[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 125 (Friday, June 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42322-42341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13990]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XD006]


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Marine Site Characterization 
Surveys in the New York Bight

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

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine 
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given 
that NMFS has issued an IHA to Community Offshore Wind, LLC (COSW) to 
incidentally harass marine mammals during marine site characterization 
surveys in coastal waters off of New Jersey and New York in the New 
York Bight.

DATES: This authorization is effective from July 1, 2023, through June 
30, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alyssa Clevenstine, 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 proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a 
proposed incidental harassment authorization (IHA) is provided to the 
public for review.
    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or 
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses 
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods 
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying 
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar 
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for 
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as 
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, 
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth. The definitions 
of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the 
relevant sections below.

Summary of Request

    On November 17, 2022, NMFS received a request from COSW for an IHA 
to take marine mammals incidental to conducting marine site 
characterization surveys in coastal waters off of New Jersey and New 
York in the New York Bight, specifically within the Bureau of Ocean 
Energy Management (BOEM) Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for 
Renewable Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lease 
Area OCS-A 0539 (Lease Area) and associated Export Cable Route survey 
area (ECR Area). Following NMFS' review of the application, COSW 
submitted a revised request on February 27, 2023. NMFS deemed the 
application adequate and complete on March 1, 2023. COSW's request is 
for take of small numbers of 15 species (16 stocks) of marine mammals 
by Level B harassment only. Neither COSW nor NMFS expect serious injury 
or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is 
appropriate.

Description of Specified Activity

Overview

    COSW plans to conduct marine site characterization surveys, 
including high-resolution geophysical (HRG) surveys, in coastal waters 
off of New Jersey and New York in the New York Bight, specifically 
within BOEM Lease Area OCS-A 0539 and associated ECR Area, collectively 
considered the Survey Area.
    The planned marine site characterization surveys are designed to 
obtain data sufficient to meet BOEM guidelines for providing 
geophysical, geotechnical, and geohazard information for site 
assessment plan surveys and/or construction and operations plan 
development. The objective of the surveys is to support the site 
characterization, siting, and engineering design of offshore wind 
project facilities including wind turbine generators, offshore 
substations, and submarine cables within the Survey Area. Up to three 
vessels may conduct survey efforts concurrently. Underwater sound 
resulting from COSW's marine site characterization survey activities, 
specifically HRG surveys, have the potential to result in incidental 
take of marine mammals in the form of Level B harassment.

Dates and Duration

    The surveys are planned to begin as soon as practicable and 
estimated to require 293 survey days within a single year across a 
maximum of three vessels operating concurrently, which includes up to 
two vessels operating offshore (>20 meters (m) depth) and one vessel 
operating nearshore (<20 m depth). The survey days will occur any month 
throughout the year as the exact timing of the surveys during the year 
is not certain. A ``survey day'' is defined as a 24-hour (hr) activity 
period in which active acoustic sound sources are used offshore and a 
12-hr activity period when a vessel is operating nearshore. It is 
expected that each offshore vessel would cover approximately 170 
kilometers (km) of trackline per day surveyed at a speed of 
approximately 3.8 knots (kn; 7.04 km/h), based on COSW's expectations 
regarding data acquisition efficiency. There is up to 30,467 km of 
trackline survey effort planned: a maximum trackline length of 28,290 
km is planned for the Lease Area

[[Page 42323]]

and 2,177 km for the ECR Area. The IHA would be effective for 1 year 
from the date of issuance.

Specific Geographic Region

    COSW's survey activities will occur in coastal waters off of New 
Jersey and New York in the New York Bight, specifically within BOEM 
Lease Area OCS-A 0539 and associated ECR Area (Figures 1, 2). The 
Survey Area (14,759 km\2\) includes both the Lease Area (859 km\2\; 30-
51 m depth) and ECR Area (13,900 km\2\; 3-65 m depth).
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30JN23.050


[[Page 42324]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30JN23.051

BILLING CODE 3510-22-C

Detailed Description of the Specified Activity

    COSW's marine site characterization surveys within the Survey Area 
include geotechnical and geophysical surveys, including depth sounding 
to determine water depth, site bathymetry, and general seafloor 
topography using a multibeam echosounder (MBES); and medium penetration 
sub-bottom profilers (SBP; sparkers) in a single (2-dimensional (2D)) 
or triple (3-dimensional (3D)) configuration.
    Within the Lease Area and across a 500-m buffer around the Lease 
Area (30-51 m depth), COSW will acquire MBES data and ultra-high 
resolution seismic (UHRS) data in either 2D (single sparker) or 3D 
(triple sparker) scenario. Within the ECR Area (3-65 m depth), the 
survey will consist of MBES and UHRS data collection within up to 900-m 
wide corridors. A centerline of UHRS data will be collected with 500-m 
tielines. COSW would acquire MBES data at a line spacing controlled by 
water depth to meet coverage and resolution requirements. MBES are used 
to determine water depths and general bottom topography. The MBES have 
operating frequencies greater than 180 kilohertz (kHz) and are 
therefore outside the general hearing range of marine mammals. NMFS 
does not expect MBES survey activities to present a reasonably 
anticipated risk of causing incidental take of marine mammals, so these 
activities are not discussed further in this notice.
    COSW plans two scenarios: the 2D scenario and the 3D scenario. The 
total survey trackline length differs between the 2D and 3D scenarios 
but both scenarios include a maximum of two concurrently-operating 
vessels in the Lease Area with the potential for a third vessel 
operating concurrently in the ECR Area. For the 2D scenario, a 
trackline length of 5,370 km (1,515 km\2\ ensonified area) is planned 
for the Lease Area and 2,177 km (615 km\2\ ensonified area) for the ECR 
Area. Each vessel will operate one sparker in the 2D scenario. Under 
the 3D scenario, a trackline length of 28,290 km (8,923 km\2\ 
ensonified area) is planned for the Lease Area and 2,177 km (688 km\2\ 
ensonified

[[Page 42325]]

area) for the ECR Area. Each vessel will operate three sparkers in the 
3D scenario. The ECR Area trackline length remains the same across both 
scenarios. Only one vessel will operate in nearshore waters <20 m depth 
and will adhere to a 12-hr survey day.
    The only acoustic sources planned for use during COSW's HRG survey 
activities with the potential to cause incidental take of marine 
mammals are the sparkers. There are two sparker systems planned for 
use: Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark UHD 400+400 Seismic Sound Source (400 
tip/300-1,000 joules (J)) and the Geo-Source 200-400 Marine Multi-Tip 
Sparker System (400 tip/300-1,000 J).
    A detailed description of COSW's planned HRG surveys is provided in 
the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (88 FR 24574, April 
21, 2023). Since that time, no changes have been made to the planned 
HRG survey activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not 
provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the 
detailed description of the specified activity.

Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to COSW was published in 
the Federal Register on April 21, 2023 (88 FR 24574). That notice 
described, in detail, COSW's proposed activities, the marine mammal 
species that may be affected by the activities, and the anticipated 
effects on marine mammals. In that notice, we requested public input on 
the request for authorization described therein, our analyses, the 
proposed authorization, and any other aspect of the notice of proposed 
IHA, and requested that interested persons submit relevant information, 
suggestions, and comments. This proposed notice was available for a 30-
day public comment period.
    NMFS received 13 comment letters. Two of these comment letters were 
from non-governmental organizations: the Responsible Offshore 
Development Alliance (RODA) and Clean Ocean Action (COA), and one was 
from an elected local governmental official (Mayor of Borough of 
Seaside Park, New Jersey; Seaside Park). The remaining ten comments 
were from private citizens.
    All comments from private citizens expressed general opposition to 
issuance of the IHA or to the underlying associated activities. We 
reiterate here that NMFS' action concerns only the authorization of 
marine mammal take incidental to the planned surveys--NMFS' authority 
under the MMPA does not extend to the surveys themselves, or to wind 
energy development more generally. Several commenters suggested, 
without evidence, that issuance of the proposed IHA could result in the 
death of whales. We reiterate here that no mortality is anticipated or 
authorized. Many of the comments requested that NMFS not issue any IHAs 
related to wind energy development and/or expressed opposition for wind 
energy development generally without providing information relevant to 
NMFS' decision. We do not specifically address comments expressing 
general opposition to activities related to wind energy development or 
respond to comments that are out of scope of the proposed IHA (88 FR 
24574), such as comments on other Federal agency processes and 
activities not planned under this IHA.
    All substantive comments and NMFS' responses are provided below, 
and all comment letters are available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-community-offshore-wind-llc-marine-site-characterization. Please review the 
comment letters for full details regarding the comments and associated 
rationale.
    Comment: Multiple commenters expressed concern that negative 
impacts to the local fishing industry and coastal communities as a 
result of a potentially adverse impact to marine mammals (e.g., vessel 
strike resulting in death or severe injury) were not mentioned or 
evaluated in this IHA. RODA specifically noted concern regarding 
existing fishery restrictions as a result of other North Atlantic right 
whale (NARW) protections.
    Response: Neither the MMPA nor our implementing regulations require 
NMFS to analyze impacts to other industries (e.g., fisheries) or 
coastal communities from issuance of an incidental take authorization 
(ITA). Moreover, NMFS has determined that no serious injury or 
mortality is anticipated to result from COSW's specified activities and 
as discussed in the Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination 
section in this notice, only low-level behavioral harassment is 
expected for any affected species. For NARW in particular, it is 
considered unlikely, as a result of the required precautionary shutdown 
zone (i.e., 500 m versus the estimated maximum Level B harassment zone 
of 158 m), that the authorized take would occur at all.
    Comment: Multiple commenters expressed concern about an alleged 
lack of adequate analysis of cumulative impacts to marine mammals.
    Response: Neither the MMPA nor NMFS' codified implementing 
regulations call for consideration of other unrelated activities and 
their impacts on marine mammal populations. The preamble for NMFS' 
implementing regulations (54 FR 40338, September 29, 1989) states in 
response to comments that the impacts from other past and ongoing 
anthropogenic activities are to be incorporated into the negligible 
impact analysis via their impacts on the baseline. Consistent with that 
direction, NMFS has factored into its negligible impact analysis the 
impacts of other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities via their 
impacts on the baseline, e.g., as reflected in the density, 
distribution and status of the species, population size and growth 
rate, and other relevant stressors. The 1989 final rule for the MMPA 
implementing regulations also addressed public comments regarding 
cumulative effects from future, unrelated activities. There NMFS stated 
that such effects are not considered in making findings under MMPA 
section 101(a)(5) concerning negligible impact. In this case, this IHA, 
as well as other IHAs currently in effect or proposed within the 
specified geographic region, are appropriately considered an unrelated 
activity relative to the others. The IHAs are unrelated in the sense 
that they are discrete actions under section 101(a)(5)(D), issued to 
discrete applicants.
    Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA requires NMFS to make a 
determination that the take incidental to a ``specified activity'' will 
have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks of marine 
mammals. NMFS' implementing regulations 50 CFR 216.104(a)(1) require 
applicants to include in their request a detailed description of the 
specified activity or class of activities that can be expected to 
result in incidental taking of marine mammals. Thus, the ``specified 
activity'' for which incidental take coverage is being sought under 
section 101(a)(5)(D) is generally defined and described by the 
applicant. Here, COSW was the applicant for the IHA, and we are 
responding to the specified activity as described in that application 
and making the necessary findings on that basis.
    Through the response to public comments in the 1989 implementing 
regulations, NMFS also indicated (1) that we would consider cumulative 
effects that are reasonably foreseeable when preparing a NEPA analysis, 
and (2) that reasonably foreseeable cumulative effects would also be 
considered under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for ESA-
listed species, as appropriate. Accordingly, NMFS has written

[[Page 42326]]

Environmental Assessments (EA) that addressed cumulative impacts 
related to substantially similar activities in similar locations (e.g., 
the 2019 Avangrid EA for survey activities offshore North Carolina and 
Virginia; the 2017 Ocean Wind, LLC EA for site characterization surveys 
off New Jersey; and the 2018 Deepwater Wind EA for survey activities 
offshore Delaware, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island). Cumulative impacts 
regarding issuance of IHAs for site characterization survey activities 
such as those planned by COSW have been adequately addressed under NEPA 
in prior environmental analyses that support NMFS' determination that 
this action is appropriately categorically excluded from further NEPA 
analysis. NMFS independently evaluated the use of a categorical 
exclusion (CE) for issuance of COSW's IHA, which included consideration 
of extraordinary circumstances.
    Separately, the cumulative effects of substantially similar 
activities in the northwest Atlantic Ocean have been analyzed in the 
past under section 7 of the ESA when NMFS has engaged in formal intra-
agency consultation, such as the 2013 programmatic Biological Opinion 
for BOEM Lease and Site Assessment Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New 
York, and New Jersey Wind Energy Areas (https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/29291). Analyzed activities 
include those for which NMFS issued previous IHAs (82 FR 31562, July 7, 
2017; 83 FR 28808, June 21, 2018; 83 FR 36539, July 30, 2018; and 86 FR 
26465, May 10, 2021), which are similar to those planned by COSW under 
this current IHA request. This Biological Opinion (BiOp) determined 
that NMFS' issuance of IHAs for site characterization survey activities 
associated with leasing, individually and cumulatively, are not likely 
to adversely affect listed marine mammals. NMFS notes that, while 
issuance of this IHA is covered under a different consultation, this 
BiOp remains valid.
    Comment: Multiple commenters urged NMFS to deny the proposed 
project and/or postpone any offshore wind (OSW) activities until NMFS 
determines effects of all OSW activities on marine mammals in the 
region and determines that the recent whale deaths are not related to 
OSW activities. Similarly, some commenters provided general concerns 
regarding recent whale stranding events on the Atlantic Coast, 
including speculation that the strandings may be related to wind energy 
development-related activities. However, the commenters did not provide 
any specific information supporting these concerns.
    Response: NMFS authorizes take of marine mammals incidental to 
marine site characterization surveys but does not authorize the surveys 
themselves. Therefore, while NMFS has the authority to modify, suspend, 
or revoke an IHA if the IHA holder fails to abide by the conditions 
prescribed therein (including, but not limited to, failure to comply 
with monitoring or reporting requirements), or if NMFS determines that 
(1) the authorized taking is having or is likely to have more than a 
negligible impact on the species or stocks of affected marine mammals, 
or (2) the prescribed measures are likely not or are not effecting the 
least practicable adverse impact on the affected species or stocks and 
their habitat, it is not within NMFS' jurisdiction to impose a 
moratorium on offshore wind development or to require surveys to cease 
on the basis of unsupported speculation.
    NMFS reiterates that there is no evidence that noise resulting from 
offshore wind development-related site characterization surveys could 
potentially cause marine mammal stranding, and there is no evidence 
linking recent large whale mortalities and currently ongoing surveys. 
The commenters offer no such evidence. NMFS will continue to gather 
data to help us determine the cause of death for these stranded whales. 
We note the Marine Mammal Commission's recent statement: ``There 
continues to be no evidence to link these large whale strandings to 
offshore wind energy development, including no evidence to link them to 
sound emitted during wind development-related site characterization 
surveys, known as HRG surveys. Although HRG surveys have been occurring 
off New England and the mid-Atlantic coast, HRG devices have never been 
implicated or causatively-associated with baleen whale strandings.'' 
(Marine Mammal Commission Newsletter, Spring 2023).
    There is an ongoing Unusual Mortality Event (UME) for humpback 
whales along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida, which includes 
animals stranded since 2016. Partial or full necropsy examinations were 
conducted on approximately half of the whales. Necropsies were not 
conducted on other carcasses because they were too decomposed, not 
brought to land, or stranded on protected lands (e.g., national and 
state parks) with limited or no access. Of the whales examined (roughly 
90), about 40 percent had evidence of human interaction, either ship 
strike or entanglement. Vessel strikes and entanglement in fishing gear 
are the greatest human threats to large whales. The remaining 50 
necropsied whales either had an undetermined cause of death (due to a 
limited examination or decomposition of the carcass), or had other 
causes of death including parasite-caused organ damage and starvation.
    As discussed herein, HRG sources may behaviorally disturb marine 
mammals (e.g., avoidance of the immediate area). These HRG surveys are 
very different from seismic airguns used in oil and gas surveys or 
tactical military sonar. They produce much smaller impact zones 
because, in general, they have lower source levels and produce output 
at higher frequencies. The area within which HRG sources might 
behaviorally disturb a marine mammal is orders of magnitude smaller 
than the impact areas for seismic airguns or military sonar. Any marine 
mammal exposure would be at significantly lower levels and shorter 
duration, which is associated with less severe impacts to marine 
mammals.
    Comment: Several commenters expressed a concern that the proposed 
IHA and its associated specified activities would lead to mortality 
(death) of marine mammals.
    Response: NMFS emphasizes that there is no credible scientific 
evidence available suggesting that mortality and/or serious injury is a 
potential outcome of the planned survey activity. Additionally, NMFS 
cannot authorize mortality or serious injury via an IHA, and such 
taking is prohibited under Condition 3(c) of the IHA and may result in 
modification, suspension, or revocation of the IHA. NMFS notes there 
has never been a report of any serious injuries or mortalities of a 
marine mammal associated with site characterization surveys.
    The best available science indicates that Level B harassment, or 
disruption of behavioral patterns, may occur as a result of COSW's 
specified activities. We also refer to the Greater Atlantic Regional 
Fisheries Office (GARFO) 2021 Programmatic Consultation, which finds 
that these survey activities are in general not likely to adversely 
affect ESA-listed marine mammal species (i.e., GARFO's analysis 
conducted pursuant to the ESA finds that marine mammals are not likely 
to be taken at all (as that term is defined under the ESA), much less 
be taken by serious injury or mortality). That document is found at 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/consultations/
section-7-take-reporting-programmatics-greater-atlantic#offshore-wind-
site-

[[Page 42327]]

assessment-and-site-characterization-activities-programmatic-
consultation.
    Comment: COA states that there is no legal authority for permitting 
offshore geotechnical and geophysical survey activities under BOEM, 
based on text from the proposed BOEM Renewable Energy Modernization 
proposed rule (88 FR 5968, January 30, 2023; 88 FR 19578, April 3, 
2023). They further state that this has allowed for no oversight with 
regards to surveys off New Jersey and New York and that they do not 
understand how BOEM can make assertions without regulations/guidance 
for HRG survey work.
    Response: NMFS' statutory authority for this particular action is 
limited to authorizing incidental take of marine mammals. NMFS 
respectfully refers the commenter to BOEM, the agency with 
responsibility for managing development of U.S. Outer Continental Shelf 
energy and mineral resources in an environmentally and economically 
responsible way.
    Comment: RODA expressed concern regarding increased vessel traffic 
associated with OSW development generally and asserted that vessel 
speed restrictions are not ``fully mandated or enforced for OSW 
vessels.''
    Response: NMFS appreciates the commenter's concern regarding the 
potential for an overall increase in vessel traffic at the regional 
scale. However, we also note that concerns regarding the potential 
impacts of wind energy development in general are outside the scope of 
this specific action (i.e., issuance of an IHA associated with a 
specific HRG survey). NMFS takes seriously the risk of vessel strike 
and has prescribed measures to avoid the potential for vessel strike, 
despite a very low likelihood, to the extent practicable. The full list 
of mitigation measures can be found in Condition 4(m) of the IHA and in 
the Mitigation section of this notice. In addition, vessels towing 
survey gear travel at very slow speeds (4-5 kn) (reducing the already 
low likelihood of strike), and vessels associated with the survey 
activity will add a discountable amount of vessel traffic to the 
specific geographic region. We have determined that the IHA's vessel 
strike avoidance measures are sufficient to ensure the least 
practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat. 
Furthermore, NMFS is unaware of any vessel strikes related to marine 
site characterization surveys.
    RODA's reference to vessel speed restrictions being ``not fully 
mandated'' is unclear. NMFS refers again to its required vessel strike 
avoidance measures (see Condition 4(m)(ii) of the issued IHA), which 
requires that all vessels, regardless of size, observe a 10-knot speed 
restriction in SMAs, DMAs, and Slow Zones. Similarly, RODA does not 
provide a rationale for its suggestion that vessel speed restrictions 
are not enforced. We note that NMFS maintains an Enforcement Hotline 
for members of the public to report violations of vessel speed 
restrictions. Further, the IHA states that the IHA may be modified, 
suspended, or revoked if the holder fails to abide by the conditions 
prescribed therein.
    Comment: Several commenters expressed concern about the use of 
multiple vessels concurrently performing the survey work.
    Response: NMFS appreciates the commenters' concerns but notes that 
no evidence is provided to substantiate this concern. NMFS believes 
that the authorized take numbers adequately account for the potential 
take that may result from the proposed survey work, inclusive of the 
concurrent use of surveying vessels.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the review process for this IHA 
was too rapid and NMFS' due diligence was lacking.
    Response: Section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA and NMFS 
implementing regulations (50 CFR 216.104) specify the procedural 
requirements for IHA issuance. Additionally, NMFS' internal ITA 
application and review process includes numerous steps to ensure due 
diligence occurs for all ITA requests. In this case, NMFS received 
COSW's initial application on November 17, 2022, and completed several 
rounds of agency review and analysis before NMFS considered the 
application adequate and complete on March 1, 2023. NMFS drafted the 
Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA and proposed IHA, which 
went through additional rounds of internal review. The notice and 
proposed IHA were published in the Federal Register on April 21, 2023 
(88 FR 24574) and was open for a 30-day comment period (i.e., through 
May 22, 2023). NMFS reviewed all within-scope comments received for 
consideration in the final decisional process.
    More information on the authorization steps and timelines can be 
found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.
    Comment: Commenters stated that NMFS was not utilizing the best 
available science when assessing impacts to marine mammals.
    Response: NMFS relied upon the best scientific evidence available, 
including, but not limited to, the draft 2022 Stock Assessment Reports 
(SAR), scientific literature, and Duke University's density model 
(Roberts et al., 2022), in analyzing the impacts of COSW's specified 
activities on marine mammals. While commenters suggest generally that 
NMFS consider the best scientific evidence available, none of the 
commenters provided additional scientific information for NMFS to 
consider.
    Comment: RODA stated that, to their knowledge, there are no 
resources easily accessible to the public to understand what 
authorizations are required for each of these activities (pre-
construction surveys, construction, operations, monitoring surveys, 
etc.). RODA recommends that NMFS improve the transparency of this 
process and move away from what it refers to as a ``segmented phase-by-
phase and project-by-project approach to IHAs.'' RODA also requested a 
``comprehensive list/table of all Level A and Level B takes under 
currently approved authorizations per project, as well as Level A and 
Level B takes per project being requested in all authorization 
applications currently under review.''
    Response: The MMPA and its implementing regulations allow upon 
request, the incidental take of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. 
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial 
fishing) within a specified geographic region. NMFS authorizes the 
requested incidental take of marine mammals if it finds that the taking 
would be of small numbers, have no more than a ``negligible impact' on 
the marine mammal species or stock, and not have an ``unmitigable 
adverse impact'' on the availability of the species or stock for 
subsistence use. NMFS refers RODA to its website for more information 
on the marine mammal incidental take authorization process and 
timelines: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.
    NMFS emphasizes that an IHA does not authorize the activity itself 
but authorizes the take of marine mammals incidental to the ``specified 
activity'' for which incidental take coverage is being sought. In this 
case, NMFS is responding to COSW's request to incidentally take marine 
mammals while engaged in marine site characterization surveys and 
determining whether the necessary findings can be made based on COSW's 
application. The authorization of COSW's survey activities is not 
within NMFS' jurisdiction. NMFS refers RODA to BOEM's website: https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy.

[[Page 42328]]

    A list of all proposed and issued IHAs for renewable energy 
activities, such as COSW's marine site characterization surveys, 
including the requested, proposed, and/or authorized take is available 
on the agency website at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable.
    Comment: RODA expressed concern regarding the potential for 
increased uncertainty in estimates of marine mammal abundance resulting 
from wind turbine presence during aerial surveys and potential effects 
of NMFS' ability to continue using current aerial survey methods to 
fulfill its mission of precisely and accurately assessing protected 
species.
    Response: NMFS has determined that OSW development projects may 
impact several Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) surveys, 
including aerial surveys for protected species. NEFSC has developed a 
Federal survey mitigation program to mitigate the impacts to these 
surveys and is in the early stages of implementing this program. 
However, this impact is outside the scope of analysis related to the 
authorization of take incidental to COSW's specified activity under the 
MMPA.
    Comment: RODA commented that additional clarification should be 
added to the IHA that explicitly states if weather or other conditions 
that limit the range of observation of shutdown zones will be 
initiated. RODA and COA also questioned the feasibility of the shutdown 
mitigation requirements in real-world conditions and what would occur 
if the authorized take levels were exceeded. COA stated concerns on the 
required mitigation measures, assessing the effectiveness of the 
mitigation measures, and reporting the use of the mitigation measures 
in real-time.
    Response: In regards to a scenario where COSW exceeds their 
authorized take levels, any further take would be unauthorized and, 
therefore, prohibited under the MMPA. All mitigation measures stated in 
this notice and in the issued IHA are considered feasible. NMFS works 
with each ITA applicant, including COSW, to ensure that project-
specific mitigation measures are possible in real-world conditions. 
This includes shutdown zones when there is reduced visibility. As 
stated in the IHA condition 5(d), COSW must ensure certain equipment is 
provided to protected species observers (PSOs), such as thermal 
(infrared) cameras, to allow PSOs to adequately complete their duties, 
including in reduced-visibility conditions. NMFS does not agree that 
additional wording is necessary within the IHA to further describe the 
requirement and implementation of shutdown zones. If NMFS determines 
during the effective period of the IHA that the prescribed measures are 
likely not or are not effecting the least practicable adverse impact on 
the affected species or stocks and their habitat, NMFS may modify, 
suspend, or revoke the IHA. NMFS disagrees that the IHA's mitigation 
measures are insufficient.
    NMFS reviews required reporting (see Monitoring and Reporting) and 
uses the information to evaluate the mitigation measure effectiveness. 
Additionally, the mitigation measures included in COSW's IHA are not 
unique, and data from prior IHAs support the effectiveness of these 
mitigation measures. NMFS finds the level of reporting currently 
required is sufficient for managing the issued IHA and monitoring the 
affected stocks of marine mammals.
    Comment: Some comments objected to NMFS' ``small numbers'' 
determination for the numbers of marine mammals taken by Level B 
harassment under COSW's planned activities.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with the commenters' arguments on the 
topic of small numbers. Although there is limited legislative history 
available to guide NMFS and an apparent lack of biological underpinning 
to the concept, we have worked to develop a reasoned approach to small 
numbers. NMFS explains the concept of ``small numbers'' in recognition 
that there could also be quantities of individuals taken that would 
correspond with ``medium'' and ``large'' numbers. As such, NMFS 
considers that one-third of the most appropriate population abundance 
number--as compared with the assumed number of individuals taken--is an 
appropriate limit with regard to ``small numbers.'' This relative 
approach is consistent with the statement from the legislative history 
that ``[small numbers] is not capable of being expressed in absolute 
numerical limits'' (H.R. Rep. No. 97-228, at 19 (September 16, 1981)), 
and relevant case law (Center for Biological Diversity v. Salazar, 695 
F.3d 893, 907 (9th Cir. 2012) (holding that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service reasonably interpreted ``small numbers'' by analyzing take in 
relative or proportional terms)). NMFS has made the necessary small 
numbers finding for all affected species and stocks in this case.
    Comment: Several commenters expressed interest in understanding the 
outcome if the number of actual takes exceed the number authorized 
during construction of an offshore wind project (i.e., would the 
project be stopped mid-construction or operation), and how offshore 
wind developers will be held accountable for impacts to protected 
species such that impacts are not inadvertently assigned to fishermen, 
should they occur. Lastly, RODA maintains that the OSW industry must be 
accountable for incidental takes from construction and operations 
separately from the take authorizations for managed commercial fish 
stocks.
    Response: NMFS reiterates that this IHA authorizes incidental take 
of marine mammals during marine site characterization survey activities 
and not offshore wind project construction and operation activities. 
Therefore, these comments are outside the scope of the proposed IHA. 
Fishing impacts generally center on entanglement in fishing gear, which 
is a very acute, visible, and severe impact. In contrast, the impacts 
incidental to COSW's site characterization survey activities are 
primarily acoustic in nature resulting in behavioral disturbance. 
Because of the difference in potential impacts (i.e., physical versus 
auditory), any impacts resulting from COSW's survey activities would 
not be assigned to fishermen. The impacts of commercial fisheries on 
marine mammals and incidental take for said fishing activities are 
managed separately from those of non-commercial fishing activities such 
as offshore wind site characterization surveys, under MMPA section 118.
    Comment: COA expressed concern regarding ocean noise and the 
interference it has on communication between whales.
    Response: NMFS has carefully reviewed the best available scientific 
information in assessing impacts to marine mammals and determined that 
the surveys have the potential to impact marine mammals through 
behavioral effects and auditory masking. NMFS agrees that noise 
pollution in marine waters is an issue and is affecting marine mammals, 
including their ability to communicate when noise reaches certain 
thresholds. However, NMFS does not expect that the generally short-
term, intermittent, and transitory marine site characterization survey 
activities planned by COSW will create conditions of acute or chronic 
acoustic exposure leading to long-term physiological impacts in marine 
mammals. NMFS' prescribed mitigation measures are expected to further 
reduce the duration and intensity of acoustic exposure, while limiting 
the potential severity of any possible behavioral disruption. NMFS has 
determined

[[Page 42329]]

COSW's activities will not result in injury or mortality (death) of any 
marine mammal species.

Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA

    One change was made from the proposed IHA as a result of 
consultation with GARFO: an addition to the Monitoring and Reporting 
section specifying requirements relating to the use of a ``trained 
lookout'' in lieu of a PSO during required breaks for the approved PSO 
on duty on space-limited nearshore vessels.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information 
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and 
behavior and life history of the potentially affected species. NMFS 
fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader to 
these descriptions, incorporated here by reference, instead of 
reprinting the information. Additional information regarding population 
trends and threats may be found in NMFS' 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 (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
    Table 1 lists all species or stocks for which take is authorized 
for this activity, and summarizes information related to the species or 
stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA, and 
potential biological removal (PBR), where known. PBR is defined by the 
MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural 
mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while 
allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable 
population (as described in NMFS' SARs). While no serious injury or 
mortality is authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and 
mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as gross 
indicators of the status of the species or stocks and other threats.
    Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document 
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or 
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. 
NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total 
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that 
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend 
beyond U.S. waters. All MMPA managed stocks in this region are assessed 
in NMFS' U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico SARs. All values presented in 
Table 1 are the most recent available at the time of publication 
(including from the draft 2022 SARs) and are available online at: 
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments.

                                       Table 1--Species and Stocks Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      ESA/MMPA status;   Stock abundance  (CV,
            Common name                  Scientific name              Stock           strategic (Y/N)      Nmin, most recent        PBR       Annual  M/
                                                                                            \2\          abundance survey) \3\                  SI \4\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Order Artiodactyla--Infraorder Cetacea--Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenidae:
    North Atlantic right whale.....  Eubalaena glacialis...  Western North Atlantic  E/D; Y             338 (0; 332; 2020)....          0.7          8.1
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
    Fin whale......................  Balaenoptera physalus.  Western North Atlantic  E/D; Y             6,802 (0.24; 5,573,              11          1.8
                                                                                                         2016).
    Humpback whale.................  Megaptera novaeangliae  Gulf of Maine.........  -/-; Y             1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016)           22        12.15
    Minke whale....................  Balaenoptera            Canadian East Coastal.  -/-; N             21,968 (0.31; 17,002;           170         10.6
                                      acutrostrata.                                                      2016).
    Sei whale......................  Balaenoptera borealis.  Nova Scotia...........  E/D; Y             6,292 (1.02; 3,098;             6.2          0.8
                                                                                                         2016).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  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:
    Atlantic spotted dolphin.......  Stenella frontalis....  Western North Atlantic  -/-; N             39,921 (0.27; 32,032;           320            0
                                                                                                         2016).
    Atlantic white-sided dolphin...  Lagenorhynchus acutus.  Western North Atlantic  -/-; N             93,233 (0.71;54,443;            544           27
                                                                                                         2016).
    Bottlenose dolphin.............  Tursiops truncatus....  Western North           -/-; N             62,851 (0.23; 51,914;           519           28
                                                              Atlantic, Offshore.                        2016).
    Bottlenose dolphin.............  Tursiops truncatus....  Western North           -/D; Y             6,639 (0.41; 4,759;              48    12.2-21.5
                                                              Atlantic, Northern                         2016).
                                                              Migratory Coastal.
    Long-finned pilot whale........  Globicephala melas....  Western North Atlantic  -/-; N             39,215 (0.3; 30,627;            306            9
                                                                                                         2016).
    Risso's dolphin................  Grampus griseus.......  Western North Atlantic  -/-; N             35,215 (0.19; 30,051;           301           34
                                                                                                         2016).
    Common dolphin.................  Delphinus delphis.....  Western North Atlantic  -/-; N             172,974 (0.21;                1,452          390
                                                                                                         145,216; 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--Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
    Gray seal \5\..................  Halichoerus grypus....  Western North Atlantic  -/-; N             27,300 (0.22; 22,785;         1,389        4,453
                                                                                                         2016).

[[Page 42330]]

 
    Harbor seal....................  Phoca vitulina........  Western North Atlantic  -/-; N             61,336 (0.08; 57,637;         1,729          329
                                                                                                         2018).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy's Committee on Taxonomy
  (https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/; Committee on Taxonomy (2022)).
\2\ 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.
\3\ 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.
\4\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (M/SI; e.g.,
  commercial fisheries, vessel strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A
  CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\5\ NMFS's stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to the U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in Canada)
  is approximately 451,600. The annual M/SI given is for the total stock.

    A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by this 
project, including brief introductions to the species and relevant 
stocks, population trends and threats, and local occurrence, were 
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (88 FR 
24574, April 21, 2023). Since that time, we are not aware of any 
changes in the status of these species and stocks; therefore, detailed 
descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to that Federal 
Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer to the NMFS 
website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for generalized 
species accounts.

Marine Mammal Hearing

    Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals 
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious 
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to 
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine 
mammals are able to hear. Not all marine mammal species have equal 
hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 2005, Wartzok and 
Ketten, 1999, Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. 
(2007), Southall et al. (2019) recommended that marine mammals be 
divided into hearing groups based on directly measured (behavioral or 
auditory evoked potential techniques) or estimated hearing ranges 
(behavioral response data, anatomical modeling, etc.). Note that no 
direct measurements of hearing ability have been successfully completed 
for mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS 
(2018) described generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal 
hearing groups. Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the 
approximately 65-decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite 
audiograms, with the exception for lower limits for low-frequency 
cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to be biologically 
implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. 
Marine mammal hearing groups and their associated hearing ranges are 
provided in Table 2.

           Table 2--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 approximately 65 dB threshold from
  normalized composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits
  for LF cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped
  (approximation).

    The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et 
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have 
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing 
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range 
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006, Kastelein et al., 2009, Reichmuth et al., 
2013).
    For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency 
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    A description of the potential effects of the specified activities 
on marine mammals and their habitat can be found in the Federal 
Register notice for the proposed IHA (88 FR 24574, April 21, 2023). 
There is no new information on the potential effects of the specified 
activities on marine mammals. Therefore, that information is not 
repeated here; please refer to the Federal Register notice (88 FR 
24574, April 21, 2023).

Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes 
authorized through the IHA, which informs both NMFS' ``small numbers'' 
and the negligible impact determinations.
    Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these 
activities. Except with respect to certain activities

[[Page 42331]]

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 are by Level B harassment only, in the form of 
disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals 
resulting from exposure to sound produced by the sparkers. Based on the 
characteristics of the signals produced by the acoustic sources planned 
for use, Level A harassment is neither anticipated (even absent 
mitigation) nor authorized. As described previously, no serious injury 
or mortality is anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we 
describe how the take numbers are estimated.
    For acoustic impacts, generally speaking, we estimate take by 
considering: (1) acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best 
available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally 
harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the 
area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a 
day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these 
ensonified areas; and, (4) the number of days of activities. We note 
that while these factors can contribute to a basic calculation to 
provide an initial prediction of potential takes, additional 
information that can qualitatively inform take estimates is also 
sometimes available (e.g., previous monitoring results or average group 
size). Below, we describe the factors considered here in more detail 
and present the authorized take estimates.

Acoustic Thresholds

    NMFS recommends the use of 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 or exposure context (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty 
cycle, duration of the exposure, signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the 
source), the environment (e.g., bathymetry, other noises in the area, 
predators in the area), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, 
experience, demography, life stage, depth) and can be difficult to 
predict (e.g., Ellison et al., 2012, Southall et al., 2007, Southall et 
al., 2021). Based on what the available science indicates and the 
practical need to use a threshold based on a metric that is both 
predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS typically uses a 
generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the 
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS generally predicts that marine 
mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner considered 
to be Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise 
above root mean squared (RMS) SPL of 120 dB (referenced to 1 
microPascal (re 1 [mu]Pa)) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile 
driving, drilling) and above RMS SPL 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa for non-
explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., 
scientific sonar) sources.
    Generally speaking, Level B harassment take estimates based on 
these behavioral harassment thresholds are expected to include any 
likely takes by TTS as, in most cases, the likelihood of TTS occurs at 
distances from the source less than those at which behavioral 
harassment is likely. TTS of a sufficient degree can manifest as 
behavioral harassment, as reduced hearing sensitivity and the potential 
reduced opportunities to detect important signals (conspecific 
communication, predators, prey) may result in changes in behavior 
patterns that would not otherwise occur.
    COSW's marine site characterization surveys include the use of 
impulsive (i.e., sparker) sources, and therefore the RMS SPL threshold 
of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa is applicable.
    Level A harassment--NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the 
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) 
(Technical Guidance; NMFS, 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).
    The references, analysis, and methodology used in the development 
of the thresholds are described in NMFS (2018) Technical Guidance, 
which may be accessed at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
    COSW's marine site characterization surveys include the use of 
impulsive (i.e., sparker) 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 
planned for use here, and the potential for Level A harassment is not 
evaluated further in this document. Please see COSW's application for 
details of a quantitative exposure analysis exercise (i.e., calculated 
Level A harassment isopleths and estimated Level A harassment 
exposures). COSW did not request authorization of take by Level A 
harassment, and no take by Level A harassment is authorized by NMFS.

Ensonified Area

    Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the 
activity that are used in estimating the area ensonified above the 
acoustic thresholds, including source levels and transmission loss 
coefficient.
    NMFS has developed a user-friendly methodology for estimating the 
extent of the Level B harassment isopleths associated with relevant HRG 
survey equipment (NMFS, 2020). This methodology incorporates frequency 
and directionality (when relevant) 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. 
COSW used 180-degree beamwidth in the calculation for the planned 
sparker as is appropriate for an omnidirectional source.
    NMFS considers the data provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) 
to represent the best available information on source levels associated 
with HRG survey equipment and, therefore, recommends that source levels 
provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be incorporated in the 
method described above to estimate isopleth distances to harassment 
thresholds. In cases where the source level for a specific type of HRG 
equipment is not provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS 
recommends 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 in the Federal Register notice for the 
proposed IHA (88 FR 24574, April 21, 2023) shows the HRG equipment type 
used during the

[[Page 42332]]

planned surveys and the source levels associated with those HRG 
equipment types.
    COSW plans to use the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark UHD 400+400 (400 
tip/300-1000 J) and the Geo-Source 200-400 Marine Multi-tip Sparker 
System (400 tip/300-1000 J). For all source configurations (Table 1 in 
the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (88 FR 24574, April 
21, 2023)), the maximum power expected to be discharged from the 
sparker source is 1,000 J. However, Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) did 
not measure the Dura-Spark with an energy of 1,000 J, only 500 J, 2,000 
J, and 2,400 J, so the source level values for 500 J (provided in Table 
10 of Crocker and Fratantonio, 2016) were used as a proxy, as this 
setting was anticipated to be more representative of the application of 
the equipment than the next level reported for 2,000 J. The Applied 
Acoustics Dura-Spark was also used as a proxy for the Geo-Source 200-
400 Marine Multi-tip Sparker System (400 tip/300-1000 J). Using the 
measured source level of 203 dB RMS SPL of the proxy, results of 
modeling indicated that both sparkers would produce an estimated 
distance of 141 m to the Level B harassment isopleth.
    Results of modeling using the methodology described above indicated 
that, of the HRG survey equipment planned for use by the applicant 
(Table 1 in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (88 FR 
24574, April 21, 2023)) that has the potential to result in Level B 
harassment of marine mammals, both systems would produce the same 
distance to the Level B harassment isopleth (141 m). More detail is 
provided on the acoustic sources and methodology in the Federal 
Register notice for the proposed IHA; please refer to the Federal 
Register notice (88 FR 24574, April 21, 2023).

Marine Mammal Occurrence

    In this section, we provide information about the occurrence of 
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information that 
will inform the take calculations.
    Habitat-based density models produced by the Duke University Marine 
Geospatial Ecology Laboratory (Roberts et al., 2016; Roberts et al., 
2022) represent the best available information regarding marine mammal 
densities in the planned survey area. These density data incorporate 
aerial and shipboard line-transect survey data from NMFS and other 
organizations and incorporate data from numerous physiographic and 
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 in 2016 
and models for all taxa were updated in 2022 (Roberts et al., 2016; 
Roberts et al., 2022). More information is available online at https://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.
    For the exposure analysis, density data from Roberts et al. (2022) 
were mapped using a geographic information system (GIS). For the survey 
area, the monthly densities of each species as reported by Roberts et 
al. (2022) were averaged by season; thus, a density was calculated for 
each species for spring, summer, fall, and winter. Density seasonal 
averages were calculated for both the Lease Area and the ECR Area for 
each species to assess the greatest average seasonal densities for each 
species. To be conservative since the exact timing for the survey 
during the year is uncertain, the greatest average seasonal density 
calculated for each species was carried forward in the exposure 
analysis, with exceptions noted later in this discussion. Estimated 
greatest average seasonal densities (animals/km\2\) of marine mammal 
species that may be taken incidental to the planned survey can be found 
in Tables 6-1 and 6-2 of COSW's IHA application. Below, we discuss how 
densities were assumed to apply to specific species for which the 
Roberts et al. (2022) models provide results at the genus or guild 
level.
    There are two stocks of bottlenose dolphins that may be impacted by 
the surveys (Western North Atlantic Northern Migratory Coastal Stock 
(Coastal Stock) and Western North Atlantic Offshore Stock (Offshore 
Stock)); however, Roberts et al. (2022) do not differentiate by stock. 
The Coastal Stock is assumed to generally occur in waters <20 m (65 ft) 
and the Offshore Stock in waters deeper than 20 m (65 ft) isobath. The 
Lease Area is in waters >20 m (65 ft) depth and only the Offshore Stock 
would occur and potentially be taken by survey effort in that area. 
Both stocks could occur in the ECR Area, so COSW calculated separate 
mean seasonal densities for the portion that is <20 m depth and for the 
portion that is >20 m depth to use for estimating take of the Coastal 
and Offshore Stocks of bottlenose dolphins, respectively.
    Furthermore, the Roberts et al. (2022) density model does not 
differentiate between the different pinniped species. For seals, given 
their size and behavior when in the water, seasonality, and feeding 
preferences, there is limited information available on species-specific 
distribution. Density estimates from Roberts et al. (2022) include all 
seal species that may occur in the Western North Atlantic combined 
(i.e., gray, harbor, harp, hooded). For this IHA, only gray seals and 
harbor seals are reasonably expected to occur in the survey area; 
densities of seals were split evenly between these two species.
    Finally, the Roberts et al. (2022) density model does not 
differentiate between pilot whale species. While the exact latitudinal 
ranges of the two species are uncertain, only long-finned pilot whales 
are expected to occur in this project area due to their more northerly 
distribution and tolerance of shallower, colder shelf waters (Hayes et 
al., 2022). We assume that all pilot whales near the project area would 
be long-finned pilot whales due to their range overlapping and short-
finned pilot whales are not anticipated to occur as far north as the 
survey area (Garrison and Rosel, 2017). For this IHA, densities of 
pilot whales are assumed to be only long-finned pilot whale.

Take Estimation

    Here we describe how the information provided above is synthesized 
to produce a quantitative estimate of the take that is reasonably 
likely to occur and authorized.
    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 were calculated, as described above. The distance (i.e., 141 
m distance associated with both sparker systems) to the Level B 
harassment criterion and the total length of the survey trackline were 
then used to calculate the total ensonified area, or harassment zone, 
around the survey vessel.
    COSW proposes to conduct HRG surveys for a maximum total of 30,467 
km trackline length, of which a maximum of 28,290 km are in the Lease 
Area and 2,177 km are in the ECR Area. Of the ECR Area trackline, 400 
km are in waters <20 m depth. COSW is requesting take based on the 3D 
scenario as it results in the largest estimated harassment zone based 
on the planned equipment configuration, trackline distance, and 
resulting ensonified area. The 3D scenario would use a three sparker 
array with 400 tips (either Geo-Source 200-400 or Applied Acoustics 
Dura-Spark UHD) activating

[[Page 42333]]

sequentially 750 milliseconds apart, so the Harassment Zone was modeled 
for each sparker and allowed for up to the maximum proposed 16.7 m 
spacing between each sparker (see Figure 6-2 in the application). Based 
on this, the distance to Level B harassment threshold from the center 
line of the 3D scenario survey was estimated to be 157.7 m (R). Based 
on the maximum estimated distance to the Level B harassment threshold 
and maximum total survey length, the total ensonified area is 9,611 
km\2\ (8,923 km\2\ Lease Area and 688 km\2\ ECR Area), based on the 
following formula, where the total estimated trackline length (L) in 
each area was used and buffered with the horizontal distance to the 
Level B harassment threshold (R) for the 3D scenario to determine the 
total area ensonified to 160 dB RMS SPL.

Harassment Zone = (L x 2R) + [pi]R\2\

    This is a conservative estimate as it assumes the scenario that 
results in the greatest distance to the Level B harassment threshold 
(3D scenario) would be operated at all times during the entire survey, 
which may not ultimately occur.
    The number of marine mammals expected to be incidentally taken 
during the total survey is then calculated by estimating the number of 
each species predicted to occur within the ensonified area (animals/
km\2\), incorporating the greatest seasonal estimated marine mammal 
densities as described above. The product is then rounded to generate 
an estimate of the total number of instances of harassment expected for 
each species over the duration of the survey (up to 293 days). A 
summary of this method is illustrated in the following formula, where 
the Harassment Zone is multiplied by the highest seasonal mean density 
(D) of each species or stock (animals/km\2\; except for pilot whales 
where annual density was used based on data availability).

Estimated Take = Harassment Zone x D

    The resulting take of marine mammals (Level B harassment) shown in 
Table 3.

                            Table 3--Estimated Take Numbers and Total Take Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Estimated take --  Estimated take --      Total take         Percent of
               Species                    lease area          ECR area          authorized       abundance \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Atlantic right whale..........                 23                  1                 24                6.8
Humpback whale......................                 44                  2                 46                0.4
Fin whale...........................                 73                  3                 76                1.1
Sei whale...........................                 23                  1                 24                0.4
Minke whale.........................                286                 18                304                1.4
Sperm whale.........................                 10                  0                 10                0.1
Risso's dolphin.....................                 57                  2                 59                0.2
Long-finned pilot whale.............                 77                  1                 78                0.2
Atlantic white-sided dolphin........                409                 18                427                0.5
Common dolphin......................              5,431                141              5,572                3.2
Atlantic spotted dolphin............                315                  5                320                0.8
Harbor porpoise.....................              1,807                105              1,912                  2
Common bottlenose dolphin (Offshore               1,212                104              1,316                2.1
 Stock).............................
Common bottlenose dolphin (Northern                   0                115                115                1.7
 Migratory Coastal Stock)...........
Gray seal...........................              1,764                191              1,955            \2\ 0.4
Harbor seal.........................              1,764                191              1,955                2.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: take requests are all greater than average group size (see Appendix C of application).
\1\ Based on the 2022 draft marine mammal SARs.
\2\ This abundance estimate is based on the total stock abundance (including animals in Canada). The NMFS stock
  abundance estimate for U.S. population is only 27,300.

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, NMFS considers two primary factors:
    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful 
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to 
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. 
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being 
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the 
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented 
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as 
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability 
implemented as planned); and,
    (2) The practicability of the measures for applicant 
implementation, which may consider such things as cost and impact on 
operations.
    The following mitigation measures must be implemented during COSW's 
planned marine site characterization surveys. Pursuant to section 7 of 
the ESA, COSW would also be required to adhere to relevant Project 
Design Criteria (PDC) of the NMFS' 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).

Visual Monitoring and Shutdown Zones

    COSW must employ independent, dedicated, trained PSOs, meaning that 
the PSOs must (1) be employed by a third-party observer provider, (2) 
have

[[Page 42334]]

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 geophysical surveys. 
Visual monitoring must be performed by qualified, NMFS-approved PSOs. 
PSO resumes must be provided to NMFS for review and approval prior to 
the start of survey activities.
    During survey operations (e.g., any day in which use of the sparker 
source is planned to occur, and whenever the sparker source is in the 
water, whether activated or not), a minimum of one visual PSO must be 
on duty on each source vessel and conducting visual observations at all 
times during daylight hours (i.e., from 30 minutes (min) prior to 
sunrise through 30 min following sunset). A minimum of two PSOs must be 
on duty on each source vessel during nighttime hours. Visual monitoring 
must begin no less than 30 min prior to ramp-up (described below) and 
must continue until 1 hr after use of the sparker source ceases.
    Visual PSOs shall coordinate to ensure 360[deg] visual coverage 
around the vessel from the most appropriate observation posts and shall 
conduct visual observations using binoculars and the naked eye while 
free from distractions and in a consistent, systematic, and diligent 
manner. PSOs shall establish and monitor applicable shutdown zones (see 
below). These zones shall be based upon the radial distance from the 
sparker source (rather than being based around the vessel itself).
    Two shutdown zones are defined, depending on the species and 
context. Here, an extended shutdown zone encompassing the area at and 
below the sea surface out to a radius of 500 m from the sparker source 
(0-500 m) is defined for NARW. For all other marine mammals, the 
shutdown zone encompasses a standard distance of 100 m (0-100 m) during 
the use of the sparker. Any observations of marine mammals by crew 
members aboard any vessel associated with the survey shall be relayed 
to the PSO team.
    Visual PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of 4 consecutive hours 
followed by a break of at least 1 hr between watches and may conduct a 
maximum of 12 hr of observation per 24-hr period.

Pre-Start Clearance and Ramp-Up Procedures

    A ramp-up procedure, involving a gradual increase in source level 
output, is required at all times as part of the activation of the 
sparker sources when technically feasible. Operators should ramp up 
sparker to half power for 5 min and then proceed to full power. A 30 
min pre-start clearance observation period of the shutdown zones must 
occur prior to the start of ramp-up. The intent of the pre-start 
clearance observation period (30 min) is to ensure no marine mammals 
are within the shutdown zones prior to the beginning of ramp-up. The 
intent of the ramp-up is to warn marine mammals of pending operations 
and to allow sufficient time for those animals to leave the immediate 
vicinity. All operators must adhere to the following pre-start 
clearance and ramp-up requirements:
     The operator must notify a designated PSO of the planned 
start of ramp-up as agreed upon with the lead PSO; the notification 
time should not be less than 60 min prior to the planned ramp-up in 
order to allow the PSOs time to monitor the shutdown zones for 30 min 
prior to the initiation of ramp-up (pre-start clearance). During this 
30 min pre-start clearance period the entire shutdown zone must be 
visible, except as indicated below;
     Ramp-ups shall be scheduled so as to minimize the time 
spent with the source activated;
     A visual PSO conducting pre-start clearance observations 
must be notified again immediately prior to initiating ramp-up 
procedures and the operator must receive confirmation from the PSO to 
proceed;
     Any PSO on duty has the authority to delay the start of 
survey operations if a marine mammal is detected within the applicable 
pre-start clearance zone; and
     The operator must establish and maintain clear lines of 
communication directly between PSOs on duty and crew controlling the 
acoustic source to ensure that mitigation commands are conveyed swiftly 
while allowing PSOs to maintain watch.
    The pre-start clearance requirement is waived for small delphinids 
and pinnipeds. Detection of a small delphinid (individual belonging to 
the following genera of the Family Delphinidae: Steno, Delphinus, 
Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, and Tursiops) or pinniped within the shutdown 
zone does not preclude beginning of ramp-up, unless the PSO confirms 
the individual to be of a genus other than those listed, in which case 
normal pre-clearance requirements apply.
    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 the pre-clearance requirement is 
waived), PSOs may use best professional judgment in making the decision 
to call for a shutdown.
     Ramp-up may not be initiated if any marine mammal to which 
the pre-start clearance requirement applies is within the shutdown 
zone. If a marine mammal is observed within the shutdown zone during 
the 30 min pre-start clearance period, ramp-up may not begin until the 
animal(s) has been observed exiting the zones or until an additional 
time period has elapsed with no further sightings (30 min for all 
baleen whale species and sperm whales, 15 min for all other species).
     PSOs must monitor the shutdown zones 30 min before and 
during ramp-up, and ramp-up must cease and the source must be shut down 
upon observation of a marine mammal within the applicable shutdown 
zone.
     Ramp-up may occur at times of poor visibility, including 
nighttime, if appropriate visual monitoring has occurred with no 
detections of marine mammals in the 30 min prior to beginning ramp-up. 
Sparker activation may only occur at night where operational planning 
cannot reasonably avoid such circumstances.
    If the acoustic source is shut down for brief periods (i.e., <30 
min) for reasons other than implementation of prescribed mitigation 
(e.g., mechanical difficulty), it may be activated again without ramp-
up if PSOs have maintained constant visual observation and no 
detections of marine mammals have occurred within the applicable 
shutdown zone. For any longer shutdown, pre-start clearance observation 
and ramp-up are required.

Shutdown Procedures

    All operators must adhere to the following shutdown requirements:
     Any PSO on duty has the authority to call for shutdown of 
the sparker source if a marine mammal is detected within the applicable 
shutdown zone;
     The operator must establish and maintain clear lines of 
communication directly between PSOs on duty and crew controlling the 
source to ensure that shutdown commands are conveyed swiftly while 
allowing PSOs to maintain watch;
     When the sparker source is active and a marine mammal 
appears within or enters the applicable shutdown zone, the source must 
be shut down. When

[[Page 42335]]

shutdown is instructed by a PSO, the sparker source must be immediately 
deactivated and any dispute resolved only following deactivation; and
     Two shutdown zones are defined, depending on the species 
and context. An extended shutdown zone encompassing the area at and 
below the sea surface out to a radius of 500 m from the sparker source 
(0-500 m) is defined for NARW. For all other marine mammals, the 
shutdown zone encompasses a standard distance of 100 m (0-100 m) during 
the use of the sparker.
    The shutdown requirement is waived for small delphinids and 
pinnipeds. If a small delphinid (individual belonging to the following 
genera of the Family Delphinidae: Steno, Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, 
Stenella, and Tursiops) or pinniped is visually detected within the 
shutdown zone, no shutdown is required unless the PSO confirms the 
individual to be of a genus other than those listed, in which case a 
shutdown is required.
    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 or one of the species 
with a larger shutdown zone), PSOs may use best professional judgment 
in making the decision to call for a shutdown.
    Upon implementation of shutdown, the source may be reactivated 
after the marine mammal has been observed exiting the applicable 
shutdown zone or following a clearance period (30 min for all baleen 
whale species and sperm whales, 15 min for all other species) with no 
further detection of the marine mammal.
    If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or a 
species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized 
number of takes have been met, approaches or is observed within the 
Level B harassment zone (158 m), shutdown must occur.

Vessel Strike Avoidance

    Crew and supply vessel personnel must use an appropriate reference 
guide that includes identifying information on all marine mammals that 
may be encountered. Vessel operators must comply with the below 
measures except under extraordinary circumstances when the safety of 
the vessel or crew is in doubt or the safety of life at sea is in 
question. These requirements do not apply in any case where compliance 
would create an imminent and serious threat to a person or vessel or to 
the extent that a vessel is restricted in its ability to maneuver and, 
because of the restriction, cannot comply.
    Vessel operators and crews must maintain a vigilant watch for all 
marine mammals and slow down, stop their vessel(s), or alter course, as 
appropriate and regardless of vessel size, to avoid striking any marine 
mammals. A single marine mammal at the surface may indicate the 
presence of submerged animals in the vicinity of the vessel; therefore, 
precautionary measures should always be exercised. A visual observer 
aboard the vessel must monitor a vessel strike avoidance zone around 
the vessel (species-specific distances are detailed 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 marine mammal from other phenomena and (2) broadly to 
identify a marine mammal as a NARW, other whale (defined in this 
context as sperm whales or baleen whales other than NARWs), or other 
marine mammals.
    All survey vessels, regardless of size, must observe a 10-kn 
(18.52-km/h) speed restriction in specific areas designated by NMFS for 
the protection of NARWs from vessel strikes. These include all SMAs 
established under 50 CFR 224.105 (when in effect), any DMAs (when in 
effect), and Slow Zones. See www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales for specific detail regarding these areas.
     All vessels must reduce speed to 10 kn (18.52 km/h) 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 NARWs, baleen whales (except humpback and minke), sperm 
whales, and any unidentified large whales. If a NARW, baleen whale 
(except humpback and minke), sperm whale, and any unidentified large 
whale is sighted within the relevant separation distance, the vessel 
must steer a course away at 10 kn (18.52 km/h) or less until the 500-m 
separation distance has been established. If a whale is observed but 
cannot be confirmed as a species other than a NARW, the vessel operator 
must assume that it is a NARW and take appropriate action.
     All vessels must maintain a minimum separation distance of 
100 m from all humpback and minke 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, reduce speed and shift 
the engine to neutral). This does not apply to any vessel towing gear 
or any vessel that is navigationally constrained.
    Members of the PSO team will consult NMFS NARW reporting system and 
Whale Alert, daily and as able, for the presence of NARWs throughout 
survey operations, and for the establishment of DMAs and/or Slow Zones. 
It is COSW's responsibility to maintain awareness of the establishment 
and location of any such areas and to abide by these requirements 
accordingly.

Seasonal Operating Requirements

    As described above, a section of the survey area partially overlaps 
with a portion of a NARW SMA off the port of New York/New Jersey. This 
SMA is active from November 1 through April 30 of each year. The survey 
vessel, regardless of length, would be required to adhere to vessel 
speed restrictions (<10 kn (18.52 km/h)) when operating within the SMA 
during times when the SMA is active (Table 4).

      Table 4--North Atlantic Right Whale Dynamic Management Area (DMA) and Seasonal Management Area (SMA)
                                       Restrictions Within the Survey Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Survey area                  Species        DMA restrictions       Slow zones       SMA restrictions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lease Area......................  North Atlantic      If established by   If established by   N/A.
                                   right whale.        NMFS, all of        NMFS, all of
                                                       COSW's vessel       COSW's vessel
                                                       will abide by the   will abide by the
                                                       described           described
                                                       restrictions.       restrictions.

[[Page 42336]]

 
ECR Area (within SMA)...........  North Atlantic      If established by   If established by   November 1 through
                                   right whale.        NMFS, all of        NMFS, all of        April 31 (Ports
                                                       COSW's vessel       COSW's vessel       of New York/New
                                                       will abide by the   will abide by the   Jersey).
                                                       described           described
                                                       restrictions.       restrictions.
ECR Area (outside SMA)..........  North Atlantic      If established by   If established by   N/A.
                                   right whale.        NMFS, all of        NMFS, all of
                                                       COSW's vessel       COSW's vessel
                                                       will abide by the   will abide by the
                                                       described           described
                                                       restrictions.       restrictions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information on vessel strike reduction for the NARW can be found at NMFS' website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales whales.

    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's planned measures, as 
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the 
planned mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least 
practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, 
paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 
similar significance.

Monitoring and Reporting

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

Monitoring Measures

    Visual monitoring must be performed by qualified, NMFS-approved 
PSOs. COSW must submit PSO resumes for NMFS review and approval prior 
to commencement of the survey. Resumes should include dates of training 
and any prior NMFS approval, as well as dates and description of last 
experience, and must be accompanied by information documenting 
successful completion of an acceptable training course.
    For prospective PSOs not previously approved, or for PSOs whose 
approval is not current, NMFS must review and approve PSO 
qualifications. Resumes should include information related to relevant 
education, experience, and training, including dates, duration, 
location, and description of prior PSO experience. Resumes must be 
accompanied by relevant documentation of successful completion of 
necessary training.
    NMFS may approve PSOs as conditional or unconditional. A 
conditionally-approved PSO may be one who is trained but has not yet 
attained the requisite experience. An unconditionally-approved PSO is 
one who has attained the necessary experience. For unconditional 
approval, the PSO must have a minimum of 90 days at sea performing the 
role during a geophysical survey, with the conclusion of the most 
recent relevant experience not more than 18 months previous.
    At least one of the visual PSOs aboard the vessel must be 
unconditionally-approved. One unconditionally-approved visual PSO shall 
be designated as the lead for the entire PSO team. This lead should 
typically be the PSO with the most experience, who would coordinate 
duty schedules and roles for the PSO team and serve as primary point of 
contact for the vessel operator. To the maximum extent practicable, the 
duty schedule shall be planned such that unconditionally-approved PSOs 
are on duty with conditionally-approved PSOs.
    A ``trained lookout'' may be used on a space-limited nearshore 
vessel (generally operating in water less than 20 m depth for no more 
than 12 hr/day) during required breaks for the approved PSO on duty. 
Project-specific training must be conducted for all vessel crew with 
``lookout'' responsibilities prior to the start of a survey and during 
any changes in crew such that all relevant survey personnel are fully 
aware and understand the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
requirements. All vessel crew members operating as a trained lookout 
must be briefed in the identification of protected species that may 
occur in the survey area and in relevant mitigation requirements. 
Reference materials must be available aboard all project vessels for 
identification of protected species. Should a mitigation action be 
taken, the Trained Lookout will immediately notify the off-watch PSO to 
ensure that the appropriate response was taken and sightings and 
mitigation measures are properly documented (i.e., if shutdown was 
called for or avoidance measures for large whales/vessel strike 
avoidance taken, the Trained Lookout immediately notifies the off-watch 
PSO). If the survey is operating within a DMA or Slow Zone, the survey 
may only operate with a PSO on-watch.

[[Page 42337]]

    At least one PSO aboard each acoustic source vessel must have a 
minimum of 90 days at-sea experience working in the role, with no more 
than 18 months elapsed since the conclusion of the at-sea experience. 
One PSO with such experience must be designated as the lead for the 
entire PSO team and serve as the primary point of contact for the 
vessel operator. (Note that the responsibility of coordinating duty 
schedules and roles may instead be assigned to a shore-based, third-
party monitoring coordinator.) To the maximum extent practicable, the 
lead PSO must devise the duty schedule such that experienced PSOs are 
on duty with those PSOs with appropriate training but who have not yet 
gained relevant experience.
    PSOs must successfully complete relevant training, including 
completion of all required coursework and passing (80 percent or more) 
a written and/or oral examination developed for the training program.
    PSOs must have successfully attained a bachelor's degree from an 
accredited college or university with a major in one of the natural 
sciences, a minimum of 30 semester hours or equivalent in the 
biological sciences, and at least one undergraduate course in math or 
statistics. The educational requirements may be waived if the PSO has 
acquired the relevant skills through alternate experience. Requests for 
such a waiver shall be submitted to NMFS and must include written 
justification. Alternate experience that may be considered includes, 
but is not limited to (1) secondary education and/or experience 
comparable to PSO duties; (2) previous work experience conducting 
academic, commercial, or government-sponsored marine mammal surveys; 
and (3) previous work experience as a PSO (PSO must be in good standing 
and demonstrate good performance of PSO duties).
    COSW must work with the selected third-party PSO provider to ensure 
PSOs have all equipment (including backup equipment) needed to 
adequately perform necessary tasks, including accurate determination of 
distance and bearing to observed marine mammals, and to ensure that 
PSOs are capable of calibrating equipment as necessary for accurate 
distance estimates and species identification. Such equipment, at a 
minimum, shall include:
     At least one thermal (infrared) imagine device suited for 
the marine environment;
     Reticle binoculars (e.g., 7 x 50) of appropriate quality 
(at least one per PSO, plus backups);
     Global Positioning Units (GPSs) (at least one plus 
backups);
     Digital cameras with a telephoto lens that is at least 
300-mm or equivalent on a full-frame single lens reflex, also known as 
an SLR (at least one plus backups). The camera or lens should also have 
an image stabilization system;
     Equipment necessary for accurate measurement of distances 
to marine mammal;
     Compasses (at least one plus backups);
     Means of communication among vessel crew and PSOs; and
     Any other tools deemed necessary to adequately and 
effectively perform PSO tasks.
    The equipment specified above may be provided by an individual PSO, 
the third-party PSO provider, or the operator, but COSW is responsible 
for ensuring PSOs have the proper equipment required to perform the 
duties specified in the IHA.
    The PSOs will be responsible for monitoring the waters surrounding 
the 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 PSO(s) on duty to 
communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to communicate 
the action(s) that are necessary to ensure mitigation and monitoring 
requirements are implemented as appropriate.
    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, appropriate night-vision devices (e.g., 
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 must 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 and between acquisition periods, to the maximum 
extent practicable. Any observations of marine mammals by crew members 
aboard the vessel associated with the survey would be relayed to the 
PSO team. Data on all PSO observations would be recorded based on 
standard PSO collection requirements (see Reporting Measures). This 
would include dates, times, and locations of survey operations; dates 
and times of observations, location and weather; details of marine 
mammal sightings (e.g., species, numbers, behavior); and details of any 
observed marine mammal behavior that occurs (e.g., noted behavioral 
disturbances). Members of the PSO team shall consult the NMFS NARW 
reporting system and Whale Alert, daily and as able, for the presence 
of NARWs throughout survey operations.

Reporting Measures

    COSW shall submit a draft comprehensive report to NMFS on all 
activities and monitoring results within 90 days of the completion of 
the survey or expiration of the IHA, whichever comes sooner. The report 
must describe all activities conducted and sightings of marine mammals, 
must provide full documentation of methods, results, and interpretation 
pertaining to all monitoring, and must summarize the dates and 
locations of survey operations and all marine mammals sightings (dates, 
times, locations, activities, associated survey activities). The draft 
report shall also include geo-referenced, time-stamped vessel 
tracklines for all time periods during which acoustic sources were 
operating. Tracklines should include points recording any change in 
acoustic source status (e.g., when the sources began operating, when 
they were turned off, or when they changed operational status such as 
from full array to single gun or vice versa). GIS files shall be 
provided in Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI) 
shapefile format and include the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) date 
and time, latitude in decimal degrees, and longitude in decimal 
degrees. All coordinates shall be referenced to the WGS84 geographic 
coordinate system. In addition to the report, all raw observational 
data shall be made available. The report must summarize the 
information. A final report must be submitted within 30 days following 
resolution of any comments on the draft report. All draft and final 
marine mammal monitoring reports must be submitted to 
[email protected], [email protected] 
and [email protected].
    PSOs must use standardized electronic data forms to record data. 
PSOs shall record detailed information

[[Page 42338]]

about any implementation of mitigation requirements, including the 
distance of marine mammal to the acoustic source and description of 
specific actions that ensued, the behavior of the animal(s), any 
observed changes in behavior before and after implementation of 
mitigation, and if shutdown was implemented, the length of time before 
any subsequent ramp-up of the acoustic source. If required mitigation 
was not implemented, PSOs should record a description of the 
circumstances. At a minimum, the following information must be 
recorded:
    1. Vessel names (source vessel), vessel size and type, maximum 
speed capability of vessel;
    2. Dates of departures and returns to port with port name;
    3. PSO names and affiliations;
    4. Date and participants of PSO briefings;
    5. Visual monitoring equipment used;
    6. PSO location on vessel and height of observation location above 
water surface;
    7. Dates and times (Greenwich Mean Time (GMT)) of survey on/off 
effort and times corresponding with PSO on/off effort;
    8. Vessel location (decimal degrees) when survey effort begins and 
ends and vessel location at beginning and end of visual PSO duty 
shifts;
    9. Vessel location at 30-second intervals if obtainable from data 
collection software, otherwise at practical regular interval;
    10. Vessel heading and speed at beginning and end of visual PSO 
duty shifts and upon any change;
    11. Water depth (if obtainable from data collection software);
    12. Environmental conditions while on visual survey (at beginning 
and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change significantly), 
including BSS and any other relevant weather conditions including cloud 
cover, fog, sun glare, and overall visibility to the horizon;
    13. Factors that may contribute to impaired observations during 
each PSO shift change or as needed as environmental conditions change 
(e.g., vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions);
    14. Survey activity information (and changes thereof), such as 
acoustic source power output while in operation, number and volume of 
airguns operating in an array, tow depth of an acoustic source, and any 
other notes of significance (i.e., pre-start clearance, ramp-up, 
shutdown, testing, shooting, ramp-up completion, end of operations, 
streamers, etc.); and
    15. Upon visual observation of any marine mammal, the following 
information must be recorded:
    a. Watch status (sighting made by PSO on/off effort, opportunistic, 
crew, alternate vessel/platform);
    b. Vessel/survey activity at time of sighting (e.g., deploying, 
recovering, testing, shooting, data acquisition, other);
    c. PSO who sighted the animal;
    d. Time of sighting;
    e. Initial detection method;
    f. Sightings cue;
    g. Vessel location at time of sighting (decimal degrees);
    h. Direction of vessel's travel (compass direction);
    i. Speed of the vessel(s) from which the observation was made;
    j. 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;
    k. Species reliability (an indicator of confidence in 
identification);
    l. Estimated distance to the animal and method of estimating 
distance;
    m. Estimated number of animals (high/low/best);
    n. Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, yearlings, 
juveniles, calves, group composition, etc.);
    o. 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);
    p. Detailed behavior observations (e.g., number of blows/breaths, 
number of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, traveling; 
as explicit and detailed as possible; note any observed changes in 
behavior before and after point of closest approach);
    q. Mitigation actions; description of any actions implemented in 
response to the sighting (e.g., delays, shutdowns, ramp-up, speed or 
course alteration, etc.) and time and location of the action;
    r. Equipment operating during sighting;
    s. Animal's closest point of approach and/or closest distance from 
the center point of the acoustic source; and,
    t. Description of any actions implemented in response to the 
sighting (e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up) and time and location of the 
action.
    If a NARW is observed at any time by PSOs or personnel on the 
project vessel, during surveys or during vessel transit, COSW must 
report the sighting information to the NMFS NARW Sighting Advisory 
System (866-755-6622) within 2 hr of occurrence, when practicable, or 
no later than 24 hr after occurrence. NARW sightings in any location 
may also be reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via channel 16 and through 
the Whale Alert app (http://www.whalealert.org).
    In the event that personnel involved in the survey activities 
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the incident must be 
reported to NMFS as soon as feasible by phone (866-755-6622) and by 
email ([email protected] and 
[email protected]). The report must include the 
following information:
    1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first 
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
    2. Species identification (if known) or description of the 
animal(s) involved;
    3. Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the 
animal is dead);
    4. Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
    5. If available, photographs or video footage of the animal(s); and
    6. General circumstances under which the animal was discovered.
    In the event of a vessel strike of a marine mammal by any vessel 
involved in the activities, COSW must report the incident to NMFS by 
phone (866-755-6622) and by email ([email protected] 
and [email protected]) as soon as feasible. The report 
would include the following information:
    1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
    2. Species identification (if known) or description of the 
animal(s) involved;
    3. Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
    4. Vessel's course/heading and what operations were being conducted 
(if applicable);
    5. Status of all sound sources in use;
    6. Description of avoidance measures/requirements that were in 
place at the time of the strike and what additional measures were 
taken, if any, to avoid strike;
    7. Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, 
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility) immediately preceding the 
strike;
    8. Estimated size and length of animal that was struck;
    9. Description of the behavior of the marine mammal immediately 
preceding and/or following the strike;
    10. If available, description of the presence and behavior of any 
other marine mammals immediately preceding the strike;
    11. Estimated fate of the animal (e.g., dead, injured but alive, 
injured and

[[Page 42339]]

moving, blood or tissue observed in the water, status unknown, 
disappeared); and
    12. To the extent practicable, photographs or video footage of the 
animal(s).

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the 
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not 
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough 
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to 
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be 
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the 
likely nature of any impacts or responses (e.g., intensity, duration), 
the context of any impacts or responses (e.g., critical reproductive 
time or location, foraging impacts affecting energetics), as well as 
effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We 
also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by 
evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent 
with the 1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing regulations (54 FR 40338, 
September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing 
anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their 
impacts on the baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of 
the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing 
sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).
    To avoid repetition, the majority of our analysis applies to all 
the species listed in Table 1, given that some of the anticipated 
effects of this project on different marine mammal stocks are expected 
to be relatively similar in nature. Where there are meaningful 
differences between species or stocks, or groups of species, in 
anticipated individual responses to activities, impact of expected take 
on the population due to differences in population status, or impacts 
on habitat, they are included as separate sub-sections below. 
Specifically, we provide additional discussion related to NARW and to 
other species currently experiencing UMEs.
    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 authorized. As discussed in the 
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and their 
Habitat section, non-auditory physical effects, auditory physical 
effects, and vessel strike are not expected to occur. NMFS expects that 
all potential takes would be in the form of Level B 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, Ellison et al., 2012).
    In addition to being temporary, the maximum expected harassment 
zone around a survey vessel is 158 m (rounded up from the 157.7 m Level 
B harassment isopleth). 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 planned survey area 
and there are no feeding areas known to be biologically important to 
marine mammals within the survey area. There is no designated critical 
habitat for any ESA-listed marine mammals in the survey area.

North Atlantic Right Whales

    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 attribute human interactions, 
specifically vessel strikes and entanglements, as the cause of death 
for the majority of NARWs. As noted previously, the survey area 
overlaps a migratory corridor BIA for NARWs that extends from 
Massachusetts to Florida and from the coast to beyond the shelf break. 
Due to the fact that the planned survey activities are temporary (will 
occur for up to 1 year) and the spatial extent of sound produced by the 
survey would be small relative to the spatial extent of the available 
migratory habitat in the BIA, NARW migration is not expected to be 
impacted by the survey. This important migratory area is approximately 
269,488 km\2\ in size (compared with the worst case scenario of 
approximately 9,611 km\2\ of total estimated Level B harassment 
ensonified area associated with the Survey Area) and is comprised of 
the waters of the continental shelf offshore the East Coast of the 
United States, extending from Florida through Massachusetts.
    Given the relatively small size of the ensonified area, it is 
unlikely that prey availability would be adversely affected by HRG 
survey operations. Required vessel strike avoidance measures will also 
decrease risk of vessel strike during migration; no vessel strike is 
expected to occur during COSW's planned activities. Additionally, only 
very limited take by Level B harassment of NARWs has been requested and 
is authorized by NMFS as HRG survey operations are required to maintain 
and implement a 500-m shutdown zone. The 500-m shutdown zone for NARWs 
is conservative, considering the Level B harassment zone for the most 
impactful acoustic source (i.e., sparker) is estimated to be 158 m, and 
thereby minimizes the intensity and duration of any potential incidents 
of behavioral harassment for this species. As noted previously, Level A 
harassment is not expected due to the small estimated zones in 
conjunction with the aforementioned shutdown requirements. NMFS does 
not anticipate NARW takes that would result from COSW's planned 
activities will impact annual rates of recruitment or survival. Thus, 
any takes that occur will 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 COSW's Survey Area. Elevated humpback whale mortalities 
have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through Florida since 
January 2016. Of the cases examined, approximately half had evidence of 
human interaction (i.e., vessel strike, entanglement). The UME does not 
yet provide cause for concern regarding population-level impacts. 
Despite the

[[Page 42340]]

UME, the relevant population of humpback whales (the West Indies 
breeding population, or distinct population segment) remains stable at 
approximately 12,000 individuals.
    Beginning in January 2017, elevated minke whale strandings have 
occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, 
with highest numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and New York. This event 
does not provide cause for concern regarding population level impacts, 
as the likely population abundance is greater than 20,000 whales.
    Elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal mortalities were 
first observed between 2018-2020 and, as part of a separate UME, again 
in 2022. These have occurred across Maine, New Hampshire, and 
Massachusetts. Based on tests conducted so far, the main pathogen found 
in the seals is phocine distemper virus (2018-2020) and avian influenza 
(2022), although additional testing to identify other factors that may 
be involved in the UMEs is underway. The UMEs do not provide cause for 
concern regarding population-level impacts to any of these stocks. For 
harbor seals, the population abundance is over 60,000 and annual M/SI 
(339) is well below PBR (1,729) (Hayes et al., 2022). The population 
abundance for gray seals in the United States is over 27,000, with an 
estimated abundance, including seals in Canada, of approximately 
450,000. In addition, the abundance of gray seals is likely increasing 
in the U.S. Atlantic as well as in Canada (Hayes et al., 2021, Hayes et 
al., 2022).
    The required mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number 
and/or severity of takes for all species listed in Table 1, 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 before HRG survey equipment reaches 
full energy, thus preventing them from being exposed to sound levels 
that have the potential to cause injury. No Level A harassment is 
anticipated, even in the absence of mitigation measures, or authorized.
    NMFS expects that takes would be in the form of short-term Level B 
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 determination that the impacts resulting from this activity 
are not expected to adversely affect any of the species or stocks 
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
     No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or 
authorized;
     No Level A harassment (PTS) is anticipated, even in the 
absence of mitigation measures, or authorized;
     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 ensonified areas 
during the planned survey to avoid exposure to sounds from the 
activity;
     Take is anticipated to be by Level B harassment only 
consisting of brief startling reactions and/or temporary avoidance of 
the ensonified area;
     Survey activities will occur in such a comparatively small 
portion of the BIA for the NARW migration that any avoidance of the 
area due to survey activities would not affect migration. In addition, 
mitigation measures require shutdown at 500 m (over three times the 
size of the Level B harassment zone of 158 m) to minimize the effects 
of any Level B harassment take of the species; and,
     The planned 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 planned monitoring and 
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from 
the planned activity will have a negligible impact on all affected 
marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers

    As noted previously, only take of small numbers of marine mammals 
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 authorizes incidental take by Level B harassment only of 15 
marine mammal species with 16 managed stocks. The total amount of takes 
authorized relative to the best available population abundance is less 
than 7 percent for any of the 16 managed stocks (Table 3). The take 
numbers authorized are considered conservative estimates for purposes 
of the small numbers determination as they assume all takes represent 
different individual animals, which is unlikely to be the case.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity 
(including the planned mitigation and monitoring measures) and the 
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of 
marine mammals would be taken relative to the population size of the 
affected species or stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

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

Endangered Species Act

    Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that 
each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or 
carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any 
endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or 
adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA 
compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally whenever 
we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species.
    NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR) has authorized take of 
four species of marine mammals which are listed under the ESA, 
including NARW,

[[Page 42341]]

fin whale, sei whale, and sperm whale, and determined these activities 
fall within the scope of activities analyzed in the NMFS GARFO 
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).

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) and 
alternatives 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 determined 
that the issuance of this IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded 
from further NEPA review.

Authorization

    NMFS has issued an IHA to COSW for the potential harassment of 
small numbers of 15 marine mammal species (16 stocks) incidental to 
conducting marine site characterization surveys in coastal waters off 
of New Jersey and New York in the New York Bight for a period of 1 year 
that includes the previously explained mitigation, monitoring, and 
reporting requirements. The IHA can be found at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-community-offshore-wind-llc-marine-site-characterization.

    Dated: June 27, 2023.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-13990 Filed 6-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P