have some degree of directionality to the beam, as
specified in Table 1. Finally, CHIRP SBPs should be considered non-
impulsive, intermittent sources.
Summary on Specific Potential Effects of Acoustic Sound Sources
Underwater sound from active acoustic sources can include one or
more of the following: Temporary or permanent hearing impairment,
behavioral disturbance, masking, stress, and non-auditory physical
effects. The degree of effect is intrinsically related to the signal
characteristics, received level, distance from the source, and duration
of the sound exposure. Marine mammals exposed to high-intensity sound,
or to lower-intensity sound for prolonged periods, can experience
hearing threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing sensitivity
at certain frequency ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS can be permanent (PTS;
permanent threshold shift), in which case the loss of hearing
sensitivity is not fully recoverable, or temporary (TTS; temporary
threshold shift), in which case the animal's hearing threshold would
recover over time (Southall et al. 2007).
[[Page 30880]]
Animals in the vicinity of Vineyard Northeast's proposed HRG survey
activity are unlikely to incur even TTS due to the characteristics of
the sound sources, which include relatively low source levels (178 to
205 dB re 1 [micro]Pa m), and generally very short pulses and potential
duration of exposure. These characteristics mean that instantaneous
exposure is unlikely to cause TTS, as it is unlikely that exposure
would occur close enough to the vessel for received levels to exceed
peak pressure TTS criteria, and that the cumulative duration of
exposure would be insufficient to exceed cumulative sound exposure
level (SEL) criteria. Even for high-frequency cetacean species (e.g.,
harbor porpoises), which have the greatest sensitivity to potential
TTS, individuals would have to make a very close approach and also
remain very close to vessels operating these sources in order to
receive multiple exposures at relatively high levels, as would be
necessary to cause TTS. Intermittent exposures--as would occur due to
the brief, transient signals produced by these sources--require a
higher cumulative SEL to induce TTS than would continuous exposures of
the same duration (i.e., intermittent exposure results in lower levels
of TTS). Moreover, most marine mammals would more likely avoid a loud
sound source rather than swim in such close proximity as to result in
TTS. Kremser et al. (2005) noted that the probability of a cetacean
swimming through the area of exposure when a sub-bottom profiler emits
a pulse is small--because if the animal was in the area, it would have
to pass the transducer at close range in order to be subjected to sound
levels that could cause TTS and would likely exhibit avoidance behavior
to the area near the transducer rather than swim through at such a
close range. Further, the restricted beam shape of the Edge Tech 216
Chirp planned for use (Table 1) makes it unlikely that an animal would
be exposed more than briefly during the passage of the vessel.
Behavioral disturbance may include a variety of effects, including
subtle changes in behavior (e.g., minor or brief avoidance of an area
or changes in vocalizations), more conspicuous changes in similar
behavioral activities, and more sustained and/or potentially severe
reactions, such as displacement from or abandonment of high-quality
habitat. Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-
specific and any reactions depend on numerous intrinsic and extrinsic
factors (e.g., species, state of maturity, experience, current
activity, reproductive state, auditory sensitivity, time of day), as
well as the interplay between factors. Available studies show wide
variation in response to underwater sound; therefore, it is difficult
to predict specifically how any given sound in a particular instance
might affect marine mammals perceiving the signal.
In addition, sound can disrupt behavior through masking, or
interfering with, an animal's ability to detect, recognize, or
discriminate between acoustic signals of interest (e.g., those used for
intraspecific communication and social interactions, prey detection,
predator avoidance, navigation). Masking occurs when the receipt of a
sound is interfered with by another coincident sound at similar
frequencies and at similar or higher intensity and may occur whether
the sound is natural (e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves,
precipitation) or anthropogenic (e.g., shipping, sonar, seismic
exploration) in origin. Marine mammal communications would not likely
be masked appreciably by the acoustic signals given the directionality
of the signals for most HRG survey equipment types planned for use
(Table 1) and the brief period when an individual mammal is likely to
be exposed.
Sound may affect marine mammals through impacts on the abundance,
behavior, or distribution of prey species (e.g., crustaceans,
cephalopods, fish, and zooplankton) (i.e., effects to marine mammal
habitat). Prey species exposed to sound might move away from the sound
source, experience TTS, experience masking of biologically relevant
sounds, or show no obvious direct effects. The most likely impacts (if
any) for most prey species in a given area would be temporary avoidance
of the area. Surveys using active acoustic sound sources move through
an area, limiting exposure to multiple pulses. In all cases, sound
levels would return to ambient once a survey ends and the noise source
is shut down and, when exposure to sound ends, behavioral and/or
physiological responses are expected to end relatively quickly.
Finally, the HRG survey equipment will not have significant impacts to
the seafloor and does not represent a source of pollution.
Vessel Strike
Vessel collisions with marine mammals, or ship strikes, can result
in death or serious injury of the animal. These interactions are
typically associated with large whales, which are less maneuverable
than are smaller cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to large vessels.
Ship strikes generally involve commercial shipping vessels, which are
normally larger and of which there is much more traffic in the ocean
than geophysical survey vessels. Jensen and Silber (2004) summarized
ship strikes of large whales worldwide from 1975-2003 and found that
most collisions occurred in the open ocean and involved large vessels
(e.g., commercial shipping). For vessels used in geophysical survey
activities, vessel speed while towing gear is typically only 4-5 knots.
At these speeds, both the possibility of striking a marine mammal and
the possibility of a strike resulting in serious injury or mortality
are so low as to be discountable. At average transit speed for
geophysical survey vessels, the probability of serious injury or
mortality resulting from a strike is less than 50 percent. However, the
likelihood of a strike actually happening is again low given the
smaller size of these vessels and generally slower speeds. Notably in
the Jensen and Silber study, no strike incidents were reported for
geophysical survey vessels during that time period.
The potential effects of Vineyard Northeast's specified survey
activity are expected to be limited to Level B behavioral harassment.
No permanent or temporary auditory effects, or significant impacts to
marine mammal habitat, including prey, are expected.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed for authorization through this IHA, which will inform both
NMFS' consideration of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact
determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to noise from certain HRG acoustic sources.
Based primarily on the characteristics of the signals produced by the
acoustic sources planned for use, Level A harassment is neither
anticipated (even absent mitigation), nor proposed to be authorized.
Consideration of the
[[Page 30881]]
anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures (i.e., pre-start
clearance and shutdown measures), discussed in detail below in the
Proposed Mitigation section, further strengthens the conclusion that
Level A harassment is not a reasonably expected outcome of the survey
activity. As previously described, no serious injury or mortality is
anticipated or proposed to be authorized for this activity. Below we
describe how take is estimated.
Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic
thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science
indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some
degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water
that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or
occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4)
and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the
factors considered here in more detail and present the proposed take
estimates.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS uses acoustic thresholds that identify the received level of
underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably
expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or
to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment--Though significantly driven by received level,
the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure
is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the
source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment
(e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to
predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what
the available science indicates and the practical need to use a
threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for
most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on
received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS
predicts that marine mammals may be behaviorally harassed (i.e., Level
B harassment) when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for impulsive sources
(i.e., boomers, sparkers) and non-impulsive, intermittent sources
(e.g., CHIRP SBPs) evaluated here for Vineyard Northeast's proposed
activity.
Level A harassment--NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0)
(Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory
injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups
(based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from
two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). For more
information, see NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed
at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
Vineyard Northeast's proposed activity includes the use of
impulsive (i.e., boomers and sparkers) and non-impulsive (e.g., CHIRP
SBPs) sources. However, as discussed above, NMFS has concluded that
Level A harassment is not a reasonably likely outcome for marine
mammals exposed to noise from the sources proposed for use here, and
the potential for Level A harassment is not evaluated further in this
document. Please see Vineyard Northeast's application for a
quantitative Level A exposure analysis exercise. The results indicated
that maximum estimated distances to Level A harassment isopleths were
less than 5 m for all sources and hearing groups, with the exception of
an estimated 53 m distance to the Level A harassment isopleth for high-
frequency cetaceans (i.e., harbor porpoises) during use of the Applied
Acoustics AA251 Boomer (see Table 1 for source characteristics).
Vineyard Northeast did not request authorization of take by Level A
harassment and no take by Level A harassment is proposed for
authorization by NMFS.
Ensonified Area
NMFS has developed a user-friendly methodology for estimating the
extent of the Level B harassment isopleths associated with relevant HRG
survey equipment (NMFS, 2020). This methodology incorporates frequency
and directionality to refine estimated ensonified zones. For acoustic
sources that operate with different beamwidths, the maximum beamwidth
was used, and the lowest frequency of the source was used when
calculating the frequency-dependent absorption coefficient (Table 1).
NMFS considers the data provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)
to represent the best available information on source levels associated
with HRG survey equipment and, therefore, recommends that source levels
provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be incorporated in the
method described above to estimate distances to harassment isopleths.
In cases when the source level for a specific type of HRG equipment is
not provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS recommends that
either the source levels provided by the manufacturer be used, or, in
instances where source levels provided by the manufacturer are
unavailable or unreliable, a proxy from Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)
be used instead. Table 1 shows the HRG equipment types that may be used
during the proposed surveys and the source parameters associated with
each type of equipment. Appendix A of Vineyard Northeast's IHA
application provides detailed information on the acoustic source
parameters used to calculate distances to regulatory thresholds.
Results of modeling using the methodology described above indicated
that, of the HRG survey equipment planned for use by Vineyard Northeast
that has the potential to result in Level B harassment of marine
mammals, the Applied Acoustics AA251 Boomer would produce the largest
distance to the Level B harassment isopleth (178 m). Estimated
distances to the Level B harassment isopleth for all source types
evaluated here, including the boomer, are provided in Table 4. Although
Vineyard Northeast does not expect to use the AA251 Boomer source on
all planned survey days, it proposes to assume, for purposes of
analysis, that the boomer sources would be used on all survey days and
across all hours within a given survey day. This is a conservative
approach, as the actual sources used on individual survey days, or
during a portion of a survey day, may produce smaller distances to the
Level B harassment isopleth.
Table 4--Distances to Level B Harassment Isopleth
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance to
Level B
Equipment harassment
isopleth (m)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edge Tech Chirp 216..................................... 4.3
GeoMarine Geo Spark 2000 (400 tip)...................... 141
Applied Acoustics AA 251 Boomer......................... 178
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 30882]]
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section, we provide the information about presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations.
Habitat-based density models produced by the Duke University Marine
Geospatial Ecology Laboratory (Roberts et al., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2021)
represent the best available information regarding marine mammal
densities in the Survey Area. The density data presented by Roberts et
al. (2016, 2017, 2018, 2021) incorporates aerial and shipboard line-
transect survey data from NMFS and other organizations and incorporates
data from 8 physiographic and 16 dynamic oceanographic and biological
covariates, and controls for the influence of sea state, group size,
availability bias, and perception bias on the probability of making a
sighting. These density models were originally developed for all
cetacean taxa in the U.S. Atlantic (Roberts et al., 2016). In
subsequent years, certain models have been updated based on additional
data as well as certain methodological improvements. More information
is available online at seamap.env.duke .edu/models/Duke-EC-GOM-2015/.
Density estimates for all species within the Survey Area were
derived from habitat-based density modeling results reported by Roberts
et al. (2016; 2017; 2018; 2021). Those data provide abundance estimates
for species or species guild within 10 km x 10 km grid cells (100
km\2\) or, in the case of North Atlantic right whale densities, within
5 km x 5 km grid cells, on a monthly or annual basis, depending on the
species. Using a GIS (ESRI 2017), the proposed Survey Area and the
North Atlantic right whale Cape Cod Bay SMA polygon shown in Figure 1
were used to select grid cells from the Roberts et al. (2016; 2017;
2018; 2021) data that contain the most recent monthly or annual
estimates for each species for the months of May through December. For
the months of January through April, only the proposed Survey Area
polygon was used to select density grid cells since it excludes waters
within Cape Cod Bay, where no surveys will occur while the Cape Cod Bay
SMA is active from January 1 through May 15. The average monthly
abundance for each species was calculated as the mean value of all grid
cells within the Survey Area and then converted to density
(individuals/1 km\2\) by dividing by 100 km\2\. Finally, an average
annual density was calculated by taking the mean across all 12 months
for each species. See Table 8 in Vineyard Northeast's IHA application
for all density information. When determining requested take numbers,
Vineyard Northeast also considered average group sizes based on
Protected Species Observer (PSO) sighting reports from previous surveys
in the region.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate. In order to estimate
the number of marine mammals predicted to be exposed to sound levels
that would result in harassment, radial distances to predicted
isopleths corresponding to harassment thresholds are calculated, as
described above. The maximum distance (i.e., 178 m distance associated
with boomers) to the Level B harassment criterion and the estimated
trackline distance traveled per day by a given survey vessel (i.e., 80
km) are then used to calculate the daily ensonified area, or zone of
influence (ZOI) around the survey vessel.
The ZOI is a representation of the maximum extent of the ensonified
area around a HRG sound source over a 24-hr period. The ZOI for each
piece of equipment operating at or below 180 kHz was calculated per the
following formula:
ZOI = (Distance/day x 2r) + [pi]r\2\
Where r is the linear distance from the source to the harassment
isopleth.
The largest daily ZOI (28.6 km\2\), associated with the proposed
use of boomers, was applied to all planned survey days.
Potential Level B density-based harassment exposures are estimated
by multiplying the average annual density of each species within the
Survey Area by the daily ZOI. That product is then multiplied by the
number of planned survey days (869), and the product is rounded to the
nearest whole number. These results are shown in Table 5.
For other less common species, the predicted densities from Roberts
et al. (2016; 2017; 2018; 2021) are very low and the resulting density-
based estimate is less than a single animal or a typical group size for
the species. In such cases, the density-based exposure estimate is
increased to the mean group size for the species to account for a
chance encounter during an activity. Mean group sizes for each species
were calculated from recent aerial and/or vessel-based surveys (Kraus
et al., 2016; Palka et al. 2017) as shown in Table 5 (below) and Table
10 of the IHA application.
The larger of the two estimates from the approaches described
above, density-based exposure estimates or mean group size, was
selected as the amount of requested take as shown in Table 5.
Additionally, based on observational data collected during prior HRG
surveys in this area, the density of common dolphins predicted by the
Roberts et al. (2018) model does not appear to adequately reflect the
number of common dolphins that may be encountered during the planned
surveys. Data collected by PSOs on survey vessels operating in 2020-
2021 showed that an average of approximately 16 common dolphins may be
observed within 200 m of a vessel (the approximate Level B harassment
isopleth distance) per survey day (Vineyard-Wind 2021). Multiplying the
anticipated 869 survey days by 16 common dolphins per day results in an
estimated take of 13,904 common dolphins, so this has been used as the
requested take of common dolphins shown in Table 5.
The estimated monthly density of seals provided in Roberts et al.
(2018) includes all seal species present in the region as a single
guild. To split the resulting ``seal'' density-based exposure estimate
by species, Vineyard Northeast multiplied the estimate by the
proportion of the combined abundance attributable to each species.
Specifically, Vineyard Northeast summed the SAR Nbest
abundance estimates (Hayes et al. 2021) for the two species (gray seal
= 27,300, harbor seal = 61,336; total = 88,636) and divided the total
by the estimate for each species to get the proportion of the total for
each species (gray seal = 0.308; harbor seal = 0.692). The total
estimated exposure from the ``seal'' density provide by Roberts et al.
(2018) was then multiplied by these proportions to get the species-
specific density-based exposure estimates.
Given that most of the surveying will occur offshore (i.e., water
depths >30 m), bottlenose dolphins encountered in the Survey Area would
likely belong to the Western North Atlantic Offshore stock; therefore,
all takes are being requested from this stock. However, it is possible
that a few bottlenose dolphins encountered during nearshore surveys off
the coast of New Jersey could be from the North Atlantic Northern
Migratory Coastal stock. Similarly, the distributions of short- and
long-finned pilot whales based on sighting data from the Ocean
Biodiversity Information System database (OBIS 2021) indicate that
pilot whale sightings in the Survey Area would most likely be long-
finned pilot whales, so all requested pilot whale takes are for long-
finned pilot whales.
[[Page 30883]]
Species considered to be rare or not expected to occur in the
Survey Area were not included in Vineyard Northeast's previous exposure
estimates because the densities would be too low to provide meaningful
results. Nonetheless, species considered to be rare are occasionally
encountered. For example, white-beaked dolphins were observed in both
2019 and 2020 during marine site characterization surveys in the Survey
Area (Vineyard Wind 2019, 2020), with the sighting of white-beaked
dolphins in 2019 consisting of 30 animals. Other rare species
encountered in the Survey Area during previous surveys include the
false killer whale in 2019 (5 individuals) and 2021 (1 individual)
(Vineyard Wind 2019, 2021), and orca (killer whale) in 2022 (2
individuals; data not yet submitted). Vineyard Northeast is requesting
take of each of these three species, based on the largest number of
individuals observed within one year (Table 5).
Finally, recent deployments of passive acoustic devices in the New
York Bight yielded detections of blue whale vocalizations approximately
20 nautical miles (nm) (37 km) southeast of the entrance to New York
Harbor during the months of January, February, and March (Muirhead et
al. 2018); blue whale vocalizations have also been recorded off the
coast of Rhode Island during acoustic surveys (Kraus et al. 2016). More
recently, during three years of monthly aerial surveys in the New York
Bight (2017-2020), Zoidis et al. (2021) reported 3 sightings of blue
whales, totaling 5 individuals. Although sightings of blue whales in
the Survey Area are rare, in light of these recent observations of blue
whales, Vineyard Northeast is requesting take of one blue whale based
on the average group size (Palka et al., 2017) (Table 5).
Table 5--Summary of Take Numbers Proposed for Authorization
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual
average Density- based Mean group Takes by Level Proposed takes
Species density exposure size \1\ B harassment Abundance as percent of
(km\2\) estimate requested stock (%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue whale \2\.......................................... 0.00000 0.2 1.0 1 402 0.2
Fin whale............................................... 0.00149 54.0 1.8 55 6,802 0.8
Humpback whale.......................................... 0.00084 32.5 2.0 33 1,396 2.4
Minke whale............................................. 0.00062 29.0 1.2 30 21,968 0.1
North Atlantic right whale.............................. 0.00164 27.7 2.4 28 368 7.6
Sei whale............................................... 0.00005 3.4 1.6 4 6,292 0.1
Sperm whale............................................. 0.00006 8.4 1.5 9 4,349 0.2
Orca (killer whale) \2\................................. .............. .............. .............. 2 Unk 0.0
False killer whale \2\.................................. .............. .............. .............. 5 1,791 0.3
Atlantic spotted dolphin................................ 0.0008 13.6 29.0 29 39,921 0.1
Atlantic white-sided dolphin............................ 0.02226 791.1 27.9 792 92,233 0.9
Bottlenose dolphin (Western North Atlantic offshore 0.0403 507.1 7.8 508 62,851 0.8
stock).................................................
Bottlenose dolphin (Western North Atlantic northern .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
migratory coastal stock)...............................
Common dolphin.......................................... 0.0544 816.4 34.9 24,480 172,974 0.1
Long-finned pilot whale................................. 0.00459 285.1 8.4 286 39,215 0.7
White-beaked dolphin \2\................................ .............. .............. .............. 30 536,016 0.0
Risso's dolphin......................................... 0.00012 70.5 5.4 71 35,493 0.2
Harbor porpoise......................................... 0.02858 1431.3 2.7 1,432 95,543 0.1
Gray seal............................................... 0.09784 294.2 0.4 295 27,131 1.0
Harbor seal............................................. 661.1 1.0 662 75,834 0.9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Mean group size based on Kraus et al., 2016 (fin, humpback, minke, North Atlantic right, sei, and pilot whales; Atlantic white-sided, bottlenose,
and common dolphins; harbor porpoise) or Palka et al., 2017 (blue and sperm whales; Atlantic spotted and Risso's dolphin; harbor and gray seals).
\2\ Rare (or unlikely to occur) species.
The take numbers shown in Table 5 are those requested by Vineyard
Northeast. NMFS concurs with the requested take numbers and proposes to
authorize them.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to the
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting the
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully consider two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat.
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned), and;
(2) The practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
[[Page 30884]]
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
NMFS proposes the following mitigation measures be implemented
during Vineyard Northeast's proposed marine site characterization
surveys. Pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, Vineyard Northeast would
also be required to adhere to relevant Project Design Criteria (PDC) of
the NMFS' Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO)
programmatic consultation (specifically PDCs 4, 5, and 7) regarding
geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/consultations/section-7-take-reporting-programmatics-greater-atlantic#offshore-wind-site-assessment-and-site-characterization-activities-programmatic-consultation).
Marine Mammal Shutdown Zones and Level B Harassment Zone
Marine mammal shutdown zones (SZs) would be established around the
HRG survey equipment and monitored by PSOs:
500-m SZ for North Atlantic right whales;
100-m SZ for all other marine mammals.
If a marine mammal is detected approaching or entering the SZs
during the HRG survey, the vessel operator would adhere to the shutdown
procedures described below to minimize noise impacts on the animals.
These stated requirements will be included in the site-specific
training provided to the survey team.
Pre-Start Clearance
Marine mammal clearance zones (CZs) would be established around the
HRG survey equipment and monitored by PSOs:
500-m CZ for all ESA-listed marine mammals; and
100-m CZ for all other marine mammals.
Vineyard Northeast would implement a 30-minute pre-start clearance
period prior to initiation of ramp-up of specified HRG equipment.
During this period, CZs would be monitored by PSOs, using the
appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up may not be initiated if any
marine mammal(s) is within its respective CZ. If a marine mammal is
observed within its CZ during the pre-start clearance period, ramp-up
may not begin until the animal(s) has been observed exiting its
respective CZ or until an additional time has elapsed with no further
sighting (i.e., 15 minutes for small odontocetes and seals, and 30
minutes for all other species).
Ramp-Up of Survey Equipment
When technically feasible, a ramp-up procedure would be used for
HRG survey equipment capable of adjustment of energy levels at the
start or restart of survey activities. The ramp-up procedure would be
used at the beginning of HRG survey activities to provide additional
protection to marine mammals in or near the Survey Area by allowing
them to vacate the area prior to the commencement of survey equipment
operation at full power. A ramp-up would begin with the powering up of
the smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its lowest practical power
output appropriate for the survey. When technically feasible, the power
would then be gradually turned up and other acoustic sources would be
added.
Ramp-up activities will be delayed if a marine mammal(s) enters its
respective CZ. Ramp-up will continue if the animal has been observed
exiting its respective CZ or until an additional period has elapsed
with no additional sightings (i.e., 15 minutes for small odontocetes
and seals, and 30 minutes for all other species).
Activation of survey equipment through ramp-up procedures may not
occur when visual observation of the pre-start clearance/shutdown zone
is not expected to be effective using the appropriate visual technology
(i.e., during inclement conditions such as heavy rain or fog).
Shutdown Procedures
An immediate shutdown of the specified HRG survey equipment would
be required if a marine mammal is sighted entering or within its
respective SZ. The vessel operator must comply immediately with any
call for shutdown by the PSO. Any disagreement between the PSO and
vessel operator should be discussed only after shutdown has occurred.
Subsequent restart of the survey equipment can be initiated if the
animal has been observed exiting its respective SZ or until an
additional time has elapsed (i.e., 15 minutes for harbor porpoise, 30
minutes for all other species).
If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or a
species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized
number of takes have been met, approaches or is observed within the
applicable Level B harassment zone (Table 4), shutdown would occur.
If the acoustic source is shut down for reasons other than
mitigation (e.g., mechanical difficulty) for less than 30 minutes, it
may be activated again without ramp-up if PSOs have maintained constant
observation and no detections of any marine mammal have occurred within
the respective SZs. If the acoustic source is shut down for a period
longer than 30 minutes, then pre-start clearance and ramp-up procedures
will be initiated as described in the previous section.
The shutdown requirement would be waived for pinnipeds and for
small delphinids of the following genera: Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus,
Stenella, and Tursiops. Specifically, if a delphinid from the specified
genera or a pinniped is visually detected approaching the vessel (i.e.,
to bow ride) or towed equipment, shutdown is not required. Furthermore,
if there is uncertainty regarding identification of a marine mammal
species (i.e., whether the observed marine mammal(s) belongs to one of
the delphinid genera for which shutdown is waived), PSOs must use best
professional judgement in making the decision to call for a shutdown.
Additionally, shutdown is required if a delphinid or pinniped detected
in the shutdown zone and belongs to a genus other than those specified.
Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and ramp-up procedures would not be
required during HRG survey operations using only non-impulsive sources
(e.g., echosounders), other than non-parametric sub-bottom profilers
(e.g., CHIRP SBPs).
Vessel Strike Avoidance
Vineyard Northeast must ensure that vessel operators and crew
maintain a vigilant watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down or
stop their vessels to avoid striking these species. Survey vessel crew
members responsible for navigation duties will receive site-specific
training on marine mammals sighting/reporting and vessel strike
avoidance measures. Vessel strike avoidance measures include the
following, except under circumstances when complying with these
requirements would put the safety of the vessel or crew at risk:
Vessel operators and crews must maintain a vigilant watch
for all protected species and slow down, stop their vessel(s), or alter
course, as appropriate and regardless of vessel size, to avoid striking
any protected species. A visual observer aboard the vessel must monitor
a vessel strike avoidance zone based on the appropriate separation
distance around the vessel (distances stated below).
[[Page 30885]]
Visual observers monitoring the vessel strike avoidance zone may be
third-party observers (i.e., PSOs) or crew members, but crew members
responsible for these duties must be provided sufficient training to
(1) distinguish protected species from other phenomena and (2) broadly
to identify a marine mammal as a North Atlantic right whale, other
whale (defined in this context as sperm whales or baleen whales other
than North Atlantic right whales), or other marine mammal.
Members of the monitoring team will consult NMFS North
Atlantic right whale reporting system and Whale Alert at the start of
every PSO shift, for situational awareness regarding the presence of
North Atlantic right whales throughout the Survey Area, and for the
establishment of Slow Zones (including visual-detection-triggered
dynamic management areas (DMAs) and acoustically-triggered slow zones)
within or near the Survey Area.
All survey vessels, regardless of size, must observe a 10-
knot speed restriction in specific areas designated by NMFS for the
protection of North Atlantic right whales from vessel strikes,
including SMAs and DMAs when in effect;
All vessels greater than or equal to 19.8 m in overall
length operating from November 1 through April 30 will operate at
speeds of 10 knots or less at all times;
All vessels must reduce their speed to 10 knots or less
when mother/calf pairs, pods, or large assemblages of cetaceans are
observed near a vessel;
All vessels must maintain a minimum separation distance of
500 m from North Atlantic right whales and other ESA-listed species. If
an ESA-listed species is sighted within the relevant separation
distance, the vessel must steer a course away at 10 knots or less until
the 500-m separation distance has been established. If a whale is
observed but cannot be confirmed as a species that is not ESA-listed,
the vessel operator must assume that it is an ESA-listed species and
take appropriate action.
All vessels must, to the maximum extent practicable,
attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 100 m from all
non-ESA listed whales,
All vessels must, to the maximum extent practicable,
attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 50 m from all
other marine mammals, with an understanding that at times this may not
be possible (e.g., for animals that approach the vessel).
When marine mammals are sighted while a vessel is
underway, the vessel must take action as necessary to avoid violating
the relevant separation distance (e.g., attempt to remain parallel to
the animal's course, avoid excessive speed or abrupt changes in
direction until the animal has left the area). If marine mammals are
sighted within the relevant separation distance, the vessel must reduce
speed and shift the engine to neutral, not engaging the engines until
animals are clear of the area. This does not apply to any vessel towing
gear or any vessel that is navigationally constrained.
Seasonal Restrictions
Vineyard Northeast proposes to refrain from conducting survey
activities using HRG equipment operating at or below 180 kHz from
January 1 through May 15 within the North Atlantic right whale SMA in
Cape Cod Bay.
Crew Training
Project-specific training will be conducted for all vessel crew
prior to the start of a survey and during any changes in crew such that
all survey personnel are fully aware and understand the mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements. Prior to implementation with
vessel crews, the training program will be provided to NMFS for review
and approval. Confirmation of the training and understanding of the
requirements will be documented on a training course log sheet. Signing
the log sheet will certify that the crew member understands and will
comply with the necessary requirements throughout the survey
activities.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical to both
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density).
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks.
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat).
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
Visual monitoring will be performed by qualified, NMFS-approved
PSOs, the resumes of whom will be provided to NMFS for review and
approval prior to the start of survey activities. Vineyard Northeast
would employ independent, dedicated, trained PSOs, meaning that the
PSOs must (1) be employed by a third-party observer provider, (2) have
no tasks other than to conduct observational effort, collect data, and
communicate with and instruct relevant vessel crew with regard to the
presence of marine mammals and mitigation requirements (including brief
alerts regarding maritime hazards), and (3) have successfully completed
an approved PSO training course appropriate for their designated task.
On a case-by-case basis, non-independent observers may be approved by
NMFS for limited, specific duties in support of
[[Page 30886]]
approved, independent PSOs on smaller vessels with limited crew
capacity operating in nearshore waters. Section 5 of the draft IHA
contains further details regarding PSO approval.
The PSOs will be responsible for monitoring the waters surrounding
each survey vessel to the farthest extent permitted by sighting
conditions, including shutdown zones, during all HRG survey operations.
PSOs will visually monitor and identify marine mammals, including those
approaching or entering the established shutdown zones during survey
activities. It will be the responsibility of the Lead PSO on duty to
communicate the presence of marine mammals to the vessel operator as
well as to communicate the action(s) that are necessary to ensure
mitigation and monitoring requirements are implemented as appropriate.
During all HRG survey operations (e.g., any day on which use of a
specified HRG source is planned to occur), a minimum of one PSO must be
on duty during daylight operations on each survey vessel, conducting
visual observations at all times on all active survey vessels during
daylight hours (i.e., from 30 minutes prior to sunrise through 30
minutes following sunset). Two PSOs will be on watch during nighttime
operations. The PSO(s) would ensure 360[deg] visual coverage around the
vessel from the most appropriate observation posts and would conduct
visual observations using binoculars and/or night vision goggles and
the naked eye while free from distractions and in a consistent,
systematic, and diligent manner. PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of
4 consecutive hours followed by a break of at least 2 hours between
watches and may conduct a maximum of 12 hours of observation per 24-hr
period. In cases where multiple vessels are surveying concurrently, any
observations of marine mammals would be communicated to PSOs on all
nearby survey vessels.
PSOs must be equipped with binoculars and have the ability to
estimate distance and bearing to detect marine mammals, particularly in
proximity to shutdown zones. Reticulated binoculars must also be
available to PSOs for use as appropriate based on conditions and
visibility to support the sighting and monitoring of marine mammals.
During nighttime operations, night-vision goggles with thermal clip-ons
and infrared technology would be used. Position data would be recorded
using hand-held or vessel GPS units for each sighting.
During good conditions (e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort Sea State
(BSS) 3 or less), to the maximum extent practicable, PSOs would also
conduct observations when the acoustic source is not operating for
comparison of sighting rates and behavior with and without use of the
active acoustic sources. Any observations of marine mammals by crew
members aboard any vessel associated with the survey would be relayed
to the PSO team. Data on all PSO observations would be recorded based
on standard PSO collection requirements. This would include dates,
times, and locations of survey operations; dates and times of
observations, location and weather; details of marine mammal sightings
(e.g., species, numbers, behavior); and details of any observed marine
mammal behavior that occurs (e.g., noted behavioral disturbances).
Proposed Reporting Measures
Within 90 days after completion of survey activities or expiration
of this IHA, whichever comes sooner, a final technical report will be
provided to NMFS that fully documents the methods and monitoring
protocols, summarizes the data recorded during monitoring, summarizes
the number of marine mammals observed during survey activities (by
species, when known), summarizes the mitigation actions taken during
surveys (including what type of mitigation and the species and number
of animals that prompted the mitigation action, when known), and
provides an interpretation of the results and effectiveness of all
mitigation and monitoring. A final report must be submitted within 30
days following resolution of any comments on the draft report. All
draft and final marine mammal and acoustic monitoring reports must be
submitted to [email protected] and [email protected].
The report must contain at minimum, the following:
PSO names and affiliations;
Dates of departures and returns to port with port name;
Dates and times (Greenwich Mean Time) of survey effort and
times corresponding with PSO effort;
Vessel location (latitude/longitude) when survey effort
begins and ends; vessel location at beginning and end of visual PSO
duty shifts;
Vessel heading and speed at beginning and end of visual
PSO duty shifts and upon any line change;
Environmental conditions while on visual survey (at
beginning and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change
significantly), including wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea state,
Beaufort wind force, swell height, weather conditions, cloud cover, sun
glare, and overall visibility to the horizon;
Factors that may be contributing to impaired observations
during each PSO shift change or as needed as environmental conditions
change (e.g., vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); and
Survey activity information, such as type of survey
equipment in operation, acoustic source power output while in
operation, and any other notes of significance (i.e., pre-start
clearance survey, ramp-up, shutdown, end of operations, etc.).
If a marine mammal is sighted, the following information should be
recorded:
Watch status (sighting made by PSO on/off effort,
opportunistic, crew, alternate vessel/platform);
PSO who sighted the animal;
Time of sighting;
Vessel location at time of sighting;
Water depth;
Direction of vessel's travel (compass direction);
Direction of animal's travel relative to the vessel;
Pace of the animal;
Estimated distance to the animal and its heading relative
to vessel at initial sighting;
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;
Estimated number of animals (high/low/best);
Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, yearlings,
juveniles, calves, group composition, etc.);
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);
Detailed behavior observations (e.g., number of blows,
number of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, traveling;
as explicit and detailed as possible; note any observed changes in
behavior);
Animal's closest point of approach and/or closest distance
from the center point of the acoustic source;
Platform activity at time of sighting (e.g., deploying,
recovering, testing, data acquisition, other); and
Description of any actions implemented in response to the
sighting (e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up, speed or course alteration,
etc.) and time and location of the action.
If a North Atlantic right whale is observed at any time by PSOs or
personnel on any project vessels, during
[[Page 30887]]
surveys or during vessel transit, Vineyard Northeast would report
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.
In the event that Vineyard Northeast personnel discover an injured
or dead marine mammal, Vineyard Northeast would report the incident to
the NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR) and the NMFS New England/
Mid-Atlantic Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. The report
would include the following information:
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, Vineyard
Northeast would report the incident to the NMFS OPR and the NMFS New
England/Mid-Atlantic Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. The
report would include the following information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the
incident;
Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
Vessel's course/heading and what operations were being
conducted (if applicable);
Status of all sound sources in use;
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;
Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility) immediately preceding the
strike;
Estimated size and length of animal that was struck;
Description of the behavior of the marine mammal
immediately preceding and following the strike;
If available, description of the presence and behavior of
any other marine mammals immediately preceding the strike;
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
To the extent practicable, photographs or video footage of
the animal(s).
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, our analysis applies to all the species listed
in Table 5, given that NMFS expects the anticipated effects of the
proposed survey to be similar in nature. Where there are meaningful
differences between species or stocks--as is the case of the 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 Level B harassment takes would be 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, even absent mitigation, given the
nature of the operations and the estimated size of the Level A
harassment zones.
In addition to being temporary, the maximum behavioral harassment
zone radius is 178 m (associated with the Applied Acoustics AA251
Boomer). When estimating Level B harassment take numbers, Vineyard
Northeast made the conservative assumption that this maximum zone size
applied to all 869 survey days when, in reality, the Applied Acoustics
AA251 Boomer would not be used throughout the entire 24 hours of every
proposed survey day. The other acoustic sources with the potential to
result in take of marine mammals produced Level B harassment zones with
even smaller radii (141 m, Edge Tech CHIRP 216; 4 m, GeoMarine Geo
Spark 2000). Therefore, the ensonified area surrounding each acoustic
source is relatively small compared to the overall distribution of the
animals in the area and their use of the habitat.
The planned Survey Area encompasses, or is in close proximity to,
feeding BIAs for North Atlantic right whales (February-April/April-
June), humpback whales (March-December), fin whales (March-October),
sei whales (May-November), and minke whales (March-November), as well
as the migratory BIA for North Atlantic right whales (November 1-April
30) (LaBrecque et al., 2015). Most of these feeding BIAs are extensive
and sufficiently large (e.g., 705 km\2\ and 3,149 km\2\ for North
Atlantic right whales; 47,701 km\2\ for humpback whales; 2,933 km\2\
for fin whales; 56,609 km\2\ for sei whales), and the acoustic
footprint of the planned survey is sufficiently small that feeding
opportunities for these species would not be reduced appreciably. In
addition, feeding behavior is not likely to be significantly impacted
as prey species are mobile and are broadly distributed
[[Page 30888]]
throughout the Survey Area; therefore, marine mammals that may be
temporarily displaced during survey activities are expected to be able
to resume foraging once they have moved away from areas with disturbing
levels of underwater noise. Because of the temporary nature of the
disturbance and the availability of similar habitat and resources in
the surrounding area, the impacts to marine mammals and the food
sources that they utilize are not expected to cause significant or
long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or their
populations. There are no rookeries, mating or calving grounds known to
be biologically important to marine mammals within the proposed Survey
Area.
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 currently an active UME. Overall, preliminary
findings support human interactions, specifically vessel strikes and
entanglements, as the cause of death for the majority of North Atlantic
right whales.
The proposed Survey Area partially overlaps with the migratory
corridor BIA and migratory route SMA for North Atlantic right whales,
which extends from Massachusetts to Florida, from the coast to beyond
the shelf break. That the spatial acoustic footprint of the proposed
survey is very small relative to the spatial extent of the available
migratory habitat supports the expectation that North Atlantic right
whale migration will not be impacted by the proposed survey. Required
vessel strike avoidance measures will also decrease risk of ship strike
during migration. Additionally, Vineyard Northeast would be required to
adhere to a 10-knot speed restriction in the migratory corridor SMA,
and in any DMA(s), should NMFS establish one (or more) in the Survey
Area.
The most northern and northeastern portions of the proposed Survey
Area overlap with Cape Cod Bay (January 1-May 15), Off Race Point
(March 1-April 30), and Great South Channel (April 1-July 31) SMAs.
Vineyard Northeast's proposed seasonal restriction on survey activities
in Cape Cod Bay (which is also part of a feeding BIA (February 1-April
30) and designated critical foraging habitat for North Atlantic right
whales) when the SMA is active minimizes potential impacts on the
species' foraging when densities of North Atlantic right whales and
their prey are expected to be highest in that section of the Survey
Area. The seasonal restriction also minimizes the likelihood that
survey activities would occur during the Off Race Point SMA, which
overlaps in time with and is in close proximity to the Cape Cod Bay
SMA. Finally, although the eastern edge of Survey Area partially
overlaps with the western-most portion of the Great South Channel
feeding BIA, SMA, and critical foraging habit, the relatively small
size of the ensonified area relative to the foraging habitat available
to North Atlantic right whales, it is unlikely that foraging
opportunities and behavior would be adversely affected by survey
operations.
The slow survey speed (approximately 4 knots) and required vessel
strike avoidance measures will decrease risk of ship strike such that
no ship strike is expected to occur during Vineyard Northeast's
proposed activities. The 500-m shutdown zone for North Atlantic right
whales is conservative (considering the distance to the Level B
harassment isopleth for the most impactful acoustic source (i.e.,
boomer) is estimated to be 178 m) and thereby minimizes the potential
for behavioral harassment of this species.
Again, Level A harassment is not expected due to the small PTS
zones associated with HRG equipment types proposed for use. The
proposed behavioral harassment takes of North Atlantic right whale are
not expected to exacerbate or compound upon the ongoing UME. The
limited North Atlantic right whale behavioral 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. As stated previously, it is unlikely that North
Atlantic right whale prey availability would be adversely affected
given the relatively small size of the ensonified area during Vineyard
Northeast's proposed survey activities. Accordingly, NMFS does not
anticipate potential take of North Atlantic right whales that would
result from Vineyard Northeast'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 above, there are several active UMEs occurring in the
vicinity of Vineyard Northeast'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.
Elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal mortalities were
first observed in July 2018 and have occurred across Maine, New
Hampshire, and Massachusetts. Based on tests conducted so far, the main
pathogen found in the seals is phocine distemper virus, although
additional testing to identify other factors that may be involved in
this UME are underway. The UME does not yet provide cause for concern
regarding population-level impacts to any of these stocks. For harbor
seals, the population abundance is over 61,000 and annual M/SI (339) is
well below PBR (1,729) (Hayes et al., 2021). The population abundance
for gray seals in the United States is over 27,000, with an estimated
abundance, including seals in Canada, of approximately 450,000. In
addition, the abundance of gray seals is likely increasing in the U.S.
Atlantic as well as in Canada (Hayes et al., 2021).
The required mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number
and/or severity of proposed takes for all species listed in Table 5,
including those with active UMEs, to the level of least practicable
adverse impact. In particular, ramp-up procedures would provide animals
in the vicinity of the survey vessel the opportunity to move away from
the sound source 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. Implementation of the required mitigation would further reduce
this
[[Page 30889]]
potential. Therefore, NMFS is not proposing any Level A harassment for
authorization.
NMFS expects that takes would be in the form of short-term
behavioral harassment by way of temporary vacating of the area, or
decreased foraging (if such activity was occurring)--reactions that (at
the scale and intensity anticipated here) are considered to be of low
severity, with no lasting biological consequences. Since both the
sources and marine mammals are mobile, animals would only be exposed
briefly to a small ensonified area that might result in take.
Additionally, required mitigation measures would further reduce
exposure to sound that could result in more severe behavioral
harassment.
Biologically Important Areas for Other Species
As previously discussed, impacts from the proposed project are
expected to be localized to the specific area of activity and only
during periods of time where Vineyard Northeast's acoustic sources are
active. While areas of biological importance to foraging fin whales,
sei whales, minke whales, and humpback whales exist within the proposed
Survey Area, NMFS does not expect this proposed action to affect these
areas or any species' ability to utilize prey resources within the
BIAs, given the nature of the survey activity, and the combination of
the mitigation and monitoring measures being required of Vineyard
Northeast.
Several major haul-out sites exist for harbor seals within the
Survey Area along the New Jersey coast (e.g., Great Bay, Sandy Hook,
and Barnegat Inlet), New York Coast (e.g., Montauk Island), and Rhode
Island coast (e.g., Narragansett Bay), and for gray and harbor seals
along the Massachusetts coast (e.g., Cape Cod, Monomoy Island)
(DiGiovanni and Sabrosky 2010). However, as hauled-out seals would be
out of the water, no in-water effects are expected.
Preliminary Determinations
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from
this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No mortality or serious injury is anticipated or proposed
to be authorized;
No Level A harassment (PTS) is anticipated, even in the
absence of mitigation measures, or proposed for authorization;
Any foraging interruptions are expected to be short term
and unlikely to be cause significant impacts;
Impacts on marine mammal habitat and species that serve as
prey for marine mammals are expected to be minimal and the alternate
areas of similar habitat value for marine mammals are readily
available;
Take is anticipated to be by Level B behavioral harassment
only, consisting of brief startling reactions and/or temporary
avoidance of the Survey Area;
Survey activities would occur in such a comparatively
small portion of the BIA for North Atlantic right whale migration,
including a small area of designated critical habitat, that any
avoidance of the area due to survey activities would not affect
migration. In addition, the mitigation measure to shut down at 500 m to
minimize potential for Level B behavioral harassment would limit both
the number and severity of take of the species.
Similarly, due to the relatively small footprint of the
survey activities in relation to the size of BIAs for North Atlantic
right, humpback, fin, sei, and minke whale foraging, the survey
activities would not affect foraging behavior of these species; and
Proposed mitigation measures, including visual monitoring
and shutdowns, are expected to minimize the intensity of potential
impacts to marine mammals.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to
small numbers of marine mammals. When the predicted number of
individuals to be taken is less than one third of the species or stock
abundance, the take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally,
other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as
the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.
NMFS proposes to authorize incidental take (by Level B harassment
only) of 19 marine mammal species (with 20 managed stocks). The total
amount of takes proposed for authorization relative to the best
available population abundance is less than 8 percent for all stocks,
less than 3 percent for 19 stocks, and less than 1 percent for 18
stocks (Table 5). Therefore, NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals may be taken relative to the estimated
overall population abundances for those stocks.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size
of the affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR) consults internally whenever
we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species.
NMFS OPR is proposing to authorize the incidental take of four
species of marine mammals which are listed under the ESA, including the
North Atlantic right, blue, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has
determined that this activity falls within the scope of activities
analyzed in NMFS GARFO's programmatic consultation regarding
geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic
Renewable Energy Regions (completed
[[Page 30890]]
June 29, 2021; revised September 2021). NMFS GARFO concurred with this
determination.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to Vineyard Northeast authorizing take, by Level B
harassment incidental to conducting marine site characterization
surveys off the coast from Massachusetts to New Jersey from June 22,
2022, through June 21, 2023, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. A
draft of the proposed IHA can be found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and
any other aspect of this notice of proposed IHA for the proposed site
characterization surveys. We also request at this time comment on the
potential Renewal of this proposed IHA as described in the paragraph
below. Please include with your comments any supporting data or
literature citations to help inform decisions on the request for this
proposed IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-time, one-year
Renewal IHA following notice to the public providing an additional 15
days for public comments when (1) up to another year of identical or
nearly identical, or nearly identical, activities as described in the
Description of Proposed 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:
A request for Renewal is received no later than 60 days
prior to the needed Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing that the
Renewal IHA expiration date cannot extend beyond one year from
expiration of the initial IHA).
The request for Renewal must include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the
requested Renewal IHA are identical to the activities analyzed under
the initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so
minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) that the changes do not affect the
previous analyses, mitigation and monitoring requirements, or take
estimates (with the exception of reducing the type or amount of take).
(2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the
required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the
monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not
previously analyzed or authorized.
Upon review of the request for Renewal, the status of the affected
species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS determines
that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, the
mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and
appropriate, and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid.
Dated: May 17, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-10928 Filed 5-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P