19864 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

him at (503) 820–2412 for technical 

assistance. 

Council address: Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, 7700 NE 

Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, 

OR 97220. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

John DeVore, Staff Officer, Pacific 

Fishery Management Council; 

telephone: (503) 820–2413. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

purpose of the SSC Groundfish 

Subcommittee’s meeting is to review 

proposed changes to the Terms of 

Reference for the Groundfish Stock 

Assessment Reviews that will inform 

the process for conducting and 

reviewing groundfish assessments in 

2023 and 2024. Members of the Pacific 

Council’s groundfish advisory bodies 

are encouraged to attend. Proposed 

changes to the Terms of Reference 

(https://www.pcouncil.org/documents/ 

2022/02/e-8-attachment-4-draft-termsof-reference-for-the-groundfish-andcoastal-pelagic-species-stockassessment-process-for-2023-2024.pdf/) 

were provided to the Pacific Council at 

their March 2022 virtual meeting, which 

were adopted by the Pacific Council for 

public review. The Pacific Council is 

scheduled to adopt a final Terms of 

Reference at their June meeting in 

Vancouver, WA. 

No management actions will be 

decided by the SSC’s Groundfish 

Subcommittee. The SSC Groundfish 

Subcommittee members’ role will be 

development of recommendations and 

reports for consideration by the SSC and 

Pacific Council at the June meeting in 

Vancouver, WA. 

Although nonemergency issues not 

contained in the meeting agendas may 

be discussed, those issues may not be 

the subject of formal action during this 

meeting. Action will be restricted to 

those issues specifically listed in this 

notice and any issues arising after 

publication of this notice that require 

emergency action under Section 305(c) 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act, 

provided the public has been notified of 

the intent of the SSC Groundfish 

Subcommittee to take final action to 

address the emergency. 

Special Accommodations 

This meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities. Requests for 

sign language interpretation or other 

auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. 

Kris Kleinschmidt (kris.kleinschmidt@

noaa.gov; (503) 820–2412) at least 10 

days prior to the meeting date. 

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

Dated: April 1, 2022. 

Rey Israel Marquez, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07302 Filed 4–5–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB855] 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Marine Site 

Characterization Surveys Off of 

Coastal Virginia 

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 Virginia Electric and Power 

Company doing business as Dominion 

Energy Virginia (Dominion Energy) for 

authorization to take marine mammals 

incidental to marine site 

characterization surveys off of Virginia 

in support of the Coastal Virginia 

Offshore Wind Commercial (CVOW 

Commercial) Project. Pursuant to the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments 

on its proposal to issue an incidental 

harassment authorization (IHA) to 

incidentally take marine mammals 

during the specified activities. NMFS is 

also requesting comments on a possible 

one-time, one-year renewal that could 

be issued under certain circumstances 

and if all requirements are met, as 

described in Request for Public 

Comments at the end of this notice. 

NMFS will consider public comments 

prior to making any final decision on 

the issuance of the requested MMPA 

authorizations and agency responses 

will be summarized in the final notice 

of our decision. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than May 6, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 

Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service and should be 

submitted via email to ITP.Davis@

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: 

Leah Davis, 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 

issued or, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, a notice of a proposed 

incidental take authorization may be 

provided to the public for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s) and will not have 

an unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

taking for subsistence uses (where 

relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe 

the permissible methods of taking and 

other ‘‘means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact’’ on the 

affected species or stocks and their 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance, and on the 

availability of the species or stocks for 

taking for certain subsistence uses 

(referred to in shorthand as 

‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19865 

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 September 30, 2021, NMFS 

received a request from Dominion 

Energy for an IHA to take marine 

mammals incidental to marine site 

characterization surveys off of Virginia. 

Dominion Energy submitted revised 

applications on December 3, 2021, 

January 21, 2022 and March 2, 2022 in 

response to comments from NMFS. The 

application was deemed adequate and 

complete on March 8, 2022. Dominion 

Energy’s request is for take of a small 

number of 16 species of marine 

mammals by Level B harassment only. 

Neither Dominion Energy nor NMFS 

expects serious injury or mortality to 

result from this activity and, therefore, 

an IHA is appropriate. 

NMFS previously issued IHAs to 

Dominion Energy for similar and related 

work in the same general area (85 FR 

55415; September 8, 2020 (modified on 

December 17, 2020 (85 FR 81879) and 

April 22, 2021 (86 FR 21298)), 85 FR 

30930; May 21, 2020, and 83 FR 39062; 

August 8, 2018). Dominion Energy 

complied with all the requirements (e.g., 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of 

the previous IHA and information 

regarding their monitoring results may 

be found in the Estimated Take section. 

Description of Proposed Activity 

Overview 

As part of its overall marine site 

characterization survey operations, 

Dominion Energy proposes to conduct 

high-resolution geophysical (HRG) 

surveys in the Lease Area and along the 

Offshore Export Cable Corridor (OECC) 

off of Virginia. The purpose of the 

surveys is to locate and identify 

potential unexploded ordnance (UXO) 

in support of the Dominion Energy 

Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind 

Commercial Project. Underwater sound 

resulting from Dominion Energy’s 

proposed site characterization survey 

activities, specifically HRG surveys, has 

the potential to result in incidental take 

of marine mammals in the form of 

behavioral harassment. 

Dates and Duration 

Dominion Energy initially anticipated 

that HRG survey activities would occur 

on approximately 122 vessel days (104 

in the Lease Area and 18 in the project’s 

OECC), with an assumed daily survey 

distance of 178 km/day. However, in 

discussions with NMFS, Dominion 

Energy later updated the estimated 

vessel distance to 58 km/day to better 

reflect actual daily vessel distances 

achieved during previous surveys. 

Accordingly, survey activities are now 

estimated to occur on up to 244 vessel 

days (208 days in the Lease Area and 36 

days in the project’s OECC). Each day 

that a survey vessel is operating counts 

as a single survey day, e.g., two survey 

vessels operating on the same day count 

as two survey days. This schedule is 

based on assumed 24-hour operations. 

Dominion Energy proposes to begin 

survey activities upon receipt of an IHA, 

and continue for up to one year (though 

the actual duration will likely be 

shorter, particularly given the use of 

multiple vessels). The IHA would be 

effective for one year from the date of 

issuance. 

Specific Geographic Region 

Dominion Energy’s HRG survey 

activities would occur in the Northwest 

Atlantic Ocean within federal and state 

waters. The surveys would occur in 

Lease Area OCS–A 0483, which is a 

portion of the Mid-Atlantic Wind 

Energy Area, and along an export cable 

corridor within the lower Chesapeake 

Bay as shown in Figure 1. The Lease 

Area is approximately 498 km2 (122,799 

acres). 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19866 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

Detailed Description of Specific Activity 

Dominion Energy proposes to conduct 

HRG survey operations including single 

and multibeam depth sounding, seafloor 

imaging, and medium penetration subbottom profiling. The HRG surveys may 

be conducted using any or all of the 

following equipment types: Side scan 

sonar, single and multibeam depth 

sounders, magnetometers, boomers, or 

sparkers. Dominion Energy anticipates 

that HRG survey activities would 

include two vessels operating 

concurrently (though up to four vessels 

may operate concurrently). Survey 

vessels would operate at least several 

kilometers apart, typically operating 

with even greater distances of 

separation between two vessels. 

Dominion Energy assumes that HRG 

survey activities would be conducted 

continuously 24 hours per day, with an 

assumed daily survey distance of 58 km 

per day. This assumption is based on 

Dominion’s experience through past 

survey effort. 

Acoustic sources planned for use 

during HRG survey activities proposed 

by Dominion Energy include the 

following: 

• Medium penetration sub-bottom 

profiler (boomers and sparkers) to map 

deeper subsurface stratigraphy as 

needed. A boomer is a broadband sound 

source operating in the 3.5 Hz to 10 kHz 

frequency range. Sparkers create 

acoustic pulses from 50 Hz to 4 kHz 

omnidirectionally from the source that 

can penetrate several hundred meters 

into the seafloor. These sources are 

typically towed behind the vessel; 

Operation of the following survey 

equipment types is not reasonably 

expected to present risk of marine 

mammal take, and will not be discussed 

further beyond the brief summaries 

provided below: 

• Multibeam echosounders to 

determine water depths and general 

bottom topography (estimated to range 

from approximately minimum vessel 

draft to 38 m deep). 

• Single beam echosounders to 

determine water depths and general 

bottom topography (estimated to range 

from approximately minimum vessel 

draft to 38 m deep). 

• Sidescan sonar (SSS) is used for 

seabed sediment classification purposes 

and to identify natural and man-made 

acoustic targets resting on the bottom as 

well as any anomalous features. 

Table 1 identifies the representative 

survey equipment with the expected 

potential to result in exposure of marine 

mammals and 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 

on the final survey design, vessel 

availability, and survey contractor 

selection. 

HRG surveys are expected to use 

several equipment types concurrently in 

order to collect multiple aspects of 

geophysical data along one transect. 

Selection of equipment combinations is 

based on specific survey objectives. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1EN06AP22.032</GPH>

Figure 1-- Proposed Survey Area 
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19867 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIVE HRG EQUIPMENT

System Representative equipment a

Operating 

frequency 

(kHz) 

RMS source 

level 

(dB re 1 μPA m) 

Peak source 

level 

(dB re 1 μPA m) 

Primary beam width 

(degrees) 

Pulse duration 

(millisecond) 

Multibeam Echosounder ................ R2Sonics 2026 ............................. 170–450 b 191 b 221 0.45 × 0.45–1 × 1 .... 0.015–1.115 

Medium Penetration Seismic ......... Geo Marine Dual 400 Sparker 

800J.

0.3–1.2 c 203 c 212 Omnidirectional ....... 0.5–0.8 

Applied Acoustics S-Boom (Triple 

Plate Boomer 1000J).

0.5–3.5 d 203 d 213 60 e .......................... 10 

a Make/model of equipment may vary depending on availability. Will be finalized as part of the survey preparations and contract negotiations with the survey contractor. b Reported by manufacturer. 

cBased on data from Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) for the Applied Acoustics Dura Spark. 

dBased on data from Crocker and Frantantonio (2016) for the Applied Acoustics S-Boom with CS. 

eThe beam width was based on data from Crocker and Frantantonio (2016) for the Applied Acoustics S-Boom. 

dB re 1 μPa m—decibels referenced to 1 microPascal at 1 meter. 

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. 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 

draft 2021 SARs (available online at: 

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

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

draft-marine-mammal-stockassessment-reports). 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS LIKELY TO OCCUR IN THE PROJECT AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY DOMINION ENERGY’S

PROPOSED 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 North 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 6,802 (0.24, 5,573, 2016) 11 1.8 

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

Minke whale ........................ Balaenoptera acutorostrata ...... Canadian East Coast ................ -, -, N 21,968 (0.31, 17,002, 

2016).

170 10.6 

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

Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Family Physeteridae: 

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

Family Delphinidae: 

Atlantic white-sided dolphin Lagenorhynchus acutus ............ Western North Atlantic .............. -, -, N 93,233 (0.71, 54,443, 

2016).

544 27 

Bottlenose dolphin .............. Tursiops spp. ............................ Western North Atlantic Offshore -, -, N 62,851b (0.23, 51,914b, 

2016).

519 28 

Southern Migratory Coastal ...... -, -, Y 3,751 (0.6, 2,353, 2016) 23 0–18.3 

Short-finned pilot whale ...... Globicephala macrorhynchus ... Western North Atlantic .............. -, -, Y 28,924 (0.24, 23,637, 

2016).

236 136 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 
19868 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS LIKELY TO OCCUR IN THE PROJECT AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY DOMINION ENERGY’S

PROPOSED 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

Long-finned pilot whale ...... Globicephala melas .................. Western North Atlantic .............. -, -, N 39,215 (0.3, 30,627, 

2016).

306 29 

Risso’s dolphin ................... Grampus griseus ...................... Western North Atlantic .............. -, -, N 35,215 (0.19, 30,051, 

2016).

301 34 

Common dolphin ................ Delphinus delphis ..................... Western North Atlantic .............. -, -, N 172,974 (0.21, 145,216, 

2016).

1,452 390 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ...... Stenella frontalis ....................... Western North Atlantic .............. -, -, N 39,921 (0.27, 32,032, 

2016).

320 0 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises): 

Harbor porpoise .................. Phocoena phocoena ................. Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy ...... -, -, N 95,543 (0.31, 74,034, 

2016).

851 164 

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia 

Family Phocidae (earless seals): 

Gray seal4 .......................... Halichoerus grypus ................... Western North Atlantic .............. -, -, N 27,300 (0.22, 22,785, 

2016).

1,389 4,453 

Harbor seal ......................... Phoca vitulina ........................... Western North Atlantic .............. -, -, N 61,336 (0.08, 57,637, 

2018).

1,729 339 

1ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). 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-assessments. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. 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). 4 NMFS’ stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in Canada) is approximately 451,431. The annual 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. All species that 

could potentially occur in the proposed 

survey areas are included in Table 3–1 

of the IHA application. However, the 

temporal and/or spatial occurrence of 

several species listed in Table 3–1 of the 

IHA application is such that take of 

these species is not expected to occur. 

Blue whales rarely occur in the project 

area (U.S. Navy Marine Species 

Monitoring, 2018a). Clymene dolphin, 

dwarf sperm whale, false killer whale, 

Fraser’s dolphin, killer whale, 

pantropical spotted dolphin, melonheaded whale, pygmy killer whale, 

pygmy sperm whale, rough-toothed 

dolphin, spinner dolphin, striped 

dolphin, white beaked dolphin, 

Blainville’s beaked whale, Cuvier’s 

beaked whale, Sowerby’s beaked whale, 

and True’s beaked whale are generally 

found in more pelagic shelf-break 

waters, have a preference for northern 

latitudes, or are so rarely sighted that 

their presence in the Survey Area is 

unlikely. While a harp seal was recently 

observed at the Chesapeake Tunnel Joint 

Venture Parallel Thimble Shoal Tunnel 

Project in Virginia Beach, Virginia, such 

an occurrence is extremely uncommon, 

as they, and hooded seals typically 

occur far north of the project area. 

In addition, the Florida manatee 

(Trichechus manatus; a sub-species of 

the West Indian manatee) has been 

previously documented as an occasional 

visitor to the Northeast region during 

summer months (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS) 2019). However, 

manatees are managed by the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and are 

not considered further in this document. 

For the majority of species potentially 

present in the specific geographic 

region, NMFS has designated only a 

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

North Atlantic’’) for management 

purposes. This includes the ‘‘Canadian 

east coast’’ stock of minke whales, 

which includes all minke whales found 

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

for management purposes. For 

humpback whales, NMFS defines stocks 

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

Gulf of Maine. However, references to 

humpback whales in this document 

refer to any individuals of the species 

that are found in the specific geographic 

region. Additional information on these 

animals can be found in Sections 3 and 

4 of Dominion Energy’s IHA 

application, the draft 2021 SARs 

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

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

marine-mammal-stock-assessments), 

and NMFS’ website. 

Below is a description of the species 

that have the highest likelihood of 

occurring in the survey area and are 

thus expected to potentially be taken by 

the proposed activities as well as further 

detail informing the baseline for select 

species (i.e., information regarding 

current Unusual Mortality Events 

(UMEs) and important habitat areas). 

North Atlantic Right Whale 

The North Atlantic right whale ranges 

from calving grounds in the 

southeastern United States to feeding 

grounds in New England waters and 

into Canadian waters (Hayes et al. 

2018). Surveys have demonstrated the 

existence of seven areas where North 

Atlantic right whales congregate 

seasonally, including north and east of 

the proposed survey area in Georges 

Bank, off Cape Cod, and in 

Massachusetts Bay (Hayes et al. 2018). 

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

right whales are generally thought to 

depart from the feeding grounds in the 

North Atlantic and move south to their 

calving grounds off Georgia and Florida. 

However, recent research indicates our 

understanding of their movement 

patterns remains incomplete (Davis et 

al. 2017). A review of passive acoustic 

monitoring (PAM) data from 2004 to 

2014 throughout the western North 

Atlantic demonstrated nearly 

continuous year-round right whale 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19869 

presence across their entire habitat 

range (for at least some individuals), 

including in locations previously 

thought of as migratory corridors, 

suggesting that not all of the population 

undergoes a consistent annual migration 

(Davis et al. 2017). However, given that 

Dominion Energy’s surveys would occur 

off of Virginia, any right whales in the 

vicinity of the survey areas are expected 

to be transient, most likely migrating 

through the area. 

The western North Atlantic 

population demonstrated overall growth 

of 2.8 percent per year between 1990 to 

2010, despite a decline in 1993 and no 

growth between 1997 and 2000 (Pace et 

al. 2017). However, since 2010 the 

population has been in decline, with a 

99.99 percent probability of a decline of 

just under 1 percent per year (Pace et al. 

2017). Between 1990 and 2015, calving 

rates varied substantially, with low 

calving rates coinciding with all three 

periods of decline or no growth (Pace et 

al. 2017). On average, North Atlantic 

right whale calving rates are estimated 

to be roughly half that of southern right 

whales (Eubalaena australis; Pace et al. 

2017), which are increasing in 

abundance (NMFS, 2015). In 2018, no 

new North Atlantic right whale calves 

were documented in their calving 

grounds; this represented the first time 

since annual NOAA aerial surveys 

began in 1989 that no new right whale 

calves were observed. Eighteen right 

whale calves were documented in 2021. 

As of March 13, 2022 and the writing of 

this proposed notice, 15 North Atlantic 

right whale calves have documented to 

have been born during this calving 

season. Presently, the best available 

population estimate for North Atlantic 

right whales is 386 per the 2021 draft 

Atlantic SARs (https://www.fisheries.

noaa.gov/national/marine-mammalprotection/marine-mammal-stockassessments). 

The proposed survey area overlaps 

part of the migratory corridor 

Biologically Important Area (BIA) for 

North Atlantic right whales (effective 

March–April and November–December) 

that extends from Massachusetts to 

Florida (LeBrecque et al. 2015). Off the 

coast of Virginia, 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. The proposed survey 

area is in the vicinity of the SMA off of 

the Chesapeake Bay that is active from 

November 1 through April 30 of each 

year. Within SMAs, the regulations 

require a mandatory vessel speed (less 

than 10 kn) for all vessels greater than 

65 ft. 

Elevated North Atlantic right whale 

mortalities have occurred since June 7, 

2017, along the U.S. and Canadian 

coast. This event has been declared an 

Unusual Mortality Event (UME), with 

human interactions, including 

entanglement in fixed fishing gear and 

vessel strikes, implicated in at least 15 

of the mortalities thus far. As of March 

13, 2022, a total of 34 confirmed dead 

stranded whales (21 in Canada; 13 in 

the United States) have been 

documented. The cumulative total 

number of animals in the North Atlantic 

right whale UME has been updated to 

49 individuals to include both the 

confirmed mortalities (dead stranded or 

floaters; n=34) and seriously injured 

free-swimming whales (n=15) to better 

reflect the confirmed number of whales 

likely removed from the population 

during the UME and more accurately 

reflect the population impacts. More 

information is available online at: 

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

national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022- 

north-atlantic-right-whale-unusualmortality-event. 

Information on right whale Slow 

Zones can be found on NMFS’ website 

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

national/endangered-speciesconservation/reducing-vessel-strikesnorth-atlantic-right-whales). 

Fin Whale 

Fin whales are common in waters of 

the U.S. Atlantic Exclusive Economic 

Zone (EEZ), principally from Cape 

Hatteras northward (Waring et al. 2016). 

Fin whales are present in the MidAtlantic region during all four seasons, 

although sighting data indicate that they 

are more prevalent during winter, 

spring, and summer (Hayes et al. 2019). 

While fall is the season of lowest overall 

abundance off Virginia, they do not 

depart the area entirely. Fin whales, 

much like humpback whales, seem to 

exhibit habitat fidelity to feeding areas 

(Kenney and Vigness-Raposa 2010; 

Hayes et al. 2019). While fin whales 

typically feed in the Gulf of Maine and 

the waters surrounding New England, 

mating and calving (and general 

wintering) areas are largely unknown 

(Hayes et al. 2019). 

Humpback Whale 

Humpback whales are found 

worldwide in all oceans. Humpback 

whales were listed as endangered under 

the Endangered Species Conservation 

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

ESA replaced the ESCA, and 

humpbacks continued to be listed as 

endangered. On September 8, 2016, 

NMFS divided the species into 14 

distinct population segments (DPS), 

removed the current species-level 

listing, and in its place listed four DPSs 

as endangered and one DPS as 

threatened (81 FR 62259; September 8, 

2016). The remaining nine DPSs were 

not listed. The West Indies DPS, which 

is not listed under the ESA, is the only 

DPS of humpback whale that is 

expected to occur in the survey area, 

though these individuals are not 

necessarily from the Gulf of Maine 

feeding population managed as a stock 

by NMFS. Barco et al. (2002) estimated 

that, based on photo-identification, only 

39 percent of individual humpback 

whales observed along the mid- and 

south Atlantic U.S. coast are from the 

Gulf of Maine stock. Bettridge et al. 

(2015) estimated the size of this West 

Indies DPS population at 12,312 (95 

percent CI 8,688–15,954) whales in 

2004–05, which is consistent with 

previous population estimates of 

approximately 10,000–11,000 whales 

(Stevick et al. 2003; Smith et al. 1999) 

and the increasing trend for the West 

Indies DPS (Bettridge et al. 2015). 

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). 

Three previous UMEs involving 

humpback whales have occurred since 

2000, in 2003, 2005, and 2006. Since 

January 2016, elevated humpback whale 

mortalities have occurred along the 

Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida. 

Partial or full necropsy examinations 

have been conducted on approximately 

half of the 157 known cases (as of March 

13, 2022). Of the whales examined, 

about 50 percent had evidence of 

human interaction, either ship strike or 

entanglement. While a portion of the 

whales have shown evidence of premortem vessel strike, this finding is not 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19870 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

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. 

Minke Whale 

Minke whales can be found in 

temperate, tropical, and high-latitude 

waters. The Canadian East Coast stock 

can be found in the area from the 

western half of the Davis Strait (45° W) 

to the Gulf of Mexico (Waring et al. 

2016). This species generally occupies 

waters less than 100 m deep on the 

continental shelf. Little is known about 

minke whales’ specific movements 

through the mid-Atlantic region; 

however, there appears to be a strong 

seasonal component to minke whale 

distribution, with acoustic detections 

indicating that they migrate south in 

mid-October to early November, and 

return from wintering grounds starting 

in March through early April (Risch et 

al. 2014). Northward migration appears 

to track the warmer waters of the Gulf 

Stream along the continental shelf, 

while southward migration is made 

farther offshore (Risch et al. 2014). 

Since January 2017, elevated minke 

whale mortalities have occurred along 

the Atlantic coast from Maine through 

South Carolina, with a total of 122 

strandings at the time of publication of 

this notice. There have been eight 

recorded strandings in Virginia and two 

in North Carolina. This event has been 

declared a UME. Full or partial 

necropsy examinations were conducted 

on more than 60 percent of the whales. 

Preliminary findings in several of the 

whales have shown evidence of human 

interactions or infectious disease, but 

these findings are not consistent across 

all of the whales examined, so more 

research is needed. More information is 

available at: https://www.fisheries.

noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/ 

2017-2022-minke-whale-unusualmortality-event-along-atlantic-coast. 

Sei Whale 

The Nova Scotia stock of sei whales 

occurs in deeper waters of the 

continental shelf edge waters of the 

eastern United States and northeastward 

to south of Newfoundland. The 

southern portion of the stock’s range 

during spring and summer includes the 

Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank. Spring 

is the period of greatest abundance in 

U.S. waters, with sightings concentrated 

along the eastern margin of Georges 

Bank and into the Northeast Channel 

area, and along the southwestern edge of 

Georges Bank in the area of 

Hydrographer Canyon (Waring et al. 

2015). In the waters off of Virginia, sei 

whales are uncommon; however, a 2018 

aerial survey conducted by the U.S. 

Navy recorded sei whales in the area 

surrounding Norfolk Canyon (U.S. Navy 

n.d.). 

Atlantic White-Sided Dolphin 

Atlantic white-sided dolphins occur 

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 (Waring et al. 2017). 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 occur from 

Georges Bank to Jeffreys Ledge (off New 

Hampshire), with even lower numbers 

south of Georges Bank, as documented 

by a few strandings collected on beaches 

of Virginia to South Carolina. From June 

through September, large numbers of 

white-sided dolphins occur 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. 

Infrequent Virginia and North Carolina 

observations appear to represent the 

southern extent of the species’ range 

during the winter months (Hayes et al. 

2019). 

Bottlenose Dolphin 

The population of bottlenose dolphins 

in the North Atlantic consists of a 

complex mosaic of dolphin stocks 

(Waring et al. 2016). There are two 

stocks that may be found in the vicinity 

of the Survey Area—the western North 

Atlantic Offshore Stock (WNAOS) and 

the Southern Coastal Migratory Stock 

(SCMS). There are two distinct 

bottlenose dolphin morphotypes: 

Coastal and offshore. The coastal 

morphotype resides in waters typically 

less than 20 m (65.6 ft) deep, along the 

inner continental shelf (within 7.5 km 

[4.6 miles] of shore; Hayes et al. 2018). 

This coastal population was further 

subdivided into seven stocks based 

largely upon spatial distribution 

(Waring et al. 2016). The SCMS is the 

coastal stock found south of Assateague, 

Virginia, to northern Florida and is the 

stock most likely to be encountered in 

the vicinity of the export cable portion 

of the Survey Area. Seasonally, SCMS 

movements indicate they are mostly 

found in southern North Carolina (Cape 

Lookout) from October to December; 

they continue to move farther south 

from January to March to as far south as 

northern Florida and move back north 

to coastal North Carolina from April to 

June. SCMS bottlenose dolphins occupy 

waters north of Cape Lookout, North 

Carolina, to as far north as Chesapeake 

Bay from July to August. An observed 

shift in spatial distribution during a 

summer 2004 survey indicated that the 

northern boundary for the SCMS may 

vary from year to year (Hayes et al. 

2018). The offshore population consists 

of one stock (WNAOS) in the western 

North Atlantic Ocean distributed 

primarily along the outer continental 

shelf and continental slope, and 

distributed widely during the spring 

and summer from Georges Bank to the 

Florida Keys with late summer and fall 

incursions as far north the Gulf of Maine 

depending on water temperatures 

(Kenney 1990; Hayes et al. 2017). The 

WNAOS generally occurs seaward of 34 

km (21 miles) and in deeper waters. 

A combined genetic and logistic 

regression analysis that incorporated 

depth, latitude, and distance from shore 

was used to model the probability that 

a particular common bottlenose dolphin 

group seen in coastal waters was of the 

coastal versus offshore morphotype 

(Garrison et al. 2017a). North of Cape 

Hatteras during summer months, there 

is strong separation between the coastal 

and offshore morphotypes (Kenney 

1990; Garrison et al. 2017a), and the 

coastal morphotype is nearly completely 

absent in waters >20 m depth. South of 

Cape Hatteras, the regression analysis 

indicated that the coastal morphotype is 

most common in waters <20 m deep, 

but occurs at lower densities over the 

continental shelf, in waters >20 m deep, 

where it overlaps to some degree with 

the offshore morphotype. For the 

purposes of defining stock boundaries, 

estimating abundance, and identifying 

bycaught samples, the offshore 

boundary of the SMCS is defined as the 

20-m isobath north of Cape Hatteras and 

the 200-m isobath south of Cape 

Hatteras. In summary, this stock is best 

delimited in warm water months, when 

it overlaps least with other stocks, as 

common bottlenose dolphins of the 

coastal morphotype that occupy coastal 

waters from the shoreline to 200 m 

depth from Cape Lookout to Cape 

Hatteras, North Carolina, and coastal 

waters 0–20 m in depth from Cape 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19871 

Hatteras to Assateague, Virginia, 

including Chesapeake Bay (Hayes et al. 

2018). 

Pilot Whale 

Long-finned and short-finned pilot 

whales occur in the Western Atlantic. 

Both species of pilot whale are more 

generally found along the edge of the 

continental shelf at depths of 100 to 

1,000 m (330 to 3,300 ft), choosing areas 

of high relief or submerged banks. Longfinned pilot whales in the western 

North Atlantic are more pelagic, 

occurring in especially high densities in 

winter and early spring over the 

continental slope, then moving inshore 

and onto the shelf in summer and 

autumn following squid and mackerel 

populations (Reeves et al. 2002). They 

frequently travel into the central and 

northern Georges Bank, Great South 

Channel, and northward into the Gulf of 

Maine areas during the late spring 

through late fall (Hayes et al. 2019). 

Short-finned pilot whales prefer 

tropical, subtropical, and warm 

temperate waters (Jefferson et al. 2015). 

The short-finned pilot whale mostly 

ranges from New Jersey south through 

Florida, the northern Gulf of Mexico, 

and the Caribbean without any seasonal 

movements or concentrations (Hayes et 

al. 2019). The latitudinal ranges of the 

two species remain uncertain, although 

south of Cape Hatteras, most pilot whale 

sightings are expected to be short-finned 

pilot whales, while north of ∼42° N most 

pilot whales are expected to be longfinned pilot whales (Hayes et al. 2019). 

Risso’s Dolphin 

Risso’s dolphins are distributed 

worldwide in tropical and temperate 

seas and in the Northwest Atlantic 

occur from Florida to eastern 

Newfoundland. The species has an 

apparent preference for steep, shelf-edge 

habitats between about 400 to 1,000 m 

(1,312 to 3,280 ft) deep (Baird 2009). 

Risso’s dolphin of the western North 

Atlantic stock prefers temperate to 

tropical waters typically from 15 to 20 

°C (59 to 68 °F) and are rarely found in 

waters below 10 °C (50 °F). Off the 

northeastern U.S. coast, Risso’s 

dolphins are distributed along the 

continental shelf edge from Cape 

Hatteras northward to Georges Bank 

during spring, summer, and autumn. In 

winter, the range is in the mid-Atlantic 

Bight and extends outward into oceanic 

waters. In general, the population 

occupies the mid-Atlantic continental 

shelf edge year round (Hayes et al. 

2019). 

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 200 m and 

2,000 m isobaths and over prominent 

underwater topography and east to the 

mid-Atlantic Ridge. Common dolphins 

have been noted to be associated with 

Gulf Stream features (CETAP 1982; 

Selzer and Payne 1988; Waring et al. 

1992). The species is seasonally found 

in abundance between Cape Hatteras 

and Georges Bank from mid-January to 

May. Between mid-summer and fall 

they migrate onto Georges Bank and the 

Scotian Shelf, and large aggregations 

occur on Georges Bank in fall (Reeves et 

al. 2002; Hayes et al. 2019). The species 

is less common south of Cape Hatteras, 

although schools have been reported as 

far south as the Georgia/South Carolina 

border (Hayes et al. 2019). 

Sperm Whale 

The distribution of the sperm whale 

in the U.S. EEZ occurs on the 

continental shelf edge, over the 

continental slope, and into mid-ocean 

regions (Waring et al. 2019). 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 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 south of New England 

reaches peak levels, and there remains 

a continental shelf edge occurrence in 

the Mid-Atlantic Bight (Waring et al. 

2015). Off the coast of Virginia, sperm 

whales have recently been observed 

spending a significant amount of time 

near Norfolk Canyon and in waters over 

1,800 m deep (6,000 ft; U.S. Navy n.d. 

2017). 

Atlantic Spotted Dolphin 

Atlantic spotted dolphins are found in 

tropical and warm temperate waters 

along the continental shelf from 10 to 

200 m (33 to 650 ft) deep to slope waters 

greater than 500 m (1,640 ft). Their 

range extends from southern New 

England, south to Gulf of Mexico and 

the Caribbean to Venezuela (Waring et 

al. 2014). This stock regularly occurs in 

continental shelf waters south of Cape 

Hatteras and in continental shelf edge 

and continental slope waters north of 

this region (Waring et al. 2014). There 

are two forms of this species, with the 

larger ecotype inhabiting the continental 

shelf and is usually found inside or near 

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

Harbor Porpoise 

The harbor porpoise inhabits shallow, 

coastal waters, often found in bays, 

estuaries, and harbors. In the western 

Atlantic, they occur from Cape Hatteras 

north to Greenland. During summer 

(July to September), harbor porpoises 

are concentrated in the northern Gulf of 

Maine and southern Bay of Fundy 

region, generally in waters less than 150 

m deep with a few sightings in the 

upper Bay of Fundy and on Georges 

Bank. During fall (October–December) 

and spring (April–June), harbor 

porpoises are widely dispersed from 

New Jersey to Maine, with lower 

densities farther north and south. They 

occur from the coastline to deep waters 

(>1,800 m), although the majority of the 

population occurs over the continental 

shelf. The harbor porpoise is likely to 

occur in the waters of the mid-Atlantic 

during winter months, as this species 

prefers cold temperate and subarctic 

waters (Hayes et al. 2019). Harbor 

porpoise generally move out of the MidAtlantic during spring, migrating north 

to the Gulf of Maine. There does not 

appear to be a temporally coordinated 

migration or a specific migratory route 

to and from the Bay of Fundy region 

(Hayes et al. 2018). 

Gray Seal 

The gray seal occurs on both coasts of 

the Northern Atlantic Ocean and are 

divided into three major populations 

(Hayes et al. 2019). The western north 

Atlantic stock occurs in eastern Canada 

and the northeastern United States, 

occasionally as far south as North 

Carolina. Gray seals inhabit rocky coasts 

and islands, sandbars, ice shelves and 

icebergs (Hayes et al. 2019). In the 

United States, gray seals congregate in 

the summer to give birth at four 

established colonies in Massachusetts 

and Maine (Hayes et al. 2019). From 

September through May, they disperse 

and can be abundant as far south as 

New Jersey. The range of gray seals 

appears to be shifting as they are 

regularly being reported further south 

than they were historically (Rees et al. 

2016). 

Gray seals are uncommon in Virginia 

and the Chesapeake Bay. Only 15 gray 

seal strandings were documented in 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19872 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

Virginia from 1988 through 2013 (Barco 

and Swingle 2014). They are rarely 

found resting on the rocks around the 

portal islands of the Chesapeake Bay 

Bridge Tunnel (CBBT) from December 

through April alongside harbor seals. 

Seal observation surveys conducted at 

the CBBT recorded one gray seal in each 

of the 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons 

while no gray seals were reported 

during the 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 

seasons (Rees et al. 2016, Jones et al. 

2018). 

Harbor Seal 

Harbor seals are the most abundant 

seals in the waters of the eastern United 

States and are commonly found in all 

nearshore waters of the Atlantic Ocean 

from Newfoundland, Canada southward 

to northern Florida (Hayes et al. 2019). 

While harbor seals occur year-round 

north of Cape Cod, they only occur 

south of Cape Cod (southern New 

England to New Jersey) during winter 

migration, typically September through 

May (Kenney and Vigness-Raposa 2010; 

Hayes et al. 2019). During the summer, 

most harbor seals can be found north of 

Massachusetts within the coastal waters 

of central and northern Maine as well as 

the Bay of Fundy (Hayes et al. 2019). 

Since July 2018, elevated numbers of 

harbor seal and gray seal mortalities 

have occurred across Maine, New 

Hampshire and Massachusetts. This 

event has been declared a UME. 

Additionally, stranded seals have 

shown clinical signs as far south as 

Virginia, although not in elevated 

numbers. Therefore the UME 

investigation now encompasses all seal 

strandings from Maine to Virginia. As of 

March, 2020 there a total of 3,152 

reported strandings (of all species), 

though only 10 occurred in Virginia 

while 8 were recorded in Maryland. Full 

or partial necropsy examinations have 

been conducted on some of the seals 

and samples have been collected for 

testing. Based on tests conducted thus 

far, the main pathogen found in the 

seals is phocine distemper virus. NMFS 

is performing additional testing to 

identify any other factors that may be 

involved in this UME. This UME is nonactive and pending closure, and 

therefore, it is not discussed further in 

this notice. Information on this UME is 

available online at: 

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

2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-eventalong. 

Marine Mammal Hearing 

Hearing is the most important sensory 

modality for marine mammals 

underwater, and exposure to 

anthropogenic sound can have 

deleterious effects. To appropriately 

assess the potential effects of exposure 

to sound, it is necessary to understand 

the frequency ranges marine mammals 

are able to hear. Current data indicate 

that not all marine mammal species 

have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., 

Richardson et al. 1995; Wartzok and 

Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). 

To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) 

recommended that marine mammals be 

divided into functional hearing groups 

based on directly measured or estimated 

hearing ranges on the basis of available 

behavioral response data, audiograms 

derived using auditory evoked potential 

techniques, anatomical modeling, and 

other data. Note that no direct 

measurements of hearing ability have 

been successfully completed for 

mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency 

cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) 

described generalized hearing ranges for 

these marine mammal hearing groups. 

Generalized hearing ranges were chosen 

based on the approximately 65 decibel 

(dB) threshold from the normalized 

composite audiograms, with the 

exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower 

bound was deemed to be biologically 

implausible and the lower bound from 

Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine 

mammal hearing groups and their 

associated hearing ranges are provided 

in Table 1. 

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 two 

phocid pinniped 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), eight are classified as 

mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all 

delphinids and the sperm whale), and 

one is classified as high-frequency 

cetaceans (i.e., harbor porpoise). 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

This section includes a summary and 

discussion of the ways that components 

of the specified activity may impact 

marine mammals and their habitat. 

Detailed descriptions of the potential 

effects of similar specified activities 

have been provided in other recent 

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 waters off of North 

Carolina and Virginia (e.g., 85 FR 36537, 

June 17, 2020; 86 FR 43212, August 6, 

2021). No significant new information is 

available, and we refer the reader to 

these documents rather than repeating 

the details here. The Estimated Take 

section includes a quantitative analysis 

of the number of individuals that are 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19873 

expected to be taken by Dominion 

Energy’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. 

Background on Active Acoustic Sound 

Sources and Acoustic Terminology 

This subsection contains a brief 

technical background on sound, on the 

characteristics of certain sound types, 

and on metrics used in this proposal 

inasmuch as the information is relevant 

to the specified activity and to the 

summary of the potential effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals. 

For general information on sound and 

its interaction with the marine 

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

Hastings (2008); Richardson et al. 

(1995); Urick (1983). 

Sound travels in waves, the basic 

components of which are frequency, 

wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. 

Frequency is the number of pressure 

waves that pass by a reference point per 

unit of time and is measured in hertz or 

cycles per second. Wavelength is the 

distance between two peaks or 

corresponding points of a sound wave 

(length of one cycle). Higher frequency 

sounds have shorter wavelengths than 

lower frequency sounds, and typically 

attenuate (decrease) more rapidly, 

except in certain cases in shallower 

water. Amplitude is the height of the 

sound pressure wave or the ‘‘loudness’’ 

of a sound and is typically described 

using the relative unit of the decibel. A 

sound pressure level (SPL) in dB is 

described as the ratio between a 

measured pressure and a reference 

pressure (for underwater sound, this is 

1 microPascal (mPa)), and is a 

logarithmic unit that accounts for large 

variations in amplitude. Therefore, a 

relatively small change in dB 

corresponds to large changes in sound 

pressure. The source level (SL) 

represents the SPL referenced at a 

distance of 1 m from the source 

(referenced to 1 mPa), while the received 

level is the SPL at the listener’s position 

(referenced to 1 mPa). 

Root mean square (rms) is the 

quadratic mean sound pressure over the 

duration of an impulse. Root mean 

square is calculated by squaring all of 

the sound amplitudes, averaging the 

squares, and then taking the square root 

of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean 

square accounts for both positive and 

negative values; squaring the pressures 

makes all values positive so that they 

may be accounted for in the summation 

of pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 

2005). This measurement is often used 

in the context of discussing behavioral 

effects, in part because behavioral 

effects, which often result from auditory 

cues, may be better expressed through 

averaged units than by peak pressures. 

Sound exposure level (SEL; 

represented as dB re 1 mPa2-s) represents 

the total energy in a stated frequency 

band over a stated time interval or event 

and considers both intensity and 

duration of exposure. The per-pulse SEL 

is calculated over the time window 

containing the entire pulse (i.e., 100 

percent of the acoustic energy). SEL is 

a cumulative metric; it can be 

accumulated over a single pulse, or 

calculated over periods containing 

multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL 

represents the total energy accumulated 

by a receiver over a defined time 

window or during an event. Peak sound 

pressure (also referred to as zero-to-peak 

sound pressure or 0–pk) is the 

maximum instantaneous sound pressure 

measurable in the water at a specified 

distance from the source and is 

represented in the same units as the rms 

sound pressure. 

When underwater objects vibrate or 

activity occurs, sound-pressure waves 

are created. These waves alternately 

compress and decompress the water as 

the sound wave travels. Underwater 

sound waves radiate in a manner similar 

to ripples on the surface of a pond and 

may be either directed in a beam or 

beams or may radiate in all directions 

(omnidirectional sources), as is the case 

for sound produced by the pile driving 

activity considered here. The 

compressions and decompressions 

associated with sound waves are 

detected as changes in pressure by 

aquatic life and man-made sound 

receptors such as hydrophones. 

Even in the absence of sound from the 

specified activity, the underwater 

environment is typically loud due to 

ambient sound, which is defined as 

environmental background sound levels 

lacking a single source or point 

(Richardson et al. 1995). The sound 

level of a region is defined by the total 

acoustical energy being generated by 

known and unknown sources. These 

sources may include physical (e.g., 

wind and waves, earthquakes, ice, 

atmospheric sound), biological (e.g., 

sounds produced by marine mammals, 

fish, and invertebrates), and 

anthropogenic (e.g., vessels, dredging, 

construction) sound. A number of 

sources contribute to ambient sound, 

including wind and waves, which are a 

main source of naturally occurring 

ambient sound for frequencies between 

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

general, ambient sound levels tend to 

increase with increasing wind speed 

and wave height. Precipitation can 

become an important component of total 

sound at frequencies above 500 Hz, and 

possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet 

times. Marine mammals can contribute 

significantly to ambient sound levels, as 

can some fish and snapping shrimp. The 

frequency band for biological 

contributions is from approximately 12 

Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient 

sound related to human activity include 

transportation (surface vessels), 

dredging and construction, oil and gas 

drilling and production, geophysical 

surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel 

noise typically dominates the total 

ambient sound for frequencies between 

20 and 300 Hz. In general, the 

frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are 

below 1 kHz and, if higher frequency 

sound levels are created, they attenuate 

rapidly. 

The sum of the various natural and 

anthropogenic sound sources that 

comprise ambient sound at any given 

location and time depends not only on 

the source levels (as determined by 

current weather conditions and levels of 

biological and human activity) but also 

on the ability of sound to propagate 

through the environment. In turn, sound 

propagation is dependent on the 

spatially and temporally varying 

properties of the water column and sea 

floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a 

result of the dependence on a large 

number of varying factors, ambient 

sound levels can be expected to vary 

widely over both coarse and fine spatial 

and temporal scales. Sound levels at a 

given frequency and location can vary 

by 10–20 dB from day to day 

(Richardson et al. 1995). The result is 

that, depending on the source type and 

its intensity, sound from the specified 

activity may be a negligible addition to 

the local environment or could form a 

distinctive signal that may affect marine 

mammals. Details of source types are 

described in the following text. 

Sounds are often considered to fall 

into one of two general types: Pulsed 

and non-pulsed (defined in the 

following). The distinction between 

these two sound types is important 

because they have differing potential to 

cause physical effects, particularly with 

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

Southall et al. 2007). Please see Southall 

et al. (2007) for an in-depth discussion 

of these concepts. The distinction 

between these two sound types is not 

always obvious, as certain signals share 

properties of both pulsed and nonVerDate Sep<11>2014 17:47 Apr 05, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06APN1.SGM 06APN1

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19874 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

pulsed sounds. A signal near a source 

could be categorized as a pulse, but due 

to propagation effects as it moves farther 

from the source, the signal duration 

becomes longer (e.g., Greene and 

Richardson, 1988). 

Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, 

explosions, gunshots, sonic booms, 

impact pile driving) produce signals 

that are brief (typically considered to be 

less than one second), broadband, atonal 

transients (ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 

1998; NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003) and 

occur either as isolated events or 

repeated in some succession. Pulsed 

sounds are all characterized by a 

relatively rapid rise from ambient 

pressure to a maximal pressure value 

followed by a rapid decay period that 

may include a period of diminishing, 

oscillating maximal and minimal 

pressures, and generally have an 

increased capacity to induce physical 

injury as compared with sounds that 

lack these features. 

Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, 

narrowband, or broadband, brief or 

prolonged, and may be either 

continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995; 

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

of short duration but without the 

essential properties of pulses (e.g., rapid 

rise time). Examples of non-pulsed 

sounds include those produced by 

vessels, aircraft, machinery operations 

such as drilling or dredging, vibratory 

pile driving, and active sonar systems. 

The duration of such sounds, as 

received at a distance, can be greatly 

extended in a highly reverberant 

environment. 

Sparkers and boomers produce pulsed 

signals with energy in the frequency 

ranges specified in Table 1. The 

amplitude of the acoustic wave emitted 

from sparker sources is equal in all 

directions (i.e., omnidirectional), while 

other sources planned for use during the 

proposed surveys have some degree of 

directionality to the beam, as specified 

in Table 1. 

Summary on Specific Potential Effects 

of Acoustic Sound Sources 

Underwater sound from active 

acoustic sources can include one or 

more of the following: Temporary or 

permanent hearing impairment, 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 Dominion 

Energy’s proposed HRG survey activity 

are unlikely to incur even TTS due to 

the characteristics of the sound sources, 

which include relatively low source 

levels (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 sources 

in order to receive multiple exposures at 

relatively high levels, as would be 

necessary to cause TTS. Intermittent 

exposures—as would occur due to the 

brief, transient signals produced by 

these sources—require a higher 

cumulative SEL to induce TTS than 

would continuous exposures of the 

same duration (i.e., intermittent 

exposure results in lower levels of TTS). 

Moreover, most marine mammals would 

more likely avoid a loud sound source 

rather than swim in such close 

proximity as to result in TTS. Kremser 

et al. (2005) noted that the probability 

of a cetacean swimming through the 

area of exposure when a sub-bottom 

profiler emits a pulse is small—because 

if the animal was in the area, it would 

have to pass the transducer at close 

range in order to be subjected to sound 

levels that could cause TTS and would 

likely exhibit avoidance behavior to the 

area near the transducer rather than 

swim through at such a close range. 

Further, the restricted beam shape of 

many of HRG survey devices planned 

for use (Table 1) makes it unlikely that 

an animal would be exposed more than 

briefly during the passage of the vessel. 

Behavioral disturbance may include a 

variety of effects, including subtle 

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

avoidance of an area or changes in 

vocalizations), more conspicuous 

changes in similar behavioral activities, 

and more sustained and/or potentially 

severe reactions, such as displacement 

from or abandonment of high-quality 

habitat. Behavioral responses to sound 

are highly variable and context-specific 

and any reactions depend on numerous 

intrinsic and extrinsic factors (e.g., 

species, state of maturity, experience, 

current activity, reproductive state, 

auditory sensitivity, time of day), as 

well as the interplay between factors. 

Available studies show wide variation 

in response to underwater sound; 

therefore, it is difficult to predict 

specifically how any given sound in a 

particular instance might affect marine 

mammals perceiving the signal. 

In addition, sound can disrupt 

behavior through masking, or interfering 

with, an animal’s ability to detect, 

recognize, or discriminate between 

acoustic signals of interest (e.g., those 

used for intraspecific communication 

and social interactions, prey detection, 

predator avoidance, navigation). 

Masking occurs when the receipt of a 

sound is interfered with by another 

coincident sound at similar frequencies 

and at similar or higher intensity, and 

may occur whether the sound is natural 

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

precipitation) or anthropogenic (e.g., 

shipping, sonar, seismic exploration) in 

origin. Marine mammal 

communications would not likely be 

masked appreciably by the acoustic 

signals given the directionality of the 

signals for most HRG survey equipment 

types 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. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19875 

Vessel Strike 

Vessel collisions with marine 

mammals, or ship strikes, can result in 

death or serious injury of the animal. 

These interactions are typically 

associated with large whales, which are 

less maneuverable than are smaller 

cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to 

large vessels. Ship strikes generally 

involve commercial shipping vessels, 

which are generally larger and of which 

there is much more traffic in the ocean 

than geophysical survey vessels. Jensen 

and Silber (2004) summarized ship 

strikes of large whales worldwide from 

1975–2003 and found that most 

collisions occurred in the open ocean 

and involved large vessels (e.g., 

commercial shipping). For vessels used 

in geophysical survey activities, vessel 

speed while towing gear is typically 

only 4–5 knots (7.4–9.3 km/hr). 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 Dominion 

Energy’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 HRG sources. Based 

primarily on the characteristics of the 

signals produced by the acoustic 

sources planned for use, Level A 

harassment is neither anticipated (even 

absent mitigation) nor proposed to be 

authorized. Consideration of the 

anticipated effectiveness of the 

mitigation measures (i.e., exclusion 

zones (EZs) and shutdown measures) 

discussed in detail below in the 

Proposed Mitigation section, further 

strengthens the conclusion that Level A 

harassment is not a reasonably 

anticipated outcome of the survey 

activity. As described previously, no 

serious injury or mortality is anticipated 

or proposed to be authorized for this 

activity. Below we describe how the 

take is estimated. 

Generally speaking, we estimate take 

by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds 

above which NMFS believes the best 

available science indicates marine 

mammals will be behaviorally harassed 

or incur some degree of permanent 

hearing impairment; (2) the area or 

volume of water that will be ensonified 

above these levels in a day; (3) the 

density or occurrence of marine 

mammals within these ensonified areas; 

and, (4) and the number of days of 

activities. We note that while these 

basic factors can contribute to a basic 

calculation to provide an initial 

prediction of takes, additional 

information that can qualitatively 

inform take estimates is also sometimes 

available (e.g., previous monitoring 

results or average group size). Below, we 

describe the factors considered here in 

more detail and present the proposed 

take estimate. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

NMFS recommends the use of 

acoustic thresholds that identify the 

received level of underwater sound 

above which exposed marine mammals 

would be reasonably expected to be 

behaviorally harassed (equated to Level 

B harassment) or to incur PTS of some 

degree (equated to Level A harassment). 

Level B Harassment—Though 

significantly driven by received level, 

the onset of behavioral disturbance from 

anthropogenic noise exposure is also 

informed to varying degrees by other 

factors related to the source (e.g., 

frequency, predictability, duty cycle), 

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

the receiving animals (hearing, 

motivation, experience, demography, 

behavioral context) and can be difficult 

to predict (Southall et al. 2007, Ellison 

et al. 2012). Based on what the available 

science indicates and the practical need 

to use a threshold based on a factor that 

is both predictable and measurable for 

most activities, NMFS uses a 

generalized acoustic threshold based on 

received level to estimate the onset of 

behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts 

that marine mammals 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 the impulsive sources 

(i.e., boomers, sparkers) evaluated here 

for Dominion Energy’s proposed 

activity. 

Level A harassment—NMFS’ 

Technical Guidance for Assessing the 

Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on 

Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) 

(Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies 

dual criteria to assess auditory injury 

(Level A harassment) to five different 

marine mammal groups (based on 

hearing sensitivity) as a result of 

exposure to noise from two different 

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

NMFS’s 2018 Technical Guidance, 

which may be accessed at 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

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

Dominion Energy’s proposed activity 

includes the use of impulsive (i.e., 

sparkers and boomers) sources. 

However, as discussed above, NMFS has 

concluded that Level A harassment is 

not a reasonably likely outcome for 

marine mammals exposed to noise 

through use of the sources proposed for 

use here, and the potential for Level A 

harassment is not evaluated further in 

this document. Please see Dominion 

Energy’s application for details of a 

quantitative exposure analysis exercise, 

i.e., calculated Level A harassment 

isopleths and estimated Level A 

harassment exposures. Maximum 

estimated Level A harassment isopleths 

were less than 6 m for all sources and 

hearing groups with the exception of an 

estimated 54 m zone calculated for highfrequency cetaceans during use of the 

Applied Acoustics S-Boom Boomer, (see 

Table 1 for source characteristics). 

Dominion Energy did not request 

authorization of take by Level A 

harassment, and no take by Level A 

harassment is proposed for 

authorization by NMFS. 

Ensonified Area 

NMFS has developed a user-friendly 

methodology for estimating the extent of 

the Level B harassment isopleths 

associated with relevant HRG survey 

equipment (NMFS, 2020). This 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19876 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

methodology incorporates frequency 

and directionality to refine estimated 

ensonified zones. For acoustic sources 

that operate with different beamwidths, 

the maximum beamwidth was used, and 

the lowest frequency of the source was 

used when calculating the frequencydependent absorption coefficient (Table 

1). 

NMFS considers the data provided by 

Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) to 

represent the best available information 

on source levels associated with HRG 

equipment and, therefore, recommends 

that source levels provided by Crocker 

and Fratantonio (2016) be incorporated 

in the method described above to 

estimate isopleth distances to 

harassment thresholds. In cases when 

the source level for a specific type of 

HRG equipment is not provided in 

Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS 

recommends that either the source 

levels provided by the manufacturer be 

used, or, in instances where source 

levels provided by the manufacturer are 

unavailable or unreliable, a proxy from 

Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be used 

instead. Table 1 shows the HRG 

equipment types that may be used 

during the proposed surveys and the 

source levels associated with those HRG 

equipment types. 

Results of modeling using the 

methodology described above indicated 

that, of the HRG survey equipment 

planned for use by Dominion Energy 

that has the potential to result in Level 

B harassment of marine mammals, the 

Geo Marine Dual 400 Sparker 800J 

would produce the largest Level B 

harassment isopleth (141 m; see Table 

6–3 of Dominion Energy’s application). 

The Applied Acoustics S-Boom (Triple 

Plate Boomer 1000J) would produce a 

Level B harassment isopleth of 22 m. 

Although Dominion Energy does not 

expect to use the Geo Marine Dual 400 

Sparker 800J source on all planned 

survey days, it proposes to assume, for 

purposes of analysis, that the sparker 

would be used on all survey days. This 

is a conservative approach, as the actual 

sources used on individual survey days 

may produce smaller harassment 

distances. 

Marine Mammal Occurrence 

In this section we provide the 

information about 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 

and the Marine-life Data and Analysis 

Team, based on the best available 

marine mammal data from 1992–2019 

obtained in a collaboration between 

Duke University, the Northeast Regional 

Planning Body, the University of North 

Carolina Wilmington, the Virginia 

Aquarium and Marine Science Center, 

and NOAA (Roberts et al. 2016a; Curtice 

et al. 2018), represent the best available 

information regarding marine mammal 

densities in the survey area. More 

recently, these data have been updated 

with new modeling results and include 

density estimates for pinnipeds (Roberts 

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

The density data presented by Roberts 

et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021) 

incorporates aerial and shipboard linetransect survey data from NMFS and 

other organizations and incorporates 

data from eight physiographic and 16 

dynamic oceanographic and biological 

covariates, and controls for the 

influence of sea state, group size, 

availability bias, and perception bias on 

the probability of making a sighting. 

These density models were originally 

developed for all cetacean taxa in the 

U.S. Atlantic (Roberts et al. 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), with the exception of the 

North Atlantic right whale (discussed 

below). The updated models incorporate 

additional sighting data, including 

sightings from NOAA’s Atlantic Marine 

Assessment Program for Protected 

Species (AMAPPS) surveys. 

For the exposure analysis, the density 

data from Roberts et al. (2016, 2017, 

2018, 2020, 2021) were mapped using a 

geographic information system (GIS). 

For the full survey area, Dominion 

Energy averaged the densities of each 

species as reported by Roberts et al. 

(2016, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021) by 

season; thus, a density was calculated 

for each species for spring, summer, fall 

and winter. To be conservative, the 

greatest seasonal density calculated for 

each species was then carried forward 

in the exposure analysis. The largest 

estimated seasonal densities (animals 

per km2) of all marine mammal species 

that may be taken by the proposed 

survey, for all survey areas, is shown in 

Table 4, below. Below, we discuss how 

densities were assumed to apply to 

specific species for which the Roberts et 

al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021) 

models provide results at the genus or 

guild level. Additional data regarding 

average group sizes from survey effort in 

the region was considered to ensure take 

estimates are adequate to account for 

anticipated real-world encounter rates. 

For bottlenose dolphin densities, 

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

not differentiate by stock. Given the 

southern coastal migratory stock’s 

propensity to occur in waters shallower 

than the 25 m (82 ft) isobath north of 

Cape Hatteras (Reeves et al. 2002; Hayes 

et al. 2018), the project’s offshore export 

cable route corridor segment was 

roughly divided along the 25 m (82 ft) 

isobath. Roughly 90 percent of the cable 

corridor is 25 m (82 ft) or less in depth. 

The Lease Area is mostly located within 

depths exceeding 25 m (82 ft), where the 

southern coastal migratory stock would 

be unlikely to occur. Roughly 25 percent 

of the Lease Area survey segment is 25 

m (82 ft) or less in depth. Therefore, to 

account for the potential for mixed 

stocks within the Project’s offshore 

export cable route corridor, 90 percent 

of the estimated take calculation in that 

area is assumed to be of individuals in 

the southern coastal migratory stock and 

the remaining applied to the Western 

North Atlantic offshore stock within the 

Project’s offshore export cable route 

corridor survey area. Within the Lease 

Area, 25 percent of the estimated take 

calculation is assumed to be of 

individuals from the southern coastal 

migratory stock and the remaining 

applied to the Western North Atlantic 

offshore stock. 

The seasonality, feeding preferences, 

and habitat use by gray seals often 

overlaps with that of harbor seals in the 

survey areas. The density models 

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

2018) do not differentiate between gray 

seals and harbor seals. Rather, the 

model provides one density estimate for 

‘‘seals.’’ Therefore, for the density 

values reported in the IHA application, 

Dominion Energy assumed that half of 

the seals were gray seals, and the other 

half harbor seals. 

Dominion Energy used model Version 

10 (Roberts et al. 2021) to estimate the 

density of North Atlantic right whales. 

While two more recent versions 

(Version 11 and Version 11.1) of the 

model are available, the updates in 

these versions do not affect the densities 

in the project area. The update in 

Version 11 pertains to Cape Cod Bay 

only, which is outside of the CVOW 

project area. Density surfaces in Version 

11.1 did not change from Version 11; 

rather Version 11.1 includes uncertainty 

surfaces as well as density surfaces. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19877 

TABLE 4—MAXIMUM SEASONAL DENSITIES OF MARINE MAMMALS IN THE LEASE AREA AND OECC 

[Animals per 100 km2] 

Species Lease area/OECC 

North Atlantic right whale .............................................................................................................................................................. 0.111 

Humpback whale ........................................................................................................................................................................... 0.060 

Fin whale ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.184 

Sei whale ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.001 

Minke whale ................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.047 

Sperm whale .................................................................................................................................................................................. 0.003 

Pilot whale ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.029 

Bottlenose dolphin (Offshore) ........................................................................................................................................................ 10.614 

Bottlenose dolphin (Southern Migratory Coastal). 

Common dolphin ............................................................................................................................................................................ 2.163 

Atlantic white-sided dolphin ........................................................................................................................................................... 0.600 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ................................................................................................................................................................. 0.311 

Risso’s dolphin ............................................................................................................................................................................... 0.008 

Harbor porpoise ............................................................................................................................................................................. 0.794 

Gray seal ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.514 

Harbor seal. 

Take Calculation and Estimation 

Here we describe how the information 

provided above is brought together to 

produce a quantitative take estimate. In 

order to estimate the number of marine 

mammals predicted to be exposed to 

sound levels that would result in 

harassment, radial distances to 

predicted isopleths corresponding to 

harassment thresholds are calculated, as 

described above. Those distances are 

then used to calculate the area(s) around 

the HRG survey equipment predicted to 

be ensonified to sound levels that 

exceed harassment thresholds. The area 

estimated to be ensonified to relevant 

thresholds in a single day (zone of 

influence (ZOI)) is then calculated, 

based on areas predicted to be 

ensonified around the HRG survey 

equipment (i.e., 141 m) and the 

estimated trackline distance traveled per 

day by the survey vessel (i.e., 58 km). 

Based on the maximum estimated 

distance to the Level B harassment 

threshold of 141 m (Geo Marine Dual 

400 Sparker 800J) and the maximum 

estimated daily track line distance of 58 

km, the ZOI is estimated to be 16.4 km2

during Dominion Energy’s planned HRG 

surveys. As described above, this is a 

conservative estimate as it assumes the 

HRG source that results in the greatest 

distance to the Level B harassment 

isopleth would be operated at all times 

during all vessel days. 

ZOI = (Distance/day × 2r) + pr2

Where r is the linear distance from the 

source to the harassment isopleth. 

Potential daily Level B harassment 

takes are estimated by multiplying the 

average annual marine mammal 

densities (animals/km2), as described 

above, by the ZOI. Estimated numbers of 

each species taken over the duration of 

the authorization are calculated by 

multiplying the potential daily Level B 

harassment takes by the total number of 

vessel days. The product is then 

rounded, to generate an estimate of the 

total number of instances of harassment 

expected for each species over the 

duration of the survey. A summary of 

this method is illustrated in the 

following formula: 

Estimated Take = D × ZOI × vessel 

days 

Where D = average species density 

(animals/km2), ZOI = maximum daily 

ensonified area to relevant threshold, 

and vessel days = 244. 

Take by Level B harassment proposed 

for authorization is shown in Table 5. 

TABLE 5—TOTAL NUMBERS OF POTENTIAL INCIDENTAL TAKE OF MARINE MAMMALS PROPOSED FOR AUTHORIZATION AND

PROPOSED TAKES AS A PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION

Species 

Estimated takes 

by Level B 

harassment 

Proposed takes by 

Level B 

harassment a

Abundance Proposed takes as 

a percent of stock 

North Atlantic right whale .............................................................. 4.4 4 368 1.4 

Humpback whale ........................................................................... 2.4 2 1,396 <1 

Fin whale ....................................................................................... 7.4 7 6,802 <1 

Sei whale ....................................................................................... 0.04 0 6,292 0 

Minke whale ................................................................................... 1.9 2 21,968 <1 

Sperm whale .................................................................................. 0.0 0 4,349 0 

Short-finned pilot whale ................................................................. 1.2 20 28,924 <1 

Long-finned pilot whale .................................................................. .............................. .............................. 39,215 <1 

Bottlenose dolphin (Western North Atlantic Offshore stock) ......... 279.2 279 62,851 <1 

Bottlenose dolphin (Southern Migratory Coastal stock) ................ 147.1 147 3,751 3.9 

Common dolphin ............................................................................ 86.6 4,880 172,974 2.8 

Atlantic white-sided dolphin ........................................................... 24.1 25 93,233 <1 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ................................................................. 12.5 4,880 39,921 12.4 

Risso’s dolphin ............................................................................... 0.3 25 35,215 <1 

Harbor porpoise ............................................................................. 31.8 32 95,543 <1 

Gray seal ....................................................................................... 12 12 451,431 <1 

Harbor seal .................................................................................... 12 12 61,336 <1 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19878 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

The proposed take listed in Table 5 

generally reflects the estimated take 

calculation described above (Estimated 

Take = D × ZOI × vessel days). Further, 

take estimates for pilot whale and 

Risso’s dolphin have been modified to 

reflect group size estimates, and take 

estimates for Atlantic spotted dolphin 

and common dolphin have been 

modified to reflect previous monitoring 

in the CVOW project area, as described 

further below. 

Roberts et al. (2017) provides a 

density for all pilot whales that does not 

differentiate between short-finned and 

long-finned pilot whales, both of which 

could be in the project area. However, 

the take estimate for pilot whales was 

further adjusted to account for group 

size. Dominion Energy estimates that a 

group of 20 pilot whales (Reeves et al. 

2002) may be taken by Level B 

harassment during the surveys. While 

the take calculation described above 

estimates no takes of Risso’s dolphin, 

Dominion Energy also conservatively 

estimates that a group of 25 Risso’s 

dolphins (Reeves et al., 2002) may be 

taken by Level B harassment during the 

surveys. NMFS concurs with these 

estimates, and proposes to authorize 20 

takes by Level B harassment of pilot 

whales and 25 takes by Level B 

harassment of Risso’s dolphin. 

Previous monitoring in the CVOW 

project area (Dominion Energy, 2021; 86 

FR 21298; April 22, 2021 and 85 FR 

81879; December 17, 2020) indicates 

that the calculated take of Atlantic 

spotted dolphin and common dolphin is 

too low. Given previous monitoring, 

Dominion Energy conservatively 

estimated that two pods of common 

dolphins, each averaging 10 individuals, 

may be taken by Level B harassment on 

each vessel day (2 pods × 10 individuals 

× 244 vessel days = 4,880 takes by Level 

B harassment of common dolphin). 

Dominion Energy conservatively 

estimates that one pod of Atlantic 

spotted dolphins, averaging 20 

individuals, may be taken by Level B 

harassment on each vessel day (1 pod × 

20 individuals × 244 vessel days = 4,880 

takes by Level B harassment of Atlantic 

spotted dolphin). While these estimates 

are likely conservative, NMFS concurs, 

and proposes to authorize 4,880 takes by 

Level B harassment of both common 

dolphin and Atlantic spotted dolphin. 

Proposed Mitigation 

In order to issue an IHA under section 

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

set forth the permissible methods of 

taking pursuant to the activity, and 

other means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on the species or 

stock and its habitat, paying particular 

attention to rookeries, mating grounds, 

and areas of similar significance, and on 

the availability of the species or stock 

for taking for certain subsistence uses 

(latter not applicable for this action). 

NMFS regulations require applicants for 

incidental take authorizations to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting the activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, we carefully consider two 

primary factors: 

(1) The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 

expected to reduce impacts to marine 

mammals, marine mammal species or 

stocks, and their habitat. This considers 

the nature of the potential adverse 

impact being mitigated (likelihood, 

scope, range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned), the 

likelihood of effective implementation 

(probability implemented as planned), 

and; 

(2) The practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost, 

impact on operations, and, in the case 

of a military readiness activity, 

personnel safety, practicality of 

implementation, and impact on the 

effectiveness of the military readiness 

activity. 

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and 

Their Habitat 

NMFS proposes the following 

mitigation measures be implemented 

during Dominion Energy’s proposed 

marine site characterization surveys. 

Pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, 

Dominion Energy would also be 

required to adhere to relevant Project 

Design Criteria (PDC) of the NMFS’ 

Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries 

Office (GARFO) programmatic 

consultation (specifically PDCs 4, 5, and 

7) regarding geophysical surveys along 

the U.S. Atlantic coast (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-englandmid-atlantic/consultations/section-7- 

take-reporting-programmatics-greateratlantic#offshore-wind-site-assessmentand-site-characterization-activitiesprogrammatic-consultation). 

Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones and 

Harassment Zones 

Marine mammal exclusion zones (EZ) 

would be established around the HRG 

survey equipment and monitored by 

protected species observers (PSOs): 

• 500 m EZ for North Atlantic right 

whales during use of specified acoustic 

sources (sparkers, boomers, and nonparametric sub-bottom profilers). 

• 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 non all other marine 

mammals. 

Dominion Energy would implement a 

30-minute pre-start clearance period 

prior to the initiation of ramp-up of 

specified HRG equipment (see exception 

to this requirement in the Shutdown 

Procedures section below). During this 

period, clearance zones will be 

monitored by the PSOs, using the 

appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up 

may not be initiated if any marine 

mammal(s) is within its respective 

clearance zone. If a marine mammal is 

observed within an clearance zone 

during the pre-start 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19879 

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 

seals 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 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 operator should be 

discussed only after shutdown has 

occurred. Subsequent restart of the 

survey equipment can be initiated if the 

animal has been observed exiting its 

respective exclusion zone or until an 

additional time period has elapsed (i.e., 

15 minutes for harbor porpoise, 30 

minutes for all other species). 

If a species for which authorization 

has not been granted, or, a species for 

which authorization has been granted 

but the authorized number of takes have 

been met, approaches or is observed 

within the Level B harassment zone, 

shutdown would occur. 

If the acoustic source is shut down for 

reasons other than mitigation (e.g., 

mechanical difficulty) for less than 30 

minutes, it may be activated again 

without ramp-up if PSOs have 

maintained constant observation and no 

detections of any marine mammal have 

occurred within the respective 

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 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). 

Vessel Strike Avoidance 

Dominion Energy 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 to identify 

a marine mammal as a right whale, 

other whale (defined in this context as 

sperm whales or baleen whales other 

than right whales), or other marine 

mammal; 

• 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 survey vessels, regardless of 

size, must observe a 10-knot (18.5 km/ 

hr) speed restriction in specific areas 

designated by NMFS for the protection 

of North Atlantic right whales from 

vessel strikes including seasonal 

management areas (SMAs) and dynamic 

management areas (DMAs) when in 

effect; 

• All vessels greater than or equal to 

19.8 m in overall length operating from 

November 1 through April 30 will 

operate at speeds of 10 knots (18.5 km/ 

hr) or less at all times; 

• All vessels must reduce their speed 

to 10 knots (18.5 km/hr) or less when 

mother/calf pairs, pods, or large 

assemblages of cetaceans are observed 

near a vessel; 

• All vessels must maintain a 

minimum separation distance of 500 m 

from 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 50m 

from all other marine mammals, with an 

understanding that at times this may not 

be possible (e.g., for animals that 

approach the vessel); and 

• 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 

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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19880 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

as other measures considered by NMFS, 

NMFS has preliminarily determined 

that the proposed mitigation measures 

provide the means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on marine mammal 

species or stocks and their habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance. 

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

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

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that will result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present in the proposed action area. 

Effective reporting is critical both to 

compliance as well as ensuring that the 

most value is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density). 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) Action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

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

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

of marine mammal species with the 

action; or (4) biological or behavioral 

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

feeding areas). 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors. 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks. 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat). 

• 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. Dominion 

Energy would employ independent, 

dedicated, trained PSOs, meaning that 

the PSOs must (1) be employed by a 

third-party observer provider, (2) have 

no tasks other than to conduct 

observational effort, collect data, and 

communicate with and instruct relevant 

vessel crew with regard to the presence 

of marine mammals and mitigation 

requirements (including brief alerts 

regarding maritime hazards), and (3) 

have successfully completed an 

approved PSO training course 

appropriate for their designated task. On 

a case-by-case basis, non-independent 

observers may be approved by NMFS for 

limited, specific duties in support of 

approved, independent PSOs on smaller 

vessels with limited crew capacity 

operating in nearshore waters. Section 5 

of the draft IHA contains further details 

regarding PSO approval. 

The PSOs will be responsible for 

monitoring the waters surrounding each 

survey vessel to the farthest extent 

permitted by sighting conditions, 

including 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° visual coverage around the vessel 

from the most appropriate observation 

posts and would conduct visual 

observations using binoculars and/or 

night vision goggles and the naked eye 

while free from distractions and in a 

consistent, systematic, and diligent 

manner. PSOs may be on watch for a 

maximum of 4 consecutive hours 

followed by a break of at least 2 hours 

between watches and may conduct a 

maximum of 12 hours of observation per 

24-hr period. In cases where multiple 

vessels are surveying concurrently, any 

observations of marine mammals would 

be communicated to PSOs on all nearby 

survey vessels. 

PSOs must be equipped with 

binoculars and have the ability to 

estimate distance and bearing to detect 

marine mammals, particularly in 

proximity to 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, behavior); and 

details of any observed marine mammal 

behavior that occurs (e.g., noted 

behavioral disturbances). 

Proposed Reporting Measures 

Within 90 days after completion of 

survey activities or expiration of this 

IHA, whichever comes sooner, a draft 

technical report will be provided to 

NMFS that fully documents the 

methods and monitoring protocols, 

summarizes the data recorded during 

monitoring, summarizes the number of 

marine mammals observed during 

survey activities (by species, when 

known), summarizes the mitigation 

actions taken during surveys (including 

what type of mitigation and the species 

and number of animals that prompted 

the mitigation action, when known), 

and provides an interpretation of the 

results and effectiveness of all 

mitigation and monitoring. A final 

report must be submitted within 30 days 

following resolution of any comments 

on the draft report. All draft and final 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19881 

marine mammal and acoustic 

monitoring reports must be submitted to 

PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov 

and ITP.Davis@noaa.gov. The report 

must contain at minimum, the 

following: 

• PSO names and affiliations; 

• Dates of departures and returns to 

port with port name; 

• Dates and times (Greenwich Mean 

Time) of survey effort and times 

corresponding with PSO effort; 

• Vessel location (latitude/longitude) 

when survey effort begins and ends; 

vessel location at beginning and end of 

visual PSO duty shifts; 

• Vessel heading and speed at 

beginning and end of visual PSO duty 

shifts and upon any line change; 

• Environmental conditions while on 

visual survey (at beginning and end of 

PSO shift and whenever conditions 

change significantly), including wind 

speed and direction, Beaufort sea state, 

Beaufort wind force, swell height, 

weather conditions, cloud cover, sun 

glare, and overall visibility to the 

horizon; 

• Factors that may be contributing to 

impaired observations during each PSO 

shift change or as needed as 

environmental conditions change (e.g., 

vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); 

and 

• Survey activity information, such as 

type of survey equipment in operation, 

acoustic source power output while in 

operation, and any other notes of 

significance (i.e., pre-start clearance 

survey, ramp-up, shutdown, end of 

operations, etc.). 

If a marine mammal is sighted, the 

following information should be 

recorded: 

• Watch status (sighting made by PSO 

on/off effort, opportunistic, crew, 

alternate vessel/platform); 

• PSO who sighted the animal; 

• Time of sighting; 

• Vessel location at time of sighting; 

• Water depth; 

• Direction of vessel’s travel (compass 

direction); 

• Direction of animal’s travel relative 

to the vessel; 

• Pace of the animal; 

• Estimated distance to the animal 

and its heading relative to vessel at 

initial sighting; 

• Identification of the animal (e.g., 

genus/species, lowest possible 

taxonomic level, or unidentified); also 

note the composition of the group if 

there is a mix of species; 

• Estimated number of animals (high/ 

low/best); 

• Estimated number of animals by 

cohort (adults, yearlings, juveniles, 

calves, group composition, etc.); 

• Description (as many distinguishing 

features as possible of each individual 

seen, including length, shape, color, 

pattern, scars or markings, shape and 

size of dorsal fin, shape of head, and 

blow characteristics); 

• Detailed behavior observations (e.g., 

number of blows, number of surfaces, 

breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, 

traveling; as explicit and detailed as 

possible; note any observed changes in 

behavior); 

• Animal’s closest point of approach 

and/or closest distance from the center 

point of the acoustic source; 

• Platform activity at time of sighting 

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

acquisition, other); and 

• Description of any actions 

implemented in response to the sighting 

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

or course alteration, etc.) and time and 

location of the action. 

If a North Atlantic right whale is 

observed at any time by PSOs or 

personnel on any project vessels, during 

surveys or during vessel transit, 

Dominion Energy 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 Dominion Energy 

personnel discover an injured or dead 

marine mammal, Dominion Energy 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: 

1. Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the first discovery (and 

updated location information if known 

and applicable); 

2. Species identification (if known) or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

3. Condition of the animal(s) 

(including carcass condition if the 

animal is dead); 

4. Observed behaviors of the 

animal(s), if alive; 

5. If available, photographs or video 

footage of the animal(s); and 

6. General circumstances under which 

the animal was discovered. 

In the unanticipated event of a ship 

strike of a marine mammal by any vessel 

involved in the activities covered by the 

IHA, Dominion Energy would report the 

incident to the NMFS OPR and the 

NMFS New England/Mid-Atlantic 

Stranding Coordinator as soon as 

feasible. The report would include the 

following information: 

• Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the incident; 

• Species identification (if known) or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Vessel’s speed during and leading 

up to the incident; 

• Vessel’s course/heading and what 

operations were being conducted (if 

applicable); 

• Status of all sound sources in use; 

• Description of avoidance measures/ 

requirements that were in place at the 

time of the strike and what additional 

measures were taken, if any, to avoid 

strike; 

• Environmental conditions (e.g., 

wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea 

state, cloud cover, visibility) 

immediately preceding the strike; 

• Estimated size and length of animal 

that was struck; 

• Description of the behavior of the 

marine mammal immediately preceding 

and following the strike; 

• If available, description of the 

presence and behavior of any other 

marine mammals immediately 

preceding the strike; 

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

dead, injured but alive, injured and 

moving, blood or tissue observed in the 

water, status unknown, disappeared); 

and 

• To the extent practicable, 

photographs or video footage of the 

animal(s). 

Negligible Impact Analysis and 

Determination 

NMFS has defined negligible impact 

as an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 

finding is based on the lack of likely 

adverse effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival (i.e., 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19882 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the environmental baseline 

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

of the species, population size and 

growth rate where known, ongoing 

sources of human-caused mortality, or 

ambient noise levels). 

To avoid repetition, our analysis 

applies to all the species listed in Table 

2, 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 short-term Level B 

behavioral harassment in the form of 

temporary avoidance of the area or 

decreased foraging (if such activity was 

occurring), reactions that are considered 

to be of low severity and with no lasting 

biological consequences (e.g., Southall 

et al. 2007). Even repeated Level B 

harassment of some small subset of an 

overall stock is unlikely to result in any 

significant realized decrease in viability 

for the affected individuals, and thus 

would not result in any adverse impact 

to the stock as a whole. As described 

above, Level A harassment is not 

expected to occur given the nature of 

the operations, the estimated size of the 

Level A harassment zones, and the 

required shutdown zones for certain 

activities. 

In addition to being temporary, the 

maximum expected harassment zone 

around a survey vessel is 141 m. 

Although this distance is assumed for 

all survey activity in estimating take 

numbers proposed for authorization and 

evaluated here, in reality, the Geo 

Marine Dual 400 Sparker would likely 

not be used across the entire 24-hour 

period and across all 244 vessel days. 

The other acoustic sources operating 

below 200 kHz that Dominion Energy 

has included in their application 

produce Level B harassment zones 

below 22 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. There is no designated 

critical habitat for any ESA-listed 

marine mammals in the proposed 

survey area. 

North Atlantic Right Whales 

The status of the North Atlantic right 

whale population is of heightened 

concern and, therefore, merits 

additional analysis. As noted 

previously, elevated North Atlantic right 

whale mortalities began in June 2017, 

and there is an active UME. Overall, 

preliminary findings support human 

interactions, specifically vessel strikes 

and entanglements, as the cause of 

death for the majority of right whales. 

As noted previously, the proposed 

survey area overlaps a migratory 

corridor BIA for North Atlantic right 

whales. Due to the fact that the impacts 

of the proposed survey are expected to 

be of low severity (as described in the 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and their Habitat), 

the proposed survey activities are 

temporary, and the spatial extent of 

sound produced by the survey would be 

very small relative to the spatial extent 

of the available migratory habitat in the 

BIA (the overlap between the BIA and 

the proposed survey area would cover 

approximately 4,000 km2 of the 269,448 

km2 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 

Dominion Energy’s proposed activities. 

The 500-m shutdown zone for right 

whales is conservative, considering the 

Level B harassment isopleth for the 

most impactful acoustic source (i.e., 

sparker) is estimated to be 141 m, and 

thereby minimizes the potential for 

behavioral harassment of this species. 

As noted previously, Level A 

harassment is not expected due to the 

small PTS zones associated with HRG 

equipment types proposed for use. The 

proposed authorization of take by Level 

B harassment of North Atlantic right 

whale is not expected to exacerbate or 

compound upon the ongoing UME. The 

limited takes of North Atlantic right 

whale by Level B harassment proposed 

for authorization are expected to be of 

a short duration, and given the number 

of estimated takes, repeated exposures 

of the same individual are not expected. 

Further, given the relatively small size 

of the ensonified area during Dominion 

Energy’s proposed activities, it is 

unlikely that North Atlantic right whale 

prey availability would be adversely 

affected. Accordingly, NMFS does not 

anticipate North Atlantic right whales 

takes that would result from Dominion 

Energy’s proposed activities would 

impact annual rates of recruitment or 

survival of any individuals. Thus, any 

takes that occur would not result in 

population level impacts. 

Other Marine Mammal Species With 

Active UMEs 

As noted previously, there are several 

active UMEs occurring in the vicinity of 

Dominion Energy’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. 

The required mitigation measures are 

expected to reduce the number and/or 

severity of proposed takes for all species 

listed in Table 2, including those with 

active UMEs, to the level of least 

practicable adverse impact. In 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 19883 

particular, they would provide animals 

the opportunity to move away from the 

sound source throughout the survey 

area before HRG survey equipment 

reaches full energy, thus preventing 

them from being exposed to sound 

levels that have the potential to cause 

injury (Level A harassment) or more 

severe Level B harassment. As discussed 

previously, take by Level A harassment 

(injury) is considered unlikely, even 

absent mitigation, based on the 

characteristics of the signals produced 

by the acoustic sources planned for use, 

and is not proposed for authorization. 

Implementation of required mitigation 

would further reduce this potential. 

NMFS expects that takes would be in 

the form of short-term Level B 

behavioral harassment by way of brief 

startling reactions and/or temporary 

vacating of the area, or decreased 

foraging (if such activity was 

occurring)—reactions that (at the scale 

and intensity anticipated here) are 

considered to be of low severity, with 

no lasting biological consequences. 

Since both the sources and marine 

mammals are mobile, animals would 

only be exposed briefly to a small 

ensonified area that might result in take. 

Additionally, required mitigation 

measures would further reduce 

exposure to sound that could result in 

more severe behavioral harassment. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our preliminary determination that the 

impacts resulting from this activity are 

not expected to adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival: 

• No mortality or serious injury is 

anticipated or proposed to be 

authorized; 

• No Level A harassment (PTS) is 

anticipated, even in the absence of 

mitigation measures, or proposed for 

authorization; 

• Foraging success is not likely to be 

impacted as effects on species that serve 

as prey species for marine mammals 

from the survey are expected to be 

minimal; 

• The availability of alternate areas of 

similar habitat value for marine 

mammals to temporarily vacate the 

survey area during the planned survey 

to avoid exposure to sounds from the 

activity; 

• Take is anticipated to be by Level 

B behavioral harassment only consisting 

of brief startling reactions and/or 

temporary avoidance of the survey area; 

• While the survey area is within 

areas noted as a migratory BIA for North 

Atlantic right whales, the activities 

would occur in such a comparatively 

small area such that any avoidance of 

the survey area due to activities would 

not affect migration. 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 effective visual monitoring, 

and shutdowns are expected to 

minimize potential impacts to marine 

mammals. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

proposed monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS preliminarily finds 

that the total marine mammal take from 

the proposed activity will have a 

negligible impact on all affected marine 

mammal species or stocks. 

Small Numbers 

As noted above, only small numbers 

of incidental take may be authorized 

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

the MMPA for specified activities other 

than military readiness activities. The 

MMPA does not define small numbers 

and so, in practice, where estimated 

numbers are available, NMFS compares 

the number of individuals taken to the 

most appropriate estimation of 

abundance of the relevant species or 

stock in our determination of whether 

an authorization is limited to small 

numbers of marine mammals. When the 

predicted number of individuals to be 

taken is fewer than one third of the 

species or stock abundance, the take is 

considered to be of small numbers. 

Additionally, other qualitative factors 

may be considered in the analysis, such 

as the temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. 

NMFS proposes to authorize 

incidental take (by Level B harassment 

only) of 16 marine mammal species 

(with 17 managed stocks). The total 

amount of takes proposed for 

authorization relative to the best 

available population abundance is less 

than 33 percent for all stocks (Table 5). 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the proposed activity 

(including the proposed mitigation and 

monitoring measures) and the 

anticipated take of marine mammals, 

NMFS preliminarily finds that small 

numbers of marine mammals will be 

taken relative to the population size of 

the affected species or stocks. 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of the affected marine mammal stocks or 

species implicated by this action. 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

the total taking of affected species or 

stocks would not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

such species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act 

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered 

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

1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal 

agency insure that any action it 

authorizes, funds, or carries out is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat. To ensure 

ESA compliance for the issuance of 

IHAs, NMFS Office of Protected 

Resources (OPR) consults internally 

whenever we propose to authorize take 

for endangered or threatened species. 

NMFS OPR is proposing to authorize 

the incidental take of North Atlantic 

right, sei, fin, sperm whales, which are 

listed under the ESA. NMFS has 

determined that this activity falls within 

the scope of activities analyzed in 

NMFS GARFO’s programmatic 

consultation regarding geophysical 

surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast in 

the three Atlantic Renewable Energy 

Regions (completed June 29, 2021; 

revised September 2021). 

Proposed Authorization 

As a result of these preliminary 

determinations, NMFS proposes to issue 

an IHA to Dominion Energy authorizing 

take, by Level B harassment, incidental 

to conducting marine site 

characterization surveys off of Virginia 

from May 2022 to 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 surveys. We also 

request at this time comment on the 

potential Renewal of this proposed IHA 

as described in the paragraph below. 

Please include with your comments any 

supporting data or literature citations to 

help inform decisions on the request for 

this IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA. 

On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may 

issue a one-time, one-year Renewal IHA 

following notice to the public providing 

an additional 15 days for public 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
19884 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 2022 / Notices 

comments when (1) up to another year 

of identical or nearly identical, or nearly 

identical, activities as described in the 

Description of Proposed Activities 

section of this notice is planned or (2) 

the activities as described in the 

Description of Proposed Activities 

section of this notice would not be 

completed by the time the IHA expires 

and a Renewal would allow for 

completion of the activities beyond that 

described in the Dates and Duration 

section of this notice, provided all of the 

following conditions are met: 

• A request for renewal is received no 

later than 60 days prior to the needed 

Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing 

that the Renewal IHA expiration date 

cannot extend beyond one year from 

expiration of the initial IHA). 

• The request for renewal must 

include the following: 

(1) An explanation that the activities 

to be conducted under the requested 

Renewal IHA are identical to the 

activities analyzed under the initial 

IHA, are a subset of the activities, or 

include changes so minor (e.g., 

reduction in pile size) that the changes 

do not affect the previous analyses, 

mitigation and monitoring 

requirements, or take estimates (with 

the exception of reducing the type or 

amount of take). 

(2) A preliminary monitoring report 

showing the results of the required 

monitoring to date and an explanation 

showing that the monitoring results do 

not indicate impacts of a scale or nature 

not previously analyzed or authorized. 

Upon review of the request for 

Renewal, the status of the affected 

species or stocks, and any other 

pertinent information, NMFS 

determines that there are no more than 

minor changes in the activities, the 

mitigation and monitoring measures 

will remain the same and appropriate, 

and the findings in the initial IHA 

remain valid. 

Dated: April 1, 2022. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07258 Filed 4–5–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB930] 

Pacific Fishery Management Council; 

Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery 

Management Council’s (Pacific Council) 

Highly Migratory Species Management 

Team (HMSMT) is holding an online 

meeting, which is open to the public. 

DATES: The online meeting will be held 

Friday, April 22, 2022, from 10 a.m. to 

5 p.m. Pacific Time and continues 

Friday, April 29, 2022, from 9 a.m. to 5 

p.m., Pacific Time. 

ADDRESSES: This meeting will be held 

online. Specific meeting information, 

including directions on how to join the 

meeting and system requirements will 

be provided in the meeting 

announcement on the Pacific Council’s 

website (see www.pcouncil.org). You 

may send an email to Mr. Kris 

Kleinschmidt (kris.kleinschmidt@

noaa.gov) or contact him at (503) 820– 

2412 for technical assistance. 

Council address: Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, 7700 NE 

Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, 

OR 97220–1384. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kit 

Dahl, Staff Officer, Pacific Council; 

telephone: (503) 820–2422. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

purpose of this meeting is for the 

HMSMT to review preliminary 

modeling results used to evaluate the 

range of alternatives for high priority 

protected species hard caps in the 

California large mesh drift gillnet 

fishery adopted by the Council in 

November 2021, consider any 

modifications or updates to model 

specifications, and discuss the contents 

of its report for the June 2022 Council 

meeting on its preliminary evaluation of 

the alternatives. The HMSMT also may 

discuss other topics of interest relevant 

to the June 2022 Council meeting 

agenda. 

Although non-emergency issues not 

contained in the meeting agenda may be 

discussed, those issues may not be the 

subject of formal action during this 

meeting. Action will be restricted to 

those issues specifically listed in this 

document and any issues arising after 

publication of this document that 

require emergency action under section 

305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act, 

provided the public has been notified of 

the intent to take final action to address 

the emergency. 

Special Accommodations 

Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to Mr. Kris 

Kleinschmidt (kris.kleinschmidt@

noaa.gov; (503) 820–2412) at least 10 

days prior to the meeting date. 

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

Dated: April 1, 2022. 

Rey Israel Marquez, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07289 Filed 4–5–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID: 0648–XB931] 

Research Track Assessment for 

Eastern Georges Bank and Georges 

Bank Haddock 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: NMFS will convene the 

Research Track Assessment Peer Review 

Meeting for the purpose of reviewing 

Eastern Georges Bank (EGB) and 

Georges Bank (GB) haddock stocks. The 

Research Track Assessment Peer Review 

is a formal scientific peer-review 

process for evaluating and presenting 

stock assessment results to managers for 

fish stocks in the offshore U.S. and 

Canadian waters of the northwest 

Atlantic. Assessments are prepared by 

the research track working group and 

reviewed by an independent panel of 

stock assessment experts from the 

Center of Independent Experts (CIE). 

The public is invited to attend the 

presentations and discussions between 

the review panel and the scientists who 

have participated in the stock 

assessment process. 

DATES: The public portion of the 

Research Track Assessment Peer Review 

Meeting will be held from March 28, 

2022–March 31, 2022. The meeting will 

conclude on March 31, 2022 at 5:30 

p.m. Eastern Standard Time. Please see 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for the 

daily meeting agenda. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held 

via WebEx. 

Link: https://noaanmfsmeets.webex.com/noaanmfs-meets/

j.php?MTID=mfadfc0e507ed0

52d63c95340b3a9d9d4. 

Meeting number (access code): 2764 

775 0084. 

Meeting password: D9Zm8ZBMbZ8. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1