4200 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

bigger issue. Specifically, scenarios are 

stories about possible future 

developments. This approach is 

designed to help stakeholders and 

managers think broadly about the future 

implications of climate change to help 

define what changes can potentially be 

made now to be better prepared. 

Three introductory ‘‘kick-off’’ 

webinars were held in 2021 to explain 

the overall initiative and share draft 

objectives and possible outcomes of the 

work with the public. The next phase of 

this initiative, the exploration phase, 

includes another series of webinars 

outlined in this notice. The primary 

objective of these meetings is to share 

information about and discuss the key 

drivers of change that could shape East 

Coast fisheries over the next 20 years— 

which will then become the ‘‘building 

blocks’’ for scenario creation. Three 

separate webinars are planned, each 

dealing with a different area of driving 

forces/uncertainties that are shaped by 

climate change. The first on February 

14, 2022, will cover oceanographic 

drivers of change (e.g., ocean 

temperature, sea level rise, acidification, 

ocean currents). The second on 

February 23, 2022, will focus on 

biological drivers of change (e.g., 

changing spatial distributions, health of 

stocks, habitat loss, rate of ecosystem 

change). And the last webinar on March 

2, 2022, will focus on social and 

economic drivers of change (e.g., 

competing ocean uses, community 

impacts, consumer demand). During 

each webinar a brief overview and 

status of the initiative will be presented 

followed by a more detailed 

presentation by a lead presenter 

outlining the current and future trends 

for each topic. Next, a small panel of 

experts will join the lead presenter to 

provide additional perspectives. Finally, 

there will be an opportunity for 

questions of the panelists and presenters 

as well as limited public comments at 

the end of each webinar. 

Additional details about the webinars 

will be posted to this page once 

available: https://www.mafmc.org/ 

climate-change-scenario-planning. 

The public also should be aware that 

the meeting will be recorded. Consistent 

with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the 

recording is available upon request. 

Special Accommodations 

These meetings are physically 

accessible to people with disabilities. 

Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to: Thomas A. Nies, 

Executive Director, at (978) 465–0492, at 

least 5 days prior to the meeting date. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: January 24, 2022. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01658 Filed 1–26–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB392] 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Marine Site 

Characterization Surveys off New 

Jersey and New York for Atlantic 

Shores Offshore Wind, LLC 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental 

harassment authorization; request for 

comments on proposed authorization 

and possible renewal. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request 

from Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind, 

LLC (Atlantic Shores) for authorization 

to take marine mammals incidental to 

marine site characterization surveys off 

New Jersey and New York in the area of 

Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands 

for Renewable Energy Development on 

the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area 

OCS–A 0499. Pursuant to the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS 

is requesting comments on its proposal 

to issue an incidental harassment 

authorization (IHA) to incidentally take 

marine mammals during the specified 

activities. NMFS is also requesting 

comments on a possible one-time, oneyear Renewal that could be issued under 

certain circumstances and if all 

requirements are met, as described in 

Request for Public Comments at the end 

of this notification. NMFS will consider 

public comments prior to making any 

final decision on the issuance of the 

requested MMPA authorizations and 

agency responses will be summarized in 

the final notification of our decision. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than February 28, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 

Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service. Written 

comments should be submitted via 

email to ITP.Potlock@noaa.gov. 

Instructions: NMFS is not responsible 

for comments sent by any other method, 

to any other address or individual, or 

received after the end of the comment 

period. Comments, including all 

attachments, must not exceed a 25 

megabyte file size. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted online at 

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

incidental-take-authorizations-otherenergy-activities-renewable without 

change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelsey Potlock, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

Electronic copies of the application and 

supporting documents, as well as a list 

of the references cited in this document, 

may be obtained online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-other-energyactivities-renewable. In case of problems 

accessing these documents, please call 

the contact listed above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of 

marine mammals, with certain 

exceptions. sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) 

of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) 

direct the Secretary of Commerce (as 

delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon 

request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and either regulations are 

issued or, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, a notice of a proposed 

incidental take authorization may be 

provided to the public for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s) and will not have 

an unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

taking for subsistence uses (where 

relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe 

the permissible methods of taking and 

other ‘‘means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact’’ on the 

affected species or stocks and their 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance, and on the 

availability of the species or stocks for 

taking for certain subsistence uses 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4201 

(referred to in shorthand as 

‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of the takings are set forth. 

The definitions of all applicable 

MMPA statutory terms cited above are 

included in the relevant sections below. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 

NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 

216–6A, NMFS must review our 

proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an 

IHA) with respect to potential impacts 

on the human environment. This action 

is consistent with categories of activities 

identified in Categorical Exclusion B4 

(IHAs with no anticipated serious injury 

or mortality) of the Companion Manual 

for NOAA Administrative Order 216– 

6A, which do not individually or 

cumulatively have the potential for 

significant impacts on the quality of the 

human environment and for which we 

have not identified any extraordinary 

circumstances that would preclude this 

categorical exclusion. Accordingly, 

NMFS has preliminarily determined 

that the issuance of the proposed IHA 

qualifies to be categorically excluded 

from further NEPA review. 

We will review all comments 

submitted in response to this 

notification prior to concluding our 

NEPA process or making a final 

decision on the IHA request. 

Summary of Request 

On August 16, 2021, NMFS received 

a request from Atlantic Shores for an 

IHA to take marine mammals incidental 

to marine site characterization surveys 

occurring in three locations (Lease Area 

and Export Cable Routes (ECR) North 

and South) off of New Jersey and New 

York in the area of Commercial Lease of 

Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy 

Development on the Outer Continental 

Shelf Lease Area (OCS)–A 0499. NMFS 

deemed the application adequate and 

complete on December 13, 2021. 

Atlantic Shores’ request is for take of a 

small number of 15 species of marine 

mammals (comprised of 16 stocks) by 

Level B harassment only. Neither 

Atlantic Shores nor NMFS expects 

serious injury or mortality to result from 

this activity and, therefore, an IHA is 

appropriate. 

NMFS previously issued two IHAs to 

Atlantic Shores for similar work (85 FR 

21198, April 16, 2020; 86 FR 21289, 

April 22, 2021 (Renewal)). As required, 

Atlantic Shores provided a monitoring 

report for the work performed under the 

2020 IHA (85 FR 21198, April 16, 2020; 

available at https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/ 

incidental-take-authorization-atlanticshores-offshore-wind-llc-marine-sitecharacterization). 

At the time of developing this 

proposed IHA for Atlantic Shores’ 2022 

project, the 2021 (Renewal) monitoring 

report was not available as the renewed 

project is ongoing until its expiration 

date on April 19, 2022 (86 FR 21289; 

April 22, 2021). However, the 2020 

monitoring report confirmed that 

Atlantic Shores had previously 

implemented the required mitigation 

and monitoring, and demonstrated that 

no impacts of a scale or nature not 

previously analyzed or authorized had 

occurred as a result of the activities 

conducted under the 2020 IHA. 

Description of Proposed Activity 

Overview 

As part of its overall marine site 

characterization survey operations, 

Atlantic Shores proposes to conduct 

high-resolution geophysical (HRG) 

surveys in the Lease Area (OCS)-A 0499 

and along potential submarine cable 

routes (ECRs North and South) to a 

landfall location in either New York or 

New Jersey. 

The purpose of the proposed surveys 

are to support the site characterization, 

siting, and engineering design of 

offshore wind project facilities 

including wind turbine generators, 

offshore substations, and submarine 

cables within the Lease Area and along 

export cable routes (ECRs). As many as 

three survey vessels may operate 

concurrently as part of the proposed 

surveys. Underwater sound resulting 

from Atlantic Shores’ proposed site 

characterization survey activities, 

specifically HRG surveys, has the 

potential to result in incidental take of 

marine mammals in the form of 

behavioral harassment. 

Dates and Duration 

The estimated duration of the surveys 

is expected to be up to 360 total survey 

days over the course of a single year 

within the three survey areas (Table 1). 

As multiple vessels (i.e., three survey 

vessels) may be operating concurrently 

across the Lease Area and two ECRs, 

each day that a survey vessel is 

operating counts as a single survey day. 

For example, if three vessels are 

operating in the two ECRs and Lease 

Area concurrently, this counts as three 

survey days. This schedule is based on 

24-hours of operations throughout 12 

months. The schedule presented here 

for this proposed project has accounted 

for potential down time due to 

inclement weather or other projectrelated delays. Proposed activities 

would occur from April 20, 2022 

through April 19, 2023 as to not overlap 

the Renewal IHA that expires after April 

19, 2022. 

TABLE 1—NUMBER OF SURVEY DAYS

THAT ATLANTIC SHORES PLANS TO

PERFORM THE DESCRIBED HRG 

SURVEY ACTIVITIES

Survey area 

Number of 

active survey 

days 

expected 1

Lease Area ........................... 120 

ECR North ............................ 180 

ECR South ............................ 60 

Total ............................... 360 

1Surveys in each area may temporally overlap; therefore, actual number of days of activity in a given year would be less than 360. 

Specific Geographic Region 

Atlantic Shores’ proposed activities 

would occur in the Northwest Atlantic 

Ocean within Federal and state waters 

(Figure 1). Surveys would occur in the 

Lease Area and along potential 

submarine cable routes to landfall in 

either New York or New Jersey. 

Proposed activities would occur within 

the Commercial Lease of Submerged 

Lands for Renewable Energy 

Development in OCS–A 0499. The 

survey area is approximately 1,450,006 

acres (2,265.6 square miles (mi2); 5,868 

square kilometers (km2)) and extends 

approximately 24 nautical miles (nm; 28 

miles (mi); 44 kilometers (km)) offshore. 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4202 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1EN27JA22.006</GPH>

Figure 1-- Map of the Three Sites (Lease Area and Export Cable Routes North and 

South) that Atlantic Shores Proposes to Perform Site Characterization Surveys 

(HRG). 
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4203 

Detailed Description of Specific Activity 

Atlantic Shores’ proposed marine site 

characterization surveys include HRG 

and geotechnical survey activities. 

These survey activities would occur 

within the both the Lease Area and 

within ECRs between the Lease Area 

and the coasts of New York and New 

Jersey. The Lease Area is approximately 

5,867.97 km2 (1,450,006 acres) and is 

located approximately 24 nm (44 km) 

from the coastline (see Figure 1). The 

proposed survey area is approximately 

from Long Island, New York to Atlantic 

City, New Jersey. For the purpose of this 

proposed IHA, the Lease Area and ECRs 

are collectively referred to as the survey 

area. 

Atlantic Shores’ survey activities are 

anticipated to be supported by vessels, 

which will maintain a speed of 

approximately to 3.5 knots (kn; 6.5 

kilometer per hour (km/h)) while 

transiting survey lines. The proposed 

HRG and geotechnical survey activities 

are described below. 

Proposed Geotechnical Survey 

Activities 

Atlantic Shores’ proposed 

geotechnical activities would include 

the drilling of sample boreholes, deep 

cone penetration tests (CPTs), and 

shallow CPTs. Such proposed activities 

have been performed before by Atlantic 

Shores and considerations of the 

impacts produced from geotechnical 

activities have been previously analyzed 

and included in the proposed 2020 

Federal Register notice for Atlantic 

Shores’ HRG activities (85 FR 7926; 

February 12, 2020). The same 

discussion by NMFS to not analyze the 

geotechnical activities further that was 

included in that notification applies to 

this proposed project. In that 

notification, NMFS determined that the 

likelihood of the proposed geotechnical 

surveys resulting in harassment of 

marine mammals was to be so low as to 

be discountable. As this information 

remains applicable and NMFS’ 

determination has not changed, these 

activities will not be discussed further 

in this proposed notification. 

Proposed Geophysical Survey Activities 

Atlantic Shores has proposed that 

HRG survey operations would be 

conducted continuously 24 hours a day. 

Based on 24-hour operations, the 

estimated total duration of the proposed 

activities would be approximately 360 

survey days. This includes 120 days of 

survey activities in the Lease Area, 180 

days in ECR North, and 60 days in ECR 

South (refer back to Table 1). As 

previously discussed above, this 

schedule does include potential down 

time due to inclement weather or other 

project-related delays. 

The HRG survey activities will be 

supported by vessels of sufficient size to 

accomplish the survey goals in each of 

the specified survey areas. It is assumed 

surveys in each of the identified survey 

areas will be executed by a single vessel 

during any given campaign (i.e., no 

more than one survey vessel would 

operate in the Lease Area at any given 

time, but there may be one survey vessel 

operating in the Lease Area and one 

vessel operating each of the ECR areas 

concurrently, i.e., three vessels). HRG 

equipment will either be mounted to or 

towed behind the survey vessel at a 

typical survey speed of approximately 

3.5 knot (6.5 km) per hour. The 

geophysical survey activities proposed 

by Atlantic Shores would include the 

following: 

• Depth sounding (multibeam depth 

sounder and single beam echosounder) 

to determine water depths and general 

bottom topography (currently estimated 

to range from approximately 16-feet (ft; 

5-m to 131-ft (40-m) in depth); 

• Magnetic intensity measurements 

(gradiometer) for detecting local 

variations in regional magnetic field 

from geological strata and potential 

ferrous objects on and below the bottom; 

• Seafloor imaging (side scan sonar 

survey) for seabed sediment 

classification purposes, to identify 

natural and man-made acoustic targets 

resting on the bottom as well as any 

anomalous features; 

• Shallow penetration sub-bottom 

profiler (pinger/chirp) to map the near 

surface stratigraphy (top 0-ft to 16-ft (0- 

m to 5-m) soils below seabed); and, 

• Medium penetration sub-bottom 

profiler (chirps/parametric profilers/ 

sparkers) to map deeper subsurface 

stratigraphy as needed (soils down to 

246-ft (75-m) to 328-ft (100-m) below 

seabed). 

Table 2 identifies the representative 

survey equipment that may be used in 

support of planned geophysical survey 

activities. The make and model of the 

listed geophysical equipment may vary 

depending on availability and the final 

equipment choices will vary depending 

upon the final survey design, vessel 

availability, and survey contractor 

selection. Geophysical surveys are 

expected to use several equipment types 

concurrently in order to collect multiple 

aspects of geophysical data along one 

transect. Selection of equipment 

combinations is based on specific 

survey objectives. All categories of 

representative HRG survey equipment 

shown in Table 2 work with operating 

frequencies <180 kHz. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIVE EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS WITH OPERATING FREQUENCIES BELOW 180 kHz 

HRG survey equipment 

(sub-bottom profiler) Representative equipment type 

Operating 

frequency 

ranges 

(kHz) 

Operational 

source level 

ranges 

(dBRMS) b

Beamwidth 

ranges 

(degrees) 

Typical pulse 

durations 

RMS 

(millisecond) 

Pulse 

repetition rate 

(Hz) 

Sparker (impulsive) ............. Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 a ............................. 0.01 to 1.9 203 180 3.4 2 

Geo Marine Geo-Source ............................................... 0.2 to 5 195 180 7.2 0.41 

CHIRPs (non-impulsive) ..... Edgetech 2000–DSS ..................................................... 2 to 16 195 24 6.3 10 

Edgetech 216 ................................................................. 2 to 16 179 17, 20, or 24 10 10 

Edgetech 424 ................................................................. 4 to 24 180 71 4 2 

Edgetech 512i ................................................................ 0.7 to 12 179 80 9 8 

Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom ImagerTM .......................... 4 to 12.5 190 120 4.5 44 

Note: Two sources proposed for use by Atlantic Shores (i.e., the INNOMAR SES–2000 Medium-100 Parametric and the INNOMAR deep-36 Parametric) are not 

expected to result in take due to their higher frequencies and extremely narrow beamwidths. Because of this, these sources were not considered when calculating the 

Level B harassment isopleths and are not discussed further in this notification. Acoustic parameters on these parametric sub-bottom profilers can be found in Atlantic 

Shores’ IHA application on NMFS’ website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable). aAtlantic Shores discussed with NMFS and include information in their application that while the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 is planned to be used during 

project activities, the equipment specifications and subsequent analysis are based on the SIG ELC 820 with a power level of 750 joules (J) at a 5-meter depth (Crocker and Fratantonio (2016)). However, Atlantic Shores expects a more reasonable power level to be 500–600 J based on prior experience with HRG surveys; 750 J 

was used as a worst-case scenario to conservatively account for take of marine mammals as these higher electrical outputs would only be used in areas with denser 

substrates (700–800 J). b Root mean square (RMS) = 1 microPa. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4204 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

Atlantic Shores has indicated to 

NMFS that the expected energy levels of 

the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 

would range between 500–600 joules (J) 

in most cases. However, in their IHA 

application, Atlantic Shores includes a 

discussion that, based on their previous 

experiences and survey efforts using the 

Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark, Atlantic 

Shores do not expect the electrical 

output to exceed 700–800 J, except in 

situations where denser substrates are 

present. 

The deployment of HRG survey 

equipment, including the equipment 

planned for use during Atlantic Shores’ 

proposed activities produces sound in 

the marine environment that has the 

potential to result in harassment of 

marine mammals. Proposed mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting measures are 

described in detail later in this 

document (please see Proposed 

Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring 

and Reporting). 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

Sections 3 and 4 of the application 

summarize available information 

regarding status and trends, distribution 

and habitat preferences, and behavior 

and life history, of the potentially 

affected species. Additional information 

regarding population trends and threats 

may be found in NMFS’s Stock 

Assessment Reports (SARs; https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments) and more 

general information about these species 

(e.g., physical and behavioral 

descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s 

website (https://www.fisheries.

noaa.gov/find-species). 

Table 3 lists all species or stocks for 

which take is expected and proposed to 

be authorized for this action, and 

summarizes information related to the 

population or stock, including 

regulatory status under the MMPA and 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) and 

potential biological removal (PBR), 

where known. For taxonomy, we follow 

Committee on Taxonomy (2021). PBR is 

defined by the MMPA as the maximum 

number of animals, not including 

natural mortalities, that may be removed 

from a marine mammal stock while 

allowing that stock to reach or maintain 

its optimum sustainable population (as 

described in NMFS’s SARs). While no 

mortality is anticipated or authorized 

here, PBR and annual serious injury and 

mortality from anthropogenic sources 

are included here as gross indicators of 

the status of the species and other 

threats. 

Marine mammal abundance estimates 

presented in this document represent 

the total number of individuals that 

make up a given stock or the total 

number estimated within a particular 

study or survey area. NMFS’s stock 

abundance estimates for most species 

represent the total estimate of 

individuals within the geographic area, 

if known, that comprises that stock. For 

some species, this geographic area may 

extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed 

stocks in this region are assessed in 

NMFS’s draft 2021 U.S. Atlantic and 

Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock 

Assessment (SARs). All values 

presented in Table 3 are the most recent 

available at the time of publication and 

are available in the draft 2021 SARs 

available online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments. 

TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES LIKELY TO OCCUR NEAR THE SURVEY AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY ATLANTIC

SHORES’ PROPOSED HRG ACTIVITIES

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent abundance survey) 2PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) 

North Atlantic right whale .......... Eubalaena glacialis ........ Western Atlantic Stock ............. E/D, Y 368 (0; 364; 2019) .................... 0.7 7.7 

Humpback whale ....................... Megaptera novaeangliae Gulf of Maine ............................ -/-; Y 1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016) .............. 22 12.15 

Fin whale ................................... Balaenoptera physalus ... Western North Atlantic Stock ... E/D, Y 6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 2016) ......... 11 1.8 

Sei whale ................................... Balaenoptera borealis .... Nova Scotia Stock .................... E/D, Y 6,292 (1.02; 3,098; 2016) ......... 6.2 0.8 

Minke whale ............................... Balaenoptera 

acutorostrata.

Canadian East Coastal Stock ... -/-, N 21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 2016) ..... 170 10.6 

Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Sperm whale .............................. Physeter macrocephalus North Atlantic Stock .................. E/D, Y 4,349 (0.28; 3,451; 2016) ......... 3.9 0 

Long-finned pilot whale .............. Globicephala melas ........ Western North Atlantic Stock ... -/-, N 39,215 (0.3; 30,627; 2016) ....... 306 29 

Atlantic white-sided dolphin ....... Lagenorhynchus acutus Western North Atlantic Stock ... -/-, N 93,233 (0.71; 54,443; 2016) ..... 544 227 

Bottlenose dolphin ..................... Tursiops truncatus .......... Western North Atlantic Northern 

Migratory Coastal Stock.

-/D, Y 6,639 (0.41; 4,759; 2016) ......... 48 12.2–21.5 

Western North Atlantic Offshore 

Stock.

-/-, N 62,851 (0.23; 51,914; 2016) ..... 519 28 

Common dolphin ........................ Delphinus delphis ........... Western North Atlantic Stock ... -/-, N 172,974 (0.21, 145,216, 2016) 1,452 390 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ............. Stenella frontalis ............. Western North Atlantic Stock ... -/-, N 39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 2016) ..... 320 0 

Risso’s dolphin ........................... Grampus griseus ............ Western North Atlantic Stock ... -/-, N 35,215 (0.19; 30,051; 2016) ..... 301 34 

Harbor porpoise ......................... Phocoena phocoena ...... Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy 

Stock.

-/-, N 95,543 (0.31; 74,034; 2016) ..... 851 164 

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia 

Harbor seal ................................ Phoca vitulina ................. Western North Atlantic Stock ... -/-, N 61,336 (0.08; 57,637; 2018) ..... 1,729 339 

Gray seal 4 ................................. Halichoerus grypus ......... Western North Atlantic Stock ... -/-, N 27,300 (0.22; 22,785; 2016) ..... 1,389 4,453 

1ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be 

declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA 

as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments. CV is 

the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. 3These values, found in NMFS’ SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, 

ship strike). 4 NMFS’ stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in Canada) is approximately 451,431. The annual mortality and serious injury (M/SI) value given is for the total stock. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 

I I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4205 

As indicated above, all 15 species 

(with 16 managed stocks) in Table 3 

temporally and spatially co-occur with 

the activity to the degree that take is 

reasonably likely to occur, and we have 

proposed authorizing it. Four marine 

mammal species that are listed under 

the ESA may be present in the survey 

area and are included in the take 

request: The North Atlantic right, fin, 

sei, and sperm whale. 

The temporal and/or spatial 

occurrence of several cetacean and 

pinniped species listed in Table 3–1 of 

Atlantic Shores’ 2022 IHA application is 

such that take of these species is not 

expected to occur either because they 

have very low densities in the survey 

area or are known to occur further 

offshore than the survey area. These 

include: The blue whale (Balaenoptera 

musculus), Cuvier’s beaked whale 

(Ziphius cavirostris), four species of 

Mesoplodont beaked whale 

(Mesoplodon spp.), dwarf and pygmy 

sperm whale (Kogia sima and Kogia 

breviceps), short-finned pilot whale 

(Globicephala macrorhynchus), 

northern bottlenose whale (Hyperoodon 

ampullatus), killer whale (Orcinus 

orca), pygmy killer whale (Feresa 

attenuata), false killer whale (Pseudorca 

crassidens), melon-headed whale 

(Peponocephala electra), striped 

dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba), whitebeaked dolphin (Lagenorhynchus 

albirostris), pantropical spotted dolphin 

(Stenella attenuata), Fraser’s dolphin 

(Lagenodelphis hosei), rough-toothed 

dolphin (Steno bredanensis), Clymene 

dolphin (Stenella clymene), spinner 

dolphin (Stenella longirostris), hooded 

seal (Cystophora cristata), and harp seal 

(Pagophilus groenlandicus). As 

harassment and subsequent take of these 

species is not anticipated as a result of 

the proposed activities, these species are 

not analyzed or discussed further. 

In addition, the Florida manatees 

(Trichechus manatus; a sub-species of 

the West Indian manatee) has been 

previously documented as an occasional 

visitor the Northeast region during 

summer months (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS) 2019). However, 

manatees are managed by the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and are 

not considered further in this document. 

For the majority of species potentially 

present in the specific geographic 

region, NMFS has designated only a 

single generic stock (e.g., ‘‘western 

North Atlantic’’) for management 

purposes. This includes the ‘‘Canadian 

east coast’’ stock of minke whales, 

which includes all minke whales found 

in U.S. waters and is also a generic stock 

for management purposes. For 

humpback whales, NMFS defines stocks 

on the basis of feeding locations, i.e., 

Gulf of Maine. However, references to 

humpback whales in this document 

refer to any individuals of the species 

that are found in the specific geographic 

region. Additional information on these 

animals can be found in Sections 3 and 

4 of Atlantic Shores’ IHA application, 

the draft 2021 SARs (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments), and 

NMFS’ website. 

Below is a description of the species 

that have the highest likelihood of 

occurring in the survey area and are 

thus expected to potentially be taken by 

the proposed activities as well as further 

detail informing the baseline for select 

species (i.e., information regarding 

current Unusual Mortality Events 

(UMEs) and important habitat areas). 

North Atlantic Right Whale 

The North Atlantic right whale ranges 

from calving grounds in the 

southeastern United States to feeding 

grounds in New England waters and 

into Canadian waters (Hayes et al., 

2018). Surveys have demonstrated the 

existence of seven areas where North 

Atlantic right whales congregate 

seasonally, including north and east of 

the proposed survey area in Georges 

Bank, off Cape Cod, and in 

Massachusetts Bay (Hayes et al., 2018). 

In the late fall months (e.g., October), 

right whales are generally thought to 

depart from the feeding grounds in the 

North Atlantic and move south to their 

calving grounds off Georgia and Florida. 

However, recent research indicates our 

understanding of their movement 

patterns remains incomplete (Davis et 

al., 2017). A review of passive acoustic 

monitoring data from 2004 to 2014 

throughout the western North Atlantic 

demonstrated nearly continuous yearround right whale presence across their 

entire habitat range (for at least some 

individuals), including in locations 

previously thought of as migratory 

corridors, suggesting that not all of the 

population undergoes a consistent 

annual migration (Davis et al., 2017). 

However, given that Atlantic Shores’ 

surveys would be concentrated offshore 

New Jersey, any right whales in the 

vicinity of the survey areas are expected 

to be transient, most likely migrating 

through the area. 

The western North Atlantic 

population demonstrated overall growth 

of 2.8 percent per year between 1990 to 

2010, despite a decline in 1993 and no 

growth between 1997 and 2000 (Pace et 

al., 2017). However, since 2010 the 

population has been in decline, with a 

99.99 percent probability of a decline of 

just under 1 percent per year (Pace et 

al., 2017). Between 1990 and 2015, 

calving rates varied substantially, with 

low calving rates coinciding with all 

three periods of decline or no growth 

(Pace et al., 2017). On average, North 

Atlantic right whale calving rates are 

estimated to be roughly half that of 

southern right whales (Eubalaena 

australis) (Pace et al., 2017), which are 

increasing in abundance (NMFS, 2015). 

In 2018, no new North Atlantic right 

whale calves were documented in their 

calving grounds; this represented the 

first time since annual NOAA aerial 

surveys began in 1989 that no new right 

whale calves were observed. Eighteen 

right whale calves were documented in 

2021. As of December 8, 2021 and the 

writing of this proposed Notification, 

two North Atlantic right whale calves 

have documented to have been born 

during this calving season. Presently, 

the best available population estimate 

for North Atlantic right whales is 386 

per the draft 2021 SARs (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments). 

The proposed survey area is part of a 

migratory corridor Biologically 

Important Area (BIA) for North Atlantic 

right whales (effective March–April and 

November–December) that extends from 

Massachusetts to Florida (LeBrecque et 

al., 2015). Off the coast of New Jersey, 

the migratory BIA extends from the 

coast to beyond the shelf break. This 

important migratory area is 

approximately 269,488 km2 in size 

(compared with the approximately 

5,605.2 km2 of total estimated Level B 

harassment ensonified area associated 

with the 360 planned survey days) and 

is comprised of the waters of the 

continental shelf offshore the East Coast 

of the United States, extending from 

Florida through Massachusetts. NMFS’ 

regulations at 50 CFR part 224.105 

designated nearshore waters of the MidAtlantic Bight as Mid-Atlantic U.S. 

Seasonal Management Areas (SMA) for 

right whales in 2008. SMAs were 

developed to reduce the threat of 

collisions between ships and right 

whales around their migratory route and 

calving grounds. A portion of one SMA, 

which occurs off the mouth of Delaware 

Bay, overlaps spatially with a section of 

the proposed survey area. The SMA, 

which occurs off the mouth of Delaware 

Bay, is active from November 1 through 

April 30 of each year. Within SMAs, the 

regulations require a mandatory vessel 

speed (less than 10 kn) for all vessels 

greater than 65 ft. A portion of one SMA 

overlaps spatially with the northern 

section of the proposed survey area. All 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4206 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

Atlantic Shores survey vessels, 

regardless of length, would be required 

to adhere to a 10 knot vessel speed 

restriction when operating within this 

SMA. In addition, all Atlantic Shores 

survey vessels, regardless of length, 

would be required to adhere to a 10 knot 

vessel speed restriction when operating 

in any Dynamic Management Area 

(DMA) declared by NMFS. 

Elevated North Atlantic right whale 

mortalities have occurred since June 7, 

2017, along the U.S. and Canadian 

coast. This event has been declared an 

Unusual Mortality Event (UME), with 

human interactions, including 

entanglement in fixed fishing gear and 

vessel strikes, implicated in at least 15 

of the mortalities thus far. As of October 

13, 2021, a total of 34 confirmed dead 

stranded whales (21 in Canada; 13 in 

the United States) have been 

documented. The cumulative total 

number of animals in the North Atlantic 

right whale UME has been updated to 

49 individuals to include both the 

confirmed mortalities (dead stranded or 

floaters) (n=34) and seriously injured 

free-swimming whales (n=15) to better 

reflect the confirmed number of whales 

likely removed from the population 

during the UME and more accurately 

reflect the population impacts. More 

information is available online at: 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-life-distress/2017-2021-northatlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortalityevent. Furthermore, we continue to 

evaluate our North Atlantic right whale 

vessel strike reduction programs, both 

regulatory and non-regulatory. NMFS 

anticipates releasing a proposed rule 

modifying the right whale speed 

regulations in Spring 2022 to further 

address the risk of mortality and serious 

injury from vessel collisions in U.S. 

waters. 

During the development of this 

proposed notification, several Slow 

Zones were implemented off New Jersey 

and New York that are worth 

mentioning. On November 11, 2021, 

December 11, 2021, and December 20, 

2021, the Woods Hole Oceanographic 

Institution’s Ocean City buoy detected 

the presence of right whales east of 

Ocean City, Maryland. In response, 

NMFS implemented two right whale 

Slow Zones for the area with expiration 

dates of November 26, 2021, December 

26, 2021, and January 4, 2022, 

respectively. Additionally, as of 

November 8, 2021, NMFS extended a 

voluntary right whale Slow Zone (via 

acoustic trigger) located south of 

Nantucket, Massachusetts. This is due 

to expire on November 19, 2021. Four 

other voluntary right whale Slow Zones 

were announced by NMFS on November 

20, 2021, November 30, 2021, December 

13, 2021, and December 21, 2021, via an 

acoustic trigger of a right whale detected 

off New York City, New York. These, at 

the time of the development of this 

notification, expired after December 5, 

2021, December 14, 2021, December 26, 

2021, and January 5, 2022, respectively. 

Lastly, four more Slow Zones were 

implemented on November 30, 2021, 

December 2, 2021, December 13, 2021, 

and December 20, 2021 after the 

acoustic detection of right whales 

southeast of Atlantic City, New Jersey. 

These zones were active through 

December 8, 2021, December 17, 2021, 

December 26, 2021, and January 4, 2022, 

respectively. More information on these 

right whale Slow Zones can be found on 

NMFS’ website (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

endangered-species-conservation/ 

reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlanticright-whales). 

Humpback Whale 

Humpback whales are found 

worldwide in all oceans. Humpback 

whales were listed as endangered under 

the Endangered Species Conservation 

Act (ESCA) in June 1970. In 1973, the 

ESA replaced the ESCA, and 

humpbacks continued to be listed as 

endangered. On September 8, 2016, 

NMFS divided the species into 14 

distinct population segments (DPS), 

removed the current species-level 

listing, and in its place listed four DPSs 

as endangered and one DPS as 

threatened (81 FR 62259; September 8, 

2016). The remaining nine DPSs were 

not listed. The West Indies DPS, which 

is not listed under the ESA, is the only 

DPS of humpback whale that is 

expected to occur in the survey area, 

although are not necessarily from the 

Gulf of Maine feeding population 

managed as a stock by NMFS. Barco et 

al., (2002) estimated that, based on 

photo-identification, only 39 percent of 

individual humpback whales observed 

along the mid- and south Atlantic U.S. 

coast are from the Gulf of Maine stock. 

Bettridge et al., (2015) estimated the size 

of this population at 12,312 (95 percent 

CI 8,688–15,954) whales in 2004–05, 

which is consistent with previous 

population estimates of approximately 

10,000–11,000 whales (Stevick et al., 

2003; Smith et al., 1999) and the 

increasing trend for the West Indies DPS 

(Bettridge et al., 2015). 

Humpback whales utilize the midAtlantic as a migration pathway 

between calving/mating grounds to the 

south and feeding grounds in the north 

(Waring et al., 2007a; Waring et al., 

2007b). A key question with regard to 

humpback whales off the mid-Atlantic 

states is their stock identity. Using fluke 

photographs of living and dead whales 

observed in the region, Barco et al., 

(2002) reported that 43 percent of 21 

live whales matched to the Gulf of 

Maine, 19 percent to Newfoundland, 

and 4.8 percent to the Gulf of St 

Lawrence, while 31.6 percent of 19 dead 

humpbacks were known Gulf of Maine 

whales. Although Gulf of Maine whales 

apparently dominate the population 

composition of the mid-Atlantic, lack of 

photographic effort in Newfoundland 

makes it likely that the observed match 

rates under-represent the true presence 

of Canadian whales in the region 

(Waring et al., 2016). Barco et al., (2002) 

suggested that the mid-Atlantic region 

primarily represents a supplemental 

winter-feeding ground used by 

humpbacks. Recent research by King et 

al., (2021) has demonstrated a high 

occurrence and use (foraging) of the 

New York Bight area by humpback 

whales than previously known. 

Furthermore, King et al., (2021) 

highlights important concerns for 

humpback whales found specifically in 

the nearshore environment (<10 km 

from shore) from various anthropogenic 

impacts. 

Three previous UMEs involving 

humpback whales have occurred since 

2000, in 2003, 2005, and 2006. Since 

January 2016, elevated humpback whale 

mortalities have occurred along the 

Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida. 

Partial or full necropsy examinations 

have been conducted on approximately 

half of the 154 known cases (as of 

October 13, 2021). Of the whales 

examined, about 50 percent had 

evidence of human interaction, either 

ship strike or entanglement. While a 

portion of the whales have shown 

evidence of pre-mortem vessel strike, 

this finding is not consistent across all 

whales examined and more research is 

needed. NOAA is consulting with 

researchers that are conducting studies 

on the humpback whale populations, 

and these efforts may provide 

information on changes in whale 

distribution and habitat use that could 

provide additional insight into how 

these vessel interactions occurred. More 

information is available at: 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-life-distress/2016-2021- 

humpback-whale-unusual-mortalityevent-along-atlantic-coast. 

Fin Whale 

Fin whales are common in waters of 

the U.S. Atlantic Exclusive Economic 

Zone (EEZ), principally from Cape 

Hatteras northward (Waring et al., 

2016). Fin whales are present north of 

35-degree latitude in every season and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4207 

are broadly distributed throughout the 

western North Atlantic for most of the 

year (Waring et al., 2016). They are 

typically found in small groups of up to 

five individuals (Brueggeman et al., 

1987). The main threats to fin whales 

are fishery interactions and vessel 

collisions (Waring et al., 2016). 

Sei Whale 

The Nova Scotia stock of sei whales 

can be found in deeper waters of the 

continental shelf edge waters of the 

northeastern U.S. and northeastward to 

south of Newfoundland. The southern 

portion of the stock’s range during 

spring and summer includes the Gulf of 

Maine and Georges Bank. Spring is the 

period of greatest abundance in U.S. 

waters, with sightings concentrated 

along the eastern margin of Georges 

Bank and into the Northeast Channel 

area, and along the southwestern edge of 

Georges Bank in the area of 

Hydrographer Canyon (Waring et al., 

2015). Sei whales occur in shallower 

waters to feed. Sei whales are listed as 

engendered under the ESA, and the 

Nova Scotia stock is considered strategic 

and depleted under the MMPA. The 

main threats to this stock are 

interactions with fisheries and vessel 

collisions. 

Minke Whale 

Minke whales can be found in 

temperate, tropical, and high-latitude 

waters. The Canadian East Coast stock 

can be found in the area from the 

western half of the Davis Strait (45 °W) 

to the Gulf of Mexico (Waring et al., 

2016). This species generally occupies 

waters less than 100-m deep on the 

continental shelf. There appears to be a 

strong seasonal component to minke 

whale distribution in the survey areas, 

in which spring to fall are times of 

relatively widespread and common 

occurrence while during winter the 

species appears to be largely absent 

(Waring et al., 2016). 

Since January 2017, elevated minke 

whale mortalities have occurred along 

the Atlantic coast from Maine through 

South Carolina, with a total of 118 

strandings (as of October 13, 2021). This 

event has been declared a UME. Full or 

partial necropsy examinations were 

conducted on more than 60 percent of 

the whales. Preliminary findings in 

several of the whales have shown 

evidence of human interactions or 

infectious disease, but these findings are 

not consistent across all of the whales 

examined, so more research is needed. 

More information is available at: 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-life-distress/2017-2021-minkewhale-unusual-mortality-event-alongatlantic-coast. 

Sperm Whale 

The distribution of the sperm whale 

in the U.S. EEZ occurs on the 

continental shelf edge, over the 

continental slope, and into mid-ocean 

regions (Waring et al., 2014). The basic 

social unit of the sperm whale appears 

to be the mixed school of adult females 

plus their calves and some juveniles of 

both sexes, normally numbering 20–40 

animals in all. There is evidence that 

some social bonds persist for many 

years (Christal et al., 1998). This species 

forms stable social groups, site fidelity, 

and latitudinal range limitations in 

groups of females and juveniles 

(Whitehead, 2002). In summer, the 

distribution of sperm whales includes 

the area east and north of Georges Bank 

and into the Northeast Channel region, 

as well as the continental shelf (inshore 

of the 100-m isobath) south of New 

England. In the fall, sperm whale 

occurrence south of New England on the 

continental shelf is at its highest level, 

and there remains a continental shelf 

edge occurrence in the mid-Atlantic 

bight. In winter, sperm whales are 

concentrated east and northeast of Cape 

Hatteras. 

Long-Finned Pilot Whale 

Long-finned pilot whales are found 

from North Carolina and north to 

Iceland, Greenland and the Barents Sea 

(Waring et al., 2016). In U.S. Atlantic 

waters the species is distributed 

principally along the continental shelf 

edge off the northeastern U.S. coast in 

winter and early spring and in late 

spring, pilot whales move onto Georges 

Bank and into the Gulf of Maine and 

more northern waters and remain in 

these areas through late autumn (Waring 

et al., 2016). Long-finned pilot whales 

are not listed under the ESA. The 

Western North Atlantic stock is 

considered strategic under the MMPA. 

Atlantic White-Sided Dolphin 

White-sided dolphins are found in 

temperate and sub-polar waters of the 

North Atlantic, primarily in continental 

shelf waters to the 100m depth contour 

from central West Greenland to North 

Carolina (Waring et al., 2016). The Gulf 

of Maine stock is most common in 

continental shelf waters from Hudson 

Canyon to Georges Bank, and in the Gulf 

of Maine and lower Bay of Fundy. 

Sighting data indicate seasonal shifts in 

distribution (Northridge et al., 1997). 

During January to May, low numbers of 

white-sided dolphins are found from 

Georges Bank to Jeffreys Ledge (off New 

Hampshire), with even lower numbers 

south of Georges Bank, as documented 

by a few strandings collected on beaches 

of Virginia to South Carolina. From June 

through September, large numbers of 

white-sided dolphins are found from 

Georges Bank to the lower Bay of 

Fundy. From October to December, 

white-sided dolphins occur at 

intermediate densities from southern 

Georges Bank to southern Gulf of Maine 

(Payne and Heinemann, 1990). Sightings 

south of Georges Bank, particularly 

around Hudson Canyon, occur year 

round but at low densities. 

Atlantic Spotted Dolphin 

Atlantic spotted dolphins are found in 

tropical and warm temperate waters 

ranging from southern New England, 

south to Gulf of Mexico and the 

Caribbean to Venezuela (Waring et al., 

2014). This stock regularly occurs in 

continental shelf waters south of Cape 

Hatteras and in continental shelf edge 

and continental slope waters north of 

this region (Waring et al., 2014). There 

are two forms of this species, with the 

larger ecotype inhabiting the continental 

shelf and is usually found inside or near 

the 200-m isobaths (Waring et al., 2014). 

Common Dolphin 

The short-beaked common dolphin is 

found worldwide in temperate to 

subtropical seas. In the North Atlantic, 

short-beaked common dolphins are 

commonly found over the continental 

shelf between the 100-m and 2,000-m 

isobaths and over prominent 

underwater topography and east to the 

mid-Atlantic Ridge (Waring et al., 2016). 

Bottlenose Dolphin 

There are two distinct bottlenose 

dolphin morphotypes in the western 

North Atlantic: The coastal and offshore 

forms (Waring et al., 2016). The offshore 

form is distributed primarily along the 

outer continental shelf and continental 

slope in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean 

from Georges Bank to the Florida Keys. 

The coastal morphotype is 

morphologically and genetically distinct 

from the larger, more robust 

morphotype that occupies habitats 

further offshore. Spatial distribution 

data, tag-telemetry studies, photo-ID 

studies and genetic studies demonstrate 

the existence of a distinct Northern 

Migratory stock of coastal bottlenose 

dolphins (Waring et al., 2014). During 

summer months (July–August), this 

stock occupies coastal waters from the 

shoreline to approximately the 25-m 

isobath between the Chesapeake Bay 

mouth and Long Island, New York; 

during winter months (January–March), 

the stock occupies coastal waters from 

Cape Lookout, North Carolina, to the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4208 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

North Carolina/Virginia border (Waring 

et al., 2014). The Western North 

Atlantic northern migratory coastal 

stock and the Western North Atlantic 

offshore stock may be encountered by 

the proposed survey. 

Harbor Porpoise 

In the Lease Area, only the Gulf of 

Maine/Bay of Fundy stock may be 

present. This stock is found in U.S. and 

Canadian Atlantic waters and is 

concentrated in the northern Gulf of 

Maine and southern Bay of Fundy 

region, generally in waters less than 

150-m deep (Waring et al., 2016). They 

are seen from the coastline to deep 

waters (>1,800-m; Westgate et al., 1998), 

although the majority of the population 

is found over the continental shelf 

(Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to 

the species is interactions with fisheries, 

with documented take in the U.S. 

northeast sink gillnet, mid-Atlantic 

gillnet, and northeast bottom trawl 

fisheries and in the Canadian herring 

weir fisheries (Waring et al., 2016). 

Pinninpeds (Harbor Seal and Gray Seal) 

The harbor seal is found in all 

nearshore waters of the North Atlantic 

and North Pacific Oceans and adjoining 

seas above about 30°N (Burns, 2009). In 

the western North Atlantic, harbor seals 

are distributed from the eastern 

Canadian Arctic and Greenland south to 

southern New England and New York, 

and occasionally to the Carolinas 

(Waring et al., 2016). Haul-out and 

pupping sites are located off Manomet, 

MA and the Isles of Shoals, ME, but 

generally do not occur in areas in 

southern New England (Waring et al., 

2016). 

There are three major populations of 

gray seals found in the world; eastern 

Canada (western North Atlantic stock), 

northwestern Europe and the Baltic Sea. 

Gray seals in the survey area belong to 

the western North Atlantic stock. The 

range for this stock is thought to be from 

New Jersey to Labrador. Current 

population trends show that gray seal 

abundance is likely increasing in the 

U.S. Atlantic EEZ (Waring et al., 2016). 

Although the rate of increase is 

unknown, surveys conducted since their 

arrival in the 1980s indicate a steady 

increase in abundance in both Maine 

and Massachusetts (Waring et al., 2016). 

It is believed that recolonization by 

Canadian gray seals is the source of the 

U.S. population (Waring et al., 2016). 

Since July 2018, elevated numbers of 

harbor seal and gray seal mortalities 

have occurred across Maine, New 

Hampshire and Massachusetts. This 

event has been declared a UME. 

Additionally, stranded seals have 

shown clinical signs as far south as 

Virginia, although not in elevated 

numbers, therefore the UME 

investigation now encompasses all seal 

strandings from Maine to Virginia. Ice 

seals (harp and hooded seals) have also 

started stranding with clinical signs, 

again not in elevated numbers, and 

those two seal species have also been 

added to the UME investigation. A total 

of 3,152 reported strandings (of all 

species) had occurred from July 1, 2018, 

through March 13, 2020. Full or partial 

necropsy examinations have been 

conducted on some of the seals and 

samples have been collected for testing. 

Based on tests conducted thus far, the 

main pathogen found in the seals is 

phocine distemper virus. NMFS is 

performing additional testing to identify 

any other factors that may be involved 

in this UME. Presently, this UME is 

non-active and is pending closure by 

NMFS as of March 2020. Information on 

this UME is available online at: 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-englandmid-atlantic/marine-life-distress/2018- 

2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-eventalong. 

Marine Mammal Hearing 

Hearing is the most important sensory 

modality for marine mammals 

underwater, and exposure to 

anthropogenic sound can have 

deleterious effects. To appropriately 

assess the potential effects of exposure 

to sound, it is necessary to understand 

the frequency ranges marine mammals 

are able to hear. Current data indicate 

that not all marine mammal species 

have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., 

Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and 

Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). 

To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) 

recommended that marine mammals be 

divided into functional hearing groups 

based on directly measured or estimated 

hearing ranges on the basis of available 

behavioral response data, audiograms 

derived using auditory evoked potential 

techniques, anatomical modeling, and 

other data. Note that no direct 

measurements of hearing ability have 

been successfully completed for 

mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency 

cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) 

described generalized hearing ranges for 

these marine mammal hearing groups. 

Generalized hearing ranges were chosen 

based on the approximately 65 decibel 

(dB) threshold from the normalized 

composite audiograms, with the 

exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower 

bound was deemed to be biologically 

implausible and the lower bound from 

Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine 

mammal hearing groups and their 

associated hearing ranges are provided 

in Table 4. 

TABLE 4—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS

[NMFS, 2018] 

Hearing group Generalized hearing 

range * 

Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ......................................................................................................................... 7 Hz to 35 kHz. 

Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) .............................................. 150 Hz to 160 kHz. 

High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L. 

australis).

275 Hz to 160 kHz. 

Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) ....................................................................................................................... 50 Hz to 86 kHz. 

Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) .................................................................................................. 60 Hz to 39 kHz. 

* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’ 

hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram, 

with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation). 

The pinniped functional hearing 

group was modified from Southall et al., 

(2007) on the basis of data indicating 

that phocid species have consistently 

demonstrated an extended frequency 

range of hearing compared to otariids, 

especially in the higher frequency range 

(Hemila ̈ et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 

2009; Reichmuth, 2013). 

For more detail concerning these 

groups and associated frequency ranges, 

please see NMFS (2018) for a review of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4209 

available information. Fifteen marine 

mammal species (13 cetacean and 2 

pinniped (both phocid) species) have 

the reasonable potential to co-occur 

with the proposed survey activities. 

Please refer back to Table 3. Of the 

cetacean species that may be present, 

five are classified as low-frequency 

cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete species), 

seven are classified as mid-frequency 

cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid species and 

the sperm whale), and one is classified 

as a high-frequency cetacean (i.e., 

harbor porpoise). 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

This section includes a summary and 

discussion of the ways that components 

of the specified activity may impact 

marine mammals and their habitat. 

Detailed descriptions of the potential 

effects of similar specified activities 

have been provided in other recent and 

related Federal Register notifications, 

including for survey activities using 

similar HRG methodologies, over 

similar amounts of time, and occurring 

within the same specified geographical 

region (e.g., 82 FR 20563, May 3, 2017; 

85 FR 36537, June 17, 2020; 85 FR 7926, 

February 12, 2020; 85 FR 37848, June 

24, 2020; 85 FR 48179, August 10, 2020; 

86 FR 16327, March 29, 2021; 86 FR 

17782, April 6, 2021). No significant 

new information is available, and we 

refer the reader to these documents 

rather than repeating the details here. 

The Estimated Take section later in 

this document includes a quantitative 

analysis of the number of individuals 

that are expected to be taken by Atlantic 

Shores’ activities. The Negligible Impact 

Analysis and Determination section 

considers the content of this section, the 

Estimated Take section, and the 

Proposed Mitigation section, to draw 

conclusions regarding the likely impacts 

of these activities on the reproductive 

success or survivorship of individuals 

and how those impacts on individuals 

are likely to impact marine mammal 

species or stocks. 

Background on Active Acoustic Sound 

Sources and Acoustic Terminology 

This subsection contains a brief 

technical background on sound, on the 

characteristics of certain sound types, 

and on metrics used in this proposal 

inasmuch as the information is relevant 

to the specified activity and to the 

summary of the potential effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals. 

For general information on sound and 

its interaction with the marine 

environment, please see, e.g., Au and 

Hastings (2008); Richardson et al., 

(1995); Urick (1983). 

Sound travels in waves, the basic 

components of which are frequency, 

wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. 

Frequency is the number of pressure 

waves that pass by a reference point per 

unit of time and is measured in hertz or 

cycles per second. Wavelength is the 

distance between two peaks or 

corresponding points of a sound wave 

(length of one cycle). Higher frequency 

sounds have shorter wavelengths than 

lower frequency sounds, and typically 

attenuate (decrease) more rapidly, 

except in certain cases in shallower 

water. Amplitude is the height of the 

sound pressure wave or the ‘‘loudness’’ 

of a sound and is typically described 

using the relative unit of the decibel. A 

sound pressure level (SPL) in dB is 

described as the ratio between a 

measured pressure and a reference 

pressure (for underwater sound, this is 

1 microPascal (mPa)), and is a 

logarithmic unit that accounts for large 

variations in amplitude. Therefore, a 

relatively small change in dB 

corresponds to large changes in sound 

pressure. The source level (SL) 

represents the SPL referenced at a 

distance of 1-m from the source 

(referenced to 1 mPa), while the received 

level is the SPL at the listener’s position 

(referenced to 1 mPa). 

Root mean square (rms) is the 

quadratic mean sound pressure over the 

duration of an impulse. Root mean 

square is calculated by squaring all of 

the sound amplitudes, averaging the 

squares, and then taking the square root 

of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean 

square accounts for both positive and 

negative values; squaring the pressures 

makes all values positive so that they 

may be accounted for in the summation 

of pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 

2005). This measurement is often used 

in the context of discussing behavioral 

effects, in part because behavioral 

effects, which often result from auditory 

cues, may be better expressed through 

averaged units than by peak pressures. 

Sound exposure level (SEL; 

represented as dB re 1 mPa2-s) represents 

the total energy in a stated frequency 

band over a stated time interval or event 

and considers both intensity and 

duration of exposure. The per-pulse SEL 

is calculated over the time window 

containing the entire pulse (i.e., 100 

percent of the acoustic energy). SEL is 

a cumulative metric; it can be 

accumulated over a single pulse, or 

calculated over periods containing 

multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL 

represents the total energy accumulated 

by a receiver over a defined time 

window or during an event. Peak sound 

pressure (also referred to as zero-to-peak 

sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum 

instantaneous sound pressure 

measurable in the water at a specified 

distance from the source and is 

represented in the same units as the rms 

sound pressure. 

When underwater objects vibrate or 

activity occurs, sound-pressure waves 

are created. These waves alternately 

compress and decompress the water as 

the sound wave travels. Underwater 

sound waves radiate in a manner similar 

to ripples on the surface of a pond and 

may be directed either in a beam or in 

beams or may radiate in all directions 

(omnidirectional sources). The 

compressions and decompressions 

associated with sound waves are 

detected as changes in pressure by 

aquatic life and man-made sound 

receptors such as hydrophones. 

Even in the absence of sound from the 

specified activity, the underwater 

environment is typically loud due to 

ambient sound, which is defined as 

environmental background sound levels 

lacking a single source or point 

(Richardson et al., 1995). The sound 

level of a region is defined by the total 

acoustical energy being generated by 

known and unknown sources. These 

sources may include physical (e.g., 

wind and waves, earthquakes, ice, 

atmospheric sound), biological (e.g., 

sounds produced by marine mammals, 

fish, and invertebrates), and 

anthropogenic (e.g., vessels, dredging, 

construction) sound. A number of 

sources contribute to ambient sound, 

including wind and waves, which are a 

main source of naturally occurring 

ambient sound for frequencies between 

200 Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In 

general, ambient sound levels tend to 

increase with increasing wind speed 

and wave height. Precipitation can 

become an important component of total 

sound at frequencies above 500 Hz, and 

possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet 

times. Marine mammals can contribute 

significantly to ambient sound levels, as 

can some fish and snapping shrimp. The 

frequency band for biological 

contributions is from approximately 12 

Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient 

sound related to human activity include 

transportation (surface vessels), 

dredging and construction, oil and gas 

drilling and production, geophysical 

surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel 

noise typically dominates the total 

ambient sound for frequencies between 

20 and 300 Hz. In general, the 

frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are 

below 1 kHz and, if higher frequency 

sound levels are created, they attenuate 

rapidly. 

The sum of the various natural and 

anthropogenic sound sources that 

comprise ambient sound at any given 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4210 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

location and time depends not only on 

the source levels (as determined by 

current weather conditions and levels of 

biological and human activity) but on 

the ability of sound to propagate 

through the environment. In turn, sound 

propagation is dependent on the 

spatially and temporally varying 

properties of the water column and sea 

floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a 

result of the dependence on a large 

number of varying factors, ambient 

sound levels can be expected to vary 

widely over both coarse and fine spatial 

and temporal scales. Sound levels at a 

given frequency and location can vary 

by 10–20 dB from day to day 

(Richardson et al., 1995). The result is 

that, depending on the source type and 

its intensity, sound from the specified 

activity may be a negligible addition to 

the local environment or could form a 

distinctive signal that may affect marine 

mammals. Details of source types are 

described in the following text. 

Sounds are often considered to fall 

into one of two general types: Pulsed 

and non-pulsed (defined in the 

following). The distinction between 

these two sound types is important 

because they have differing potential to 

cause physical effects, particularly with 

regard to hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in 

Southall et al., 2007). Please see 

Southall et al., (2007) for an in-depth 

discussion of these concepts. The 

distinction between these two sound 

types is not always obvious, as certain 

signals share properties of both pulsed 

and non-pulsed sounds. A signal near a 

source could be categorized as a pulse, 

but due to propagation effects as it 

moves farther from the source, the 

signal duration becomes longer (e.g., 

Greene and Richardson, 1988). 

Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, 

explosions, gunshots, sonic booms, 

impact pile driving) produce signals 

that are brief (typically considered to be 

less than one second), broadband, atonal 

transients (ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 

1998; NIOSH, 1998) and occur either as 

isolated events or repeated in some 

succession. Pulsed sounds are all 

characterized by a relatively rapid rise 

from ambient pressure to a maximal 

pressure value followed by a rapid 

decay period that may include a period 

of diminishing, oscillating maximal and 

minimal pressures, and generally have 

an increased capacity to induce physical 

injury as compared with sounds that 

lack these features. 

Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, 

narrowband, or broadband, brief or 

prolonged, and may be either 

continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995; 

NIOSH, 1998). Some of these nonpulsed sounds can be transient signals 

of short duration but without the 

essential properties of pulses (e.g., rapid 

rise time). Examples of non-pulsed 

sounds include those produced by 

vessels, aircraft, machinery operations 

such as drilling or dredging, vibratory 

pile driving, and active sonar systems. 

The duration of such sounds, as 

received at a distance, can be greatly 

extended in a highly reverberant 

environment. 

Sparkers produce pulsed signals with 

energy in the frequency ranges specified 

in Table 2. The amplitude of the 

acoustic wave emitted from sparker 

sources is equal in all directions (i.e., 

omnidirectional), while other sources 

planned for use during the proposed 

surveys have some degree of 

directionality to the beam, as specified 

in Table 2. Other sources planned for 

use during the proposed survey activity 

(e.g., CHIRPs) should be considered 

non-pulsed, intermittent sources. 

Summary on Specific Potential Effects 

of Acoustic Sound Sources 

Underwater sound from active 

acoustic sources can include one or 

more of the following: Temporary or 

permanent hearing impairment, 

behavioral disturbance, masking, stress, 

and non-auditory physical effects. The 

degree of effect is intrinsically related to 

the signal characteristics, received level, 

distance from the source, and duration 

of the sound exposure. Marine 

mammals exposed to high-intensity 

sound, or to lower-intensity sound for 

prolonged periods, can experience 

hearing threshold shift (TS), which is 

the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain 

frequency ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS 

can be permanent (PTS; permanent 

threshold shift), in which case the loss 

of hearing sensitivity is not fully 

recoverable, or temporary (TTS; 

temporary threshold shift), in which 

case the animal’s hearing threshold 

would recover over time (Southall et al., 

2007). 

Animals in the vicinity of Atlantic 

Shores’ proposed HRG survey activity 

are unlikely to incur even TTS due to 

the characteristics of the sound sources, 

which include relatively low source 

levels (179 to 245 dB re 1 mPa m), and 

generally very short pulses and 

potential duration of exposure. These 

characteristics mean that instantaneous 

exposure is unlikely to cause TTS, as it 

is unlikely that exposure would occur 

close enough to the vessel for received 

levels to exceed peak pressure TTS 

criteria, and that the cumulative 

duration of exposure would be 

insufficient to exceed cumulative sound 

exposure level (SEL) criteria. Even for 

high-frequency cetacean species (e.g., 

harbor porpoises), which have the 

greatest sensitivity to potential TTS, 

individuals would have to make a very 

close approach and also remain very 

close to vessels operating these sources 

in order to receive multiple exposures at 

relatively high levels, as would be 

necessary to cause TTS. Intermittent 

exposures—as would occur due to the 

brief, transient signals produced by 

these sources—require a higher 

cumulative SEL to induce TTS than 

would continuous exposures of the 

same duration (i.e., intermittent 

exposure results in lower levels of TTS). 

Moreover, most marine mammals would 

more likely avoid a loud sound source 

rather than swim in such close 

proximity as to result in TTS. Kremser 

et al., (2005) noted that the probability 

of a cetacean swimming through the 

area of exposure when a sub-bottom 

profiler emits a pulse is small—because 

if the animal was in the area, it would 

have to pass the transducer at close 

range in order to be subjected to sound 

levels that could cause TTS and would 

likely exhibit avoidance behavior to the 

area near the transducer rather than 

swim through at such a close range. 

Further, the restricted beam shape of 

many of HRG survey devices planned 

for use (Table 2) makes it unlikely that 

an animal would be exposed more than 

briefly during the passage of the vessel. 

Behavioral disturbance may include a 

variety of effects, including subtle 

changes in behavior (e.g., minor or brief 

avoidance of an area or changes in 

vocalizations), more conspicuous 

changes in similar behavioral activities, 

and more sustained and/or potentially 

severe reactions, such as displacement 

from or abandonment of high-quality 

habitat. Behavioral responses to sound 

are highly variable and context-specific 

and any reactions depend on numerous 

intrinsic and extrinsic factors (e.g., 

species, state of maturity, experience, 

current activity, reproductive state, 

auditory sensitivity, time of day), as 

well as the interplay between factors. 

Available studies show wide variation 

in response to underwater sound; 

therefore, it is difficult to predict 

specifically how any given sound in a 

particular instance might affect marine 

mammals perceiving the signal. 

In addition, sound can disrupt 

behavior through masking, or interfering 

with, an animal’s ability to detect, 

recognize, or discriminate between 

acoustic signals of interest (e.g., those 

used for intraspecific communication 

and social interactions, prey detection, 

predator avoidance, navigation). 

Masking occurs when the receipt of a 

sound is interfered with by another 

coincident sound at similar frequencies 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4211 

and at similar or higher intensity, and 

may occur whether the sound is natural 

(e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves, 

precipitation) or anthropogenic (e.g., 

shipping, sonar, seismic exploration) in 

origin. Marine mammal 

communications would not likely be 

masked appreciably by the acoustic 

signals given the directionality of the 

signals for most HRG survey equipment 

types planned for use (Table 2) and the 

brief period when an individual 

mammal is likely to be exposed. 

Classic stress responses begin when 

an animal’s central nervous system 

perceives a potential threat to its 

homeostasis. That perception triggers 

stress responses regardless of whether a 

stimulus actually threatens the animal; 

the mere perception of a threat is 

sufficient to trigger a stress response 

(Moberg 2000; Seyle 1950). Once an 

animal’s central nervous system 

perceives a threat, it mounts a biological 

response or defense that consists of a 

combination of the four general 

biological defense responses: Behavioral 

responses, autonomic nervous system 

responses, neuroendocrine responses, or 

immune responses. In the case of many 

stressors, an animal’s first and 

sometimes most economical (in terms of 

biotic costs) response is behavioral 

avoidance of the potential stressor or 

avoidance of continued exposure to a 

stressor. An animal’s second line of 

defense to stressors involves the 

sympathetic part of the autonomic 

nervous system and the classical ‘‘fight 

or flight’’ response which includes the 

cardiovascular system, the 

gastrointestinal system, the exocrine 

glands, and the adrenal medulla to 

produce changes in heart rate, blood 

pressure, and gastrointestinal activity 

that humans commonly associate with 

‘‘stress.’’ These responses have a 

relatively short duration and may or 

may not have significant long-term 

effect on an animal’s welfare. An 

animal’s third line of defense to 

stressors involves its neuroendocrine 

systems; the system that has received 

the most study has been the 

hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal system 

(also known as the HPA axis in 

mammals). Unlike stress responses 

associated with the autonomic nervous 

system, virtually all neuro-endocrine 

functions that are affected by stress— 

including immune competence, 

reproduction, metabolism, and 

behavior—are regulated by pituitary 

hormones. Stress-induced changes in 

the secretion of pituitary hormones have 

been implicated in failed reproduction 

(Moberg 1987; Rivier 1995), reduced 

immune competence (Blecha 2000), and 

behavioral disturbance. Increases in the 

circulation of glucocorticosteroids 

(cortisol, corticosterone, and 

aldosterone in marine mammals; see 

Romano et al., 2004) have been long 

been equated with stress. The primary 

distinction between stress (which is 

adaptive and does not normally place an 

animal at risk) and distress is the biotic 

cost of the response. In general, there 

are few data on the potential for strong, 

anthropogenic underwater sounds to 

cause non-auditory physical effects in 

marine mammals. The available data do 

not allow identification of a specific 

exposure level above which nonauditory effects can be expected 

(Southall et al., 2007). There is currently 

no definitive evidence that any of these 

effects occur even for marine mammals 

in close proximity to an anthropogenic 

sound source. In addition, marine 

mammals that show behavioral 

avoidance of survey vessels and related 

sound sources are unlikely to incur nonauditory impairment or other physical 

effects. NMFS does not expect that the 

generally short-term, intermittent, and 

transitory HRG and geotechnical survey 

activities would create conditions of 

long-term, continuous noise and chronic 

acoustic exposure leading to long-term 

physiological stress responses in marine 

mammals. 

Sound may affect marine mammals 

through impacts on the abundance, 

behavior, or distribution of prey species 

(e.g., crustaceans, cephalopods, fish, 

and zooplankton) (i.e., effects to marine 

mammal habitat). Prey species exposed 

to sound might move away from the 

sound source, experience TTS, 

experience masking of biologically 

relevant sounds, or show no obvious 

direct effects. The most likely impacts 

(if any) for most prey species in a given 

area would be temporary avoidance of 

the area. Surveys using active acoustic 

sound sources move through an area, 

limiting exposure to multiple pulses. In 

all cases, sound levels would return to 

ambient once a survey ends and the 

noise source is shut down and, when 

exposure to sound ends, behavioral and/ 

or physiological responses are expected 

to end relatively quickly. Finally, the 

HRG survey equipment will not have 

significant impacts to the seafloor and 

does not represent a source of pollution. 

Vessel Strike 

Vessel collisions with marine 

mammals, or ship strikes, can result in 

death or serious injury of the animal. 

These interactions are typically 

associated with large whales, which are 

less maneuverable than are smaller 

cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to 

large vessels. Ship strikes generally 

involve commercial shipping vessels, 

which are generally larger and of which 

there is much more traffic in the ocean 

than geophysical survey vessels. Jensen 

and Silber (2004) summarized ship 

strikes of large whales worldwide from 

1975–2003 and found that most 

collisions occurred in the open ocean 

and involved large vessels (e.g., 

commercial shipping). For vessels used 

in geophysical survey activities, vessel 

speed while towing gear is typically 

only 4–5 knots. At these speeds, both 

the possibility of striking a marine 

mammal and the possibility of a strike 

resulting in serious injury or mortality 

are so low as to be discountable. At 

average transit speed for geophysical 

survey vessels, the probability of serious 

injury or mortality resulting from a 

strike is less than 50 percent. However, 

the likelihood of a strike actually 

happening is again low given the 

smaller size of these vessels and 

generally slower speeds. Notably in the 

Jensen and Silber study, no strike 

incidents were reported for geophysical 

survey vessels during that time period. 

The potential effects of Atlantic 

Shores’ specified survey activity are 

expected to be limited to Level B 

behavioral harassment. No permanent or 

temporary auditory effects, or 

significant impacts to marine mammal 

habitat, including prey, are expected. 

Marine Mammal Habitat 

The HRG survey equipment will not 

contact the seafloor and does not 

represent a source of pollution. We are 

not aware of any available literature on 

impacts to marine mammal prey from 

sound produced by HRG survey 

equipment. However, as the HRG survey 

equipment introduces noise to the 

marine environment, there is the 

potential for it to result in avoidance of 

the area around the HRG survey 

activities on the part of marine mammal 

prey. Any avoidance of the area on the 

part of marine mammal prey would be 

expected to be short term and 

temporary. 

Because of the temporary nature of 

the disturbance, and the availability of 

similar habitat and resources (e.g., prey 

species) in the surrounding area, the 

impacts to marine mammals and the 

food sources that they utilize are not 

expected to cause significant or longterm consequences for individual 

marine mammals or their populations. 

Impacts on marine mammal habitat 

from the proposed activities will be 

temporary, insignificant, and 

discountable. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4212 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

Estimated Take 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes proposed 

for authorization through this IHA, 

which will inform both NMFS’ 

consideration of ‘‘small numbers’’ and 

the negligible impact determination. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, 

which (i) has the potential to injure a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 

or (ii) has the potential to disturb a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild by causing disruption 

of behavioral patterns, including, but 

not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

(Level B harassment). 

Authorized takes would be by Level B 

harassment only, in the form of 

disruption of behavioral patterns for 

individual marine mammals resulting 

from exposure to noise from certain 

HRG acoustic sources. Based primarily 

on the characteristics of the signals 

produced by the acoustic sources 

planned for use and the proposed 

mitigation measures, Level A 

harassment is neither anticipated, nor 

proposed to be authorized. Take by 

Level A harassment (injury) is 

considered unlikely, even absent 

mitigation, based on the characteristics 

of the signals produced by the acoustic 

sources planned for use, and is not 

proposed for authorization. 

Implementation of required mitigation 

further reduces this potential. 

Furthermore and as previously 

described, no serious injury or mortality 

is anticipated or proposed to be 

authorized for this activity. Below we 

describe how the take is estimated. 

Generally speaking, we estimate take 

by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds 

above which NMFS believes the best 

available science indicates marine 

mammals will be behaviorally harassed 

or incur some degree of permanent 

hearing impairment; (2) the area or 

volume of water that will be ensonified 

above these levels in a day; (3) the 

density or occurrence of marine 

mammals within these ensonified areas; 

and, (4) and the number of days of 

activities. We note that while these 

basic factors can contribute to a basic 

calculation to provide an initial 

prediction of takes, additional 

information that can qualitatively 

inform take estimates is also sometimes 

available (e.g., previous monitoring 

results or average group size). Below, we 

describe the factors considered here in 

more detail and present the proposed 

take estimate. 

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 (e.g., 

frequency, predictability, duty cycle), 

the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and 

the receiving animals (hearing, 

motivation, experience, demography, 

behavioral context) and can be difficult 

to predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison 

et al., 2012). Based on what the 

available science indicates and the 

practical need to use a threshold based 

on a factor that is both predictable and 

measurable for most activities, NMFS 

uses a generalized acoustic threshold 

based on received level to estimate the 

onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS 

predicts that marine mammals may be 

behaviorally harassed (i.e., Level B 

harassment) when exposed to 

underwater anthropogenic noise above 

received levels of 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) 

for the impulsive sources (i.e., sparkers) 

and non-impulsive, intermittent sources 

(e.g., CHIRPs) evaluated here for 

Atlantic Shores’ proposed activity. 

Level A harassment—NMFS’ 

Technical Guidance for Assessing the 

Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on 

Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) 

(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). 

These thresholds are provided in the 

table below (Table 5). The references, 

analysis, and methodology used in the 

development of the thresholds are 

described in NMFS (2018) Technical 

Guidance, which may be accessed at 

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

marine-mammal-acoustic-technicalguidance. 

TABLE 5—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT

Hearing group 

PTS onset acoustic thresholds * 

(received level) 

Impulsive Non-impulsive 

Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ...................................... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ......................... Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB. 

Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ...................................... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ........................ Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB. 

High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ..................................... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ........................ Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB. 

Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) ............................. Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ........................ Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB. 

Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) ............................. Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ....................... Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB. 

* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should 

also be considered. 

Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s. 

In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI, 2013). However, ANSI defines peak 

sound pressure as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated 

with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF 

cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level 

thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for 

action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4213 

The 2020 proposed notification for 

Atlantic Shores’ HRG surveys (85 FR 

7926; February 12, 2020) previously 

analyzed the potential for Level A 

harassment (refer to Table 5 in that 

notification and additional discussion 

therein). 

Similar to the past IHAs issued to 

Atlantic Shores, the proposed activities 

for 2022 include the use of impulsive 

(i.e.,) and non-impulsive (e.g., CHIRPs) 

sources. Carrying through the same logic 

as the locations, species, survey 

durations, equipment used, and source 

levels are all of a similar scope 

previously analyzed for Atlantic Shores’ 

surveys, and as discussed above, NMFS 

has concluded that Level A harassment 

is not a reasonably likely outcome for 

marine mammals exposed to noise 

through use of the sources proposed for 

use here due to the mitigation measures 

Atlantic Shores has proposed, and the 

potential for Level A harassment is not 

evaluated further in this document. 

Atlantic Shores did not request 

authorization of take by Level A 

harassment, and no take by Level A 

harassment is proposed for 

authorization by NMFS. 

Ensonified Area 

Here, we describe operational and 

environmental parameters of the activity 

that will feed into identifying the area 

ensonified above the acoustic 

thresholds, which include source levels 

and transmission loss coefficient. 

NMFS has developed a user-friendly 

methodology for estimating the extent of 

the Level B harassment isopleths 

associated with relevant HRG survey 

equipment (NMFS, 2020). This 

methodology incorporates frequency 

and directionality to refine estimated 

ensonified zones. For acoustic sources 

that operate with different beamwidths, 

the maximum beamwidth was used, and 

the lowest frequency of the source was 

used when calculating the frequencydependent absorption coefficient (Table 

2). 

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 when 

the source level for a specific type of 

HRG equipment is not provided in 

Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS 

recommends that either the source 

levels provided by the manufacturer be 

used, or, in instances where source 

levels provided by the manufacturer are 

unavailable or unreliable, a proxy from 

Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be used 

instead. Table 2 shows the HRG 

equipment types that may be used 

during the proposed surveys and the 

source levels associated with those HRG 

equipment types. The computations and 

results from the Level B ensonified area 

analysis are displayed in Tables 6 and 

7 below. 

TABLE 6—INPUTS INTO THE LEVEL B HARASSMENT SPREADSHEET FOR HIGH RESOLUTION GEOPHYSICAL SOURCES USING

A TRANSMISSION LOSS COEFFICIENT OF 20 

Source name 

Input values in spreadsheet Computed 

values 

(meters) 

Threshold 

level 

Source level 

(dBrms) 

Frequency 

(kH) 

Beamwidth 

(degrees) 

Water depth 

(m) Slant 

distance of 

threshold 

Horizontal 

threshold 

range (m) 

SIG ELC 820 Sparker 

at 750J * .................... 160 203 0.01 180 5 141 141 

Geo Marine Survey 

System 2D SUHRS 

at 400J ...................... 160 195 0.2 180 5 56 56 

Edgetech 2000–DSS ... 160 195 2 24 5 56 1 

Edgetech 216 ............... 160 179 2 24 5 9 1 

Edgetech 424 ............... 160 180 4 71 10 10 6 

Edgetech 512i .............. 160 179 0.7 80 10 9 6 

Pangeosubsea SubBottom Imager TM ..... 160 190 4 120 5 32 9 

* Used as a proxy for the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 because the specific energy setting is not described in Crocker and Franantonio 

(2016). 

TABLE 7—MAXIMUM DISTANCES TO LEVEL B 160 dBRMS THRESHOLD BY EQUIPMENT TYPE OPERATING BELOW 180 kHz 

HRG survey equipment 

(sub-bottom profiler) Representative equipment type 

Distances 

to level B 

threshold 

(m) 

Sparker ............................ Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 ............................................................................................................ 141 

Geo Marine Survey System 2D SUHRS ................................................................................................... 56 

CHIRP ............................. Edgetech 2000–DSS ................................................................................................................................. 56 

Edgetech 216 ............................................................................................................................................. 9 

Edgetech 424 ............................................................................................................................................. 10 

Edgetech 512i ............................................................................................................................................ 9 

Pangeosubsea Sub-Bottom ImagerTM ...................................................................................................... 32 

Results of modeling using the 

methodology described and shown 

above indicated that, of the HRG survey 

equipment planned for use by Atlantic 

Shores that has the potential to result in 

Level B harassment of marine mammals, 

the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 

would produce the largest Level B 

harassment isopleth (141-m; please refer 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4214 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

back to Tables 6 and 7 above, as well as 

Table 6–1 in Atlantic Shores’ IHA 

application). Estimated Level B 

harassment isopleths associated with 

the CHIRP equipment planned for use 

are also found in Tables 6 and 7. All 

CHIRPs equipment produced Level B 

harassment isopleths much smaller than 

the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 

sparker did. 

Although Atlantic Shores does not 

expect to use sparker sources on all 

planned survey days and during the 

entire duration that surveys are likely to 

occur, Atlantic Shores proposes to 

assume for purposes of analysis that the 

sparker would be used on all survey 

days and across all hours. This is a 

conservative approach, as the actual 

sources used on individual survey days 

may produce smaller harassment 

distances. 

Marine Mammal Occurrence 

In this section, we provide the 

information about presence, density, or 

group dynamics of marine mammals 

that will inform the take calculations. 

Habitat-based density models 

produced by the Duke University 

Marine Geospatial Ecology Laboratory 

and the Marine-life Data and Analysis 

Team, based on the best available 

marine mammal data from 1992–201 

obtained in a collaboration between 

Duke University, the Northeast Regional 

Planning Body, the University of North 

Carolina Wilmington, the Virginia 

Aquarium and Marine Science Center, 

and NOAA (Roberts et al., 2016a; 

Curtice et al., 2018), represent the best 

available information regarding marine 

mammal densities in the survey area. 

More recently, these data have been 

updated with new modeling results and 

include density estimates for pinnipeds 

(Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017, 2018). 

The density data presented by Roberts 

et al., (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020) 

incorporates aerial and shipboard linetransect survey data from NMFS and 

other organizations and incorporates 

data from eight physiographic and 16 

dynamic oceanographic and biological 

covariates, and controls for the 

influence of sea state, group size, 

availability bias, and perception bias on 

the probability of making a sighting. 

These density models were originally 

developed for all cetacean taxa in the 

U.S. Atlantic (Roberts et al., 2016a). In 

subsequent years, certain models have 

been updated based on additional data 

as well as certain methodological 

improvements. More information is 

available online at https://seamap.env.

duke.edu/models/Duke/EC/. Marine 

mammal density estimates in the survey 

area (animals/km2) were obtained using 

the most recent model results for all 

taxa (Roberts et al., 2016b, 2017, 2018, 

2020). The updated models incorporate 

additional sighting data, including 

sightings from NOAA’s Atlantic Marine 

Assessment Program for Protected 

Species (AMAPPS) surveys. 

For the exposure analysis, density 

data from Roberts et al., (2016b, 2017, 

2018, 2021) were mapped using a 

geographic information system (GIS). 

For each of the survey areas (i.e., Lease 

Area, ECR North, ECR South), the 

densities of each species as reported by 

Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021) 

were averaged by season; thus, a density 

was calculated for each species for 

spring, summer, fall and winter. To be 

conservative, the greatest seasonal 

density calculated for each species was 

then carried forward in the exposure 

analysis. Estimated seasonal densities 

(animals per km2) of all marine mammal 

species that may be taken by the 

proposed survey, for all survey areas are 

shown in Tables C–1, C–2 and C–3 in 

Appendix C of Atlantic Shores’ IHA 

application. The maximum seasonal 

density values used to estimate take 

numbers are shown in Table 8 below. 

Below, we discuss how densities were 

assumed to apply to specific species for 

which the Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 

2018, 2021) models provide results at 

the genus or guild level. 

For bottlenose dolphin densities, 

Roberts et al., (2016b, 2017, 2018) does 

not differentiate by stock. The Western 

North Atlantic northern migratory 

coastal stock is generally expected to 

occur only in coastal waters from the 

shoreline to approximately the 20-m 

(65-ft) isobath (Hayes et al., 2018). As 

the Lease Area is located within depths 

exceeding 20-m, where the offshore 

stock would generally be expected to 

occur, all calculated bottlenose dolphin 

exposures within the Lease Area were 

assigned to the offshore stock. However, 

both stocks have the potential to occur 

in the ECR North and ECR South survey 

areas. To account for the potential for 

mixed stocks within ECR North and 

South, the survey areas ECR North and 

South were divided approximately 

along the 20-m depth isobath, which 

roughly corresponds to the 10-fathom 

contour on NOAA navigation charts. As 

approximately 33 percent of ECR North 

and ECR South are 20-m or less in 

depth, 33 percent of the estimated take 

calculation for bottlenose dolphins was 

applied to the Western North Atlantic 

northern migratory coastal stock and the 

remaining 67 percent was applied to the 

offshore stock. 

For this proposed project, Atlantic 

Shores has used the same pilot whale 

densities that were previously used in 

the 2020 and subsequent 2021 

(Renewal) IHAs. To better estimate the 

number of pilot whales that could 

potentially be impacted by the proposed 

project, although exposure is noted as 

unlikely to occur in the IHA 

application, Atlantic Shores adjusted 

the take estimate by average group size. 

Because the seasonality, feeding 

preferences, and habitat use by gray 

seals often overlaps with that of harbor 

seals in the survey areas, it was assumed 

that modeled takes of seals could occur 

to either of the respective species. 

Furthermore, as the density models 

produced by Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 

2018) do not differentiate between the 

different pinniped species, the same 

density estimates were applied to both 

seal species. Because of this, pinniped 

density values reported in Atlantic 

Shores’ IHA application are described as 

‘‘seals’’ and not species-specific. 

Since Atlantic Shores’ 2020 and 2021 

(Renewal) IHAs for HRG surveys were 

completed, the North Atlantic right 

whale density data has been updated for 

this proposed project. This is due to the 

inclusion of three new datasets: 2011– 

2015 Northeast Large Pelagic Survey 

Cooperative, 2017–2018 Marine 

Mammal Surveys of the Wind Energy 

Areas conducted by the New England 

Aquarium, and 2017–2018 New York 

Bight Whale Monitoring Program 

surveys conducted by the New York 

State Department of Environmental 

conservation (NYSDEC). This new 

density data shows distribution changes 

that are likely influenced by 

oceanographic and prey covariates in 

the whale density model (Roberts et al., 

2021). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4215 

TABLE 8—MAXIMUM SEASONAL MARINE MAMMAL DENSITIES (NUMBER OF ANIMALS PER 100 km2) IN THE SURVEY AREAS

(APPENDIX C OF ATLANTIC SHORES’ IHA APPLICATION) 

Species groups Species 

Maximum seasonal densities 

Lease area ECR north ECR south 

Cetaceans ........... North Atlantic right whale ........................................................................... 0.499 0.182 0.179 

Humpback whale ........................................................................................ 0.076 0.082 0.103 

Fin whale .................................................................................................... 0.100 0.080 0.057 

Sei whale .................................................................................................... 0.004 0.004 0.002 

Minke whale ............................................................................................... 0.055 0.017 0.019 

Sperm whale .............................................................................................. 0.013 0.005 0.003 

Long-finned pilot whale .............................................................................. 0.036 0.012 0.009 

Bottlenose dolphin (Western North Atlantic coastal migratory) ................. ........................ 21.675 58.524 

Bottlenose dolphin (Western North Atlantic offshore) ............................... 21.752 21.675 58.524 

Common dolphin ........................................................................................ 3.120 1.644 1.114 

Atlantic white-sided dolphin ....................................................................... 0.487 0.213 0.152 

Atlantic spotted dolphin .............................................................................. 0.076 0.059 0.021 

Risso’s dolphin ........................................................................................... 0.010 0.001 0.002 

Harbor porpoise ......................................................................................... 2.904 7.357 2.209 

Pinnipeds ............ Gray seal .................................................................................................... 4.918 9.737 6.539 

Harbor seal ................................................................................................. 4.918 9.737 6.539 

Note—Many of the densities provided in this table have been previously used and applied during the 2020 IHA to Atlantic Shores and its subsequent Renewal and remain applicable. 

Take Calculation and Estimation 

Here we describe how the information 

provided above is brought together to 

produce a quantitative take estimate. 

In order to estimate the number of 

marine mammals predicted to be 

exposed to sound levels that would 

result in harassment, radial distances to 

predicted isopleths corresponding to 

Level B harassment thresholds are 

calculated, as described above. The 

maximum distance (i.e., 141-m distance 

associated with the Applied Acoustics 

Dura-Spark 240) to the Level B 

harassment criterion and the estimated 

distance traveled per day by a given 

survey vessel (i.e., 55-km (34.2-mi)) are 

then used to calculate the daily 

ensonified area, or zone of influence 

(ZOI) around the survey vessel. 

Atlantic Shores estimates that 

proposed surveys will achieve a 

maximum daily track line distance of 55 

km per day (24-hour period) during 

proposed HRG surveys. This distance 

accounts for the vessel traveling at 

approximately 3.5 knots and accounts 

for non-active survey periods. Based on 

the maximum estimated distance to the 

Level B harassment threshold of 141-m 

(Table 7) and the maximum estimated 

daily track line distance of 55 km across 

all survey sites, an area of 15.57 km2

would be ensonified to the Level B 

harassment threshold per day across all 

survey sites during Atlantic Shores’ 

proposed surveys (Table 9) based on the 

following formula: 

Mobile Source ZOI = (Distance/day × 2r) 

+ pr2

Where: 

Distance/day = the maximum distance a 

survey vessel could travel in a 24-hour 

period; and 

r = the maximum radial distance from a given 

sound source to the NOAA Level A or 

Level B harassment thresholds. 

TABLE 9—MAXIMUM HRG SURVEY AREA DISTANCES FOR ATLANTIC SHORES’ PROPOSED PROJECT

Survey area 

Number of 

active 

survey days 

Survey 

distances 

per day 

in km (mi) 

Maximum 

radial 

distance 

(r) in m (ft) 

Calculated 

ZOI per day 

(km2) 

Total 

annual 

ensonified 

area (km2) 

Lease Area ........................................................................... 120 55 (34.2) 141 (463) 15.57 1,868.4 

ECR North ............................................................................ 180 2,802.6 

ECR South ........................................................................... 60 934.2 

As described above, this is a 

conservative estimate as it assumes the 

HRG source that results in the greatest 

isopleth distance to the Level B 

harassment threshold would be 

operated at all times during the entire 

survey, which may not ultimately occur. 

The number of marine mammals 

expected to be incidentally taken per 

day is then calculated by estimating the 

number of each species predicted to 

occur within the daily ensonified area 

(animals/km2), incorporating the 

maximum seasonal estimated marine 

mammal densities as described above. 

Estimated numbers of each species 

taken per day across all survey sites are 

then multiplied by the total number of 

survey days (i.e., 360). The product is 

then rounded, to generate an estimate of 

the total number of instances of 

harassment expected for each species 

over the duration of the survey. A 

summary of this method is illustrated in 

the following formula with the resulting 

proposed take of marine mammals is 

shown below in Table 10: 

Estimated Take = D × ZOI × # of days 

Where: 

D = average species density (per km2); and 

ZOI = maximum daily ensonified area to 

relevant thresholds. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4216 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

TABLE 10—NUMBERS OF POTENTIAL INCIDENTAL TAKE OF MARINE MAMMALS PROPOSED FOR AUTHORIZATION AND

PROPOSED TAKES AS A PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION

Species 

Calculated 

takes by 

Level B 

harassment e

Takes 

proposed for 

Level B 

harassment 

to be 

authorized f

Total 

Proposed 

takes (Level 

B Harassment) 

to be 

authorized f

Proposed 

takes (Level B 

Harassment) 

as a 

percentage of 

population/ 

stock a f

North Atlantic right whale ................................................................................ 17 17 17 4.62 

Humpback whale ............................................................................................. 4 c 8 8 0.57 

Fin whale ......................................................................................................... 5 5 5 0.07 

Sei whale ......................................................................................................... 2 2 2 0.03 

Minke whale ..................................................................................................... 2 2 2 0.01 

Sperm whale .................................................................................................... 1 1 1 0.03 

Long-finned pilot whale .................................................................................... 20 20 20 0.05 

Bottlenose dolphin (W.N. Atlantic Coastal Migratory) ..................................... 385 385 385 5.80 

Bottlenose dolphin (W.N. Atlantic Offshore) .................................................... 1,175 1,175 1,175 1.87 

Common dolphin (short-beaked) ..................................................................... 406 b 560 560 0.32 

Atlantic white-sided dolphin ............................................................................. 17 17 17 0.02 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ................................................................................... 50 d 100 100 0.25 

Risso’s dolphin ................................................................................................. 30 30 30 0.08 

Harbor porpoise ............................................................................................... 282 282 282 0.30 

Harbor seal ...................................................................................................... 426 426 426 0.56 

Gray seal ......................................................................................................... 426 426 426 1.56 

a Calculated percentages of population/stock were based on the population estimates (Nest) found in the NMFS’s draft 2021 U.S. Atlantic and 

Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessment on NMFS’s website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports). bBased on information obtained from the monitoring report provided to NMFS after the completion of the 2020 project, as well as information 

provided by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal communication, October 29, 2021), NMFS has proposed to increase the number of authorized 

takes (by Level B harassment only) for common dolphins. cBased on recent data from King et al. (2021) where humpback whales were the most commonly sighted species in the New York Bight, 

NMFS has proposed to increase the take of humpback whales by assuming that Atlantic Shores’ four modeled exposures would be of groups 

rather than individuals, and therefore multiplied by an average group size of two to yield eight. dBased on information obtained from the monitoring report provided to NMFS after the completion of the 2020 project, as well as information 

provided by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal communication, October 29, 2021), NMFS has proposed to increase the number of authorized 

takes (by Level B harassment only) for Atlantic spotted dolphins. eThese values were proposed by Atlantic Shores. 

fThese values were proposed by NMFS. 

The take numbers shown in Table 10 

represent those originally calculated 

and requested by Atlantic Shores with 

minor modifications by NMFS for 

humpback whales, common dolphins, 

and Atlantic spotted dolphins, which 

are discussed below. 

As noted within Atlantic Shores’ IHA 

application and discussed within the 

Renewal IHA application (see Atlantic 

Shores Offshore Wind, 2021), there was 

an adjustment made for Risso’s 

dolphins, common dolphins, and longfinned pilot whales based on typical 

pod and group sizes, which yielded the 

values described above in Table 10. 

NMFS agrees with these approaches, as 

described in the IHA applications, with 

exception for three cetacean species 

described below. 

Estimated takes of common dolphins 

were increased from the density-based 

estimate based on information provided 

by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, personal 

communication, October 29, 2021) and 

sightings described in the 2020 

monitoring report. Based on these 

previous observations, exposures of 

common dolphins above the 160-dB 

harassment threshold were estimated at 

1.55 per day. Assuming that this same 

exposure rate continues for the 

presently planned activity yields the 

estimate provided in Table 10. 

Based on recent information from 

King et al. (2021) that demonstrated that 

the humpback whale is commonly 

sighted along the New York Bight area, 

NMFS determined that the humpback 

whale take request may be too low given 

the occurrence of animals near the 

survey area. Because of this, NMFS 

proposes to double the requested take to 

account for underestimates to the actual 

occurrence of this species within the 

density data. 

Previously, 100 takes of Atlantic 

spotted dolphins, by Level B 

harassment, were authorized to Atlantic 

Shores during their 2020 IHA. Based on 

a lack of sightings in the 2020 field 

season per the submitted monitoring 

report, Atlantic Shores had requested 

and been authorized half of these takes 

(50 Level B harassment) during their 

2021 field season for their Renewal IHA. 

However, based on information 

provided by Atlantic Shores (P. Phifer, 

personal communication, October 29, 

2021) as the monitoring report for the 

2021 field season is not yet available, 

NMFS has proposed to increase the take 

previously requested by Atlantic Shores 

from 50 to 100 to account for the 

numerous sightings of Atlantic spotted 

dolphins that had already occurred 

early into Atlantic Shores’ 2021 field 

season (17 takes out of 50 authorized for 

the Renewal IHA). 

As described above, Roberts et al. 

(2018) produced density models for all 

seals and did not differentiate by seal 

species. The take calculation 

methodology as described above 

resulted in an estimate of 852 total seal 

takes for both species. Based on this 

estimate, Atlantic Shores has requested 

852 takes total for pinnipeds (426 each 

species), based on the use of the same 

density for both species as they are 

known to overlap in habitat use, 

foraging, and spatial scale. Furthermore, 

as the density estimates were not split 

by species in Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 

2018) this approach assumes that the 

likelihood of either species occurring 

during the survey is equal. We think 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4217 

this is a reasonable approach and 

therefore propose to authorize the 

requested amount of take, as shown in 

Table 10. 

Worth noting is the proposed 

authorized take of North Atlantic right 

whales, which stems from an increase in 

the density of North Atlantic right 

whales at the survey site. Atlantic 

Shores used information from Roberts et 

al., (2020) that demonstrated that the 

density of North Atlantic right whales 

has increased by approximately 40 

percent in some portions of the survey 

area compared to the 2020 IHA (see 

Table 11), which justifies the total 

proposed take number presented above 

in Table 10. While past monitoring 

reports (see the 2020 report on NMFS’ 

website) have reported no observations 

of North Atlantic right whales during 

the 2020 surveys, NMFS agrees with the 

approach taken by Atlantic Shores as 

using the best available science to be 

conservative and proposes to authorize 

17 takes by Level B harassment only of 

North Atlantic right whales during the 

proposed project. 

TABLE 11—CHANGES IN NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE DENSITIES IN THE PROJECT SITE FROM THE 2020 IHA TO THIS

PROPOSED 2022 IHA PER DATA FROM ROBERTS ET AL., (2020) 

Winter Spring Summer Fall 

2020 

IHA 

2022 

IHA 

2020 

IHA 

2022 

IHA 

2020 

IHA 

2022 

IHA 

2020 

IHA 

2022 

IHA 

Lease Area ....................... 0.087 0.499 0.060 0.426 0.008 0.002 0.006 0.009 

Northern ECR .................. 0.068 0.182 0.056 0.149 0.008 0.001 0.006 0.011 

Southern ECR .................. 0.073 0.179 0.055 0.097 0.007 0.000 0.006 0.005 

Proposed Mitigation 

In order to issue an IHA under section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must 

set forth the permissible methods of 

taking pursuant to the activity, and 

other means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on the species or 

stock and its habitat, paying particular 

attention to rookeries, mating grounds, 

and areas of similar significance, and on 

the availability of the species or stock 

for taking for certain subsistence uses 

(latter not applicable for this action). 

NMFS regulations require applicants for 

incidental take authorizations to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting the activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, we carefully consider two 

primary factors: 

(1) The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 

expected to reduce impacts to marine 

mammals, marine mammal species or 

stocks, and their habitat. This considers 

the nature of the potential adverse 

impact being mitigated (likelihood, 

scope, range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned), the 

likelihood of effective implementation 

(probability implemented as planned), 

and; 

(2) The practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost, 

impact on operations, and, in the case 

of a military readiness activity, 

personnel safety, practicality of 

implementation, and impact on the 

effectiveness of the military readiness 

activity. 

Proposed Mitigation Measures 

NMFS proposes the following 

proposed mitigation measures be 

implemented during Atlantic Shores’ 

proposed marine site characterization 

surveys, in compliance with the 

proposed IHA and with the NOAA 

Fisheries Greater Atlantic Regional 

Office (GARFO) programmatic 

consultation (specifically Project Design 

Criteria (PDC) 4, 5, and 7) regarding 

geophysical surveys along the U.S. 

Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic 

Renewable Energy Regions (NOAA 

GARFO, 2021; https://www.fisheries.

noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/ 

consultations/section-7-take-reportingprogrammatics-greateratlantic#offshore-wind-site-assessmentand-site-characterization-activitiesprogrammatic-consultation). 

Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones and 

Level B Harassment Zones 

Marine mammal Exclusion Zones 

would be established around the HRG 

survey equipment and monitored by 

protected species observers (PSOs). 

These PSOs will be NMFS-approved 

visual PSOs. Based upon the acoustic 

source in use (impulsive: Sparkers; nonimpulsive: Non-parametric sub-bottom 

profilers), a minimum of one PSO must 

be on duty, per source vessel, during 

daylight hours and two PSOs must be 

on duty, per source vessel, during 

nighttime hours. These PSO will 

monitor Exclusion Zones based upon 

the radial distance from the acoustic 

source rather than being based around 

the vessel itself. The Exclusion Zone 

distances are as follows: 

• A 500-m Exclusion Zone for North 

Atlantic right whales during use of 

specified acoustic sources (impulsive: 

Sparkers; non-impulsive: Nonparametric sub-bottom profilers). 

• A 100-m Exclusion Zone for all 

other marine mammals (excluding 

NARWs) during use of specified 

acoustic sources (except as specified 

below). All visual monitoring must 

begin no less than 30 minutes prior to 

the initiation of the specified acoustic 

source and must continue until 30 

minutes after use of specified acoustic 

sources ceases. 

If a marine mammal were detected 

approaching or entering the Exclusion 

Zones during the HRG survey, the vessel 

operator would adhere to the shutdown 

procedures described below to 

minimize noise impacts on the animals. 

These stated requirements will be 

included in the site-specific training to 

be provided to the survey team. 

Ramp-Up of Survey Equipment and PreClearance of the Exclusion Zones 

When technically feasible, a ramp-up 

procedure would be used for HRG 

survey equipment capable of adjusting 

energy levels at the start or restart of 

survey activities. A ramp-up would 

begin with the powering up of the 

smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its 

lowest practical power output 

appropriate for the survey. The ramp-up 

procedure would be used in order to 

provide additional protection to marine 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4218 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

mammals near the survey area by 

allowing them to vacate the area prior 

to the commencement of survey 

equipment operation at full power. 

When technically feasible, the power 

would then be gradually turned up and 

other acoustic sources would be added. 

All ramp-ups shall be scheduled so as 

to minimize the time spent with the 

source being activated. 

Ramp-up activities will be delayed if 

a marine mammal(s) enters its 

respective Exclusion Zone. Ramp-up 

will continue if the animal has been 

observed exiting its respective 

Exclusion Zone or until an additional 

time period has elapsed with no further 

sighting (i.e., 15 minutes for small 

odontocetes and seals and 30 minutes 

for all other species). 

Atlantic Shores would implement a 

30 minute pre-clearance period of the 

Exclusion Zones prior to the initiation 

of ramp-up of HRG equipment. The 

operator must notify a designated PSO 

of the planned start of ramp-up where 

the notification time should not be less 

than 60 minutes prior to the planned 

ramp-up. This would allow the PSOs to 

monitor the Exclusion Zones for 30 

minutes prior to the initiation of rampup. Prior to ramp-up beginning, Atlantic 

Shores must receive confirmation from 

the PSO that the Exclusion Zone is clear 

prior to proceeding. During this 30 

minute pre-start clearance period, the 

entire applicable Exclusion Zones must 

be visible. The exception to this would 

be in situations where ramp-up may 

occur during periods of poor visibility 

(inclusive of nighttime) as long as 

appropriate visual monitoring has 

occurred with no detections of marine 

mammals in 30 minutes prior to the 

beginning of ramp-up. Acoustic source 

activation may only occur at night 

where operational planning cannot 

reasonably avoid such circumstances. 

During this period, the Exclusion 

Zone will be monitored by the PSOs, 

using the appropriate visual technology. 

Ramp-up may not be initiated if any 

marine mammal(s) is within its 

respective Exclusion Zone. If a marine 

mammal is observed within an 

Exclusion Zone during the pre-clearance 

period, ramp-up may not begin until the 

animal(s) has been observed exiting its 

respective Exclusion Zone or until an 

additional time period has elapsed with 

no further sighting (i.e., 15 minutes for 

small odontocetes and pinnipeds and 30 

minutes for all other species). If a 

marine mammal enters the Exclusion 

Zone during ramp-up, ramp-up 

activities must cease and the source 

must be shut down. Any PSO on duty 

has the authority to delay the start of 

survey operations if a marine mammal 

is detected within the applicable prestart clearance zones. 

The pre-clearance zones would be: 

• 500-m for all ESA-listed species 

(North Atlantic right, sei, fin, sperm 

whales); and 

• 100-m for all other marine 

mammals. 

If any marine mammal species that 

are listed under the ESA are observed 

within the clearance zones, the 30 

minute clock must be paused. If the PSO 

confirms the animal has exited the zone 

and headed away from the survey 

vessel, the 30 minute clock that was 

paused may resume. The pre-clearance 

clock will reset to 30 minutes if the 

animal dives or visual contact is 

otherwise lost. 

If the acoustic source is shut down for 

brief periods (i.e., less than 30 minutes) 

for reasons other than implementation 

of prescribed mitigation (e.g., 

mechanical difficulty), 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 Exclusion Zone. For any 

longer shutdown, pre-start clearance 

observation and ramp-up are required. 

Activation of survey equipment 

through ramp-up procedures may not 

occur when visual detection of marine 

mammals within the pre-clearance zone 

is not expected to be effective (e.g., 

during inclement conditions such as 

heavy rain or fog). 

The acoustic source(s) must be 

deactivated when not acquiring data or 

preparing to acquire data, except as 

necessary for testing. Unnecessary use 

of the acoustic source shall be avoided. 

Shutdown Procedures 

An immediate shutdown of the 

impulsive HRG survey equipment 

(Table 7) would be required if a marine 

mammal is sighted entering or within its 

respective Exclusion Zone(s). Any PSO 

on duty has the authority to call for a 

shutdown of the acoustic source if a 

marine mammal is detected within the 

applicable Exclusion Zones. Any 

disagreement between the PSO and 

vessel operator should be discussed 

only after shutdown has occurred. The 

vessel operator would establish and 

maintain clear lines of communication 

directly between PSOs on duty and 

crew controlling the HRG source(s) to 

ensure that shutdown commands are 

conveyed swiftly while allowing PSOs 

to maintain watch. 

The shutdown requirement is waived 

for small delphinids (belonging to the 

genera of the Family Delpinidae: 

Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or 

Tursiops) and pinnipeds if they are 

visually detected within the applicable 

Exclusion Zones. If a species for which 

authorization has not been granted, or, 

a species for which authorization has 

been granted but the authorized number 

of takes have been met, approaches or 

is observed within the applicable Level 

B harassment zone, shutdown would 

occur. In the event of uncertainty 

regarding the identification of a marine 

mammal species (i.e., such as whether 

the observed marine mammal belongs to 

Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or 

Tursiops for which shutdown is waived, 

PSOs must use their best professional 

judgement in making the decision to 

call for a shutdown. 

Specifically, if a delphinid from the 

specified genera or a pinniped is 

visually detected approaching the vessel 

(i.e., to bow ride) or towed equipment, 

shutdown is not required. 

Upon implementation of a shutdown, 

the source may be reactivated after the 

marine mammal has been observed 

exiting the applicable Exclusion Zone or 

following a clearance period of 15 

minutes for harbor porpoises and 30 

minutes for all other species where 

there are no further detections of the 

marine mammal. 

Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and 

ramp-up procedures are not required 

during HRG survey operations using 

only non-impulsive sources (e.g., 

parametric sub-bottom profilers) other 

than non-parametric sub-bottom 

profilers (e.g., CHIRPs). Pre-clearance 

and ramp-up, but not shutdown, are 

required when using non-impulsive, 

non-parametric sub-bottom profilers. 

Seasonal Operating Requirements 

As described above, the section of the 

proposed survey area partially overlaps 

with a portion of a North Atlantic right 

whale SMA off the port of New York/ 

New Jersey. This SMA is active from 

November 1 through April 30 of each 

year. All survey vessels, regardless of 

length, would be required to adhere to 

vessel speed restrictions (<10 knots) 

when operating within the SMA during 

times when the SMA is active. In 

addition, between watch shifts, 

members of the monitoring team would 

consult NMFS’ North Atlantic right 

whale reporting systems for the 

presence of North Atlantic right whales 

throughout survey operations. Members 

of the monitoring team would also 

monitor the NMFS North Atlantic right 

whale reporting systems for the 

establishment of Dynamic Management 

Areas (DMA). NMFS may also establish 

voluntary right whale Slow Zones any 

time a right whale (or whales) is 

acoustically detected. Atlantic Shores 

should be aware of this possibility and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4219 

remain attentive in the event a Slow Zone is established nearby or 

overlapping the survey area (Table 12). 

TABLE 12—NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT AREA (DMA) AND SEASONAL MANAGEMENT AREA

(SMA) RESTRICTIONS WITHIN THE SURVEY AREAS

Survey area Species DMA restrictions Slow zones SMA restrictions 

Lease Area ...................... North Atlantic right whale 

(Eubalaena glacialis).

If established by NMFS, all of Atlantic Shores’ vessels will abide by 

the described restrictions 

N/A. 

ECR North ....................... November 1 through July 31 

(Raritan Bay). 

ECR South ....................... N/A. 

More information on Ship Strike Reduction for the North Atlantic right whale can be found at NMFS’ website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangeredspecies-conservation/reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales. 

There are no known marine mammal 

rookeries or mating or calving grounds 

in the survey area that would otherwise 

potentially warrant increased mitigation 

measures for marine mammals or their 

habitat (or both). The proposed survey 

would occur in an area that has been 

identified as a biologically important 

area for migration for North Atlantic 

right whales. However, given the small 

spatial extent of the survey area relative 

to the substantially larger spatial extent 

of the right whale migratory area and 

the relatively low amount of noise 

generated by the survey, the survey is 

not expected to appreciably reduce the 

quality of migratory habitat nor to 

negatively impact the migration of 

North Atlantic right whales, thus 

mitigation to address the proposed 

survey’s occurrence in North Atlantic 

right whale migratory habitat is not 

warranted. 

Vessel Strike Avoidance 

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. 

Survey vessel crewmembers 

responsible for navigation duties will 

receive site-specific training on marine 

mammals sighting/reporting and vessel 

strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike 

avoidance measures would include the 

following, except under circumstances 

when complying with these 

requirements would put the safety of the 

vessel or crew at risk: 

• Atlantic Shores will ensure that 

vessel operators and crew maintain a 

vigilant watch for cetaceans and 

pinnipeds and slow down, stop their 

vessels, or alter course, as appropriate 

and regardless of vessel size, to avoid 

striking any marine mammal. A single 

marine mammal at the surface may 

indicate the presence of additional 

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 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 right whale, other whale (defined in 

this context as sperm whales or baleen 

whales other than right whales), or other 

marine mammals. All vessels, regardless 

of size, must observe a 10-knot speed 

restriction in specific areas designated 

by NMFS for the protection of North 

Atlantic right whales from vessel 

strikes, including seasonal management 

areas (SMAs) and dynamic management 

areas (DMAs) when in effect. See 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

endangered-species-conservation/ 

reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlanticright-whales for specific detail regarding 

these areas. 

• All vessels must reduce their speed 

to 10-knots or less when mother/calf 

pairs, pods, or large assemblages of 

cetaceans are observed near a vessel; 

• All vessels must maintain a 

minimum separation distance of 500-m 

(1,640-ft) from right whales and other 

ESA-listed species. If an ESA-listed 

species is sighted within the relevant 

separation distance, the vessel must 

steer a course away at 10-knots or less 

until the 500-m separation distance has 

been established. If a whale is observed 

but cannot be confirmed as a species 

that is not ESA-listed, the vessel 

operator must assume that it is an ESAlisted species and take appropriate 

action. 

• All vessels must maintain a 

minimum separation distance of 100-m 

(328-ft) from non-ESA-listed baleen 

whales. 

• All vessels must, to the maximum 

extent practicable, attempt to maintain a 

minimum separation distance of 50-m 

(164-ft) from all other marine mammals, 

with an understanding that, at times, 

this may not be possible (e.g., for 

animals that approach the vessel, bowriding species). 

• When marine mammal are sighted 

while a vessel is underway, the vessel 

shall 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 monitoring team will 

consult NMFS North Atlantic right 

whale reporting system and Whale 

Alert, daily and as able, for the presence 

of North Atlantic right whales 

throughout survey operations, and for 

the establishment of a DMA. If NMFS 

should establish a DMA in the survey 

area during the survey, the vessels will 

abide by speed restrictions in the DMA. 

Training 

All PSOs must have completed a PSO 

training program and received NMFS 

approval to act as a PSO for geophysical 

surveys. Documentation of NMFS 

approval and most recent training 

certificates of individual PSOs’ 

successful completion of a commercial 

PSO training course must be provided 

upon request. Further information can 

be found at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/endangered-speciesconservation/protected-speciesobservers. In the event where third-party 

PSOs are not required, crew members 

serving as lookouts must receive 

training on protected species 

identification, vessel strike 

minimization procedures, how and 

when to communicate with the vessel 

captain, and reporting requirements. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

I 
4220 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

Atlantic Shores shall instruct relevant 

vessel personnel with regard to the 

authority of the marine mammal 

monitoring team, and shall ensure that 

relevant vessel personnel and the 

marine mammal monitoring team 

participate in a joint onboard briefing 

(hereafter PSO briefing), led by the 

vessel operator and lead PSO, prior to 

beginning survey activities to ensure 

that responsibilities, communication 

procedures, marine mammal monitoring 

protocols, safety and operational 

procedures, and IHA requirements are 

clearly understood. This PSO briefing 

must be repeated when relevant new 

personnel (e.g., PSOs, acoustic source 

operator) join the survey operations 

before their responsibilities and work 

commences. 

Project-specific training will be 

conducted for all vessel crew prior to 

the start of a survey and during any 

changes in crew such that all survey 

personnel are fully aware and 

understand the mitigation, monitoring, 

and reporting requirements. All vessel 

crew members must be briefed in the 

identification of protected species that 

may occur in the survey area and in 

regulations and best practices for 

avoiding vessel collisions. Reference 

materials must be available aboard all 

project vessels for identification of 

listed species. The expectation and 

process for reporting of protected 

species sighted during surveys must be 

clearly communicated and posted in 

highly visible locations aboard all 

project vessels, so that there is an 

expectation for reporting to the 

designated vessel contact (such as the 

lookout or the vessel captain), as well as 

a communication channel and process 

for crew members to do so. Prior to 

implementation with vessel crews, the 

training program will be provided to 

NMFS for review and approval. 

Confirmation of the training and 

understanding of the requirements will 

be documented on a training course log 

sheet. Signing the log sheet will certify 

that the crew member understands and 

will comply with the necessary 

requirements throughout the survey 

activities. 

Based on our evaluation of Atlantic 

Shores’ proposed measures, as well as 

other measures considered by NMFS, 

NMFS has preliminarily determined 

that the proposed mitigation measures 

provide the means effecting the least 

practicable impact on the affected 

species or stocks and their habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance. 

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the 

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that will result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present in the proposed action area. 

Effective reporting is critical to both 

compliance as well as ensuring that the 

most value is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density). 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) Action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life 

history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence 

of marine mammal species with the 

action; or (4) biological or behavioral 

context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or 

feeding areas). 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors. 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks. 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat). 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Proposed Monitoring Measures 

Atlantic Shores must use 

independent, dedicated, trained PSOs, 

meaning that the PSOs must be 

employed by a third-party observer 

provider, must have no tasks other than 

to conduct observational effort, collect 

data, and communicate with and 

instruct relevant vessel crew with regard 

to the presence of marine mammal and 

mitigation requirements (including brief 

alerts regarding maritime hazards), and 

must have successfully completed an 

approved PSO training course for 

geophysical surveys. Visual monitoring 

must be performed by qualified, NMFSapproved PSOs. PSO resumes must be 

provided to NMFS for review and 

approval prior to the start of survey 

activities. 

PSO names must be provided to 

NMFS by the operator for review and 

confirmation of their approval for 

specific roles prior to commencement of 

the survey. For prospective PSOs not 

previously approved, or for PSOs whose 

approval is not current, NMFS must 

review and approve PSO qualifications. 

Resumes should include information 

related to relevant education, 

experience, and training, including 

dates, duration, location, and 

description of prior PSO experience. 

Resumes must be accompanied by 

relevant documentation of successful 

completion of necessary training. 

NMFS may approve PSOs as 

conditional or unconditional. A 

conditionally-approved PSO may be one 

who is trained but has not yet attained 

the requisite experience. An 

unconditionally-approved PSO is one 

who has attained the necessary 

experience. For unconditional approval, 

the PSO must have a minimum of 90 

days at sea performing the role during 

a geophysical survey, with the 

conclusion of the most recent relevant 

experience not more than 18 months 

previous. 

At least one of the visual PSOs aboard 

the vessel must be unconditionallyapproved. One unconditionallyapproved visual PSO shall be 

designated as the lead for the entire PSO 

team. This lead should typically be the 

PSO with the most experience, would 

coordinate duty schedules and roles for 

the PSO team, and serve as primary 

point of contact for the vessel operator. 

To the maximum extent practicable, the 

duty schedule shall be planned such 

that unconditionally-approved PSOs are 

on duty with conditionally-approved 

PSOs. 

PSOs must have successfully attained 

a bachelor’s degree from an accredited 

college or university with a major in one 

of the natural sciences, a minimum of 

30 semester hours or equivalent in the 

biological sciences, and at least one 

undergraduate course in math or 

statistics. The educational requirements 

may be waived if the PSO has acquired 

the relevant skills through alternate 

experience. Requests for such a waiver 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4221 

shall be submitted to NMFS and must 

include written justification. Alternate 

experience that may be considered 

includes, but is not limited to (1) 

secondary education and/or experience 

comparable to PSO duties; (2) previous 

work experience conducting academic, 

commercial, or government-sponsored 

marine mammal surveys; and (3) 

previous work experience as a PSO 

(PSO must be in good standing and 

demonstrate good performance of PSO 

duties). 

PSOs must successfully complete 

relevant training, including completion 

of all required coursework and passing 

(80 percent or greater) a written and/or 

oral examination developed for the 

training program. 

PSOs must coordinate to ensure 360° 

visual coverage around the vessel from 

the most appropriate observation posts 

and shall conduct visual observations 

using binoculars or night-vision 

equipment and the naked eye while free 

from distractions and in a consistent, 

systematic, and diligent manner. 

PSOs may be on watch for a 

maximum of four consecutive hours 

followed by a break of at least two hours 

between watches and may conduct a 

maximum of 12 hours of observation per 

24-hour period. 

Any observations of marine mammal 

by crew members aboard any vessel 

associated with the survey shall be 

relayed to the PSO team. 

Atlantic Shores 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 × 50) of 

appropriate quality (at least one per 

PSO, plus backups); 

• Global Positioning Units (GPS) (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 (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-part PSO provider, or the operator, 

but Atlantic Shores is responsible for 

ensuring PSOs have the proper 

equipment required to perform the 

duties specified in the IHA. 

During good conditions (e.g., daylight 

hours; Beaufort sea state 3 or less), PSOs 

shall conduct observations when the 

specified acoustic sources are not 

operating for comparison of sighting 

rates and behavior with and without use 

of the specified acoustic sources and 

between acquisition periods, to the 

maximum extent practicable. 

The PSOs will be responsible for 

monitoring the waters surrounding each 

survey vessel to the farthest extent 

permitted by sighting conditions, 

including Exclusion Zones, during all 

HRG survey operations. PSOs will 

visually monitor and identify marine 

mammals, including those approaching 

or entering the established Exclusion 

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. 

Atlantic Shores plans to utilize six 

PSOs across each vessel to account for 

shift changes, with a total of 18 during 

this project (six PSOs per vessel x three 

vessels). At a minimum, during all HRG 

survey operations (e.g., any day on 

which use of an HRG source is planned 

to occur), one PSO must be on duty 

during daylight operations on each 

survey vessel, conducting visual 

observations at all times on all active 

survey vessels during daylight hours 

(i.e., from 30 minutes prior to sunrise 

through 30 minutes following sunset) 

and two PSOs will be on watch during 

nighttime operations. The PSO(s) would 

ensure 360° visual coverage around the 

vessel from the most appropriate 

observation posts and would conduct 

visual observations using binoculars 

and/or night vision goggles and the 

naked eye while free from distractions 

and in a consistent, systematic, and 

diligent manner. PSOs may be on watch 

for a maximum of four consecutive 

hours followed by a break of at least two 

hours between watches and may 

conduct a maximum of 12 hours of 

observation per 24-hr period. In cases 

where multiple vessels are surveying 

concurrently, any observations of 

marine mammals would be 

communicated to PSOs on all nearby 

survey vessels. 

PSOs must be equipped with 

binoculars and have the ability to 

estimate distance and bearing to detect 

marine mammals, particularly in 

proximity to Exclusion Zones. 

Reticulated binoculars must also be 

available to PSOs for use as appropriate 

based on conditions and visibility to 

support the sighting and monitoring of 

marine mammals. During nighttime 

operations, night-vision goggles with 

thermal clip-ons and infrared 

technology would be used. Position data 

would be recorded using hand-held or 

vessel GPS units for each sighting. 

During good conditions (e.g., daylight 

hours; Beaufort sea state (BSS) 3 or less), 

to the maximum extent practicable, 

PSOs would also conduct observations 

when the acoustic source is not 

operating for comparison of sighting 

rates and behavior with and without use 

of the active acoustic sources. Any 

observations of marine mammals by 

crew members aboard any vessel 

associated with the survey would be 

relayed to the PSO team. Data on all 

PSO observations would be recorded 

based on standard PSO collection 

requirements (see Proposed Reporting 

Measures). This would include dates, 

times, and locations of survey 

operations; dates and times of 

observations, location and weather; 

details of marine mammal sightings 

(e.g., species, numbers, behavior); and 

details of any observed marine mammal 

behavior that occurs (e.g., noted 

behavioral disturbances). 

Proposed Reporting Measures 

Atlantic Shores shall submit a draft 

comprehensive report on all activities 

and monitoring results within 90 days 

of the completion of the survey or 

expiration of the IHA, whichever comes 

sooner. The report must describe all 

activities conducted and sightings of 

marine mammals, must provide full 

documentation of methods, results, and 

interpretation pertaining to all 

monitoring, and must summarize the 

dates and locations of survey operations 

and all marine mammals sightings 

(dates, times, locations, activities, 

associated survey activities). The draft 

report shall also include geo-referenced, 

time-stamped vessel tracklines for all 

time periods during which acoustic 

sources were operating. Tracklines 

should include points recording any 

change in acoustic source status (e.g., 

when the sources began operating, when 

they were turned off, or when they 

changed operational status such as from 

full array to single gun or vice versa). 

GIS files shall be provided in ESRI 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4222 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

shapefile format and include the UTC 

date and time, latitude in decimal 

degrees, and longitude in decimal 

degrees. All coordinates shall be 

referenced to the WGS84 geographic 

coordinate system. In addition to the 

report, all raw observational data shall 

be made available. The report must 

summarize the information submitted in 

interim monthly reports (if required) as 

well as additional data collected. A final 

report must be submitted within 30 days 

following resolution of any comments 

on the draft report. All draft and final 

marine mammal and acoustic 

monitoring reports must be submitted to 

PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov 

and ITP.Potlock@noaa.gov. 

PSOs must use standardized 

electronic data forms to record data. 

PSOs shall record detailed information 

about any implementation of mitigation 

requirements, including the distance of 

marine mammal to the acoustic source 

and description of specific actions that 

ensued, the behavior of the animal(s), 

any observed changes in behavior before 

and after implementation of mitigation, 

and if shutdown was implemented, the 

length of time before any subsequent 

ramp-up of the acoustic source. If 

required mitigation was not 

implemented, PSOs should record a 

description of the circumstances. At a 

minimum, the following information 

must be recorded: 

1. Vessel names (source vessel and 

other vessels associated with survey), 

vessel size and type, maximum speed 

capability of vessel; 

2. Dates of departures and returns to 

port with port name; 

3. The lease number; 

4. PSO names and affiliations; 

5. Date and participants of PSO 

briefings; 

6. Visual monitoring equipment used; 

7. PSO location on vessel and height 

of observation location above water 

surface; 

8. Dates and times (Greenwich Mean 

Time) of survey on/off effort and times 

corresponding with PSO on/off effort; 

9. Vessel location (decimal degrees) 

when survey effort begins and ends and 

vessel location at beginning and end of 

visual PSO duty shifts; 

10. Vessel location at 30-second 

intervals if obtainable from data 

collection software, otherwise at 

practical regular interval 

11. Vessel heading and speed at 

beginning and end of visual PSO duty 

shifts and upon any change; 

12. Water depth (if obtainable from 

data collection software); 

13. Environmental conditions while 

on visual survey (at beginning and end 

of PSO shift and whenever conditions 

change significantly), including BSS 

and any other relevant weather 

conditions including cloud cover, fog, 

sun glare, and overall visibility to the 

horizon; 

14. Factors that may contribute to 

impaired observations during each PSO 

shift change or as needed as 

environmental conditions change (e.g., 

vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); 

and 

15. Survey activity information (and 

changes thereof), such as acoustic 

source power output while in operation, 

number and volume of airguns 

operating in an array, tow depth of an 

acoustic source, and any other notes of 

significance (i.e., pre-start clearance, 

ramp-up, shutdown, testing, shooting, 

ramp-up completion, end of operations, 

streamers, etc.). 

Upon visual observation of any 

marine mammal, the following 

information must be recorded: 

1. Watch status (sighting made by 

PSO on/off effort, opportunistic, crew, 

alternate vessel/platform); 

2. Vessel/survey activity at time of 

sighting (e.g., deploying, recovering, 

testing, shooting, data acquisition, 

other); 

3. PSO who sighted the animal; 

4. Time of sighting; 

5. Initial detection method; 

6. Sightings cue; 

7. Vessel location at time of sighting 

(decimal degrees); 

8. Direction of vessel’s travel 

(compass direction); 

9. Speed of the vessel(s) from which 

the observation was made; 

10. Identification of the animal (e.g., 

genus/species, lowest possible 

taxonomic level or unidentified); also 

note the composition of the group if 

there is a mix of species; 

11. Species reliability (an indicator of 

confidence in identification); 

12. Estimated distance to the animal 

and method of estimating distance; 

13. Estimated number of animals 

(high/low/best); 

14. Estimated number of animals by 

cohort (adults, yearlings, juveniles, 

calves, group composition, etc.); 

15. Description (as many 

distinguishing features as possible of 

each individual seen, including length, 

shape, color, pattern, scars, or markings, 

shape and size of dorsal fin, shape of 

head, and blow characteristics); 

16. Detailed behavior observations 

(e.g., number of blows/breaths, number 

of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, 

diving, feeding, traveling; as explicit 

and detailed as possible; note any 

observed changes in behavior before and 

after point of closest approach); 

17. Mitigation actions; description of 

any actions implemented in response to 

the sighting (e.g., delays, shutdowns, 

ramp-up, speed or course alteration, 

etc.) and time and location of the action; 

18. Equipment operating during 

sighting; 

19. Animal’s closest point of approach 

and/or closest distance from the center 

point of the acoustic source; and 

20. Description of any actions 

implemented in response to the sighting 

(e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up) and 

time and location of the action. 

If a North Atlantic right whale is 

observed at any time by PSOs or 

personnel on any project vessels, during 

surveys or during vessel transit, Atlantic 

Shores must report the sighting 

information to the NMFS North Atlantic 

Right Whale Sighting Advisory System 

(866–755–6622) within two hours of 

occurrence, when practicable, or no 

later than 24 hours after occurrence. 

North Atlantic right whale sightings in 

any location may also be reported to the 

U.S. Coast Guard via channel 16 and 

through the WhaleAlert app (http://

www.whalealert.org). 

In the event that Atlantic Shores 

personnel discover an injured or dead 

marine mammal, regardless of the cause 

of injury or death. In the event that 

personnel involved in the survey 

activities discover an injured or dead 

marine mammal, Atlantic Shores must 

report the incident to NMFS as soon as 

feasible by phone (866–755–6622) and 

by email (nmfs.gar.stranding@noaa.gov 

and PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@

noaa.gov) as soon as feasible. The report 

must include the following information: 

1. Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the first discovery (and 

updated location information if known 

and applicable); 

2. Species identification (if known) or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

3. Condition of the animal(s) 

(including carcass condition if the 

animal is dead); 

4. Observed behaviors of the 

animal(s), if alive; 

5. If available, photographs or video 

footage of the animal(s); and 

6. General circumstances under which 

the animal was discovered. 

In the unanticipated event of a ship 

strike of a marine mammal by any vessel 

involved in the activities covered by the 

IHA, Atlantic Shores must report the 

incident to NMFS by phone (866–755– 

6622) and by email 

(nmfs.gar.stranding@noaa.gov and 

PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov) 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; 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4223 

3. Vessel’s speed during and leading 

up to the incident; 

4. Vessel’s course/heading and what 

operations were being conducted (if 

applicable); 

5. Status of all sound sources in use; 

6. Description of avoidance measures/ 

requirements that were in place at the 

time of the strike and what additional 

measures were taken, if any, to avoid 

strike; 

7. Environmental conditions (e.g., 

wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea 

state, cloud cover, visibility) 

immediately preceding the strike; 

8. Estimated size and length of animal 

that was struck; 

9. Description of the behavior of the 

marine mammal immediately preceding 

and/or following the strike; 

10. If available, description of the 

presence and behavior of any other 

marine mammals immediately 

preceding the strike; 

11. Estimated fate of the animal (e.g., 

dead, injured but alive, injured and 

moving, blood or tissue observed in the 

water, status unknown, disappeared); 

and 

12. To the extent practicable, 

photographs or video footage of the 

animal(s). 

Negligible Impact Analysis and 

Determination 

NMFS has defined negligible impact 

as an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 

finding is based on the lack of likely 

adverse effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number 

of takes alone is not enough information 

on which to base an impact 

determination. In addition to 

considering estimates of the number of 

marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ 

through harassment, NMFS considers 

other factors, such as the likely nature 

of any responses (e.g., intensity, 

duration), the context of any responses 

(e.g., critical reproductive time or 

location, migration), as well as effects 

on habitat, and the likely effectiveness 

of the mitigation. We also assess the 

number, intensity, and context of 

estimated takes by evaluating this 

information relative to population 

status. Consistent with the 1989 

preamble for NMFS’s implementing 

regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 

1989), the impacts from other past and 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the environmental baseline 

(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status 

of the species, population size and 

growth rate where known, ongoing 

sources of human-caused mortality, or 

ambient noise levels). 

To avoid repetition, our analysis 

applies to all the species listed in Table 

4, given that NMFS expects the 

anticipated effects of the proposed 

survey to be similar in nature. Where 

there are meaningful differences 

between species or stocks—as is the 

case of the North Atlantic right whale— 

they are included as separate 

subsections below. NMFS does not 

anticipate that serious injury or 

mortality would occur as a result from 

HRG surveys, even in the absence of 

mitigation, and no serious injury or 

mortality is proposed to be authorized. 

As discussed in the Potential Effects 

section, non-auditory physical effects 

and vessel strike are not expected to 

occur. NMFS expects that all potential 

takes would be in the form of short-term 

Level B behavioral harassment in the 

form of temporary avoidance of the area 

or decreased foraging (if such activity 

was occurring), reactions that are 

considered to be of low severity and 

with no lasting biological consequences 

(e.g., Southall et al., 2007). Even 

repeated Level B harassment of some 

small subset of an overall stock is 

unlikely to result in any significant 

realized decrease in viability for the 

affected individuals, and thus would 

not result in any adverse impact to the 

stock as a whole. As described above, 

Level A harassment is not expected to 

occur given the nature of the operations, 

the estimated size of the Level A 

harassment zones, and the required 

shutdown zones for certain activities. 

In addition to being temporary, the 

maximum expected harassment zone 

around a survey vessel is 141 m. 

Although this distance is assumed for 

all survey activity in estimating take 

numbers proposed for authorization and 

evaluated here, in reality, the Applied 

Acoustics Dura-Spark 240 would likely 

not be used across the entire 24-hour 

period and across all 360 days. As noted 

in Table 7, the other acoustic sources 

Atlantic Shores has included in their 

application produce Level B harassment 

zones below 60-m. Therefore, the 

ensonified area surrounding each vessel 

is relatively small compared to the 

overall distribution of the animals in the 

area and their 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 longterm consequences for individual 

marine mammals or their populations. 

There are no rookeries, mating or 

calving grounds known to be 

biologically important to marine 

mammals within the proposed survey 

area and there are no feeding areas 

known to be biologically important to 

marine mammals within the proposed 

survey area. There is no designated 

critical habitat for any ESA-listed 

marine mammals in the proposed 

survey area. 

North Atlantic Right Whales 

The status of the North Atlantic right 

whale population is of heightened 

concern and, therefore, merits 

additional analysis. As noted 

previously, elevated North Atlantic right 

whale mortalities began in June 2017 

and there is an active UME. Overall, 

preliminary findings support human 

interactions, specifically vessel strikes 

and entanglements, as the cause of 

death for the majority of right whales. 

As noted previously, the proposed 

survey area overlaps a migratory 

corridor BIA for North Atlantic right 

whales. Due to the fact that the 

proposed survey activities are 

temporary and the spatial extent of 

sound produced by the survey would be 

very small relative to the spatial extent 

of the available migratory habitat in the 

BIA, right whale migration is not 

expected to be impacted by the 

proposed survey. 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 ship strike during migration; no 

ship strike is expected to occur during 

Atlantic Shores’ proposed activities. 

The 500-m shutdown zone for right 

whales is conservative, considering the 

Level B harassment isopleth for the 

most impactful acoustic source (i.e., 

sparker) is estimated to be 141-m, and 

thereby minimizes the potential for 

behavioral harassment of this species. 

As noted previously, Level A 

harassment is not expected due to the 

small PTS zones associated with HRG 

equipment types proposed for use. The 

proposed authorizations for Level B 

harassment takes of North Atlantic right 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
4224 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 

whale are not expected to exacerbate or 

compound upon the ongoing UME. The 

limited North Atlantic right whale Level 

B harassment takes proposed for 

authorization are expected to be of a 

short duration, and given the number of 

estimated takes, repeated exposures of 

the same individual are not expected. 

Further, given the relatively small size 

of the ensonified area during Atlantic 

Shores’ proposed activities, it is 

unlikely that North Atlantic right whale 

prey availability would be adversely 

affected. Accordingly, NMFS does not 

anticipate North Atlantic right whales 

takes that would result from Atlantic 

Shores’ proposed activities would 

impact annual rates of recruitment or 

survival. Thus, any takes that occur 

would not result in population level 

impacts. 

Other Marine Mammal Species With 

Active UMEs 

As noted previously, there are several 

active UMEs occurring in the vicinity of 

Atlantic Shores’ proposed survey area. 

Elevated humpback whale mortalities 

have occurred along the Atlantic coast 

from Maine through Florida since 

January 2016. Of the cases examined, 

approximately half had evidence of 

human interaction (ship strike or 

entanglement). The UME does not yet 

provide cause for concern regarding 

population-level impacts. Despite the 

UME, the relevant population of 

humpback whales (the West Indies 

breeding population, or DPS) remains 

stable at approximately 12,000 

individuals. 

Beginning in January 2017, elevated 

minke whale strandings have occurred 

along the Atlantic coast from Maine 

through South Carolina, with highest 

numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and 

New York. This event does not provide 

cause for concern regarding population 

level impacts, as the likely population 

abundance is greater than 20,000 

whales. 

Elevated numbers of harbor seal and 

gray seal mortalities were first observed 

in July 2018 and have occurred across 

Maine, New Hampshire, and 

Massachusetts. Based on tests 

conducted so far, the main pathogen 

found in the seals is phocine distemper 

virus, although additional testing to 

identify other factors that may be 

involved in this UME are underway. 

The UME does not yet provide cause for 

concern regarding population-level 

impacts to any of these stocks. For 

harbor seals, the population abundance 

is over 75,000 and annual M/SI (350) is 

well below PBR (2,006) (Hayes et al., 

2020). 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., 2020). 

The required mitigation measures are 

expected to reduce the number and/or 

severity of proposed takes for all species 

listed in Table 4, including those with 

active UMEs, to the level of least 

practicable adverse impact. In 

particular, they would provide animals 

the opportunity to move away from the 

sound source throughout the survey 

area before HRG survey equipment 

reaches full energy, thus preventing 

them from being exposed to sound 

levels that have the potential to cause 

injury (Level A harassment) or more 

severe Level B harassment. As discussed 

previously, take by Level A harassment 

(injury) is considered unlikely, even 

absent mitigation, based on the 

characteristics of the signals produced 

by the acoustic sources planned for use, 

and is not proposed for authorization. 

Implementation of required mitigation 

would further reduce this potential. 

Therefore, NMFS is not proposing any 

Level A harassment for authorization. 

NMFS expects that takes would be in 

the form of short-term Level B 

behavioral harassment by way of brief 

startling reactions 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. 

Biologically Important Areas for Other 

Species 

As previously discussed, impacts 

from the proposed project are expected 

to be localized to the specific area of 

activity and only during periods of time 

where Atlantic Shores’ acoustic sources 

are active. While areas of biological 

importance to fin whales, humpback 

whales, and harbor seals can be found 

off the coast of New Jersey and New 

York, NMFS does not expect this 

proposed action to affect these areas. 

This is due to the combination of the 

mitigation and monitoring measures 

being required of Atlantic Shores as 

well as the location of these biologically 

important areas. All of these important 

areas are found outside of the range of 

this survey area, as is the case with fin 

whales and humpback whales (BIAs 

found further north), and, therefore, not 

expected to be impacted by Atlantic 

Shores’ proposed survey activities. 

Three major haul-out sites exist for 

harbor seals within ECR North along 

New Jersey, including at Great Bay, 

Sand Hook, and Barnegat Inlet (CWFNJ, 

2015). As hauled out seals would be out 

of the water, no in-water effects are 

expected. 

Preliminary Determinations 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our preliminary determination that the 

impacts resulting from this activity are 

not expected to adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival: 

• No mortality or serious injury is 

anticipated or proposed to be 

authorized; 

• No Level A harassment (PTS) is 

anticipated, even in the absence of 

mitigation measures, or proposed for 

authorization; 

• Foraging success is not likely to be 

impacted as effects on species that serve 

as prey species for marine mammals 

from the survey are expected to be 

minimal; 

• The availability of alternate areas of 

similar habitat value for marine 

mammals to temporarily vacate the 

survey area during the planned survey 

to avoid exposure to sounds from the 

activity; 

• Take is anticipated to be by Level 

B behavioral harassment only consisting 

of brief startling reactions and/or 

temporary avoidance of the survey area; 

• While the survey area is within 

areas noted as a migratory BIA for North 

Atlantic right whales, the activities 

would occur in such a comparatively 

small area such that any avoidance of 

the survey area due to activities would 

not affect migration; and 

• The proposed mitigation measures, 

including effective visual monitoring, 

and shutdowns are expected to 

minimize potential impacts to marine 

mammals. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

proposed monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS preliminarily finds 

that the total marine mammal take from 

the proposed activity will have a 

negligible impact on all affected marine 

mammal species or stocks. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2022 / Notices 4225 

Small Numbers 

As noted above, only small numbers 

of incidental take may be authorized 

under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of 

the MMPA for specified activities other 

than military readiness activities. The 

MMPA does not define small numbers 

and so, in practice, where estimated 

numbers are available, NMFS compares 

the number of individuals taken to the 

most appropriate estimation of 

abundance of the relevant species or 

stock in our determination of whether 

an authorization is limited to small 

numbers of marine mammals. When the 

predicted number of individuals to be 

taken is less than one third of the 

species or stock abundance, the take is 

considered to be of small numbers. 

Additionally, other qualitative factors 

may be considered in the analysis, such 

as the temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. 

NMFS proposes to authorize 

incidental take (by Level B harassment 

only) of 15 marine mammal species 

(with 16 managed stocks). The total 

amount of takes proposed for 

authorization relative to the best 

available population abundance is less 

than 6 percent for all stocks (Table 9). 

Therefore, NMFS preliminarily finds 

that small numbers of marine mammals 

may be taken relative to the estimated 

overall population abundances for those 

stocks. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the proposed activity 

(including the proposed mitigation and 

monitoring measures) and the 

anticipated take of marine mammals, 

NMFS preliminarily finds that small 

numbers of marine mammals will be 

taken relative to the population size of 

the affected species or stocks. 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of the affected marine mammal stocks or 

species implicated by this action. 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

the total taking of affected species or 

stocks would not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

such species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act 

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal 

agency insure that any action it 

authorizes, funds, or carries out is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat. To ensure 

ESA compliance for the issuance of 

IHAs, NMFS Office of Protected 

Resources (OPR) consults internally 

whenever we propose to authorize take 

for endangered or threatened species. 

NMFS OPR is proposing to authorize 

the incidental take of four species of 

marine mammals which are listed under 

the ESA, including the North Atlantic 

right, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has 

determined that this activity falls within 

the scope of activities analyzed in 

NMFS GARFO’s programmatic 

consultation regarding geophysical 

surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast in 

the three Atlantic Renewable Energy 

Regions (completed June 29, 2021; 

revised September 2021). NMFS GARFO 

concurred with this determination. 

Proposed Authorization 

As a result of these preliminary 

determinations, NMFS proposes to issue 

an IHA to Atlantic Shores authorizing 

take, by Level B harassment incidental 

to conducting marine site 

characterization surveys off of New 

Jersey and New York from April 20, 

2022 through April 19, 2023, provided 

the previously mentioned mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting requirements 

are incorporated. A draft of the 

proposed IHA can be found at https:// 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-other-energyactivities-renewable. 

Request for Public Comments 

We request comment on our analyses, 

the proposed authorization, and any 

other aspect of this notice of proposed 

IHA for the proposed site 

characterization surveys. We also 

request at this time comment on the 

potential Renewal of this proposed IHA 

as described in the paragraph below. 

Please include with your comments any 

supporting data or literature citations to 

help inform decisions on the request for 

this proposed IHA or a subsequent 

Renewal IHA. 

On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may 

issue a one-time, one-year Renewal IHA 

following notification to the public 

providing an additional 15 days for 

public comments when (1) up to 

another year of identical or nearly 

identical, or nearly identical, activities 

as described in the Description of 

Proposed Activities section of this 

notification is planned or (2) the 

activities as described in the Description 

of Proposed Activities section of this 

notification would not be completed by 

the time the IHA expires and a Renewal 

would allow for completion of the 

activities beyond that described in the 

Dates and Duration section of this 

notification, provided all of the 

following conditions are met: 

• A request for Renewal is received 

no later than 60 days prior to the needed 

Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing 

that the Renewal IHA expiration date 

cannot extend beyond one year from 

expiration of the initial IHA); 

• The request for Renewal must 

include the following: 

(1) An explanation that the activities 

to be conducted under the requested 

Renewal IHA are identical to the 

activities analyzed under the initial 

IHA, are a subset of the activities, or 

include changes so minor (e.g., 

reduction in pile size) that the changes 

do not affect the previous analyses, 

mitigation and monitoring 

requirements, or take estimates (with 

the exception of reducing the type or 

amount of take); and 

(2) A preliminary monitoring report 

showing the results of the required 

monitoring to date and an explanation 

showing that the monitoring results do 

not indicate impacts of a scale or nature 

not previously analyzed or authorized. 

Upon review of the request for 

Renewal, the status of the affected 

species or stocks, and any other 

pertinent information, NMFS 

determines that there are no more than 

minor changes in the activities, the 

mitigation and monitoring measures 

will remain the same and appropriate, 

and the findings in the initial IHA 

remain valid. 

Dated: January 21, 2022. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01557 Filed 1–26–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB749] 

North Pacific Fishery Management 

Council; Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of web conference. 

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery 

Management Council’s (Council) 

Scallop Plan Team will meet February 

16, 2022. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

Wednesday, February 16, 2022, from 9 

a.m. to 5 p.m., Alaska Time. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1