2022-17978. Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Marine Site Characterization Surveys

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 Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to Attentive Energy, LLC (Attentive Energy) to incidentally harass marine mammals during marine site characterization surveys associated with high resolution geophysical (HRG) equipment off the coast of New Jersey and New York in the area of Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area OCS-A 0538. There are no changes from the proposed authorization in this final authorization.

DATES:

This authorization is effective from September 15, 2022 through September 14, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jenna Harlacher, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, [phone]. Electronic copies of the application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​action/​incidental-take-authorization-attentive-energy-llc-marine-site-characterization-surveys-new. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The MMPA prohibits the “take” of marine mammals, with certain exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed incidental harassment authorization is provided to the public for review.

Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods of taking and other “means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact” on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as “mitigation”); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth. The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the relevant sections below.

Summary of Request

On April 11, 2022, NMFS received a request from Attentive Energy for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to conducting marine site characterization surveys off the coast of New Jersey and New York in the area of the Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf Lease Area (OCS)-A 0538. The application was deemed adequate and complete on May 23, 2022. On June 17 2022, NMFS published a proposed IHA for public comment (87 FR 38094). Attentive Energy's request is for take of 15 species of marine mammals by Level B harassment only. Neither Attentive Energy nor NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. There are no changes from the proposed IHA to the final IHA.

On August 1, 2022, NMFS announced proposed changes to the existing North Atlantic right whale vessel speed regulations to further reduce the likelihood of mortalities and serious injuries to endangered right whales from vessel collisions, which are a leading cause of the species' decline and a primary factor in an ongoing Unusual Mortality Event (87 FR 46921). Should a final vessel speed rule be issued and become effective during the effective period of this IHA (or any other MMPA incidental take authorization), the authorization holder would be required to comply with any and all applicable requirements contained within the final rule. Specifically, where measures in any final vessel speed rule are more protective or restrictive than those in this or any other MMPA authorization, authorization holders would be required to comply with the requirements of the rule. Alternatively, where measures in this or any other MMPA authorization are more restrictive or protective than those in any final vessel speed rule, the measures in the MMPA authorization would remain in place. These changes would become effective immediately upon the effective date of any final vessel speed rule and would not require any further action on NMFS's part.

Description of Activity

Overview

Attentive Energy plans to conduct marine site characterization surveys using high-resolution geophysical (HRG) acoustic sources in the Lease Area OCS-A 0538.

The purpose of the survey is to support the site characterization, siting, and engineering design of offshore wind project facilities including wind turbine generators, offshore substations, and submarine cables within the Lease Area. One survey vessel will operate as part of the planned surveys. Underwater sound resulting from Attentive Energy's site characterization survey activities, specifically HRG survey effort, has the potential to result in incidental take of marine mammals in the form of behavioral harassment.

Dates and Duration

The estimated duration of the surveys is expected to be up to 42 to 56 total survey days (6 to 8 weeks) within a single year in the Lease Area. A survey day is defined as a 24-hour survey period where 200 kilometer of track line is surveyed. This schedule is based on 24-hours of operations for up to 8-weeks. In total there are 3,028 km of track line that would be surveyed within the Lease Area. The schedule presented here for this project has accounted for potential down time due to inclement weather or other project-related delays, therefor actual survey time will be less than 8 weeks. Planned activities would occur between September 15, 2022 and September 14, 2023.

Specific Geographic Region

Attentive Energy's planned activities would occur in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean within Federal and state waters (Figure 1). Surveys would occur in the Lease Area off the coast of New York and New Jersey in the New York bight. Planned activities would occur within the Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy Development in OCS-A 0538. The OCS Lease area is approximately 577.6 km² and is located between 30 and 60 meters water depth.

Detailed Description of Specific Activity

Attentive Energy's marine site characterization surveys include HRG and geotechnical survey activities. These survey activities would occur within the Lease Area off the coasts of New York and New Jersey in the New York Bight. The planed HRG and geotechnical survey activities are described below.

Geotechnical Survey Activities

Attentive Energy's geotechnical survey activities would include the drilling of sample boreholes, deep cone penetration tests, and shallow cone penetration tests. The geotechnical survey activity is not expected to result in take of marine mammals. Similar activities were performed before in a nearby lease area by Atlantic Shores, and considerations of the impacts produced from geotechnical activities have been previously analyzed and included in the proposed 2020 Federal Register notice for Atlantic Shores' HRG activities (85 FR 7926; February 12, 2020). In that notification, NMFS determined that the likelihood of the geotechnical surveys resulting in harassment of marine mammals was to be so low as to be discountable. As this information remains applicable and NMFS' determination has not changed, these activities will not be discussed further in this notification.

Geophysical Survey Activities

Attentive Energy has planned that HRG survey operations would be conducted continuously 24 hours a day. Based on 24-hour operations, the estimated total duration of the activities would be approximately 8 weeks. As previously discussed above, this schedule does include potential down time due to inclement weather or other project-related delays. The HRG survey will be conducted with primary track lines spaced at 150-meter (m) intervals and tie-lines spaced at 500 −m intervals.

The HRG survey activities will be supported by the use of a purpose-built survey vessel. These are designed with built-in A-frames and davits, permanently mounted winches, and other items on the deck specifically for survey operations. The geophysical survey activities planned by Attentive Energy would include the following:

• Depth sounding to determine water depth, site bathymetry, and general bottom topography (multibeam echosounder);

• Magnetic intensity measurements (gradiometer) for detecting local variations in regional magnetic field from geological strata and potential ferrous objects on and below the bottom;

• Seafloor imaging (sidescan sonar survey) for seabed sediment classification purposes, to identify natural and human-made acoustic targets resting on the bottom as well as any anomalous features;
• Shallow-bottom penetration sub-bottom profiler (SBP) to map the near surface stratigraphy (top 0 to 10 m [33 feet] below seabed in sand and 0 to 15 m [49 feet] in mixed sediments); and
• Medium penetration SBP (sparker) to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy as needed (soils down to at least 100 m [328 ft] below seabed in sand and at least 125 m [410 feet] below seabed in mixed sediments).

The representative survey equipment that may be used in support of planned geophysical survey activities can be found in Table 0-3 of Attentive Energy's Application. The make and model of the listed geophysical equipment may vary depending on availability and the final equipment choices will vary depending upon the final survey design, vessel availability, and survey contractor selection. Geophysical surveys are expected to use several equipment types concurrently in order to collect multiple aspects of geophysical data along one transect. Selection of equipment combinations is based on specific survey objectives. All HRG survey equipment is listed in the application, including equipment that NMFS doesn't expect to result in take due to their higher frequencies and extremely narrow beam widths. Because of this, these sources were not considered when calculating the Level B harassment isopleths and are not discussed further in this notice. Acoustic parameters on this equipment can be found in Attentive Energy's IHA application on NMFS' website ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-mammal-protection/​incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable). We will only be discussing further the equipment listed below in Table 1. For equipment source level specifications noted in Table 1, a proxy representing the closest match in composition and operation of the Dual Geo-Spark was used from Crocker and Fratantonio (2016).

Table 1—Acoustic Equipment for HRG Surveys

HRG equipment type	Equipment make/model	Operating frequency (kHz)	Source level (RMS dB re 1 μPa @1m)	Reference for source level	Pulse duration (milliseconds)	Repetition rate (Hz)	Beam width (degrees)
Mobile, Impulsive
Deep SBP	Dual Geo-Spark 2000X (400 tip/500J)	0.3	203	Crocker and Fratantonio 2016 *	1.1	4	180
* Applied Acoustics Dura-spark 500J to 2,000J as Proxy.
Key: RMS—Root mean square; dB—Decibel; re—referenced at; m—meters; SBP—Sub-bottom profiler; Hz—hertz; kHz—kilohertz; μPa—microPascal.

The deployment of HRG survey equipment, including the equipment planned for use during Attentive Energy's activities, produces sound in the marine environment that has the potential to result in harassment of marine mammals. Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures 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 Attentive Energy was published in the Federal Register on June 27, 2022 (87 FR 38094). That notice described, in detail, Attentive Energy's activities, the marine mammal species that may be affected by the activities, and the anticipated effects on marine mammals. In that notice, we requested public input on the request for authorization described therein, our analyses, the proposed authorization, and any other aspect of the notice of proposed IHA, and requested that interested persons submit relevant information, suggestions, and comments. This proposed notice was available for a 30-day public comment period.

NMFS received letters from two environmental non-governmental organizations (eNGOs) (Oceana, Inc. (Oceana) and Clean Ocean Action (COA)). All comments, and NMFS' responses, are provided below, and the letters are available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​action/​incidental-take-authorization-attentive-energy-llc-marine-site-characterization-surveys-new). Please review the letters for full details regarding the comments and underlying justification.

Comment 1: COA does not agree with NMFS' negligible impact determination for North Atlantic right whale (NARW) and states that NMFS provides an inaccurate characterization of impacts to NARW.

Response: NMFS disagrees with the COA's position regarding the negligible impact analysis, and they do not provide a reasoned basis for finding that the effects of the specified activity would be greater than negligible on NARW. The Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination section of the proposed IHA (87 FR 38094) provides a detailed qualitative discussion supporting NMFS' determination that any anticipated impacts from this action would be negligible. The section contains a number of factors that were considered by NMFS based on the best available scientific data and why we concluded that impacts resulting from the specified activity are not reasonably expected to, or reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.

With specific regard to NARW, we note that take is authorized for only a very small percentage of the right whale population (see Table 6). However, the numbers of potential incidents of take or animals taken are only part of an assessment and are not, alone, decisively indicative of the degree of impact. In order to adequately evaluate the effects of noise exposure at the population level, the total number of take incidents must be further interpreted in context of relevant biological and population parameters and other biological, environmental, and anthropogenic factors and in a spatially and temporally explicit manner. The effects to individuals of a “take” are not necessarily equal. Some take events represent exposures that only just exceed a Level B harassment threshold, which would be expected to result in lower-level impacts, while other exposures occur at higher received levels and would typically be expected to have comparatively greater potential impacts on an individual. Further, responses to similar received levels may result in significantly different impacts on an individual dependent upon the context of the exposure or the status of the individuals ( e.g., if it occurred in an area and time where concentrated feeding was occurring, or to individuals weakened by other effects). In this case, NMFS reiterates that no such higher level takes are expected to occur. The maximum anticipated Level B harassment zone is 141 m, a distance smaller than the precautionary shutdown zone of 500 m. To the extent that any exposure of NARW does occur, it would be expected to result in lower-level impacts that are unlikely to result in significant or long-lasting impacts to the exposed individual and, given the relatively small amount of exposures expected to occur, it is unlikely that these exposures would result in population-level impacts. NMFS acknowledges that impacts of a similar degree on a proportion of the individuals in a stock may have differing impacts to the stock based on its status, i.e., smaller stocks may be less able to absorb deaths or reproductive suppression and maintain similar growth rates as larger stocks. However, even given the precarious status of the NARW, the low-level nature of the impacts expected to occur from this action and the small number of individuals affected supports NMFS' determination that population-level impacts will not occur. The commenters provide no substantive reasoning to contradict this finding, and do not support their assertions of effects greater than NMFS has assumed may occur.

Comment 2: COA and Oceana asserted that NMFS is overestimating the population abundance for NARW.

Response: NMFS agrees that the most up to date population estimate should be used for assessing NARW abundance estimates. The revised abundance estimate (368; 95 percent with a confidence interval of 356-378) published by Pace (2021) (and subsequently included in the 2021 draft Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-mammal-protection/​marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports)), which was used in the proposed IHA, provides the most recent and best available estimate, and introduced improvements to NMFS' right whale abundance model. Specifically, Pace (2021) looked at a different way of characterizing annual estimates of age-specific survival. NMFS considered all relevant information regarding NARW, including the information cited by the commenters. However, NMFS relies on the SAR. Recently, NMFS 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-right-whale), as COA mentioned. 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 NARW or authorized take numbers, nor affect our ability to make the required findings under the MMPA for Attentive Energy's survey activities.

NMFS further notes that the MMPA specifies that the “best available data” must be used, which does not always mean the most recent. As is NMFS' prerogative, we referenced the best available NARW abundance estimate of 368 from the draft 2021 SARs as NMFS' determination of the best available data that we relied on in our analysis. The Pace (2021) results strengthened the case for a change in mean survival rates after 2010-2011, but did not significantly change other current estimates (population size, number of new animals, adult female survival) derived from the model.

Lastly, as we stated previously and in the notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 38094; June 27, 2022), any impacts to marine mammals are expected to be temporary and minor and, given the relative size of the survey area compared to the overall migratory route and foraging habitat (which is not affected by the specified activity). The survey area is small (approximately 854 km² total area) compared to the size of the NARW migratory Biologically Important Areas (BIA) (269,448 km² ). Because of this, and in context of the minor, low-level nature of the impacts expected to result from the planned survey, such impacts are not expected to result in disruption to biologically important behaviors.

Comment 3: Oceana and COA asserted that NMFS must fully consider the discrete effects of each activity and the cumulative effects of the suite of approved, proposed and potential activities on marine mammals and NARWs in particular and ensure that the cumulative effects are not excessive before issuing or renewing an IHA. Additionally, Oceana and COA state that they are similarly concerned with cumulative impacts of offshore wind development on marine mammal species in the region.

Response: Neither the MMPA nor NMFS' codified implementing regulations call for a separate “cumulative effects” analysis 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. 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, this IHA, as well as other IHAs currently in effect or proposed within the specified geographic region, are appropriately considered an unrelated activity 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, Attentive Energy is 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, NMFS also indicated that (1) we would consider cumulative effects that are reasonably foreseeable when preparing a NEPA analysis, and (2) reasonably foreseeable cumulative effects would also be considered under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for ESA-listed species, as appropriate. Accordingly, NMFS has written Environmental Assessments (EA) that addressed cumulative impacts related to substantially similar activities, in similar locations, e.g., the 2017 Ocean Wind, LLC EA for site characterization surveys off New Jersey and the 2018 Deepwater Wind EA for survey activities offshore Delaware, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. Cumulative impacts regarding issuance of IHAs for site characterization survey activities such as those planned by Attentive Energy have been adequately addressed under NEPA in prior environmental analyses that support NMFS' determination that this action is appropriately categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis. NMFS independently evaluated the use of a categorical exclusion (CE) for issuance of Attentive Energy's IHA, which included consideration of extraordinary circumstances.

Separately, the cumulative effects of substantially similar activities in the northwest Atlantic Ocean have been analyzed in the past under section 7 of the ESA when NMFS has engaged in formal intra-agency consultation, such as the 2013 programmatic Biological Opinion for BOEM Lease and Site Assessment Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey Wind Energy Areas ( https://repository.library.noaa.gov/​view/​noaa/​29291). Analyzed activities include those for which NMFS issued previous IHAs (82 FR 31562; July 7, 2017, 85 FR 21198; April 16, 2020 and 86 FR 26465; May 10, 2021), which are similar to those planned by Attentive Energy under this current IHA request. This Biological Opinion (BiOp) determined that NMFS' issuance of IHAs for site characterization survey activities associated with leasing, individually and cumulatively, are not likely to adversely affect listed marine mammals. NMFS notes that, while issuance of this IHA is covered under a different consultation, this BiOp remains valid.

Comment 4: COA is concerned regarding the wide range of marine mammal species that could be impacted by the activities, as well as a lack of baseline data being available for species in the area, specifically harbor seals. In addition, COA has stated that NMFS did not adequately address the potential for cumulative impacts to bottlenose dolphins from Level B harassment over several years of project activities.

Response: We appreciate the concern expressed by COA. NMFS utilizes the best available science when analyzing which species may be impacted by an applicant's proposed activities. Based on information found in the scientific literature, as well as based on density models developed by Duke University, all marine mammal species included in the proposed Federal Register notice have some likelihood of occurring in Attentive Energys' survey areas. Furthermore, the MMPA requires us to evaluate the effects of the specified activities in consideration of the best scientific evidence available and, if the necessary findings are made, to issue the requested take authorization. The MMPA does not allow us to delay decision making in hopes that additional information may become available in the future. Furthermore, NMFS notes that it has previously addressed discussions on cumulative impact analyses in previous comments and references COA back to these specific responses in this Notice.

Regarding the lack of baseline information cited by COA, with specific concern pointed out for harbor seals, NMFS points towards two sources of information for marine mammal baseline information: the Ocean/Wind Power Ecological Baseline Studies, January 2008—December 2009 completed by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection in July 2010 ( https://dspace.njstatelib.org/​xmlui/​handle/​10929/​68435) and the Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (AMAPPS; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​new-england-mid-atlantic/​population-assessments/​atlantic-marine-assessment-program-protected) with annual reports available from 2010 to 2020 ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​resource/​publication-database/​atlantic-marine-assessment-program-protected-species) that cover the areas across the Atlantic Ocean. NMFS has duly considered this and all available information.

Based on the information presented, NMFS has determined that no new information has become available, nor do the commenters present additional information, that would change our determinations since the publication of the proposed notice.

Comment 5: Oceana stated that NMFS must utilize the best available science, and suggested that NMFS has not done so, specifically referencing information regarding the NARW such as updated population estimates, habitat usage in the survey area, and seasonality information. Oceana specifically asserted that NMFS is not using the best available science with regards to the NARW population estimate. Similarly, COA ensures that activities covered by this IHA should not occur during peak migratory season or biologically sensitive periods for the affected species.

Response: While NMFS agrees that the best available science should be used for assessing NARW abundance estimates, we disagree that Oceana's cited study represents the most recent and best available estimate for NARW abundance. Rather the revised abundance estimate (368; 95 percent with a confidence interval of 356-378) published by Pace (2021) (and subsequently included in the 2021 draft Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-mammal-protection/​marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports)), which was used in the proposed IHA, provides the most recent and best available estimate, and introduced improvements to NMFS' right whale abundance model. Specifically, Pace (2021) looked at a different way of characterizing annual estimates of age-specific survival. NMFS considered all relevant information regarding NARW, including the information cited by the commenters. However, NMFS relies on the SAR. Recently (after publication of the notice of proposed IHA), NMFS updated its species web page to recognize the population estimate for NARW is now below 350 animals ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​species/​north-atlantic-right-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 NARW or authorized take numbers, nor affect our ability to make the required findings under the MMPA for Attentive Energy's survey activities.

NMFS further notes that the commenters seem to be conflating the phrase “best available data” with “the most recent data.” The MMPA specifies that the “best available data” must be used, which does not always mean the most recent. As is NMFS' prerogative, we referenced the best available NARW abundance estimate of 368 from the draft 2021 SARs as NMFS' determination of the best available data that we relied on in our analysis. The Pace (2021) results strengthened the case for a change in mean survival rates after 2010-2011, but did not significantly change other current estimates (population size, number of new animals, adult female survival) derived from the model. Furthermore, NMFS notes that the SARs are peer reviewed by other scientific review groups prior to being finalized and published.

NMFS considered the best available science regarding both recent habitat usage patterns for the study area and up-to-date seasonality information in the notice of the proposed IHA, including consideration of existing BIAs and densities provided by Roberts et al. (2021). While the commenter has suggested that NMFS consider best available information for recent habitat usage patterns and seasonality, it has not offered any additional information which it suggests should be considered best available information in place of what NMFS considered in its notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 38094; June 27, 2022).

Lastly, as we stated in the notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 38094; June 27, 2022), any impacts to marine mammals are expected to be temporary and minor and, given the relative size of the survey area compared to the overall migratory route leading to foraging habitat (which is not affected by the specified activity). Comparatively, the survey area is extremely small (854 km² ) compared to the size of the NARW migratory BIA (269,448 km² ). Because of this, and in context of the minor, low-level nature of the impacts expected to result from the planned survey, such impacts are not expected to result in disruption to biologically important behaviors. Also, refer to comment two for similar discussion on right whale abundance.

Comment 6: Oceana made comments objecting to NMFS' renewal process regarding the extension of any 1-year IHA with a truncated 15-day public comment period as it violates the MMPA, and suggested an additional 30-day public comment period is necessary for any renewal request.

Response: NMFS' IHA renewal process meets all statutory requirements. In prior responses to comments about IHA renewals ( e.g.,84 FR 52464; October 2, 2019 and 85 FR 53342, August 28, 2020), 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, 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.

In particular, we emphasize that any Renewal IHA does have a 30-day public comment period, and in fact, each Renewal IHA is made available for a 45-day public comment period. The notice of the proposed IHA published in the Federal Register on June 27, 2022 (87 FR 38094) made clear that NMFS was seeking comment on the proposed IHA and the potential issuance of a renewal for this survey. As detailed in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA and on the agency's website, any renewal is limited to another year of identical or nearly identical activities in the same location or the same activities that were not completed within the 1-year period of the initial IHA. NMFS' analysis of the anticipated impacts on marine mammals caused by the applicant's activities covers both the initial IHA period and the possibility of a 1-year renewal. Therefore a member of the public considering commenting on a proposed Initial IHA also knows exactly what activities (or subset of activities) would be included in a proposed Renewal IHA, the potential impacts of those activities, the maximum amount and type of take that could be caused by those activities, the mitigation and monitoring measures that would be required, and the basis for the agency's negligible impact determinations, least practicable adverse impact findings, small numbers findings, and (if applicable) the no unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence use finding—all the information needed to provide complete and meaningful comments on a possible renewal at the time of considering the proposed initial IHA. Reviewers have the information needed to meaningfully comment on both the immediate proposed IHA and a possible 1-year renewal, should the IHA holder choose to request one.

While there would be additional documents submitted with a renewal request, for a qualifying renewal these would be limited to documentation that NMFS would 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 would also need to confirm, among other things, that the activities would 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 would also contain a preliminary monitoring report, in order 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, which includes NMFS' direct notice to anyone who commented on the proposed initial IHA, 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. 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' 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 these, 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's decision-making process”, as Congress intended.

Comment 7: Oceana stated that NMFS must require that all IHA applicants minimize the impacts of underwater noise to have the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitats in and around the project site, including through the use of best available technology and methods to minimize sound levels from geophysical surveys such as through the use of technically and commercially feasible and effective noise reduction and attenuation measures.. Oceana additionally states that NMFS must make an assessment of which activities, technologies and strategies are truly necessary to achieve site characterization to inform development of the offshore wind projects and which are not critical, asserting that NMFS should prescribe the appropriate survey techniques.

Response: The MMPA requires that an IHA include measures that will effect the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species and stocks and, in practice, NMFS agrees that the IHA should include conditions for the survey activities that will first avoid adverse effects on NARW in and around the survey site, where practicable, and then minimize the effects that cannot be avoided. NMFS has determined that the IHA meets this requirement to effect the least practicable adverse impact. As part of the analysis for all marine site characterization survey IHAs, NMFS evaluated the effects expected as a result of the specified activity, made the necessary findings, and prescribed mitigation requirements sufficient to achieve the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species and stocks of marine mammals. It is not within NMFS' purview to make judgments regarding what may be appropriate techniques or technologies for an operator's survey objectives.

Comment 8: Oceana noted that chronic stressors are an emerging concern for NARW conservation and recovery, and stated that chronic stress may result in energetic effects for NARW. Oceana suggested that NMFS has not fully considered both the use of the area and the effects of both acute and chronic stressors on the health and fitness of NARW, as disturbance responses in NARW's could lead to chronic stress or habitat displacement, leading to an overall decline in their health and fitness.

Response: 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 planned by Attentive Energy will create conditions of acute or chronic acoustic exposure leading to long-term physiological stress responses in marine mammals. NMFS has also prescribed a robust suite of mitigation measures, including extended distance shutdowns for NARW, 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' negligible impact analyses. Because NARW generally use this location in a transitory manner, specifically for migration, any potential impacts from these surveys are lessened for other behaviors due to the brief periods where exposure is possible. In context of these expected low-level impacts, which are not expected to meaningfully affect important behavior, we also refer again to the large size of the migratory corridor compared with the survey area (the overlap between the BIA and the proposed survey area will cover approximately 854 km² of the 269,448 km² BIA). Thus, the transitory nature of NARW's at this location means it is unlikely for any exposure to cause chronic effects, as Attentive Energy's planned survey area and ensonified zones are much smaller than the overall migratory corridor. As such, NMFS does not expect acute or cumulative stress to be a detrimental factor to NARW from Attentive Energy's described survey activities.

Comment 9: Oceana states that Attentive Energy's activities will increase service vessel traffic in and around the project area and that the IHA must include a vessel traffic plan to minimize the effects of increased vessel traffic.

Response: NMFS disagrees with Oceana's statement that the IHA must require a vessel traffic plan. During HRG surveys there are no service vessels required. NMFS agrees that a vessel plan may be potentially appropriate for project construction, but it is not needed for marine site characterization surveys.

Comment 10: Oceana suggests that Protected Species Observers (PSOs) complement their survey efforts at all times when underway, using additional technologies, such as infrared detection devices when in low-light conditions.

Response: NMFS agrees with Oceana regarding this suggestion and a requirement to utilize a thermal (infrared) device during low-light conditions was included in the proposed Federal Register notice. That requirement is included as a requirement of the issued IHA.

Comment 11: Oceana recommended that NMFS restrict all vessels of all sizes associated with the proposed survey activities to speeds less than 10 knots (kn) (5.14 meters/second (m/s)) at all times with no exceptions due to the risk of vessel strikes to NARWs and other large whales.

Response: While NMFS acknowledges that vessel strikes can result in injury or mortality, we have analyzed the potential for vessel strike resulting from Attentive Energy's activity and have determined that based on the nature of the activity 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. The required mitigation measures, all of which were included in the proposed IHA and are now required in the final IHA, include: A requirement that all vessel operators comply with 10 kn (18.5 km/hour (kph)) or less speed restrictions in any Seasonal Management Area (SMA), Dynamic Management Area (DMA) or Slow Zone while underway, and check daily for information regarding the establishment of mandatory or voluntary vessel strike avoidance areas (SMAs, DMAs, Slow Zones) and information regarding NARW sighting locations; a requirement that all vessels greater than or equal to 19.8 m in overall length operating from November 1 through April 30 operate at speeds of 10 kn (18.5 kph) or less; a requirement that all vessel operators reduce vessel speed to 10 kn (18.5 kph) or less when any large whale, any mother/calf pairs, pods, or large assemblages of non-delphinid cetaceans are observed near the vessel; a requirement that 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; a requirement that, if underway, vessels must steer a course away from any sighted ESA-listed whale at 10 kn (18.5 kph) or less until the 500 m minimum separation distance has been established; a requirement that, 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; a requirement that all vessels underway must maintain a minimum separation distance of 100 m from all non-ESA-listed baleen whales; and a requirement that all vessels underway must, to the maximum extent practicable, attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 50 m from all other marine mammals, with an understanding that at times this may not be possible ( e.g., for animals that approach the vessel). We have determined that the vessel strike avoidance measures in the IHA are sufficient to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat. Furthermore, no documented vessel strikes have occurred for any marine site characterization surveys for which IHAs were issued from NMFS during the survey activities themselves or while transiting to and from survey sites.

Comment 12: Oceana suggests that NMFS require vessels to maintain a separation distance of at least 500 m from NARW at all times.

Response: NMFS agrees with Oceana regarding this suggestion and a requirement to maintain a separation distance of at least 500 m from NARWs at all times was included in the proposed Federal Register notice and was included as a requirement in the issued IHA.

Comment 13: Oceana recommended that the IHA should require all vessels supporting site characterization be equipped with and use Class A Automatic Identification System (AIS) devices at all times while on the water. Oceana suggested this requirement should apply to all vessels, regardless of size, associated with the survey.

Response: NMFS is generally supportive of the idea that vessels involved with survey activities be equipped with and use 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 (38 FR 63268, December 7, 2018); however, those activities carried the potential for much more significant impacts than the marine site characterization surveys to be carried out by Attentive Energy, 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.

Comment 14: Oceana stated that the IHA must include a requirement for all phases of the site characterization to subscribe to the highest level of transparency, including frequent reporting to federal agencies. Oceana recommended 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. Oceana states that to foster stakeholder relationships and allow public engagement and oversight of the permitting, the IHA should require all reports and data to 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. As included in the proposed IHA, the final IHA includes requirements for reporting that address Oceana's recommendations. Attentive Energy 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 monitoring. PSO datasheets or raw sightings data must also be provided with the draft and final monitoring report. This final monitoring report is then made available to the public on NMFS website.

Further, the draft IHA and final IHA stipulate that if a NARW is observed at any time by any survey vessels, during surveys or during vessel transit, Attentive Energy must immediately report sighting information to the NMFS NARW Sighting Advisory System within two hours of occurrence, when practicable, or no later than 24 hours after occurrence. Attentive Energy may also report the sighting to the U.S. Coast Guard. Additionally, Attentive Energy must report any discoveries of injured or dead marine mammals to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and to the New England/Mid-Atlantic Regional Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. This includes entangled animals. All reports and associated data submitted to NMFS are included on the website for public inspection.

Comment 15: Oceana asserts that the IHA must include requirements to hold all vessels associated with site characterization surveys accountable to the IHA requirements, including vessels owned by the developer, contractors, employees, and others regardless of ownership, operator, and contract. They state that exceptions and exemptions will create enforcement uncertainty and incentives to evade regulations through reclassification and redesignation. They recommend that NMFS simplify this by requiring all vessels to abide by the same requirements, regardless of size, ownership, function, contract or other specifics.

Response: NMFS agrees with Oceana and required these measures in the proposed IHA and final IHA. The IHA requires that a copy of the IHA must be in the possession of Attentive Energy, the vessel operators, the lead PSO, and any other relevant designees of Attentive Energy operating under the authority of this IHA. The IHA also states that Attentive Energy must ensure that the vessel operator and other relevant vessel personnel, including the PSO team, are briefed on all responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocols, operational procedures, and IHA requirements prior to the start of survey activity, and when relevant new personnel join the survey operations.

Comment 16: Oceana recommends a shutdown requirement if a NARW or other ESA-listed species is detected in the clearance zone as well as a publicly available explanation of any exemptions as to why the applicant would not be able to shut down in these situations.

Response: There are several shutdown requirements described in the Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA (87 FR 38094; June 27, 2022), and which are included in the final IHA, including the stipulation that geophysical survey equipment must be immediately shut down if any marine mammal is observed within or entering the relevant Exclusion Zone while geophysical survey equipment is operational. Oceana mentions an exemption to the shutdown for human safety, however, there is no exemption for the shutdown requirement for NARW, ESA-listed species, or any other species.

Attentive Energy is required to implement a 30-minute pre-start clearance period prior to the initiation of ramp-up of specified HRG equipment. During this period, clearance zones will be monitored by the PSOs, using the appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up may not be initiated if any marine mammal(s) is within its respective clearance zone. If a marine mammal is observed within an clearance zone during the pre-start clearance period, ramp-up may not begin until the animal(s) has been observed exiting its respective exclusion zone or until an additional time period has elapsed with no further sighting ( i.e., 15 minutes for harbor porpoise, and 30 minutes for all other species). If the acoustic source is shut down for reasons other than mitigation ( e.g., mechanical difficulty) for less than 30 minutes, it may be activated again without ramp-up if PSOs have maintained constant observation and no detections of any marine mammal have occurred within the respective exclusion zones.

In regards to reporting, Attentive Energy must notify NMFS if a NARW is observed at any time by any survey vessels during surveys or during vessel transit. Additionally, Attentive Energy is required to report the relevant survey activity information, such as such as the 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.) as well as the estimated distance to an animal and its heading relative to the survey vessel at the initial sighting and survey activity information. We note that if a NARW is detected within the Exclusion Zone before a shutdown is implemented, the NARW and its distance from the sound source, including if it is within the Level B harassment zone, would be reported in Attentive Energy's final monitoring report and made publicly available on NMFS' website. Attentive Energy is required to immediately notify NMFS of any sightings of NARWs and report upon survey activity information. NMFS believes that these requirements address the commenter's concerns.

Comment 17: Oceana recommended that when HRG surveys are allowed to resume after a shutdown event, the surveys should be required to use a ramp-up procedure to encourage any nearby marine life to leave the area.

Response: NMFS agrees with this recommendation and included in the Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA (87 FR 38094; June 27, 2022) and this final IHA a stipulation that when technically feasible, survey equipment must be ramped up at the start or restart of survey activities. A ramp-up procedure, involving a gradual increase in source level output, is required at all times as part of the activation of the acoustic source when technically feasible. Operators should ramp up sources to half power for 5 minutes and then proceed to full power. A 30-minute pre-start clearance observation period must occur prior to the start of ramp-up (or initiation of source use if ramp-up is not technically feasible). NMFS notes that ramp-up is not required for short periods where acoustic sources were shut down ( i.e., less than 30 minutes) if PSOs have maintained constant visual observation and no detections of marine mammals occurred within the applicable Exclusion Zones.

Comment 18: Oceana recommended increasing the Exclusion Zone to 1,000m for NARWs with requirements for HRG survey vessels to use PSOs and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) to establish and monitor these zones.

Response: NMFS notes that the 500 m Exclusion Zone for NARWs exceeds the modeled distance to the largest 160 dB Level B harassment isopleth (141 m during sparker use) by a conservative margin to be extra cautious. Commenters do not provide a compelling rationale for why the Exclusion Zone should be even larger. Given that these surveys are relatively low impact and that, regardless, NMFS has prescribed a precautionary NARW Exclusion Zone that is larger (500 m) than the conservatively estimated largest harassment zone (141 m), NMFS has determined that the Exclusion Zone is appropriate.

Regarding the use of acoustic monitoring to implement the exclusion zones, NMFS does not anticipate that acoustic monitoring would be effective for a variety of reasons discussed below and therefore has not required it in this IHA. As described in the Mitigation section, NMFS has determined that the prescribed mitigation requirements are sufficient to effect the least practicable adverse impact on all affected species or stocks.

The commenters do not explain why they expect that PAM would be effective in detecting vocalizing mysticetes, nor does NMFS agree that this measure is warranted, as it is not expected to be effective for use in detecting the species of concern. It is generally accepted that, even in the absence of additional acoustic sources, using a towed passive acoustic sensor 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 decibel (dB) re 1 μPa (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 24-hour 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 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 141 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 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 other low frequency cetaceans, species for which PAM has limited efficacy), and the cost and impracticability of implementing a full-time 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. NMFS has previously provided discussions on why PAM isn't a required monitoring measure during HRG survey IHAs in past Federal Register notices (see 86 FR 21289, April 22, 2021 and 87 FR 13975, March 11, 2022 for examples).

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' Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-mammal-protection/​marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about these species ( e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS' website ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​find-species).

Table 2 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and authorized for this activity, 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. 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' SARs). While no serious injury or mortality is expected to occur, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as gross indicators of the status of the species or stocks 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' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in NMFS' 2021 draft U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Stock Assessment Report SARs. All values presented in Table 2 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/​draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).

Table 2—Species Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities

Common name	Scientific name	Stock	ESA/MMPA status; strategic (Y/N) 1	Stock abundance (CV, N min , most recent abundance survey) 2	PBR	Annual M/SI 3
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
North Atlantic right whale	Eubalaena glacialis	Western Atlantic Stock	E/D, Y	368 4 (0; 364; 2019)	0.7	7.7
Humpback whale	Megaptera novaeangliae	Gulf of Maine	-/-; Y	1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016)	22	12.15
Fin whale	Balaenoptera physalus	Western North Atlantic Stock	E/D, Y	6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 2016)	11	1.8
Sei whale	Balaenoptera borealis	Nova Scotia Stock	E/D, Y	6,292 (1.02; 3,098; 2016)	6.2	0.8
Minke whale	Balaenoptera acutorostrata	Canadian East Coastal Stock	-/-, N	21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 2016)	170	10.6
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Sperm whale	Physeter macrocephalus	North Atlantic Stock	E/D, Y	4,349 (0.28; 3,451; 2016)	3.9	0
Long-finned pilot whale	Globicephala melas	Western North Atlantic Stock	-/-, N	39,215 (0.3; 30,627; 2016)	306	29
Atlantic white-sided dolphin	Lagenorhynchus acutus	Western North Atlantic Stock	-/-, N	93,233 (0.71; 54,443; 2016)	544	227
Bottlenose dolphin	Tursiops truncatus	Western North Atlantic Offshore Stock	-/-, N	62,851 (0.23; 51,914; 2016)	519	28
Common dolphin	Delphinus delphis	Western North Atlantic Stock	-/-, N	172,974 (0.21, 145,216, 2016)	1,452	390
Atlantic spotted dolphin	Stenella frontalis	Western North Atlantic Stock	-/-, N	39,921 (0.27; 32,032; 2016)	320	0
Risso's dolphin	Grampus griseus	Western North Atlantic Stock	-/-, N	35,215 (0.19; 30,051; 2016)	301	34
Harbor porpoise	Phocoena phocoena	Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy Stock	-/-, N	95,543 (0.31; 74,034; 2016)	851	164
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Harbor seal	Phoca vitulina	Western North Atlantic Stock	-/-, N	61,336 (0.08; 57,637; 2018)	1,729	339
Gray seal 5	Halichoerus grypus	Western North Atlantic Stock	-/-, N	27,300 (0.22; 22,785; 2016)	1,389	4,453
1  ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
2  NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-mammal-protection/​ marine-mammal-stock-assessments. CV is the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
3  These values, found in NMFS' SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined ( e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike).
4  The draft 2022 SARs have yet to be released; however, 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-right-whale).
5  NMFS' stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in Canada) is approximately 451,431. The annual mortality and serious injury (M/SI) value given is for the total stock.

As indicated above, all 15 species in Table 2 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that take is reasonably likely to occur.

The temporal and/or spatial occurrence of several cetacean and pinniped species is such that take of these species is not expected to occur either because they have very low densities in the survey area or are known to occur further inshore or offshore than the survey area. These include: blue whale ( Balaenoptera musculus), Dwarf and pygmy sperm whale ( Kogia sima and Kogia breviceps), killer whale ( Orcinus orca), false killer whale ( Pseudorca crassidens), Cuvier's beaked whale ( Ziphius cavirostris), Mesoplodont beaked whales ( Mesoplodon spp.), short finned pilot whale ( Globicephala macrorhynchus), white-beaked dolphin ( Lagenorhynchus albirostris), pantropical spotted dolphin ( Stenella attenuata), striped dolphin ( Stenella coeruleoalba), harp seal ( Pagophilus groenlandicus), and hooded seal ( Cystophora cristata). As harassment and subsequent take of these species is not anticipated as a result of the planned activities, these species are not analyzed or discussed further.

Below is a description of the species that have the highest likelihood of occurring in the survey area and are thus expected to be taken by the planned activities as well as further detail informing the status for select species ( i.e., information regarding current Unusual Mortality Events (UMEs) and important habitat areas).

North Atlantic Right Whale

The NARW range from calving grounds in the southeastern United States to feeding grounds in New England waters and into Canadian waters (Hayes et al., 2018). They are observed year round in the Mid-Atlantic Bight, and surveys have demonstrated the existence of seven areas where NARW congregate seasonally, including north and east of the survey area in Georges Bank, off Cape Cod, and in Massachusetts Bay (Hayes et al., 2018). In the late fall months ( e.g., October), right whales are generally thought to depart from the feeding grounds in the North Atlantic and move south to their calving grounds off Georgia and Florida. However, recent research indicates our understanding of their movement patterns remains incomplete (Davis et al., 2017). A review of passive acoustic monitoring data from 2004 to 2014 throughout the western North Atlantic demonstrated nearly continuous year-round right whale presence across their entire habitat range (for at least some individuals), including in locations previously thought of as migratory corridors, suggesting that not all of the population undergoes a consistent annual migration (Davis et al., 2017). Given that Attentive Energy's surveys would be concentrated offshore in the New York Bight, some right whales may be present year round however, the majority in the vicinity of the survey areas are likely to be transient, migrating through the area. Some may be present year round however, the majority migrating through.

The western North Atlantic population demonstrated overall growth of 2.8 percent per year between 1990 to 2010, despite a decline in 1993 and no growth between 1997 and 2000 (Pace et al., 2017). However, since 2010 the population has been in decline, with a 99.99 percent probability of a decline of just under 1 percent per year (Pace et al., 2017). Between 1990 and 2015, calving rates varied substantially, with low calving rates coinciding with all three periods of decline or no growth (Pace et al., 2017). On average, NARW calving rates are estimated to be roughly half that of southern right whales ( Eubalaena australis) (Pace et al., 2017), which are increasing in abundance (NMFS, 2015). In 2018, no new NARW calves were documented in their calving grounds; this represented the first time since annual NOAA aerial surveys began in 1989 that no new right whale calves were observed. Eighteen right whale calves were documented in 2021. As of the end of 2021 two NARW calves have documented to have been born during this calving season.

The survey area is part of a migratory corridor Biologically Important Area (BIA) for NARW (effective March-April and November-December) that extends from Massachusetts to Florida (LeBrecque et al., 2015). Off the coast of New Jersey, the migratory BIA extends from the coast to beyond the shelf break. This important migratory area is approximately 269,488 km² in size (compared with the approximately 854 km² of total estimated Level B harassment ensonified area associated with the 8-week planned survey) and is comprised of the waters of the continental shelf offshore the East Coast of the United States, extending from Florida through Massachusetts. NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR part 224.105 designated nearshore waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as Mid-Atlantic U.S. SMA for right whales in 2008. SMAs were developed to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and right whales around their migratory route and calving grounds. A portion of one SMA, which occurs off the mouth of the New York Bight, is close to the planned survey area. The SMA, which occurs off the mouth of the New York Bight, is active from November 1 through April 30 of each year. Within SMAs, the regulations require a mandatory vessel speed (less than 10 kn (18.5 kph)) for all vessels greater than 65 ft (19.8 m). Attentive Energy survey vessel, regardless of length, would be required to adhere to a 10 kn (18.5 kph) vessel speed restriction when operating within this SMA. In addition, Attentive Energy survey vessel, regardless of length, would be required to adhere to a 10 kn (18.5 kph) vessel speed restriction when operating in any DMA declared by NMFS.

Elevated NARW mortalities have occurred since June 7, 2017, along the U.S. and Canadian coast. This event has been declared an Unusual Mortality Event (UME), with human interactions, including entanglement in fixed fishing gear and vessel strikes, implicated in at least 15 of the mortalities thus far. As of June 2, 2022, a total of 34 confirmed dead stranded whales (21 in Canada; 13 in the United States) have been documented. The cumulative total number of animals that have stranded during the NARW UME has been updated to 50 individuals to include both the confirmed mortalities (dead stranded or floaters) (n=34) and seriously injured free-swimming whales (n=16) to better reflect the confirmed number of whales likely removed from the population during the UME and more accurately reflect the population impacts. More information is available online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-life-distress/​2017-2021-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event.

Recent aerial surveys in the New York Bight showed NARW in the planned survey area in the winter and spring, preferring deeper waters near the shelf break (NARW observed in depths ranging from 33-1041m), but were observed throughout the survey area (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020; Zoidis et al., 2021). Similarly, passive acoustic data collected from 2018 to 2020 in the New York Bight showed detections of NARW throughout the year (Estabrook et al., 2021). Seasonally, NARW acoustic presence was highest in the fall. NARW can be anticipated to occur in the survey area year-round but with lower levels in the summer from July-September.

Humpback Whale

Humpback whales are found worldwide in all oceans. Humpback whales were listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Conservation Act (ESCA) in June 1970. In 1973, the ESA replaced the ESCA, and humpbacks continued to be listed as endangered. On September 8, 2016, NMFS divided the species into 14 distinct population segments (DPS), removed the current species-level listing, and in its place listed four DPSs as endangered and one DPS as threatened (81 FR 62259; September 8, 2016). The remaining nine DPSs were not listed. The West Indies DPS, which is not listed under the ESA, is the only DPS of humpback whale that is expected to occur in the survey area. Gulf of Maine humpback whales are designated as a stock under the MMPA and are also part of the West Indies DPS. However, humpback whales occurring in the survey area are not necessarily from the Gulf of Maine stock. Barco et al. (2002) estimated that, based on photo-identification, only 39 percent of individual humpback whales observed along the mid- and south Atlantic U.S. coast are from the Gulf of Maine stock. Bettridge et al. (2015) estimated the size of this population at 12,312 (95 percent CI 8,688-15,954) whales in 2004-05, which is consistent with previous population estimates of approximately 10,000-11,000 whales (Stevick et al., 2003; Smith et al., 1999) and the increasing trend for the West Indies DPS (Bettridge et al., 2015).

Humpback whales utilize the mid-Atlantic as a migration pathway between calving/mating grounds to the south and feeding grounds in the north (Waring et al., 2007a; Waring et al., 2007b). A key question with regard to humpback whales off the Mid-Atlantic states is their stock identity. Furthermore, King et al. (2021) highlights important concerns for humpback whales found specifically in the nearshore environment (<10 km from shore) from various anthropogenic impacts.

Recent aerial surveys in the New York Bight observed humpback whales in the spring and winter, but sightings were reported year round in the area (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020). Humpback whales preferred deeper waters near the shelf break, but were observed throughout the area. Additionally, passive acoustic data recorded humpback whales in the New York Bight throughout the year, but the presence was highest in the fall and summer months (Estabrook et al., 2021).

Three previous UMEs involving humpback whales have occurred since 2000, in 2003, 2005, and 2006. Since January 2016, elevated humpback whale mortalities have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida. Partial or full necropsy examinations have been conducted on approximately half of the 159 known cases (as of June 2, 2022). Of the whales examined, about 50 percent had evidence of human interaction, either ship strike or entanglement. While a portion of the whales have shown evidence of pre-mortem vessel strike, this finding is not consistent across all whales examined and more research is needed. NOAA is consulting with researchers that are conducting studies on the humpback whale populations, and these efforts may provide information on changes in whale distribution and habitat use that could provide additional insight into how these vessel interactions occurred. More information is available at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-life-distress/​2016-2021-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.

Fin Whale

Fin whales are common in waters of the U. S. Atlantic Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), principally from Cape Hatteras northward (Waring et al., 2016). Fin whales are present north of 35-degree latitude in every season and are broadly distributed throughout the western North Atlantic for most of the year (Waring et al., 2016). They are typically found in small groups of up to five individuals (Brueggeman et al., 1987). The main threats to fin whales are fishery interactions and vessel collisions (Waring et al., 2016).

The western north Atlantic stock of fin whales includes the area from Central Virginia to Newfoundland/Labrador Canada. This region is primarily a feeding ground for this migratory species that tends to calve and breed in lower latitudes or offshore. There is currently no critical habitat designated for this species.

Recent aerial surveys in the New York Bight observed fin whales year-round throughout the survey area, but they preferred deeper waters near the shelf break (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020). Passive acoustic data from 2018 to 2020 also detected fin whales throughout the year (Estabrook et al., 2021).

Sei Whale

The Nova Scotia stock of sei whales can be found in deeper waters of the continental shelf edge waters of the northeastern U.S. and northeastward to south of Newfoundland. The southern portion of the stock's range during spring and summer includes the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank. Spring is the period of greatest abundance in U.S. waters, with sightings concentrated along the eastern margin of Georges Bank and into the Northeast Channel area, and along the southwestern edge of Georges Bank in the area of Hydrographer Canyon (Waring et al., 2015). Sei whales occur in shallower waters to feed. Currently there is no critical habitat for sei whales, though they can be observed along the shelf edge of the continental shelf. The main threats to this stock are interactions with fisheries and vessel collisions.

Recently conducted aerial surveys in the New York Bight observed sei whales in both winter and spring, though they preferred deeper waters near the shelf break (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020). Passive acoustic data in the survey area detected sei whales throughout the year except January and July, with highest detections in March and April (Estabrook et al., 2021).

Minke Whale

Minke whales can be found in temperate, tropical, and high-latitude waters. The Canadian East Coast stock can be found in the area from the western half of the Davis Strait (45°W) to the Gulf of Mexico (Waring et al., 2016). This species generally occupies waters less than 100-m deep on the continental shelf. There appears to be a strong seasonal component to minke whale distribution in the survey areas, in which spring to fall are times of relatively widespread and common occurrence while during winter the species appears to be largely absent (Waring et al., 2016). Recent aerial surveys in the New York Bight area found that minke whales were observed throughout the survey area, with highest numbers sighting in the spring months (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020).

Since January 2017, elevated minke whale mortalities have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, with a total of 122 strandings (as of June 2, 2022). This event has been declared a UME. Full or partial necropsy examinations were conducted on more than 60 percent of the stranded whales. Preliminary findings in several of the whales have shown evidence of human interactions or infectious disease, but these findings are not consistent across all of the whales examined, so more research is needed. More information is available at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-life-distress/​2017-2021-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.

Sperm Whale

The distribution of the sperm whale in the U.S. EEZ occurs on the continental shelf edge, over the continental slope, and into mid-ocean regions (Waring et al., 2014). They are rarely found in waters less than 300 meters deep. The basic social unit of the sperm whale appears to be the mixed school of adult females plus their calves and some juveniles of both sexes, normally numbering 20-40 animals in all. There is evidence that some social bonds persist for many years (Christal et al., 1998). This species forms stable social groups, site fidelity, and latitudinal range limitations in groups of females and juveniles (Whitehead, 2002). In summer, the distribution of sperm whales includes the area east and north of Georges Bank and into the Northeast Channel region, as well as the continental shelf (inshore of the 100-m isobath) south of New England. In the fall, sperm whale occurrence south of New England on the continental shelf is at its highest level, and there remains a continental shelf edge occurrence in the mid-Atlantic bight. In winter, sperm whales are concentrated east and northeast of Cape Hatteras.

Recent aerial studies observed sperm whales in the highest number in the summer, with a preference for the shelf break (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020). Passive acoustic recordings of sperm whale recorded them throughout the year, and again highest during spring and summer (Estabrook et al., 2021).

Risso's Dolphin

The status of the Western North Atlantic stock is not well understood. They are broadly distributed in tropical and temperate latitudes throughout the world's oceans, and the Western North Atlantic stock occurs from Florida to eastern Newfoundland. They are common on the northwest Atlantic continental shelf in summer and fall with lower abundances in winter and spring. Newer aerial surveys in the New York Bight area sighted Risso's dolphins throughout the year at the shelf break with highest abundances in spring and summer (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020).

Long-Finned Pilot Whale

Long-finned pilot whales are found from North Carolina and north to Iceland, Greenland and the Barents Sea (Waring et al., 2016). In U.S. Atlantic waters the species is distributed principally along the continental shelf edge off the northeastern U.S. coast in winter and early spring and in late spring, pilot whales move onto Georges Bank and into the Gulf of Maine and more northern waters and remain in these areas through late autumn (Waring et al., 2016). Recently conducted aerial surveys in the New York Bight area noted a preference for deeper water at the shelf break throughout the year (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020).

Atlantic White-Sided Dolphin

White-sided dolphins are found in temperate and sub-polar waters of the North Atlantic, primarily in continental shelf waters to the 100m depth contour from central West Greenland to North Carolina (Waring et al., 2016). The Gulf of Maine stock is most common in continental shelf waters from Hudson Canyon to Georges Bank, and in the Gulf of Maine and lower Bay of Fundy. Sighting data indicate seasonal shifts in distribution (Northridge et al., 1997). During January to May, low numbers of white-sided dolphins are found from Georges Bank to Jeffreys Ledge (off New Hampshire), with even lower numbers south of Georges Bank, as documented by a few strandings collected on beaches of Virginia to South Carolina. From June through September, large numbers of white-sided dolphins are found from Georges Bank to the lower Bay of Fundy. From October to December, white-sided dolphins occur at intermediate densities from southern Georges Bank to southern Gulf of Maine (Payne and Heinemann, 1990). Sightings south of Georges Bank, particularly around Hudson Canyon, occur year round but at low densities. Recent aerial studies confirmed previous studies with observations in fall and winter in the New York Bight area with preference for deep water at the shelf break throughout the year (Normandeau Associates and APEM, 2020).

Atlantic Spotted Dolphin

Atlantic spotted dolphins are found in tropical and warm temperate waters ranging from southern New England, south to Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean to Venezuela (Waring et al., 2014). This stock regularly occurs in continental shelf waters south of Cape Hatteras and in continental shelf edge and continental slope waters north of this region (Waring et al., 2014). There are two forms of this species, with the larger ecotype inhabiting the continental shelf and is usually found inside or near the 200-m isobaths (Waring et al., 2014). They are relatively uncommon in the survey area.

Common Dolphin

The common dolphin is found worldwide in temperate to subtropical seas. In the North Atlantic, common dolphins are commonly found over the continental shelf between the 100-m and 2,000-m isobaths and over prominent underwater topography and east to the mid-Atlantic Ridge (Waring et al., 2016). They have been observed in coastal and offshore waters, observed migrating to mid-Atlantic waters during winter months.

Bottlenose Dolphin

There are two distinct bottlenose dolphin morphotypes in the western North Atlantic: The coastal and offshore stocks (Waring et al., 2016). The offshore stock is distributed primarily along the outer continental shelf and continental slope in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean from Georges Bank to the Florida Keys. The offshore stock is the only stock likely to occur in the survey area due to it being limited to the Lease area. The Western North Atlantic Offshore stock is generally observed along the outer continental shelf and slope in waters deeper than 34 m and over 34 km offshore (Torres et al., 2003).

Harbor Porpoise

In the Lease Area, only the Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy stock may be present in the fall and winter. This stock is found in U.S. and Canadian Atlantic waters and is concentrated in the northern Gulf of Maine and southern Bay of Fundy region, generally in waters less than 150-m deep (Waring et al., 2016). They are seen from the coastline to deep waters (>1,800-m; Westgate et al., 1998), although the majority of the population is found over the continental shelf (Waring et al., 2016). The main threat to the species is interactions with fisheries, with documented take in the U.S. northeast sink gillnet, mid-Atlantic gillnet, and northeast bottom trawl fisheries and in the Canadian herring weir fisheries (Waring et al., 2016).

Pinnipeds (Harbor Seal and Gray Seal)

The harbor seal is found in all nearshore waters of the North Atlantic and North Pacific Oceans and adjoining seas above about 30°N (Burns, 2009). In the western North Atlantic, harbor seals are distributed from the eastern Canadian Arctic and Greenland south to southern New England and New York, and occasionally to the Carolinas (Waring et al., 2016). Haulout and pupping sites are located off Manomet, MA and the Isles of Shoals, ME, but generally do not occur in areas in southern New England (Waring et al., 2016). They seasonal migrate down to the mid-Atlantic from fall to spring months.

There are three major populations of gray seals found in the world; eastern Canada (western North Atlantic stock), northwestern Europe and the Baltic Sea. Gray seals are regularly observed in the survey area in the survey area and these seals belong to the western North Atlantic stock. The range for this stock is thought to be from New Jersey to Labrador. Current population trends show that gray seal abundance is likely increasing in the U.S. Atlantic EEZ (Waring et al., 2016). Although the rate of increase is unknown, surveys conducted since their arrival in the 1980s indicate a steady increase in abundance in both Maine and Massachusetts (Waring et al., 2016). It is believed that recolonization by Canadian gray seals is the source of the U.S. population (Waring et al., 2016). Documented haul outs for gray seas in Long Island area, with a possible rookery on Little Gull Island.

Since July 2018, elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal mortalities have occurred across Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts. This event has been declared a UME. Additionally, stranded seals have shown clinical signs ( e.g., symptoms of disease) as far south as Virginia, although not in elevated numbers, therefore the UME investigation now encompasses all seal strandings from Maine to Virginia. Ice seals (harp and hooded seals) have also started stranding with clinical signs, again not in elevated numbers, and those two seal species have also been added to the UME investigation. A total of 3,152 reported strandings (of all species) had occurred from July 1, 2018, through March 13, 2020. Full or partial necropsy examinations have been conducted on some of the seals and samples have been collected for testing. Based on tests conducted thus far, the main pathogen found in the seals is phocine distemper virus. NMFS is performing additional testing to identify any other factors that may be involved in this UME. Presently, this UME is non-active and is pending closure by NMFS. Information on this UME is available online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​new-england-mid-atlantic/​marine-life-distress/​2018-2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-event-along.

Marine Mammal Hearing

Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine mammals are able to hear. 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, 2019) recommended that marine mammals be divided into hearing groups based on directly measured (behavioral or auditory evoked potential techniques) or estimated hearing ranges (behavioral response data, anatomical modeling, etc.). Note that no direct measurements of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes ( i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 3.

Table 3—Marine Mammal Hearing Groups

[NMFS, 2018]

Hearing group	Generalized hearing range *
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales)	7 Hz to 35 kHz.
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales)	150 Hz to 160 kHz.
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L. australis)	275 Hz to 160 kHz.
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals)	50 Hz to 86 kHz.
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals)	60 Hz to 39 kHz.
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite ( i.e., all species within the group), where individual species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).

The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range (Hemilä 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

This section provides a discussion of the ways in which components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. The Estimated Take section later in this document includes a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination section considers the content of this section, the Estimated Take section, and the Mitigation section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and whether those impacts are reasonably expected to, or reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.

Background on Active Acoustic Sound Sources and Acoustic Terminology

This subsection contains a brief technical background on sound, on the characteristics of certain sound types, and on metrics used inasmuch as the information is relevant to the specified activity and to the summary of the potential effects of the specified activity on marine mammals. For general information on sound and its interaction with the marine environment, please see, e.g., Au and Hastings (2008); Richardson et al., (1995); Urick (1983).

Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and is measured in hertz or cycles per second. Wavelength is the distance between two peaks or corresponding points of a sound wave (length of one cycle). Higher frequency sounds have shorter wavelengths than lower frequency sounds, and typically attenuate (decrease) more rapidly, except in certain cases in shallower water. Amplitude is the height of the sound pressure wave or the “loudness” of a sound and is typically described using the relative unit of the decibel. A sound pressure level (SPL) in dB is described as the ratio between a measured pressure and a reference pressure (for underwater sound, this is 1 microPascal (μPa)), and is a logarithmic unit that accounts for large variations in amplitude. Therefore, a relatively small change in dB corresponds to large changes in sound pressure. The source level (SL) represents the SPL referenced at a distance of 1-m from the source (referenced to 1 μPa), while the received level is the SPL at the listener's position (referenced to 1 μPa).

Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over the duration of an impulse. Root mean square is calculated by squaring all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the square root of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean square accounts for both positive and negative values; squaring the pressures makes all values positive so that they may be accounted for in the summation of pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be better expressed through averaged units than by peak pressures.

Sound exposure level (SEL; represented as dB re 1 μPa² -s) represents the total energy in a stated frequency band over a stated time interval or event and considers both intensity and duration of exposure. The per-pulse SEL is calculated over the time window containing the entire pulse ( i.e., 100 percent of the acoustic energy). SEL is a cumulative metric; it can be accumulated over a single pulse, or calculated over periods containing multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL represents the total energy accumulated by a receiver over a defined time window or during an event. Peak sound pressure (also referred to as zero-to-peak sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum instantaneous sound pressure measurable in the water at a specified distance from the source and is represented in the same units as the rms sound pressure.

When underwater objects vibrate or activity occurs, sound-pressure waves are created. These waves alternately compress and decompress the water as the sound wave travels. Underwater sound waves radiate in a manner similar to ripples on the surface of a pond and may be directed either in a beam or in beams or may radiate in all directions (omnidirectional sources). The compressions and decompressions associated with sound waves are detected as changes in pressure by aquatic life and man-made sound receptors such as hydrophones.

Even in the absence of sound from the specified activity, the underwater environment is typically loud due to ambient sound, which is defined as environmental background sound levels lacking a single source or point (Richardson et al., 1995). The sound level of a region is defined by the total acoustical energy being generated by known and unknown sources. These sources may include physical ( e.g., wind and waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric sound), biological ( e.g., sounds produced by marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates), and anthropogenic ( e.g., vessels, dredging, construction) sound. A number of sources contribute to ambient sound, including wind and waves, which are a main source of naturally occurring ambient sound for frequencies between 200 Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In general, ambient sound levels tend to increase with increasing wind speed and wave height. Precipitation can become an important component of total sound at frequencies above 500 Hz, and possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet times. Marine mammals can contribute significantly to ambient sound levels, as can some fish and snapping shrimp. The frequency band for biological contributions is from approximately 12 Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient sound related to human activity include transportation (surface vessels), dredging and construction, oil and gas drilling and production, geophysical surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel noise typically dominates the total ambient sound for frequencies between 20 and 300 Hz. In general, the frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are below 1 kHz and, if higher frequency sound levels are created, they attenuate rapidly.

The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources that comprise ambient sound at any given location and time depends not only on the source levels (as determined by current weather conditions and levels of biological and human activity) but on the ability of sound to propagate through the environment. In turn, sound propagation is dependent on the spatially and temporally varying properties of the water column and sea floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of the dependence on a large number of varying factors, ambient sound levels can be expected to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial and temporal scales. Sound levels at a given frequency and location can vary by 10-20 dB from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result is that, depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from the specified activity may be a negligible addition to the local environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect marine mammals. Details of source types are described in the following text.

Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types: pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction between these two sound types is important because they have differing potential to cause physical effects, particularly with regard to hearing ( e.g., Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see Southall et al. (2007) for an in-depth discussion of these concepts. The distinction between these two sound types is not always obvious, as certain signals share properties of both pulsed and non-pulsed sounds. A signal near a source could be categorized as a pulse, but due to propagation effects as it moves farther from the source, the signal duration becomes longer ( e.g., Greene and Richardson, 1988).

Pulsed sound sources ( e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic booms, impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients (ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998) and occur either as isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed sounds are all characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient pressure to a maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period that may include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and minimal pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce physical injury as compared with sounds that lack these features.

Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or prolonged, and may be either continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995; NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses ( e.g., rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems. The duration of such sounds, as received at a distance, can be greatly extended in a highly reverberant environment.

Sparkers produce pulsed signals with energy in the frequency ranges, 0.05-4.0 kiloHertz (kHz). The amplitude of the acoustic wave emitted from sparker sources is equal in all directions ( i.e., omnidirectional), while other sources planned for use during the planned surveys have some degree of directionality to the beam.

Summary on Specific Potential Effects of Acoustic Sound Sources

Underwater sound from active acoustic sources can cause one or more of the following: temporary or permanent hearing impairment, behavioral disturbance, masking, stress, and non-auditory physical effects. The degree of effect is intrinsically related to the signal characteristics, received level, distance from the source, and duration of the sound exposure. Marine mammals exposed to high-intensity sound, or to lower-intensity sound for prolonged periods, can experience hearing threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain frequency ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS can be permanent (PTS; permanent threshold shift), in which case the loss of hearing sensitivity is not fully recoverable, or temporary (TTS; temporary threshold shift), in which case the animal's hearing threshold would recover over time (Southall et al., 2007).

Animals in the vicinity of Attentive Energy HRG survey activity are unlikely to incur even TTS due to the characteristics of the sound sources, which include generally very short pulses and potential duration of exposure. These characteristics mean that instantaneous exposure is unlikely to cause TTS, as it is unlikely that exposure would occur close enough to the vessel for received levels to exceed peak pressure TTS criteria, and that the cumulative duration of exposure would be insufficient to exceed cumulative sound exposure level (SEL) criteria. Even for high-frequency cetacean species ( e.g., harbor porpoises), which have the greatest sensitivity to potential TTS, individuals would have to make a very close approach and also remain very close to the vessel operating these sources in order to receive multiple exposures at relatively high levels, as would be necessary to cause TTS. Intermittent exposures—as would occur due to the brief, transient signals produced by these sources—require a higher cumulative SEL to induce TTS than would continuous exposures of the same duration ( i.e., intermittent exposure results in lower levels of TTS). Moreover, most marine mammals would more likely avoid a loud sound source rather than swim in such close proximity as to result in TTS. Kremser et al. (2005) noted that the probability of a cetacean swimming through the area of exposure when a sub-bottom profiler emits a pulse is small—because if the animal was in the area, it would have to pass the transducer at close range in order to be subjected to sound levels that could cause TTS and would likely exhibit avoidance behavior to the area near the transducer rather than swim through at such a close range. Further, the restricted beam shape of many of HRG survey devices planned for use makes it unlikely that an animal would be exposed more than briefly during the passage of the vessel. No mortality, injury or Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) are expected to occur.

Behavioral disturbance to marine mammals from sound may include a variety of effects, including subtle changes in behavior ( e.g., minor or brief avoidance of an area or changes in vocalizations), more conspicuous changes in similar behavioral activities, and more sustained and/or potentially severe reactions, such as displacement from or abandonment of high-quality habitat. Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-specific and any reactions depend on numerous intrinsic and extrinsic factors ( e.g., species, state of maturity, experience, current activity, reproductive state, auditory sensitivity, time of day), as well as the interplay between factors. Available studies show wide variation in response to underwater sound; therefore, it is difficult to predict specifically how any given sound in a particular instance might affect marine mammals perceiving the signal.

In addition, sound can disrupt behavior through masking, or interfering with, an animal's ability to detect, recognize, or discriminate between acoustic signals of interest ( e.g., those used for intraspecific communication and social interactions, prey detection, predator avoidance, navigation). Masking occurs when the receipt of a sound is interfered with by another coincident sound at similar frequencies and at similar or higher intensity, and may occur whether the sound is natural ( e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves, precipitation) or anthropogenic ( e.g., shipping, sonar, seismic exploration) in origin. Marine mammal communications would not likely be masked appreciably by the acoustic signals expected from Attentive Energy's surveys given the directionality of the signals for most HRG survey equipment types planned for use and the brief period when an individual mammal is likely to be exposed.

Classic stress responses begin when an animal's central nervous system perceives a potential threat to its homeostasis. That perception triggers stress responses regardless of whether a stimulus actually threatens the animal; the mere perception of a threat is sufficient to trigger a stress response (Moberg 2000; Seyle 1950). Once an animal's central nervous system perceives a threat, it mounts a biological response or defense that consists of a combination of the four general biological defense responses: behavioral responses, autonomic nervous system responses, neuroendocrine responses, or immune responses. In the case of many stressors, an animal's first and sometimes most economical (in terms of biotic costs) response is behavioral avoidance of the potential stressor or avoidance of continued exposure to a stressor. An animal's second line of defense to stressors involves the sympathetic part of the autonomic nervous system and the classical “fight or flight” response which includes the cardiovascular system, the gastrointestinal system, the exocrine glands, and the adrenal medulla to produce changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and gastrointestinal activity that humans commonly associate with “stress.” These responses have a relatively short duration and may or may not have significant long-term effect on an animal's welfare. An animal's third line of defense to stressors involves its neuroendocrine systems; the system that has received the most study has been the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal system (also known as the HPA axis in mammals). Unlike stress responses associated with the autonomic nervous system, virtually all neuro-endocrine functions that are affected by stress—including immune competence, reproduction, metabolism, and behavior—are regulated by pituitary hormones. Stress-induced changes in the secretion of pituitary hormones have been implicated in failed reproduction (Moberg 1987; Rivier 1995), reduced immune competence (Blecha 2000), and behavioral disturbance. Increases in the circulation of glucocorticosteroids (cortisol, corticosterone, and aldosterone in marine mammals; see Romano et al., 2004) have been long been equated with stress. The primary distinction between stress (which is adaptive and does not normally place an animal at risk) and distress is the biotic cost of the response. In general, there are few data on the potential for strong, anthropogenic underwater sounds to cause non-auditory physical effects in marine mammals. The available data do not allow identification of a specific exposure level above which non-auditory effects can be expected (Southall et al., 2007). There is currently no definitive evidence that any of these effects occur even for marine mammals in close proximity to an anthropogenic sound source. In addition, marine mammals that show behavioral avoidance of survey vessels and related sound sources are unlikely to incur non-auditory impairment or other physical effects. NMFS does not expect that the generally short-term, intermittent, and transitory HRG and geotechnical survey activities would create conditions of long-term, continuous noise and chronic acoustic exposure leading to long-term physiological stress responses in marine mammals.

Sound may affect marine mammals through impacts on the abundance, behavior, or distribution of prey species ( e.g., crustaceans, cephalopods, fish, and zooplankton) ( i.e., effects to marine mammal habitat). Prey species exposed to sound might move away from the sound source, experience TTS, experience masking of biologically relevant sounds, or show no obvious direct effects. The most likely impacts (if any) for most prey species in a given area would be temporary avoidance of the area. Surveys using active acoustic sound sources move through an area, limiting exposure to multiple pulses. In all cases, sound levels would return to ambient once a survey ends and the noise source is shut down and, when exposure to sound ends, behavioral and/or physiological responses are expected to end relatively quickly.

Vessel Strike

Vessel collisions with marine mammals, or ship strikes, can result in death or serious injury of the animal. These interactions are typically associated with large whales, which are less maneuverable than are smaller cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to large vessels. Ship strikes generally involve commercial shipping vessels, which are generally larger and of which there is much more traffic in the ocean than geophysical survey vessels. Jensen and Silber (2004) summarized ship strikes of large whales worldwide from 1975-2003 and found that most collisions occurred in the open ocean and involved large vessels ( e.g., commercial shipping). For vessels used in geophysical survey activities, vessel speed while towing gear is typically only 4-5 kn (7.4-9.3 kph). At these speeds, both the possibility of striking a marine mammal and the possibility of a strike resulting in serious injury or mortality are so low as to be discountable. At average transit speed for geophysical survey vessels, the probability of serious injury or mortality resulting from a strike is less than 50 percent. However, the likelihood of a strike actually happening is again low given the smaller size of these vessels and generally slower speeds. Notably in the Jensen and Silber study, no strike incidents were reported for geophysical survey vessels during that time period.

Marine Mammal Habitat

The HRG survey equipment will not contact the seafloor and does not represent a source of pollution. We are not aware of any available literature on impacts to marine mammal prey from sound produced by HRG survey equipment. However, as the HRG survey equipment introduces noise to the marine environment, there is the potential for it to result in avoidance of the area around the HRG survey activities on the part of marine mammal prey. Any avoidance of the area on the part of marine mammal prey would be expected to be short term and temporary.

Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance, and the availability of similar habitat and resources ( e.g., prey species) in the surrounding area, the impacts to marine mammals and the food sources that they utilize are not expected to cause significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations. Impacts on marine mammal habitat from the planned activities will be temporary, insignificant, and discountable.

The effects of Attentive Energy's specified survey activity are expected to be limited to Level B behavioral harassment. No permanent or temporary auditory effects, or significant impacts to marine mammal habitat, including prey, are expected.

Estimated Take

This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes authorized through this IHA, which will inform 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 would be by Level B harassment only, in the form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to noise from certain HRG acoustic sources. Based on the nature of the activity, Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor authorized. As described previously, no serious injury or mortality is anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the planned take numbers are estimated.

For acoustic impacts, 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) the number of days of activities. We note that while these factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial prediction of potential 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 —Though significantly driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the source or exposure context ( e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle, duration of the exposure, signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the source), the environment ( e.g., bathymetry, other noises in the area, predators in the area), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, life stage, depth) and can be difficult to predict ( e.g., Southall et al., 2007, 2021, Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to use a threshold based on a metric that is both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS typically uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS generally predicts that marine mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner considered to be Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above root-mean-squared pressure received levels (RMS SPL) of 120 dB (referenced to 1 micropascal (re 1 μPa)) for continuous ( e.g., vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above RMS SPL 160 dB re 1 μPa for non-explosive impulsive ( e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent ( e.g., scientific sonar) sources.

Attentive Energy's HRG sruveys include the use impulsive (sparker) sources, and therefore the RMS SPL thresholds of 160 dB re 1 μPa is applicable.

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 non-impulsive).

These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references, analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​marine-mammal-protection/​marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.

Table 4—Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift

Hearing group	PTS onset acoustic thresholds* (received level)
	Impulsive	Non-impulsive
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans	Cell 1: Lpk,flat : 219 dB; LE,LF,24h : 183 dB	Cell 2: LE,LF,24h : 199 dB
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans	Cell 3: Lpk,flat : 230 dB; LE,MF,24h : 185 dB	Cell 4: >LE,MF,24h : 198 dB
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans	Cell 5: Lpk,flat : 202 dB; LE,HF,24h : 155 dB	Cell 6: LE,HF,24h : 173 dB
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW)(Underwater)	Cell 7: >Lpk,flat : 218 dB; LE,PW,24h : 185 dB	Cell 8: LE,PW,24h : 201 dB
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW)(Underwater)	Cell 9: Lpk,flat : 232 dB; LE,OW,24h : 203 dB	Cell 10: LE,OW,24h : 219 dB
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.
Note:  Peak sound pressure ( Lpk ) has a reference value of 1 µPa, and cumulative sound exposure level ( LE ) has a reference value of 1µPa2 s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript “flat” is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways ( i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.

Ensonified Area

Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the survey activity that are used in estimating the area ensonified above the acoustic thresholds, including source levels and transmission loss coefficient.

NMFS has developed a user-friendly methodology for estimating the extent of the Level B harassment isopleths associated with relevant HRG survey equipment (NMFS 2020). This methodology incorporates frequency and directionality to refine estimated ensonified zones. For acoustic sources that operate with different beamwidths, the maximum beamwidth was used, and the lowest frequency of the source was used when calculating the frequency-dependent absorption coefficient (Table 1).

NMFS considers the data provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) to represent the best available information on source levels associated with HRG survey equipment and, therefore, recommends that source levels provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be incorporated in the method described above to estimate isopleth distances to harassment thresholds. In cases when the source level for a specific type of HRG equipment is not provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS recommends that either the source levels provided by the manufacturer be used, or, in instances where source levels provided by the manufacturer are unavailable or unreliable, a proxy from Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be used instead. Table 1 shows the HRG equipment type used during the planned surveys and the source levels associated with those HRG equipment types.

The results of the Level B harassment ensonified area analysis using the methodology described indicated that, of the HRG survey equipment planned for use by Attentive Energy the only one that has the potential to result in Level B harassment of marine mammals, the Dual Geo-Spark, has a Level B harassment isopleth of 141-m.

Marine Mammal Occurrence

In this section we provide information about the occurrence of marine mammals, including density or other relevant information, which will inform the take calculations.

Habitat-based density models produced by the Duke University Marine Geospatial Ecology Laboratory and the Marine-life Data and Analysis Team, based on the best available marine mammal data from 1992-2021 obtained in a collaboration between Duke University, the Northeast Regional Planning Body, the University of North Carolina Wilmington, the Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center, and NOAA (Roberts et al. 2016a; Curtice et al. 2018), represent the best available information regarding marine mammal densities in the survey area. More recently, these data have been updated with new modeling results and include density estimates for pinnipeds (Roberts et al. 2016b, 2017, 2018).

The density data presented by Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021) incorporates aerial and shipboard line-transect survey data from NMFS and other organizations and incorporates data from eight physiographic and 16 dynamic oceanographic and biological covariates, and controls for the influence of sea state, group size, availability bias, and perception bias on the probability of making a sighting. These density models were originally developed for all cetacean taxa in the U.S. Atlantic (Roberts et al. 2016a). In subsequent years, certain models have been updated based on additional data as well as certain methodological improvements. More information is available online at https://seamap.env .duke.edu/models/Duke/EC/.

Marine mammal density estimates in the survey area (animals/km² ) were obtained using the most recent model results for all taxa (Roberts et al. 2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021). The updated models incorporate additional sighting data, including sightings from NOAA's Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (AMAPPS) surveys.

For the exposure analysis, density data from Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021) were mapped using a geographic information system (GIS). For the survey area, the monthly densities of each species as reported by Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021) were averaged by season; thus, a density was calculated for each species for spring, summer, fall and winter. To be conservative, the greatest seasonal density calculated for each species was then carried forward in the exposure analysis, with a few exceptions noted later. Estimated seasonal densities (animals/km² ) of marine mammal species that may be taken by the planned survey are in Table 5 below. The maximum seasonal density values used to estimate take numbers are shown in Table 6 below. Below, we discuss how densities were assumed to apply to specific species for which the Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018, 2021) models provide results at the genus or guild level.

For bottlenose dolphin densities, Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018) do not differentiate by stock. The Western North Atlantic northern migratory coastal stock is generally expected to occur only in coastal waters from the shoreline to approximately the 20-m (65-ft) isobath (Hayes et al. 2018). As the Lease Area is located within depths exceeding 20-m, where the offshore stock would generally be expected to occur, all calculated bottlenose dolphin exposures within the survey area were assigned to the offshore stock. Bottlenose dolphins densities were also calculated using the single month with the highest density to account for recent observations from IHAs issued in the New York Bight area, which documented more dolphins than the output of the Roberts' model predicted (86 FR 26465, May 10, 2021 and 85 FR 21198, April 16, 2020).

For long-finned pilot whales, the Roberts et al. (2016, 2017) data only provide a single raster grid containing annual density estimate for Globicephala species ( i.e., short-finned and long-finned pilot whales combined). The annual density raster grid was used to estimate density in the survey area and assumed it applies only to long-finned pilot whales, as short-finned pilot whales are not anticipated to occur as far north as the survey area.

Furthermore, the Roberts et al. (2016b, 2017, 2018) density model does not differentiate between the different pinniped species. For seals, given their size and behavior when in the water, seasonality, and feeding preferences, there is limited information available on species-specific distribution. Density estimates of Roberts et al. (2016, 2018) include all seal species that may occur in the Western North Atlantic combined ( i.e., harbor, gray, hooded, and harp). For this IHA, only the harbor seals and gray seals are reasonably expected to occur in the survey area; densities of seals were split evenly between these two species.

Table 5—Estimated Marine Mammal Densities (Animals per km² ) for Lease Area

Species	Spring	Summer	Fall	Winter	Monthly max	Annual mean
Mysticetes
North Atlantic Right Whale	0.00352	0.00004	0.00011	0.00172	0.00515	0.00135
Humpback Whale	0.00062	0.00022	0.00036	0.00012	0.00076	0.00033
Fin Whale	0.00258	0.00314	0.00227	0.00162	0.00444	0.00240
Sei Whale	0.00016	0.00003	0.00003	0.00002	0.00025	0.00006
Common Minke Whale	0.00190	0.00075	0.00054	0.00066	0.00286	0.00096
Odontocetes
Sperm Whale	0.00004	0.00054	0.00037	0.00002	0.00104	0.00024
Risso's Dolphin	0.00018	0.00108	0.00034	0.00046	0.00179	0.00052
Long-finned Pilot Whale	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	0.00471
Atlantic White-sided Dolphin	0.03038	0.01714	0.01310	0.02069	0.05016	0.02033
Short-beaked Common Dolphin	0.05495	0.04535	0.05959	0.13725	0.18987	0.07428
Atlantic Spotted Dolphin	0.00054	0.00599	0.00516	0.00024	0.00843	0.00298
Harbor Porpoise	0.07644	0.00042	0.00175	0.03952	0.12475	0.02953
Common Bottlenose Dolphin	0.01265	0.01828	0.04450	0.02509	0.05284	0.02513
Pinnipeds
Gray Seal	0.01540	0.00021	0.00015	0.00837	0.01961	0.00604
Harbor Seal	0.01540	0.00021	0.00015	0.00837	0.01961	0.00604

Take Estimation

Here we describe how the information provided above is synthesized to produce a quantitative estimate of the take that is reasonably likely to occur and planned for authorization.

In order to estimate the number of marine mammals predicted to be exposed to sound levels that would result in harassment, radial distances to predicted isopleths corresponding to Level B harassment thresholds are calculated, as described above. The maximum distance ( i.e., 141-m distance associated with the Dual Geo-Spark 2000X) to the Level B harassment criterion and the total length of the survey trackline are then used to calculate the total ensonified area, or zone of influence (ZOI) around the survey vessel.

Attentive Energy estimates that planned surveys will complete a total of 3,028 km survey trackline during HRG surveys. Based on the maximum estimated distance to the Level B harassment threshold of 141-m (Table 5) and the total survey length, the total ensonified area is therefore 854 km² based on the following formula:

Mobile Source ZOI = (Total survey length × 2r) + πr²

Where:

total survey length = the total distance of the survey track lines within the lease area; and

r = the maximum radial distance from a given sound source to the Level B harassment threshold.

As described above, this is a conservative estimate as it assumes the HRG source that results in the greatest isopleth distance to the Level B harassment threshold would be operated at all times during the entire survey, which may not ultimately occur.

The number of marine mammals expected to be incidentally taken during the total survey is then calculated by estimating the number of each species predicted to occur within the ensonified area (animals/km² ), incorporating the maximum seasonal estimated marine mammal densities as described above. The product is then rounded, to generate an estimate of the total number of instances of harassment expected for each species over the duration of the survey. A summary of this method is illustrated in the following formula with the resulting take of marine mammals shown below in Table 6:

Estimated Take = D × ZOI

Where:

D = average species density (per km² ); and

ZOI = maximum daily ensonified area to relevant thresholds.

Table 6—Numbers of Potential Incidental Take of Marine Mammals Authorized and Planned Takes as a Percentage of Population

Species	Abundance*	Estimated Level B takes	Total
			Level B takes authorized	Percent of abundance
North Atlantic right whale	368	3	3	0.82
Humpback whale	1,396	1	†2	0.14
Fin whale	6,802	3	3	<0.1
Sei whale	6,292	0	†2	<0.1
Minke whale	21,968	2	2	<0.1
Sperm whale	4,349	0	†2	<0.1
Long-finned pilot whale	39,215	4	†15	<0.1
Bottlenose dolphin (W.N. Atlantic Offshore) a	62,851	38	38	<0.1
Common dolphin	172,974	162	162	<0.1
Atlantic white-sided dolphin	93,233	26	26	<0.1
Atlantic spotted dolphin	39,921	5	†31	<0.1
Risso's dolphin	32,215	1	†9	<0.1
Harbor porpoise	95,543	65	65	<0.1
Harbor seal	61,336	13	13	<0.1
Gray seal a	451,431	13	13	<0.1
* The abundances in this column are based on the NMFS draft 2021 SAR.
† Take request based on average group size using sightings data from Palka et al. (2017, 2021) and CETAP (1982). See Appendix C for data.
a  This abundance estimate is the total stock abundance (including animals in Canada). The NMFS stock abundance estimate for U.S. population only is 27,300.

The take numbers authorized in Table 6 are consistent with those requested by Attentive Energy. NMFS concurs with Attentive Energy's method of revising take estimates to reflect mean group size where the estimated takes were less than a typical group size (Palka et al., 2017, 2021; CETAP 1982).

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, NMFS considers 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.

Mitigation Measures

NMFS requires that the following mitigation measures be implemented during Attentive Energy's planned marine site characterization surveys. Pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, Attentive Energy is also required to adhere to relevant Project Design Criteria (PDC) of the NMFS' Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO) programmatic consultation (specifically PDCs 4, 5, and 7) regarding geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​new-england-mid-atlantic/​consultations/​section-7-take-reporting-programmatics-greater-atlantic#offshore-wind-site-assessment-and-site-characterization-activities-programmatic-consultation).

Marine Mammal Exclusion Zones and Level B Harassment Zones

Marine mammal Exclusion Zones would be established around the HRG survey equipment and monitored by protected species observers (PSOs). These PSOs will be NMFS-approved visual PSOs. Based upon the acoustic source in use (impulsive: sparkers), a minimum of one PSO must be on duty on the source vessel during daylight hours and two PSOs must be on duty on the source vessel during nighttime hours. These PSO will monitor Exclusion Zones based upon the radial distance from the acoustic source rather than being based around the vessel itself. The Exclusion Zone distances are as follows:

• A 500-m Exclusion Zone for NARW during use of specified acoustic sources (impulsive: sparkers).
• A 100-m Exclusion Zone for all other marine mammals (excluding NARWs) during use of specified acoustic sources (except as specified below).

All visual monitoring must begin no less than 30 minutes prior to the initiation of the specified acoustic source and must continue until 30 minutes after use of specified acoustic sources ceases.

If a marine mammal were detected approaching or entering the Exclusion Zones during the HRG survey, the vessel operator would adhere to the shutdown procedures described below to minimize noise impacts on the animals. These stated requirements will be included in the site-specific training to be provided to the survey team.

Ramp-Up of Survey Equipment and Pre-Clearance of the Exclusion Zones

When technically feasible, a ramp-up procedure would be used for HRG survey equipment capable of adjusting energy levels at the start or restart of survey activities. A ramp-up would begin with the powering up of the smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its lowest practical power output appropriate for the survey. The ramp-up procedure would be used in order to provide additional protection to marine mammals near the survey area by allowing them to vacate the area prior to the commencement of survey equipment operation at full power. When technically feasible, the power would then be gradually turned up and other acoustic sources would be added. All ramp-ups shall be scheduled so as to minimize the time spent with the source being activated.

Ramp-up activities will be delayed if a marine mammal(s) enters its respective Exclusion Zone. Ramp-up will continue if the animal has been observed exiting its respective Exclusion Zone or until an additional time period has elapsed with no further sighting ( i.e., 15 minutes for harbor porpoise and 30 minutes for all other species).

Attentive Energy would implement a 30 minute pre-clearance period of the Exclusion Zones prior to the initiation of ramp-up of HRG equipment. The operator must notify a designated PSO of the planned start of ramp-up not less than 60 minutes prior to the planned ramp-up. This would allow the PSOs to monitor the Exclusion Zones for 30 minutes prior to the initiation of ramp-up. Prior to ramp-up beginning, Attentive Energy must receive confirmation from the PSO that the Exclusion Zone is clear prior to proceeding. During this 30 minute pre-start clearance period, the entire applicable Exclusion Zones must be visible. The exception to this would be in situations where ramp-up may occur during periods of poor visibility (inclusive of nighttime) as long as appropriate visual monitoring has occurred with no detections of marine mammals in 30 minutes prior to the beginning of ramp-up. Acoustic source activation may occur at night only where operational planning cannot reasonably avoid such circumstances.

During this period, the Exclusion Zone will be monitored by the PSOs, using the appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up may not be initiated if any marine mammal(s) is within its respective Exclusion Zone. If a marine mammal is observed within an Exclusion Zone during the pre-clearance period, ramp-up may not begin until the animal(s) has been observed exiting its respective Exclusion Zone or until an additional time period has elapsed with no further sighting ( i.e., 15 minutes for harbor porpoise and 30 minutes for all other species). If a marine mammal enters the Exclusion Zone during ramp-up, ramp-up activities must cease and the source must be shut down. Any PSO on duty has the authority to delay the start of survey operations if a marine mammal is detected within the applicable pre-start clearance zones. The prestart clearance requirement does not include small delphinids (genera Stenella, Lagenorhynchus, Delphinus, or Tursiops) or seals.

The pre-clearance zones would be:

• 500-m for all ESA-listed species (North Atlantic right, sei, fin, sperm whales); and
• 100-m for all other marine mammals.

If any marine mammal species that are listed under the ESA are observed within the clearance zones, the clock must be paused. If the PSO confirms the animal has exited the zone and headed away from the survey vessel, the clock that was paused may resume. The pre-clearance clock will reset if the animal dives or visual contact is otherwise lost.

If the acoustic source is shut down for brief periods ( i.e., less than 30 minutes) for reasons other than implementation of prescribed mitigation ( e.g., mechanical difficulty), it may be activated again without ramp-up if PSOs have maintained constant visual observation and no detections of marine mammals have occurred within the applicable Exclusion Zone. For any longer shutdown, pre-start clearance observation and ramp-up are required.

Activation of survey equipment through ramp-up procedures may not occur when visual detection of marine mammals within the pre-clearance zone is not expected to be effective ( e.g., during inclement conditions such as heavy rain or fog).

The acoustic source(s) must be deactivated when not acquiring data or preparing to acquire data, except as necessary for testing. Unnecessary use of the acoustic source shall be avoided.

Shutdown Procedures

An immediate shutdown of the impulsive HRG survey equipment (Table 5) would be required if a marine mammal is sighted entering or within its respective Exclusion Zone(s). Any PSO on duty has the authority to call for a shutdown of the acoustic source if a marine mammal is detected within the applicable Exclusion Zones. Any disagreement between the PSO and vessel operator should be discussed only after shutdown has occurred. The vessel operator would establish and maintain clear lines of communication directly between PSOs on duty and crew controlling the HRG source(s) to ensure that shutdown commands are conveyed swiftly while allowing PSOs to maintain watch.

The shutdown requirement is waived for small delphinids (belonging to the genera of the Family Delpinidae: Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or Tursiops) and pinnipeds if they are visually detected within the applicable Exclusion Zones. If a species for which authorization has not been granted or a species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized number of takes have been met approaches or is observed within the applicable Exclusion Zone, shutdown would occur. In the event of uncertainty regarding the identification of a marine mammal species ( i.e., such as whether the observed marine mammal belongs to Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, or Tursiops for which shutdown is waived), PSOs must use their best professional judgement in making the decision to call for a shutdown.

Upon implementation of a shutdown, the sound source may be reactivated after the marine mammal has been observed exiting the applicable Exclusion Zone or following a clearance period of 15 minutes for harbor porpoise and 30 minutes for all other species where there are no further detections of the marine mammal.

Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and ramp-up procedures are not required during HRG survey operations using only non-impulsive sources ( e.g., parametric sub-bottom profilers, sonar, Echosounder, etc.).

Seasonal Operating Requirements

As described above, a section of the survey area partially overlaps with a portion of a NARW SMA off the port of New York/New Jersey. This SMA is active from November 1 through April 30 of each year. The survey vessel, regardless of length, would be required to adhere to vessel speed restrictions (<10 knots) when operating within the SMA during times when the SMA is active. In addition, between watch shifts, members of the monitoring team would consult NMFS' NARW reporting systems for the presence of NARW throughout survey operations. Members of the monitoring team would also monitor the NMFS NARW reporting systems for the establishment of DMA. NMFS may also establish voluntary right whale Slow Zones any time a right whale (or whales) is acoustically detected. Attentive Energy should be aware of this possibility and remain attentive in the event a Slow Zone is established nearby or overlapping the survey area (Table 7).

Table 7—North Atlantic Right Whale Dynamic Management Area (DMA) and Seasonal Management Area (SMA) Restrictions Within the Survey Areas

Survey area	Species	DMA restrictions	Slow zones	SMA restrictions
Lease Area ECR North	North Atlantic right whale ( Eubalaena glacialis)	If established by NMFS, all of Attentive Energy's vessel will abide by the described restrictions.		N/A. November 1 through July 31 (Raritan Bay).
ECR South				N/A.
More information on Ship Strike Reduction for the NARW can be found at NMFS' website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​endangered-species-conservation/​reducing-vessel-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales.

There are no known marine mammal rookeries or mating or calving grounds in the survey area that would otherwise potentially warrant increased mitigation measures for marine mammals or their habitat (or both). The planned survey would occur in an area that has been identified as a biologically important area for migration for NARW. However, given the small spatial extent of the survey area relative to the substantially larger spatial extent of the right whale migratory area and the relatively low amount of noise generated by the survey, the survey is not expected to appreciably reduce the quality of migratory habitat or to negatively impact the migration of NARW, thus additional mitigation to address the survey's occurrence in NARW migratory habitat is not warranted.

Vessel Strike Avoidance

Vessel operators must comply with the below measures except under extraordinary circumstances when the safety of the vessel or crew is in doubt or the safety of life at sea is in question. These requirements do not apply in any case where compliance would create an imminent and serious threat to a person or vessel or to the extent that a vessel is restricted in its ability to maneuver and, because of the restriction, cannot comply.

Survey vessel crewmembers responsible for navigation duties will receive site-specific training on marine mammals sighting/reporting and vessel strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike avoidance measures would include the following, except under circumstances when complying with these requirements would put the safety of the vessel or crew at risk:

• Attentive Energy will ensure that vessel operators and crew maintain a vigilant watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down, stop their vessel, or alter course, as appropriate and regardless of vessel size, to avoid striking any marine mammal. A single marine mammal at the surface may indicate the presence of additional submerged animals in the vicinity of the vessel; therefore, precautionary measures should always be exercised. A visual observer aboard the vessel must monitor a vessel strike avoidance zone around the vessel (species-specific distances detailed below). Visual observers monitoring the vessel strike avoidance zone may be third-party observers ( i.e., PSOs) or crew members, but crew members responsible for these duties must be provided sufficient training to (1) distinguish marine mammal from other phenomena, and (2) broadly to identify a marine mammal as a right whale, other whale (defined in this context as sperm whales or baleen whales other than right whales), or other marine mammals. The vessel, regardless of size, must observe a 10-knot speed restriction in specific areas designated by NMFS for the protection of NARW from vessel strikes, including SMAs and DMAs when in effect. See www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​endangered-species-conservation/​reducing-ship-strikes-north-atlantic-right-whales for specific detail regarding these areas.

• The vessel must reduce speed to 10-knots or less when mother/calf pairs, pods, or large assemblages of cetaceans are observed near a vessel;
• The vessel must maintain a minimum separation distance of 500-m (1,640-ft) from right whales and other ESA-listed species. If an ESA-listed species is sighted within the relevant separation distance, the vessel must steer a course away at 10-knots or less until the 500-m separation distance has been established. If a whale is observed but cannot be confirmed as a species that is not ESA-listed, the vessel operator must assume that it is an ESA-listed species and take appropriate action.
• The vessel must maintain a minimum separation distance of 100-m (328-ft) from non-ESA-listed baleen whales.

• The vessel must, to the maximum extent practicable, attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 50-m (164-ft) from all other marine mammals, with an understanding that, at times, this may not be possible ( e.g., for animals that approach the vessel, bow-riding species).

• When marine mammal are sighted while a vessel is underway, the vessel shall take action as necessary to avoid violating the relevant separation distance ( e.g., attempt to remain parallel to the animal's course, avoid excessive speed or abrupt changes in direction until the animal has left the area, reduce speed and shift the engine to neutral). This does not apply to any vessel towing gear or any vessel that is navigationally constrained.

Members of the monitoring team will consult NMFS NARW reporting system and Whale Alert, daily and as able, for the presence of NARW throughout survey operations, and for the establishment of a DMA. If NMFS should establish a DMA in the survey area during the survey, the vessel will abide by speed restrictions in the DMA.

Training

All PSOs must have completed a PSO training program and received NMFS approval to act as a PSO for geophysical surveys. Documentation of NMFS approval and most recent training certificates of individual PSOs' successful completion of a commercial PSO training course must be provided upon request. Further information can be found at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/​national/​endangered-species-conservation/​protected-species-observers. In the event where third-party PSOs are not required, crew members serving as lookouts must receive training on protected species identification, vessel strike minimization procedures, how and when to communicate with the vessel captain, and reporting requirements.

Attentive Energy shall instruct relevant vessel personnel with regard to the authority of the marine mammal monitoring team, and shall ensure that relevant vessel personnel and the marine mammal monitoring team participate in a joint onboard briefing (hereafter PSO briefing), led by the vessel operator and lead PSO, prior to beginning survey activities to ensure that responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocols, safety and operational procedures, and IHA requirements are clearly understood. This PSO briefing must be repeated when relevant new personnel ( e.g., PSOs, acoustic source operator) join the survey operations before their responsibilities and work commences.

Project-specific training will be conducted for all vessel crew prior to the start of a survey and during any changes in crew such that all survey personnel are fully aware and understand the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements. All vessel crew members must be briefed in the identification of protected species that may occur in the survey area and in regulations and best practices for avoiding vessel collisions. Reference materials must be available aboard the project vessel for identification of listed species. The expectation and process for reporting of protected species sighted during surveys must be clearly communicated and posted in highly visible locations aboard the project vessel, so that there is an expectation for reporting to the designated vessel contact (such as the lookout or the vessel captain), as well as a communication channel and process for crew members to do so. Prior to implementation with vessel crews, the training program will be provided to NMFS for review and approval. Confirmation of the training and understanding of the requirements will be documented on a training course log sheet. Signing the log sheet will certify that the crew member understands and will comply with the necessary requirements throughout the survey activities.

Based on our evaluation of the applicant's measures, as well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

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 while conducting the activities. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring.

Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:

• Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area in which take is anticipated ( e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density);

• Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) action or environment ( e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) affected species ( e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure ( e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);

• Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
• How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks;

• Effects on marine mammal habitat ( e.g., marine mammal prey species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of marine mammal habitat); and,

• Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Monitoring Measures

Attentive Energy must use independent, dedicated, trained PSOs, meaning that the PSOs must be employed by a third-party observer provider, must have no tasks other than to conduct observational effort, collect data, and communicate with and instruct relevant vessel crew with regard to the presence of marine mammal and mitigation requirements (including brief alerts regarding maritime hazards), and must have successfully completed an approved PSO training course for geophysical surveys. Visual monitoring must be performed by qualified, NMFS-approved PSOs. PSO resumes must be provided to NMFS for review and approval prior to the start of survey activities.

PSO names must be provided to NMFS by the operator for review and confirmation of their approval for specific roles prior to commencement of the survey. For prospective PSOs not previously approved, or for PSOs whose approval is not current, NMFS must review and approve PSO qualifications. Resumes should include information related to relevant education, experience, and training, including dates, duration, location, and description of prior PSO experience. Resumes must be accompanied by relevant documentation of successful completion of necessary training.

NMFS may approve PSOs as conditional or unconditional. A conditionally-approved PSO may be one who is trained but has not yet attained the requisite experience. An unconditionally-approved PSO is one who has attained the necessary experience. For unconditional approval, the PSO must have a minimum of 90 days at sea performing the role during a geophysical survey, with the conclusion of the most recent relevant experience not more than 18 months previous.

At least one of the visual PSOs aboard the vessel must be unconditionally-approved. One unconditionally-approved visual PSO shall be designated as the lead for the entire PSO team. This lead should typically be the PSO with the most experience, who would coordinate duty schedules and roles for the PSO team and serve as primary point of contact for the vessel operator. To the maximum extent practicable, the duty schedule shall be planned such that unconditionally-approved PSOs are on duty with conditionally-approved PSOs.

PSOs must have successfully attained a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with a major in one of the natural sciences, a minimum of 30 semester hours or equivalent in the biological sciences, and at least one undergraduate course in math or statistics. The educational requirements may be waived if the PSO has acquired the relevant skills through alternate experience. Requests for such a waiver shall be submitted to NMFS and must include written justification. Alternate experience that may be considered includes, but is not limited to (1) secondary education and/or experience comparable to PSO duties; (2) previous work experience conducting academic, commercial, or government-sponsored marine mammal surveys; and (3) previous work experience as a PSO (PSO must be in good standing and demonstrate good performance of PSO duties).

PSOs must successfully complete relevant training, including completion of all required coursework and passing (80 percent or greater) a written and/or oral examination developed for the training program.

PSOs must coordinate to ensure 360° visual coverage around the vessel from the most appropriate observation posts and shall conduct visual observations using binoculars or night-vision equipment and the naked eye while free from distractions and in a consistent, systematic, and diligent manner.

PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of four consecutive hours followed by a break of at least two hours between watches and may conduct a maximum of 12 hours of observation per 24-hour period.

Any observations of marine mammals by crew members aboard any vessel associated with the survey shall be relayed to the PSO team.

Attentive Energy must work with the selected third-party PSO provider to ensure PSOs have all equipment (including backup equipment) needed to adequately perform necessary tasks, including accurate determination of distance and bearing to observed marine mammals, and to ensure that PSOs are capable of calibrating equipment as necessary for accurate distance estimates and species identification. Such equipment, at a minimum, shall include:

• At least one thermal (infrared) imagine device suited for the marine environment;

• Reticle binoculars ( e.g., 7 x 50) of appropriate quality (at least one per PSO, plus backups);

• Global Positioning Units (GPS) (at least one plus backups);
• Digital cameras with a telephoto lens that is at least 300-mm or equivalent on a full-frame single lens reflex (SLR) (at least one plus backups). The camera or lens should also have an image stabilization system;
• Equipment necessary for accurate measurement of distances to marine mammal;
• Compasses (at least one plus backups);
• Means of communication among vessel crew and PSOs; and
• Any other tools deemed necessary to adequately and effectively perform PSO tasks.

The equipment specified above may be provided by an individual PSO, the third-party PSO provider, or the operator, but Attentive Energy is responsible for ensuring PSOs have the proper equipment required to perform the duties specified in the IHA.

During good conditions ( e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort sea state 3 or less), PSOs shall conduct observations when the specified acoustic sources are not operating for comparison of sighting rates and behavior with and without use of the specified acoustic sources and between acquisition periods, to the maximum extent practicable.

The PSOs will be responsible for monitoring the waters surrounding the survey vessel to the farthest extent permitted by sighting conditions, including Exclusion Zones, during all HRG survey operations. PSOs will visually monitor and identify marine mammals, including those approaching or entering the established Exclusion Zones during survey activities. It will be the responsibility of the PSO(s) on duty to communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to communicate the action(s) that are necessary to ensure mitigation and monitoring requirements are implemented as appropriate.

At a minimum, Attentive Energy plans to use a PSO during all HRG survey operations ( e.g., any day on which use of an HRG source is planned to occur), one PSO must be on duty during daylight operations on the survey vessel, conducting visual observations at all times on the active survey vessel during daylight hours ( i.e., from 30 minutes prior to sunrise through 30 minutes following sunset) and two PSOs will be on watch during nighttime operations. The PSO(s) would ensure 360° visual coverage around the vessel from the most appropriate observation posts and would conduct visual observations using binoculars and/or night vision goggles and the naked eye while free from distractions and in a consistent, systematic, and diligent manner. PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of four consecutive hours followed by a break of at least two hours between watches and may conduct a maximum of 12 hr of observation per 24 hr period.

PSOs must be equipped with binoculars and have the ability to estimate distance and bearing to detect marine mammals, particularly in proximity to Exclusion Zones. Reticulated binoculars must also be available to PSOs for use as appropriate based on conditions and visibility to support the sighting and monitoring of marine mammals. During nighttime operations, night-vision goggles with thermal clip-ons and infrared technology would be used. Position data would be recorded using hand-held or vessel GPS units for each sighting.

During good conditions ( e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort sea state (BSS) 3 or less), to the maximum extent practicable, PSOs would also conduct observations when the acoustic source is not operating for comparison of sighting rates and behavior with and without use of the active acoustic sources. Any observations of marine mammals by crew members aboard the vessel associated with the survey would be relayed to the PSO team.

Data on all PSO observations would be recorded based on standard PSO collection requirements (see Reporting Measures). This would include dates, times, and locations of survey operations; dates and times of observations, location and weather; details of marine mammal sightings ( e.g., species, numbers, behavior); and details of any observed marine mammal behavior that occurs ( e.g., noted behavioral disturbances).

Reporting Measures

Attentive Energy shall submit a draft comprehensive report on all activities and monitoring results within 90 days of the completion of the survey or expiration of the IHA, whichever comes sooner. The report must describe all activities conducted and sightings of marine mammals, must provide full documentation of methods, results, and interpretation pertaining to all monitoring, and must summarize the dates and locations of survey operations and all marine mammals sightings (dates, times, locations, activities, associated survey activities). The draft report shall also include geo-referenced, time-stamped vessel tracklines for all time periods during which acoustic sources were operating. Tracklines should include points recording any change in acoustic source status ( e.g., when the sources began operating, when they were turned off, or when they changed operational status such as from full array to single gun or vice versa). GIS files shall be provided in ESRI shapefile format and include the UTC date and time, latitude in decimal degrees, and longitude in decimal degrees. All coordinates shall be referenced to the WGS84 geographic coordinate system. In addition to the report, all raw observational data shall be made available. The report must summarize the information submitted in interim monthly reports (if required) as well as additional data collected. A final report must be submitted within 30 days following resolution of any comments on the draft report. All draft and final marine mammal monitoring reports must be submitted to [e-mail], [e-mail] and [e-mail].

PSOs must use standardized electronic data forms to record data. PSOs shall record detailed information about any implementation of mitigation requirements, including the distance of marine mammal to the acoustic source and description of specific actions that ensued, the behavior of the animal(s), any observed changes in behavior before and after implementation of mitigation, and if shutdown was implemented, the length of time before any subsequent ramp-up of the acoustic source. If required mitigation was not implemented, PSOs should record a description of the circumstances. At a minimum, the following information must be recorded:

1. Vessel name (source vessel), vessel size and type, maximum speed capability of vessel;

2. Dates of departures and returns to port with port name;

3. The lease number;

4. PSO names and affiliations;

5. Date and participants of PSO briefings;

6. Visual monitoring equipment used;

7. PSO location on vessel and height of observation location above water surface;

8. Dates and times (Greenwich Mean Time) of survey on/off effort and times corresponding with PSO on/off effort;

9. Vessel location (decimal degrees) when survey effort begins and ends and vessel location at beginning and end of visual PSO duty shifts;

10. Vessel location at 30-second intervals if obtainable from data collection software, otherwise at practical regular interval;

11. Vessel heading and speed at beginning and end of visual PSO duty shifts and upon any change;

12. Water depth (if obtainable from data collection software);

13. Environmental conditions while on visual survey (at beginning and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change significantly), including BSS and any other relevant weather conditions including cloud cover, fog, sun glare, and overall visibility to the horizon;

14. Factors that may contribute to impaired observations during each PSO shift change or as needed as environmental conditions change ( e.g., vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); and

15. Survey activity information (and changes thereof), such as acoustic source power output while in operation, number and volume of airguns operating in an array, tow depth of an acoustic source, and any other notes of significance ( i.e., pre-start clearance, ramp-up, shutdown, testing, shooting, ramp-up completion, end of operations, streamers, etc.).

Upon visual observation of any marine mammal, the following information must be recorded:

1. Watch status (sighting made by PSO on/off effort, opportunistic, crew, alternate vessel/platform);

2. Vessel/survey activity at time of sighting ( e.g., deploying, recovering, testing, shooting, data acquisition, other);

3. PSO who sighted the animal;

4. Time of sighting;

5. Initial detection method;

6. Sightings cue;

7. Vessel location at time of sighting (decimal degrees);

8. Direction of vessel's travel (compass direction);

9. Speed of the vessel(s) from which the observation was made;

10. Identification of the animal ( e.g., genus/species, lowest possible taxonomic level or unidentified); also note the composition of the group if there is a mix of species;

11. Species reliability (an indicator of confidence in identification);

12. Estimated distance to the animal and method of estimating distance;

13. Estimated number of animals (high/low/best);

14. Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, yearlings, juveniles, calves, group composition, etc.);

15. Description (as many distinguishing features as possible of each individual seen, including length, shape, color, pattern, scars, or markings, shape and size of dorsal fin, shape of head, and blow characteristics);

16. Detailed behavior observations ( e.g., number of blows/breaths, number of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, traveling; as explicit and detailed as possible; note any observed changes in behavior before and after point of closest approach);

17. Mitigation actions; description of any actions implemented in response to the sighting ( e.g., delays, shutdowns, ramp-up, speed or course alteration, etc.) and time and location of the action;

18. Equipment operating during sighting;

19. Animal's closest point of approach and/or closest distance from the center point of the acoustic source; and

20. Description of any actions implemented in response to the sighting ( e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up) and time and location of the action.

If a NARW is observed at any time by PSOs or personnel on the project vessel, during surveys or during vessel transit, Attentive Energy must report the sighting information to the NMFS NARW Sighting Advisory System (866-755-6622) within two hours of occurrence, when practicable, or no later than 24 hours after occurrence. NARW sightings in any location may also be reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via channel 16 and through the WhaleAlert app ( http://www.whalealert.org).

In the event that Attentive Energy personnel discover an injured or dead marine mammal, regardless of the cause of injury or death or in the event that personnel involved in the survey activities discover an injured or dead marine mammal, Attentive Energy must report the incident to NMFS as soon as feasible by phone [phone]) and by email ( [e-mail] and [e-mail]) as soon as feasible. The report must include the following information:

1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);

2. Species identification (if known) or description of the animal(s) involved;

3. Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the animal is dead);

4. Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;

5. If available, photographs or video footage of the animal(s); and

6. General circumstances under which the animal was discovered.

In the unanticipated event of a ship strike of a marine mammal by any vessel involved in the activities covered by the IHA, Attentive Energy must report the incident to NMFS by phone [phone]) and by email ( [e-mail] and [e-mail]) as soon as feasible. The report would include the following information:

1. Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;

2. Species identification (if known) or description of the animal(s) involved;

3. Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;

4. Vessel's course/heading and what operations were being conducted (if applicable);

5. Status of all sound sources in use;

6. Description of avoidance measures/requirements that were in place at the time of the strike and what additional measures were taken, if any, to avoid strike;

7. Environmental conditions ( e.g., wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility) immediately preceding the strike;

8. Estimated size and length of animal that was struck;

9. Description of the behavior of the marine mammal immediately preceding and/or following the strike;

10. If available, description of the presence and behavior of any other marine mammals immediately preceding the strike;

11. Estimated fate of the animal ( e.g., dead, injured but alive, injured and moving, blood or tissue observed in the water, status unknown, disappeared); and

12. To the extent practicable, photographs or video footage of the animal(s).

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival ( i.e., population-level 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, or ambient noise levels).

To avoid repetition, the majority of our analysis applies to all the species listed in Table 3, given that some of the anticipated effects of this project on different marine mammal stocks are expected to be relatively similar in nature. Where there are meaningful differences between species or stocks, or groups of species, in anticipated individual responses to activities, impact of expected take on the population due to differences in population status, or impacts on habitat, they are included as separate subsections below.

NMFS does not anticipate that serious injury or mortality would result from HRG surveys, even in the absence of mitigation, and no serious injury or mortality is authorized. As discussed in the Potential Effects section, non-auditory physical effects and vessel strike are not expected to occur. NMFS expects that all potential takes would be in the form of short-term Level B behavioral harassment in the form of temporary avoidance of the area or decreased foraging (if such activity was occurring), reactions that are considered to be of low severity and with no lasting biological consequences ( e.g., Southall et al., 2007). Even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of an overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in viability for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole, refer to Potential Effects and Estimated Take section for further discussion.

In addition to being temporary, the maximum expected harassment zone around a survey vessel is 141-m. Although this distance is assumed for all survey activity in estimating take numbers planned for authorization and evaluated here, in reality, the Dual Geo-Spark 2000X would likely not be used across the entire 24-hour period and across all 56 days. As noted in their application, the other acoustic sources Attentive Energy has included in their application have minimal Level B harassment zones. Therefore, when not using the sparker, the ensonified area surrounding the vessel is small compared to the overall distribution of the animals and ambient sound in the area and their use of the habitat. Feeding behavior is not likely to be significantly impacted as prey species are mobile and are broadly distributed throughout the survey area; therefore, marine mammals that may be temporarily displaced during survey activities are expected to be able to resume foraging once they have moved away from areas with disturbing levels of underwater noise. Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance and the availability of similar habitat and resources in the surrounding area, the impacts to marine mammals and the food sources that they utilize are not expected to cause significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations.

There are no rookeries, mating or calving grounds known to be biologically important to marine mammals within the planned 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 noted previously, elevated NARW mortalities began in June 2017 and there is an active UME. Overall, preliminary findings support human interactions, specifically vessel strikes and entanglements, as the cause of death for the majority of right whales. As noted previously, the survey area overlaps a migratory corridor BIA for NARW. Due to the fact that the planned survey activities are temporary and the spatial extent of sound produced by the survey would be very small relative to the spatial extent of the available migratory habitat in the BIA, right whale migration is not expected to be impacted by the survey. Given the relatively small size of the ensonified area, it is unlikely that prey availability would be adversely affected by HRG survey operations. Required vessel strike avoidance measures will also decrease risk of ship strike during migration; no ship strike is expected to occur during Attentive Energy's planned activities. The 500-m shutdown zone for right whales is conservative, considering the Level B harassment isopleth for the most impactful acoustic source ( i.e., sparker) is estimated to be 141-m, and thereby minimizes the potential for behavioral harassment of this species.

As noted previously, Level A harassment is not expected due to the small PTS zones associated with HRG equipment types planned for use. The authorizations for Level B harassment takes of NARW are not expected to exacerbate or compound upon the ongoing UME. The limited NARW Level B harassment takes authorized are expected to be of a short duration, and given the number of estimated takes, repeated exposures of the same individual are not expected. Further, given the relatively small size of the ensonified area during Attentive Energy's activities, it is unlikely that NARW prey availability would be adversely affected. Accordingly, NMFS does not anticipate NARW takes that would result from Attentive Energy's activities would impact annual rates of recruitment or survival. Thus, any takes that occur would not result in population level impacts.

Other Marine Mammal Species With Active UMEs

As noted previously, there are several active UMEs occurring in the vicinity of Attentive Energy'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 stranding's have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, with highest numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and New York. This event does not provide cause for concern regarding population level impacts, as the likely population abundance is greater than 20,000 whales.

The required mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number and/or severity of takes for all species listed in Table 2, including those with active UMEs, to the level of least practicable adverse impact. In particular, they would provide animals the opportunity to move away from the sound source throughout the survey area before HRG survey equipment reaches full energy, thus preventing them from being exposed to sound levels that have the potential to cause injury (Level A harassment) or more severe Level B harassment. As discussed previously, take by Level A harassment (injury) is considered unlikely, even absent mitigation, based on the characteristics of the signals produced by the acoustic sources planned for use, and is not authorized. Implementation of required mitigation would further reduce this potential. Therefore, NMFS is not authorizing any Level A harassment.

NMFS expects that takes would be in the form of short-term Level B behavioral harassment by way of brief startling reactions and/or temporary vacating of the area, or decreased foraging (if such activity was occurring)—reactions that (at the scale and intensity anticipated here) are considered to be of low severity, with no lasting biological consequences. Since both the sources and marine mammals are mobile, animals would only be exposed briefly to a small ensonified area that might result in take. Additionally, required mitigation measures would further reduce exposure to sound that could result in more severe behavioral harassment.

Biologically Important Areas for Other Species

As previously discussed, impacts from the project are expected to be localized to the specific area of activity and only during periods of time where Attentive Energy's acoustic sources are active. While areas of biological importance to fin whales, humpback whales, and harbor seals can be found off the coast of New Jersey and New York, NMFS does not expect this action to affect these areas. This is due to the combination of the mitigation and monitoring measures being required of Attentive Energy's as well as the location of these biologically important areas. All of these important areas are found outside of the range of this survey area, as is the case with fin whales and humpback whales (BIAs found further north), and, therefore, not expected to be impacted by Attentive Energy's survey activities.

In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity are not expected to adversely affect any of the species or stocks through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:

• No serious injury or mortality 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 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 NARW, the activities would occur in such a comparatively small area such that any avoidance of the survey area due to activities would not affect migration; and
• The mitigation measures, including effective visual monitoring, and shutdowns are expected to minimize potential impacts to marine mammals.

Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the planned activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers

As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals. When the predicted number of individuals to be taken is fewer than one-third of the species or stock abundance, the take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally, other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.

NMFS plans to authorize incidental take (by Level B harassment only) of 15 marine mammal species (with 15 managed stocks). The total amount of takes planned for authorization relative to the best available population abundance is less than 1 percent for all stocks (Table 7).

Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity (including the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily 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 of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species.

NMFS OPR is authorizing take of four species of marine mammals which are listed under the ESA, including the North Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has determined that this activity falls within the scope of activities analyzed in NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office's (GARFO) programmatic consultation regarding geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic Renewable Energy Regions (completed June 29, 2021; revised September 2021).

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 the 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 IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.

Authorization

As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to Attentive Energy authorizing take, by Level B harassment, incidental to conducting marine site characterization surveys off of New York and New Jersey in the New York bight for a period of one year, which includes the previously explained mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements.

Dated: August 16, 2022.

Kimberly Damon-Randall,

Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.