15922 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

used to submit payments by mail. The 

IFQ Permit Holder Fee Submission 

Form and the Registered Crab Receiver 

Fee Submission Form have been revised 

and renamed the IFQ Permit Holder Fee 

Calculation Form and the Registered 

Crab Receiver Fee Calculation Form, 

respectively. 

This information collection is 

necessary under the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), which 

authorizes observer deployment fees 

and cost recovery fees. Section 304(d) of 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act authorizes 

and requires the collection of cost 

recovery fees for limited access privilege 

programs and community development 

quota programs. Section 313 of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act authorizes a 

system of fees to support a fisheries 

research plan and deploy observers in 

the North Pacific fisheries. The fee 

documentation forms and volume and 

value reports that are included in this 

collection are necessary to track, verify, 

and enforce the fee collection systems. 

This information collection is 

required in Federal regulations at 50 

CFR parts 679 and 680. Information on 

the observer coverage fee and cost 

recovery fee programs is provided on 

the NMFS Alaska Region website at 

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

commercial-fishing/cost-recoveryprograms-fee-collection-and-feepayment-alaska. 

Cost recovery fees may not exceed 3 

percent of the ex-vessel value of the 

fishery, and must recover the 

incremental (program) costs associated 

with management, data collection, and 

enforcement of these programs that are 

directly incurred by government 

agencies tasked with overseeing these 

fisheries. NMFS recovers program costs 

of seven cost recovery programs in this 

information collection: Pacific Halibut 

and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota 

(IFQ) Program; Bering Sea and Aleutian 

Islands Crab Rationalization Program; 

Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish 

Program; Western Alaska Community 

Development Quota Program; American 

Fisheries Act Program; Aleutian Islands 

Pollock Program; and Amendment 80 

Program. The party responsible for 

paying the cost recovery fee varies by 

program. 

The observer coverage fee funds 

deployment of observers and electronic 

monitoring in the partial coverage 

category of the North Pacific Observer 

Program (Observer Program). Unlike the 

cost recovery fees, this is a straight fee 

and does not recover incremental costs 

associated with the program. NMFS 

assesses a fee of 1.65 percent of the exvessel value of groundfish and halibut 

landed in the partial coverage category 

under the Observer Program. The 

information collected by observers 

provides scientific information for 

minimizing bycatch and managing the 

groundfish and halibut fisheries in the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands and 

Gulf of Alaska. 

Catcher vessel owners split the 

observer coverage fee with the registered 

buyers or owners of shoreside or 

stationary floating processors. While the 

owners of catcher vessels and 

processors in the partial coverage 

category are each responsible for paying 

their portion of the fee, the owners of 

shoreside or stationary floating 

processors and registered buyers are 

responsible for collecting the fees from 

catcher vessels, and remitting the full 

fee to NMFS. Owners of catcher/ 

processors in the partial coverage 

category are responsible for remitting 

the full fee to NMFS. 

Processors that receive and purchase 

landings of IFQ halibut or sablefish, 

rockfish, groundfish, and crab subject to 

observer and/or cost recovery fees must 

annually submit an ex-vessel volume 

and value report that provides 

information on the pounds purchased 

and value paid. NMFS uses this 

information to establish the total exvessel value of the fishery, calculate 

standard prices, and establish annual 

fee percentages in each fishery. 

IFQ permit holders and registered 

crab receivers that do not agree with 

their NMFS assessed fee liability 

summary and who are paying a revised 

fee, use the fee calculation forms to 

calculate and submit documentation 

supporting their revised fee. 

Any person who receives an initial 

administrative determination for 

incomplete payment of a cost recovery 

fee or observer coverage fee may appeal 

under the appeals procedures set out at 

15 CFR part 906. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations; Individuals or 

households. 

Frequency: Annually; as needed. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory, 

Required to Obtain or Retain Benefits. 

Legal Authority: Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act. 

This information collection request 

may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. 

Follow the instructions to view the 

Department of Commerce collections 

currently under review by OMB. 

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be 

submitted within 30 days of the 

publication of this notice on the 

following website www.reginfo.gov/ 

public/do/PRAMain. Find this 

particular information collection by 

selecting ‘‘Currently under 30-day 

Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or 

by using the search function and 

entering either the title of the collection 

or the OMB Control Number 0648–0711. 

Sheleen Dumas, 

Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of 

the Chief Information Officer, Commerce 

Department. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05946 Filed 3–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB845] 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Marine Site 

Characterization Surveys Off of 

Delaware 

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 Orsted Wind Power North 

America, LLC, (Orsted) on behalf of 

Garden State Offshore Energy, LLC 

(Garden State) and Skipjack Offshore 

Energy, LLC (Skipjack) for authorization 

to take marine mammals incidental to 

site characterization surveys off the 

coast of Delaware. Pursuant to the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments 

on its proposal to issue an incidental 

harassment authorization (IHA) to 

incidentally take marine mammals 

during the specified activities. NMFS is 

also requesting comments on a possible 

one-time, one-year renewal that could 

be issued under certain circumstances 

and if all requirements are met, as 

described in Request for Public 

Comments at the end of this notice. 

NMFS will consider public comments 

prior to making any final decision on 

the issuance of the requested MMPA 

authorization and agency responses will 

be summarized in the final notice of our 

decision. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than April 20, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 

Permits and Conservation Division, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15923 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service. Written 

comments should be submitted via 

email to ITP.Corcoran@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 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/ 

incidental-take-authorizations-undermarine-mammal-protection-act without 

change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim 

Corcoran, 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/permit/ 

incidental-take-authorizations-undermarine-mammal-protection-act. In case 

of problems accessing these documents, 

please call the contact listed above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of 

marine mammals, with certain 

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

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

direct the Secretary of Commerce (as 

delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon 

request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and either regulations are 

proposed or, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, a notice of a proposed 

incidental harassment authorization is 

provided to the public for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s) and will not have 

an unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

taking for subsistence uses (where 

relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe 

the permissible methods of taking and 

other ‘‘means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact’’ on the 

affected species or stocks and their 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance, and on the 

availability of the species or stocks for 

taking for certain subsistence uses 

(referred to in shorthand as 

‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of the takings are set forth. 

The definitions of all applicable 

MMPA statutory terms cited above are 

included in the relevant sections below. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

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

NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 

216–6A, NMFS must review our 

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

IHA) with respect to potential impacts 

on the human environment. 

This action is consistent with 

categories of activities identified in 

Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no 

anticipated serious injury or mortality) 

of the Companion Manual for NOAA 

Administrative Order 216–6A, which do 

not individually or cumulatively have 

the potential for significant impacts on 

the quality of the human environment 

and for which we have not identified 

any extraordinary circumstances that 

would preclude this categorical 

exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has 

preliminarily determined that the 

issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies 

to be categorically excluded from 

further NEPA review. 

We will review all comments 

submitted in response to this notice 

prior to concluding our NEPA process 

or making a final decision on the IHA 

request. 

Summary of Request 

On October 1, 2021, NMFS received a 

request from Orsted on behalf of Garden 

State Offshore Energy, LLC and Skipjack 

Offshore Energy, LLC, both subsidiaries 

of Orsted, for an IHA to take marine 

mammals incidental to marine site 

characterization surveys off the coast of 

Delaware. Hereafter, we refer to the 

applicant as Orsted. Following NMFS’ 

review of the draft application, a revised 

version was submitted on November 24, 

2021. The application was deemed 

adequate and complete on February 11, 

2022. Orsted’s request is for take of a 

small number of 16 species of marine 

mammals by Level B harassment only. 

Neither Orsted nor NMFS expects 

serious injury or mortality to result from 

this activity and, therefore, an IHA is 

appropriate. 

NMFS previously issued IHAs to 

Garden State (86 FR 33664; June 25, 

2021)) and Skipjack (86 FR 18943; April 

12, 2021)) for related work. However, 

work has not been completed under 

these IHAs at this time, which are 

effective until April 4, 2022 and June 

10, 2022, respectively. Orsted plans to 

survey the combined survey area of the 

aforementioned projects, and the same 

two Lease Area currently being 

surveyed under those IHAs (see Figure 

1). 

Description of Proposed Activity 

Overview 

As part of their overall marine site 

characterization survey operations, 

Orsted plans to conduct high-resolution 

geophysical (HRG) and geotechnical 

surveys in Lease Areas OCS–A 0482 and 

0519 (Lease Areas), and the associated 

export cable route (ECR) area off the 

coast of Delaware (Figure 1). 

The purpose of the marine site 

characterization surveys is to collect 

data concerning seabed (geophysical, 

geotechnical, and geohazard), 

ecological, and archeological conditions 

within the footprint of offshore wind 

facility development. Surveys are also 

conducted to support engineering 

design and to map Unexploded 

Ordnance (UXO). Underwater sounds 

resulting from the site characterization 

survey activities, specifically HRG 

surveys, has the potential to result in 

incidental take of marine mammals in 

the form of Level B harassment. Table 

1 identifies representative survey 

equipment with the expected potential 

to result in take of marine mammals. 

Dates and Duration 

The proposed site characterization 

surveys are anticipated to occur 

between May 10, 2022 and May 9, 2023. 

The exact dates have not yet been 

established. The activity is expected to 

include up to 350 survey days over the 

course of a single year (‘‘survey day’’ 

defined as a 24-hour (hr) activity period 

in which the assumed number of line 

kilometers (km) are surveyed). The 

number of anticipated survey days was 

calculated as the number of days needed 

to reach the overall level of effort 

required to meet survey objectives 

assuming any single vessel travels 4 

knots (kn) and surveys cover, on 

average, 70 line km per 24-hr period. 

The applicant assumes the use of 

sparker systems, which produce the 

largest estimated harassment isopleths, 

on all survey days (see Table 1). 

Specific Geographic Region 

The proposed activities will occur 

within the survey area which includes 

the Lease Area and potential ECRs to 

landfall locations in Delaware, as shown 

in Figure 1. This survey area combines 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15924 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

the survey areas in the previously 

issued Garden State (86 FR 33664; June 

25, 2021) and Skipjack (86 FR 18943; 

April 12, 2021) IHAs. The combined 

Lease Areas (Garden State Lease Area 

OCS–A–0482 and Skipjack Lease Area 

OCS–A–0519) are comprised of 

approximately 568 square kilometers 

(km2) within the WEA of BOEM’s MidAtlantic planning area (see Figure 1). 

Water depths in the Lease Area range 

from approximately 15 to 40 meters (m). 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C Detailed Description of Specific Activity 

Orsted proposes to conduct HRG 

survey operations, including multibeam 

depth sounding, seafloor imaging, and 

shallow and medium penetration subbottom profiling. The HRG surveys will 

include the use of seafloor mapping 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICESEN21MR22.037</GPH>

0...:9131',021 

'\'"om•: 2:~:34 PM User,dfan' 

it 

t 

1iJ 

Figure 3. Project Area 

0 12.5 25 

Nam•, 3613,. TI02.,MMno~• • .JIIAc.FiQ03 Piilh: V:IJ®sl3013JH,\.SU"11nuri<!s\MXO\Oh1i:011111o!l\Tlls>l02_US.F~Jl(,\.Sldpjoci(.Wllld\3G73,.T102,.M••ln"5peclll,.IHA,.l'lg03,m,d 

O~e Sa,vt"Kf 9/jJ2tY.M'•lf:5"1':56AM ' 

-Auth<:it: 

50 Miles () 

Figure 1. Survey area for the site characterization surveys which include the Lease 

Areas and the potential export cable route area. 
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15925 

equipment with operating frequencies 

above 180 kilohertz (kHz) (e.g., sidescan sonar (SSS), multibeam 

echosounders (MBES)); magnetometers 

and gradiometers that have no acoustic 

output; and shallow- to mediumpenetration sub-bottom profiling (SBP) 

equipment (e.g., parametric sonars, 

compressed high-intensity radiated 

pulses (CHIRPs), boomers, sparkers) 

with operating frequencies below 180 

kilohertz (kHz). No deep-penetration 

SBP surveys (e.g., airgun or bubble gun 

surveys) will be conducted. Survey 

equipment will be deployed from as 

many as three vessels or remotely 

operated vehicles (ROVs) during the site 

characterization activities within the 

Lease area and ECR area. Equipment 

deployed on the ROVs would be 

identical to that deployed on the vessel; 

however, the sparker systems are not 

normally deployed from an ROV due to 

the power supply required. For Orsted’s 

proposed survey activity, ROVs would 

be used for smaller impact sources (i.e., 

CHIRPs) or de minimus sources. The 

extent of ROV usage in this project is 

unknown at this time, however NMFS 

expects the use of ROVs to have de 

minimus impacts relative to the use of 

vessels given the smaller sources and 

inherent nature of utilizing an ROV 

(e.g., much smaller size of an ROV 

relative to a vessel and less acoustic 

exposure given location of their use in 

the water column). For these reasons, 

our analysis focuses on the acoustic 

sources themselves and the use of 

vessels to deploy such sources, rather 

than the specific use of ROVs to deploy 

the survey equipment. Therefore, ROVs 

are not further analyzed in this notice. 

Orsted assumes that vessels would 

generally conduct survey effort at a 

transit speed of approximately 4 kn, 

which equates to 70 line km per 24-hour 

operation period. On this basis a total of 

350 vessel survey days are expected 

within Lease Areas OCS–A 0482, OCS– 

A 0519, and the associated ECR area. 

Water depths in the Lease Areas range 

from approximately 15 to 40 meters (m). 

Water depths within the ECR area 

extend from the shoreline to 

approximately 40 m deep. 

Acoustic sources planned for use 

during HRG survey activities proposed 

by Orsted include the following. Survey 

equipment can either be towed, pole 

mounted, hull-mounted on the vessel 

(or on an ROV as noted above), or 

mounted on other survey equipment 

(e.g., transponders) (Table 1): 

• Shallow penetration, nonimpulsive, intermittent, mobile, nonparametric SBPs (i.e., CHIRP SBPs) are 

used to map the near-surface 

stratigraphy (top 0 to 10 m) of sediment 

below seabed. A CHIRP system emits 

sonar pulses that increase in frequency 

from approximately 2 to 20 kHz over 

time. The frequency range can be 

adjusted to meet project variables. These 

sources are typically mounted on a pole, 

either over the side of the vessel or 

through a moon pool in the bottom of 

the hull. The operational configuration 

and relatively narrow beamwidth of 

these sources reduce the likelihood that 

an animal would be exposed to the 

signal. 

• Medium penetration SBPs 

(boomers) are used to map deeper 

subsurface stratigraphy as needed. A 

boomer is a broad-band sound source 

operating in the 3.5 Hz to 10 kHz 

frequency range. This system is 

commonly mounted on a sled and 

towed behind the vessel. Boomers are 

impulsive and mobile sources. The 

sound levels produced by this 

equipment type have the potential to 

result in Level B harassment of marine 

mammals; and 

• Medium penetration SBPs 

(sparkers) are used to map deeper 

subsurface stratigraphy as need. 

Sparkers create acoustic pulses from 50 

Hz to 4 kHz omnidirectionally from the 

source, and are considered to be 

impulsive and mobile sources. Sparkers 

are typically towed behind the vessel 

with adjacent hydrophone arrays to 

receive the return signals. The sound 

levels produced by this equipment type 

have the potential to result in Level B 

harassment of marine mammals. 

Operation of the following survey 

equipment types is not reasonably 

expected to result in take of marine 

mammals and will not be discussed 

further beyond the brief summaries 

provided below: 

• Parametric SBPs, also commonly 

referred to as sediment echosounders, 

are used to provide high data density in 

sub-bottom profiles that are typically 

required for cable routes, very shallow 

water, and archaeological surveys. 

Parametric SPBs are typically mounted 

on a pole, either over the side of the 

vessel or through a moon pool in the 

bottom of the hull. Crocker and 

Fratantonio (2016) does not provide 

relevant measurements or source data 

for parametric SBPs, however, some 

source information is provided by the 

manufacturer. For the proposed project, 

the SBP used would generate short, very 

narrow-beam (1° to 3.5°) sound pulses at 

relatively high frequencies (generally 

around 85 to 100 kHz). The narrow 

beamwidth significantly reduces the 

potential for exposure while the high 

frequencies of the source are rapidly 

attenuated in sea water. Given the 

narrow beamwidth and relatively high 

frequency. NMFS does not reasonably 

expect there to be potential for marine 

mammals to be exposed to the signal; 

• Acoustic Cores are seabed-mounted 

sources with three distinct sound 

sources: A high-frequency parametric 

source, a high-frequency CHIRP sonar, 

and a low-frequency CHIRP sonar. The 

beamwidth is narrow (3.5° to 8°) and the 

source is operated roughly 3.5 m above 

the seabed from a seabed mount, with 

the transducer pointed directly 

downward; 

• Ultra-short baseline (USBL) 

positioning systems are used to provide 

high accuracy ranges by measuring the 

time between the acoustic pulses 

transmitted by vessel transceiver and a 

transponder (or beacon) necessary to 

produce the acoustic profile. It is a twocomponent system with a moon pool- or 

side pole mounted transceiver and one 

or several transponders mounted on 

other survey equipment. USBLs are 

expected to produce extremely small 

acoustic propagation distances in their 

typical operating configuration; 

• Multibeam echosounders (MBES) 

are used to determine water depths and 

general bottom topography. MBES sonar 

systems project sonar pulses in several 

angled beams from a transducer 

mounted to a ship’s hull. The beams 

radiate out form the transducer in a fanshaped pattern orthogonally to the 

ship’s direction. The proposed MBESs 

all have operating frequencies >180 kHz 

and are therefore outside the general 

hearing range of marine mammals; and 

• Side scan sonars (SSS) are used for 

seabed sediment classification purposes 

and to identify natural and man-made 

acoustic targets on the seafloor. The 

sonar device emits conical or fanshaped pulses down toward the seafloor 

in multiple beams at a wide angle, 

perpendicular to the path of the sensor 

through the water column. The 

proposed SSSs all have operating 

frequencies >180 kHZ and are therefore 

outside the general hearing range of 

marine mammals. 

Table 1 identifies representative 

survey equipment with the expected 

potential to result in exposure of marine 

mammals and thus potentially result in 

take. 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. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15926 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIVE HRG SURVEY EQUIPMENT

Equipment Reference 

for SL 

Operating 

frequency 

(kHz) 

SL 

(SPL dB re 

1 μPa m) 

SL 

(SEL dB re 

1 μPa2

m2 s) 

SL 

(PK dB re 

1 μPa m) 

Pulse 

duration 

(width) 

(ms) 

Repetition 

rate 

(Hz) 

Beamwidth 

(degrees) 

ET 216 (2000DS or 3200 top unit) ................................. MAN ......... 2–16 

2–8 

195 178 .................. 20 6 24 

ET 424 3200–XS ............................................................ CF ............ 4–24 176 152 .................. 3.4 2 71

ET 512i ........................................................................... CF ............ 0.7–12 179 158 .................. 9 8 80 

GeoPulse 5430A ............................................................ MAN ......... 2–17 196 183 .................. 50 10 55 

Teledyne Benthos Chirp III—TTV 170 ........................... MAN ......... 2–7 197 185 .................. 60 15 100 

Pangeo SBI .................................................................... MAN ......... 4.5–12.5 188.2 165 .................. 4.5 45 120 

AA, Dura-spark UHD Sparker (400 tips, 500 J) 1 ........... CF ............ 0.3–1.2 203 174 211 1.1 4 Omni 

AA, Dura-spark UHD Sparker Model 400 x 400 4 .......... CF ............ 0.3–1.2 203 174 211 1.1 4 Omni 

GeoMarine, Dual 400 Sparker, Model Geo-Source 

800 1 2.

CF ............ 0.4–5 203 174 211 1.1 2 Omni 

GeoMarine Sparker, Model Geo-Source 200–400 1 2 .... CF ............ 0.3–1.2 203 174 211 1.1 4 Omni 

GeoMarine Sparker, Model Geo-Source 200 Lightweight 1 2.

CF ............ 0.3–1.2 203 174 211 1.1 4 Omni 

AA, triple plate S-Boom (700–1,000 J) 3 ........................ CF ............ 0.1–5 205 172 211 0.6 4 80 

μPa = micropascal; AA = Applied Acoustics; CF = Crocker and Fratantonio (2016); CHIRP = compressed high-intensity radiated pulses; dB = decibel; EM = equipment mounted; ET = edgetech; J = joule; Omni = omnidirectional source; re = referenced to; PK = zero-to-peak sound pressure level; PM = pole mounted; SBI = subbottom imager; SEL = sound exposure level; SL = source level; SPL = root-mean-square sound pressure level; T = towed; TB = Teledyne benthos; UHD = ultra-high 

definition; WFA = weighting factor adjustment. 1The Dura-spark measurements and specifications provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) were used for all sparker systems proposed for the survey. The 

data provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) represent the most applicable data for similar sparker systems with comparable operating methods and settings 

when manufacturer or other reliable measurements are not available. 2The AA Dura-spark (500 J, 400tips) was used as a proxy source. 

3 Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) provide S-Boom measurements using two different power sources (CSP–D700 and CSP–N). The CSP–D700 power source was 

used in the 700 J measurements but not in the 1,000 J measurements. The CSP–N source was measured for both 700 J and 1,000 J operations but resulted in a 

lower SL; therefore, the single maximum SL value was used for both operational levels of the S-Boom. 

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 2 lists all species or stocks for 

which take is expected and proposed to 

be authorized for this action, and 

summarizes information related to the 

population or stock, including 

regulatory status under the MMPA and 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) and 

potential biological removal (PBR), 

where known. For taxonomy, 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 U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of 

Mexico SARs (e.g., Hayes et al., 2021). 

All values presented in Table 2 are the 

most recent available at the time of 

publication and are available in the 

2020 SARs (Hayes et al., 2021) and the 

draft 2021 SARs (available online at: 

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

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

draft-marine-mammal-stockassessment-reports). 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES LIKELY TO OCCUR NEAR THE SURVEY AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY ORSTED’S

ACTIVITY

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) 

Family Balaenidae: 

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

Family Balaenopteridae 

(rorquals): 

Fin whale ............................ Balaenoptera physalus ............. Western North Atlantic ... E, D, Y 6802 (0.24, 5573, 2016) ........... 11 1.8 

Sei whale ............................ Balaenoptera borealis ............... Nova Scotia .................... E, D, Y 6292 (1.02, 3098, 2016) ........... 6.2 0.8 

Minke whale ........................ Balaenoptera acutorostrata ...... Canadian Eastern Coastal.-,-, N 21,968 (0.31, 17002, 2016) ...... 170 10.6 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

I I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15927 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES LIKELY TO OCCUR NEAR THE SURVEY AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY ORSTED’S

ACTIVITY—Continued 

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Humpback whale ................ Megaptera novaeangliae .......... Gulf of Maine .................. -,-, Y 1396 (0, 1380, 2016) ................ 22 12.15 

Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Family Physeteridae: 

Sperm whale ....................... Physeter macrocephalus .......... North Atlantic .................. E, D, Y 4349 (0.28, 3451, See SAR) .... 3.9 0 

Family Delphinidae: 

Atlantic white-sided dolphin Lagenorhynchus acutus ............ Western North Atlantic ... -, -, N 93,233 (0.71, 54443, See SAR) 544 27 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ...... Stenella frontalis ....................... Western North Atlantic ... -, -, N 39,921 (0.27, 32032, See SAR) 320 0 

Common bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus .................... Western North Atlantic 

Offshore.

-, -, N 62,851 (0.23, 51914, See SAR) 519 28 

Western North Atlantic 

Northern Migratory 

Coastal.

-, -, Y 6,639 (0.41, 4759, 2016) .......... 48 12.2–21.5 

Long-finned pilot whale ...... Globicephala melas .................. Western North Atlantic ... -, -, N 39,215 (0.3, 30627, See SAR) 306 29 

Short-finned pilot whale ...... Globicephala macrorhynchus ... Western North Atlantic ... -, -, Y 28,924 (0.24, 23637, See SAR) 236 136 

Risso’s dolphin ................... Grampus griseus ...................... Western North Atlantic ... -, -, N 35,215 (0.19, 30051, 2016) ...... 301 34 

Common dolphin ................ Delphinus delphis ..................... Western North Atlantic ... -, -, N 172,974 (0.21, 145216, 2016) .. 1,452 390 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises): 

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

Fundy.

-, -, N 95,543 (0.31, 74034, 2016) ...... 851 164 

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia 

Family Phocidae (earless seals): 

Gray seal 4 .......................... Halichoerus grypus ................... Western North Atlantic ... -, -, N 27300 (0.22, 22785, 2016) ....... 1,389 4453 

Harbor seal ......................... Phoca vitulina ........................... Western North Atlantic ... -, -, N 61,336 (0.08, 57637, 2018) ...... 1,729 339 

1Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the 

ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or 

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

designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports-species-stock. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. 3These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated 

mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 4The NMFS stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to the U.S. population only, however the actual stock abundance is approximately 

451,431 (including animals in Canada). The annual mortality and serious injury (M/SI) value given is for the total stock. 

As indicated above, all 16 species 

(with 17 managed stocks) in Table 2 

temporally and spatially co-occur with 

the activity to the degree that take is 

reasonably likely to occur, and we have 

proposed authorizing it. In addition to 

what is included in Sections 3 and 4 of 

Orsted’s application, the SARs, and 

NMFS’ website, further detail informing 

the baseline for select species (e.g., 

information regarding current Unusual 

Mortality Events (UMEs) and important 

habitat areas) is provided below. 

North Atlantic Right Whales 

The western North Atlantic right 

whale population ranges from calving 

grounds in coastal waters of the 

southeastern United States to feeding 

grounds in New England waters and the 

Canadian Bay of Fundy, Scotian Shelf, 

and Gulf of St. Lawrence (Hayes et al., 

2021). In the late fall months (e.g., 

November), right whales are generally 

thought to depart from the feeding 

grounds in the northeast Atlantic and 

migrate south to their calving grounds 

off the coast of Georgia and Florida. 

However, passive acoustic studies of 

right whales have demonstrated their 

year-round presence in the Gulf of 

Maine (Morano et al., 2012; Bort et al., 

2015), New Jersey (Whitt et al., 2013), 

and Virginia (Salisbury et al., 2016). Off 

the coast of New Jersey, right whales 

were acoustically detected in all 

seasons, with peak detections occurring 

in April and May (Whitt et al., 2013), 

and visually observed in winter, spring, 

and summer during an environmental 

baseline study (EBS) conducted by the 

New Jersey Department of Environment 

Protection (NJDEP, 2010). A 

comprehensive study of passive 

acoustic monitoring data from 2004 

through 2014 by Davis et al. (2017) 

demonstrated year-round presence of 

certain individual right whales across 

their entire habitat range (southeastern 

Atlantic to northern Atlantic), 

suggesting that not all individuals 

undergo consistent annual migration. 

The proposed survey area is located 

within the migratory corridor 

Biologically Important Area (BIA) for 

North Atlantic right whales (March– 

April and November–December) that 

extends from Massachusetts to Florida 

(LaBrecque et al., 2015). Off the coast of 

New Jersey and Delaware, the migratory 

BIA extends from the coast to beyond 

the shelf break. This important 

migratory area is approximately 269,488 

km2 in size 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 Mid-Atlantic 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 the 

Delaware Bay, overlaps spatially for the 

proposed survey area (https://appsnefsc.fisheries.noaa.gov/psb/surveys/ 

MapperiframeWithText.html). This 

SMA is active from November 1 through 

April 30 of each year. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

I I I I 
15928 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

In addition to active SMAs, Dynamic 

Management areas (DMAs) may be 

established by NOAA Fisheries based 

on visual sightings documenting the 

presence of three or more right whales 

within a discrete area. DMAs are 

voluntary slow-speed zones and 

mariners are encouraged to avoid these 

areas or reduce speeds to 10 kn or less 

while transiting through these areas. 

More information, as well as the most 

up-to-date DMA establishments can be 

found on NMFS’ website (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

endangered-species-conservation/ 

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

Elevated right whale mortalities have 

been documented since June 7, 2017 

along the U.S. and Canadian coast and 

have collectively been declared an 

UME. As of January 7, 2022, there have 

been a total of 34 dead stranded whales 

(21 in Canada; 13 in the United States), 

and the leading category for cause of 

death for this UME is ‘‘human 

interaction’’, specifically from 

entanglements or vessel strikes. The 

cumulative total number of animals in 

the North Atlantic right whale UME has 

been updated to 50 individuals to 

include both the confirmed mortalities 

(dead, stranded or floating) (n=34) and 

seriously injured free-swimming whales 

(n=16). This number better reflects the 

number of whale likely removed from 

the population during the UME and 

more accurately reflects the population 

impacts. More information is available 

online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-life-distress/2017-2022-northatlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortalityevent. 

Humpback Whales 

Humpback whales are found 

worldwide in all oceans. In winter, 

humpback whales from waters off New 

England, Canada, Greenland, Iceland, 

and Norway, migrate to mate and calve 

primarily in the West Indies, where 

spatial and genetic mixing among these 

groups occurs. NMFS currently defines 

humpback whale stocks on the basis of 

feeding locations, i.e., Gulf of Maine. 

However, our reference to humpback 

whales in this document refers to any 

individual of the species that are found 

in the specific geographic region. These 

individuals may be from the same 

breeding population (e.g., West Indies 

breeding population of humpback 

whales) but visit different feeding areas. 

Based on photo-identification, only 39 

percent of individual humpback whales 

observed along the mid- and south 

Atlantic U.S. coasts are from the Gulf of 

Marine stock (Barco et al., 2002). 

Therefore, the SAR abundance estimate 

is an underrepresentation of the relevant 

population, i.e., the West Indies 

breeding population. 

Prior to 2016, humpback whales were 

listed under the ESA as an endangered 

species worldwide. Following a 2015 

global status review (Bettridge et al., 

2015), NMFS established 14 DPSs with 

different listing statuses (81 FR 62259; 

September 8, 2016) pursuant to the ESA. 

Humpback whales in the survey area are 

expected to be from the West Indies 

DPS, which consists of the whales 

whose breeding range includes the 

Atlantic margin of the Antilles from 

Cuba to northern Venezuela, and whose 

feeding range primarily includes the 

Gulf of Marine, eastern Canada, and 

western Greenland. This DPS is not ESA 

listed. Bettridge et al. (2003) estimated 

the size of the West Indies DPS at 

12,312 (95% CI 8,688–15,954) whales in 

2004–2005, 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). 

Although humpback whales are 

migratory between feeding areas and 

calving areas, individual variability in 

the timing of migrations may result in 

the presence of individuals in highlatitude areas throughout the year 

(Straley, 1990). Records of humpback 

whales off the U.S. mid-Atlantic coast 

(New Jersey to North Carolina) from 

January through March suggest these 

waters may represent a supplemental 

winter feeding ground used by juvenile 

and mature humpback whales of the 

U.S. and Canadian North Atlantic stocks 

(LaBrecque et al., 2015). 

Since January 2016, elevated 

humpback whale mortalities have 

occurred along the Atlantic coast from 

Maine to Florida. Partial or full 

necropsy examinations have been 

conducted on approximately half of 

stranded humpback whales. Of the 

whales examined, about 50 percent had 

evidence of human interactions, either 

ship strike or entanglement. In total, 10 

humpback whale strandings occurred in 

2021. While a portion of the whales 

have shown evidence of pre-mortem 

vessel strike, this finding is not 

consistent across all whales examined 

and more research is needed. NOAA is 

consulting with researchers that are 

conducting studies on the humpback 

whale populations, and these efforts 

may provide information on changes in 

whale distribution and habitat use that 

could provide additional insight into 

how these vessel interactions occurred. 

More information is available at: https:// 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-life-distress/2016-2022- 

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

Fin Whales 

Fin whales are common in waters off 

the U.S. Atlantic Exclusive Economic 

Zone (EEZ), primarily from Cape 

Hatteras northward (Hayes et al., 2021). 

Fin whales are present north of 35° 

latitude in every season and are broadly 

distributed throughout the western 

North Atlantic for most of the year 

(Hayes et al., 2021). 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 

(Hayes et al., 2021). 

Sei Whales 

The Nova Scotia stock of sei whales 

can be found in deeper waters of the 

continental shelf edge 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 the U.S. 

waters, with sightings concentrated 

along the eastern margin of Georges 

Bank and into the Northeast Channel 

area, and along the southwestern edge of 

Georges Bank in the area of 

Hydrographer Canyon (Hayes et al., 

2021). Sei whales occur in shallower 

waters to feed. Although sightings of sei 

whales are uncommon in the survey 

area, sightings have occurred in waters 

off of Maryland and Delaware during 

previous surveys (Garden State Offshore 

Energy 2019; Atlantic Shores 2020). The 

main threats to this stock are human 

interactions with fisheries and vessel 

collisions. 

Minke Whales 

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 (Hayes et al., 

2021). This species generally occupies 

waters less than 100 m deep on the 

continental shelf. Strong seasonal 

distribution has been documented with 

minke whales in the survey areas, in 

which spring through fall are times are 

relatively widespread and common 

occurrence whereas during the winter 

whales are largely absent (Hayes et al., 

2021). 

Since January 2017, elevated minke 

whale mortalities have occurred along 

the Atlantic coast from Maine through 

South Carolina leading to a declared 

UME. As of January 7, 2022, 122 minke 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15929 

whale strandings have occurred since 

the UME was declared in 2017. Full or 

partial necropsy examinations were 

conducted on more than 60 percent of 

the whales. Preliminary findings of the 

whales have shown evidence of human 

interactions or infectious disease. These 

findings are not consistent across all of 

the whales examined, so more research 

is needed. More information on this 

UME is available at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-life-distress/2017-2022-minkewhale-unusual-mortality-event-alongatlantic-coast. 

Sperm Whales 

The distribution of sperm whales in 

the U.S. EEZ occurs on the continental 

shelf edge, over the continental slope, 

and into the mid-ocean regions (Hayes 

et al., 2021). 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 winter, sperm whales 

concentrate east and northeast of Cape 

Hatteras. In spring, distribution shifts 

northward to the east of Delaware and 

Virginia, and is widespread throughout 

the central Mid-Atlantic Bight and the 

southern part of Georges Bank. In the 

fall, sperm whale occurrence on the 

continental shelf (inshore of the 100 m 

isobaths) south of New England reaches 

peak levels, and there remains a 

continental shelf edge occurrence in the 

Mid-Atlantic Bight (Hayes et al., 2021). 

No sperm whales were recorded during 

the Mid-Atlantic Bight surveys or the 

NJDEP EBS surveys. CETAP and NMFS 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

sightings in the shelf-edge and off-shelf 

waters included many social groups 

with calves and juveniles (CETAP, 

1982). Sperm whales were usually seen 

at the tops of seamounts and rises and 

did not generally occur over slops. 

Sperm whales were recorded at depths 

varying from 800 to 3,500 m. Although 

the likelihood of occurrence within the 

survey area remains very low, the sperm 

whale was included as an affected 

species due to its high seasonal 

densities east of the survey area. 

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 100 m depth contour 

from central West Greenland to North 

Carolina (Hayes et al., 2021). 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 the 

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 the Gulf of Mexico and the 

Caribbean to Venezuela (Hayes et al., 

2021). This stock regularly occurs in 

continental shelf waters south of Cape 

Hatteras and in continental shelf edges 

and slope waters north of this region 

(Hayes et al., 2021). There are two forms 

of this species, with the larger ecotype 

inhabiting the continental shelf and 

usually found within or near the 200 m 

isobaths (Hayes et al., 2021). 

Bottlenose Dolphin 

There are two distinct bottlenose 

dolphin morphotypes in the western 

North Atlantic: The coastal and offshore 

forms (Hayes et al., 2021). 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 coastal stock of coastal 

bottlenose dolphins (Hayes et al., 2021). 

North of Cape Hatteras, there is 

separation of the offshore and coastal 

morphotypes across bathymetric 

contours during summer months. Aerial 

surveys flown from 1979 through 1981 

indicated a concentration of bottlenose 

dolphins in waters <25 m deep that 

corresponded with the coastal 

morphotype, and an area of high 

abundance along the shelf break that 

corresponded with the offshore stock 

(Hayes et al., 2020). Torres et al. (2003) 

found a statistically significant break in 

the distribution of the morphotypes; 

almost all dolphins found in waters >34 

m depth and >34 km from shore were 

of the offshore morphotype. The coastal 

stock is best defined by its summer 

distribution, when it occupies coastal 

waters from the shoreline to the 20-m 

isobath between Virginia and New York 

(Hayes et al., 2021). This stock migrates 

south during late summer and fall, and 

during colder months it occupies waters 

off Virginia and North Carolina (Hayes 

et al., 2021). Therefore, during the 

summer, dolphins found inside the 20- 

m isobath in the survey area are likely 

to belong to the coastal stock, while 

those found in deeper waters or 

observed during cooler months belong 

to the offshore stock. 

Long-Finned Pilot Whale 

Long-finned pilot whales are found 

from North Carolina to Iceland, 

Greenland and the Barents Sea (Hayes et 

al., 2021). In the 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 northward, and 

remain in these areas through late fall 

(Hayes et al., 2021). Long-finned and 

short-finned pilot whales overlap 

spatially along the mid-Atlantic shelf 

break between Delaware and the 

southern flank of Georges Bank. Longfinned pilot whales have occasionally 

been observed stranded as far south as 

South Carolina, but sightings of longfinned pilot whales south of Cape 

Hatteras would be considered unusual 

(Hayes et al., 2021). The main threats to 

this species include interactions with 

fisheries and habitat issues including 

exposure to high levels of 

polychlorinated biphenyls and 

chlorinated pesticides, and toxic metals 

including mercury, lead, and cadmium, 

and selenium (Hayes et al., 2021). 

Short-Finned Pilot Whale 

As described above, long-finned and 

short-finned pilot whales overlap 

spatially with the survey area and along 

the mid-Atlantic shelf. There is limited 

information on the distribution of shortfinned pilot whales. They prefer warmer 

tropical waters and deeper waters 

offshore, and in the northeastern United 

States they are often sighted near the 

Gulf Stream (Hayes et al., 2021). Shortfinned pilot whales have occasionally 

been observed stranded as far north as 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15930 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

Massachusetts but north of ∼42°N shortfinned pilot whale sightings would be 

considered unusual while south of Cape 

Hatteras most pilot whales would 

expected to be short-finned pilot whales 

(Hayes et al., 2021). As with long-finned 

pilot whales, the main threats to this 

species include interactions with 

fisheries and habitat issues including 

exposure to high levels of 

polychlorinated biphenyls and 

chlorinated pesticides, and toxic metals 

including mercury, lead, cadmium, and 

selenium (Hayes et al., 2021). 

Risso’s Dolphin 

Risso’s dolphins are large dolphins 

with a characteristic blunt head and 

light coloration, often with extensive 

scarring. They are widely distributed in 

tropical and temperate seas. In the 

Western North Atlantic they occur from 

Florida to eastern Newfoundland 

(Leatherwood et al., 1976; Baird and 

Stacey, 1991). Off the U.S. Northeast 

Coast, Risso’s dolphins are primarily 

distributed along the continental shelf, 

but can also be found swimming in 

shallower waters to the mid-shelf 

(Hayes et al., 2021). 

Risso’s dolphins occur along the 

continental shelf edge from Cape 

Hatteras to Georges Bank during spring, 

summer, and autumn. In winter, they 

are distributed in the Mid-Atlantic from 

the continental shelf edge outward 

(Hayes et al., 2021). The majority of 

sightings during the 2011 surveys 

occurred along the continental shelf 

break with generally lower sighting rates 

over the continental slope (Palka, 2012). 

Risso’s dolphins can be found in MidAtlantic waters year-round and are more 

likely to be encountered offshore given 

their preference for deeper waters along 

the shelf edge. However, previous 

surveys have commonly observed this 

species in shallower waters, making it 

possible this species could be 

encountered in the survey area, 

particularly in summer when they are 

more abundant in this region (Curtice et 

al., 2019; Williams et al., 2015a, b; 

Hayes et al., 2021). 

Common Dolphin 

The common dolphin is found worldwide in temperate to subtropical seas. In 

the North Atlantic, 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 (Hayes et 

al., 2021). Common dolphins are 

distributed in waters off the eastern U.S. 

coast from Cape Hatteras northeast to 

Georges Bank (35° to 42° N) during midJanuary to May and move as far north 

as the Scotian Shelf from mid-summer 

to autumn (CETAP, 1982; Hayes et al., 

2020; Hamazaki, 2002; Selzer and 

Payne, 1988). 

Harbor Porpoise 

Harbor porpoises commonly occur 

throughout Massachusetts Bay from 

September through April. During the 

fall and spring, harbor porpoises are 

widely distributed along the east coast 

from New Jersey to Maine. During the 

summer, the porpoises are concentrated 

in the Northern Gulf of Maine and 

Southern Bay of Fundy in water depths 

<150 m. In winter, densities increase in 

the waters off New Jersey to North 

Carolina and decrease in the waters 

from New York to New Brunswick; 

however, specific migratory timing or 

routes are not apparent. Although still 

considered uncommon, harbor 

porpoises were regularly detected 

offshore of Maryland during winter and 

spring surveys (Wingfield et al., 2017). 

They were the second most frequently 

sighted cetacean during the NJDEP EBS, 

with 90 percent of the sightings during 

the winter, three during the spring, and 

one during the summer (Whitt et al., 

2015). The lack of sightings during the 

fall was attributed to low visibility 

conditions during those months, but 

available data indicate this species is 

likely present offshore New Jersey 

during fall and winter (Whitt et al., 

2015). 

In the survey 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 (Hayes et al., 2021). 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 

(Hayes et al., 2021). 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 (Hayes et al. 2021). 

Harbor Seal 

The harbor seal is found in all 

nearshore waters of the North Atlantic 

and North Pacific Oceans and adjoining 

seas above 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 (Hayes et 

al., 2021). The harbor seals within the 

survey area are part of the single 

Western North Atlantic stock. Between 

September and May they undergo 

seasonal migrations into southern New 

England and the Mid-Atlantic (Hayes et 

al., 2021). 

From July 2018 through March 2020, 

elevated numbers of harbor seal and 

gray seal mortalities have occurred 

across Maine, New Hampshire and 

Massachusetts. Additionally, stranded 

seals have shown clinical signs as far 

south as Virginia, although no in 

elevated numbers, therefore the UME 

investigation encompassed all seal 

strandings from Maine to Virginia. A 

total of 3,152 reported strandings (of 

both harbor and gray seals) occurred 

during the declared UME. Full or partial 

necropsy examinations have been 

conducted on some of the seals and 

samples have been collected for testing. 

Based on tests conducted as of April 30, 

2021, 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. This event was 

declared a UME from 2018 through 

2020, and is currently pending closure 

to become non-active. Therefore, this 

UME will not be addressed further in 

this document. Further information is 

available at: https://

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

2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-eventalong. 

Gray Seal 

There are three major populations of 

gray seals found worldwide; 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. Although gray 

seals are not regularly sighted offshore 

of Delaware, their range has been 

expanding southward in recent years, 

and have recently been observed as far 

south as the barrier islands of Virginia. 

Current population trends show that 

gray seal abundance is likely increasing 

in the U.S. Atlantic EEZ (Hayes et al., 

2021). It is believed that recolonization 

by Canadian gray seals is the source of 

the U.S. population (Hayes et al., 2021). 

As described above, elevated seal 

mortalities, including gray seals, have 

occurred from Maine to Virginia from 

2018 through 2020. Phocine distemper 

virus has been the main pathogen found 

in stranded seals. More information is 

available at: https://

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

2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-eventalong. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15931 

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 3. 

TABLE 3—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 and Holt, 2013). 

For more detail concerning these 

groups and associated frequency ranges, 

please see NMFS (2018) for a review of 

available information. 16 marine 

mammal species (14 cetacean and 2 

pinniped (both phocid) species) have 

the reasonable potential to co-occur 

with the proposed survey activities. 

Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean 

species that may be present, five are 

classified as low-frequency cetaceans 

(i.e., all mysticete species), nine are 

classified as mid-frequency cetaceans 

(i.e., all delphinid and ziphiid species 

and the sperm whale), and one is 

classified as high-frequency cetaceans 

(i.e., harbor porpoise and Kogia spp.). 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

This section includes a summary and 

discussion of the ways that Orsted’s 

specified activity may impact marine 

mammals and their habitat. Detailed 

descriptions of the potential effects of 

similar specified activities have been 

provided in other recent Federal 

Register notices, including for survey 

activities using the same methodology, 

over a similar amount of time, and 

occurring in the Mid-Atlantic region, 

including Delaware waters (e.g., 82 FR 

20563, May 3, 2017; 85 FR 36537, June 

17, 2020; 85 FR 37848, June 24, 2020; 

85 FR 48179, August 10, 2020; 86 FR 

11239, February 24, 2021, 86 FR 28061, 

May 25, 2021). No significant new 

information is available, and we refer 

the reader to these documents rather 

than repeating the details here. The 

Estimated Take section includes a 

quantitative analysis of the number of 

individuals that are expected to be taken 

by Orsted’s activity. The Negligible 

Impact Analysis and Determination 

section considers the potential effects of 

the specified activity, the Estimated 

Take section, and the Proposed 

Mitigation section, to draw conclusions 

regarding the likely impacts 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. 

Summary on Specified 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, nonauditory physical or physiological 

effects, behavioral disturbance, stress, 

and masking. The degree of effect is 

intrinsically related to the signal 

characteristics, received level, distance 

from the source, and duration of the 

sound exposure. Marine mammals 

exposed to high-intensity sound, or to 

lower-intensity sound for prolonged 

periods, can experience hearing 

threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of 

hearing sensitivity at certain frequency 

ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS can be 

permanent (PTS), in which case the loss 

of hearing sensitivity is not fully 

recoverable, or temporary (TTS), in 

which case the animal’s hearing 

threshold would recover over time 

(Southall et al., 2007). 

Animals in the vicinity of Orsted’s 

proposed site characterization survey 

activity are unlikely to incur even TTS 

due to the characteristics of the sound 

sources, which include relatively low 

sound source levels (176 to 205 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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15932 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

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 though at such a close range. 

Further, the restricted beam shape of 

many of HRG survey devices planned 

for use (Table 1) makes it unlikely that 

an animal would be exposed more than 

briefly during the passage of the vessel. 

Behavioral disturbances may include 

a variety of effects, including subtle 

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

avoidance of an area or changes in 

vocalizations), more conspicuous 

changes in similar behavioral activities, 

and more sustained and/or potentially 

severe reactions, such as displacement 

from or abandonment of high-quality 

habitat. Behavioral responses to sound 

are highly variable and context-specific 

and any reactions depend on numerous 

intrinsic and extrinsic factors (e.g., 

species, state of maturity, experience, 

current activity, reproductive state, 

auditory sensitivity, time of day), as 

well as the interplay between factors. 

Available studies show wide variation 

in response to underwater sound; 

therefore, it is difficult to predict 

specifically how any given sound in a 

particular instance might affect marine 

mammals perceiving the signal. 

In addition, sound can disrupt 

behavior through masking, or interfering 

with, an animal’s ability to detect, 

recognize, or discriminate between 

acoustic signals of interest (e.g., those 

used for intraspecific communication 

and social interactions, prey detection, 

predator avoidance, navigation). 

Masking occurs when the receipt of a 

sound is interfered with by another 

coincident sound at similar frequencies 

and at similar or higher intensity, and 

may occur whether the sound is natural 

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

precipitation) or anthropogenic (e.g., 

shipping, sonar, seismic exploration) in 

origin. Marine mammal 

communications would not likely be 

masked appreciably by the acoustic 

signals given the directionality of the 

signals for most HRG survey equipment 

types planned for use (Table 1) and the 

brief period when an individual 

mammal is likely to be exposed. 

Sound may affect marine mammals 

through impacts on the abundance, 

behavior, or distribution of prey species 

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

zooplankton) (i.e., effects to marine 

mammal habitat). Prey species exposed 

to sound might move away from the 

sound source, experience TTS, 

experience masking of biologically 

relevant sounds, or show no obvious 

direct effects. The most likely impacts 

(if any) for most prey species in a given 

area would be temporary avoidance of 

the area. Surveys using active acoustic 

sound sources move through an area 

relatively quickly, limiting exposure to 

multiple pulses. In all cases, sound 

levels would return to ambient once a 

survey ends and the noise source is shut 

down and, when exposure to sound 

ends, behavioral and/or physiological 

responses are expected to end relatively 

quickly. Finally, the HRG survey 

equipment will not have significant 

impacts to the seafloor and does not 

represent a source of pollution. 

Vessel Strike 

Vessel collisions with marine 

mammals, or ship strikes, can result in 

death or serious injury of the animal. 

These interactions are typically 

associated with large whales, which are 

less maneuverable than are smaller 

cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to 

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 kn (as is the speed of the vessel 

for Orsted’s proposed HRG survey). 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 Orsted’s 

specified survey activity are expected to 

be limited to Level B behavioral 

harassment. No permanent or temporary 

auditory effects, or significant impacts 

to marine mammal habitat, including 

prey, are expected. 

Estimated Take 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes proposed 

for authorization through this IHA, 

which will inform both NMFS’ 

consideration of ‘‘small numbers’’ and 

the negligible impact determination. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, 

which (i) has the potential to injure a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 

or (ii) has the potential to disturb a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild by causing disruption 

of behavioral patterns, including, but 

not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

(Level B harassment). 

Authorized takes would be by Level B 

harassment only, in the form of 

disruption of behavioral patterns for 

individual marine mammals resulting 

from exposure to noise from certain 

HRG acoustic sources. Based primarily 

on the characteristics of the signals 

proposed by the acoustic sources 

planned for use, Level A harassment is 

neither anticipated (even absent 

mitigation), nor proposed to be 

authorized. Consideration of the 

anticipated effectiveness of the 

measures (i.e., exclusion zones and 

shutdown measures), discussed in detail 

below in the Proposed Mitigation 

section, further strengthens the 

conclusion that Level A harassment is 

not a reasonably anticipated outcome of 

the survey activity. As described 

previously, no serious injury or 

mortality is anticipated or proposed to 

be authorized for this activity. Below we 

describe how the take is estimated. 

Generally speaking, we estimate take 

by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds 

above which NMFS believes the best 

available science indicates marine 

mammals will be behaviorally harassed 

or incur some degree of permanent 

hearing impairment; (2) the area or 

volume of water that will be ensonified 

above these levels in a day; (3) the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15933 

density or occurrence of marine 

mammals within these ensonified areas; 

and, (4) 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 for non-explosive 

sources—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 are likely to be behaviorally 

harassed in a manner we consider Level 

B harassment when exposed to 

underwater anthropogenic noise above 

received levels of 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) 

for impulsive (e.g., sparkers and 

boomers) evaluated here for Orsted’s 

proposed activity. 

Level A harassment for non-explosive 

sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance 

for Assessing the Effects of 

Anthropogenic Sound on Marine 

Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) 

(Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies 

dual criteria to assess auditory injury 

(Level A harassment) to five different 

marine mammal groups (based on 

hearing sensitivity) as a result of 

exposure to noise from two different 

types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). For more information, see 

NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which 

may be accessed at https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-acoustic-technical-guidance. 

Orsted’s proposed HRG survey 

includes the use of impulsive sources. 

However, as described above, NMFS has 

concluded that Level A harassment is 

not a reasonably likely outcome for 

marine mammals exposed to noise 

through use of the sources proposed for 

use here, and the potential for Level A 

harassment is not evaluated further in 

this document. Please see Orsted’s 

application for details of a quantitative 

exposure analysis exercise, i.e., 

calculated Level A harassment isopleths 

and estimated Level A harassment 

exposures. Orsted 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 determining the rms 

sound pressure level (SPLrms) at the 160- 

dB isopleth for the purpose of 

estimating the extent of Level B 

harassment isopleths associated with 

HRG survey equipment (NMFS, 2020). 

This methodology incorporates 

frequency and some directionality to 

refine estimated ensonified zones. 

Orsted used NMFS’s methodology, 

using the source level and operation 

mode of the equipment planned for 

used during the proposed survey, to 

estimate the maximum ensonified area 

over a 24-hr period also referred to as 

the harassment area (Table 1). Potential 

takes by Level B harassment are 

estimated within the ensonified area 

(i.e., harassment area) as an SPL 

exceeding 160 dB re 1 mPa for impulsive 

sources (e.g., sparkers, boomers) within 

an average day of activity. 

The harassment zone is a 

representation of the maximum extent 

of the ensonified area around a sound 

source over a 24-hr period. The 

harassment area was calculated per the 

following formula: 

Stationary Source: Harassment zone = 

pr2

Mobile Source: Harassment zone = 

(Distance/day 2r) + pr2

Where r is the linear distance from the 

source to the isopleth for the Level B 

harassment threshold and day = 1 (i.e., 

24 hours). 

The estimated potential daily active 

survey distance of 70 km was used as 

the estimated areal coverage over a 24- 

hr period. This distance accounts for the 

vessel traveling at roughly 4 kn and only 

for periods during which equipment 

<180 kHz is in operation. A vessel 

traveling 4 kn can cover approximately 

110 km per day; however, based on data 

from 2017, 2018, and 2019 surveys, 

survey coverage over a 24-hour period is 

closer to 70 km per day as a result of 

delays due to, e.g., weather, equipment 

malfunction. For daylight only vessels, 

the distance is reduced to 35 km per 

day; however, to maintain the potential 

for 24-hr surveys, the corresponding 

Level B harassment zones provide in 

Table 4 were calculated for each source 

based on the Level B threshold 

distances within a 24-hour (70 km) 

operational period. 

TABLE 4—CALCULATED HARASSMENT ZONES ENCOMPASSING LEVEL B 1 THRESHOLDS FOR EACH SOUND SOURCE OR

COMPARABLE SOUND SOURCE CATEGORY

Source 

Level B 

harassment 

isopleths 

(m) 

Level B 

harassment 

zone 

(km2) 2

ET 216 CHIRP ............................................................................................................................................. 9 1.3 

ET 424 CHIRP ............................................................................................................................................. 4 0.6 

ET 512i CHIRP ............................................................................................................................................ 6 0.8 

GeoPulse 5430 ............................................................................................................................................ 21 2.9 

TB CHIRP III ................................................................................................................................................ 48 6.7 

Pangeo SBI .................................................................................................................................................. 22 3.1 

AA Triple plate S-Boom (700–1,000 J) ....................................................................................................... 34 4.8 

AA, Dura-spark UHD Sparkers .................................................................................................................... 141 3 19.8 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15934 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

TABLE 4—CALCULATED HARASSMENT ZONES ENCOMPASSING LEVEL B 1 THRESHOLDS FOR EACH SOUND SOURCE OR

COMPARABLE SOUND SOURCE CATEGORY—Continued 

Source 

Level B 

harassment 

isopleths 

(m) 

Level B 

harassment 

zone 

(km2) 2

GeoMarine Sparkers .................................................................................................................................... 141 3 19.8 

AA = Applied Acoustics; CHIRP = compressed high-intensity radiated pulses; ET = edgetech; HF = high-frequency; J = joules; LF = low-frequency; MF = mid-frequency; PW = phocid pinnipeds in water; SBI = sub-bottom imager; SBP = sub-bottom profiler; TB = Teledyne benthos; 

UHD = ultra-high definition. 1The applicant calculated both Level A and B isopleths to comprehensively assess the potential impacts of the predicted source operations as 

required for this Application. However, as described previously throughout this document, Level A takes are not expected and thus, are not proposed to be authorized, therefore they are not discussed in this document. Please refer to Orsted’s application for more information. 2Based on maximum threshold distances provided in Table 4 of Orsted’s application and calculated for Level B root-mean-square sound pressure level thresholds. 

Marine Mammal Occurrence 

In this section, we provide the 

information about the presence, density, 

or group dynamics of marine mammals 

that will inform the take calculations. 

Habitat based density models 

produced by the Duke University 

Marine Geospatial Ecology Laboratory 

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

represent the best available information 

regarding marine mammal densities in 

the survey area. The density data 

presented by Roberts et al. (2016, 2017, 

2018, 2020) incorporate aerial and 

shipboard line-transect data from NMFS 

and other organizations and incorporate 

data from 8 physiographic and 16 

dynamic oceanographic and biological 

covariates, and control for the influence 

of sea state, group size, availability bias, 

and perception bias on the probability 

of making a sighting. These density 

models were originally developed for all 

cetacean taxa in the U.S. Atlantic 

(Roberts et al., 2016). In subsequent 

years, certain models have been updated 

based on additional data as well as 

certain methodological improvements. 

More information is available online at 

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., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021). 

The updated models incorporate 

sighting data, including sightings from 

NOAA’s Atlantic Marine Assessment 

Program for Protected Species 

(AMAPPS) surveys. 

For exposure analysis, density data 

from Roberts et al., (2016, 2017, 2018, 

2020, 2021) were mapped using a 

geographic information system (GIS). 

Density grid cells that included any 

portion of the proposed survey Area 

were selected for all survey months (see 

Figure 3 of Orsted’s application). For the 

survey area (i.e., Lease Areas OCS–A– 

0482, 5219), the densities for each 

species as reported by Roberts et al., 

2016, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021) were 

averaged by month; those values were 

then used to calculate the mean annual 

density for each species within the 

survey Area. Estimated mean monthly 

and annual densities (animals per km2) 

of all marine mammal species that may 

be taken by the proposed survey are 

shown in Table 7 of Orsted’s 

application. The mean annual density 

values used to estimate take numbers 

are shown in Table 5 below. 

Due to limited data availability and 

difficulties identifying individuals to 

species level during visual surveys, 

individual densities are not able to be 

provided for all species and they are 

instead grouped into ‘‘guilds’’ (Roberts 

et al., 2021). These guilds include pilot 

whales, and seals. Long- and shortfinned pilot whales are difficult to 

distinguish during shipboard surveys so 

individual habitat models were not able 

to be developed and thus, densities are 

assumed to apply to both species. 

Similarly, Roberts et al. (2018) produced 

density models for all seals but did not 

differentiate by seal species. Because the 

seasonality and habitat use by gray seals 

roughly overlaps with that of harbor 

seals in the survey areas, it was assumed 

that the mean annual density could refer 

to either of the represented species and 

was, therefore, divided equally between 

the two species. 

For bottlenose dolphin densities, 

Roberts et al. (2016, 2017, 2018, 2020, 

2021) does not differentiate by stock. As 

previously discussed, both the northern 

migratory coastal stock and the Western 

North Atlantic offshore stock are 

expected to occur in the proposed 

survey Area. To estimate densities for 

both stocks, the density blocks from 

within the survey Area were divided 

using the 20 m isobath (Hayes et al. 

2021). Therefore, any density blocks 

located between the coastline and the 

20 m isobath were attributed to the 

migratory coastal stock, and density 

blocks beyond this isobath were 

attributed to the offshore stock (see 

Table 5 for average annual densities 

calculated). 

TABLE 5—ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL DENSITIES (ANIMALS PER km2) OF POTENTIALLY AFFECTED MARINE MAMMALS

WITHIN THE PROPOSED SURVEY AREA BASED ON MONTHLY HABITAT DENSITY MODELS

[Roberts et al., 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021] 

Species 

Average annual 

density 

(km2) 

Fin whale ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.001 

Sei Whale ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 0 

Minke Whale .................................................................................................................................................................................. 0.0003 

Humpback whale ........................................................................................................................................................................... 0.0005 

North Atlantic Right Whale ............................................................................................................................................................ 0.0017 

Sperm Whale ................................................................................................................................................................................. 0.0001 

Atlantic White-Sided Dolphin ......................................................................................................................................................... 0.0015 

Atlantic Spotted Dolphin ................................................................................................................................................................ 0.0007 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15935 

TABLE 5—ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL DENSITIES (ANIMALS PER km2) OF POTENTIALLY AFFECTED MARINE MAMMALS

WITHIN THE PROPOSED SURVEY AREA BASED ON MONTHLY HABITAT DENSITY MODELS—Continued 

[Roberts et al., 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021] 

Species 

Average annual 

density 

(km2) 

Bottlenose Dolphin (Offshore) 1 ..................................................................................................................................................... 0.0569 

Bottlenose Dolphin (Migratory) 1 .................................................................................................................................................... 0.3972 

Long-finned Pilot Whale 2 .............................................................................................................................................................. 0.0004 

Short-Finned Pilot Whale 2 ............................................................................................................................................................ 0.0004 

Risso’s Dolphin .............................................................................................................................................................................. 0 

Common Dolphin ........................................................................................................................................................................... 0.0101 

Harbor Porpoise ............................................................................................................................................................................. 0.0085 

Gray Seal 3 4 .................................................................................................................................................................................. 0.0007 

Harbor Seal 3 4 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 0.0007 

1Bottlenose dolphin stocks were delineated based on the 20-m isobath as identified in NMFS 2021 Stock Assessment Report; all density 

blocks falling inshore of the 20-m depth contour were assumed to belong to the migratory coastal stock, and those beyond this depth were assumed to belong to the offshore stock. 2 Roberts (2021) only provides density estimates for ‘‘generic’’ pilot whales, so individual densities for each species are unavailable and densities were therefore assumed to apply to both species as both species have the same potential to occur in the survey area. 3Seal densities are not given by individual months or species, instead, seasons are divided as summer (June, July, August) and Winter (September–May) and applied to ‘‘generic’’ seals; as a result, reported seasonal densities for spring and fall are the same and are not provided for 

each species (Roberts, 2021) (See Table 7 in Orsted’s application). 4 Data used to establish the density estimates from Roberts (2021) are based on information for all seal species that may occur in the Western 

North Atlantic (e.g., harbor, gray, hooded, harp). However, only the harbor seal and gray seal are reasonably expected to occur in the survey 

area, and the densities were split evenly between both species. 

Take Calculation and Estimation 

Here, we describe how the 

information provided above is brought 

together to produce a quantitative take 

estimate. 

For most species, the potential Level 

B harassment exposures were estimated 

by multiplying the average annual 

density of each species (Table 5) within 

the Lease Area and ECR area by the 

largest daily harassment zone (19.8 km2) 

(Table 4). That product was then 

multiplied by the number of operating 

vessel days (350), and the product is 

rounded to the nearest whole number: 

Estimated take = species density × 

harassment zone × # of Survey Days 

For bottlenose dolphin densities, 

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

2020) does not differentiate by 

individual stock. The WNA offshore 

stock is assumed to be located in depths 

exceeding the 20 m isobath, while the 

WNA Northern migratory coastal stock 

is assumed to be found in shallower 

depths than the 20 m isobath north of 

Cape Hatteras (Reeves et al., 2002; 

Waring et al., 2016). The maximum 

potential Level B harassment takes 

calculated for each stock of bottlenose 

dolphins are based on the full survey 

duration occurring inside or outside the 

20 m isobath; however only a portion of 

the survey will occur in each area. At 

this time, Orsted does not know the 

exact number of survey days that may 

occur within each area, and could not 

differentiate the maximum number of 

calculated instances of take (2,752, 

calculated for the migratory stock) 

between the two stocks of bottlenose 

dolphins potentially present during the 

proposed survey activities. Orsted 

therefore requested, and NMFS 

proposes to authorize, 2,752 instances of 

take of bottlenose dolphins, regardless 

of stock. 

No takes were calculated for sei 

whale, sperm whale, or Risso’s dolphin; 

however, based on anticipated species 

distributions and data from previous 

surveys in the same general area it is 

possible that these species could be 

encountered. Therefore, Orsted 

requested, and NMFS proposes to 

authorize, takes of these species based 

on estimated group sizes (Kenney and 

Vigness-Raposa, 2010; Barkaszi and 

Kelly, 2019). For common dolphins, 

only 70 takes were calculated. However, 

draft Protected Species Observer (PSO) 

reports from the ongoing Garden State 

and Skipjack surveys near the proposed 

action area and completed surveys from 

2018 through 2020 indicate the 

potential for more common dolphins to 

be encountered in the area. Therefore, 

Orsted requested, and NMFS proposes 

to authorize, take of 400 common 

dolphins. Calculated exposure estimates 

and proposed take authorizations are 

shown in Table 6. 

TABLE 6—PROPOSED AUTHORIZED AMOUNT OF TAKING, BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT ONLY, BY SPECIES AND STOCK AND

PERCENT OF TAKE BY STOCK

Species Stock Abundance Level B 

takes a

Max percent 

of population 

Low-frequency cetaceans: 

Fin whales ................................................ Western North Atlantic ................................... 6,802 7 0.10

Sei whales ............................................... Nova Scotia .................................................... 6,292 0 (1) 0.02 

Minke whales ........................................... Canadian Eastern Coastal ............................. 21,968 2 0.01 

Humpback whales ................................... Gulf of Maine .................................................. 1,396 4 0.29 

North Atlantic right whale ........................ Western Atlantic ............................................. 368 11 2.99 

Mid-frequency cetaceans: 

Sperm whale ............................................ North Atlantic .................................................. 4,349 0 (3) 0.07 

Atlantic white-sided dolphin ..................... Western North Atlantic ................................... 93,233 10 (50) 0.05 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ........................... Western North Atlantic ................................... 39,921 5 (15) 0.04 

Common bottlenose dolphin b .................. WNA Offshore ................................................ 62,851 c 2,752 4.38 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15936 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

TABLE 6—PROPOSED AUTHORIZED AMOUNT OF TAKING, BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT ONLY, BY SPECIES AND STOCK AND

PERCENT OF TAKE BY STOCK—Continued 

Species Stock Abundance Level B 

takes a

Max percent 

of population 

WNA Northern Migratory Coastal .................. 6,639 ........................ 41.45 

Pilot whales .............................................. Short-finned .................................................... 28,924 3 (20) 0.07 

Long-finned .................................................... 39,215 3 (20) 0.05 

Risso’s dolphin ......................................... Western North Atlantic ................................... 35,215 0 (30) 0.09 

Common dolphin ...................................... Western North Atlantic ................................... 172,974 70 (400) 0.23 

High-frequency cetaceans: 

Harbor porpoise ....................................... Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy ........................... 95,543 82 0.09 

Pinnipeds: 

Gray seal ................................................. Western North Atlantic ................................... 27,300 4 0.01 

Harbor seal .............................................. Western North Atlantic ................................... 61,336 4 0.01

aParentheses denote proposed take authorization where different from Orsted’s calculated take estimates. Calculated takes were adjusted for 

the proposed take authorization in one of two ways: (1) For species for which calculated take was significantly less than the number of individuals reported in the available monitoring reports and any available draft data (e.g., ongoing surveys) in the area, the total number of individuals 

reported were used for take requests; (2) For species with no calculated takes, or takes were less than mean group size, requested takes were 

based the mean group sizes derived from the following references: 

• Sei whale: Kenney and Vigness-Raposa, 2010 

• Sperm whale: Barkaszi and Kelly, 2018 

• Atlantic white-sided dolphin: NMFS, 2021 

• Atlantic spotted dolphin: NMFS, 2021 

• Pilot whales: Kenney and Vigness-Raposa, 2010 b Risso’s dolphin: Barkaszi and Kelly, 2018; and Take estimate is based on the maximum number of calculated instances of take for either 

stock and is assumed to apply to all bottlenose dolphins potentially present in the survey area. Therefore takes could consist of individuals from 

either the Offshore or the Northern Migratory Coastal stock. Although unlikely, for purposes of calculating max percentage of population, we assume all takes could be allocated to either stock. cAssumes multiple repeated takes of same individuals from each stock. Please see the Small Numbers section for additional information. 

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. 

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and 

Their Habitat 

NMFS proposes the following 

mitigation measures be implemented 

during Orsted’s proposed marine site 

characterization surveys. Pursuant to 

section 7 of the ESA, Orsted would also 

be required to adhere to relevant Project 

Design Criteria (PDC) of the NMFS 

Greater Atlantic Regional Office 

(GARFO) programmatic consultation 

(specifically PDCs 4, 5, and 7) regarding 

geophysical surveys along the U.S. 

Atlantic coast (see NOAA GARFO, 2021; 

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/newengland-mid-atlantic/consultations/ 

section-7-take-reporting-programmaticsgreater-atlantic#offshore-wind-siteassessment-and-site-characterizationactivities-programmatic-consultation). 

Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones and 

Harassment Zones 

Marine mammal Exclusion Zones (EZ) 

would be established around the HRG 

survey equipment and monitored by 

NMFS-approved protected species 

observers (PSOs): 

• 500 m EZ for North Atlantic right 

whales (NARW) during use of acoustic 

sources <180 kHz (e.g., Sparkers, Nonparametric sub-bottom profilers); and 

• 100 m EZ for all other marine 

mammals, with certain exceptions 

specified below, during operation of 

impulsive acoustic sources (boomer 

and/or sparker). 

If a marine mammal is detected 

approaching or entering the EZs 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. 

Pre-Start Clearance 

Marine mammal clearance zones 

would be established around the HRG 

survey equipment and monitored by 

protected species observers (PSOs): 

• 500 m for all ESA-listed marine 

mammals; and 

• 100 m for all other marine 

mammals. 

Orsted would implement a 30-minute 

pre-start clearance period prior to the 

initiation of ramp-up of specified HRG 

equipment. During this period, 

clearance zones will be monitored by 

PSOs, using the appropriate visual 

technology. Ramp-up may not be 

initiated if any marine mammal(s) is 

within its respective clearance zone. If 

a marine mammal is observed within a 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15937 

clearance zone during the pre-star 

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 seals, and 30 minutes for all other 

species). 

Ramp-Up of Survey Equipment 

A ramp-up procedure, involving a 

gradual increase in source level output, 

is required at all times as part of the 

activation of the acoustic source when 

technically feasible. The ramp-up 

procedure would be used at the 

beginning of HRG survey activities in 

order to provide additional protection to 

marine mammals near the survey area 

by allowing them to vacate the area 

prior to the commencement of survey 

equipment operation at full power. 

Operators should ramp-up sources to 

half power for 5 minutes and then 

proceed to full power. 

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 30 minutes for all other species). 

Ramp-up may occur at times of poor 

visibility, including nighttime, if 

appropriate visual monitoring has 

occurred with no detections of marine 

mammals in the 30 minutes prior to 

beginning ramp-up. Acoustic source 

activation may only occur at night 

where operational planning cannot 

reasonably avoid such circumstances. 

Shutdown Procedures 

An immediate shutdown of the 

impulsive HRG survey equipment 

would be required if a marine mammal 

is sighted entering or is within its 

respective exclusion zone. The vessel 

operator must comply immediately with 

any call for shutdown by the Lead PSO. 

Any disagreement between the Lead 

PSO and vessel operatory should be 

discussed only after shutdown has 

occurred. Subsequent restart of the 

survey equipment can be initiated if the 

animal has been observed exiting its 

respective exclusion zone or until an 

additional time period has elapsed (i.e., 

15 minutes for small odontocetes and 30 

minutes for all other species). 

If species for which authorization has 

not been granted, or, a species for which 

authorization has been granted but the 

authorization number of takes have been 

met, approaches or is observed within 

the Level B harassment zone (Table 4), 

shutdown would occur. 

If the acoustic source is shut down for 

reasons other than mitigation (e.g., 

mechanical difficulty) for less than 30 

minutes, it may be activated again 

without ramp-up if SOs have 

maintained constant observation and no 

detections of any marine mammal have 

occurred within the respective 

exclusion zones. If the acoustic source 

is shut down for a period longer than 30 

minutes, then pre-clearance and rampup procedures will be initiated as 

described in the previous section. 

The shutdown requirement would be 

waived for pinnipeds and for small 

delphinids of the following genera: 

Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, 

and Tursiops. Specifically, if a 

delphinid from the specified genera or 

a pinniped is visually detected 

approaching the vessel (i.e., to bow ride) 

or towed equipment, shutdown is not 

required. Furthermore, if there is 

uncertainty regarding identification of a 

marine mammal species (i.e,. whether 

the observed marine mammal(s) belongs 

to one of the delphinid genera for which 

shutdown is waived), PSOs must use 

best professional judgement in making 

the decision to call for a shutdown. 

Additionally, shutdown is required if a 

delphinid or pinniped is detected in the 

exclusion zone and belongs to a genus 

other than those specified. 

Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and 

ramp-up procedures are not required 

during HRG survey operations using 

only non-impulsive sources (e.g., 

echosounders) other than nonparametric sub-bottom profilers (e.g., 

CHIRPs). 

Vessel Strike Avoidance 

Orsted must adhere to the following 

measures except in the case where 

compliance would create an imminent 

and serious threat to a person or vessel 

or to the extent that a vessel is restricted 

in its ability to maneuver and, because 

of the restriction, cannot comply: 

• Vessel operators and crews must 

maintain a vigilant watch for all 

protected species and slow down, stop 

their vessel, or alter course, as 

appropriate and regardless of vessel 

size, to avoid striking any protected 

species. A visual observer aboard the 

vessel must monitor a vessel strike 

avoidance zone based on the 

appropriate separation distance around 

the vessel (distances stated below). 

Visual observers monitoring the vessel 

strike avoidance zone may be thirdparty observers (i.e., PSOs) or crew 

members, but crew members 

responsible for these duties must be 

provided sufficient training to (1) 

distinguish protected species from other 

phenomena, and (2) broadly 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 mammal; 

• All survey vessels, regardless of 

size, must observe a 10-knot speed 

restriction in specified 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; 

• Members of the monitoring team 

will consult NMFS North Atlantic right 

whale reporting system and Whale 

Alert, as able, for the presence of North 

Atlantic right whales throughout survey 

operations, and for the establishment of 

a DMA. If NMFS should establish a 

DMA in the survey area during the 

survey, the vessels will abide by speed 

restrictions in the DMA; 

• All vessels greater than or equal to 

19.8 m in overall length operating from 

November 1 through April 30 will 

operate at speeds of 10 kn or less at all 

times; 

• All vessels must reduce their speed 

to 10 kn or less when mother/calf pairs, 

pods, or large assemblages of any 

species of cetaceans is observed near a 

vessel; 

• All vessels must maintain a 

minimum separation distance of 500 m 

from right whales and other ESA-listed 

large whales; 

• If a whale is observed but cannot be 

confirmed as a species other than a right 

whale or other ESA-listed large whale, 

the vessel operator must assume that it 

is a right whale and take appropriate 

action; 

• All vessels must maintain a 

minimum separation distance of 100 m 

from non-ESA listed whales; 

• All vessels must, to the maximum 

extent practicable, attempt to maintain a 

minimum separation distance of 50 m 

from all other marine mammals, with an 

understanding that at times this may not 

be possible (e.g., for animals that 

approach the vessel); 

• When marine mammals are sighted 

while a vessel is underway, the vessel 

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). If 

marine mammals are sighted within the 

relevant separation distance, the vessel 

must reduce speed and shift the engine 

to neutral, not engaging the engines 

until animals are clear of the area. This 

does not apply to any vessel towing gear 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15938 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

or any vessel that is navigationally 

constrained. 

Project-specific training will be 

conducted for all vessel crew prior to 

the start of a survey and during any 

changes in crew such that all survey 

personnel are fully aware and 

understand the mitigation, monitoring, 

and reporting requirements. Prior to 

implementation with vessel crews, the 

training program will be provided to 

NMFS for review and approval. 

Confirmation of the training and 

understanding of the requirements will 

be documented on a training course log 

sheet. Signing the log sheet will certify 

that the crew member understands and 

will comply with the necessary 

requirements throughout the survey 

activities. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s proposed measures, as well 

as other measures considered to by 

NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily 

determined that the proposed mitigation 

measures provide the means of effective 

the least practicable impact on marine 

mammal species or stocks and their 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance. 

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

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

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that will result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present in the proposed action area. 

Effective reporting is critical both to 

compliance as well as ensuring that the 

most value is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density); 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) Action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

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

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

of marine mammal species with the 

action; or (4) biological or behavioral 

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

feeding areas); 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors; 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks; 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat); and 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Proposed Monitoring Measures 

Visual monitoring will be performed 

by qualified, NMFS-approved PSOs, the 

resumes of whom will be provided to 

NMFS for review and approval prior to 

the start of survey activities. Orsted 

would employ independent, dedicated, 

trained PSOs, meaning that the PSOs 

must (1) be employed by a third-party 

observer provider, (2) have no tasks 

other than to conduct observational 

effort, collect data, and communicate 

with and instruct relevant vessel crew 

with regard to the presence of marine 

mammals and mitigation requirements 

(including brief alerts regarding 

maritime hazards), and (3) have 

successfully completed an approved 

PSO training course appropriate for 

their designated task. On a case-by-case 

basis, non-independent observers may 

be approved by NMFS for limited, 

specified duties in support of approved, 

independent PSOs on smaller vessels 

with limited crew operating in 

nearshore waters. 

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 Lead PSO on 

duty to communicate the presence of 

marine mammals as well as to 

communicate the action(s) that are 

necessary to ensure mitigation and 

monitoring requirements are 

implemented as appropriate. 

During all HRG survey operations 

(e.g., any day on which use of an HRG 

source is planned to occur), a minimum 

of one PSO must be on duty during 

daylight operations on each survey 

vessel, conducting visual observations 

at all times on all active survey vessels 

during daylight hours (i.e., from 30 

minutes prior to sunrise through 30 

minutes following sunset). Two PSOs 

will be on watch during nighttime 

operations. The PSO(s) would ensure 

360 degree visual coverage around the 

vessel from the most appropriate 

observation posts and would conduct 

visual observations using binoculars 

and/or night vision goggles and the 

naked eye while free from distractions 

and in a consistent, systematic, and 

diligent manner. PSOs may be on watch 

for a maximum of 4 consecutive hours 

followed by a break of at least 2 hours 

between watches and may conduct a 

maximum of 12 hours of observations 

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. 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, behaviors); and 

details of any observed marine mammal 

behavior that occurs (e.g., notes 

behavioral disturbances). For more 

detail on the proposed monitoring 

requirements, see Condition 5 of the 

draft IHA. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15939 

Proposed Reporting Measures 

Within 90 days after completion of 

survey activities or expiration of this 

IHA, whichever comes sooner, a draft 

comprehensive report will be provided 

to NMFS that fully documents the 

methods and monitoring protocols, 

summarizes the data recorded during 

monitoring, summarizes the number of 

marine mammals observed during 

survey activities (by species, when 

known), summarizes the mitigation 

actions taken during surveys including 

what type of mitigation and the species 

and number of animals that prompted 

the mitigation action, when known), 

and provides an interpretation of the 

results and effectiveness of all 

mitigation and monitoring. Any 

recommendations made by NMFS must 

be addressed in the final report prior to 

acceptance by NMFS. A final report 

must be submitted within 30 days 

following 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.Corcoran@noaa.gov. The report 

must contain at minimum, the 

following: 

• PSO names and affiliations; 

• Dates of departures and returns to 

port with port names; 

• Dates and times (Greenwich Mean 

Time) of survey effort and times 

corresponding with PSO effort; 

• Vessel location (latitude/longitude) 

when survey effort begins and ends; 

vessel location at beginning and end of 

visual PSO duty shifts; 

• Vessel heading and speed at 

beginning and end of visual PSO duty 

shifts and upon any line change; 

• Environmental conditions while on 

visual survey (at beginning and end of 

PSO shift and whenever conditions 

change significantly), including wind 

speed and direction, Beaufort sea state, 

Beaufort wind force, swell height, 

weather conditions, cloud cover, sun 

glare, and overall visibility to the 

horizon; 

• Factors that may be contributing to 

impaired observations during each PSO 

shift change or as needed as 

environmental conditions change (e.g., 

vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); 

and 

• Survey activity information, such as 

type of survey equipment in operation, 

acoustic source power output while in 

operation, and any other notes of 

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

ramp-up, shutdown, end of operations, 

etc.). 

If a marine mammal is sighted, the 

following information should be 

recorded: 

• Watch status (sighting made by PSO 

on/off effort, opportunistic, crew, 

alternate vessel/platform); 

• PSO who sighted the animal; 

• Time of sighting; 

• Vessel location at time of sighting; 

• Water depth; 

• Direction of vessel’s travel (compass 

direction); 

• Direction of animal’s travel relative 

to the vessel; 

• Pace of the animal; 

• Estimated distance to the animal 

and its heading relative to vessel at 

initial sighting; 

• Identification of the animal (e.g., 

genus/species, lowest possible 

taxonomic level, or unidentified); also 

note the composition of the group if 

there is a mix of species; 

• Estimated number of animals (high/ 

low/best); 

• Estimated number of animals by 

cohort (adults, yearlings, juveniles, 

calves, group composition, etc.); 

• Description (as many distinguishing 

features as possible of each individual 

seen, including length, shape, color, 

pattern, scars or markings, shape and 

size of dorsal fin, shape of head, and 

blow characteristics); 

• Detailed behavior observations (e.g., 

number of blows, number of surfaces, 

breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, 

traveling; as explicit and detailed as 

possible; note any observed changes in 

behavior); 

• Animal’s closest point of approach 

and/or closest distance from the center 

point of the acoustic source; 

• Platform activity at time of sighting 

(e.g., deploying, recovering, testing, data 

acquisition, other); and 

• Description of any actions 

implemented in response to the sighting 

(e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up, speed 

or course alteration, etc.) and time and 

location of the action. 

If a North Atlantic right whale is 

observed at any time by PSOs or 

personnel on any project vessels, during 

surveys or during vessel transit, Orsted 

must immediately report sighting 

information to the NMFS North Atlantic 

Right Whale Sighting Advisory System: 

(866) 755–6622. North Atlantic right 

whale sightings in any location may also 

be reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via 

channel 16. 

In the event that Orsted personnel 

discover an injured or dead marine 

mammal, Orsted will report the incident 

to the NMFS Office of Protected 

Resources OPR) and the NMFS New 

England/Mid-Atlantic Stranding 

Coordinator as soon as feasible. The 

report would include the following 

information: 

• Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the first discovery (and 

updated location information if known 

and applicable); 

• Species identification (if known) or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Condition of the animal(s) 

(including carcass condition if the 

animal is dead); 

• Observed behaviors of the 

animal(s), if alive; 

• If available, photographs or video 

footage of the animal(s); and 

• General circumstances under which 

the animal was discovered. 

In the unanticipated event of a ship 

strike of a marine mammal by any vessel 

involved in this activities covered by 

the IHA, Orsted would report the 

incident to NMFS OPR and the NMFS 

New/England/Mid-Atlantic Stranding 

Coordinator as soon as feasible. The 

report would include the following 

information: 

• Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the incident; 

• Species identification (if known) or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Vessel’s speed during and leading 

up to the incident; 

• Vessel’s course/heading and what 

operations were being conducted (if 

applicable); 

• Status of all sound sources in use; 

• Description of avoidance measures/ 

requirements that were in place at the 

time of the strike and what additional 

measures were taken, if any, to avoid 

strike; 

• Environmental conditions (e.g., 

wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea 

state, cloud cover, visibility) 

immediately preceding the strike; 

• Estimated size and length of animal 

that was struck; 

• Description of the behavior of the 

marine mammal immediately preceding 

and following the strike; 

• If available, description of the 

presence and behavior of any other 

marine mammals immediately 

preceding the strike; 

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

dead, injured but alive, injured and 

moving, blood or tissue observed in the 

water, status unknown, disappeared); 

and 

• To the extent practicable, 

photographs or video footage of the 

animal(s). 

Negligible Impact Analysis and 

Determination 

NMFS has defined negligible impact 

as an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15940 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

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 species listed in Table 6, 

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 of 

Specified Activities on Marine 

Mammals and their Habitat section, 

non-auditory physical effects and vessel 

strike are not expected to occur. NMFS 

expects that all potential takes would be 

in the form of 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, 2021). Even repeated Level 

B harassment of some small subset of an 

overall stock is unlikely to result in any 

significant realized decrease in viability 

for the affected individuals, and thus 

would not result in any adverse impact 

to the stock as a whole. As described 

above, Level A harassment is not 

expected to occur given the nature of 

the operations and the estimated small 

size of the Level A harassment zones. 

In addition to being temporary, the 

maximum expected harassment zone 

around the survey vessel is 141 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 long-term consequences 

for individual marine mammals or their 

populations. 

There are no rookeries, mating or 

calving grounds known to be 

biologically important to marine 

mammals within the proposed survey 

area and there are no feeding areas 

known to be biologically important to 

marine mammals within the proposed 

survey area. The proposed survey area 

lies significantly south (over 250 miles 

(402 km)) of where Biologically 

Important Areas are defined for fin and 

humpback whales. Therefore, they are 

not considered to be ‘‘nearby’’ the 

survey area and are not discussed 

further. 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 (NARW) population is of 

heightened concern and therefore, 

merits additional analysis. As noted 

previously, elevated NARW mortalities 

began in June 2017 and there is an 

active UME. Overall, preliminary 

findings support human interactions, 

specifically vessel strikes and 

entanglements, as the cause of death for 

the majority of right whales. The 

proposed survey area overlaps with a 

migratory corridor Biologically 

Important Area (BIA) for North Atlantic 

right whales (effective March–April; 

November–December) that extends from 

Massachusetts to Florida (LaBrecque et 

al., 2015). Off the coast of Delaware, this 

migratory BIA extends from the coast to 

beyond the shelf break. Due to the fact 

that the proposed survey activities 

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 

Orsted’s proposed activities. 

Additionally, only very limited take by 

Level B harassment of NARW has been 

requested and is being proposed for 

authorization by NMFS as HRG survey 

operations are required to maintain a 

500 EZ and shutdown if a NARW is 

sighted at or within the EZ. The 500 m 

shutdown zone for right whales is 

conservative, considering the Level B 

harassment isopleth for the most 

impactful sources (i.e., GeoMarine 

Sparkers, AA Dura-spark UHD Sparkers, 

AA Triple plate S-Boom) 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, nor 

authorized, due to the small PTS zones 

associated with HRG equipment types 

proposed for use. NMFS does not 

anticipate NARW takes that result from 

the proposed survey activities would 

impact annual rates of recruitment or 

survival. Thus, any takes that occur 

would not result in population level 

impacts. 

Other Marine Mammals With Active 

UMEs 

As noted previously, there are several 

active UMEs occurring in the vicinity of 

Garden State’s proposed survey area. 

Elevated humpback whale mortalities 

have occurred along the Atlantic coast 

from Maine through Florida since 

January 2016. Of the cases examined, 

approximately half had evidence of 

human interaction (ship strike or 

entanglement). The UME does not yet 

provide cause for concern regarding 

population-level impacts. Despite the 

UME, the relevant population of 

humpback whales (the West Indies 

breeding population, or DPS) remains 

stable at approximately 12,000 

individuals. 

Beginning in January 2017, elevated 

minke whale strandings have occurred 

along the Atlantic coast from Maine 

through South Carolina, with highest 

numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and 

New York. This event does not provide 

cause for concern regarding population 

level impacts, as the likely population 

abundance is greater than 20,000 

whales. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 15941 

The required mitigation measures are 

expected to reduce the number and/or 

severity of proposed takes for all species 

listed in Table 6, including those with 

active UMEs, to the level of least 

practicable adverse impact. In 

particular, they would provide animals 

the opportunity to move away from the 

sound source throughout the survey 

area before HRG survey equipment 

reaches full energy, thus preventing 

them from being exposed to sound 

levels that have the potential to cause 

injury (Level A harassment) or more 

severe Level B harassment. No Level A 

harassment is anticipated, even in the 

absence of mitigation measures, or 

proposed for authorization. 

NMFS expects that takes would be in 

the form of short-term Level B 

behavioral harassment by way of brief 

startling reactions and/or temporary 

vacating of the area, or decreased 

foraging (if such activity was 

occurring)—reactions that (at the scale 

and intensity anticipated here) are 

considered to be of low severity, with 

no lasting biological consequences. 

Since both the sources and marine 

mammals are mobile, animals would 

only be exposed briefly to a small 

ensonified area that might result in take. 

Additionally, the required mitigation 

measures would further reduce 

exposure to sound that could result in 

more severe behavioral harassment. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our preliminary determination that the 

impacts resulting from this activity are 

not expected to adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival: 

• No mortality or serious injury is 

anticipated or proposed for 

authorization; 

• No Level A harassment (PTS) is 

anticipated, even in the absence of 

mitigation measures, or proposed for 

authorization; 

• Foraging success is not likely to be 

significantly impacted as effects on 

species that serve as prey species for 

marine mammals from the survey are 

expected to be minimal; 

• The availability of alternate areas of 

similar habitat value for marine 

mammals to temporarily vacate the 

survey area during the planned survey 

to avoid exposure to sounds from the 

activity; 

• Take is anticipated to be of 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. In addition, 

mitigation measures require shutdown 

at 500 m (almost four times the size of 

the Level B harassment isopleth (141 

m), which minimizes the effects of the 

take on the species; and 

• The proposed mitigation measures, 

including visual monitoring and 

shutdowns, are expected to minimize 

potential impacts to marine mammals. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

proposed monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS preliminarily finds 

that the total marine mammal take from 

the proposed activity will have a 

negligible impact on all affected marine 

mammal species or stocks. 

Small Numbers 

As noted above, only small numbers 

of incidental take may be authorized 

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

the MMPA for specified activities other 

than military readiness activities. The 

MMPA does not define small numbers 

and so, in practice, where estimated 

numbers are available, NMFS compares 

the number of individuals taken to the 

most appropriate estimation of 

abundance of the relevant species or 

stock in our determination of whether 

an authorization is limited to small 

numbers of marine mammals. When the 

predicted number of individuals to be 

taken is fewer than one third of the 

species or stock abundance, the take is 

considered to be of small numbers. 

Additionally, other qualitative factors 

may be considered in the analysis, such 

as the temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. 

The amount of take NMFS proposes to 

authorize is below one third of the 

estimated stock abundance for all 

species (in fact, take of individuals is 

less than 5 percent of the abundance of 

the affected stocks for these species, see 

Table 6) except for the WNA northern 

migratory coastal stock of bottlenose 

dolphins. The figures presented in Table 

6 are likely conservative estimates as 

they assume all takes are of different 

individual animals which is likely not 

to be the case. Some individuals may 

return multiple times in a day, but PSOs 

would count them as separate takes if 

they cannot be individually identified. 

This is the particularly the case for 

bottlenose dolphins. 

As mentioned above, there are two 

bottlenose dolphin stocks that could 

occur in the survey area: The WNA 

Offshore and WNA northern migratory 

coastal stocks. Given the uncertainty 

regarding the number of days Orsted’s 

proposed survey may be within the 20 

m isobath, the proposed authorization of 

2,752 instances of take by Level B 

harassment is not allocated to a specific 

stock but rather could be of either stock. 

However, based on the stocks’ 

respective occurrence in the area and 

the consideration of various factors as 

described below, we have determined 

that the number of individuals taken 

would comprise of less than one-third of 

the best available population abundance 

estimate of either stock. Detailed 

descriptions of the stocks’ ranges have 

been provided in the Description of 

Marine Mammals in the Area of 

Specified Activities section. 

Both the northern migratory and 

offshore stocks have expansive ranges 

and are the only dolphin stocks thought 

to make broad-scale, seasonal 

migrations in the coastal waters of the 

North Atlantic. Given the large ranges 

associated with these two stocks, it is 

unlikely that large segments of either 

stock would consistently remain in the 

survey area. The majority of both stocks 

are likely to be found widely dispersed 

across their respective habitat ranges, 

and individuals within each stock 

migrate on a seasonal basis. 

The northern migratory stock spans 

from the shelf waters of Florida to Long 

Island, New York and experience 

spatiotemporal overlap with several 

other bottlenose dolphin stocks in the 

Western North Atlantic. The stock is 

best defined by its distribution during 

summer water months (July and 

August), when it overlaps with the 

fewest stocks, during which it occupies 

coastal waters from the shoreline to 

approximately the 20-m isobath 

between Assateague, Virginia and Long 

Island, New York (Hayes et al., 2021). 

However, during the winter months 

(e.g., January and February), the stock 

occupies coastal waters from 

approximately Cape Lookout, North 

Carolina to the North Carolina/Virginia 

border. A study of tagged individuals 

found that four dolphins off the coast of 

New Jersey in the late summer moved 

south to North Carolina and inhabited 

waters near and just south of Cape 

Hatteras during cold water months. 

These animals then returned to the 

coastal waters of New Jersey in the 

following warm weather months 

(Garrison et al., 2017). Additionally, 

during aerial and ship surveys off the 

New Jersey coast in 2008 and 2009, no 

sightings of common bottlenose 

dolphins were made during November 

through February, and bottlenose 

dolphins were sighted from early March 

to mid-October and were most abundant 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
15942 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2022 / Notices 

during May–August. Therefore, the 

stock is not expected to be present in its 

entirety year round at the proposed 

project location. 

Further, many of the dolphin 

observations in the Delaware Bay and 

South of Cape May, NJ are likely 

repeated sightings of the same 

individuals. A by Toth et al., (2010) 

conducted 73 boat-based photoidentification surveys in southern New 

Jersey near the Bay from 2003–2005 and 

found that of the 205 individuals 

identified, 44 percent were sighted 

multiple times within or among the 

years. Multiple sightings of the same 

individual would considerably reduce 

the number of individual animals that 

are taken by harassment. 

The offshore stock is distributed 

primarily along the outer continental 

shelf and continental slope in the 

Northwest Atlantic Ocean from Georges 

Band to the Florida Keys (Hayes et al., 

2021). There is suspected overlap of the 

two stocks south of Cape Hatteras, North 

Carolina to some degree. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our determination regarding the 

incidental take of small numbers of the 

affected stocks of a species or stock: 

• The take of marine mammal stocks 

comprises less than 5 percent of any 

stock abundance (with the exception of 

the northern migratory stock of 

bottlenose dolphins); 

• Potential bottlenose dolphin takes 

in the survey area are likely to be 

allocated between both distinct stocks; 

• Bottlenose dolphin stocks in the 

survey area have extensive ranges and it 

would be unlikely to find a high 

percentage of individuals from either 

stock concentrated in a relatively small 

area such as the proposed survey area; 

• Many of the takes would likely be 

repeats of the same animals, especially 

during summer months. 

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 

NMFS has determined that issuance of 

the proposed IHA 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). 

Proposed Authorization 

As a result of these preliminary 

determinations, NMFS proposes to issue 

an IHA to Orsted for conducting marine 

site characterization surveys off the 

coast of Delaware from May 10, 2022 

through May, 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/permit/ 

incidental-take-authorizations-undermarine-mammal-protection-act. 

Request for Public Comments 

We request comment on our analyses, 

the proposed authorization, and any 

other aspect of this notice of proposed 

IHA for the proposed marine site 

characterization survey. We also request 

at this time comment on the potential 

Renewal of this proposed IHA as 

described in the paragraph below. 

Please include with your comments any 

supporting data or literature citations to 

help inform decisions on the request for 

this IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA. 

On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may 

issue a one-time, one-year Renewal IHA 

following notice to the public providing 

an additional 15 days for public 

comments when (1) up to another year 

of identical or nearly identical activities 

as described in the Description of 

Proposed Activities section of this 

notice is planned or (2) the activities as 

described in the Description of 

Proposed Activities section of this 

notice would not be completed by the 

time the IHA expires and a Renewal 

would allow for completion of the 

activities beyond that described in the 

Dates and Duration section of this 

notice, provided all of the following 

conditions are met: 

• A request for renewal is received no 

later than 60 days prior to the needed 

Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing 

that the Renewal IHA expiration date 

cannot extend beyond one year from 

expiration of the initial IHA). 

• The request for renewal must 

include the following: 

(1) An explanation that the activities 

to be conducted under the requested 

Renewal IHA are identical to the 

activities analyzed under the initial 

IHA, are a subset of the activities, or 

include changes so minor (e.g., 

reduction in pile size) that the changes 

do not affect the previous analyses, 

mitigation and monitoring 

requirements, or take estimates (with 

the exception of reducing the type or 

amount of take); 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: March 16, 2022. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05935 Filed 3–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB890] 

Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 

Incidental to Construction and 

Operation of the Revolution Wind 

Offshore Wind Farm Offshore of Rhode 

Island 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES