# Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the SouthCoast Wind Project Offshore Massachusetts > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2024-13770 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Proposed Rule - **Published:** June 27, 2024 - **Citation:** 89 FR 53708 ## Text DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 217 [Docket No. 240605-0153] RIN 0648-BM11 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the SouthCoast Wind Project Offshore Massachusetts AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Proposed rule; proposed letter of authorization; request for comments. SUMMARY: NMFS received a request from SouthCoast Wind Energy LLC (SouthCoast) (formerly Mayflower Wind Energy LLC), for Incidental Take Regulations (ITR) and an associated Letter of Authorization (LOA) pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The requested regulations would govern the authorization of take, by Level A harassment and Level B harassment, of small numbers of marine mammals over the course of five years (2027-2032) incidental to construction of the SouthCoast Wind Project (SouthCoast Project) offshore of Massachusetts within the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lease Area OCS-A 0521 (Lease Area) and associated Export Cable Corridors (ECCs). Specified activities expected to result in incidental take are pile driving (impact and vibratory), unexploded ordnance or munitions and explosives of concern (UXO/MEC) detonation, and site assessment surveys using high-resolution geophysical (HRG) equipment. NMFS requests comments on this proposed rule. NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any final decision on the promulgation of the requested ITR and issuance of the LOA; agency responses to public comments will be summarized in the final rule. The regulations, if promulgated, would be effective April 1, 2027 through March 31, 2032. DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than July 29, 2024. ADDRESSES: A plain language summary of this proposed rule is available at https://www.regulations.gov/docket/ NOAA-NMFS-2024-0074. Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e- Portal. Visit https://www.regulations.gov and type NOAA-NMFS-2024-0074 in the Rulemaking Search box. Click on the “Comment” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments. Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on https://www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information ( e.g., name, address), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). A copy of SouthCoast's Incidental Take Authorization (ITA) 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/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carter Esch, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose and Need for Regulatory Action This proposed rule, if promulgated, would provide a framework under the authority of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ) to allow for the authorization of take of marine mammals incidental to construction of the SouthCoast Project within the Lease Area and along ECCs to landfall locations in Massachusetts. NMFS received a request from SouthCoast for 5-year regulations and a LOA that would authorize take of individuals of 16 species of marine mammals by harassment only (4 species by Level A harassment and Level B harassment and 12 species by Level B harassment only) incidental to SouthCoast's construction activities. No mortality or serious injury is anticipated or proposed for authorization. Please see the Legal Authority for the Proposed Action section below for relevant definitions. Legal Authority for the Proposed Action 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, regulations are promulgated, and public notice and an opportunity for public comment are provided. 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). If such findings are made, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods of taking; 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 as “mitigation”); and requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such takings. As noted above, no serious injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed for authorization in this proposed rule. Relevant definitions of MMPA statutory and regulatory terms are included below: • U.S. Citizen —individual U.S. citizens or any corporation or similar entity if it is organized under the laws of the United States or any governmental unit defined in 16 U.S.C. 1362(13); 50 CFR 216.103); • Take —to harass, hunt, capture, or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal (16 U.S.C. 1362(13); 50 CFR 216.3); • Incidental harassment, Incidental taking, and incidental, but not intentional, taking —an accidental taking. This does not mean that the taking is unexpected, but rather it includes those takings that are infrequent, unavoidable or accidental (50 CFR 216.103); • Serious Injury —any injury that will likely result in mortality (50 CFR 216.3); • Level A harassment —any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (16 U.S.C. 1362(18); 50 CFR 216.3); and • Level B harassment —any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which 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 (16 U.S.C. 1362(18); 50 CFR 216.3). Summary of Major Provisions Within the Proposed Rule The major provisions of this proposed rule are: • Allowing NMFS to authorize, under a LOA, the take of small numbers of marine mammals by Level A harassment and/or Level B harassment incidental to the SouthCoast Project and prohibiting take of such species or stocks in any manner not permitted ( e.g., mortality or serious injury); • Establishing a seasonal moratorium on foundation installation within 20 kilometers (km) (12.4 miles (mi)) of the 30-m isobath on the western side of Nantucket Shoals which, for purposes of this proposed rule, is hereafter referred to as the North Atlantic Right Whale Enhanced Mitigation Area (NARW EMA), from October 16-May 31, annually; • Establishing a seasonal moratorium on foundation installation throughout the rest of the Lease Area January 1-May 15 and a restriction on foundation pile driving in December unless Southcoast requests and NMFS approves piling driving in December, which would require SouthCoast to implement enhanced mitigation and monitoring to minimize impacts to North Atlantic right whales ( Eubalaena glacialis ); • Establishing enhanced North Atlantic right whale monitoring, clearance, and shutdown procedures SouthCoast must implement in the NARW EMA August 1-October 15, and throughout the rest of the Lease Area May 16-31 and December 1-31; • Establishing a seasonal moratorium on the detonation of unexploded ordnance or munitions and explosives of concern (UXO/MEC) December 1-April 30 to minimize impacts to North Atlantic right whales; • Requirements for UXO/MEC detonations to only occur if all other means of removal are exhausted ( i.e., As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) risk mitigation procedure) and conducting UXO/MEC detonations during daylight hours only and limiting detonations to 1 per 24 hour period; • Conducting both visual and passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) by trained, NMFS-approved Protected Species Observers (PSOs) and PAM operators before, during, and after select in-water construction activities; • Requiring training for all SouthCoast Project personnel to ensure marine mammal protocols and procedures are understood; • Establishing clearance and shutdown zones for all in-water construction activities to prevent or reduce the risk of Level A harassment and to minimize the risk of Level B harassment, including a delay or shutdown of foundation impact pile driving and delay to UXO/MEC detonation if a North Atlantic right whale is observed at any distance by PSOs or acoustically detected within certain distances; • Establishing minimum visibility and PAM monitoring zones during foundation impact pile driving and detonations of UXO/MECs; • Requiring use of a double bubble curtain during all foundation pile driving installation activities and UXO/MEC detonations to reduce noise levels to those modeled assuming a broadband 10 decibel (dB) attenuation; • Requiring sound field verification (SFV) monitoring during pile driving of foundation piles and during UXO/MEC detonations to measure in situ noise levels for comparison against the modeled results and ensure noise levels assuming 10 dB attenuation are not exceeded; • Requiring SFV during the operational phase of the SouthCoast Project; • Implementing soft-starts during pile driving and ramp-up during the use of high-resolution geophysical (HRG) marine site characterization survey equipment; • Requiring various vessel strike avoidance measures; • Requiring various measures during fisheries monitoring surveys, such as immediately removing gear from the water if marine mammals are considered at-risk of interacting with gear; • Requiring regular and situational reporting, including, but not limited to, information regarding activities occurring, marine mammal observations and acoustic detections, and sound field verification monitoring results; and • Requiring monitoring of the North Atlantic right whale sighting networks, Channel 16, and PAM data as well as reporting any sightings to NMFS. Through adaptive management, NMFS Office of Protected Resources may modify ( e.g., remove, revise, or add to) the existing mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures summarized above and required by the LOA. NMFS must withdraw or suspend an LOA issued under these regulations, after notice and opportunity for public comment, if it finds the methods of taking or the mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures are not being substantially complied with (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(B); 50 CFR 216.106(e)). Additionally, failure to comply with the requirements of the LOA may result in civil monetary penalties and knowing violations may result in criminal penalties (16 U.S.C. 1375; 50 CFR 216.106(g)). National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) On February 15, 2021, SouthCoast submitted a Construction and Operations Plan (COP) to BOEM for approval to construct and operate the SouthCoast Project, which has been updated several times since, as recently as September 2023. On November 1, 2021, BOEM published in the Federal Register a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the COP (86 FR 60270). On February 17, 2023, BOEM published and made its SouthCoast Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Commercial Wind Lease OCS-A 0521 available for public comment for 45 days, February 17, 2023 to April 3, 2023 (88 FR 10377). On April 4, 2023, BOEM extended the public comment period by 15 days through April 18, 2023 (88 FR 19986). Additionally, BOEM held three virtual public hearings on March 20, March 22, and March 27, 2023. 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 evaluate the potential impacts on the human environment of the proposed action ( i.e., promulgating the regulations and subsequently issuing a 5-year LOA to SouthCoast) and alternatives to that action. Accordingly, NMFS is a cooperating agency on BOEM's Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and proposes to adopt the EIS, provided our independent evaluation of the document finds that it includes adequate information analyzing the effects on the human environment of promulgating the proposed regulations and issuing the LOA. Information in the SouthCoast ITA application, this proposed rule, and the BOEM EIS mentioned above collectively provide the environmental information related to proposed promulgation of these regulations and associated LOA for public review and comment. NMFS will review all comments submitted in response to this proposed rulemaking prior to concluding the NEPA process or making a final decision on the request for an ITA. Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST-41) The SouthCoast Project is covered under Title 41 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, or “FAST-41.” FAST-41 includes a suite of provisions designed to expedite the environmental review for covered infrastructure projects, including enhanced interagency coordination as well as milestone tracking on the public-facing Permitting Dashboard. FAST-41 also places a 2-year limitations period on any judicial claim that challenges the validity of a Federal agency decision to issue or deny an authorization for a FAST-41 covered project. 42 U.S.C. 4370m-6(a)(1)(A). SouthCoast's proposed project is listed on the Permitting Dashboard, where milestones and schedules related to the environmental review and permitting for the project can be found: https://www.permits.performance.gov/permitting-project/southcoast-wind-energy-llc-southcoast-wind. Summary of Request On March 18, 2022, Mayflower Wind Energy LLC (Mayflower Wind) submitted a request for the promulgation of regulations and issuance of an associated 5-year LOA to take marine mammals incidental to construction activities associated with the Mayflower Wind Project offshore of Massachusetts in the Lease Area OCS-A-0521. On February 1, 2023, Mayflower Wind notified NMFS that it changed its company name and project name to SouthCoast Wind Energy LLC and SouthCoast Wind Project, respectively. SouthCoast's request is for the incidental, but not intentional, taking of a small number of 16 marine mammal species (comprising 16 stocks) by Level B harassment (for all 16 species or stocks) and by Level A harassment (for four species or stocks). No serious injury or mortality is expected to result from the specified activities, nor is any proposed for authorization. In response to our questions and comments and following extensive information exchange between SouthCoast and NMFS, SouthCoast submitted revised applications on April 23, June 24, and August 16, 2022, and a final revised application on September 14, 2022, which NMFS deemed adequate and complete on September 19, 2022. On October 17, 2022, NMFS published a notice of receipt (NOR) of SouthCoast's adequate and complete application in the Federal Register (87 FR 62793), requesting comments and soliciting information related to SouthCoast's request during a 30-day public comment period. During the NOR public comment period, NMFS received comment letters from one member of the public, Seafreeze, Ltd, and two environmental non-governmental organizations: Conservation Law Foundation and Oceana. NMFS has reviewed all submitted material and has taken the material into consideration during the drafting of this proposed rule. Following publication of the NOR (87 FR 62793, October 17, 2022), NMFS further assessed potential impacts of SouthCoast's proposed activities on North Atlantic right whales that utilize foraging habitat within and near the Lease Area and consulted with SouthCoast to develop enhanced mitigation and monitoring measures that would reduce the likelihood of these potential impacts. On March 15, 2024, following extensive information exchange, SouthCoast submitted a North Atlantic Right Whale Enhanced Mitigation Plan and Monitoring Plan and revised application on March 15, 2024, which NMFS accepted on March 19, 2024. NMFS previously issued two Incidental Harassment Authorizations (IHAs) to Mayflower Wind and one IHA to SouthCoast Wind authorizing the taking of marine mammals incidental to marine site characterization surveys (using HRG equipment) of SouthCoast's Lease Area (OCS-A 0521) (see 85 FR 45578, July 29, 2020; 86 FR 38033, July 19, 2021; 88 FR 31678, May 18, 2023). To date, SouthCoast has complied with all IHA requirements ( e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and reporting). Information regarding SouthCoast's monitoring results, which were utilized in take estimation, may be found in the Estimated Take section, and the full monitoring reports can be found on NMFS' website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-other-energy-activities-renewable. 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 promulgated and become effective during the effective period of these proposed regulations (or any other MMPA incidental take authorization), the authorization holder would be required to comply with any and all applicable requirements contained within such final vessel speed 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 such 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. The responsibility to comply with the applicable requirements of any vessel speed rule would become effective immediately upon the effective date of any final vessel speed rule and, when notice is published of the effective date, NMFS would also notify SouthCoast if the measures in such speed rule were to supercede any of the measures in the MMPA authorization. Description of the Specified Activities Overview SouthCoast has proposed to construct and operate an up to 2,400 megawatt (MW) offshore wind energy facility (SouthCoast Project) in state and Federal waters in the Atlantic Ocean in Lease Area OCS-A-0521. This lease area is located within the Massachusetts Wind Energy Area (MA WEA), 26 nautical miles (nm, 48 km) south of Martha's Vineyard and 20 nm (37 km) south of Nantucket, Massachusetts. Development of the offshore wind energy facility would be divided into two projects, each of which would be developed in separate years. Project 1 and Project 2 would occupy the northeastern and southwestern halves (approximately) of the Lease Area, respectively. Each Project would have the potential to generate approximately 1,200 MW of renewable energy. Once operational, SouthCoast would allow the State of Massachusetts to advance Federal and State offshore wind targets as well as reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase grid reliability, and support economic development and growth in the region. The SouthCoast Project would consist of several different types of permanent offshore infrastructure: wind turbine generators (WTGs), offshore substation platforms (OSPs), associated WTG and OSP foundations, inter-array and ECCs, and offshore cabling. Onshore substation and converter stations, onshore interconnection routes, and operations and maintenance (O&M) facilities are also planned. There are 149 positions in OSP foundations (totaling no more than 149) would be installed. The number of WTG foundations installed would vary by project. SouthCoast has not yet determined the exact number of OSPs necessary to support each project, but the total across projects would not exceed five. Project 1 would include up to 85 WTG foundations, and Project 2 would include up to 73 WTG foundations for a maximum of 147 WTG foundations for both Project 1 and Project 2. Project 1 foundations would be installed in two distinct areas. Subject to extensive mitigation, including extended seasonal restrictions and monitoring, SouthCoast would install up to 54 foundations within the NARW EMA, defined as the northeastern portion of the lease area within 20 km (9.3 mi) of the 30-m (98.4 ft) isobath along the western side of Nantucket Shoals (see Figure 2 in the Specified Geographical Area section for more detail). The remaining foundations for Project 1 (out of a maximum of 85) would be installed in positions immediately southwest of the NARW EMA. SouthCoast is considering three foundation types for WTGs and OSPs: monopile, piled jacket, and suction-bucket jacket. SouthCoast would install up to two different foundation types for WTGs ( i.e., piled jacket and monopiles), and potentially a third concept for OSPs ( e.g., suction bucket jacket). However, due to economic and technical infeasibility, suction-bucket jackets are no longer under consideration for Project 1. Geotechnical investigations at Project 2 foundation locations are ongoing, and SouthCoast will need to assess the data to determine whether it would be feasible to install suction-bucket jacket foundations, rather than monopile or jacket foundations. However, due to predicted installation complexities, this is not the preferred foundation type. If suction bucket foundations are selected for Project 2, pile driving would not be necessary. SouthCoast is considering multiple installation scenarios for each project, which differ by foundation type and number, and installation method. For Project 1, SouthCoast plans to install either all monopile WTG (Project 1, Scenario 1; P1S1: 71 WTGs) or pin-piled jacket (Project 1, Scenario 2; P1S2: 85 WTGs) foundations by impact pile driving only. For Project 2, unless suction bucket jackets are selected as the preferred type, foundation installation would also include either all monopile or all piled jacket WTG foundations, which would be installed using impact pile driving only (Project 2, Scenario 1; P2S1: 68 WTGs) or a combination of vibratory and impact (Project 2, Scenario 2; P2S2, 73 WTGs; Project 2 Scenario 3; P2S3 62 WTGs) pile driving. Each WTG and OSP would be supported by a single foundation. OSP monopile or piled jacket foundations would be installed using only impact pile driving. SouthCoast is considering three OSP designs: modular, integrated, and DC-converter. Should they elect to install piled jacket foundations to support OSPs, the number of jacket legs and pin piles would vary depending on the OSP design. SouthCoast currently identifies installation of one DC-converter OSP per project, each supported by a piled jacket foundation, as the most realistic scenario. Inter-array cables will transmit electricity from the WTGs to the OSP. Export cables would transmit electricity from each OSP to a landfall site. All offshore cables will connect to onshore export cables, substations, and grid connections, which would be located at landfall locations. SouthCoast is proposing to develop one preferred ECC for both Project 1 and Project 2, making landfall and interconnecting to the ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE) grid at Brayton Point, in Somerset, Massachusetts ( i.e., the Brayton Point Export Cable Corridor (Brayton Point ECC)). For Project 2, SouthCoast is proposing an alternative export cable corridor which, if utilized, would make landfall and interconnect to the ISO-NE grid in the town of Falmouth, MA (the Falmouth ECC) in the event that technical, logistical, grid interconnection, or other unforeseen challenges arise during the design and engineering phase that prevent Project 2 from making interconnection at Brayton Point. Specified activities would also include temporary installation of up to four nearshore gravity-based structures ( e.g., gravity cell or gravity-based cofferdam) and/or dredged exit pits to connect the offshore export cables to onshore facilities; vessel-based site characterization and assessment surveys using high-resolution geophysical active acoustic sources with frequencies of less than 180 kilohertz (kHz) (HRG surveys); detonation of up to 10 unexploded ordnances or Munitions and Explosives of Concern (UXO/MEC) of different charge weights; several types of fishery and ecological monitoring surveys; site preparation work ( e.g., boulder removal); the placement of scour protected; trenching, laying, and burial activities associated with the installation of the export cable from OSPs to shore-based switching and substations and inter-array cables between turbines; transit within the Lease Area and between ports and the Lease Area to transport crew, supplies, and materials to support pile installation via vessels; and WTG operation. Based on the current project schedule, SouthCoast anticipates WTGs would become operational for Project 1 beginning in approximately Q2 2029 and Project 2 by Q4 2031, after installation is completed and all necessary components, such as array cables, OSPs, ECCs, and onshore substations are installed. Turbines would be commissioned individually by personnel on location, so the number of commissioning teams would dictate how quickly turbines would become operational. SouthCoast expects that all turbines will be commissioned by Q4 2031. Marine mammals exposed to elevated noise levels during impact and vibratory pile driving during foundation installation, detonations of UXO/MECs, or HRG surveys may be taken by Level A harassment and/or Level B harassment depending on the specified activity. No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed for authorization. Dates and Duration The specified activities would occur over approximately 6 years, starting in the fourth quarter of 2026 and continuing through the end of 2031. SouthCoast anticipates that the specified activities with the potential to result in take by harassment of marine mammals would begin in the second quarter of 2027 and occur throughout all 5 years of the proposed regulations which, if issued, would be effective from April 1, 2027-March 31, 2032. The general schedule provided in table 1 includes all of the major project components, including those that may result in harassment of marine mammals ( i.e., foundation installation, HRG surveys, and UXO/MEC detonation) and those that are not expected to do so (shown in italics). Projects 1 and 2 will be developed in separate years, which may not be consecutive. To allow flexibility in the final design and during the construction period, SouthCoast has not identified specific years in which each Project would be installed. Table 1—Estimated Activity Schedule To Construct and Operate the SouthCoast Project Specified activity Estimated schedule Activity timing HRG Surveys Q2 2027-Q3 2031 Any time of the year, up to 112.5 days per year during construction of Project 1 and Project 2, and up to 75 days per year during non-construction years. Scour Protection Pre- or Post-Installation Q1 2027-Q3 2029 Any time of the year. WTG and OSP Foundation Installation, Project 1 Q2-Q4 2028 or Q2-Q4 2029 1 2 Approximately 6 months. WTG and OSP Foundation Installation, Project 2 Q2-Q4 2030 1 2 3 Approximately 6 months. Horizontal Directional Drilling at Cable Landfall Sites Project 1 Q4 2026-Q1 2027 Project 2 Q4 2029-Q1 2030 Approximately 6 months per project. UXO/MEC Detonations Q2-Q4 2028, 2029, and 2030 4 Up to 5 days for Project 1 and up to 5 days for Project 2. No more than 10 days total. Inter-array Cable Installation Project 1: 2028-2029 Project 2: 2029-2030 Project 1: up to 16 months. Project 2: up to 12 months. Export Cable Installation and Termination Project 1: 2027-2029 Project 2: 2029-2030 Project 1: up to 30 months. Project 2: up to 12 months. Fishery Monitoring Surveys Before, during, and after construction of Projects 1 and 2 Any time of year. Turbine Installation and Operation Initial turbines operational 2030, all turbines operational by 2032. 1 SouthCoast does not currently know in which of these years Project 1 and Project 2 construction would occur but estimates that each Project would be completed in a single year (2 years total). 2 NMFS is proposing seasonal restriction mitigation measures that would limit pile driving to June 1 through October 15 in the NARW EMA and May 16 through December 31 in the rest of the Lease Area (although proposing requiring NMFS' prior approval to install foundations in December). 3 Should SouthCoast decide to install suction bucket foundations for Project 2, installation would occur Q2 2030-Q2 2031. This activity would not be seasonally restricted because installation of this foundation type does not require pile driving. 4 NMFS is proposing seasonal restriction mitigation measures UXO/MEC detonations from December 1 through April 30. 5 Activities in italics are not expected to result in incidental take of marine mammals. Specific Geographical Region Most of SouthCoast's specified activities would occur in the Northeast U.S. Continental Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem (NES LME), an area of approximately 260,000 km 2 (64,247,399.2 acres), spanning from Cape Hatteras in the south to the Gulf of Maine in the north. More specifically, the Lease Area and ECC would be located within the Mid-Atlantic Bight subarea of the NES LME, which extends between Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, and Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, and eastward into the Atlantic to the 100-m (328.1 ft) isobath. The Lease Area and ECCs are located within the Southern New England (SNE) sub-region of the Northeast U.S. Shelf Ecosystem, at the northernmost end of the Mid-Atlantic Bight (MAB), which is distinct from other regions based on differences in productivity, species assemblages and structure, and habitat features (Cook and Auster, 2007). Weather-driven surface currents, tidal mixing, and estuarine outflow all contribute to driving water movement through the area (Kaplan, 2011), which is subjected to highly seasonal variation in temperature, stratification, and productivity. The Lease Area, OCS-A 0521, is part of the Massachusetts Wind Energy Area (MA WEA) (3,007 square kilometers (km 2 ) (742,974 acres)) (Figure 1). Within the MA WEA, the Lease Area covers approximately 516 km 2 (127, 388 acres) and is located approximately 30 statute miles (mi) (26 nm; 48 km) south of Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, and approximately 23 mi (20 nm, 37 km) south of Nantucket, Massachusetts. At its closest point to land, the Lease Area is approximately 45 mi (39 nm, 72 km) south from the mainland at Nobska Point in Falmouth, Massachusetts. During construction, the Project will require support from temporary construction laydown yard(s) and construction port(s). The operational phase of the Project will require support from onshore O&M facilities. While a final decision has not yet been made, SouthCoast will likely use more than one marshalling port for the SouthCoast Project. The following ports are under consideration: New Bedford, MA; Fall River, MA; South Quay, RI; Salem Harbor, MA; Port of New London, CT; Port of Charleston, SC; Port of Davisville, RI; Sparrows Point Port, Maryland; and Sheet Harbor, Canada. BILLING CODE 3510-22-P EP27JN24.000 The Brayton Point ECC and the Falmouth ECC would traverse Federal and state territorial waters of Massachusetts and Rhode Island, making landfall at Brayton Point in Somerset, Massachusetts or at Falmouth, Massachusetts, respectively. Within the Brayton Point ECC, up to six submarine offshore export cables, including up to four power cables and up to two dedicated communications cables, would be installed from one or more OSPs within the lease area in Federal waters and run through the Sakonnet River, make intermediate landfall on Aquidneck Island in Portsmouth, Rhode Island, which includes an underground onshore export cable route, and then into Mount Hope Bay to make landfall at Brayton Point in Somerset, Massachusetts. Within the Falmouth export cable corridor, up to five submarine offshore export cables, including up to four power cables and up to one dedicated communications cable, would be installed from one or more OSPs within the Lease Area and run through Muskeget Channel into Nantucket Sound in Massachusetts state waters to make landfall in Falmouth, Massachusetts. As described in further detail below, SouthCoast proposed mitigation and monitoring measures that would apply throughout the Lease Area, as well as enhanced measures applicable to a portion of the Lease Area that overlaps with the NARW EMA. The 30-m (98.4 ft)) isobath represents bathymetry defining the edge of Nantucket Shoals and corresponds with the predicted location of tidal mixing fronts in this region (Simpson and Hunter, 1974; Wilkin, 2006) and observations of high productivity and North Atlantic right whale foraging (Leiter et al., 2017; White et al., 2020). EP27JN24.001 BILLING CODE 3510-22-C Water depths in the project area (which includes the lease area, cable corridors, vessel transit lanes and ensonified area above NMFS thresholds) span from less than 1 meter ((m); 3.28 feet (ft)), near the landfall sites, to approximately 64 m at the deepest location in the lease area. Water depths in the lease area, in relation to Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW), range from approximately 37.1 to 63.5 m (121.7-208.3 ft). Of the 149 foundation locations, 101 are located in waters depths less than 54 m (177 ft) and the remaining 48 are located in water depths from 54-64 m (177-210 ft). Water depths along the Brayton Point and Falmouth ECCs range from 0-41.5 m (0-136.2 ft) MLLW. The cable landfall construction areas would be approximately 2.0-10.0 m (6.6-32.8 ft) deep in Somerset and 5.0 to 8.0 m (16.4-26.3 ft) deep in Falmouth. Geological conditions in the project area, including sediment composition, are the result of glacial processes. The pattern of sediment distribution in the Mid-Atlantic Bight is relatively simple. The continental shelf south of New England is broad and flat, dominated by fine-grained sediments. Sediment composition is primarily dominated by sand, but varies by location, comprising various sand grain sizes sand to silt. Seafloor conditions in the Lease Area align with the findings at nearby locations in the RI/MA and MA WEAs showing little relief and low complexity ( i.e., mostly homogeneous) (section 6.6.1.6.1, SouthCoast Wind COP, 2024; Epsilon, 2018). Data collected as part of SouthCoast's benthic surveys indicate varying levels of surficial sediment mobility throughout the Lease Area and ECCs, evidenced by the ubiquitous presence of bedforms (ripples), both large and small. The deeper shelf waters of the Lease Area and ECCs are characterized by predominantly rippled sand and soft bottoms. Where the Falmouth ECC would enter Muskeget Channel and Nantucket Sound, the surface sediments become coarser sand with gravel and hard bottoms. The coarser sediments represent reworked glacial materials. No large-scale seabed topographic features or bedforms were found within the Lease Area (SouthCoast Wind COP, 2024). Moraine deposits related to the formation of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Island have resulted in boulder fields along portions of both ECCs (Baldwin et al., 2016; Oldale, 1980). The Brayton Point ECC also crosses moraine features represented by the Southwest Shoal off Martha's Vineyard and Browns Ledge off the Elizabeth Island in Rhode Island Sound (section 3.1, SouthCoast Wind COP, 2024). The species that inhabit the benthic habitats of the Lease Area and OCS are typically described as infaunal species, those living in the sediments ( e.g., polychaetes, amphipods, mollusks), and epifaunal species, those living on the seafloor surface (mobile, e.g., sea starts, sand dollars, sand shrimp) or attached to substrates (sessile organisms; e.g., barnacles, anemones, tunicates). These organisms are important food sources for several commercially important northern groundfish species. The SouthCoast Lease Area is located adjacent to Nantucket Shoals, a broad shallow and sandy shelf that extends southeast of Nantucket Island. Waters from the Gulf of Maine, the Great South Channel, and Nantucket Sound converge in this area, creating a well-mixed water column throughout the year (Limeburner and Beardsley, 1982). The shoals area has an underwater dunelike topography and strong tidal currents (PCCS, 2005). Surface currents become stronger during the spring and summer as heating and stratification increase (Brookes, 1992; PCCS, 2005). Due to wind and tidal mixing, a persistent tidal front occurs along the western edge of Nantucket Shoals, (Chen et al., 1994a; b). This frontal region typically spans approximately 10-20 km (6.2-12.4 mi) (Potter and Lough, 1987; Lough and Manning, 2001; Ullman and Cornillon, 2001; White and Veit, 2020), with its strength and cross-isobath flow potentially influenced by regional winds (Ullman and Cornillon, 2001). The estimated location of this front varies from the 50-m (164-ft) isobath to inshore of the 30-m (98.4-ft) isobath (Ullman and Cornillon, 2001; Wilkin, 2006). The ecology of the Nantucket Shoals region is unique in that it supports recurring enhanced aggregations of zooplankton that provide prey for North Atlantic right whales and other species migrating to the region to forage (Quintana-Rizzo et al., 2021). The region is characterized by complex hydrodynamics and ecology. The hydrodynamics of this region result from processes at variable spatial scales that extend from oceanic (Gulf Stream warm core rings) to local (tidal mixing) and timescales of seasonal (stratification) to decadal (National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 2023). The physical oceanographic and bathymetric features ( i.e., shallow, well-lit, well-mixed) provide for year-round high phytoplankton biomass. Strong tidal currents create thorough mixing of the water column, distributing nutrients, which enhances and concentrates productivity of phytoplankton and zooplankton (PCCS, 2005; White et al., 2020). High productivity in the area is also stimulated by a local tidal pump generated by the tidal dissipation between Nantucket Sound and the shoals so significantly that this tidal pump creates one of the largest tidal dispensation areas in New England (Chen et al., 2018; Quintana-Rizzo et al., 2021). Hydrographic features, such as circulation patterns and tides, result in the flow of zooplankton into area from source regions outside, rather than increased primary productivity due to upwelling (Kenney and Wishner, 1995; PCCS, 2005). The persistent frontal zone on the western side of Nantucket Shoals, with an estimated location that varies from the 50-m isobath to inshore of the 30-m (98.4-ft) isobath (Ullman and Cornillon, 2001; Wilkin, 2006), aggregates zooplankton prey whose distributions are dependent on hydrodynamics and frontal features (White et al., 2020). These aggregations not only draw North Atlantic right whales but also other marine vertebrates that forage on the resulting dense prey patches, such as schooling fish and sea ducks and white-winged scooters (Scales et al., 2014; White et al., 2020). The frontal zone is also associated with a wide diversity of mollusk, crustacean, and echinoderm species, as well as surf clams, quahogs, and “intense winter aggregations” of Gammarid amphipods (White et al., 2020). Detailed Description of Specified Activities Below, we provide detailed descriptions of SouthCoast's specified activities, explicitly noting those that are anticipated to result in the take of marine mammals and for which incidental take authorization is requested. Additionally, a brief explanation is provided for those activities that are not expected to result in the take of marine mammals. For more information beyond that provided here, see SouthCoast's ITA application. WTG and OSP Foundation Installation SouthCoast proposes to install a maximum of 149 foundations composed of a combination of up to 147 WTG and up to 5 OSP foundations, conforming to spacing on a 1 nm x 1 nm (1.9 km x 1.9 km) grid layout, oriented east-west and north-south). SouthCoast would be restricted from pile driving in the NARW EMA from October 16 through May 31 and January 1 through May 15 in the remainder of the Lease Area. SouthCoast should avoid pile driving in December ( i.e., it should not be planned), and it may only occur with prior approval by NMFS and implementation of enhanced mitigation and monitoring measures. SouthCoast must notify NMFS in writing by September 1 of that year, indicating that circumstances are expected to necessitate pile driving in December. Project 1 would include installation of up to 86 foundations (85 WTG, 1 OSP), including 54 foundations located within the NARW EMA and up to 32 foundations immediately to the southwest of the NARW EMA. Foundation installation would begin in the northeast portion of the Project 1 area (Figure 2) no earlier than June 1, 2028, given NMFS' proposed pile driving seasonal restriction. By installing foundations in this portion of the Project 1 area first (beginning June 1), SouthCoast would begin conducting work closest to Nantucket Shoals and then progressing towards the southwest and moving away from Nantucket Shoals. SouthCoast would complete foundation installations in the NARW EMA by October 15, prior to when North Atlantic right whale occurrence is expected to begin increasing in eastern southern New England ( e.g., Davis et al., 2024). The number of WTG foundations available for Project 2 depends on the final footprint for Project 1, but the combined number for both projects would not exceed 147. SouthCoast would install Project 2 foundations in the portion of the Lease Area southwest of Project 1. SouthCoast would install foundations using impact pile driving only for Project 1 and a combination of impact and vibratory pile driving for Project 2. Vibratory setting, a technique wherein the pile is initially installed with a vibratory hammer until an impact hammer is needed, is particularly useful when soft seabed sediments, such as those previously described for SouthCoast's project area in the Specified Geographic Region section, are not sufficiently stiff to support the weight of the pile during the initial installation, increasing the risk of `pile run' ( i.e., where a pile sinks rapidly through seabed sediments). Piles subject to pile run can be difficult to recover and pose significant safety risks to the personnel and equipment on the construction vessel. The vibratory hammer mitigates this risk by forming a hard connection to the pile using hydraulic clamps, thereby acting as a lifting/handling tool as well as a vibratory hammer. The tool is inserted into the pile on the construction vessel deck, and the connection made. The pile is then lifted, upended, and lowered into position on the seabed using the vessel crane. After the pile is lowered into position, vibratory pile installation will commence, whereby piles are driven into soil using a longitudinal vibration motion. The vibratory hammer installation method can continue until the pile is inserted to a depth that is sufficient to fully support the structure, and then the impact hammer can be positioned and operated to complete the pile installation. This can be accomplished using a single installation vessel equipped with both hammer types or two separate vessels, each equipped with either the vibratory or impact hammer. For each Project, SouthCoast expects to install foundations within a 6-month period each year for two years. However, it is possible that foundation installation could continue into a second year for either Project, depending on construction logistics and local and environmental conditions that may influence SouthCoast's ability to maintain the planned construction schedule. Regardless of shifts in the construction schedule, the seasonal restrictions on pile driving would apply. SouthCoast has proposed to initiate pile driving any time of day or night. Once construction begins, SouthCoast would proceed as rapidly as possible while implementing all required mitigation and monitoring measures, to reduce the total duration of construction. NMFS acknowledges the benefits of completing construction quickly during times when North Atlantic right whales are unlikely to be in the area but also recognizes challenges associated with monitoring during reduced visibility conditions, such as at night. SouthCoast is currently conducting a review of available, systematically collected data on the efficacy of technology to monitor (visually and acoustically) marine mammals during nighttime and in reduced visibility conditions during daytime. Should SouthCoast submit, and NMFS approve, an Alternative Monitoring Plan (which includes nighttime pile driving monitoring), pile driving may be initiated at night. While the majority of foundation installations would be sequential ( i.e., one at a time), SouthCoast proposed concurrent pile driving ( i.e., two installation vessels installing foundations at the same time) for a small number of foundations, limited to the few days on which both OSP and WTG foundations are installed simultaneously. Using a single installation vessel, SouthCoast anticipates that a maximum of two monopile foundations could be sequentially driven into the seabed per day, assuming 24-hour pile driving operations; however, installation of one monopile per day is expected to be more common and the installation schedule assumed for the take estimation analyses reflects this (table 2). For jacket foundation installation, SouthCoast estimates that no more than four pin piles (supporting one jacket foundation) could be installed per 24 hours on days limited to sequential installation. SouthCoast anticipates that, on days with concurrent pile driving using two installation vessels, up to, 1) two WTG monopiles or four WTG pin piles (by one installation vessel) and, 2) four OSP pin piles (by a second vessel, working simultaneously) could be installed in 24 hours. As described previously, SouthCoast is considering several foundation options. For Project 1, SouthCoast is considering installation of two types of WTG foundations, monopile or pin-piled jacket, which would be installed by impact pile driving only. SouthCoast is also considering these foundation types for Project 2 but may use a combination of vibratory and/or impact pile driving for their installation. Finally, suction-bucket jacket foundations may provide an alternative to monopile and pin-piled jacket foundations to support WTGs for Project 2. However, installing this third foundation type does not require impact or vibratory pile driving, and it is not anticipated to result in noise levels that would cause harassment to marine mammals. Therefore, suction-bucket jacket foundations are not discussed further beyond the brief explanation below. Although considering three foundation types for Projects 1 and 2, for the purposes of estimating the maximum impacts to marine mammals that could occur incidental to WTG and OSP foundation installation, SouthCoast assumed WTGs would be supported by monopile or pin-piled jacket foundations and that OSPs would be supported by pin-piled jacket foundations. For both Project 1 and Project 2 acoustic and exposure modeling of the potential acoustic impacts resulting from installation of monopiles and pin piles (see Estimated Take section), SouthCoast proposed multiple WTG and OSP foundation installation scenarios for Projects 1 and 2, distinguished by foundation type and number, installation method ( i.e., impact only; vibratory and impact pile driving), order ( i.e., sequential or concurrent) and construction schedule (table 2). Table 2—Potential Installation Scenarios for Project 1 and Project 2 1 Number of piles Installation order and method 9/16-m monopile 1/day 9/16-m monopile 2/day 4.5-m pin piles WTG jacket piles 4/day 4.5-m pin piled OSP jacket 4/day Total foundations Total days Project 1 (IMPACT ONLY) Project 1 Scenario 1 (P1S1) Sequential (IMPACT) 44 24 71 WTG 1 OSP 59 Concurrent (IMPACT) 3 12 Project 1 Scenario 2 (P1S2) Sequential (IMPACT) 324 85 WTG 1 OSP 85 Concurrent (IMPACT) 16 16 Project 2 (VIBE AND/OR IMPACT) Project 2 Scenario 1 (P2S1) Sequential (IMPACT) 35 30 68 WTG 1 OSP 53 Concurrent (IMPACT) 3 12 Project 2 Scenario 2 (P2S2) Sequential (IMPACT) 3 73 WTG 1 OSP 49 Sequential (VIBE+IMPACT) 19 48 Concurrent (IMPACT) 3 12 Project 2 Scenario 3 (P2S3) Sequential (IMPACT) 40 62 WTG 1 OSP 62 Sequential (VIBE+IMPACT) 192 Concurrent (IMPACT) 16 16 1 Installation schedules vary based on foundation type (WTG monopile or pin-piled jacket, OSP pin-piled jacket) and number, installation method (impact, or combination of vibratory and impact), and installation order (sequential or concurrent). As described previously, SouthCoast considered two WTG foundation installation scenarios for Project 1 and one scenario for Project 2 that would employ impact pile driving only (I), and two scenarios for Project 2 that would require a combination of vibratory and impact pile driving (V/I): • Project 1 ○ Scenario 1 (I): 71 monopile WTG, 1 pin-piled jacket OSP ○ Scenario 2 (I): 85 pin-piled jacket WTG, 1 pin-piled jacket OSP • Project 2 ○ Scenario 1 (I): 68 monopile WTG, 1 pin-piled jacket OSP ○ Scenario 2 (V/I): 73 monopile WTG, 1 pin-piled jacket OSP ○ Scenario 3 (V/I): 62 pin-piled jacket WTG, 1 pin-piled jacket OSP For each Project, only one scenario would be implemented. For example, SouthCoast could choose to install Scenario 1 for Project 1 (P1S1; 71 monopile WTG foundations, 1 pin-piled jacket OSP foundation) and Scenario 1 for Project 2 (P2S1; 68 monopile WTG foundations, 1 pin-piled jacket OSP foundation) for a total of 139 WTG monopile and 2 OSP pin-piled jacket foundations, or 141 foundations overall (table 2). Alternatively, SouthCoast could install Scenario 2 for Project 1 (P1S2; 85 WTG pin-piled jacket foundations, and 1 OSP pin-piled jacket) and Scenario 3 for Project 2 (P2S3; 62 pin-piled jacket foundation, 1 pin-piled jacket OSP foundation), for a total of 147 WTG and 2 OSP foundations (or 149 foundations overall). Both of these combinations fall within SouthCoast's PDE, which specifies that SouthCoast would install no more than up to 147 WTG foundations and up to 5 OSP foundations. Given this limitation, there are Project 2 scenarios that can not be combined with scenarios for Project 1 because the total WTG foundation number would exceed 147 ( i.e., the total number of WTG foundations would be 153 should SouthCoast combine the Project 1 Scenario 2 (85 pin-piled jacket WTG foundations) with Project 2 Scenario 1 (68 monopile WTG foundations) or 158 if combined with Project 2 Scenario 2). Thus, SouthCoast's selection of a scenario for Project 2 will depend on their scenario choice for Project 1. WTG Foundations Monopile SouthCoast proposed three scenarios that include monopile installations to support WTGs. A monopile foundation normally consists of a single steel tubular section with several sections of rolled steel plate welded together. Secondary structures on each WTG monopile foundation would include a boat landing or alternative means of safe access, ladders, a crane, and other ancillary components. Figure 3 in SouthCoast's application provides a conceptual example of a monopile. SouthCoast would install up to 147 WTG monopile foundations with a maximum diameter tapering from 9 m (2.7 ft) above the waterline to 16 m (52.5 ft) below the waterline ( 9/16 -m monopile). A typical impact pile driven monopile installation sequence begins with transport of the monopiles either directly to the Lease Area or to the construction staging port by an installation vessel or a feeding barge. At the foundation location, the main installation vessel upends the monopile in a vertical position in the pile gripper mounted on the side of the vessel. The impact hammer is then lifted on top of the pile and pile driving commences with a 20-minute minimum soft-start, where lower hammer energy is used at the beginning of each pile installation to allow marine mammal and prey to move away from the sound source before noise levels increase to the maximum extent. Piles are driven until the target embedment depth is met, then the pile hammer is removed and the monopile is released from the pile gripper. SouthCoast would install WTG monopiles using an impact pile driver with a maximum hammer energy of 6,600 kJ (model NNN 6600) for a total of 7,000 strikes (including soft-start hammer strikes) at a rate of 30 strikes per minute to a total maximum penetration depth of 50 m (164 ft). As described previously, for pile installations utilizing vibratory pile driving as well, this impact installation sequence would be preceded by use of a vibratory hammer to drive the pile to a depth that is sufficient to fully support the structure before beginning the soft-start and subsequent impact hammering. For these piles, SouthCoast would use a vibratory hammer (model HX-CV640) followed by a maximum of 5,000 impact hammer strikes (including soft-start) using the same hammer and parameters specified above. SouthCoast is proposing to install the majority of monopile foundations consecutively using a single vessel and on a small number of days, concurrently with OSP piled jacket pin piles using two vessels (see Dates and Duration section). Under typical conditions, impact installation of a single monopile foundation is estimated to require up to 4 hours of active impact pile driving (7,000 strikes/30 strikes per minute equals approximately 233 minutes, or 3.9 hours), which can occur either in a continuous 4-hour interval or intermittently over a longer time period. For installations requiring vibratory and impact pile driving, the installation duration is also expected to last approximately 4 hours, beginning with 20 minutes of active vibratory driving, followed by short period during which the hammer set-up would be changed from vibratory to impact, after which impact installation would begin with a 20-minute soft-start (5,000 strikes/30 strikes per minute equals approximately 167 minutes, or 2.8 hours). Following monopile installation completion, SouthCoast anticipates it would then take approximately 4 hours to move to the next piling location. Once at the new location, a 1-hour marine mammal monitoring period would occur such that there would be a minimum of 5 hours between pile installations. Based on this schedule, SouthCoast estimates a maximum of two monopiles could be sequentially driven per day using a single installation vessel, assuming a 24-hour pile driving schedule. For Project 1 Scenario 1, it is assumed that all 71 WTG monopiles would be installed using only an impact hammer ( i.e., no vibratory pile driving), requiring a maximum of 284 hours (71 WTGs × 4 hours each) of active impact pile driving. Similarly, for Project 2 Scenario 1, it is assumed that all 68 monopiles would be installed using the same approach, for a total of 272 hours of impact hammering. However, for Project 2 Scenario 2, it is assumed that 67 (out of a total of 73) monopiles would be installed using a combination of vibratory and impact pile driving, and 6 monopiles would be installed using only impact pile driving. Installation of all WTG foundations for Project 2 Scenario 2 would require a total of approximately 212 hours (6 WTGs × 4 hours plus 67 WTGs × 2.8 hours each) of impact and 23 hours (67 WTGs × 20 minutes each) of vibratory pile driving. Pin-Piled Jacket As an alternative to monopiles, SouthCoast proposed one scenario for each Project (P1S2 and P2S3) that, when combined, would include installation of 147 pin-piled jacket foundations to support WTGs. Jackets are large lattice structures made of steel tubes welded together and supported by securing piles ( i.e., pin piles). Figure 4 of SouthCoast's application provides a conceptual example of this type of foundation. For the SouthCoast Project, each WTG piled jacket foundation would have up to four legs supported by one pin pile per leg, for a total of up to 588 pin piles to support 147 WTGs. Each pin pile would have a maximum diameter of 4.5 m (14.7 ft). Pin-piled jacket foundation installation is a multi-stage process, beginning with preparation of the seabed by clearing any debris. The WTG jacket foundations are expected to be pre-piled, meaning that pin piles would be installed first, and the jacket structure would be set on those pre-installed piles. Once the piled-jacket foundation materials are delivered to the Lease Area, a reusable template would be placed on the prepared seabed to ensure accurate positioning of the pin piles that will be installed to support the jacket. Pin piles would be individually lowered into the template and driven to the target penetration depth using the same approach described for monopile installation. For installations requiring only impact pile driving ( e.g., P1S2), SouthCoast would install pin piles using an impact pile driver with a maximum hammer energy of 3,500 kJ (MHU 3500S) for a total of 4,000 strikes (including soft-start hammer strikes) at a rate of 30 strikes per minute to a maximum penetration depth of 70 m (229.6 ft). When installations require both types of pile driving, this impact pile driving sequence would only begin after SouthCoast utilized a vibratory hammer (S-CV640) to set the pile to a depth providing adequate stability. Subsequent impact hammering (using the same hammer specified) above would require fewer strikes (n=2,667) to drive the pile to the final 70-m maximum penetration depth. Under typical conditions, impact-only installation (applicable to P1S2, and all OSP pin-piled jacket foundations) of each pin pile is estimated to require approximately 2 hours of active impact pile driving (4,000 strikes/30 strikes per minute equals approximately 133 minutes, or 2.2 hours), for a maximum of 8.8 hours total for a single WTG or OSP pin- piled jacket foundation supported by 4 pin piles. For each pin pile requiring vibratory and impact pile driving (applicable to P2S3 WTG pin-piled jacket foundations only), the installation would begin with 90 minutes of vibratory hammering per pin pile, and would require fewer hammer strikes per pile over a shorter duration compared to impact-only installations (2,667 strikes/30 strikes per minute equals approximately 89 minutes, or 1.5 hours), for a total of 6 hours for each installation method (12 hours total). Pile driving would occur continuously or intermittently, with installations requiring both methods of pile driving punctuated by the time required to change from the vibratory to impact hammer. SouthCoast estimates that they could install a maximum of four pin piles per day, assuming use of a single installation vessel and 24-hour pile driving operations. Following pin pile installations, a vessel would install the jacket to the piles, either directly after the piling vessel completes operations or up to one year later. For Project 1 Scenario 2, it is assumed that all 85 WTG pin-piled jacket foundations (for a total of 340 pin piles) would be installed using only an impact hammer ( i.e., no vibratory pile driving), requiring a maximum of 680 hours (85 WTGs × 8 hours each) of active impact pile driving. For Project 2 Scenario 3, it is assumed that 48 (out of a total of 62) pin-piled jacket foundations (or 192 out of 248 pin piles) would be installed using a combination of vibratory and impact pile driving, and 14 pin-piled jacket foundations (or 56 pin piles) would be installed using only impact pile driving. Installation of all WTG foundations for Project 2 Scenario 3 would require a total of approximately 184 hours (14 WTGs × 8 hours plus 48 WTGs × 1.5 hours each) of impact and 72 hours (48 WTGs × 90 minutes (or 1.5 hours) each) of vibratory pile driving. Installation of WTG monopile and pin-piled jacket foundations is anticipated to result in take of marine mammals due to noise generated during pile driving. Therefore, SouthCoast has requested, and NMFS proposes to authorize, take by Level A harassment and Level B harassment of marine mammals incidental to this activity. Suction Bucket Suction bucket jackets have a similar steel lattice design to the piled jacket described previously, but the connection to the seafloor is different (see Figure 5 in SouthCoast's application for a conceptual example of the WTG suction bucket jacket foundation). These substructures use suction-bucket foundations instead of piles to secure the structure to the seabed; thus, no impact driving would be used for installation of WTG suction bucket jackets. Should SouthCoast select this foundation type for Project 2, each of the suction-bucket jacket substructures, including four buckets per foundation (one per leg), would be installed as described below. Similar to monopiles and pin-piled jackets, the number of suction-bucket jacket foundations will depend on the final design for Project 1. For suction-bucket jackets, the jacket is lowered to the seabed, the open bottom of the bucket and weight of the jacket embeds the bottom of the bucket in the seabed. To complete the installation and secure the foundation, water and air are pumped out of the bucket creating a negative pressure within the bucket, which embeds the foundation buckets into the seabed. The jacket can also be leveled at this stage by varying the applied pressure. The pumps will be released from the suction buckets once the jacket reaches its designed penetration. The connection of the required suction hoses is typically completed using a remotely operated vehicle (ROV). As previously indicated, installation of suction bucket foundations is not expected to result in take of marine mammals; thus, this activity is not further discussed. Offshore Substation Platform (OSP) Each construction scenario SouthCoast defined includes installation of a pin-piled jacket foundation to support a single OSP per Projects 1 and 2, However, in the ITA application, SouthCoast indicates that their project design envelope includes the potential installation of up to a total of 5 OSPs, situated on the same 1 nm x 1 nm (1.9 km x 1.9 km) grid layout as the WTG foundation, and describes three OSP designs ( i.e., modular, integrated, or Direct Current (DC) Converter) that are under consideration (see Figures 6, 7, and 8 in SouthCoast's ITA application). The number of OSPs installed would vary based upon design. Based on the COP PDE, SouthCoast could install a minimum of a single modular OSP on a monopile foundation, and a maximum of five DC Converter OSPs, each with nine pin-piled jacket foundations secured by three pin piles each, for a total of 135 pin piles. All OSP monopile and pin-piled jacket foundations would be installed using only impact pile driving. Installation of an OSP monopile foundation would follow the same parameters ( e.g., pile diameter, hammer energy, penetration depth) and procedure as previously described for WTG monopiles. OSP piled jacket foundations would be similar to that described for WTG piled jacket foundations but would be installed using a post-piling, rather than pre-piling, installation sequence. In this sequence, the seabed is prepared, the jacket is set on the seafloor, and the piles are driven through the jacket legs to the designed penetration depth (dependent upon which OSP design is selected). The piles are connected to the jacket via grouted and/or swaged connections. A second vessel may perform grouting tasks, freeing the installation vessel to continue jacket installation at a subsequent OSP location, if needed. Pin piles for each jacket design would be installed using an impact hammer with a maximum energy of 3,500 kJ. A maximum of four OSP pin piles could be installed per day using a single vessel, assuming 24-hour pile driving operations. All impact pile driving activity of pin piles would include a 20-minute soft-start at the beginning of each pile installation. Installation of a single OSP piled jacket foundation by impact pile driving (the only proposed method) would vary by design and the associated number of supporting pin piles, each of which would require 2 hours of impact hammering. The “Modular OSP” design would sit on any one of the three types of substructure designs ( i.e., monopile, piled jacket, or suction bucket) similar in size and weight to those described for the WTGs (see Section 1.1.1 in SouthCoast's ITA application), with the topside connected to a transition piece (TP). This Modular OSP design is an AC solution and will likely hold a single transformer with a single export cable. This option is a relatively small design relative to other options and, thus, has benefits related to manufacture, transportation, and installation. An example of the Modular OSP on a jacket substructure is shown in Figure 6 of SouthCoast's ITR application. The Modular OSP design assumes an OSP topside height ranging from 50 m (164 ft) to 73.9 m (242.5 ft). A Modular OSP piled jacket foundation would be the smallest and include three to four legs with one to two pin piles per leg (three to eight total pin piles per piled jacket). Pin piles would have a diameter of up to 4.5 m (14.7 ft) and would be installed using up to a 3,500-kJ hammer to a target penetration depth of 70 m (229.6 ft) below the seabed. The “Integrated OSP” design would have a jacket substructure and a larger topside than the Modular OSP. This OSP option is also an AC solution and is designed to support a high number of inter-array cable connections as well as the connection of multiple export cables. This design differs from the Modular OSP in that it is expected to contain multiple transformers and export cables integrated into a single topside. The Integrated OSP design assumes the same topside height indicated for the Modular design. Depending on the final weight of the topside and soil conditions, the jacket substructure may be four- or six-legged and require support from one to three piles per leg (up to 16 pin piles). The larger size of the Integrated OSP would provide housing for a greater number of electrical components as compared to smaller designs (such as the Modular OSP), reducing the number of OSPs required to support the proposed Project. An example of the integrated OSP design is shown in Figure 7 of SouthCoast's ITR application. SouthCoast may install one or more “DC Converter OSPs.” This OSP option would serve as a gathering platform for inter-array cables and then convert power from high-voltage AC to high-voltage DC or it could be connected to one or more AC gathering units (Modular or Integrated OSPs) and serve to convert power from AC to DC prior to transmission on an export cable. The DC Converter OSP would be installed on a piled jacket foundation with four legs, each supported by three to four 3.9-m (12.8-ft) pin piles per leg (up to 16 total pin piles per jacket), installed using a 3,500-kJ hammer to a target penetration depth of 90 m (295.3 ft) below the seabed. Please see Figure 8 in SouthCoast's ITR application for example of a DC jacket OSP design. Although SouthCoast has not yet selected an OSP design or finalized their foundation installation plan, they anticipate that they would only install only two of the five OSPs included in the PDE, one per Project. Each OSP would be supported by a piled jacket foundation with four legs anchored by three to four pin piles (for a total of up to 16 pin piles per OSP piled jacket). SouthCoast plans to install a maximum of four OSP jacket pin piles per day, so an OSP jacket foundation requiring 16 pin piles would be installed over four days (intermittently). For all three OSP piled jacket options (modular, integrated and DC-converter), installation of a single pin pile is anticipated to take up to 2 hours of pile driving. It is anticipated that a maximum of eight pin piles could be driven into the seabed per day assuming 24-hour pile driving operation. Pile driving activity will include a soft-start at the beginning of each pin pile installation. Impacts of pile-driving noise incidental to OSP piled jacket foundation installation have been evaluated based on the use of a 3,500 kJ hammer, as this is representative of the maximum hammer energy included in the PDE. Installation of OSP foundations is anticipated to result in take of marine mammals due to noise generated during pile driving. Therefore, SouthCoast has requested, and NMFS proposes to authorize, take by Level A harassment and Level B harassment of marine mammals incidental to OSP foundation installation. HRG Surveys SouthCoast would conduct HRG surveys to identify any seabed debris and to support micrositing of the WTG and OSP foundations and ECCs. These surveys may utilize active acoustic equipment such as multibeam echosounders, side scan sonars, shallow penetration sub-bottom profilers (SBPs) ( e.g., parametric Compressed High-Intensity Radiated Pulses (CHIRP) SBPs and non-parametric SBP), medium penetration sub-bottom profilers ( e.g., sparkers and boomers), and ultra-short baseline positioning equipment, some of which are expected to result in the take of marine mammals. Surveys would occur annually, with durations dependent on the activities occurring in that year ( i.e., construction years versus non-construction years). HRG surveys will be conducted using up to four vessels. On average, 80-line km (49.7-mi) will be surveyed per vessel each survey day at approximately 5.6 km/hour (3 knots) on a 24-hour basis although some vessels may only operate during daylight hours (~12-hour survey vessels). During the 2-year construction phase, an estimated 4,000 km (2,485 mi) may be surveyed within the Lease Area and 5,000 km (3,106 mi) along the ECCs in water depth ranging from 2 m (6.5 ft) to 62 m (204 ft). A maximum of four vessels will be used concurrently for surveying. While the final survey plans will not be completed until construction contracting commences, HRG surveys are anticipated to operate at any time of year for a maximum of 112.5 survey days per year. During non-construction periods (3 of the 5 years within the effective period of the regulations), SouthCoast would survey an estimated 2,800 km (1,7398 mi) in the Lease Area and 3,200 km (1,988.4 mi) along the ECCs each year for three years (n=18,000 km total). Using the same estimate of 80 km (49.7 mi) of surveys completed each day per vessel, approximately 75 days of surveys would occur each year, for a total of up to 225 active sound source days over the 3-year operations period. Of the HRG equipment types proposed for use, the following sources have the potential to result in take of marine mammals: • Shallow penetration sub-bottom profilers (SBPs) to map the near-surface stratigraphy (top 0 to 5 m (0 to 16 ft) of sediment below seabed). A CHIRP system emits sonar pulses that increase in frequency over time. The pulse length frequency range can be adjusted to meet Projectvariables. These are typically mounted on the hull of the vessel or from a side pole. • Medium penetration SBPs (boomers) to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy as needed. A boomer is a broad-band sound source operating in the 3.5 Hz to 10 kHz frequency range. This system is typically mounted on a sled and towed behind the vessel. • Medium penetration SBPs (sparkers) to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy as needed. A sparker creates acoustic pulses from 50 Hz to 4 kHz omni-directionally from the source that can penetrate several hundred meters into the seafloor. These are typically towed behind the vessel with adjacent hydrophone arrays to receive the return signals. Table 3 identifies all the representative survey equipment that operate below 180 kilohertz (kHz) ( i.e., at frequencies that are audible and have the potential to disturb marine mammals) that may be used in support of planned geophysical survey activities and is likely to be detected by marine mammals given the source level, frequency, and beamwidth of the equipment. Equipment with operating frequencies above 180 kHz ( e.g., SSS, MBES) and equipment that does not have an acoustic output ( e.g., magnetometers) will also be used but are not discussed further because they are outside the general hearing range of marine mammals likely to occur in the Lease Area and ECCs. No take is expected from the operation of these sources; therefore, they are not discussed further. Table 3—Summary of Representative HRG Survey Equipment and Operating Parameters Equipment type Representative model Operating frequency (kHz) Source Level SPL rms (dB) Source Level 0-pk (dB) Pulse duration (ms) Repetition rate (Hz) Beamwidth (degrees) Information source Sub-bottom Profiler EdgeTech 3100 with SB 2-16 1 towfish EdgeTech DW-106 1 2-16 1-6 179 176 184 183 10 14.4 9.1 10 51 66 CF. CF. Knudson Pinger 2 Teledyn Benthos CHIRP III—TTV 170 3 15 2-7 180 199 187 204 4 10 2 14.4 71 82 CF. CF. Sparker 4 Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark UHD (400 tips, 800 J) 0.01-1.9 203 213 3.4 2 Omni CF. Geomarine Geo-Spark (400 tips, 800 J) 0.01-1.9 203 213 3.4 2 Omni CF. Boomer Applied Acoustics triple plate S-Boom (700-1,000 J) 0.1-5 205 211 0.9 3 61 CF. Note: J = joule; kHz = kilohertz; dB = decibels; SL = source level; UHD = ultra-high definition; rms = root-mean square; μPa = microPascals; re = referenced to; SPL = sound pressure level; PK = zero-to-peak pressure level; Omni = omnidirectional source; CF = Crocker and Fratantonio (2016). 1 The EdgeTech Chirp 512i measurements and specifications provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) were used as a proxy for the Edgetech 3100 with SB-216 towfish and EdgeTech DW-106. 2 The EdgeTech Chirp 424 as a proxy for source levels as the Chirp 424 has similar operation settings as the Knudsen Pinger SBP. 3 The Knudsen 3202 Echosounder measurements and specifications provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) were used as a proxy for the Teledyne Benthos Chirp III TTV 170. 4 The SIG ELC 820 Sparker, 5 m source depth, 750 J setting was used a proxy for both the Applied Acoustics Dura-Spark UHD (400 tips, 800 J) and Geomarine Geo-Spark (400 tips, 800 J). Based on the operating frequencies of HRG survey equipment in table 3 and the hearing ranges of the marine mammals that have the potential to occur in the Lease Area and ECCs, HRG survey activities have the potential to result in take by Level B harassment of marine mammals. No take by Level A harassment is anticipated as a result of HRG survey activities. UXO/MEC Detonations SouthCoast anticipates encountering UXO/MECs during Project construction in the Lease Area and along the ECCs. UXO/MECs include explosive munitions such as bombs, shells, mines, torpedoes, etc., that did not explode when they were originally deployed or were intentionally discarded in offshore munitions dump sites to avoid land-based detonations. SouthCoast plans to remove any UXO/MEC encountered, else, the risk of incidental detonation associated with conducting seabed-altering activities, such as cable laying and foundation installation in proximity to UXO/MECs, would potentially jeopardize the health and safety of Projectparticipants. SouthCoast would follow an industry standard As Low as Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) process that minimizes the number of detonations, to the extent possible. For UXO/MECs that are positively identified in proximity to specified activities on the seabed, several alternative strategies would be considered prior to in-situ UXO/MEC disposal. These may include: (1) relocating the activity away from the UXO/MEC (avoidance); (2) physical UXO/MEC removal (lift and shift); (3) alternative combustive removal technique (low order disposal); (4) cutting the UXO/MEC open to apportion large ammunition or deactivate fused munitions (cut and capture); or (5) using shaped charges to ignite the explosive materials and allow them to burn at a slow rate rather than detonate instantaneously (deflagration). Only after these alternatives are considered and found infeasible would in-situ high-order UXO/MEC detonation be pursued. If detonation is necessary, detonation noise could result in the take of marine mammals by Level A harassment and Level B harassment. SouthCoast is currently conducting a study to more accurately determine the number of UXO/MECs that may be encountered during the specified activities (see section 1.1.5 in SouthCoast's ITA application). Based on estimates for other offshore wind projects in southern New England, SouthCoast assumes that up to ten UXO/MEC 454-kg (1000 pounds; lbs) charges, which is the largest charge that is reasonably expected to be encountered, may require in situ detonation. Although it is highly unlikely that all ten charges would weigh 454 kg, this approach was determined to be the most conservative for the purposes of impact analysis. All charged detonations would occur on different days ( i.e., only one detonation would occur per day). In the event that high-order detonation is determined to be the preferred and safest method of disposal, all detonations would occur during daylight hours. SouthCoast proposed a seasonal restriction on UXO/MEC detonations from December 1-April 30, annually. UXO/MEC activities have the potential to result in take by Level A harassment and Level B harassment of marine mammals. No non-auditory take by Level A harassment is anticipated due to proposed mitigation and monitoring measures. Cable Landfall Construction Installation of the SouthCoast export cables at the designated landfall sites will be accomplished using horizontal directional drilling (HDD) methodology. HDD is a “trenchless” process for installing cables or pipes which enables the cables to remain buried below the beach and intertidal zone while limiting environmental impact during installation. Drilling activities would occur on land with the borehole extending under the seabed to an exit point offshore, outside of the intertidal zone. There will be up to two ECCs, both exiting the Lease Area in the northwestern corner. These then split, with one making landfall at Brayton Point in Somerset, MA (Brayton Point ECC) and the other in Falmouth, MA (Falmouth ECC). The Brayton Point ECC is anticipated to contain up to six export cables, bundled where practicable, while the Falmouth ECC is anticipated to contain up to five export cables. HDD seaward exit points will be sited within the defined ECCs at the Brayton Point and intermediate Aquidneck Island landfall sites and at the Falmouth landfall site(s). The exit points will be within approximately 3,500 ft (1,069 m) of the shoreline for the Falmouth ECC landfall(s), and within approximately 1,000 ft (305 m) of the shoreline for the Brayton Point landfalls. At the seaward exit point, construction activities may include installation of either a temporary gravity-based structure ( i.e., gravity cell or gravity-based cofferdam) or a dredged exit pit, neither of which would require pile driving or hammering. Additionally, a conductor pipe may be installed at the exit point to support the drilling activity. Conductor pipe installation would include pushing or jetting rather than pipe ramming. For the Falmouth landfall locations, the proposed HDD trajectory is anticipated to be approximately 0.9 mi (1.5 km) in length with a cable burial depth of up to approximately 90 ft (27.4 m) below the seabed. HDD boreholes will be separated by a distance of approximately 33 ft (10 m). Each offshore export cable is planned to require a separate HDD, with an individual bore and conduit for each export cable. The number of boreholes per site will be equal to the number of power cables installed. The Falmouth ECC would include up to four power cables with up to four boreholes at each landfall site. There may be up to one additional communications cable; however, the communications cable would be installed within the same bore as one of the power cables, likely within a separate conduit. For the Brayton Point and Aquidneck Island intermediate landfall locations, the proposed HDD trajectory is anticipated to be approximately 0.3 mi (0.5 km) in length with a cable burial depth of up to approximately 90 ft (27.4 m) below the seabed. HDD bores will be separated by a distance of approximately 33 ft (10 m). It is anticipated the high-voltage DC cables will be unbundled at landfall. Each high-voltage DC power cable is planned to require a separate HDD, with an individual bore and conduit for each power cable. The Brayton Point and Aquidneck Island ECCs will include up to four power cables for a total of up to four boreholes at each landfall site. Each dedicated communications cable may be installed within the same bore as a power cable, likely within a separate conduit. In collaboration with the HDD contractor, SouthCoast will further assess the potential use of a dredged exit pit and/or gravity cell at each landfall location. The specifics of each site will be evaluated in detail, in terms of soil and metocean conditions ( i.e., current), suitability for maintaining a dredged exit pit for the duration of the HDD construction, and other construction planning factors that may affect the HDD operation. The relatively low noise levels generated by installation and removal of gravity-cell cofferdams, dredged exit pits, and conductor pipe are not expected to result in Level A harassment or Level B harassment of marine mammals. SouthCoast is not requesting, and NMFS is not proposing to authorize, take associated with landfall construction activities. Therefore, these activities are not analyzed further in this document. Cable Laying and Installation Cable burial operations would occur both in the Lease Area for the inter-array cables connecting WTGs to OSPs and in the ECCs for cables carrying power from the OSPs to shore. The offshore export cables would be buried in the seabed at a target depth of up to 1.0 to 4.0 m (3.2 to 13.1 ft) while the inter-array cables would be buried at a target depth up to 1.0 to 2.5 m (3.2 to 8.2 ft). Both cable types would be buried onshore up to the transition joint bays. All cable burial operations would follow installation of the monopile foundations as the foundations must be in place to provide connection points for the export cable and inter-array cables. Cable laying, cable installation, and cable burial activities planned to occur during the construction of the SouthCoast Project May include the following: jetting; vertical injection; leveling; mechanical cutting; plowing (with or without jet-assistance); pre-trenching; boulder removal; and controlled flow excavation. Installation of any required protection at the cable ends is typically completed prior to cable installation from the vessel. Some dredging may be required prior to cable laying due to the presence of sandwaves. Sandwave clearance may be undertaken to provide a level bottom to install the export cable. The work could be undertaken by traditional dredging methods such as a trailing suction hopper. Alternatively, controlled flow excavation or a water-injection dredger could be used. In some cases, multiple passes may be required. The method of sand wave clearance SouthCoast chooses would be based on the results from the site investigation surveys and cable design. As the noise levels generated from cable laying and installation work are low, the potential for take of marine mammals to result is discountable. SouthCoast is not requesting, and NMFS is not proposing to authorize, take associated with cable laying activities. Therefore, cable laying activities are not analyzed further in this document. Vessel Operation SouthCoast will utilize various types of vessels over the course of the 5-year proposed regulations for surveying, foundation installation, cable installation, WTG and OSP installation, UXO/MEC detonation, and support activities. SouthCoast anticipates operating an average of 15 to 35 vessels daily depending on construction phase, with an expected maximum of 50 vessels in the Lease Area at one time during the foundation installation period. Table 4 provides a list of the vessel types, number of each vessel type, number of expected trips, and anticipated years each vessel type will be in use. All vessels will follow the vessel strike avoidance measures as described in the Proposed Mitigation section. To support offshore construction, assembly and fabrication, crew transfer and logistics, as well as other operational activities, SouthCoast has identified several existing domestic port facilities located in Massachusetts (Ports of Salem, New Bedford, Fall River), Rhode Island (Ports of Providence and Davisville), Connecticut (Port of New London), and to a lesser extent Maryland (Sparrows Point Port), South Carolina (Port of Charleston), and Texas (Port of Corpus Cristi). The largest vessels are expected to be used during the foundation installation phase with heavy transport vessels, heavy lift crane vessels, cable laying vessels, supply and crew vessels, and associated tugs and barges transporting construction equipment and materials. A large service operation vessel would have the ability to stay in the lease area and house crews overnight. These larger vessels will generally move slowly over a short distance between work locations, within the Lease Area and along ECCs. Smaller vessels would be used to transfer crew and smaller dimension Project materials to and from, as well as within, the Lease Area. Transport vessels will travel between several ports and the Lease Area over the course of the construction period following mandatory vessel speed restrictions (see Proposed Mitigation section). These vessels will range in size from smaller crew transport to tug and barge vessels. Construction crews responsible for assembling the WTGs would hotel onboard installation vessels at sea, thus limiting the number of crew vessel transits expected during the construction period. WTG and OSP foundation installation vessels may include jack-up, DP, or semi-submersible vessels. Jack-up vessels lower their legs into the seabed for stability and then lift out of the water, whereas DP vessels utilize computer-controlled positioning systems and thrusters to maintain their station. SouthCoast is also considering the use of heavy lift vessels, barges, feeder vessels, and roll-on lift-off vessels to transport WTG components to the Lease Area for installation by the WTG installation vessel. Fabrication and installation vessels may include transport vessels, feeder vessels, jack-up vessels, and installation vessels. Sounds from vessels associated with the proposed Project are anticipated to be similar in frequency to existing levels of commercial traffic present in the region. Vessel sound would be associated with cable installation vessels and operations, piling installation vessels, and general transit to and from WTG or OSP locations during construction. During construction, it is estimated that multiple vessels may operate concurrently at different locations throughout the Lease Area or ECCs. Some of these vessels may maintain their position (using DP thrusters) during pile driving or other construction activities. The dominant underwater sound source on DP vessels arises from cavitation on the propeller blades of the thrusters (Leggat et al., 1981). The noise power from the propellers is proportional to the number of blades, propeller diameter, and propeller tip speed. Sound levels generated by vessels using DP are dependent on the operational state and weather conditions. All vessels emit sound from propulsion systems while in transit. The SouthCoast Project would be constructed in an area that consistently experiences extensive marine traffic. As such, marine mammals in the general region are regularly subjected to vessel activity and would potentially be habituated to the associated underwater noise as a result of this exposure (BOEM, 2014b). Because noise from vessel traffic associated with construction activities is likely to be similar to background vessel traffic noise, the potential risk of impacts from vessel noise to marine life is expected to be low relative to the risk of impact from pile-driving sound. Sound produced through use of DP thrusters is considered a continuous sound source and similar to that produced by transiting vessels. DP thrusters are typically operated either in a similarly predictable manner or used intermittently for short durations around stationary activities. Sound produced by DP thrusters would be preceded by and associated with sound from ongoing vessel noise and would be similar in nature. Any marine mammals in the vicinity of the activity would be aware of the vessel's presence, thus making it unlikely that the noise source would elicit a startle response. Construction-related vessel activity, including the use of dynamic positioning thrusters, is not expected to result in take of marine mammals. SouthCoast did not request, and NMFS does not propose to authorize, take associated with vessel activity. During operations, SouthCoast will use crew transfer vessels (CTVs) and service operations vessels (SOVs). The number of each vessel type, number of trips, and potential ports to be used during operations and maintenance are provided in table 4. The operations vessels will follow the vessel strike avoidance measures as described in the Proposed Mitigation section. Table 4—Type and Number of Vessels Anticipated During Construction and Operations Vessel types Estimated number of vessel type Supply trips to port from lease area (or point of entry in U.S., where applicable 1 ) Anticipated years in use Vessel Use During Construction Heavy Lift Crane Vessel 1-5 70 2028-2031 (P1 and 2). Heavy Transport Vessel 1-20 65 2027-2031 (P1 and 2). Tugboat 1-12 655 2028-2031 (P1 and 2). Crew Transfer Vessel 2-5 1,608 2028-2031 (P1 and 2). Anchor Handling Tug 1-10 16 2028-2031 (Projects 1 and 2). Scour Protection Installation Vessel 1-2 40 2028-2030 (P1 and P2). Cable Laying Barge 1-3 20 2027-2028 (Project 1). 2029-2030 (Project 2). Cable Transport and Lay Vessel 1-5 88 2028-2029 Project 1 and Project 2. Maintenance Crew/CTVs 2-5 1,608 2028-2031 (P1 and 2). Dredging Vessel 1-5 100 2026-2027 (P1) 2029-2030 (P2). Survey Vessel 1-5 26 2027-2031 (P1 and P2). Barge 1-6 510 2028-2031 (P1 and P2). Jack-up Accommodation Vessel 1-2 14 2029-2030 (P1 and P2). DP Accommodation Vessel 1-2 16 2029-2030 (P1 and P2). Service Operation Vessel 1-4 480 2029-2031 (P1 and P2). Multi-purpose Support Vessel/Service Operation Vessel 1-8 660 2027-2031 (P1 and P2). Vessel Use During Operations Maintenance Crew/Crew Transfer Vessels (CTVs) Service Operation Vessel 1-2 1-2 15,015 1,638 2028-2031. While vessel strikes cause injury or mortality of marine mammals, NMFS does not anticipate such taking to occur from the specified activity due to general low probability and proposed extensive vessel strike avoidance measures (see Proposed Mitigation section). SouthCoast has not requested, and NMFS is not proposing to authorize, take from vessel strikes. Seabed Preparation Seabed preparations will be the first offshore activity to occur during the construction phase of the SouthCoast Project, and may include scour ( i.e., erosion) protection, sand leveling, sand wave removal, and boulder removal. Scour protection is the placement of materials on the seafloor around the substructures to prevent the development of scour, or erosion, created by the presence of structures. Each substructure used for WTGs and OSPs may require individual scour protection, thus the type and amount utilized will vary depending on the final substructure type selected for installation. For a substructure that utilizes seabed penetration in the form of piles or suction caissons, the use of scour protectant to prevent scour development results in minimized substructure penetration. Scour protection considered for Projects 1 and 2 may include rock (rock bags), concrete mattresses, sandbags, artificial seaweeds/reefs/frond mats, or self-deploying umbrella systems (typically used for suction-bucket jackets). Installation activities and order of events of scour protection will depend on the type and material used. For rock scour protection, a rock placement vessel may be deployed. A thin layer of filter stones would be placed prior to pile driving activity while the armor rock layer would be installed following completion of foundation installation. Frond mats or umbrella-based structures may be pre-attached to the substructure, in which case the pile and scour protection would be installed simultaneously. For all types of scour protection materials considered, the results of detailed geological campaigns and assessments will support the final decision of the extent of scour protection required. Placement of scour protection may result in suspended sediments and a minor conversion of marine mammal prey benthic habitat conversion of the existing sandy bottom habitat to a hard bottom habitat as well as potential beneficial reef effects (see Section 1.3 of the ITA application). Seabed preparation may also include leveling, sand wave removal, and boulder removal. SouthCoast may utilize equipment to level the seabed locally in order to use seabed operated cable burial tools to ensure consistent burial is achieved. If sand waves are present, the tops may be removed to provide a level bottom to install the export cable. Sand wave removal may be conducted using a trailing suction hopper dredger (or similar), a water injection dredge in shallow areas, or a constant flow excavator. Any boulder discovered in the cable route during pre-installation surveys that cannot be easily avoided by micro-routing may be removed using non-explosive methods such as a grab lift or plow. If deemed necessary, a pre-lay grapnel run will be conducted to clear the cable route of buried hazards along the installation route to remove obstacles that could impact cable installation such as abandoned mooring lines, wires, or fishing equipment. Site-specific conditions will be assessed prior to any boulder removal to ensure that boulder removal can safely proceed. Boulder clearance is a discreet action occurring over a short duration resulting in short term direct effects. Sound produced by Dynamic Positioning (DP) vessels is considered non-impulsive and is typically more dominant than mechanical or hydraulic noises produced from the cable trenching or boulder removal vessels and equipment. Therefore, noise produced by a pull vessel with a towed plow or a support vessel carrying a boulder grab would be comparable to or less than the noise produced by DP vessels, so impacts are also expected to be similar. Boulder clearance is a discreet action occurring over a short duration resulting in short term direct effects. Additionally, sound produced by boulder clearance vessels and equipment would be preceded by, and associated with, sound from ongoing vessel noise and would be similar in nature. presence, further reducing the potential for startle or flight responses on the part of marine mammals. Monitoring of past projects that entailed use of DP thrusters has shown a lack of observed marine mammal responses as a result of exposure to sound from DP thrusters (NMFS 2018). As DP thrusters are not expected to result in take of marine mammals, these activities are not analyzed further in this document. NMFS expects that marine mammals would not be exposed to sounds levels or durations from seafloor preparation work that would disrupt behavioral patterns. Therefore, the potential for take of marine mammals to result from these activities is discountable and SouthCoast did not request, and NMFS does not propose to authorize, any takes associated with seafloor preparation work. These activities are not analyzed further in this document. NMFS does not expect site preparation work, including boulder removal and sand leveling, to generate noise levels that would cause take of marine mammals. Underwater noise associated with these activities is expected to be similar in nature to the non-impulsive sound produced by the DP cable lay vessels used to install inter-array cables in the Lease Area and export cables along the ECCs. Boulder clearance is a discreet action occurring over a short duration resulting in short term direct effects. Southcoast did not request take of marine mammals incidental to this activity, and based on the activity, NMFS neither expects nor proposes to authorize take of marine mammals incidental to this activity. Thus, this activity will not be discussed further. Fisheries and Benthic Monitoring SouthCoast has developed a fisheries monitoring plan (FMP) focusing on the Lease Area, an inshore FMP that focuses on nearshore portions of the Brayton Point ECC ( i.e., the Sakonnet River), and a benthic monitoring plan that covers both offshore and inshore portions of the Lease Area and ECCs. The fisheries and benthic monitoring plans for the SouthCoast Project were developed following guidance outlined in “Guidelines for Providing Information on Fisheries for Renewable Energy Development on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf” (BOEM, 2019) and the Responsible Offshore Science Alliance (ROSA) “Offshore Wind Project Monitoring Framework and Guidelines” (2021). SouthCoast is working with the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth's School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST) (in partnership with the Massachusetts Lobstermen's Association) and Inspire Environmental to develop and conduct surveys as a cooperative research program using local fishing vessels and knowledge. SouthCoast intends to conduct their research on contracted commercial and recreational fishing vessels whenever practicable. Offshore fisheries monitoring will likely include the following types of surveys: trawls, ventless trap, drop camera, neuston net, and acoustic telemetry with tagging of highly migratory species ( e.g., blue sharks). Inshore fisheries monitoring surveys will also include acoustic telemetry targeting commercially and recreationally important fish species ( e.g., striped bass) and trap survey targeting whelk. Benthic monitoring plans are under development and may include grab samples and collection of imagery. Because the gear types and equipment used for the acoustic telemetry study, benthic habitat monitoring, and drop camera monitoring surveys do not have components with which marine mammals are likely to interact ( i.e., become entangled in or hooked by), these activities are unlikely to have any impacts on marine mammals. Therefore, only trap and trawl surveys, in general, have the potential to result in harassment to marine mammals. However, based on proposed mitigation and monitoring measures, taking marine mammals from this specified activity is not anticipated. A full description of mitigation and monitoring measures can be found in the Proposed Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring sections. Given the planned implementation of the mitigation and monitoring measures, SouthCoast did not request, and NMFS is not proposing to authorize, take of marine mammals incidental to research trap and trawl surveys. Any lost gear associated with the fishery surveys will be reported to the NOAA Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office Protected Resources Division (GARFO PRD) as soon as possible. Therefore, take from fishery surveys will not be discussed further. Description of Marine Mammals in the Specified Geographical Region Thirty-eight marine mammal species and/or stocks under NMFS' jurisdiction have geographic ranges within the western North Atlantic OCS (Hayes et al., 2023). In the ITA application, SouthCoast identified 31 of those species that could potentially occur in the Lease Area and surrounding waters. However, for reasons described below, SouthCoast has requested, and NMFS proposes to authorize, take of only 16 species (comprising 16 stocks) of marine mammals. Section 4 of SouthCoast's ITA application summarizes available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and behavior and life history of the species included in SouthCoast's take estimation analyses, except for the Atlantic spotted dolphin as it was unintentionally excluded from this section but included in Section 6 Take Estimates for Marine Mammals. Given previous observations of the species in the RI/MA and MA WEAs, SouthCoast included Atlantic spotted dolphins take analyses (and Table 5), and is requesting Level B harassment take of the species incidental to foundation installation, UXO/MEC detonation, and HRG surveys, which NMFS is proposing for authorization. NMFS fully considered all available information for the potentially affected species, and we refer the reader to Section 4 of the ITA application for more details about each species (except the Atlantic spotted dolphin) instead of reprinting the information. A description of Atlantic spotted dolphin distribution, population trends, and life history can be found in the NMFS SAR (Hayes et al., 2019) ( https://media.fisheries.bnoaa.gov/dam-migration/2019_sars_atlantic_atlanticbspottedbdolphin.pdf ). Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports ) 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). Of the 31 marine mammal species (comprising 31 stocks) SouthCoast determined have geographic ranges that include the project area, 14 are considered rare or unexpected based on the best scientific information available ( i.e., sighting and distribution data, low predicted densities, and lack of preferred habitat) for a given species. SouthCoast did not request, and NMFS is not proposing to authorize, take of these species and they are not discussed further in this proposed rulemaking: Dwarf and pygmy sperm whales ( Kogia sima and K. breviceps ), Cuvier's beaked whale ( Ziphius cavirostris ), four species of Mesoplodont beaked whales ( Mesoplodon densitostris, M. europaeus, M. mirus, and M. bidens ), killer whale ( Orcinus orca ), short-finned pilot whale ( Globicephalus macrohynchus ), white-beaked dolphin ( Lagenorhynchus albirotris ), pantropical spotted dolphin ( Stenella attenuate ), and the, striped dolphin ( Stenella coeruleoalba ). Two species of phocid pinnipeds are also uncommon in the project area, including: harp seals ( Pagophilus groenlandica ) and hooded seals ( Cystophora cristata ). In addition, the Florida manatee ( Trichechus manatus; a sub-species of the West Indian manatee) has been previously documented as a rare visitor to the Northeast region during summer months (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2022). However, manatees are managed by the USFWS and are not considered further in this document. More information on this species can be found at the following website: https://www.fws.gov/species/manatee-trichechus-manatus. Table 5 lists all species or stocks for which take is likely and proposed for authorization for this action and summarizes information related to the species or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological removal (PBR), where known. PBR is defined 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” (16 U.S.C. 1362(20)). While no mortality is anticipated or proposed for authorization, 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' U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico SARs. All values presented in table 5 are the most recent available at the time of publication and, unless noted otherwise, use NMFS' draft 2023 SARs (Hayes et al., 2024) available online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports. Table 5—Marine Mammal Species 1 That May Occur in the Specified Geographical Region and Be Taken by Harassment Common name 1 Scientific name Stock ESA/ MMPA status; strategic (Y/N) 2 Stock abundance (CV, N min , most recent abundance survey) 3 PBR Annual M/SI 4 Order Artiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) Family Balaenidae: North Atlantic right whale Eubalaena glacialis Western Atlantic E, D, Y 340 (0; 337; 2021); 356 (346-363, 2022) 5 0.7 6 27.2 Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals): Blue whale Balaenoptera musculus Western North Atlantic E, D, Y UNK (UNK; 402; 1980-2008) 0.8 0 Fin whale Balaenoptera physalus Western North Atlantic E, D, Y 6,802 (0.24; 5,573; 2021) 11 2.05 Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis Nova Scotia E, D, Y 6,292 (1.02; 3,098; 2021) 6.2 0.6 Minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata Canadian Eastern Coastal -, -, N 21,968 (0.31; 17,002; 2021) 170 9.4 Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae Gulf of Maine -, -, Y 1,396 (0; 1,380; 2016) 22 12.15 Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) Family Physeteridae: Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus North Atlantic E, D, Y 5,895 (0.29; 4,639; 2021) 9.28 0.2 Family Delphinidae: Atlantic white-sided dolphin Lagenorhynchus acutus Western North Atlantic -, -, N 93,233 (0.71; 54,433; 2021) 544 28 Atlantic spotted dolphin Stenella frontalis Western North Atlantic -, -, N 31,506 (0.28; 25,042; 2021) 250 0 Bottlenose dolphin 7 Tursiops truncatus Western North Atlantic Offshore -, -, N 64,587 (0.24; 52,801; 2021) 7 507 28 Long-finned pilot whale 8 Globicephala melas Western North Atlantic -, -, N 39,215 (0.3; 30,627; 2021) 306 5.7 Common dolphin (short-beaked) Delphinus delphis Western North Atlantic -, -, N 93,100 (0.21; 59,817; 2021) 1,452 414 Risso's dolphin Grampus griseus Western North Atlantic -, -, N 44,067 (0.19; 30,662; 2021) 307 18 Family Phocoenidae (porpoises): Harbor porpoise Phocoena phocoena Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy -, -, N 85,765 (0.53; 56,420; 2021) 649 45 Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia Family Phocidae (earless seals): Gray seal 9 Halichoerus grypus Western North Atlantic -, -, N 27,911 (0.20; 23,624; 2021) 1,512 4,570 Harbor seal Phoca vitulina Western North Atlantic -, -, N 61,336 (0.08; 57,637; 2018) 1,729 339 1 Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy's Committee on Taxonomy ( https://www.marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies /; Committee on Taxonomy (2022)). 2 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, is declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future, or listed under the ESA. A marine mammal species or population is considered depleted under the MMPA if it is below its optimum sustainable population (OSP) level, or is listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA. 3 CV is the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. 4 These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined ( e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). 5 The current SAR includes an estimated population (N best 340) based on sighting history through November 2021 (Hayes et al., 2024). In October 2023, NMFS released a technical report identifying that the North Atlantic right whale population size based on sighting history through 2022 was 356 whales, with a 95 percent credible interval ranging from 346 to 363 (Linden, 2023). 6 Total annual average observed North Atlantic right whale mortality during the period 2017-2021 was 7.1 animals and annual average observed fishery mortality was 4.6 animals. Numbers presented in this table (27.2 total mortality and 176 fishery mortality) are 2016-2020 estimated annual means, accounting for undetected mortality and serious injury. 7 There are two morphologically and genetically distinct common bottlenose morphotypes, the Western North Atlantic Northern Migratory Coastal stock and the Western North Atlantic Offshore stock. The western North Atlantic offshore stock is primarily distributed along the outer shelf and slope from Georges Bank to Florida during spring and summer and has been observed in the Gulf of Maine during late summer and fall (Hayes et al. 2020), whereas the northern migratory coastal stock is distributed along the coast between southern Long Island, New York, and Florida (Hayes et al., 2018). Given their distribution, only the offshore stock of bottlenose dolphins is likely to occur in the project area. 8 There are two pilot whale species, long-finned ( Globicephala melas ) and short-finned ( Globicephala macrorhynchus ), with distributions that overlap in the latitudinal range of the SouthCoast Project (Hayes et al., 2020; Roberts et al., 2016). Because it is difficult to differentiate between the two species at sea, sightings, and thus the densities calculated from them, are generally reported together as Globicephala spp. (Roberts et al., 2016; Hayes et al., 2020). However, based on the best available information, short-finned pilot whales occur in habitat that is both further offshore on the shelf break and further south than the project area (Hayes et al., 2020). Therefore, NMFS assumes that any take of pilot whales would be of long-finned pilot whales. 9 NMFS' stock abundance estimate (and associated PBR value) applies to the U.S. population only. Total stock abundance (including animals in Canada) is approximately 451,431. The annual M/SI value given is for the total stock. As indicated above, all 16 species and stocks in table 5 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that take is likely to occur. Five of the marine mammal species for which take is requested are listed as endangered under the ESA: North Atlantic right, blue, fin, sei, and sperm whales. In addition to what is included in sections 3 and 4 of SouthCoast's ITA application ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-southcoast-wind-llc-construction-southcoast-wind-offshore-wind ), the SARs ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments ), and NMFS' website ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species-directory/marine-mammals ), we provide further detail below informing the baseline for select species ( e.g., information regarding current UMEs and known important habitat areas, such as Biologically Important Areas (BIAs; https://oceannoise.noaa.gov/biologically-important-areas ) (Van Parijs et al., 2015)). There are no ESA-designated critical habitats for any species within the project area. Under the MMPA, a UME is defined as “a stranding that is unexpected; involves a significant die-off of any marine mammal population; and demands immediate response” (16 U.S.C. 1421h(6)). As of May 20, 2024, four UMEs are active. Below we include information for species that are listed under the ESA, have an active or recently closed UME occurring along the Atlantic coast, or for which there is information available related to areas of biological significance within the project area. North Atlantic Right Whale The North Atlantic right whale has been listed as Endangered since the ESA's enactment in 1973. The species was recently uplisted from Endangered to Critically Endangered on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species (Cooke, 2020). The uplisting was due to a decrease in population size (Pace et al., 2017), an increase in vessel strikes and entanglements in fixed fishing gear (Daoust et al., 2017; Davis & Brillant, 2019; Knowlton et al., 2012; Knowlton et al., 2022; Moore et al., 2021; Sharp et al., 2019), and a decrease in birth rate (Pettis et al., 2021; Reed et al., 2022). There is a recovery plan (NOAA Fisheries, 2005) for the North Atlantic right whale and, in November 2022, NMFS completed the 5-year review and concluded that no change to this listing status is warranted. ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/north-atlantic-right-whale-5-year-review ). Designated by NMFS as a Species in the Spotlight, the North Atlantic right whale is considered among the species with the greatest risk of extinction in the near future ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/endangered-species-conservation/species-in-the-spotlight ). The North Atlantic right whale population had only a 2.8-percent recovery rate between 1990 and 2011 and an overall abundance decline of 23.5 percent from 2011-2019 (Hayes et al., 2023). Since 2010, the North Atlantic right whale population has been in decline; however, the sharp decrease observed from 2015 to 2020 appears to have slowed, though the North Atlantic right whale population continues to experience annual mortalities above recovery thresholds (Pace et al., 2017; Pace et al., 2021; Linden, 2023). North Atlantic right whale calving rates dropped from 2017 to 2020 with zero births recorded during the 2017-2018 season. The 2020-2021 calving season had the first substantial calving increase in 5 years with 20 calves born, followed by 15 calves during the 2021-2022 calving season and 12 births in the 2022-2023 calving season. As of May 20, 2024, the 2023-2024 calving season includes 19 births. However, mortalities continue to outpace births, including three calf mortalities/presumed mortalities during the 2024 calving season, and the best estimates indicate fewer than 70 reproductively active females remain in the population (Hayes et al., 2024). North Atlantic right whale total annual mortality and serious injury (M/SI) estimates have fluctuated in recent years, as presented in annual stock assessment reports. The estimate for 2022 (31.2) was a marked increase over the previous year. In the 2022 SARs, Hayes et al., (2023) report the total annual North Atlantic right whale mortality increased from 8.1 (which represents 2016-2020) to 31.2 (which represents 2015-2019), however, this updated estimate also accounted for undetected mortality and serious injury (Hayes et al., 2024). Presently, the best available peer-reviewed population estimate for North Atlantic right whales is 340 per the draft 2023 SARs (Hayes et al., 2024). Approximately, 42 percent of the population is known to be in reduced health (Hamilton et al., 2021) likely contributing to smaller body sizes at maturation, making them more susceptible to threats and reducing fecundity (Moore et al., 2021; Reed et al., 2022; Stewart et al., 2022; Pirotta et al., 2024). Body size is generally positively correlated to reproductive potential. Pirrota et al. (2024) found North Atlantic right whale body size was strongly associated with the probability of giving birth to a calf, such that smaller body size was associated with lower reproductive output. In turn, shorter females that do calve tend to produce offspring with a limited maximum size, likely through a combination of genetics and the influence of body condition during gestation and weaning (Pirotta et al., 2024). When combined with other factors ( e.g., health deterioration due to sublethal effects of entanglement), this feedback loop has led to a decrease in overall body length and fecundity over the past 50 years (Pirotta et al., 2023; Pirotta et al., 2024). Since 2017, dead, seriously injured, sublethally injured, or ill North Atlantic right whales along the United States and Canadian coasts have been documented, necessitating a UME declaration and investigation. The leading category for the cause of death for this ongoing UME is “human interaction,” specifically from entanglements or vessel strikes. As of May 20, 2024, there have been 39 confirmed mortalities (dead, stranded, or floaters), 1 pending mortality, and 34 seriously injured free-swimming whales for a total of 74 whales. The UME also considers animals with sublethal injury or illness ( i.e., “morbidity”; n=51) bringing the total number of whales in the UME from 71 to 122. More information about the North Atlantic right whale UME is available online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2023-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event. The project area both spatially and temporally overlaps the migratory corridor BIA, within which a portion of the North Atlantic right whale population migrates south to calving grounds, generally in November and December, followed by a northward migration into feeding areas east and north of the project area in March and April (LaBrecque et al., 2015; Van Parijs et al., 2015). While the Project does not overlap previously identified critical feeding habitat or a feeding BIA, it is located within a recently described important feeding area south of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket, primarily along the western side of Nantucket Shoals (Kraus et al., 2016; O'Brien et al., 2022, Quintano-Rizzo et al., 2021). Finally, the Project overlaps the currently established November 1 through April 30th Block Island [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2024-13770. Public record. Not legal advice.