25452 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 

GD102, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 

80305. Phone: 303–487–3431. Email: 

Veva.Deheza@noaa.gov; or visit the 

NIDIS website at www.drought.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

National Integrated Drought Information 

System (NIDIS) was established by 

Public Law 109–430 on December 20, 

2006, and reauthorized by Public Law 

113–86 on March 6, 2014 and Public 

Law 115–423 on January 7, 2019 , with 

a mandate to provide an effective 

drought early warning system for the 

United States; coordinate, and integrate 

as practicable, Federal research in 

support of a drought early warning 

system; and build upon existing 

forecasting and assessment programs 

and partnerships. See 15 U.S.C. 313d. 

The Public Law also calls for 

consultation with ‘‘relevant Federal, 

regional, State, tribal, and local 

government agencies, research 

institutions, and the private sector’’ in 

the development of NIDIS. 15 U.S.C. 

313d(c). The NIDIS Executive Council 

provides the NIDIS Program Office with 

an opportunity to engage in individual 

consultation with senior resource 

officials from NIDIS’s Federal partners, 

as well as leaders from state and local 

government, academia, 

nongovernmental organizations, and the 

private sector. 

Status: This meeting will be open to 

public participation. Individuals 

interested in attending should register at 

https://cpaess.ucar.edu/meetings/2022/ 

nidis-executive-council-meeting-may2022. Please refer to this web page for 

the most up-to-date meeting times and 

agenda. Seating at the meeting will be 

available on a first-come, first-served 

basis. 

Special Accommodations: This 

meeting is physically accessible to 

people with disabilities. Requests for 

special accommodations may be 

directed no later than 12:00 p.m. on 

April 28, 2022, to Elizabeth Ossowski, 

Program Coordinator, David Skaggs 

Research Center, Room GD102, 325 

Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305; Email: 

Elizabeth.Ossowski@noaa.gov. 

Matters To Be Considered: The 

meeting will include the following 

topics: (1) NIDIS implementation 

updates and 2022 priorities; (2) 

Executive Council member updates and 

2022 priorities relevant to Drought, 

Climate Adaptation and Resilience, 

Water, Fire; (3) Long Term Drought and 

Aridification: Outcomes from the 2021 

Southwest Drought Forum, including 

Priority Actions where NIDIS and 

partners have a critical role to play; (4) 

Climate Engine, OpenET, and 

Applications for Drought Monitoring 

and New Opportunities; (5) Fire, Water, 

and Resilience and the Bipartisan 

Infrastructure Law. 

David Holst, 

Chief Financial and Administrative Officer, 

Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09243 Filed 4–28–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–KB–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB895] 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Kitty Hawk 

Wind Marine Site Characterization 

Surveys, North Carolina and Virginia 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental 

harassment authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

regulations implementing the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as 

amended, notification is hereby given 

that NMFS has issued an IHA to Kitty 

Hawk Wind, LLC (Kitty Hawk Wind), to 

incidentally harass marine mammals 

during marine site characterization 

surveys off North Carolina and Virginia 

in and around the area of Commercial 

Lease of Submerged Lands for 

Renewable Energy Development on the 

Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area 

(OCS)–A 0508. 

DATES: The IHA is effective from August 

1, 2022 through July 31, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jaclyn Daly, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

Electronic copies of the IHA and 

supporting documents may be obtained 

online at: https://www.fisheries.

noaa.gov/permit/incidental-takeauthorizations-under-marine-mammalprotection-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 

and reporting of the takings are set forth. 

The definitions of all applicable MMPA 

statutory terms cited above are included 

in the relevant sections below. 

Summary of Request 

On July 19, 2021, NMFS received a 

request from Kitty Hawk Wind, a 

subsidiary of Avangrid Renewables 

(Avangrid), for an IHA to take marine 

mammals incidental to conducting 

marine site characterization surveys off 

of the Atlantic Coast. Kitty Hawk 

Wind’s overall lease area (OCS–A 0508) 

is located approximately 44 kilometers 

(km) offshore of Corolla, North Carolina, 

in Federal waters. The proposed survey 

activities will occur within the wind 

development area (WDA) and along the 

electric cable corridor (ECC) to landfall 

locations in North Carolina and 

Virginia. We received a final, revised 

version of Kitty Hawk Wind’s 

application on January 12, 2022 and 

deemed it adequate and complete on 

January 13, 2022. Kitty Hawk Wind’s 

request is for take of 17 species of 

marine mammals, by Level B 

harassment only. Neither Kitty Hawk 

Wind nor NMFS expects serious injury 

or mortality to result from this activity 

and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. 

NMFS previously issued an IHA to 

Avangrid, prior to it establishing Kitty 

Hawk Wind, for similar work in the 

same geographic area on June 3, 2019 

(84 FR 31032) with effectives dates from 

June 1, 2019 through May 31, 2020 and 

to Kitty Hawk Wind specifically on July 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 25453 

21, 2021 with effective dates from July 

23, 2021 through October 31, 2021 (86 

FR 43212; August 6, 2021). Avangrid/ 

Kitty Hawk Wind complied with all the 

requirements (e.g., mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting) of the 

previous IHAs and information 

regarding their monitoring results may 

be found in the Estimated Take section. 

Avangrid and Kitty Hawk Wind’s final 

marine mammal monitoring reports 

submitted pursuant to those IHAs can 

be found at https://www.fisheries.

noaa.gov/action/incidental-takeauthorization-avangrid-renewables-llcmarine-site-characterization-surveys. 

Description of Proposed Activity 

Kitty Hawk Wind is planning to 

conduct marine site characterization 

surveys with the use of high-resolution 

geophysical (HRG) survey equipment in 

the Atlantic Ocean off of North Carolina 

and Virginia (we note only limited 

survey work will extend into waters off 

Virginia). Kitty Hawk will also conduct 

surveys in the inshore sounds of North 

Carolina, including Bogue, Pamlico, 

Albemarle, and Currituck Sounds (as 

part of the ECC); however, those surveys 

will use equipment operating at 

frequencies above 180 kilohertz (kHz) 

(outside marine mammal hearing range) 

and therefore will not result in 

harassment to marine mammals. For 

this reason, survey work in inshore 

sounds is not further discussed in this 

notice. In addition to Kitty Hawk South 

surveys, there will be a small amount of 

residual survey effort from the Kitty 

Hawk North WDA and ECC (the area 

surveyed under the previous IHAs) 

included in this survey effort due to 

inability to complete previous surveys 

as a result of unsuitable weather. 

Dates and Duration 

Kitty Hawk Wind plans to commence 

the surveys in August 2022 and 

continue for 1 year. Based on 24-hour 

operations, the HRG survey activities 

(excluding those in inshore sounds) are 

expected to require 273 vessel days 

which represents the sum of the total 

number of days each vessel operates 

(not calendar days). Three vessels using 

equipment that has the potential to 

result in harassment to marine 

mammals would operate during the 

survey. 

A detailed description of the planned 

surveys by Kitty Hawk Wind are 

provided in the Federal Register notice 

of the proposed IHA (87 FR 7139; 

February 8, 2022). Since that time, no 

changes have been made to the project 

activities. Therefore, a detailed 

description is not provided here. Please 

refer to that Federal Register notice for 

the description of the specified 

activities. Here, we provide brief 

information on the effort and sound 

sources Kitty Hawk would use during 

the surveys (Table 1 and Table 2). We 

note that all decibel (dB) levels included 

in this notice are referenced to 1 

microPascal (1 mPa). The root mean 

square decibel level (dBrms) represents 

the square root of the average of the 

pressure of the sound signal over a 

given duration. The peak dB level 

(dBpeak) represents the range in pressure 

between zero and the greatest pressure 

of the signal. Operating frequencies are 

presented in kilohertz (kHz). 

TABLE 1—SURVEY SEGMENT DETAILS

Vessel Location and line kms * Predominant HRG source Duration 

Vessel A ......................... WDA: 7,562 kms; ECC: 590 ........................ Multi-channel Seismic (Sparker) .................. WDA: 42 days; ECC: 4. 

Vessel A ......................... ECC Alternative A: 3,107 kms ..................... Single Channel Seismic (Boomer) ............... 17 days. 

Vessel A ......................... Expanded OECC: 5,843 .............................. Single Channel Seismic (Boomer) ............... 33 days. 

Vessel B ......................... WDA/ECC: 15,715 kms ............................... Single Channel Seismic (Boomer) ............... 80 days. 

Vessel C ......................... ECC Base Case: 16,071 kms ...................... Single Channel Seismic (Boomer) ............... 96 days. 

Total 

3 vessels ........................ 48,888 km .................................................... ...................................................................... 273 days. 

* Does not include survey transect line distance in Bogue, Pamlico, Albemarle, and Currituck Sounds. 

TABLE 2—KITTY HAWK WIND HRG SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS

HRG system Representative HRG 

survey equipment 

Operating 

frequencies 

kilohertz 

(kHz) 

Source level 

dBpeak

Source level 

dBrms

Pulse 

duration 

(ms) 

Beam 

width 

(degree) 

Shallow penetration subbottom profiler.EdgeTech 512i ................... 0.4 to 12 ........ c 186 c 180 1.8 to 65.8 ..... 51 to 80. 

Medium penetration subbottom profiler a.Applied Acoustics SBoom 

750J (Triple Plate Boomer).

0.9–14 ............ d 206 d 198 0.8 .................. 30.e

Multi-channel Sparker 

(MCS) in flip/flop configuration b.

Applied Acoustics DuraSpark 1000J.3.2 .................. f 223 f 213 0.5 to 3 f ......... 180. 

Multi-channel Sparker 

(MCS) in flip/flop configuration.

GeoMarine Geo-Source 

800J.

0.05 to 5 ........ 215 206 5.5 .................. 180. 

aWhile three operational powers (500/750/1000J) were modeled for the Applied Acoustics S-Boom for comparison purposes, only the 750 

joules (J) operational power is anticipated to be used. bAlthough the entire MCS array would be mobilized, the sparker sources would be activated in an alternating flip/flop sequence. 

cThe source levels are based on data from Crocker and Frantantonio (2016) for the EdgeTech 512i for 75 percent power with a bandwidth of 

0.5 to 8 kHz. dThe source levels are based on data from Crocker and Frantantonio (2016) for the Applied Acoustics S-Boom for source setting of 750J. 

eThe beamwidth was provided in email correspondence with Neil MacDonald of Modulus Technology Ltd. 

fThe source levels are based on data from Crocker and Frantantonio (2016). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
25454 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 

Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

measures contained within the IHA are 

described in detail later in this 

document (please see Mitigation and 

Monitoring and Reporting). 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue 

an IHA to Kitty Hawk Wind was 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 8, 2022 (87 FR 7139). That 

proposed notice described, in detail, 

Kitty Hawk Wind’s activities, the 

marine mammal species that may be 

affected by the activities, and the 

anticipated effects on marine mammals. 

This proposed notice was available for 

a 30-day public comment period. During 

this period, NMFS received a comment 

letter from Oceana. A summary of 

Oceana’s comments and NMFS’ 

responses are as follows: 

Comment 1: Oceana opposes NMFS’ 

renewal process and suggested NMFS 

should end its approach to renewing 

IHAs with a 15-day comment period, 

instead providing a full 30-day 

comment period for a renewal notice to 

ensure adequate public engagement. 

Response: Several statements 

provided by Oceana suggest it believes 

erroneously that NMFS is proposing to 

issue a renewal IHA to Kitty Hawk 

Wind and allowed a 15-day public 

comment period. The public comment 

period for issuance of the proposed IHA 

to Kitty Hawk Wind was February 8, 

2022 through March 10, 2022 which 

constituted 30 days and the action is 

issuance of a new IHA to Kitty Hawk, 

not a renewal IHA. While NMFS also 

solicited public comments on the 

potential for issuance of a renewal IHA, 

should Kitty Hawk Wind request one, 

that action would come later in time. 

Should Kitty Hawk request, and NMFS 

propose, to issue a renewal IHA, NMFS 

will provide an additional 15-day public 

comment period on that action for a 

total of a 45-day public comment 

period. Because any renewal (as 

explained in the Request for Public 

Comments section of the proposed IHA) 

is limited to another year of identical or 

nearly identical activities in the same 

location (as described in the Description 

of the Proposed Activity section of the 

proposed IHA) or the same activities 

that were not completed within the 1- 

year period of the initial IHA, reviewers 

have the information needed to 

effectively comment on both the 

immediate proposed IHA and a possible 

1-year renewal, should the IHA holder 

choose to request one. 

While there are additional documents 

submitted with a renewal request, for a 

qualifying renewal these are limited to 

documentation that NMFS will make 

available and use to verify that the 

activities are identical to those in the 

initial IHA, are nearly identical such 

that the changes would have either no 

effect on impacts to marine mammals or 

decrease those impacts, or are a subset 

of activities already analyzed and 

authorized but not completed under the 

initial IHA. NMFS will also confirm, 

among other things, that the activities 

will occur in the same location; involve 

the same species and stocks; provide for 

continuation of the same mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting requirements; 

and that no new information has been 

received that would alter the prior 

analysis. The renewal request must also 

contain a preliminary monitoring report, 

but that is to verify that effects from the 

activities do not indicate impacts of a 

scale or nature not previously analyzed. 

The additional 15-day public comment 

period provides the public an 

opportunity to review these few 

documents, provide any additional 

pertinent information, and comment on 

whether they think the criteria for a 

renewal have been met. NMFS also will 

provide direct notice of the proposed 

renewal to those who commented on the 

initial IHA, to provide an opportunity to 

submit any additional comments. 

Between the initial 30-day comment 

period on these same activities and the 

additional 15 days, the total comment 

period for a renewal is 45 days. 

In addition to the IHA renewal 

process being consistent with all 

requirements under section 101(a)(5)(D), 

it is also consistent with Congress’s 

intent for issuance of IHAs to the extent 

reflected in statements in the legislative 

history of the MMPA. Through the 

provision for renewals in the 

regulations, description of the process 

and express invitation to comment on 

specific potential renewals in the 

Request for Public Comments section of 

each proposed IHA, the description of 

the process on NMFS’ website, further 

elaboration on the process through 

responses to comments such as this, 

posting of substantive documents on the 

agency’s website, and provision of 30 or 

45 days for public review and comment 

on all proposed initial IHAs and 

renewals, respectively, NMFS has 

ensured that the public ‘‘is invited and 

encouraged to participate fully in the 

agency decision-making process.’’ 

In prior responses to comments about 

IHA renewals (e.g., 84 FR 52464, 

October 02, 2019; 85 FR 53342, August 

28, 2020; 86 FR 33664, June 25, 2021; 

87 FR 806, January 6, 2022), NMFS has 

explained how the renewal process, as 

implemented, is consistent with the 

statutory requirements contained in 

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

provides additional efficiencies beyond 

the use of abbreviated notices, and, 

further, promotes NMFS’ goals of 

improving conservation of marine 

mammals and increasing efficiency in 

the MMPA compliance process. 

Therefore, we intend to continue 

implementing the renewal process. For 

more information, NMFS has published 

a description of the renewal process on 

our website (available at https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/incidentalharassment-authorization-renewals). 

Comment 2: Oceana notes that the 

IHA must rely upon the most recent and 

best available science for the North 

Atlantic right whale (NARW), including 

updated population estimates, recent 

habitat use patterns for the study area, 

and a revised discussion of acute and 

cumulative stress of whales in the 

region, and asserts that NMFS does not 

do so. Specifically, for population 

estimates, Oceana suggests the NARW 

Consortium’s Annual Report Card 

(Report Card) is the best available 

science. 

Response: NMFS has used the best 

available science regarding population 

abundance and trends, habitat use of the 

survey area, and a sufficiently 

comprehensive review of existing 

stressors on NARWs, including data 

related to the ongoing unusual mortality 

event in issuing the IHA. NMFS also 

considers the best science available 

when considering renewals as well. 

The Federal Register notice of 

proposed IHA (87 FR 7139, February 8, 

2022) identifies that the NARW 

population is endangered, discusses 

habitat use of the survey area, identifies 

current stressors on the population (e.g., 

entanglement in fishing gear and vessel 

strikes), and identifies potential impacts 

of the proposed survey, including 

effects of stress, on NARWs. The notice 

of proposed IHA cites the NMFS draft 

2021 stock assessment report (SAR) as 

the best available science with respect 

to NARW population estimates (n = 

356–368). The SARs are peer-reviewed 

by the Atlantic Scientific Review Group 

whereas the Report Card, available at 

https://www.narwc.org/reportcards.html, is published independently 

by Consortium members without peer 

review. Although the 2021 NARW 

Report Card is available and indicates 

the NARW population is slightly lower 

than indicated in the draft 2021 SAR, 

NMFS relies on the SAR. Recently (after 

publication of the notice of proposed 

IHA), NMFS has updated its species 

web page to recognize the population 

estimate for NARWs is now below 350 

animals (https://www.fisheries.

noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-rightVerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Apr 28, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM 29APN1

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 25455 

whale). We anticipate that this 

information will be presented in the 

draft 2022 SAR. We note that this 

change in abundance estimate would 

not change the estimated take of 

NARWs or authorized take numbers, nor 

affect our ability to make the required 

findings under the MMPA for Kitty 

Hawk Wind’s survey activities. 

NMFS agrees with Oceana that both 

acute and chronic stressors are of 

concern for NARW conservation and 

recovery. We recognize that acute stress 

from acoustic exposure is one potential 

impact of these surveys, and that 

chronic stress can have fitness, 

reproductive, etc. impacts at the 

population-level scale. NMFS has 

carefully reviewed the best available 

scientific information in assessing 

impacts to marine mammals, and 

recognizes that the surveys have the 

potential to impact marine mammals 

through behavioral effects, stress 

responses, and auditory masking. 

However, NMFS does not expect that 

the generally short-term, intermittent, 

and transitory marine site 

characterization survey activities in a 

NARW migratory habitat would create 

conditions of acute or chronic acoustic 

exposure leading to stress responses that 

would result in meaningful impacts to 

marine mammals. NMFS has also 

prescribed a robust suite of mitigation 

measures, such as time-area limitations 

and extended distance shutdowns for 

certain species that are expected to 

further reduce the duration and 

intensity of acoustic exposure, while 

limiting the potential severity of any 

possible behavioral disruption. The 

potential for chronic stress was 

evaluated in making the determinations 

presented in NMFS’s negligible impact 

analyses. 

Comment 3: Oceana asserted that 

NMFS should fully consider the discrete 

effects of each activity and the 

cumulative effects of the suite of 

approved, proposed, and potential 

activities on marine mammals, 

including NARWs, and ensure that the 

cumulative effects are not excessive 

before issuing or renewing an IHA. 

Response: Neither the MMPA nor 

NMFS’ codified implementing 

regulations call for consideration of 

other unrelated activities and their 

impacts on populations. The preamble 

for NMFS’ implementing regulations (54 

FR 40338; September 29, 1989) states in 

response to comments that the impacts 

from other past and ongoing 

anthropogenic activities are to be 

incorporated into the negligible impact 

analysis via their impacts on the 

baseline. Consistent with that direction, 

NMFS has factored into its negligible 

impact analysis the impacts of other 

past and ongoing anthropogenic 

activities via their impacts on the 

baseline, e.g., as reflected in the density/ 

distribution and status of the species, 

population size and growth rate, and 

other relevant stressors. Section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA requires 

NMFS to modify, suspend, or revoke the 

IHA if it finds that the activity is having 

more than a negligible impact on the 

affected species or stocks of marine 

mammals. NMFS will closely monitor 

baseline conditions before and during 

the period when the IHA is effective and 

will exercise this authority if 

appropriate. The 1989 final rule for the 

MMPA implementing regulations also 

addressed public comments regarding 

cumulative effects from future, 

unrelated activities. There NMFS stated 

that such effects are not considered in 

making findings under section 101(a)(5) 

concerning negligible impact. In this 

case, both this IHA, as well as other 

IHAs currently in effect or proposed 

within the specified geographic region, 

are appropriately considered unrelated 

activities relative to the others. The 

IHAs are unrelated in the sense that 

they are discrete actions under section 

101(a)(5)(D), issued to discrete 

applicants. 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

requires NMFS to make a determination 

that the take incidental to a ‘‘specified 

activity’’ will have a negligible impact 

on the affected species or stocks of 

marine mammals. NMFS’ implementing 

regulations require applicants to include 

in their request a detailed description of 

the specified activity or class of 

activities that can be expected to result 

in incidental taking of marine mammals. 

50 CFR 216.104(a)(1). Thus, the 

‘‘specified activity’’ for which incidental 

take coverage is being sought under 

section 101(a)(5)(D) is generally defined 

and described by the applicant. Here, 

Kitty Hawk Wind was the applicant for 

the IHA, and we are responding to the 

specified activity as described in that 

application (and making the necessary 

findings on that basis). Through the 

response to public comments in the 

1989 implementing regulations, we also 

indicated (1) that NMFS would consider 

cumulative effects that are reasonably 

foreseeable when preparing a NEPA 

analysis, and (2) that reasonably 

foreseeable cumulative effects would 

also be considered under section 7 of 

the ESA for ESA-listed species, as 

appropriate. Cumulative impacts 

regarding issuance of IHAs for site 

characterization survey activities such 

as those planned by Kitty Hawk Wind 

have been adequately addressed under 

NEPA in prior environmental analyses 

that support the basis for NMFS’ 

determination that this action is 

appropriately categorically excluded 

from further NEPA analysis. NMFS 

independently evaluated the use of a 

categorical exclusion for issuance of 

Kitty Hawk Wind’s IHA, which 

included consideration of extraordinary 

circumstances. 

Comment 4: Oceana indicated the 

IHA must include conditions for the 

survey activities that will first avoid 

impacts on NARWs and then minimize 

and mitigate effects. Oceana suggested 

that NMFS should permit Kitty Hawk 

Wind to utilize lower impact techniques 

or technology if those provide 

information about the site without 

adverse effects. 

Response: Kitty Hawk Wind has 

indicated the equipment needed to 

conduct the survey is that contained 

within the IHA application and NMFS 

has prescribed measures to reduce 

impacts to the maximum extent 

practicable. NMFS has included 

measures in the IHA measures that will 

minimize impacts on NARWs, including 

a 500-m clearance and shutdown zone. 

The takes of NARWs authorized are 

included as a precaution in recognition 

of potential circumstances where 

whales are not detected in time to shut 

down; however, upon detection, 

equipment would be shut down, 

limiting exposure time and potentially 

avoiding harassment. NMFS finds the 

measures prescribed through the IHA 

result in the least practicable adverse 

impacts on marine mammals. 

Comment 5: Oceana suggested that 

during low light conditions, the IHA 

should require complimenting protected 

species observer (PSO) efforts with 

additional monitoring technologies such 

as infrared (IR) techology, a 500-m 

separation distance between vessels and 

NARWs, and requiring sources to ramp 

up. 

Response: NMFS agrees with Oceana. 

The proposed IHA made available for 

public comment and the issued IHA 

include a requirement that during 

reduced visibility conditions, including 

nighttime operations, PSOs must utilize 

enhanced detection technology, that all 

vessels maintain a 500-m separation 

distance from NARWs at all times, and 

where technically feasible (e.g., 

equipment is not on a binary on/off 

switch), a ramp-up procedure will be 

used for HRG survey equipment capable 

of adjusting energy levels at the start or 

restart of HRG survey activities. Kitty 

Hawk Wind has confirmed both the 

boomers and sparkers used during the 

survey have the capability to be rampedup, thus, they will do so. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
25456 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 

Comment 6: Oceana recommended 

that the IHA should limit all vessels of 

all sizes associated with the proposed 

survey activity to speeds less than 10 

knots (kn; 18.5 kilometers (km)/hour) at 

all times with no exceptions. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges that 

vessel strikes can result in injury, 

serious injury, or mortality and reducing 

the risk of vessel strikes to NARWs is a 

key priority. We have analyzed the 

potential for ship strike resulting from 

Kitty Hawk Wind’s activity and have 

determined that based on the nature of 

the activity (e.g., survey vessel speeds 

during operations are approximately 4 

kn (4.6 miles per hour)) and the 

required mitigation measures specific to 

vessel strike avoidance included in the 

IHA, potential for vessel strike is so low 

as to be discountable. Specific to 

NARWs, these mitigation measures, all 

of which were included in the proposed 

IHA and are contained in the final IHA, 

include a requirement that: All vessel 

operators comply with 10 kn (18.5 km/ 

hour) or less speed restrictions in any 

Seasonal Management Area (SMA; 

November 1 through April 30) or 

Dynamic Management Area (DMA) and 

check daily for information regarding 

the establishment of mandatory or 

voluntary vessel strike avoidance areas 

and information regarding NARW 

sighting locations; all vessel operators 

reduce vessel speed to 10 kn (18.5 km/ 

hour) or less when any large whale, any 

mother/calf pairs, pods, or large 

assemblages of non-delphinid cetaceans 

are observed within 100 meters (m) of 

an underway vessel; all survey vessels 

maintain a separation distance of 500-m 

or greater from any ESA-listed whales or 

other unidentified large marine 

mammals visible at the surface while 

underway; vessels must steer a course 

away from any sighted ESA-listed whale 

at 10 kn or less until the 500-m 

minimum separation distance has been 

established; and, if an ESA-listed whale 

is sighted in a vessel’s path, or within 

500 m of an underway vessel, the 

underway vessel must reduce speed and 

shift the engine to neutral. We have 

determined that the ship strike 

avoidance measures in the IHA are 

sufficient to ensure the least practicable 

adverse impact on NARWs. 

Furthermore, no documented vessel 

strikes of any marine mammal species, 

including NARWs, have occurred 

during any marine site characterization 

surveys, including transiting, for which 

NMFS has issued an IHA. 

Comment 7: Oceana recommended 

that, to support oversight and 

enforcement, the IHA should require all 

vessels to be equipped with and using 

a Class A Automatic Identification 

System (AIS) device at all times while 

on the water. 

Response: NMFS is generally 

supportive of the idea that vessels 

involved with survey activities be 

equipped with and using Class A 

Automatic Identification System 

(devices) at all times while on the water. 

Indeed, there is a precedent for NMFS 

requiring such a stipulation for 

geophysical surveys in the Atlantic 

Ocean (83 FR 63268, December 7, 2018); 

however, these activities carried the 

potential for much more significant 

impacts than the marine site 

characterization surveys to be carried 

out by Kitty Hawk Wind, with the 

potential for both Level A and Level B 

harassment take. Given the small 

isopleths and small numbers of take 

authorized by this IHA, NMFS does not 

agree that the benefits of requiring AIS 

on all vessels associated with the survey 

activities outweighs and warrants the 

cost and practicability issues associated 

with this requirement. 

The large majority of HRG vessels 

used by Kitty Hawk Wind have AIS 

onboard. There are some instances in 

which small vessels (approximately 10 

m (33 feet (ft) or smaller) are used in 

shallow water and these may or may not 

have an AIS installed. These small 

vessels would primarily work in the 

inshore sounds and very shallow coastal 

waters where the larger vessels cannot 

access. NMFS does not agree it is 

necessary to install AIS on these small 

vessels. 

Comment 8: Oceana recommended 

the IHA must require all vessels 

associated with the project, at all phases 

of development, follow the vessel plan 

and rules regardless of ownership, 

operator, contract and that developers 

are explicitly liable for behavior of all 

employees, contractors, subcontractors, 

consultants, and associated vessels and 

machinery. 

Response: The conditions in the IHA 

are relevant to all vessels and personnel 

participating in Kitty Hawk Wind’s 

survey activities for the time period that 

the IHA is effective. 

Comment 8: Oceana asserts that the 

IHA should include a requirement for 

all phases of the site characterization to 

subscribe to the highest level of 

transparency, including frequent 

reporting to Federal agencies, 

requirements to report all visual and 

acoustic detections of NARWs and any 

dead, injured, or entangled marine 

mammals to NMFS or the Coast Guard 

as soon as possible and no later than the 

end of the PSO shift. They also 

recommend all reports and data be 

accessible on a publicly available 

website. 

Response: NMFS agrees with the need 

for reporting and indeed, the MMPA 

calls for IHAs to incorporate reporting 

requirements. The proposed IHA and 

issued IHA include requirements for 

reporting that support Oceana’s 

recommendations. Kitty Hawk Wind is 

required to submit a monitoring report 

to NMFS within 90 days after 

completion of survey activities that fully 

documents the methods and monitoring 

protocols, summarizes the data recorded 

during both visual and passive acoustic 

monitoring, estimates the number of 

marine mammals that may have been 

taken during survey activities, and 

describes, assesses and compares the 

effectiveness of monitoring and 

mitigation measures. PSO datasheets or 

raw sightings data must also be 

provided with the draft and final 

monitoring report. We note acoustic 

detections will not be reported as no 

passive acoustic monitoring is required 

in the IHA (see response to Comment 

10). 

Further, the IHA stipulates that if a 

NARW is observed at any time by any 

project vessels, during surveys or during 

vessel transit, Kitty Hawk Wind must 

immediately report sighting information 

to the NMFS NARW Sighting Advisory 

System and to the U.S. Coast Guard, and 

that any discoveries of injured or dead 

marine mammals be reported by Kitty 

Hawk Wind to the Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, and to the Southeast 

Regional Stranding Coordinator as soon 

as feasible. All reports and associated 

data submitted to NMFS are included 

available for public inspection at 

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

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

incidental-take-authorizations-otherenergy-activities-renewable. 

Comment 9: Oceana recommended 

the IHA include requirements to use 

effective reactive restrictions that are 

triggered by detection of protected 

species by visual, acoustic, or other 

means before or during site 

characterization activities. Specifically, 

they suggested requiring a 1,000 m 

clearance zone and shutdown zone for 

NARWs with immediate notification to 

NMFS if this measure is triggered. 

Oceana did not provide reasoning for 

this zone size. 

NMFS Response: NMFS disagrees 

with this recommendation. The 500-m 

clearance and shutdown zones for 

NARWs exceeds the modeled distance 

to the largest 160-dB Level B harassment 

isopleth distance at highest power (445 

m). Given that calculated Level B 

harassment isopleths are likely 

conservative, and NMFS considers 

impacts from HRG survey activities to 

be near de minimis, the 500-m clearance 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 25457 

and shutdown zones is sufficiently 

protective to effect the least practicable 

adverse impact on NARWs. The issued 

IHA maintains the 500-m clearance and 

shutdown zone requirement, as 

contained within the proposed IHA. In 

addition, the IHA requires Kitty Hawk 

Wind to ramp-up sources prior to 

operating at full power when sources 

allow for such an action (sources with 

binary on/off switches cannot be 

ramped-up). 

Comment 10: Oceana recommended 

Kitty Hawk Wind use passive acoustic 

monitoring (PAM) to aid in NARW 

detection and trigger mitigation 

measures such as shutdowns. 

NMFS Response: There are several 

reasons why we do not agree that use of 

PAM is warranted for Kitty Hawk 

Wind’s HRG surveys. While NMFS 

agrees that PAM can be an important 

tool for augmenting detection 

capabilities in certain circumstances, its 

utility in further reducing impact the 

proposed HRG survey activities is 

limited. Oceana’s recommendation 

involves extremely costly and time 

consuming (i.e., impracticable) 

monitoring and mitigation measures 

that are not warranted based on the best 

available science indicating extremely 

low densities of NARWs during the 

effective period of the IHA and the 

extremely small harassment zones 

which would likely not meaningfully 

enhance detection, and the practical 

limitations of identifying precise 

locations of whales to trigger mitigation 

at such close distances to the vessel. We 

explain below, in detail, why PAM is 

not warranted for this survey. 

It is generally well-accepted that 

using towed passive acoustic sensors to 

detect baleen whales (including 

NARWs) is not typically effective 

because the noise from the vessel, the 

flow noise, and the cable noise are in 

the same frequency band and will mask 

the vast majority of baleen whale calls. 

Vessels produce low-frequency noise, 

primarily through propeller cavitation, 

with main energy in the 5–300 Hertz 

(Hz) frequency range. Source levels 

range from about 140 to 195 dB re 1 mPa 

(micropascal) at 1 m (NRC, 2003; 

Hildebrand, 2009), depending on factors 

such as ship type, load, and speed, and 

ship hull and propeller design. Studies 

of vessel noise show that it appears to 

increase background noise levels in the 

71–224 Hz range by 10–13 dB (Hatch et 

al., 2012; McKenna et al., 2012; Rolland 

et al., 2012). PAM systems employ 

hydrophones towed in streamer cables 

approximately 500 m behind a vessel. 

Noise from water flow around the cables 

and from strumming of the cables 

themselves is also low-frequency and 

typically masks signals in the same 

range. Experienced PAM operators 

participating in a recent workshop 

(Thode et al., 2017) emphasized that a 

PAM operation could easily report no 

acoustic encounters, depending on 

species present, simply because 

background noise levels rendered any 

acoustic detection impossible. The same 

workshop report stated that a typical 

eight-element array towed 500 m behind 

a vessel could be expected to detect 

delphinids, sperm whales, and beaked 

whales at the required range, but not 

baleen whales, due to expected 

background noise levels (including 

seismic noise, vessel noise, and flow 

noise). 

There are several additional reasons 

why we do not agree that use of PAM 

is warranted for Kitty Hawk Wind’s 

survey activities. While NMFS agrees 

that PAM can be an important tool for 

augmenting detection capabilities in 

certain circumstances, its utility in 

further reducing impact during HRG 

survey activities is limited. First, for this 

activity, the area expected to be 

ensonified above the Level B 

harassment threshold is relatively small 

(a maximum of 445 m)—this reflects the 

fact that, to start with, the source level 

is comparatively low and the intensity 

of any resulting impacts would be lower 

level and, further, it means that 

inasmuch as PAM will only detect a 

portion of any animals exposed within 

a zone, the overall probability of PAM 

detecting an animal in the harassment 

zone, alone and without a 

corresponding visual detection, is low— 

together these factors support the 

limited value of PAM for use in 

reducing take with smaller zones. PAM 

is only capable of detecting animals that 

are actively vocalizing, while many 

marine mammal species vocalize 

infrequently or during certain activities, 

which means that only a subset of the 

animals within the range of the PAM 

would be detected (and potentially have 

reduced impacts). Additionally, 

localization and range detection can be 

challenging under certain scenarios. For 

example, odontocetes are fast moving 

and often travel in large or dispersed 

groups which makes localization 

difficult. 

Given that the effects to marine 

mammals from the types of surveys 

authorized in this IHA are expected to 

be limited to low level behavioral 

harassment, even in the absence of 

mitigation, the limited additional 

benefit anticipated by adding this 

detection method (especially for 

NARWs), and the cost and 

impracticability of implementing a fulltime PAM program, we have determined 

the current requirements for visual 

monitoring are sufficient to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on the 

affected species or stocks and their 

habitat. 

Changes From the Proposed IHA to 

Final IHA 

In their application, Kitty Hawk Wind 

indicated they would start the proposed 

surveys in April 2022 with the goal of 

completing them prior to November 1, 

2022. In the notice of proposed IHA, 

NMFS noted this survey schedule 

would reduce impacts to NARWs given 

their migratory patterns although we did 

not propose a mitigation measure that 

the surveys must be completed by 

November and the take estimates we 

calculated assuming year-round 

surveys. Since that time, Kitty Hawk has 

informed NMFS that due to unforeseen 

changes in the schedule, the surveys are 

now scheduled to start in August 2022 

and surveys are likely to run through 

the winter. The schedule change does 

not impact take estimates for NARWs 

(n=2) or for any other marine mammal 

nor does this change our findings given 

the impacts from these types of surveys 

are already minimal and the authorized 

take of NARWs in only 2. 

Since publication of the notice of 

proposed IHA, NMFS has acknowledged 

that the population estimate of NARWs 

in now under 350 animals (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/northatlantic-right-whale). However, as 

discussed in our response to Comment 

#2 above, NMFS has determined that 

this change in abundance estimate 

would not change the estimated take of 

NARWs or authorized take numbers, nor 

affect our ability to make the required 

findings under the MMPA for Kitty 

Hawk Wind’s survey activities. The 

status and trends of the NARW 

population remain unchanged. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

Sections 3 and 4 of the application 

summarize available information 

regarding status and trends, distribution 

and habitat preferences, and behavior 

and life history, of the potentially 

affected species. NMFS fully considered 

all of this information, and we refer the 

reader to these descriptions, 

incorporated here by reference, instead 

of reprinting the information. 

Additional information regarding 

population trends and threats may be 

found in NMFS’s Stock Assessment 

Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.

noaa.gov/national/marine-mammalprotection/marine-mammal-stockassessments) and more general 

information about these species (e.g., 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
25458 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 

physical and behavioral descriptions) 

may be found on NMFS’s website 

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

Table 3 lists all species or stocks that 

may occur within the survey area 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 

serious injury or mortality is anticipated 

or issued, 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 some species, 

this geographic area may extend beyond 

U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this 

region are assessed in NMFS’s U.S. 

Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico SARs (e.g., 

Hayes et al., 2019, 2020). All values 

presented in Table 3 are the most recent 

available at the time of publication and 

are available in the draft 2021 SARs 

(available online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/draftmarine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports). 

TABLE 3—SPECIES LIKELY IMPACTED BY THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES

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 (-; 356; 2020) 4 ................... 0.8 18.6 

Family Balaenopteridae 

(rorquals): 

Humpback whale ................ Megaptera novaeangliae Gulf of Maine ............................ -/-; Y 1,393 (0; 1,375; 2016) .............. 22 58 

Fin whale ............................ Balaenoptera physalus ... Western North Atlantic .............. E/D; Y 6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 2016) ......... 11 2.35 

Sei whale ............................ Balaenoptera borealis .... Nova Scotia .............................. E/D; Y 6,292 (1.02; 3,098; 2016) ......... 6.2 1.2 

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

acutorostrata.

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

Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Family Ziphiidae: 

Cuvier’s beaked Whale ...... Ziphius cavirostris ........... Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 5,744 (0.36, 4,282, 2016) ......... 43 0.2 

Blainville’s beaked Whale ... Mesoplodon densirostris Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 10,107 (0.27, 8,085, 2016) ....... 81 0 

True’s beaked whale .......... Mesoplodon mirus .......... Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 81 .............................................. 0 

Gervais’ beaked whale ....... Mesoplodon europaeus .. Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 81 .............................................. 0 

Sowerby’s beaked whale .... Mesoplodon bidens ........ Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 81 .............................................. 0 

Family Delphinidae: 

Long-finned pilot whale ...... Globicephala melas ........ Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 39,215 (0.30; 30,627; See 

SAR).

306 21 

Short finned pilot whale ...... Globicephala 

macrorhynchus.

Western North Atlantic .............. -/-;Y 28,924 (0.24; 23,637; 2016) ..... 236 160 

Bottlenose dolphin .............. Tursiops truncatus .......... Western North Atlantic Offshore -/-; N 62,851 (0.23; 51,914, 2016) ..... 519 28 

W.N.A. Southern Migratory 

Coastal.

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

Common dolphin ................ Delphinus delphis ........... Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 172,947 (0.21; 145,216; 2016) 1,452 399 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ...... Stenella frontalis ............. Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 2012) ..... 320 0 

Risso’s dolphin ................... Grampus griseus ............ Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 35,493 (0.19; 30,289; 2016) ..... 303 54.3 

Rough-toothed dolphin ....... Steno bredanensis ......... Western North Atlantic .............. -/-; N 136 (1; 67; 2016) ...................... 0 0.7 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises): 

Harbor porpoise .................. Phocoena phocoena ...... Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy ...... -/-; N 95,543 (0.31; 74,034; 2016) ..... 851 217 

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

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

designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports-region. 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 M/SI plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, 

ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 4The draft 2022 SARs have yet to be released; however, NMFS has updated its species webpage to recognize the population estimate for NARWs is now below 

350 animals (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale). 

As indicated above, all 17 species 

(with 18 managed stocks) in Table 3 

temporally and spatially co-occur with 

the activity to the degree that take is 

reasonably likely to occur. In addition to 

what is included in Sections 3 and 4 of 

the application, the SARs, and NMFS’ 

website, further detail informing the 

baseline for select species (i.e., 

information regarding current Unusual 

Mortality Events (UME) and important 

habitat areas) was provided in the notice 

of proposed IHA (87 FR 7139; February 

8, 2022) and is not repeated here. No 

new information is available since 

publication of that notice. 

Marine Mammal Hearing 

Hearing is the most important sensory 

modality for marine mammals 

underwater, and exposure to 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 25459 

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 dB 

threshold from the normalized 

composite audiograms, with the 

exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower 

bound was deemed to be biologically 

implausible and the lower bound from 

Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine 

mammal hearing groups and their 

associated hearing ranges are provided 

in Table 4. 

TABLE 4—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS

[NMFS, 2018] 

Hearing group Generalized hearing 

range * 

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

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

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

australis).

275 Hz to 160 kHz. 

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

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

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

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

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

The pinniped functional hearing 

group was modified from Southall et al. 

(2007) on the basis of data indicating 

that phocid species have consistently 

demonstrated an extended frequency 

range of hearing compared to otariids, 

especially in the higher frequency range 

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

2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013). 

For more detail concerning these 

groups and associated frequency ranges, 

please see NMFS (2018) for a review of 

available information. 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

The effects of underwater noise from 

the deployed acoustic sources have the 

potential to result in behavioral 

harassment of marine mammals in the 

vicinity of the study area. The Federal 

Register notice for the proposed IHA (87 

FR 7139; February 8, 2022) included a 

discussion of the effects of 

anthropogenic noise on marine 

mammals and their habitat, therefore 

that information is not repeated here; 

please refer to the Federal Register 

notice (87 FR 7139; February 8, 2022) 

for that information. 

Estimated Take 

This section provides the process by 

which the estimated takes were devised 

and the number of incidental takes 

NMFS authorized in the IHA, which 

informs both NMFS’ consideration of 

‘‘small numbers’’ and the negligible 

impact determinations. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, 

which (i) has the potential to injure a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 

or (ii) has the potential to disturb a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild by causing disruption 

of behavioral patterns, including, but 

not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

(Level B harassment). 

Authorized takes are by Level B 

harassment only, in the form of 

disruption of behavioral patterns for 

individual marine mammals resulting 

from exposure to noise from certain 

HRG acoustic sources. Based primarily 

on the characteristics of the signals 

produced by the acoustic sources 

planned for use, Level A harassment is 

neither anticipated (even absent 

mitigation), nor authorized. 

Consideration of the anticipated 

effectiveness of the mitigation measures 

(i.e., exclusion zones and shutdown 

measures), discussed in detail below in 

the 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 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 take 

estimates. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

NMFS recommends the use of 

acoustic thresholds that identify the 

received level of underwater sound 

above which exposed marine mammals 

would be reasonably expected to be 

behaviorally harassed (equated to Level 

B harassment) or to incur PTS of some 

degree (equated to Level A harassment). 

Level B Harassment for non-explosive 

sources—Though significantly driven by 

received level, the onset of behavioral 

disturbance from anthropogenic noise 

exposure is also informed to varying 

degrees by other factors related to the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
25460 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 

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., sparkers 

and boomers) evaluated here for Kitty 

Hawk Wind’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’ 2018 Technical Guidance, which 

may be accessed at 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

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

Kitty Hawk Wind’s proposed activity 

includes the use of impulsive 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 Kitty Hawk 

Wind’s application for details of a 

quantitative exposure analysis exercise, 

i.e., calculated Level A harassment 

isopleths and estimated Level A 

harassment exposures. Kitty Hawk 

Wind did not request authorization of 

take by Level A harassment, and no take 

by Level A harassment is authorized. 

Ensonified Area 

Here, we describe operational and 

environmental parameters of the activity 

that will feed into identifying the area 

ensonified above the acoustic 

thresholds, which include source levels 

and transmission loss coefficient. 

Sources that have the potential to 

result in marine mammal harassment 

include sparkers and boomers. These 

are impulsive sources. The basis for the 

HRG survey take estimate is the number 

of marine mammals that would be 

exposed to sound levels in excess of 

Level B harassment criteria for 

impulsive and/or intermittent noise 

(160 dBrms). Distances to thresholds 

were calculated assuming a propagation 

loss rate of 15logR, also known as 

practical spreading. The resulting 

distances to NMFS Level B harassment 

isopleth (160 dBrms) are presented in 

Table 5. 

Kitty Hawk then considered track line 

coverage and isopleth distance to 

estimate the maximum ensonified area 

over a 24-hr period, also referred to as 

the zone of influence (ZOI). The 

estimated distance of the daily vessel 

track line was determined using the 

estimated average speed of the vessel (4 

kn (7.4 km/hr)) and the 24-hour 

operational period. Within each survey 

segment, the ZOI was calculated using 

the respective maximum distance to the 

Level B harassment threshold and 

estimated daily vessel track of 177.792 

km. During the use of the Applied 

Acoustics Dura-Spark 1000J MCS, 

estimates of take have been based on a 

maximum Level B harassment distance 

of 445 m from the sound source 

resulting in an ensonified area (i.e., ZOI) 

around the survey equipment of 158.857 

km2 per day over a projected survey 

period of 45 days (Table 5). During the 

use of Applied Acoustics S-Boom 

(boomer), estimates of take have been 

based on a maximum Level B 

harassment distance of 13.49 m from the 

sound source resulting in an ensonified 

area (i.e., ZOI) around the survey 

equipment of 4.765 km2 per day over a 

projected survey period of 273 days 

(Table 5). 

The ZOI is a representation of the 

maximum extent of the ensonified area 

around a sound source over a 24-hr 

period. The ZOI was calculated per the 

following formula: 

ZOI = (Distance/day × 2r) + pr2

TABLE 5—LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLD DISTANCES AND ENSONIFIED AREA

Dominant survey equipment 

Number 

of active 

survey days 

Estimated 

total line 

distance 

(km) 

Estimated 

distance 

per day 

(km) 

Distance to 

threshold 

ZOI 

per day 

(km2) 

MCS ..................................................................................... 47 8,152 177.792 445 158.857 

Boomer ................................................................................. 226 42,059 13.4 4.765 

Marine Mammal Occurrence 

In this section we provide the 

information about the presence, density, 

or group dynamics of marine mammals 

that will inform the take calculations. 

Habitat-based density models 

produced by the Duke University 

Marine Geospatial Ecology Laboratory 

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

represent the best available information 

regarding marine mammal densities in 

the survey area. The density data 

presented by Roberts et al. (2016, 2017, 

2018, 2020) incorporates aerial and 

shipboard line-transect survey data from 

NMFS and other organizations and 

incorporates data from 8 physiographic 

and 16 dynamic oceanographic and 

biological covariates, and controls for 

the influence of sea state, group size, 

availability bias, and perception bias on 

the probability of making a sighting. 

These density models were originally 

developed for all cetacean taxa in the 

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

subsequent years, certain models have 

been updated based on additional data 

as well as certain methodological 

improvements. More information is 

available online at 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). The updated models incorporate 

additional sighting data, including 

sightings from NOAA’s Atlantic Marine 

Assessment Program for Protected 

Species (AMAPPS) surveys. 

Monthly density grids (e.g., rasters) 

for each species were overlain with the 

Survey Area and values from all grid 

cells that overlapped the Survey Area 

were averaged to determine monthly 

mean density values for each species. 

Monthly mean density values within the 

Survey Area were averaged by season 

(Winter (December, January, February), 

Spring (March, April, May), Summer 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 25461 

(June, July, August), Fall (September, 

October, November)) to provide 

seasonal density estimates. Within each 

survey segment (WDA and offshore 

export cable corridor), the highest 

seasonal density estimates during the 

duration of the survey were used to 

estimate take. 

Take Calculation and Estimation 

Here we describe how the information 

provided above is brought together to 

produce a quantitative take estimate. 

For most species, the amount of take 

authorized is equal to the calculated 

take amount resulting from the 

following equation: D × ZOI × d where 

d equals the number of days each source 

is dominant (i.e., 47 days for the sparker 

and 226 days for the boomer). We note 

the densities provided in Table 5 

represent the number of animals/100 

km; therefore, the density is normalized 

to 1 km in the equation. However, for 

some species, this equation does not 

reflect those species that can travel in 

large groups—an important parameter to 

consider that is not captured by density 

values. The equation also does not 

capture the propensity of some 

delphinid species to be attracted to the 

vessel and bowride. Therefore, to 

account for these real-world situations, 

the authorized take is a product of group 

size. For large groups of spotted and 

common dolphins knowing their 

affinity for bow riding (and therefore 

coming very close to the vessel), Kitty 

Hawk Wind assumed one group could 

be taken each day of sparker and/or 

boomer operations (273). Based on 

marine mammal sighting data collected 

during previous survey efforts, as 

described in Avangrid’s previous 

monitoring report, Kitty Hawk Wind 

assumes an average group size for 

spotted dolphins is 16 in the survey 

area. For common dolphins, the overall 

average reported group size was 4 in all 

survey areas but the average group size 

during prior geotechnical surveys was 

17 individuals. For Risso’s dolphin and 

pilot whales, average group size for 

these species are 25 and 20, respectively 

(Reeves et al. 2002). 

For bottlenose dolphin densities, 

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

2020) does not differentiate by 

individual stock. The WDA is located 

within depths exceeding 20 m. 

Therefore, given the southern coastal 

migratory stock propensity to be found 

shallower than the 20 m depth isobath 

north of Cape Hatteras (Reeves et al., 

2002; Waring et al., 2016), take of the 

southern coastal migratory stock would 

be unlikely. Therefore, all work in the 

WDA was allocated to the offshore 

stock. 

Table 6 provides the total amount of 

take authorized in the IHA. For details 

of take per survey segment, please see 

Table 8 in Kitty Hawk’s application. 

TABLE 6—MARINE MAMMAL DENSITY AND TAKE ESTIMATES

Species Stock Calculated 

take 

Authorized 

take 

Percent of 

population 

N Atlantic right whale ....................... Western North Atlantic .................................................. 2 2 <1 

Humpback whale .............................. Gulf of Maine ................................................................ 15 15 <1 

Fin whale .......................................... Western North Atlantic .................................................. 18 18 <1 

Sei whale .......................................... Western North Atlantic .................................................. 1 1 ........................

Minke whale ..................................... Canadian East Coast .................................................... 22 22 <1

Pilot whales ...................................... Western North Atlantic .................................................. 32 32 <1 

Cuvier’s Beaked Whale .................... Western North Atlantic .................................................. 5 5 <1 

Mesoplodon spp 1 ............................. Western North Atlantic .................................................. 3 3 <1 

Bottlenose dolphin ............................ Western North Atlantic, offshore, .................................. 823 823 <1 

Western North Atlantic southern migratory coastal ...... 226 226 6.0 

Common dolphin a ............................ Western North Atlantic .................................................. 365 9,282 5.3 

Atlantic spotted dolphin a .................. Western North Atlantic .................................................. 418 8736 <1 

Risso’s dolphin a ............................... Western North Atlantic .................................................. 8 25 <1 

Rough-toothed dolphin a ................... Western North Atlantic .................................................. 1 20 14.7 

Harbor porpoise ............................... Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy .......................................... 39 39 <1 

1 Mesoplodon spp represent Blainsville beaked whales (Mesoplodon densirostris), True’s beaked whales (Mesoplodon europaeus), and/or 

Sowerby’s beaked whales (Mesoplodon bidens). 2 Multiplier applied to increase calculated take to account for two large group size, an average pod size of 16 individuals encountered in Survey 

Area (Milne 2019, 2021) has been included for spotted dolphin and 17 individuals have also been included for common dolphin (Milne 2019, 

2021). Pod size adjustments of 25 and 20 individuals (average pod size from Reeves et al. [2002]) have been included for Risso’s and roughtoothed dolphins, respectively. 

Mitigation 

In order to issue an IHA under section 

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

set forth the permissible methods of 

taking pursuant to the activity, and 

other means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on the species or 

stock and its habitat, paying particular 

attention to rookeries, mating grounds, 

and areas of similar significance, and on 

the availability of the species or stock 

for taking for certain subsistence uses 

(latter not applicable for this action). 

NMFS regulations require applicants for 

incidental take authorizations to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting the activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, we carefully consider two 

primary factors: 

(1) The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 

expected to reduce impacts to marine 

mammals, marine mammal species or 

stocks, and their habitat. This considers 

the nature of the potential adverse 

impact being mitigated (likelihood, 

scope, range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned), the 

likelihood of effective implementation 

(probability implemented as planned); 

and 

(2) The practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost and 

impact on operations. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
25462 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and 

Their Habitat 

NMFS requires that the following 

mitigation measures be implemented 

during Kitty Hawk Wind’s planned 

marine site characterization surveys. 

Pre-Clearance of the Shutdown Zones 

Kitty Hawk Wind must implement a 

30-minute monitoring period of the 

clearance zones prior to the initiation of 

ramp-up of HRG equipment. During this 

period, the clearance zone will be 

monitored by the PSOs, using the 

appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up 

may not be initiated if any marine 

mammal(s) is within its respective zone. 

If a marine mammal is observed within 

the clearance zone during the preclearance period, ramp-up may not 

begin until the animal(s) has been 

observed exiting its respective clearance 

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 

Where technically feasible (e.g., 

equipment is not on a binary on/off 

switch), a ramp-up procedure will be 

used for HRG survey equipment capable 

of adjusting energy levels at the start or 

restart of HRG survey activities. A rampup will begin with the power of the 

smallest acoustic equipment at its 

lowest practical power output 

appropriate for the survey. When 

technically feasible the power willthen 

be turned up and other acoustic sources 

added in a way such that the source 

level would increase gradually. Rampup activities not begin if a marine 

mammal(s) enters a clearance zone(s) 

prior to initiating ramp-up. Ramp-up 

will commence when the animal has 

been observed exiting the exclusion 

zone or until an additional time period 

has elapsed with no further sighting 

(i.e., 15 minutes for small dolphins and 

seals and 30 minutes for all other 

marine mammal species). The ramp-up 

procedure will be used at the beginning 

of HRG survey activities to provide 

additional protection to marine 

mammals near the survey area by 

allowing them to vacate the area prior 

to the commencement of survey 

equipment use. 

Marine Mammal Shutdown Zones 

An immediate shutdown of a sparker 

or boomer is 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 30 minutes 

has passed without subsequent 

detection of a large whale or 15 minutes 

for a smaller cetacean or seal. Table 6 

provides the required shutdown zones. 

TABLE 6—CLEARANCE AND SHUTDOWN ZONES DURING SPARKER AND BOOMER USE

Species Clearance zone 

(m) 

Shutdown zone 

(m) 

North Atlantic right whale ................................................................................................................................ 500 500 

All other ESA-listed marine mammals ............................................................................................................. 500 450 

Non-ESA marine mammals 1 ........................................................................................................................... 100 100 

1Shutdown is not required for a delphinid from specified genera Delphinus, Stenella (frontalis only), and Tursiops. 

Shutdown Procedures 

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 shutdown zone or 

the relevant time period has lapsed 

without re-detection (15 minutes for 

small odontocetes and seals, and 30 

minutes for all other species). 

The shutdown requirement is waived 

for small delphinids of the following 

genera: Delphinus, Stenella (frontalis 

only), and Tursiops. 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 detected in the exclusion 

zone and belongs to a genus other than 

those specified. 

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 only 

if the PSOs have maintained constant 

observation and the shutdown zone is 

clear of marine mammals. If the source 

is turned off for more than 30 minutes, 

it may only be restarted after PSOs have 

cleared the shutdown zones for 30 

minutes. 

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 

(445 m), shutdown is required. 

Vessel Strike Avoidance 

Kitty Hawk Wind will ensure that 

vessel operators and crew maintain a 

vigilant watch for marine mammals and 

slow down or stop their vessels to avoid 

striking these species. All personnel 

responsible for navigation and marine 

mammal observation duties will receive 

site-specific training on marine 

mammals sighting/reporting and vessel 

strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike 

avoidance measures would include the 

following, except under circumstances 

when complying with these 

requirements would put the safety of the 

vessel or crew at risk: 

• 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; 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 25463 

• All vessel operators will monitor 

the NARW Reporting Systems (e.g., the 

Early Warning System, Sighting 

Advisory System, and Mandatory Ship 

Reporting System) daily throughout the 

entire survey period for the presence of 

NARWs during activities conducted in 

support of plan submittal; 

• All vessel operators will comply 

with the 10 knot (18.5 km/hr) or less 

speed restrictions when operating in 

any SMA from November 1 through 

April 30; 

• All vessels, regardless of size, must 

observe a 10-knot speed restriction in a 

NARW DMA; 

• All survey vessels will maintain a 

separation distance of 500 m or greater 

from any sighted NARW or other ESAlisted whale; 

• If underway, vessels must steer a 

course away from any sighted NARW at 

10 kn (18.5 km/hr) or less until the 500 

m minimum separation distance has 

been established. If a NARW is sighted 

in a vessel’s path, or within 100 m to an 

underway vessel, the underway vessel 

must reduce speed and shift the engine 

to neutral. Engines will not be engaged 

until the NARW has moved outside of 

the vessel’s path and beyond 100 m. If 

stationary, the vessel must not engage 

engines until the NARW has moved 

beyond 100 m; 

• All vessels will maintain a 

separation distance of 100 m or greater 

from any sighted non-delphinid 

cetacean. If sighted, the vessel 

underway must reduce speed and shift 

the engine to neutral, and must not 

engage the engines until the nondelphinid cetacean has moved outside 

of the vessel’s path and beyond 100 m. 

If a survey vessel is stationary, the 

vessel will not engage engines until the 

non-delphinid cetacean has moved out 

of the vessel’s path and beyond 100 m; 

• All vessel operators will comply 

with 10 knot (18.5 km/hr) or less speed 

restrictions when mother/calf pairs, 

pods, or large assemblages of nondelphinid cetaceans are observed near 

an underway vessel; 

• All vessels will maintain a 

separation distance of 50 m or greater 

from any sighted delphinid cetacean 

and pinniped. Any vessel underway 

will remain parallel to a sighted 

delphinid cetacean or pinniped’s course 

whenever possible and avoid excessive 

speed or abrupt changes in direction. 

Any vessel underway reduces vessel 

speed to 10 kn (18.5 km/hr) or less 

when pods (including mother/calf pairs) 

or large assemblages of delphinid 

cetaceans are observed. Vessels may not 

adjust course and speed until the 

delphinid cetaceans have moved 

beyond 50 m and/or the abeam of the 

underway vessel; 

• All vessels underway will not 

divert or alter course in order to 

approach any marine mammal. Any 

vessel underway will avoid excessive 

speed or abrupt changes in direction to 

avoid injury to the sighted cetacean or 

pinniped; 

• All vessels must reduce their speed 

to 10 kn or less when mother/calf pairs, 

pods, or large assemblages of cetaceans 

are observed near a vessel underway; 

• All vessels must maintain a 

minimum separation distance of 500 m 

from right whales. If a whale is observed 

but cannot be confirmed as a species 

other than a right 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 or greater from any sighted nondelphinid cetacean; 

• All vessels shall attempt to 

maintain a separation distance of 50 m 

or greater from any sighted delphinid 

cetacean and pinniped, 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. 

These requirements do not apply in 

any case where compliance would 

create an imminent and serious threat to 

a person or vessel or to the extent that 

a vessel is restricted in its ability to 

maneuver and, because of the 

restriction, cannot comply. 

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. In addition to the 

aforementioned measures, Kitty Hawk 

will abide by all marine mammal 

relevant conditions in the Greater 

Atlantic Regional Office’s (GARFO) 

informal programmatic consultation, 

dated June 29, 2021 (revised September 

2021), pursuant to section 7 of the ESA. 

These include the relevant best 

management practices of project design 

criteria (PDCs) 4, 5, and 7. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

measures contained within the IHA, 

NMFS has determined that the 

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. 

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 planned survey 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
25464 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors; 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks; 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat); and 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Monitoring Measures 

Visual monitoring 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. Kitty Hawk 

Wind 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. 

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-hour 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 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). 

Reporting Measures 

Within 90 days after completion of 

survey activities or expiration of this 

IHA, whichever comes sooner, a final 

technical report will be provided to 

NMFS that fully documents the 

methods and monitoring protocols, 

summarizes the data recorded during 

monitoring, summarizes the number of 

marine mammals observed during 

survey activities (by species, when 

known), summarizes the mitigation 

actions taken during surveys (including 

what type of mitigation and the species 

and number of animals that prompted 

the mitigation action, when known), 

and provides an interpretation of the 

results and effectiveness of all 

mitigation and monitoring. Any 

recommendations made by NMFS must 

be addressed in the final report prior to 

acceptance by NMFS. All draft and final 

marine mammal and acoustic 

monitoring reports must be submitted to 

PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov 

and ITP.Daly@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); 

• Survey activity information, such as 

type of survey equipment in operation, 

acoustic source power output while in 

operation, and any other notes of 

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

ramp-up, shutdown, end of operations, 

etc.). 

If a marine mammal is sighted, the 

following information should be 

recorded: 

• Watch status (sighting made by PSO 

on/off effort, opportunistic, crew, 

alternate vessel/platform); 

• PSO who sighted the animal; 

• Time of sighting; 

• Vessel location at time of sighting; 

• Water depth; 

• Direction of vessel’s travel (compass 

direction); 

• Direction of animal’s travel relative 

to the vessel; 

• Pace of the animal; 

• Estimated distance to the animal 

and its heading relative to vessel at 

initial sighting; 

• Identification of the animal (e.g., 

genus/species, lowest possible 

taxonomic level, or unidentified); also 

note the composition of the group if 

there is a mix of species; 

• Estimated number of animals (high/ 

low/best); 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 25465 

• 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); 

• Description of any actions 

implemented in response to the sighting 

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

or course alteration, etc.) and time and 

location of the action. 

If a NARW is observed at any time by 

PSOs or personnel on any project 

vessels, during surveys or during vessel 

transit, Kitty Hawk Wind must 

immediately report sighting information 

to the NMFS NARW Sighting Advisory 

System: (866) 755–6622. NARW 

sightings in any location must also be 

reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via 

channel 16. 

In the event that Kitty Hawk Wind 

personnel discover an injured or dead 

marine mammal, Kitty Hawk Wind 

would report the incident to the NMFS 

Office of Protected Resources (OPR) and 

the NMFS Southeast Marine Mammal 

Stranding Network (1–877–942–5343) if 

the sighting is in North Carolina or the 

Northeast Stranding Network (1–866– 

755–6622) if the sighting is in Virginia 

as soon as feasible. The report would 

include the following information: 

• Time, date, and location (latitude/ 

longitude) of the first discovery (and 

updated location information if known 

and applicable); 

• Species identification (if known) or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Condition of the animal(s) 

(including carcass condition if the 

animal is dead); 

• Observed behaviors of the 

animal(s), if alive; 

• If available, photographs or video 

footage of the animal(s); and 

• General circumstances under which 

the animal was discovered. 

In the unanticipated event of a ship 

strike of a marine mammal by any vessel 

involved in the activities covered by the 

IHA, Kitty Hawk Wind would report the 

incident to the NMFS OPR and the 

NMFS Southeast Marine Mammal 

Stranding Network (1–877–942–5343) if 

the sighting is in North Carolina or the 

Northeast Stranding Network (1–866– 

755–6622) if the sighting is in Virginia 

as soon as feasible but within 24 hours. 

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 impacts or responses (e.g., 

intensity, duration), the context of any 

impacts or responses (e.g., critical 

reproductive time or location, foraging 

impacts affecting energetics), as well as 

effects on habitat, and the likely 

effectiveness of the mitigation. We also 

assess the number, intensity, and 

context of estimated takes by evaluating 

this information relative to population 

status. Consistent with the 1989 

preamble for NMFS’ implementing 

regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 

1989), the impacts from other past and 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the baseline (e.g., as 

reflected in the regulatory status of the 

species, population size and growth rate 

where known, ongoing sources of 

human-caused mortality and serious 

injury, or ambient noise levels). 

To avoid repetition, the majority of 

our analysis applies to the species listed 

in Table 6, given that many of the 

anticipated effects of the survey to be 

similar in nature. Where there are 

meaningful differences between species 

or stocks, or groups of species, in 

anticipated individual responses to 

activities, impact of the authorized take 

on the population due to differences in 

population status, or impacts on habitat, 

they are included in a separate subsection. For all species, NMFS does not 

anticipate that mortality, serious injury, 

or injury would occur as a result from 

HRG surveys, even in the absence of 

mitigation, and no serious injury or 

mortality is authorized. 

As discussed in the Potential Effects 

of Specified Activities on Marine 

Mammals and their Habitat section 

above, 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 from sparker use 

is 445 m and 13 m from boomer use. 

The ensonified area surrounding each 

vessel is relatively small compared to 

the overall distribution of the animals in 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
25466 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 

the area and their use of the habitat. 

Feeding behavior is not likely to be 

significantly impacted as the impacts of 

the surveys are limited to very small 

areas around each vessel, prey species 

are mobile and are broadly distributed 

throughout the survey area; therefore, 

marine mammals that may be 

temporarily displaced during survey 

activities are expected to be able to 

resume foraging once they have moved 

away from areas with disturbing levels 

of underwater noise. Because of the 

temporary nature of the disturbance and 

the availability of similar habitat and 

resources in the surrounding area, the 

impacts to marine mammals and the 

food sources that they utilize are not 

expected to cause significant or longterm consequences for individual 

marine mammals or their populations. 

There are no rookeries, mating or 

calving grounds known to be 

biologically important to marine 

mammals within the survey area and 

there are no feeding areas known to be 

biologically important to marine 

mammals within the survey area. There 

is no designated critical habitat for any 

ESA-listed marine mammals in the 

survey area. 

North Atlantic Right Whales 

The status of the NARW population is 

of heightened concern and, therefore, 

merits additional analysis. As discussed 

in the notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 

7139; February 8, 2022), elevated 

NARW mortalities began in June 2017 

and there is an active UME. Overall, 

preliminary findings support human 

interactions, specifically vessel strikes 

and entanglements, as the cause of 

death for the majority of right whales. 

As noted previously, the survey area 

overlaps a migratory corridor BIA for 

NARWs. Due to the fact that the survey 

activities are temporary and the spatial 

extent of sound produced by the survey 

will be very small relative to the spatial 

extent of the available migratory habitat 

in the BIA, right whale migration is not 

expected to be impacted by the survey. 

Given the relatively small size of the 

ensonified area, it is unlikely that prey 

availability would be adversely affected 

by Kitty Hawk Wind’s proposed survey 

operations. Required vessel strike 

avoidance measures would also 

decrease risk of ship strike during 

migration; no ship strike is expected to 

occur during Kitty Hawk Wind’s 

proposed activities. Additionally, only 

very limited take by Level B harassment 

of NARWs has been authorized by 

NMFS and we anticipate a very low 

level of harassment, should it occur, 

because Kitty Hawk Wind would be 

required to maintain a shutdown zone 

of 500 m if a NARW is observed. The 

authorized take accounts for any missed 

animals wherein the survey equipment 

is not shutdown immediately. Because 

shutdown would occur immediately 

upon detection (if the whale is within 

500 m), it is likely the exposure time 

would be very limited and received 

levels would not be much above 

harassment thresholds. Further, the 500 

m shutdown zone for right whales is 

conservative, considering the Level B 

harassment isopleth for the most 

impactful acoustic source (i.e., sparkerwhich may not be used on all survey 

days) is estimated to be 445 m, and 

thereby minimizes the potential for 

behavioral harassment of this species. 

As noted previously, Level A 

harassment is not expected due to the 

characteristics of the signals produced 

by the acoustic sources planned for use; 

this finding is further enforced by the 

proposed mitigation measures. NMFS 

does not anticipate NARW takes that 

would result from Kitty Hawk Wind’s 

activities would impact annual rates of 

recruitment or survival. Thus, any takes 

that occur will not result in population 

level impacts. 

Other Marine Mammal Species With 

Active UMEs 

As discussed above, there are several 

active UMEs occurring in the vicinity of 

Kitty Hawk Wind’s survey area. 

Elevated humpback whale mortalities 

have occurred along the Atlantic coast 

from Maine through Florida since 

January 2016. Of the cases examined, 

approximately half had evidence of 

human interaction (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 mitigation measures are expected 

to reduce the number and/or severity of 

takes for all species listed in Table 6, 

including those with active UMEs, to 

the level of least practicable adverse 

impact. In particular they would 

provide animals the opportunity to 

move away from the sound source 

throughout the survey area before HRG 

survey equipment reaches full energy, 

thus preventing them from being 

exposed to sound levels that have the 

potential to cause injury (Level A 

harassment) or more severe Level B 

harassment. No Level A harassment is 

anticipated, even in the absence of 

mitigation measures, or authorized. 

NMFS expects that takes will 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 will only 

be exposed briefly to a small ensonified 

area that might result in take. 

Additionally, the 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 support our 

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 authorized; 

• No Level A harassment (PTS) is 

anticipated, even in the absence of 

mitigation measures, or authorized; 

• Foraging success is not likely to be 

significantly impacted as effects on 

species that serve as prey species for 

marine mammals from the survey are 

expected to be minimal; 

• The availability of alternate areas of 

similar habitat value for marine 

mammals to temporarily vacate the 

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 

NARWs, the activities will occur in 

such a comparatively small area such 

that any avoidance of the survey area 

due to activities will not affect 

migration. In addition, the requirement 

to shut down at 500 m to minimize 

potential for Level B behavioral 

harassment would limit the effects of 

the action on migratory behavior of the 

species; and 

• The mitigation measures, including 

visual monitoring and shutdowns, are 

expected to minimize potential impacts 

to marine mammals. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2022 / Notices 25467 

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 

monitoring and mitigation measures, 

NMFS finds that the total marine 

mammal take from the 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. For this IHA, take of all 

species or stocks is below one third of 

the estimated stock abundance (in fact, 

take of individuals is less than 7 percent 

of the abundance for all affected stocks). 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the proposed activity 

(including the mitigation and 

monitoring measures) and the 

anticipated take of marine mammals, 

NMFS finds that small numbers of 

marine mammals would be taken 

relative to the population size of the 

affected species or stocks. 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of the affected marine mammal stocks or 

species implicated by this action. 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

the total taking of affected species or 

stocks would not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

such species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act 

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered 

Species Act 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 consults internally 

whenever we propose to authorize take 

for endangered or threatened species. 

NMFS is authorizing take, by Level B 

harassment only, of NARWs, fin whales, 

and sei whales which are listed under 

the ESA. On June 29, 2021 (revised 

September 2021), GARFO completed an 

informal programmatic consultation on 

the effects of certain site assessment and 

site characterization activities to be 

carried out to support the siting of 

offshore wind energy development 

projects off the U.S. Atlantic coast. Part 

of the activities considered in the 

consultation are geophysical surveys 

such as those proposed by Kitty Hawk 

Wind and for which we are proposing 

to authorize take. GARFO concluded 

site assessment surveys are not likely to 

adversely affect endangered species or 

adversely modify or destroy critical 

habitat. NMFS has determined issuance 

of the IHA is covered under the 

programmatic consultation; therefore, 

ESA consultation has been satisfied. 

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 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 determined that the issuance 

of the final IHA qualifies to be 

categorically excluded from further 

NEPA review. 

Authorization 

As a result of these determinations, 

NMFS has issued an IHA to Kitty Hawk 

Wind for conducting marine site 

characterization surveys off the coast of 

North Carolina and Virginia, provided 

the previously mentioned mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting requirements 

are incorporated. The final IHA and 

supporting documents can be found at 

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

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

Dated: April 25, 2022. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09186 Filed 4–28–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB990] 

Spring Meeting of the Advisory 

Committee to the U.S. Section to the 

International Commission for the 

Conservation of Atlantic Tunas 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of the Advisory 

Committee’s 2022 spring meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee to 

the U.S. Section to the International 

Commission for the Conservation of 

Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) announces part 

II of its annual spring meeting, to be 

held May 12–13, 2022 in Miami, 

Florida. A virtual option for joining the 

meeting will also be available. 

DATES: The open sessions of the 

Committee meeting will be held on May 

12, 2022, 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. and 

May 13, 2022, 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. Closed 

sessions will be held on May 12, 2022, 

1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Courtyard by Marriott Miami 

Coconut Grove, 2649 South Bayshore 

Drive, Miami, Florida 33133. For those 

attending virtually, please register at: 

https://forms.gle/twa9SH3RSESLiDYBA. 

Instructions will be emailed to those 

registered for virtual participation 

before the meeting occurs. Registration 

will close on May 8, 2022 at 5 p.m. EDT. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bryan Keller, Office of International 

Affairs, Trade, and Commerce, 202– 

897–9208 or at bryan.keller@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Advisory Committee to the U.S. Section 

to ICCAT will meet in open session to 

receive and discuss information on 

recent Regional Fisheries Management 

Organization (RFMO) intersessional 

meetings of interest; the results of the 

meetings of the Committee’s Species 

Working Groups; and other matters 

relating to the international 

management of ICCAT species. The 

public will have access to the open 

sessions of the meeting, but there will 

be no opportunity for public comment 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1