[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 103 (Friday, May 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32123-32141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11485]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XB758]


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to New England Wind, Phase 1 Park City 
Wind Marine Site Characterization Surveys

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request 
for comments on proposed authorization and possible renewal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Park City Wind LLC (PCW) for 
authorization to take marine mammals incidental to marine site 
characterization surveys for Phase 1 of the New England Wind Project 
located in the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Lease Area OCS-
A0534 (Lease Area) in waters offshore of Massachusetts south through 
Long Island, New York. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act 
(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an 
incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to incidentally take marine 
mammals during the specified activities. NMFS is also requesting 
comments on a possible one-time, one-year renewal that could be issued 
under certain circumstances and if all requirements are met, as 
described in Request for Public Comments at the end of this notice. 
NMFS will consider public comments

[[Page 32124]]

prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested 
MMPA authorizations and agency responses will be summarized in the 
final notice of our decision.

DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than June 27, 
2022.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, 
National Marine Fisheries Service, and should be submitted via email to 
[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 
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act without change. All personal identifying 
information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the 
commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential 
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelsey Potlock, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application 
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in 
this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable. In case of 
problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed 
above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain 
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to 
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of 
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a 
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified 
geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations 
are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a 
proposed incidental take authorization may be provided to the public 
for review.
    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or 
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses 
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods 
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying 
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar 
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for 
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as 
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, 
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth. The definitions 
of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the 
relevant sections below.

National Environmental Policy Act

    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, 
NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an IHA) 
with respect to potential impacts on the human environment.
    This action is consistent with categories of activities identified 
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or 
mortality) of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-
6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for 
significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for 
which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would 
preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has 
preliminarily determined that the issuance of the proposed IHA 
qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.
    NMFS will review all comments submitted in response to this notice 
prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the 
IHA request.

Summary of Request

    On December 17, 2021, NMFS received a request from PCW for an IHA 
to take marine mammals incidental to marine site characterization 
surveys for Phase 1 of the New England Wind Project located in the 
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Lease Area OCS-A0534 (Lease 
Area) in waters offshore of Massachusetts south through Long Island, 
New York. Following NMFS' review of the draft application, revised 
versions were submitted on February 14, 2022 and March 25, 2022. The 
March 2022 revised version was deemed adequate and complete March 25, 
2022. PCW's request is for take of 16 species of marine mammals, by 
Level B harassment only. Neither PCW nor NMFS expects serious injury or 
mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is 
appropriate. The proposed IHA would be effective for one year upon 
issuance.

Description of Proposed Activity

Overview

    New England Wind is located in the BOEM Lease Area OCS-A0534 and is 
comprised of Phase 1 PCW and Phase 2 Commonwealth Wind (CW), along with 
associated offshore and onshore cabling, onshore substations, and 
onshore operations and maintenance (O&M) facilities (Figure1). Phase 2 
is not part of this application. As part of its overall marine site 
characterization survey operations, PCW proposes to conduct high-
resolution geophysical (HRG) surveys in the Lease Area.
    The purpose of the marine site characterization surveys are to 
obtain an assessment of seabed (geophysical, geotechnical, and 
geohazard), ecological, and archeological conditions within the 
footprint of a planned offshore wind facility development area. 
Underwater sound resulting from PCW's proposed site characterization 
survey activities, specifically HRG surveys, has the potential to 
result in incidental take of marine mammals in the form of Level B 
harassment.

Dates and Duration

    PCW anticipates that HRG survey activities would occur on 
approximately 636 vessel days, with an assumed daily survey distance of 
80 km per vessel. This schedule is based on assumed 24-hour operations. 
Each day that a vessel surveys approximately 80 km within 24 hours 
would count as a single survey day, e.g., two survey vessels operating 
on the same day would count as two survey days. The use of concurrently 
surveying vessels would facilitate completion of all 636 vessel days 
within one year. PCW proposes to begin survey activities upon receipt 
of an IHA and continue for up to one year (though the actual duration 
will likely be shorter, particularly given the use of multiple 
vessels). The IHA would be effective for one year from the date of 
issuance. Site characterization activities within the Potential Survey 
Area are anticipated to begin May 2022 and will last up to one year 
with a total of 636 active sound source days. The number of active 
sound source days was calculated by dividing the total survey trackline

[[Page 32125]]

(50,880 kilometers (km)) by the approximate survey distance per day (80 
km) anticipated to be achieved. Survey operations are proposed to be 
conducted 24 hours per day to minimize the overall duration of survey 
activities and the associated period of potential impact on marine 
species. While the HRG survey activities are estimated to occur over 
the course of a full year, the actual survey duration will be shorter 
given the use of multiple vessels.

Specific Geographic Region

    HRG survey activities are proposed to occur in both Federal 
offshore waters (including Lease Area OCS-A 0534) and along potential 
OECCs in both Federal and State nearshore waters of Massachusetts, 
Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York. The proposed survey will be 
acquired within the area illustrated in Figure 1. Water depths in the 
lease area range from about 35 to 60 meters (m) (115 to 197 feet (ft)). 
Water depths along the potential OECCs range from 2.5 m to >35 m (8 to 
>115 ft).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27MY22.005

Detailed Description of Specific Activity

    PCW proposes to conduct HRG survey operations, which may include 
single and multibeam depth sounding, seafloor imaging, and shallow and 
medium penetration sub-bottom profiling. The HRG surveys may be 
conducted using any or all of the following equipment types: Side scan 
sonar, multibeam echosounder, magnetometers and gradiometers, 
parametric sub-bottom profiler (SBP), compressed high intensity radar 
pulse (CHIRP) SBP, boomers, or sparkers. Vessels would generally 
conduct survey effort at a transit speed of approximately 4 knots (kn; 
2.1 meters per sec, m/s), which equates to 110 km per 24-hr period. 
However, based on past survey experience (i.e., knowledge of typical 
daily downtime due to weather, system malfunctions, etc.), PCW assumes 
80 km as the average distance surveyed per 24 hours. On this basis (and 
as mentioned previously), a total of 636 survey days are expected.
    To facilitate completion of all 636 survey days across the survey 
area (see Figure 1) within one year, PCW proposes to use multiple 
vessels to acquire the HRG survey data. Up to three HRG vessels are 
currently proposed to operate concurrently within the survey area. HRG 
survey activities will be conducted by vessels that can accomplish the 
survey goals in specific survey areas. Each vessel will maintain both 
the required course and a survey speed required to cover approximately 
80 km (43 nm) per day during line acquisition, with consideration to 
weather delays, equipment maintenance, and crew availability. Vessel 
survey speed is anticipated to be approximately 4 knots (2.1 m/s).
    Acoustic sources planned for use during the proposed HRG survey 
activities include the following (operating frequencies are presented 
in hertz (Hz) and kilohertz (kHz):
    [ssquf] Shallow penetration non-impulsive, non-parametric sub-
bottom profilers (i.e., CHIRP SBPs) are used to map the near-surface 
stratigraphy (top 0 to 5 m (0 to 16 feet (ft))) of sediment below

[[Page 32126]]

seabed). A CHIRP system emits sonar pulses that increase in frequency 
from about 2 to 20 kHz over time. The frequency range can be adjusted 
to meet project variables. Rather than being towed, these sources are 
typically mounted on a pole or the hull of the vessel, reducing the 
likelihood that an animal would be exposed to the signal; and,
    [ssquf] Medium penetration, impulsive sources (i.e., boomers and 
sparker) are used to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy. A boomer is a 
broadband source operating in the 3.5 Hz to 10 kHz frequency range. 
Sparkers create omnidirectional acoustic pulses from 50 Hz to 4 kHz 
that can penetrate several hundred meters into the seafloor. These 
sources are typically towed behind the vessel.
    Operation of the following survey equipment types is not expected 
to present reasonable risk of marine mammal take, and will not be 
discussed further beyond the brief summaries provided below.
     Non-impulsive, parametric SBPs are used for providing high 
density data in sub-bottom profiles that are typically required for 
cable routes, very shallow water, and archaeological surveys. These 
sources generate short, very narrow-beam (1[deg] to 3.5[deg]) signals 
at high frequencies (generally around 85-100 kHz). The narrow beamwidth 
significantly reduces the potential that a marine mammal could be 
exposed to the signal, while the high frequency of operation means that 
the signal is rapidly attenuated in seawater. These sources are 
typically mounted on the hull of the vessel or deployed from a side 
pole rather than towed behind the vessel.
     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 >180kHz 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.
    HRG survey activities will occur in discrete segments corresponding 
to the following general areas:
     Lease Area OCS-A 0534--Inclusive of potential wind turbine 
generator (WTG) locations, electrical service platform (ESP) 
location(s), and inter-array cable corridors; and
     OECC route--One or more potential OECC routes through 
Federal and State waters located within the Potential Survey Area from 
northern Massachusetts to Long Island as shown in Figure 1.
    The maximum survey area has been selected to provide operational 
flexibility and to cover the possibility of multiple landfall locations 
associated with the OECC. Track line spacing for HRG survey activities 
will align with BOEM Guidelines for Providing Archaeological and 
Historic Property Information pursuant to 30 CFR part 585 (March 2017) 
and for Providing Geophysical, Geotechnical, and Geohazard Information 
pursuant to 30 CFR part 585 (July 2015) (BOEM 2015). Surveys are 
planned to support standard geophysical, geotechnical, and geohazard 
investigations as well as potential unexploded ordnance (UXO) and 
benthic habitat studies.

                                                    Table 1--Summary of Representative HRG Equipment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                        In-beam                          Out-of-beam
                                                                                                ----------------------             ---------------------
                                                                  Beam     Pulse                               Peak                               Peak
           Equipment                   System        Frequency   width    duration   Repetition    Source     source    Correction    Source     source
                                                       (kHz)    ([deg])     (ms)     rate (Hz)   level (dB  level (dB      (dB)     level (dB  level (dB
                                                                                                    re 1       re 1                    re 1       re 1
                                                                                                 [mu]Pa m)  [mu]Pa m)               [mu]Pa m)  [mu]Pa m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow subbottom profiler.....  EdgeTech Chirp           2-16       65          2         3.75        178        182         -8.1      169.9      173.9
                                  216.
Deep seismic profiler..........  Applied Acoustics      0.2-15      180        0.8            2        205        212          0.0      205.0      212.0
                                  AA251 Boomer.
                                 GeoMarine Geo          0.05-3      180        3.4            1        203        213          0.0      203.0      213.0
                                  Spark 2000 (400
                                  tip).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Edge Tech Chirp 512i used as proxy source for Edge Tech 216, as Chirp 512i has similar operation settings as Chirp 216. SIG ELC 820 Sparker used
  as proxy for GeoMarine Geo Spark 2000 (400 tip), as SIG ELC 820 has similar operation settings as Geo Spark 2000. See Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)
  and Appendix A of PCW's application for more information.
dB--decibel, RMS--Root mean square, 1 [mu]Pa-1 microPascal.

    Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are 
described in detail later in this document (please see Proposed 
Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring and Reporting).

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information 
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and 
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species. 
Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be 
found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; 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 
(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 the Committee on 
Taxonomy (2021). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of 
animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a 
marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its 
optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS'

[[Page 32127]]

SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or would be authorized here, 
PBR and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources 
are included as gross indicators of the status of the species and other 
threats.
    Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document 
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or 
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. 
NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total 
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that 
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend 
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in 
NMFS' U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico SARs. All values presented in 
Table 2 are the most recent available at the time of publication and 
are available in the Draft 2021 SARs (Hayes et al., 2021), available 
at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports.

                       Table 2--Marine Mammal Species Likely To Occur Near the Project Area That May Be Affected by PCW's Activity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         ESA/MMPA status;    Stock abundance (CV,
             Common name                  Scientific name               Stock             strategic (Y/N)      Nmin, most recent       PBR     Annual M/
                                                                                                \1\          abundance survey) \2\               SI \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenidae:
    North Atlantic right whale \4\..  Eubalaena glacialis....  Western North Atlantic   E/D; Y              368 (0; 364; 2019)....        0.7        7.7
                                                                (WNA).
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
    Humpback whale..................  Megaptera novaeangliae.  Gulf of Maine..........  -/-; Y              1,393 (0.15; 1,375;            22         58
                                                                                                             2016).
    Fin whale.......................  Balaenoptera physalus..  WNA....................  E/D; Y              6,802 (0.24; 5,573;            11       2.35
                                                                                                             2016).
    Sei whale.......................  Balaenoptera borealis..  Nova Scotia............  E/D; Y              6,292 (1.02; 3,098;           6.2        1.2
                                                                                                             2016).
    Minke whale.....................  Balaenoptera             Canadian East Coast....  -/-; N              21,968 (0.31; 17,002;         170       10.6
                                       acutorostrata.                                                        2016).
    Blue whale......................  Balaenoptera musculus..  WNA....................  E/D; Y              Unknown (unknown; 402;        0.8          0
                                                                                                             2019).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Physeteridae:
    Sperm whale.....................  Physeter macrocephalus.  North Atlantic.........  E/D; Y              4,349 (0.28;3,451;            3.9          0
                                                                                                             2016).
Family Delphinidae:
    Long-finned pilot whale.........  Globicephala melas.....  WNA....................  -/-; N              39,215 (0.30; 30,627;         306         29
                                                                                                             2016).
    Short finned pilot whale........  Globicephala             WNA....................  -/-; N              28,924 (0.24; 23,637;         236        136
                                       macrorhynchus.                                                        2016).
    Bottlenose dolphin..............  Tursiops truncatus.....  WNA Offshore...........  -/-; N              62,851 (0.23; 51,914;         519         28
                                                                                                             2016).
                                                               WNA Northern Migratory   -/D;Y               6,639 (0.41, 4,759,            48  12.2-21.5
                                                                Coastal.                                     2016).
    Common dolphin..................  Delphinus delphis......  WNA....................  -/-; N              172,974 (0.21;              1,452        390
                                                                                                             145,216; 2016).
    Atlantic white-sided dolphin....  Lagenorhynchus acutus..  WNA....................  -/-; N              93,233 (0.71; 54,443;         544         27
                                                                                                             2016).
    Atlantic spotted dolphin........  Stenella frontalis.....  WNA....................  -/-; N              39,921 (0.27; 32,032;         320          0
                                                                                                             2016).
    Risso's dolphin.................  Grampus griseus........  WNA....................  -/-; N              35,215 (0.19; 30,051;         303       54.3
                                                                                                             2016).
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
    Harbor porpoise.................  Phocoena phocoena......  Gulf of Maine/Bay of     -/-; N              95,543 (0.31; 74,034;         851        164
                                                                Fundy.                                       2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
    Gray seal \5\...................  Halichoerus grypus.....  WNA....................  -/-; N              27,300 (0.22; 22,785,       1,458      4,453
                                                                                                             2029).
    Harbor seal.....................  Phoca vitulina.........  WNA....................  -/-; N              61,336 (0.08; 57,637,       1,729        339
                                                                                                             2020).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or
  designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or
  which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is
  automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments. CV
  is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial
  fisheries, ship strike).
\4\ The draft 2022 SARs have yet to be released; however, NMFS has updated its species web page to recognize the population estimate for NARWs is now
  below 350 animals (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale).
\5\ NMFS' gray seal stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in
  Canada) is approximately 450,000. The annual M/SI value given is for the total stock.

    As indicated above, all 16 species in Table 2 temporally and 
spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that take is 
reasonably likely to occur. In addition to what is included in Sections 
3 and 4 of the application, the SARs,

[[Page 32128]]

and NMFS' website, further detail informing the baseline for select 
species (i.e., information regarding current Unusual Mortality Events 
(UME) and important habitat areas) is provided below.

North Atlantic Right Whale

    The North Atlantic right whale (NARW) is considered one of the most 
critically endangered populations of large whales in the world and has 
been listed as a Federal endangered species since 1970. The Western 
Atlantic stock is considered depleted under the MMPA (Hayes et al. 
2021). There is a recovery plan (NOAA Fisheries 2017) for the NARW and 
recently there was a five-year review of the species (NOAA Fisheries 
2017). The NARW had a 2.8 percent recovery rate between 1990 and 2011 
(Hayes et al. 2021).
    Elevated NARW mortalities have occurred since June 7, 2017, along 
the U.S. and Canadian coast with the leading category for the cause of 
death for this UME as ``human interaction,'' specifically from 
entanglements or vessel strikes. As of April 11, 2022, a total of 34 
confirmed dead stranded whales (21 in Canada; 13 in the United States) 
have been documented. The cumulative total number of animals in the 
NARW UME has been updated to 50 individuals to include both the 
confirmed mortalities (dead stranded or floaters) (n=34) and seriously 
injured free-swimming whales (n=16) to better reflect the confirmed 
number of whales likely removed from the population during the UME and 
more accurately reflect the population impacts. More information is 
available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-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 the North 
Atlantic right whale feeding Biologically Important Areas (BIAs). One 
feeding BIA is located north of the HRG Survey Area at Cape Cod Bay and 
Massachusetts Bay and occurs from February-April, and another is 
located northeast of the HRG Survey Area in the Great South Channel, 
from April-June. The proposed survey also overlaps with part of the 
migratory corridor BIA for North Atlantic right whales (March-April and 
November-December) that extends from the coast to the continental shelf 
break, and from Massachusetts to Florida (LeBrecque et al., 2015). A 
map showing designated BIAs is available at: 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 the proposed survey area.
    There are two designated critical habitat areas for the NARW, one 
of which overlaps the project area: The Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank 
region is located northeast of the HRG survey area, but parts of it 
overlap the proposed survey area, and the southeast calving grounds 
from North Carolina to Florida (NMFS 2016a) which does not overlap the 
survey area. All vessels greater than 19.8 m (65 ft) in overall length 
must operate at speeds of 10 knots (5.1 meters per second (m/s)) or 
less within these areas during specific time periods.

Humpback Whale

    NMFS recently evaluated the status of the species, and on September 
8, 2016, NMFS divided the species into 14 distinct population segments 
(DPS), removed the species-level listing, and in its place listed four 
DPSs as endangered and one DPS as threatened (81 FR 62260; September 8, 
2016). The remaining nine DPSs were not listed. The West Indies DPS, 
which is not listed under the ESA, is the only DPS of humpback whale 
that is expected to occur in the survey area. Bettridge et al. (2015) 
estimated the size of this population at 12,312 (95 percent CI 8,688-
15,954) whales in 2004-05, which is consistent with previous population 
estimates of approximately 10,000-11,000 whales (Stevick et al., 2003; 
Smith et al., 1999) and the increasing trend for the West Indies DPS 
(Bettridge et al., 2015). Whales occurring in the survey area are 
considered to be from the West Indies DPS, but are not necessarily from 
the Gulf of Maine feeding population managed as a stock by NMFS. Barco 
et al., 2002 estimated that, based on photo-identification, only 39 
percent of individual humpback whales observed along the mid- and south 
Atlantic U.S. coast are from the Gulf of Maine stock. The northern and 
most eastern portions of the proposed survey area partially overlap 
with the humpback whale feeding BIA (March through December), which 
extends throughout the Gulf of Maine, Stellwagen Bank, and Great South 
Channel (LeBrecque et al., 2015).
    Since January 2016, elevated humpback whale mortalities have 
occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida. Partial or 
full necropsy examinations have been conducted on approximately half of 
the 158 known cases (as of April 11, 2022). Of the whales examined, 
about 50 percent had evidence of human interaction, either ship strike 
or entanglement. While a portion of the whales have shown evidence of 
pre-mortem vessel strike, this finding is not consistent across all 
whales examined and more research is needed. NOAA is consulting with 
researchers that are conducting studies on the humpback whale 
populations, and these efforts may provide information on changes in 
whale distribution and habitat use that could provide additional 
insight into how these vessel interactions occurred. More information 
is available at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2022-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.

Minke Whale

    Since January 2017, elevated minke whale mortalities have occurred 
along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, with a 
total of 122 strandings (as of April 11, 2022). This event has been 
declared a UME. Full or partial necropsy examinations were conducted on 
more than 60 percent of the whales. Preliminary findings in several of 
the whales have shown evidence of human interactions or infectious 
disease, but these findings are not consistent across all of the whales 
examined, so more research is needed. More information is available at: 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-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,

[[Page 32129]]

Stellwagen Bank, Cape Anne, and Jeffreys Ledge (LeBrecque et al., 
2015).

Other Biologically Important Areas for Large Whales

    The survey area is flanked by two BIAs for feeding fin whales, the 
area to the northeast of Cape Cod is considered a BIA year-round, while 
the area off the tip of Long Island overlapping with the southwest area 
of the HRG survey area is a BIA from March to October (LaBrecque et al. 
2015). Both of these BIAs are located within the proposed survey area. 
For sei whales, a BIA for feeding occurs both to the north and to the 
east of the HRG survey area from May through November (LaBrecque et al. 
2015). A portion of the BIA is located within the proposed survey area.

Seals

    Since July 2018, elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal 
mortalities have occurred across Maine, New Hampshire and 
Massachusetts. This event was declared a UME. Additionally, stranded 
seals have shown clinical signs as far south as Virginia, although not 
in elevated numbers, therefore the UME investigation now encompasses 
all seal strandings from Maine to Virginia. Ice seals (harp and hooded 
seals) have also been stranding with clinical signs, again not in 
elevated numbers, and those two seal species have also been added to 
the UME investigation. A total of 3,152 reported strandings (of all 
species) had occurred from July 1, 2018, through March 13, 2020. Full 
or partial necropsy examinations have been conducted on some of the 
seals and samples have been collected for testing. Based on tests 
conducted thus far, the main pathogen found in the seals is phocine 
distemper virus. NMFS is performing additional testing to identify any 
other factors that may be involved in this UME. Closure of this UME is 
pending. Information on this UME is available online at: 
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 other data. Note that no direct measurements 
of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes 
(i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described 
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. 
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with 
the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the 
lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower 
bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing 
groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 3.

                  Table 3--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
                              [NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Hearing group                 Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen   7 Hz to 35 kHz.
 whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans           150 Hz to 160 kHz.
 (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked
 whales, bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true    275 Hz to 160 kHz.
 porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
 cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
 cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater)     50 Hz to 86 kHz.
 (true seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater)    60 Hz to 39 kHz.
 (sea lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
  composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
  species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
  hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
  composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
  cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).

    The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et 
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have 
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing 
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range 
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009).
    For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency 
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information. 
Sixteen marine mammal species (14 cetacean and 2 pinniped (both phocid) 
species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the proposed 
survey activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean species 
that may be present, six are classified as low-frequency cetaceans 
(i.e., all mysticete species), seven are classified as mid-frequency 
cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid species and the sperm whale), and one is 
classified as a high-frequency cetacean (i.e., harbor porpoise).

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that 
PCW's specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. 
Detailed descriptions of the potential effects of similar specified 
activities have been provided in other recent Federal Register notices, 
including for survey activities using the same methodology, over a 
similar amount of time, in Atlantic waters. (e.g., 82 FR 20563, May 3, 
2017; 85 FR 36537, June 17, 2020; 85 FR 37848, June 24, 2020; 85 FR 
48179, August 10, 2020, 86 FR 11239, February 24, 2021; 86 FR 28061, 
May 25, 2021). No significant new information is available, and we 
refer the reader to these documents rather than repeating the details 
here. The Estimated Take section includes a quantitative analysis of 
the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by PCW's 
activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination section 
considers the potential effects of the specified activity, the 
Estimated Take section, and the Proposed Mitigation section, to draw 
conclusions regarding the likely impacts

[[Page 32130]]

of these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of 
individuals and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact 
marine mammal species or stocks.

Background on Active Acoustic Sound Sources and Acoustic Terminology

    This subsection contains a brief technical background on sound, on 
the characteristics of certain sound types, and on metrics used in this 
proposal inasmuch as the information is relevant to the specified 
activity and to the summary of the potential effects of the specified 
activity on marine mammals. For general information on sound and its 
interaction with the marine environment, please see, e.g., Au and 
Hastings (2008); Richardson et al. (1995); Urick (1983).
    Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are 
frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number 
of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and 
is measured in hertz or cycles per second. Wavelength is the distance 
between two peaks or corresponding points of a sound wave (length of 
one cycle). Higher frequency sounds have shorter wavelengths than lower 
frequency sounds, and typically attenuate (decrease) more rapidly, 
except in certain cases in shallower water. Amplitude is the height of 
the sound pressure wave or the ``loudness'' of a sound and is typically 
described using the relative unit of the decibel. A sound pressure 
level (SPL) in dB is described as the ratio between a measured pressure 
and a reference pressure (for underwater sound, this is 1 microPascal 
([mu]Pa)), and is a logarithmic unit that accounts for large variations 
in amplitude. Therefore, a relatively small change in dB corresponds to 
large changes in sound pressure. The source level (SL) represents the 
SPL referenced at a distance of 1 m from the source (referenced to 1 
[mu]Pa), while the received level is the SPL at the listener's position 
(referenced to 1 [mu]Pa).
    Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over 
the duration of an impulse. Root mean square is calculated by squaring 
all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the 
square root of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean square accounts for 
both positive and negative values; squaring the pressures makes all 
values positive so that they may be accounted for in the summation of 
pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often 
used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because 
behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be 
better expressed through averaged units than by peak pressures.
    Sound exposure level (SEL; represented as dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s) 
represents the total energy in a stated frequency band over a stated 
time interval or event and considers both intensity and duration of 
exposure. The per-pulse SEL is calculated over the time window 
containing the entire pulse (i.e., 100 percent of the acoustic energy). 
SEL is a cumulative metric; it can be accumulated over a single pulse, 
or calculated over periods containing multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL 
represents the total energy accumulated by a receiver over a defined 
time window or during an event. Peak sound pressure (also referred to 
as zero-to-peak sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum instantaneous 
sound pressure measurable in the water at a specified distance from the 
source and is represented in the same units as the rms sound pressure.
    When underwater objects vibrate or activity occurs, sound-pressure 
waves are created. These waves alternately compress and decompress the 
water as the sound wave travels. Underwater sound waves radiate in a 
manner similar to ripples on the surface of a pond and may be either 
directed in a beam or beams or may radiate in all directions 
(omnidirectional sources). The compressions and decompressions 
associated with sound waves are detected as changes in pressure by 
aquatic life and man-made sound receptors such as hydrophones.
    Even in the absence of sound from the specified activity, the 
underwater environment is typically loud due to ambient sound, which is 
defined as environmental background sound levels lacking a single 
source or point (Richardson et al., 1995). The sound level of a region 
is defined by the total acoustical energy being generated by known and 
unknown sources. These sources may include physical (e.g., wind and 
waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric sound), biological (e.g., sounds 
produced by marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates), and anthropogenic 
(e.g., vessels, dredging, construction) sound. A number of sources 
contribute to ambient sound, including wind and waves, which are a main 
source of naturally occurring ambient sound for frequencies between 200 
Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In general, ambient sound levels tend to 
increase with increasing wind speed and wave height. Precipitation can 
become an important component of total sound at frequencies above 500 
Hz, and possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet times. Marine mammals can 
contribute significantly to ambient sound levels, as can some fish and 
snapping shrimp. The frequency band for biological contributions is 
from approximately 12 Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient sound 
related to human activity include transportation (surface vessels), 
dredging and construction, oil and gas drilling and production, 
geophysical surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel noise typically 
dominates the total ambient sound for frequencies between 20 and 300 
Hz. In general, the frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are below 1 kHz 
and, if higher frequency sound levels are created, they attenuate 
rapidly.
    The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources that 
comprise ambient sound at any given location and time depends not only 
on the source levels (as determined by current weather conditions and 
levels of biological and human activity) but also on the ability of 
sound to propagate through the environment. In turn, sound propagation 
is dependent on the spatially and temporally varying properties of the 
water column and sea floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of 
the dependence on a large number of varying factors, ambient sound 
levels can be expected to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial 
and temporal scales. Sound levels at a given frequency and location can 
vary by 10-20 dB from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result 
is that, depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from the 
specified activity may be a negligible addition to the local 
environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect marine 
mammals. Details of source types are described in the following text.
    Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types: 
Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction 
between these two sound types is important because they have differing 
potential to cause physical effects, particularly with regard to 
hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see 
Southall et al. (2007) for an in-depth discussion of these concepts. 
The distinction between these two sound types is not always obvious, as 
certain signals share properties of both pulsed and non-pulsed sounds. 
A signal near a source could be categorized as a pulse, but due to 
propagation effects as it moves farther from the source, the signal 
duration becomes longer (e.g., Greene and Richardson, 1988).
    Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic 
booms, impact pile driving) produce signals

[[Page 32131]]

that are brief (typically considered to be less than one second), 
broadband, atonal transients (ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 
1998; ISO, 2003) and occur either as isolated events or repeated in 
some succession. Pulsed sounds are all characterized by a relatively 
rapid rise from ambient pressure to a maximal pressure value followed 
by a rapid decay period that may include a period of diminishing, 
oscillating maximal and minimal pressures, and generally have an 
increased capacity to induce physical injury as compared with sounds 
that lack these features.
    Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or 
prolonged, and may be either continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995; 
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals 
of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses (e.g., 
rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced 
by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or 
dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems. The 
duration of such sounds, as received at a distance, can be greatly 
extended in a highly reverberant environment.
    Sparkers and boomers produce pulsed signals with energy in the 
frequency ranges specified in Table 1. The amplitude of the acoustic 
wave emitted from sparker sources is equal in all directions (i.e., 
omnidirectional), while other sources planned for use during the 
proposed surveys have some degree of directionality to the beam, as 
specified in Table 1. Other sources planned for use during the proposed 
survey activity (e.g., CHIRP SBPs) should be considered non-pulsed, 
intermittent sources.

Summary on Specific Potential Effects of Acoustic Sound Sources

    Underwater sound from active acoustic sources can include one or 
more of the following: temporary or permanent hearing impairment, non-
auditory physical or physiological effects, behavioral disturbance, 
stress, and masking. The degree of effect is intrinsically related to 
the signal characteristics, received level, distance from the source, 
and duration of the sound exposure. Marine mammals exposed to high-
intensity sound, or to lower-intensity sound for prolonged periods, can 
experience hearing threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing 
sensitivity at certain frequency ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS can be 
permanent (PTS), in which case the loss of hearing sensitivity is not 
fully recoverable, or temporary (TTS), in which case the animal's 
hearing threshold would recover over time (Southall et al., 2007).
    Animals in the vicinity of PCW's proposed HRG survey activity are 
unlikely to incur even TTS due to the characteristics of the sound 
sources, which include relatively low source levels (178 to 205 dB re 1 
[micro]Pa-m) and generally very short pulses and potential duration of 
exposure. These characteristics mean that instantaneous exposure is 
unlikely to cause TTS, as it is unlikely that exposure would occur 
close enough to the vessel for received levels to exceed peak pressure 
TTS criteria, and that the cumulative duration of exposure would be 
insufficient to exceed cumulative sound exposure level (SEL) criteria. 
Even for high-frequency cetacean species (e.g., harbor porpoises), 
which have the greatest sensitivity to potential TTS, individuals would 
have to make a very close approach and also remain very close to 
vessels operating these sources in order to receive multiple exposures 
at relatively high levels, as would be necessary to cause TTS. 
Intermittent exposures--as would occur due to the brief, transient 
signals produced by these sources--require a higher cumulative SEL to 
induce TTS than would continuous exposures of the same duration (i.e., 
intermittent exposure results in lower levels of TTS). Moreover, most 
marine mammals would more likely avoid a loud sound source rather than 
swim in such close proximity as to result in TTS. Kremser et al. (2005) 
noted that the probability of a cetacean swimming through the area of 
exposure when a sub-bottom profiler emits a pulse is small--because if 
the animal was in the area, it would have to pass the transducer at 
close range in order to be subjected to sound levels that could cause 
TTS and would likely exhibit avoidance behavior to the area near the 
transducer rather than swim through at such a close range. Further, the 
restricted beam shape of many of HRG survey devices planned for use 
(Table 1) makes it unlikely that an animal would be exposed more than 
briefly during the passage of the vessel.
    Behavioral disturbance may include a variety of effects, including 
subtle changes in behavior (e.g., minor or brief avoidance of an area 
or changes in vocalizations), more conspicuous changes in similar 
behavioral activities, and more sustained and/or potentially severe 
reactions, such as displacement from or abandonment of high-quality 
habitat. Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-
specific and any reactions depend on numerous intrinsic and extrinsic 
factors (e.g., species, state of maturity, experience, current 
activity, reproductive state, auditory sensitivity, time of day), as 
well as the interplay between factors. Available studies show wide 
variation in response to underwater sound; therefore, it is difficult 
to predict specifically how any given sound in a particular instance 
might affect marine mammals perceiving the signal.
    In addition, sound can disrupt behavior through masking, or 
interfering with, an animal's ability to detect, recognize, or 
discriminate between acoustic signals of interest (e.g., those used for 
intraspecific communication and social interactions, prey detection, 
predator avoidance, navigation). Masking occurs when the receipt of a 
sound is interfered with by another coincident sound at similar 
frequencies and at similar or higher intensity, and may occur whether 
the sound is natural (e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves, 
precipitation) or anthropogenic (e.g., shipping, sonar, seismic 
exploration) in origin. Marine mammal communications would not likely 
be masked appreciably by the acoustic signals given the directionality 
of the signals for most HRG survey equipment types proposed for use 
(Table 1) and the brief period when an individual mammal is likely to 
be exposed.
    Sound may affect marine mammals through impacts on the abundance, 
behavior, or distribution of prey species (e.g., crustaceans, 
cephalopods, fish, zooplankton) (i.e., effects to marine mammal 
habitat). Prey species exposed to sound might move away from the sound 
source, experience TTS, experience masking of biologically relevant 
sounds, or show no obvious direct effects. The most likely impacts (if 
any) for most prey species in a given area would be temporary avoidance 
of the area. Surveys using active acoustic sound sources move through 
an area relatively quickly, limiting exposure to multiple pulses. In 
all cases, sound levels would return to ambient once a survey ends and 
the noise source is shut down and, when exposure to sound ends, 
behavioral and/or physiological responses are expected to end 
relatively quickly. Finally, the HRG survey equipment will not have 
significant impacts to the seafloor and does not represent a source of 
pollution.

Vessel Strike

    Vessel collisions with marine mammals, or ship strikes, can result 
in death or serious injury of the animal. These interactions are 
typically associated with large whales, which are less maneuverable 
than are smaller cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to

[[Page 32132]]

large vessels. Ship strikes generally involve commercial shipping 
vessels, which are generally larger and of which there is much more 
traffic in the ocean than geophysical survey vessels. Jensen and Silber 
(2004) summarized ship strikes of large whales worldwide from 1975-2003 
and found that most collisions occurred in the open ocean and involved 
large vessels (e.g., commercial shipping). For vessels used in 
geophysical survey activities, vessel speed while towing gear is 
typically only 4 knots (4.6 mph). At these speeds, both the possibility 
of striking a marine mammal and the possibility of a strike resulting 
in serious injury or mortality are so low as to be discountable. At 
average transit speed for geophysical survey vessels, the probability 
of serious injury or mortality resulting from a strike is less than 50 
percent. However, the likelihood of a strike actually happening is 
again low given the smaller size of these vessels and generally slower 
speeds. Notably in the Jensen and Silber study, no strike incidents 
were reported for geophysical survey vessels during that time period.
    The potential effects of PCW's specified survey activity are 
expected to be limited to Level B behavioral harassment. No permanent 
or temporary auditory effects, or significant impacts to marine mammal 
habitat, including prey, are expected.

Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes 
proposed for authorization through this IHA, which will inform both 
NMFS' consideration of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact 
determination.
    Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these 
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent 
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of 
pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a 
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal 
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, 
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
    Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form 
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals 
resulting from exposure to noise from certain HRG acoustic sources. 
Based primarily on the characteristics of the signals produced by the 
acoustic sources planned for use, Level A harassment is neither 
anticipated (even absent mitigation), nor proposed to be authorized. 
Consideration of the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation 
measures (i.e., pre-start clearance and shutdown measures), discussed 
in detail below in the Proposed Mitigation section, further strengthens 
the conclusion that Level A harassment is not a reasonably anticipated 
outcome of the survey activity. As described previously, no serious 
injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized for 
this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
    Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic 
thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science 
indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some 
degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water 
that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or 
occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) 
and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic 
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial 
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively 
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous 
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the 
factors considered here in more detail and present the proposed take 
estimates.

Acoustic Thresholds

    NMFS uses acoustic thresholds that identify the received level of 
underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably 
expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or 
to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
    Level B Harassment--Though significantly driven by received level, 
the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure 
is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the 
source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment 
(e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, 
experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to 
predict (Southall et al., 2007; Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what 
the available science indicates and the practical need to use a 
threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for 
most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on 
received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS 
predicts that marine mammals may be behaviorally harassed (i.e., Level 
B harassment) when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above 
received levels of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for the impulsive sources 
(i.e., boomers, sparkers) and non-impulsive, intermittent sources 
(e.g., CHIRP SBPs) evaluated here for PCW's proposed activity.
    Level A Harassment--NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the 
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) 
(Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory 
injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups 
(based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from 
two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). For more 
information, see NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed 
at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
    PCW's proposed activity includes the use of impulsive (i.e., 
sparkers and boomers) and non-impulsive (e.g., CHIRP SBP) sources. 
However, as discussed above, NMFS has concluded that Level A harassment 
is not a reasonably likely outcome for marine mammals exposed to noise 
through use of the sources proposed for use here, and the potential for 
Level A harassment is not evaluated further in this document. Please 
see PCW's application for details of a quantitative exposure analysis 
exercise, i.e., calculated Level A harassment isopleths and estimated 
Level A harassment exposures. Maximum estimated Level A harassment 
isopleths were less than 4 m for all sources and hearing groups with 
the exception of an estimated 53 m zone calculated for high-frequency 
cetaceans during use of the Boomer, respectively. PCW did not request 
authorization of take by Level A harassment, and no take by Level A 
harassment is proposed for authorization by NMFS.

Ensonified Area

    NMFS has developed a user-friendly methodology for estimating the 
extent of the Level B harassment isopleths associated with relevant HRG 
survey equipment (NMFS, 2020). This methodology incorporates frequency 
and directionality to refine estimated ensonified zones. For acoustic 
sources that operate with different beamwidths, the maximum beamwidth 
was used, and the lowest frequency of the source was used when 
calculating the frequency-dependent absorption coefficient (Table 1).

[[Page 32133]]

    NMFS considers the data provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) 
to represent the best available information on source levels associated 
with HRG equipment and, therefore, recommends that source levels 
provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be incorporated in the 
method described above to estimate isopleth distances to harassment 
thresholds. In cases when the source level for a specific type of HRG 
equipment is not provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS 
recommends that either the source levels provided by the manufacturer 
be used, or, in instances where source levels provided by the 
manufacturer are unavailable or unreliable, a proxy from Crocker and 
Fratantonio (2016) be used instead. Table 1 shows the HRG equipment 
types that may be used during the proposed surveys and the source 
parameters associated with those HRG equipment types.
    Results of modeling using the methodology described above indicated 
that, of the HRG survey equipment planned for use by PCW that has the 
potential to result in Level B harassment of marine mammals, the 
Applied Acoustics AA251 Boomer would produce the largest Level B 
harassment isopleth (178 m). Estimated Level B harassment isopleths for 
all sources evaluated here are provided in Table 4. Although PCW does 
not expect to use the AA251 Boomer source on all planned survey days, 
it proposes to assume, for purposes of analysis, that the boomer 
sources would be used on all survey days and across all hours within a 
given survey day. This is a conservative approach, as the actual 
sources used on individual survey days, or during a portion of a survey 
day, may produce smaller distances to the Level B harassment isopleth.

                               Table 4--Distances to Level B Harassment Threshold
                                                  [160 dB rms]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      Level B
                                                                                   Source level     harassment
           Equipment                 System          Frequency      Beam width       (dB re 1       horizontal
                                                       (kHz)          ([deg])        [mu]Pa m)        impact
                                                                                                   distance (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shallow subbottom profiler....  EdgeTech Chirp              2-16              65             178               4
                                 216.
Deep seismic profiler.........  Applied                   0.2-15             180             205             178
                                 Acoustics AA251
                                 Boomer.
                                GeoMarine Geo             0.05-3             180             203             141
                                 Spark 2000 (400
                                 tip).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marine Mammal Occurrence

    In this section, NMFS provides information about the presence, 
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that informs the take 
calculations.
    Habitat-based density models produced by the Duke University Marine 
Geospatial Ecology Laboratory (Roberts et al., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2021) 
represent the best available information regarding marine mammal 
densities in the survey area. The density data presented by Roberts et 
al. (2016, 2017, 2018, 2021) incorporates aerial and shipboard line-
transect survey data from NMFS and other organizations and incorporates 
data from 8 physiographic and 16 dynamic oceanographic and biological 
covariates, and controls for the influence of sea state, group size, 
availability bias, and perception bias on the probability of making a 
sighting. These density models were originally developed for all 
cetacean taxa in the U.S. Atlantic (Roberts et al., 2016). In 
subsequent years, certain models have been updated based on additional 
data as well as certain methodological improvements. More information 
is available online at seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke-EC/.
    Marine mammal density estimates in the survey area (animals/km\2\) 
were obtained using the most recent model results for all taxa (Roberts 
et al., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2021). The updated models incorporate 
additional sighting data, including sightings from NOAA's Atlantic 
Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (AMAPPS) surveys. Those 
data provide abundance estimates for species or species guilds within 
10 km x 10 km grid cells (100 km\2\), or in the case of NARW densities 
within 5 km x 5 km grid cells, on a monthly or annual basis, depending 
on the species. Using geographic information system (GIS) (ESRI 2017), 
the proposed survey area and the NARW SMA polygons were used to select 
grid cells from the Roberts et al. (2016; 2017; 2018; 2021) data that 
contain the most recent monthly or annual estimates for each species 
for the months of May through December. For the months of January 
through April, only the proposed survey area polygon was used to select 
density grid cells since it excludes waters within Cape Cod Bay where 
no surveys will occur from January 1 through May 15. The average 
monthly abundance for each species was calculated as the mean value of 
all grid cells within the survey area and then converted to density 
(individuals/km\2\) by dividing by 100 km\2\. Finally, an average 
annual density was calculated by taking the mean across all 12 months 
for each species (see Table 8 of the application).
    The estimated monthly density of seals provided in Roberts et al. 
(2018) includes all seal species present in the region as a single 
guild. To split the resulting ``seal'' density-based exposure estimate 
by species, the estimate was multiplied by the proportion of the 
combined abundance attributable to each species. Specifically, the SAR 
abundance estimates (Hayes et al. 2021) were summed for the two species 
(gray seal = 27,300, harbor seal = 61,336; total = 88,636) and the 
total divided by the estimate for each species to get the proportion of 
the total for each species (gray seal = 0.308; harbor seal = 0.692). 
The total estimated exposure from the ``seal'' density provide by 
Roberts et al. (2018) was then multiplied by these proportions to get 
the species specific exposure estimates.
    Densities from each of the selected density blocks were averaged 
for each month available to provide monthly density estimates for each 
species (when available based on the temporal resolution of the model 
products), along with the average annual density. Please see Tables 8 
and 9 of PCW's application for density values used in the exposure 
estimation process. Additional data regarding average group sizes from 
survey effort in the region was considered to ensure adequate take 
estimates are evaluated (see Table 10 of the application).

Take Calculation and Estimation

    Here NMFS describes how the information provided above is brought

[[Page 32134]]

together to produce a quantitative take estimate. In order to estimate 
the number of marine mammals predicted to be exposed to sound levels 
that would result in harassment, radial distances to predicted 
isopleths corresponding to Level B harassment thresholds are 
calculated, as described above. The maximum distance (i.e., 178 m 
distance associated with the boomer) to the Level B harassment 
criterion and the estimated trackline distance traveled per day by a 
given survey vessel (i.e., 80 km) was used to calculate the daily 
ensonified area, or zone of influence (ZOI) around the survey vessel. 
This distance was multiplied by two times the average daily survey 
distance (80 km) and the area of a circle with radius 178 m was added 
to the result to calculate the daily ZOI (28.6 km\2\). The daily ZOI 
was then multiplied by the total number of expected survey days (636) 
to estimate the total ZOI for the proposed surveys (18,177 km\2\).
    Potential Level B harassment exposures are estimated by multiplying 
the average annual density of each species within either the Lease Area 
or potential ECR area by the total ZOI for the planned surveys. Those 
results are shown in Table 5.
    The larger of the two estimates from the approaches described 
above: Density-based exposure estimates or mean group size was then 
selected as the requested take as shown in Table 5. In cases where the 
calculations resulted in a non-integer, the result was rounded up to 
the nearest whole number since it is not logical to request a partial 
take. Additionally, based on observational data collected during prior 
HRG surveys in this area, the density of common dolphins predicted by 
the Roberts et al. (2018) model does not appear to adequately reflect 
the number of dolphins that may be encountered during the planned 
surveys. Data collected by Protected Species Observers (PSOs) on survey 
vessels operating in 2020-2021 showed an average of approximately 16 
common dolphins may be observed within 200 m of a vessel (the 
approximate Level B harassment distance) per survey day. Multiplying 
the anticipated 636 survey days by 16 common dolphins per day results 
in a potential estimated take of 10,176 common dolphins so this has 
been used as the requested take of common dolphins shown in Table 5.
    For the ``seal'' guild in the Roberts et al. (2018) densities, the 
exposure estimate was split by species using the relative abundance for 
the two species to produce the species-specific requested take.
    For Bottlenose dolphins, the offshore morphotype inhabits the outer 
continental slope and shelf edge regions from Georges Bank to the 
Florida Keys, while the coastal morphotype is continuously distributed 
along the Atlantic Coast from south of New York to the Florida 
Peninsula (Hayes et al. 2020)). Offshore common bottlenose dolphin 
sightings occur from Cape Hatteras to the eastern end of Georges Bank 
(Kenney 1990). The western North Atlantic offshore stock is distributed 
primarily along the OCS and continental slope, from Georges Bank to 
Cape Hatteras during spring and summer (CeTAP 1982). Bottlenose 
dolphins encountered in the survey area would likely belong to the 
Western North Atlantic Offshore stock, so all takes are being requested 
from this stock. However, it is possible that a few animals encountered 
during the surveys could be from the North Atlantic Northern Migratory 
Coastal stock, but chance of occurrence is low, and no take from this 
species is proposed. Similarly, based on the distributions described in 
Hayes et al. (2020, 2021b), pilot whale sightings in the Lease Area 
would most likely be long-finned pilot whales, so all pilot whale takes 
being requested are for long-finned pilot whales.
    For NARWs, the implementation of a 500 m acoustic shutdown zone and 
the 500 m vessel separation distance identified in the vessel strike 
avoidance measures means that the likelihood of an exposure to received 
sound levels greater than 160 dB SPLrms is very low. As a precautionary 
measure, takes by Level B harassment are requested for the proposed 
survey.

                            Table 5--Proposed Takes by Level B Harassment and Percentages of Each Species or Stock Abundance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                       Proposed take
        Taxonomic group            Common name      Stock (NEST) \a\   Density based    Mean group      by level B             Percent of stock
                                                                         exposures         size         harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cetacean (Mysticete)..........  North Atlantic     Western Atlantic               29             2.4              30  8.2.
                                 right whale.       Stock (368).
                                Blue whale.......  Western North                   0             1.0               1  Less than 1 percent.
                                                    Atlantic Stock
                                                    (402).
                                Fin whale........  Western North                  59             1.8              60  Less than 1 percent.
                                                    Atlantic Stock
                                                    (6,802).
                                Sei whale........  Nova Scotia Stock               5             1.6               5  Less than 1 percent.
                                                    (6,292).
                                Minke whale......  Canadian East                  37             1.2              37  Less than 1 percent.
                                                    Coastal Stock
                                                    (21,968).
                                Humpback whale...  West Indies DPS                45             2.0              46  3.3.
                                                    (1,396).
Cetacean (Odontocete).........  Sperm whale......  North Atlantic                  2             1.5               5  Less than 1 percent.
                                                    Stock (4,349).
                                Atlantic white-    Western North               1,014            27.9           1,014  Less than 2 percent.
                                 sided dolphin.     Atlantic Stock
                                                    (93,233).
                                Atlantic spotted   Western North                   4            29.0              29  Less than 1 percent.
                                 dolphin.           Atlantic Stock
                                                    (39,921).
                                Common bottlenose  Western North                 398             7.8             399  Less than 1 percent.
                                 dolphin.           Atlantic
                                                    Offshore Stock
                                                    (62,851).
                                Long-finned pilot  Western North                  86             8.4              86  Less than 1 percent.
                                 whale.             Atlantic Stock
                                                    (68,139).
                                Risso's dolphin..  Western North                   4             5.4              30  Less than 1 percent.
                                                    Atlantic Stock
                                                    (35,215).
                                Common dolphin     Western North               1,081            34.9          10,176  5.9.
                                 (short-beaked).    Atlantic Stock
                                                    (172,974).
                                Harbor porpoise..  Western North                 759             2.7             759  Less than 1 percent.
                                                    Atlantic Stock
                                                    (95,543).
Pinniped (Phocid).............  Gray seal........  Western North                 399             0.4             400  Less than 2 percent.
                                                    Atlantic Stock
                                                    (27,300).

[[Page 32135]]

 
                                Harbor seal......  Western North                 897             1.0             897  Less than 2 percent
                                                    Atlantic Stock
                                                    (61,336).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source--(Hayes et al. 2021).

Rare Species

    Species considered to be rare or not expected to occur in the area 
were not included in the previous exposure estimates because the 
densities would be too low to provide meaningful density-based 
exposures. Nonetheless, species considered to be rare are occasionally 
encountered. For example, white-beaked dolphins were recorded in both 
2019 and 2020 during HRG surveys in this area (Vineyard-Wind 2019, 
2020) with the sighting of White-beaked dolphins in 2019 consisting of 
30 animals. Other rare species encountered in the survey area during 
previous HRG surveys include false killer whale in 2019 (five 
individuals) and 2021 (one individual) (Vineyard-Wind 2019, 2021) and 
orca (killer whale) in 2022 (two individuals; data not yet submitted). 
When species not listed in an IHA are encountered and may be taken, it 
is necessary to cease survey operations to avoid unauthorized take. To 
avoid this potential disruption to survey operations, PCW is requesting 
and NMFS is proposing take by Level B harassment for these three rare 
species based on the largest number of individuals observed within one 
year: 30 white-beaked dolphins, 5 false killer whales, and 2 killer 
whales.
    The take numbers shown in Table 5 are those requested by PCW. NMFS 
concurs with the requested take numbers and proposes to authorize them. 
Previous monitoring data compiled by PCW (available online at: 
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-ocean-wind-marine-site-characterization-surveys-offshore-new) suggests that the 
proposed take numbers for authorization are sufficient.

Proposed Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to the 
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on 
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to 
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on 
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain 
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS 
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to 
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic 
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting the 
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 
216.104(a)(11)).
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and 
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we 
carefully consider two primary factors:
    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful 
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to 
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. 
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being 
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the 
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented 
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as 
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability 
implemented as planned); and
    (2) The practicability of the measures for applicant 
implementation, which may consider such things as cost and impact on 
operations.

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

    NMFS proposes the following mitigation measures be implemented 
during PCW's proposed marine site characterization surveys. Pursuant to 
section 7 of the ESA, PCW would also be required to adhere to relevant 
Project Design Criteria (PDC) of the NMFS' Greater Atlantic Regional 
Fisheries Office (GARFO) programmatic consultation (specifically PDCs 
4, 5, and 7) regarding geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic 
coast (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

[[Page 32136]]

procedure would be used at the beginning of HRG survey activities to 
provide additional protection to marine mammals in or near the Survey 
Area by allowing them to vacate the area prior to the commencement of 
survey equipment operation at full power. A ramp-up would begin with 
the powering up of the smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its lowest 
practical power output appropriate for the survey. When technically 
feasible, the power would then be gradually turned up and other 
acoustic sources would be added.
    Ramp-up activities will be delayed if a marine mammal(s) enters its 
respective CZ. Ramp-up will continue if the animal has been observed 
exiting its respective CZ or until an additional period has elapsed 
with no additional sightings (i.e., 15 minutes for small odontocetes 
and seals, and 30 minutes for all other species).
    Activation of survey equipment through ramp-up procedures may not 
occur when visual observation of the pre-start clearance/shutdown zone 
is not expected to be effective using the appropriate visual technology 
(i.e., during inclement conditions such as heavy rain or fog).

Shutdown Procedures

    An immediate shutdown of the specified HRG survey equipment would 
be required if a marine mammal is sighted entering or within its 
respective SZ. The vessel operator must comply immediately with any 
call for shutdown by the PSO. Any disagreement between the PSO and 
vessel operator should be discussed only after shutdown has occurred. 
Subsequent restart of the survey equipment can be initiated if the 
animal has been observed exiting its respective SZ or until an 
additional time has elapsed (i.e., 15 minutes for harbor porpoise, 30 
minutes for all other species).
    If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or a 
species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized 
number of takes have been met, approaches or is observed within the 
applicable Level B harassment zone (Table 4), shutdown would occur.
    If the acoustic source is shut down for reasons other than 
mitigation (e.g., mechanical difficulty) for less than 30 minutes, it 
may be activated again without ramp-up if PSOs have maintained constant 
observation and no detections of any marine mammal have occurred within 
the respective SZs. If the acoustic source is shut down for a period 
longer than 30 minutes, then pre-start clearance and ramp-up procedures 
will be initiated as described in the previous section.
    The shutdown requirement would be waived for pinnipeds and for 
small delphinids of the following genera: Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, 
Stenella, and Tursiops. Specifically, if a delphinid from the specified 
genera or a pinniped is visually detected approaching the vessel (i.e., 
to bow ride) or towed equipment, shutdown is not required. Furthermore, 
if there is uncertainty regarding identification of a marine mammal 
species (i.e., whether the observed marine mammal(s) belongs to one of 
the delphinid genera for which shutdown is waived), PSOs must use best 
professional judgement in making the decision to call for a shutdown. 
Additionally, shutdown is required if a delphinid or pinniped detected 
in the shutdown zone and belongs to a genus other than those specified.
    Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and ramp-up procedures would not be 
required during HRG survey operations using only non-impulsive sources 
(e.g., echosounders), other than non-parametric sub-bottom profilers 
(e.g., CHIRP SBPs).

Vessel Strike Avoidance

    Vineyard Northeast must ensure that vessel operators and crew 
maintain a vigilant watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down or 
stop their vessels to avoid striking these species. Survey vessel crew 
members responsible for navigation duties will receive site-specific 
training on marine mammals sighting/reporting and vessel strike 
avoidance measures. Vessel strike avoidance measures include the 
following, except under circumstances when complying with these 
requirements would put the safety of the vessel or crew at risk:
     Vessel operators and crews must maintain a vigilant watch 
for all protected species and slow down, stop their vessel(s), or alter 
course, as appropriate and regardless of vessel size, to avoid striking 
any protected species. A visual observer aboard the vessel must monitor 
a vessel strike avoidance zone based on the appropriate separation 
distance around the vessel (distances stated below). Visual observers 
monitoring the vessel strike avoidance zone may be third-party 
observers (i.e., PSOs) or crew members, but crew members responsible 
for these duties must be provided sufficient training to (1) 
distinguish protected species from other phenomena and (2) broadly to 
identify a marine mammal as a North Atlantic right whale, other whale 
(defined in this context as sperm whales or baleen whales other than 
North Atlantic right whales), or other marine mammal.
     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

[[Page 32137]]

or any vessel that is navigationally constrained.

Seasonal Restrictions

    Vineyard Northeast proposes to refrain from conducting survey 
activities using HRG equipment operating at or below 180 kHz from 
January 1 through May 15 within the North Atlantic right whale SMA in 
Cape Cod Bay.

Crew Training

    Project-specific training will be conducted for all vessel crew 
prior to the start of a survey and during any changes in crew such that 
all survey personnel are fully aware and understand the mitigation, 
monitoring, and reporting requirements. Prior to implementation with 
vessel crews, the training program will be provided to NMFS for review 
and approval. Confirmation of the training and understanding of the 
requirements will be documented on a training course log sheet. Signing 
the log sheet will certify that the crew member understands and will 
comply with the necessary requirements throughout the survey 
activities.
    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as 
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily 
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of 
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or 
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, 
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the 
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for 
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the 
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased 
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on 
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the 
proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to 
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the 
required monitoring.
    Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should 
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
     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); and
     Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Proposed Monitoring Measures

    Visual monitoring will be performed by qualified, NMFS-approved 
PSOs, the resumes of whom will be provided to NMFS for review and 
approval prior to the start of survey activities. PCW would employ 
independent, dedicated, trained PSOs, meaning that the PSOs must (1) be 
employed by a third-party observer provider, (2) have no tasks other 
than to conduct observational effort, collect data, and communicate 
with and instruct relevant vessel crew with regard to the presence of 
marine mammals and mitigation requirements (including brief alerts 
regarding maritime hazards), and (3) have successfully completed an 
approved PSO training course appropriate for their designated task. On 
a case-by-case basis, non-independent observers may be approved by NMFS 
for limited, specific duties in support of approved, independent PSOs 
on smaller vessels with limited crew capacity operating in nearshore 
waters. Section 5 of the draft IHA contains further details regarding 
PSO approval.
    The PSOs will be responsible for monitoring the waters surrounding 
each survey vessel to the farthest extent permitted by sighting 
conditions, including shutdown zones, during all HRG survey operations. 
PSOs will visually monitor and identify marine mammals, including those 
approaching or entering the established shutdown zones during survey 
activities. It will be the responsibility of the Lead PSO on duty to 
communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to communicate 
the action(s) that are necessary to ensure mitigation and monitoring 
requirements are implemented as appropriate.
    During all HRG survey operations (e.g., any day on which use of an 
HRG source is planned to occur), a minimum of one PSO must be on duty 
during daylight operations on each survey vessel, conducting visual 
observations at all times on all active survey vessels during daylight 
hours (i.e., from 30 minutes prior to sunrise through 30 minutes 
following sunset). Two PSOs will be on watch during nighttime 
operations and during periods of poor visibility. The PSO(s) would 
ensure 360[deg] visual coverage around the vessel from the most 
appropriate observation posts and would conduct visual observations 
using binoculars and/or night vision goggles, infared cameras and the 
naked eye while free from distractions and in a consistent, systematic, 
and diligent manner. PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of 4 
consecutive hours followed by a break of at least 2 hours between 
watches and may conduct a maximum of 12 hours of observation per 24-hr 
period. In cases where multiple vessels are surveying concurrently, any 
observations of marine mammals would be communicated to PSOs on all 
nearby survey vessels.
    PSOs must be equipped with binoculars and have the ability to 
estimate distance and bearing to detect marine mammals, particularly in 
proximity to shutdown zones. Reticulated binoculars must also be 
available to PSOs for use as appropriate based on conditions and 
visibility to support the sighting and monitoring of marine mammals. 
During nighttime operations, night-vision goggles with thermal clip-ons 
and infrared technology would be used. Position data would be recorded 
using hand-held or vessel GPS units for each sighting.
    During good conditions (e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort sea state 
(BSS) 3 or less), to the maximum extent practicable, PSOs would also 
conduct observations when the acoustic source is not operating for 
comparison of sighting rates and behavior with and without use of the 
active acoustic sources. Any observations of marine mammals by crew 
members aboard any vessel associated with the survey would be

[[Page 32138]]

relayed to the PSO team. Data on all PSO observations would be recorded 
based on standard PSO collection requirements. This would include 
dates, times, and locations of survey operations; dates and times of 
observations, location and weather; details of marine mammal sightings 
(e.g., species, numbers, behavior); and details of any observed marine 
mammal behavior that occurs (e.g., noted behavioral disturbances).

Proposed Reporting Measures

    Within 90 days after completion of survey activities or expiration 
of this IHA, whichever comes sooner, a final technical report will be 
provided to NMFS that fully documents the methods and monitoring 
protocols, summarizes the data recorded during monitoring, summarizes 
the number of marine mammals observed during survey activities (by 
species, when known), summarizes the mitigation actions taken during 
surveys (including what type of mitigation and the species and number 
of animals that prompted the mitigation action, when known), and 
provides an interpretation of the results and effectiveness of all 
mitigation and monitoring. A final report must be submitted within 30 
days following resolution of any comments on the draft report. All 
draft and final marine mammal and acoustic monitoring reports must be 
submitted to [email protected], [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 NARW is observed at any time by PSOs or personnel on any 
project vessels, during surveys or during vessel transit, PCW must 
immediately report sighting information to the NMFS NARW Sighting 
Advisory System: (866) 755-6622. NARW sightings in any location may 
also be reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via channel 16.
    In the event that PCW personnel discover an injured or dead marine 
mammal, PCW will report the incident to the NMFS Office of Protected 
Resources (OPR) and the NMFS New England/Mid-Atlantic Stranding 
Coordinator as soon as feasible. The report would include the following 
information:
     Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first 
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
     Species identification (if known) or description of the 
animal(s) involved;
     Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if 
the animal is dead);
     Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
     If available, photographs or video footage of the 
animal(s); and
     General circumstances under which the animal was 
discovered.
    In the unanticipated event of a ship strike of a marine mammal by 
any vessel involved in the activities covered by the IHA, PCW would 
report the incident to the NMFS OPR and the NMFS New England/Mid-
Atlantic Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. The report would 
include the following information:
     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).

[[Page 32139]]

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the 
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not 
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough 
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to 
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be 
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the 
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context 
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, 
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness 
of the mitigation. NMFS also assesses the number, intensity, and 
context of estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to 
population status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's 
implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts 
from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated 
into this analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline 
(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population 
size and growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused 
mortality, or ambient noise levels).
    To avoid repetition, our analysis applies to all the species listed 
in Table 5 given that NMFS expects the anticipated effects of the 
proposed survey to be similar in nature. Where there are meaningful 
differences between species or stocks--as is the case of the NARW--they 
are included as separate subsections below. NMFS does not anticipate 
that serious injury or mortality would occur as a result from HRG 
surveys, even in the absence of mitigation, and no serious injury or 
mortality is proposed to be authorized. As discussed in the Potential 
Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and their Habitat 
section, non-auditory physical effects and vessel strike are not 
expected to occur. NMFS expects that all potential takes would be in 
the form of short-term Level B behavioral harassment in the form of 
temporary avoidance of the area or decreased foraging (if such activity 
was occurring), reactions that are considered to be of low severity and 
with no lasting biological consequences (e.g., Southall et al., 2007). 
Even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of an overall 
stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in 
viability for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in 
any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. As described above, Level A 
harassment is not expected to occur given the nature of the operations 
and the estimated size of the Level A harassment zones.
    In addition to being temporary, the maximum expected harassment 
zone around a survey vessel is 178 m. Although this distance is assumed 
for all survey activity in estimating take numbers proposed for 
authorization and evaluated here, other survey activity would involve 
use of acoustic sources with a reduced acoustic harassment zone 
producing expected effects of particularly low(er) severity. Therefore, 
the ensonified area surrounding each vessel is relatively small 
compared to the overall distribution of the animals in the area and 
their use of the habitat. Feeding behavior is not likely to be 
significantly impacted as prey species are mobile and are broadly 
distributed throughout the survey area; therefore, marine mammals that 
may be temporarily displaced during survey activities are expected to 
be able to resume foraging once they have moved away from areas with 
disturbing levels of underwater noise. Because of the temporary nature 
of the disturbance and the availability of similar habitat and 
resources in the surrounding area, the impacts to marine mammals and 
the food sources that they utilize are not expected to cause 
significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or 
their populations.
    There are no rookeries, mating or calving grounds known to be 
biologically important to marine mammals within the proposed survey 
area. However, there are BIAs for large whales, which overlap with the 
survey area. As discussed earlier in this document, there are two BIAs 
for feeding fin whales that flank the survey area, a BIA for feeding 
humpback whales northeast of the survey area, and a portion of the 
minke and sei whale feeding BIAs within the survey area. Migration and 
feeding BIAs for NARW are present in the survey area, but are discussed 
in the NARW subsection below.
    Due to the fact that the proposed survey activities are temporary 
and the spatial extent of sound produced by the survey would be very 
small relative to the spatial extent of the available feeding habitat 
in the BIAs for large whales (as previously discussed), feeding for 
large whales is not expected to be impacted by the proposed survey. 
Given the relatively small size of the ensonified area, it is unlikely 
that prey availability would be adversely affected by HRG survey 
operations.

NARWs

    The status of the NARW population is of heightened concern and, 
therefore, merits additional analysis. As noted previously, elevated 
NARW mortalities began in June 2017 and there is an active UME. 
Overall, preliminary findings support human interactions, specifically 
vessel strikes and entanglements, as the cause of death for the 
majority of NARWs. As noted previously, the proposed survey area 
overlaps migratory and feeding BIAs and critical habitat for NARW. 
Because the proposed survey activities are temporary and the spatial 
extent of sound produced by the survey would be very small relative to 
the spatial extent of the available migratory and feeding habitats in 
the BIAs and critical habitat, NARW migration is not expected to be 
impacted by the proposed survey. Given the relatively small size of the 
ensonified area, it is unlikely that prey availability for NARW would 
be adversely affected by HRG survey operations. Required vessel strike 
avoidance measures will also decrease risk of ship strike during 
migration; no ship strike is expected to occur during PCW's proposed 
activities. Additionally, only very limited take by Level B harassment 
of NARW has been requested and is being proposed for authorization by 
NMFS as HRG survey operations are required to maintain a 500 m EZ and 
shutdown if a NARW is sighted at or within the EZ. The 500 m shutdown 
zone for NARWs is conservative, considering the Level B harassment 
isopleth for the most impactful acoustic source (i.e., boomer) is 
estimated to be 178 m, and thereby minimizes the potential for 
behavioral harassment of this species. As noted previously, Level A 
harassment is not expected due to the small PTS zones associated with 
HRG equipment types proposed for use. NMFS does not anticipate NARWs 
takes that would result from PCW's proposed activities would impact 
annual rates of recruitment or survival. Thus, any takes that occur 
would not result in population level impacts.

Other Marine Mammal Species With Active UMEs

    As noted previously, there are several active UMEs occurring in the 
vicinity of PCW's proposed survey area. Elevated humpback whale 
mortalities have

[[Page 32140]]

occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through Florida since 
January 2016. Of the cases examined, approximately half had evidence of 
human interaction (ship strike or entanglement). The UME does not yet 
provide cause for concern regarding population-level impacts. Despite 
the UME, the relevant population of humpback whales (the West Indies 
breeding population, or DPS) remains stable at approximately 12,000 
individuals.
    Beginning in January 2017, elevated minke whale strandings have 
occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, 
with highest numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and New York. This event 
does not provide cause for concern regarding population level impacts, 
as the likely population abundance is greater than 20,000 whales.
    The required mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number 
and/or severity of proposed takes for all species listed in Table 5, 
including those with active UMEs, to the level of least practicable 
adverse impact. In particular, they would provide animals the 
opportunity to move away from the sound source throughout the survey 
area before HRG survey equipment reaches full energy, thus preventing 
them from being exposed to sound levels that have the potential to 
cause injury (Level A harassment) or more severe Level B harassment. No 
Level A harassment is anticipated, even in the absence of mitigation 
measures, or proposed for authorization.
    NMFS expects that takes would be in the form of short-term Level B 
behavioral harassment by way of brief startling reactions and/or 
temporary vacating of the area, or decreased foraging (if such activity 
was occurring)--reactions that (at the scale and intensity anticipated 
here) are considered to be of low severity, with no lasting biological 
consequences. Since both the sources and marine mammals are mobile, 
animals would only be exposed briefly to a small ensonified area that 
might result in take. Additionally, required mitigation measures would 
further reduce exposure to sound that could result in more severe 
behavioral harassment.
    In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily 
support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from 
this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock 
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
     No mortality or serious injury is anticipated or proposed 
for authorization;
     No Level A harassment (PTS) is anticipated, even in the 
absence of mitigation measures, or proposed for authorization;
     Foraging success is not likely to be significantly 
impacted as effects on species that serve as prey species for marine 
mammals from the survey are expected to be minimal;
     The availability of alternate areas of similar habitat 
value for marine mammals to temporarily vacate the survey area during 
the planned survey to avoid exposure to sounds from the activity;
     Take is anticipated to be primarily Level B behavioral 
harassment consisting of brief startling reactions and/or temporary 
avoidance of the survey area;
     While the survey area is within areas noted as migratory 
and feeding area BIAs and designated critical habitat for NARWs, the 
activities would occur in such a comparatively small area such that any 
avoidance of the survey area due to activities would not affect 
migration or feeding. In addition, mitigation measures to shut down at 
500 m to minimize potential for Level B behavioral harassment would 
limit the severity of any take that occurs;
     While the survey area is within areas noted as feeding 
area BIAs for large whales, the activities would occur in such a 
comparatively small area such that any avoidance of the survey area due 
to activities would not affect prey availability or foraging 
activities.
     The proposed mitigation measures, including visual 
monitoring and shutdowns, are expected to minimize potential impacts to 
marine mammals.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into 
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and 
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine 
mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on 
all affected marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers

    As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be 
authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for 
specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA 
does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated 
numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to 
the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or 
stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to 
small numbers of marine mammals. When the predicted number of 
individuals to be taken is fewer than one third of the species or stock 
abundance, the take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally, 
other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as 
the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.
    NMFS proposes to authorize incidental take of 16 marine mammal 
species. The total amount of takes proposed for authorization relative 
to the best available population abundance is less than 9 percent for 
NARW, less than 6 percent for common dolphin, less than 4 percent for 
humpback whales, and less than 2 percent for all other species and 
stocks, which NMFS preliminarily finds are small numbers of marine 
mammals relative to the estimated overall population abundances for 
those stocks. Please see Table 5.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity 
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the 
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small 
numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size 
of the affected species or stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

    There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine 
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has 
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would 
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such 
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

Endangered Species Act

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any 
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize 
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or 
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated 
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, 
NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR) consults internally whenever 
we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species, in 
this case with NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO).
    NMFS is proposing to authorize the incidental take of five species 
of marine mammals which are listed under the ESA, including the North 
Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has

[[Page 32141]]

determined that these activities fall within the scope of activities 
analyzed in GARFO's programmatic consultation regarding geophysical 
surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic Renewable 
Energy Regions (completed June 29, 2021; revised September 2021). The 
consultation concluded that NMFS' issuance of incidental take 
authorization related to these activities are not likely to adversely 
affect ESA-listed marine mammals.

Proposed Authorization

    As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to 
issue an IHA to PCW for conducting marine site characterization surveys 
off the coast of Massachusetts south to Long Island, New York for one 
year from the date of issuance, provided the previously mentioned 
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. A 
draft of the proposed IHA can be found at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.

Request for Public Comments

    We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and 
any other aspect of this notice of proposed IHA for the proposed marine 
site characterization surveys. We also request at this time comment on 
the potential renewal of this proposed IHA as described in the 
paragraph below. Please include with your comments any supporting data 
or literature citations to help inform decisions on the request for 
this IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA.
    On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-time, one-year 
Renewal IHA following notice to the public providing an additional 15 
days for public comments when (1) up to another year of identical or 
nearly identical, or nearly identical, activities as described in the 
Description of Proposed Activity section of this notice is planned or 
(2) the activities as described in the Description of Proposed Activity 
section of this notice would not be completed by the time the IHA 
expires and a renewal would allow for completion of the activities 
beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section of this notice, 
provided all of the following conditions are met:
     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 24, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-11485 Filed 5-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P