National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

1

Summary Comparison of Impacts

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Habitats Impacts to habitats from water 

column disruptions under Alternative 

A would continue to be adverse and 

negligible. 

Impacts to habitats from activities 

involving physical disturbance to 

bottom substrate; sedimentation, 

turbidity and chemical contaminants; 

increased ambient underwater sound

levels; and onshore activities under 

Alternative A would continue to be 

adverse and negligible to minor. 

The impact on habitats from invasive 

species dispersal facilitated by 

activities under Alternative A would 

likely continue to be adverse and 

minor. 

Impacts to habitat areas resulting 

from Alternative A would not cause 

long-term changes in the availability of 

space, shelter, cover, or nutrients 

necessary for dependent species. 

Impacts of Alternative B on habitats 

throughout the action area would 

be the same or slightly, but not 

appreciably, larger than those that 

would occur under Alternative A for 

each impact causing factor. 

Impacts to habitat areas resulting 

from Alternative A would not cause 

long-term changes in the availability 

of space, shelter, cover, or nutrients 

necessary for dependent species 

and would not substantially increase 

in intensity with the increased level 

of effort of Alternative B.

Overall, impacts to habitats under 

Alternative B would be adverse, 

minor, and insignificant.

Impacts of Alternative C on habitats 

throughout the action area would 

be the same or slightly, but not 

appreciably, larger than those under

Alternatives A and B for each impact 

causing factor. 

Impacts to habitat areas resulting 

from Alternatives A and B would not 

cause long-term decreases in the 

availability of space, shelter, cover, 

or nutrients necessary for 

dependent species and would not 

substantially increase in intensity 

with the increased level of effort of 

Alternative C.

Overall, impacts to habitats under 

Alternative C would be adverse, 

minor, and insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

2

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Overall, impacts to habitats under 

Alternative A would continue to be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.

Marine Mammals Impacts on marine mammals 

(cetaceans, pinnipeds, sirenians, and 

fissipeds) from trash and debris and 

air emissions under Alternative A 

would continue to be adverse and

negligible. 

Impacts from human activity under 

Alternative A would continue to be

adverse and negligible on cetaceans 

and sirenians and adverse and minor 

on pinnipeds and fissipeds. 

Impacts on marine mammals 

(cetaceans, pinnipeds, sirenians, and 

fissipeds) from accidental oil, fuel, or 

chemical spills under Alternative A 

would continue to be adverse and

negligible to minor. 

Impacts on marine mammals 

(cetaceans, pinnipeds, sirenians, and 

fissipeds) from active underwater 

acoustic sources, vessel and 

equipment sound, vessel presence 

and movement of equipment in the 

Impacts of Alternative B on marine 

mammals would be the same or 

slightly, but not appreciably, larger 

than those that would occur under 

Alternative A for each impact 

causing factor.

Impacts to marine mammals

resulting from Alternative A would 

be temporary or short-term and 

would not be considered outside the 

natural range of variability of 

species’ populations, their habitats, 

or the natural processes sustaining 

them. These impacts would not 

substantially increase in intensity 

with the increased survey effort of 

Alternative B. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative B on 

marine mammals, including ESAlisted species, and habitat, including 

designated critical habitat, would be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.

Impacts of Alternative C on marine 

mammals would be the same or 

slightly, but not appreciably, larger 

than those that would occur under 

Alternatives A and B for each impact 

causing factor.

Impacts to marine mammals

resulting from Alternatives A and B 

would be temporary or short-term 

and would not be considered 

outside the natural range of 

variability of species’ populations, 

their habitats, or the natural 

processes sustaining them. These 

impacts would not substantially 

increase in intensity with the 

increased survey effort of 

Alternative C. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative C on 

marine mammals, including ESAlisted species, and habitat, including 

designated critical habitat, would be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

3

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

water under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and minor. 

Impacts on pinnipeds and fissipeds 

from air emissions under Alternative A 

would continue to be adverse and 

negligible.

Although a vessel strike is very 

unlikely, debilitating injury or 

mortality of one or a few individuals 

could occur and impacts would be 

adverse and moderate, or greater if 

an ESA-listed species is affected. If a 

walrus stampede occurs due to vessel 

or aircraft disturbance, the impact 

could be adverse and moderate or 

greater. If polar bears are disturbed at 

denning sites or if polar bear-human 

interactions occur, the impact could 

be adverse and moderate.

Potential impacts from underwater 

acoustic sources include injury 

exposures in the form of hearing loss 

(PTS) on cetaceans, but such injury 

would be rare and confined to a few 

individual high-frequency cetaceans. It 

would also include behavioral 
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

4

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

disruption exposures of cetaceans, 

pinnipeds, sirenians and fissipeds, but 

the amount of time individuals may 

exceed the behavioral exposure 

threshold would be on average less 

than a few minutes.

Impacts to marine mammals resulting 

from Alternative A would be 

temporary or short-term and would 

not be considered outside the natural 

range of variability of species’ 

populations, their habitats, or the 

natural processes sustaining them. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative A on 

marine mammals, including ESA-listed 

species, and habitat, including 

designated critical habitat, would 

continue to be adverse, minor, and 

insignificant.

Sea Turtles Impacts to sea turtles and their 

habitats from active underwater 

acoustic sources, vessel and 

equipment sound, and onshore 

activities under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and negligible.

Impacts of Alternative B on sea 

turtles and their habitats would be 

the same or slightly, but not 

appreciably, larger than those that 

would occur under Alternative A for 

each impact causing factor.

Impacts of Alternative C on sea 

turtles and their habitats would be 

the same or slightly, but not 

appreciably, larger than those that 

would occur under Alternatives A

and B for each impact causing 

factor.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

5

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Impacts to sea turtles and their 

habitats from vessel presence and 

movement, underwater activities, and 

air emissions under Alternative A 

would continue to be adverse and

negligible to minor.

Impacts to sea turtles and their 

habitats from accidental oil, fuel, or 

chemical spills would continue to be 

adverse and negligible to minor.

Although the effects of impact causing 

factors on sea turtles and their 

habitats range from negligible to 

moderate, moderate impacts could 

occur in the very unlikely event of an 

accidental spill of oil, fuel, or 

chemicals. Likewise, in the very 

unlikely event of a vessel strike, injury 

or death to sea turtles would also 

constitute a moderate or greater 

impact. 

Impacts to sea turtles resulting from 

Alternative A would not cause longterm changes in habitat availability 

and use, sea turtle behavior, or energy 

expenditures

Impacts to sea turtles resulting from 

Alternative A would not cause longterm changes in habitat availability 

and use, sea turtle behavior, or 

energy expenditures and would not 

substantially increase in intensity 

with the increased survey effort of 

Alternative B. 

Overall, impacts on sea turtles and 

their habitat, including designated 

critical habitat, would be adverse, 

minor, and insignificant.

Impacts to sea turtles resulting from 

Alternatives A and B would not 

cause long-term changes in habitat 

availability and use, sea turtle 

behavior, or energy expenditures

and would not substantially increase 

in intensity with the increased 

survey effort of Alternative C. 

Overall, impacts on sea turtles and 

their habitat, including designated 

critical habitat, would be adverse, 

minor, and insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

6

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Overall, impacts under Alternative A 

on sea turtles and their habitats, 

including designated critical habitat, 

would continue to be adverse, minor, 

and insignificant.

Fish Impacts to fish and their habitats from 

vessel wake and turbulence; vessel 

sound; accidental spill of oil, fuel, or 

chemicals; and disturbance of the 

ocean/lake/river bottom under 

Alternative A would continue to be 

adverse and negligible to minor.

Impacts to fish and their habitats from 

active underwater acoustic sources 

and air emissions under Alternative A 

would continue to be adverse and

minor.

Impacts to fish resulting from 

Alternative A may include some stress 

responses without permanent 

physiological damage, and may disturb 

breeding, feeding, or other activities 

but without any impacts on 

population levels; additionally, there

would not be long-term changes in 

Under Alternative B, impacts on fish 

and fish habitat would be the same 

or slightly, but not appreciably, 

larger than those that would occur

under Alternative A for each impact 

causing factor. 

Impacts to fish resulting from 

Alternative A may include some 

stress responses without permanent 

physiological damage, and may 

disturb breeding, feeding, or other 

activities but without any impacts 

on population levels; additionally, 

there would not be long-term 

changes in habitat availability and 

use or in fish behavior. These 

impacts would not substantially 

increase in intensity with the 

increased survey effort of 

Alternative B. 

Impacts of Alternative C on fish and 

fish habitat would be the same or 

slightly, but not appreciably, larger 

than those that would occur under 

Alternatives A and B for each impact 

causing factor. 

Impacts to fish resulting from 

Alternatives A and B may include 

some stress responses without 

permanent physiological damage, 

and may disturb breeding, feeding, 

or other activities but without any 

impacts on population levels; 

additionally, there would not be

long-term changes in habitat 

availability and use or in fish

behavior. These impacts would not 

substantially increase in intensity 

with the increased survey effort of 

Alternative C. 
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

7

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

habitat availability and use or in fish

behavior.

Overall, impacts of Alternative A on 

fish, including ESA-listed species, and 

fish habitat, including designated 

critical habitat, would continue to be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.

Overall, impacts of Alternative B on 

fish, including ESA-listed species,

and fish habitat, including 

designated critical habitat, would be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.

Overall, impacts of Alternative C on 

fish, including ESA-listed species,

and fish habitat, including 

designated critical habitat, would be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.

Aquatic 

Macroinvertebrates

Impacts to aquatic macroinvertebrates

and their habitats from underwater 

acoustic sources, vessel sound, and air 

emissions under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and negligible.

Impacts to aquatic macroinvertebrates

and their habitats from vessel wake 

and underwater turbulence;

accidental spill of oil, fuel, or 

chemicals; and disturbance of the 

ocean/lake/river bottom under 

Alternative A would continue to be 

adverse and negligible to minor.

Overall, impacts of Alternative A on 

aquatic macroinvertebrates, including 

ESA-listed species, and habitats, 

including designated critical habitat,

Under Alternative B, impacts on 

aquatic macroinvertebrates and 

their habitats would be the same or 

slightly, but not appreciably, larger 

than those that would occur under 

Alternative A for each impact 

causing factor. These impacts would 

not substantially increase in 

intensity with the increased survey 

effort of Alternative B. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative B on 

aquatic macroinvertebrates, 

including ESA-listed species, and 

habitats, including designated 

critical habitat, would be adverse, 

minor, and insignificant.

Under Alternative C, impacts on 

aquatic macroinvertebrates and 

their habitats would be the same or 

slightly, but not appreciably, larger 

than those that would occur under 

Alternatives A and B for each impact 

causing factor. These impacts would 

not substantially increase in 

intensity with the increased survey 

effort of Alternative C. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative C on 

aquatic macroinvertebrates, 

including ESA-listed species, and 

habitats, including designated 

critical habitat, would be adverse, 

minor, and insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

8

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

would continue to be adverse, minor, 

and insignificant.

Essential Fish Habitat

(EFH)

Impacts to EFH from disturbance of 

the water column under Alternative A 

would continue to be adverse and

negligible.

Impacts to EFH from physical impacts 

to bottom habitat; increase in 

sedimentation, turbidity, or chemical 

contamination; dispersal of invasive 

species; and increase in ambient 

sound under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and negligible 

to minor.

Impacts to EFH resulting from 

Alternative A would be infrequent, 

geographically widely distributed, and 

likely to elicit a minimal or temporary 

response from prey species or cause 

short-term changes to physical 

characteristics (i.e., changes in water 

quality).

Overall, impacts of Alternative A on 

EFH would continue to be adverse, 

minor, and insignificant.

Under Alternative B, impacts on EFH 

would be the same or slightly, but 

not appreciably, larger than those 

that would occur under Alternative 

A for each impact causing factor. 

Impacts to EFH resulting from 

Alternative A would be infrequent, 

geographically widely distributed, 

and likely to elicit a minimal or 

temporary response from prey 

species or cause short-term changes 

to physical characteristics (i.e., 

changes in water quality). These 

impacts would not substantially 

increase in intensity with the 

increased survey effort of 

Alternative B. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative B on 

EFH would be adverse, minor, and 

insignificant. 

Under Alternative C, impacts on EFH 

would be the same or slightly, but 

not appreciably, larger than those 

that would occur under Alternatives

A and B for each impact causing 

factor. 

Impacts to EFH resulting from 

Alternatives A and B would be 

infrequent, geographically widely 

distributed, and likely to elicit a 

minimal or temporary response

from prey species or cause shortterm changes to physical 

characteristics (i.e., changes in 

water quality). These impacts would 

not substantially increase in 

intensity with the increased survey 

effort of Alternative C. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative C on 

EFH would be adverse, minor, and 

insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

9

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Seabirds, Shorebirds 

and Coastal Birds, and 

Waterfowl

Impacts to birds and their habitats 

from active underwater acoustic

sources and vessel and equipment 

sound under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and negligible.

Impacts to birds and their habitats 

from aircraft sound, vessel presence 

and movement, underwater activities, 

onshore activities, and air emissions 

under Alternative A would continue to 

be adverse and negligible to minor.

Impacts to birds and their habitats 

from accidental oil, fuel, or chemical 

spills would continue to be adverse 

and minor to moderate.

Although the effects of impact causing 

factors on birds and their habitats

range from negligible to moderate, 

moderate impacts could occur in the 

very unlikely event of an accidental 

spill of oil, fuel, or chemicals. Likewise, 

in the very unlikely event of a vessel 

strike, injury or death to birds could 

constitute greater impacts. 

Under Alternative B, impacts on 

birds and their habitats would be 

the same or slightly, but not 

appreciably, larger than those that 

would occur under Alternative A for 

each impact causing factor. 

Impacts to birds resulting from 

Alternative A would generally persist 

only for the duration of an activity

and would not be expected to cause 

any long-term changes in habitat 

use and availability or energy 

expenditure outside of the natural 

range of variation. These impacts

would not substantially increase in 

intensity with the increased survey 

effort of Alternative B.

Overall, impacts on of Alternative B 

on birds, including ESA-listed 

species, and habitats, including 

designated critical habitat, would be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.

Under Alternative C, impacts on 

birds and their habitats would be 

the same or slightly, but not 

appreciably, larger than those that 

would occur under Alternatives A 

and B for each impact causing 

factor. 

Impacts to birds resulting from 

Alternatives A and B would generally 

persist only for the duration of an

activity and would not be expected 

to cause any long-term changes in 

habitat use and availability or 

energy expenditure outside of the 

natural range of variation. These 

impacts would not substantially 

increase in intensity with the 

increased survey effort of 

Alternative C. 

Overall, impacts on of Alternative C 

on birds, including ESA-listed 

species, and habitats, including 

designated critical habitat, would be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

10

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Impacts to birds resulting from 

Alternative A would generally persist 

only for the duration of an activity and 

would not be expected to cause any 

long-term changes in habitat use and 

availability or energy expenditure

outside of the natural range of 

variation.

Overall, impacts on of Alternative A on 

birds, including ESA-listed species, and 

habitats, including designated critical 

habitat, would continue to be 

adverse, minor, and insignificant.

Cultural and Historic 

Resources

Impacts to cultural and historic 

resources from installation, 

maintenance, and removal of tide 

gauges, buoys, and GPS reference 

stations under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and negligible 

to minor.

Impacts to cultural and historic 

resources from bottom sampling 

under Alternative A would continue to 

be both adverse and beneficial, 

permanent, and negligible to minor. 

Beneficial impacts would occur if a 

resource were discovered that led to 

Under Alternative B, impacts on 

cultural and historic resources

would be the same or slightly, but 

not appreciably, larger than those 

that would occur under Alternative 

A for each impact causing factor.

These impacts would not 

substantially increase in intensity 

with the increased survey effort of 

Alternative B. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative B to 

cultural and historic resources 

would be adverse, moderate, and

insignificant.

Under Alternative C, impacts on 

cultural and historic resources

would be the same or slightly, but 

not appreciably, larger than those 

that would occur under Alternatives

A and B for each impact causing 

factor. These impacts would not 

substantially increase in intensity 

with the increased survey effort of 

Alternative C. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative C to 

cultural and historic resources 

would be adverse, moderate, and

insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

11

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

the identification of a culturallysignificant artifact or a previously 

undocumented historic site.

Impacts to cultural and historic 

resources from anchoring under 

Alternative A would continue to be 

adverse, permanent, and negligible to

moderate.

Impacts on subsistence hunting and 

fishing, including Traditional Cultural 

Places, under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and negligible 

to moderate.

Although the effects of impact causing 

factors on cultural and historic 

resources range from negligible to 

moderate, moderate impacts that 

could occur if the integrity of a 

resource is diminished would be very 

unlikely. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative A to 

cultural and historic resources would 

continue to be adverse, moderate, 

and insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

12

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Socioeconomic 

Resources

The economic impacts of ocean data 

procured under Alternative A on 

health and safety, recreational 

economic activity, transportation, and 

energy-related activities would 

continue to be indirect, beneficial, 

and moderate. 

Impacts to commercial fishing under 

Alternative A would continue to be 

adverse and negligible.

Data collected under Alternative A 

would continue to improve the quality 

and quantity of ocean data and data 

products. 

Overall, Alternative A would continue 

to have indirect, beneficial, and 

moderate impacts on the ocean 

economy. 

The economic benefits of impacts of 

Alternative B would be the same or 

slightly, but not appreciably, larger 

than those discussed above under 

Alternative A. These impacts would 

not substantially increase in 

intensity with the increased survey 

effort of Alternative B. 

Overall, Alternative B would have 

indirect, beneficial, and moderate 

impacts on the ocean economy.

The economic benefits of impacts of 

Alternative C would be the same or 

slightly, but not appreciably, larger 

than those under Alternatives A and 

B. These impacts would not 

substantially increase in intensity 

with the increased survey effort of 

Alternative C.

Overall, Alternative C would have 

indirect, beneficial, and moderate 

impacts on the ocean economy.

Environmental Justice Impacts of underwater acoustic

sources on subsistence hunting of 

marine mammals under Alternative A 

would continue to be adverse and 

moderate, and the impacts to 

subsistence fishing communities 

would continue to be adverse and 

minor. 

Under Alternative B, impacts on 

environmental justice would be the 

same or slightly, but not 

appreciably, larger than those that 

would occur under Alternative A for 

each impact causing factor. These 

impacts would not substantially 

increase in intensity with the 

Under Alternative C, impacts on 

environmental justice would be the 

same or slightly, but not 

appreciably, larger than those that 

would occur under Alternatives A

and B for each impact causing 

factor. These impacts would not 

substantially increase in intensity 
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

13

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Impacts of vessel and equipment noise 

on subsistence hunting of marine 

mammals under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and minor, 

and the impacts to subsistence fishing 

communities would continue to be 

adverse and negligible. 

Impacts of vessel and equipment 

presence and movement on 

subsistence hunting of marine 

mammals under Alternative A would 

continue to be adverse and moderate, 

and the impacts to subsistence fishing 

communities would continue to be 

adverse and negligible. 

Impacts of human activities and 

accidental leakage or spillage of oil, 

fuel, and chemicals on subsistence

hunting and fishing under Alternative 

A would continue to be adverse and 

minor.

Impacts of marine trash and debris 

and air emissions on subsistence

hunting and fishing activities under 

increased survey effort of 

Alternative B. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative B on 

environmental justice would 

continue to be adverse, minor to

moderate, and insignificant. 

with the increased survey effort of 

Alternative C. 

Overall, impacts of Alternative C on 

environmental justice would 

continue to be adverse, minor to

moderate, and insignificant.
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for

Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition

14

Resource

Alternative A: No Action – Conduct 

Surveys and Mapping for Coastal and 

Marine Data Collection with Current 

Technology and Methods, at Current

Funding Levels

Alternative B: Conduct Surveys and 

Mapping with Equipment 

Upgrades, Improved Hydroacoustic 

Devices, and New Tide Stations

Alternative C: Upgrades and 

Improvements with Greater 

Funding Support

Alternative A would continue to be 

adverse and negligible. 

The availability of new mapping and 

charting information under Alternative 

A would have beneficial effects on EJ 

communities.

Overall, impacts of Alternative A on 

environmental justice would continue 

to be adverse, minor to moderate, 

and insignificant.