Final Legislative Environmental Impact Statement for the Harvest of Glaucous-Winged Gull Eggs by the Huna Tlingit in Glacier Bay National Park, 29574-29575 [2010-12608]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
29574
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Notices
concessioners will know not only the
amount of money they will be obliged
to pay the prior concessioner for
existing LSI under the terms of the new
contract, but also will know with a high
degree of certainty how much money
they will recover from this payment
upon the expiration of the new contract
(based on the 40-year amortization
period). The proposed LSI alternative
effectively eliminates the speculation
about physical depreciation and CPI
that is required for proposed contracts
under the standard LSI formula. The
resulting lower risk and greater certainty
in the business opportunity will foster
competition for the new contract by
providing a reasonable opportunity to
make a profit.
The proposed LSI alternative is
projected to provide approximately the
same rate of return for the new
concessioner as the standard LSI
formula. This is because, in developing
the minimum franchise fee under the
proposed LSI alternative, NPS estimated
that the new contract would provide the
new concessioner with a reasonable
opportunity to make a net profit. This
estimate took into consideration, among
other matters, applicable industry rate
of return expectations, the purchase
price of the existing LSI improvements,
and the LSI value that will be payable
to the concessioner after contract
expiration under the proposed LSI
alternative. If the standard LSI formula
were utilized, the projected LSI value
payment to the new concessioner would
necessarily be much higher, resulting in
a much higher minimum franchise fee
for the new contract.
In other words, the lower LSI value
payment upon contract expiration under
the proposed LSI alternative (as
opposed to the standard LSI formula)
results in a lower minimum franchise
fee, and achieves the same approximate
projected rate of return to the
concessioner. The proposed LSI
alternative results in increased cash
flows to the concessioner during the
entire term of the contract, while the
standard LSI formula provides a higher
payment of LSI at the expiration of the
contract.
The proposed LSI alternative, if
adopted by NPS, would be applicable
only to the new contract, GRTE003–11.
NPS has made no decision to apply the
proposed LSI alternative or any other
LSI alternative to future concession
contracts. If the same or other
alternative LSI formulas are considered
for utilization in subsequent contracts
pursuant to Section 405(a)(4) of the
1998 Act, opportunities for public
comment will be provided as required.
NPS will provide notice of its final
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:16 May 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
decision regarding the LSI provisions of
the new contract in the Federal Register
and/or in FedBizOpps (FedBizOpps.gov
under Solicitation No. CC–GRTE003–
11).
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Daniel N. Wenk,
Deputy Director, Operations.
[FR Doc. 2010–12703 Filed 5–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–53–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Final Legislative Environmental Impact
Statement for the Harvest of GlaucousWinged Gull Eggs by the Huna Tlingit
in Glacier Bay National Park
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice of Availability of the
Final Legislative Environmental Impact
Statement for the Harvest of GlaucousWinged Gull Eggs by the Huna Tlingit
in Glacier Bay National Park.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The National Park Service
(NPS) announces the availability of a
final Legislative Environmental Impact
Statement (LEIS) for the harvest of
glaucous-winged gull eggs by the Huna
Tlingit in Glacier Bay National Park.
The document describes and analyzes
the environmental impacts of a
preferred alternative and one additional
action alternative for managing a limited
harvest of glaucous-winged gull eggs. A
no action alternative is also evaluated.
This notice announces the availability
of the final LEIS.
DATES: A Record of Decision will be
made no sooner than 30 days after the
date the Environmental Protection
Agency’s Notice of Availability for this
final LEIS appears in the Federal
Register.
The final LEIS may be
viewed online at https://
parkplanning.nps.gov. Hard copies of
the final LEIS are available on request
from the address below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Beth Moss, Project Manager,
Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve,
Telephone: (907) 723–1777.
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The NPS
has prepared an LEIS to analyze the
effects of authorizing the limited
collection of glaucous-winged gull eggs
within Glacier Bay National Park by
Hoonah Indian Association (HIA; the
federally recognized government of the
Huna Tlingit) tribal members. Glacier
Bay is the traditional homeland of the
Huna Tlingit who traditionally
harvested eggs there prior to park
establishment. The practice was
curtailed in the 1960s, as the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act and federal regulations
prohibit it. In the late 1990s, at the
behest of tribal leaders, the NPS agreed
to explore ways to authorize this
important cultural tradition. Section 4
of the Glacier Bay National Park
Resource Management Act of 2000
directed the Secretary of Interior, in
consultation with local residents, to
assess whether gull eggs could be
collected in Glacier Bay National Park
on a limited basis without impairing the
biological sustainability of the gull
population. The Act further requires
that the Secretary submit
recommendations for legislation to
Congress if the study determines that
gull egg harvest could occur without
impairing the biological sustainability of
the park’s gull population. NPS
commissioned ethnographic and
biological studies to inform the analysis
included in this LEIS.
The NPS outlined a range of
alternatives based on project objectives,
park resources and values, and public
input and analyzed the impacts each
would have on the biological and
human environment.
Alternative 1: No Action: This
alternative serves as a baseline for
evaluating the impacts of the action
alternatives. This alternative would not
authorize the harvest of glaucouswinged gull eggs in Glacier Bay National
Park. Glaucous-winged gulls would
continue to breed in Glacier Bay
without human disturbance.
Alternative 2: This alternative would
propose legislation to authorize the
annual harvest of glaucous-winged gull
eggs at up to two designated locations
on a single pre-selected date on or
before June 9 of each year.
Alternative 3: NPS Preferred
Alternative: Alternative 3 would
propose legislation to authorize the
annual harvest of glaucous-winged gull
eggs at up to five designated locations
in Glacier Bay National Park on two
separate dates. A first harvest visit
would be authorized to occur at each of
the open sites on or before the 5th day
following onset of laying as determined
by NPS staff monitoring a reference site.
A second harvest at the same sites
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\26MYN1.SGM
26MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Notices
would be authorized to occur within
nine days of the first harvest.
Both action alternatives would
manage harvest activities under the
guidelines of a harvest management
plan cooperatively developed by the
NPS and the HIA. NPS would conduct
monitoring activities to ensure that park
resources and values were not impacted.
The Superintendent would retain the
authority to close gull colonies to
harvest.
Victor W. Knox,
Acting Regional Director, Alaska.
[FR Doc. 2010–12608 Filed 5–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–HX–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R3–ES–2010–N094; 30120–1113–000–
F6]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Indiana Bat; Notice of
Intent To Prepare a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for a
Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan
and Incidental Take Permit
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a
draft environmental impact statement
and draft habitat conservation plan;
request for comments.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) intend to
prepare a draft environmental impact
statement (EIS) to evaluate the impacts
of several alternatives relating to the
proposed issuance of an Endangered
Species Act Permit to EverPower Wind
Holdings, Inc., its subsidiary Buckeye
Wind LLC, and its affiliates (applicant)
for incidental take of the Indiana bat
(Myotis sodalis), a Federal endangered
species, from activities associated with
the construction and operation of a
wind power project in Champaign
County, Ohio. We also announce a
public comment period.
DATES: To ensure consideration, please
send your written comments by June 25,
2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Ms.
Megan Seymour, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Ohio Field Office, 4625 Morse
Rd., Suite 104, Columbus, OH 43230;
E-mail comments:
EverPowerHCP@fws.gov; or
Fax: (614) 416–8994 (Attention:
Megan Seymour).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:16 May 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Megan Seymour, at (614) 416–8993,
extension 16. Individuals who are
hearing-impaired or speech-impaired
may call the Federal Relay Service at
(800) 877–8337 for TTY assistance.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We
publish this notice in compliance with
the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.), and its implementing
regulations (40 CFR 1506.6), and section
10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.). We intend to gather the
information necessary to determine
impacts and alternatives to support a
decision regarding the potential
issuance of an incidental take permit to
the applicant, and the implementation
of the supporting draft HCP. We intend
to prepare an EIS to evaluate the
impacts of several alternatives relating
to the proposed issuance of an
incidental take permit under the Act.
The applicant proposes to apply for an
incidental take permit through
development and implementation of an
HCP. The proposed HCP will cover take
of the Indiana bat that is incidental to
activities associated with the
construction and operation of the
applicant’s Buckeye Wind Energy
project and will include measures
necessary to minimize and mitigate
impacts to the Indiana bat and its
habitat to the maximum extent
practicable.
Public Comments
We request data, comments, new
information, or suggestions from the
public, other concerned governmental
agencies, the scientific community,
Tribes, industry, or any other interested
party on this notice. These comments
will be considered by the Service in
developing a draft EIS and in the
development of an HCP and ITP. We
particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) Biological information concerning
the Indiana bat;
(2) Relevant data concerning wind
power and bat interactions;
(3) Additional information concerning
the range, distribution, population size,
and population trends of the Indiana
bat;
(4) Current or planned activities in the
subject area and their possible impacts
on the Indiana bat;
(5) The presence of archeological
sites, buildings and structures, historic
events, sacred and traditional areas, and
other historic preservation concerns,
which are required to be considered in
project planning by the National
Historic Preservation Act; and
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29575
(6) Identification of any other
environmental issues that should be
considered with regard to the proposed
development and permit action.
You may submit your comments and
materials considering this notice by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. If you previously submitted
comments on this project during the
public comment period associated with
Federal Register notice 75 FR 4840
(published January 29, 2010), you need
not resubmit your comments. All
previously received comments on this
project will be considered in
development of the draft EIS.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
use in preparing the NEPA document,
will be available for public inspection
by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Ohio Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
You may obtain copies of this notice on
the Internet at: https://www.fws.gov/
midwest/Endangered/permits/hcp/
r3hcps.html, or by mail from the Ohio
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Background
Section 9 of the Act prohibits ‘‘taking’’
of fish and wildlife species listed as
endangered under section 4 of the Act.
The Act’s implementing regulations
extend, under certain circumstances, the
prohibition of take to threatened
species. Under section 3 of the Act, the
term ‘‘take’’ means ‘‘to harass, harm,
pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect, or to attempt to
engage in any such conduct.’’ The term
‘‘harm’’ is defined by regulation as ‘‘an
act which actually kills or injures
wildlife. Such act may include
significant habitat modification or
degradation where it actually kills or
injures wildlife by significantly
impairing essential behavioral patterns,
including breeding, feeding, or
sheltering’’ (50 CFR 17.3). The term
‘‘harass’’ is defined in the regulations as
‘‘an intentional or negligent act or
omission which creates the likelihood of
injury to wildlife by annoying it to such
an extent as to significantly disrupt
normal behavioral patterns which
include, but are not limited to, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering’’ (50 CFR 17.3).
Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act requires
an applicant for an incidental take
permit to prepare an HCP that describes:
(1) The impact that will result from such
taking; (2) the steps the applicant will
take to minimize and mitigate that take
to the maximum extent practicable, and
the funding that will be available to
implement such steps; (3) the
E:\FR\FM\26MYN1.SGM
26MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29574-29575]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12608]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Final Legislative Environmental Impact Statement for the Harvest
of Glaucous-Winged Gull Eggs by the Huna Tlingit in Glacier Bay
National Park
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of the Final Legislative Environmental
Impact Statement for the Harvest of Glaucous-Winged Gull Eggs by the
Huna Tlingit in Glacier Bay National Park.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) announces the availability of
a final Legislative Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) for the
harvest of glaucous-winged gull eggs by the Huna Tlingit in Glacier Bay
National Park. The document describes and analyzes the environmental
impacts of a preferred alternative and one additional action
alternative for managing a limited harvest of glaucous-winged gull
eggs. A no action alternative is also evaluated. This notice announces
the availability of the final LEIS.
DATES: A Record of Decision will be made no sooner than 30 days after
the date the Environmental Protection Agency's Notice of Availability
for this final LEIS appears in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: The final LEIS may be viewed online at https://parkplanning.nps.gov. Hard copies of the final LEIS are available on
request from the address below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Beth Moss, Project Manager,
Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve, Telephone: (907) 723-1777.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NPS has prepared an LEIS to analyze the
effects of authorizing the limited collection of glaucous-winged gull
eggs within Glacier Bay National Park by Hoonah Indian Association
(HIA; the federally recognized government of the Huna Tlingit) tribal
members. Glacier Bay is the traditional homeland of the Huna Tlingit
who traditionally harvested eggs there prior to park establishment. The
practice was curtailed in the 1960s, as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
and federal regulations prohibit it. In the late 1990s, at the behest
of tribal leaders, the NPS agreed to explore ways to authorize this
important cultural tradition. Section 4 of the Glacier Bay National
Park Resource Management Act of 2000 directed the Secretary of
Interior, in consultation with local residents, to assess whether gull
eggs could be collected in Glacier Bay National Park on a limited basis
without impairing the biological sustainability of the gull population.
The Act further requires that the Secretary submit recommendations for
legislation to Congress if the study determines that gull egg harvest
could occur without impairing the biological sustainability of the
park's gull population. NPS commissioned ethnographic and biological
studies to inform the analysis included in this LEIS.
The NPS outlined a range of alternatives based on project
objectives, park resources and values, and public input and analyzed
the impacts each would have on the biological and human environment.
Alternative 1: No Action: This alternative serves as a baseline for
evaluating the impacts of the action alternatives. This alternative
would not authorize the harvest of glaucous-winged gull eggs in Glacier
Bay National Park. Glaucous-winged gulls would continue to breed in
Glacier Bay without human disturbance.
Alternative 2: This alternative would propose legislation to
authorize the annual harvest of glaucous-winged gull eggs at up to two
designated locations on a single pre-selected date on or before June 9
of each year.
Alternative 3: NPS Preferred Alternative: Alternative 3 would
propose legislation to authorize the annual harvest of glaucous-winged
gull eggs at up to five designated locations in Glacier Bay National
Park on two separate dates. A first harvest visit would be authorized
to occur at each of the open sites on or before the 5th day following
onset of laying as determined by NPS staff monitoring a reference site.
A second harvest at the same sites
[[Page 29575]]
would be authorized to occur within nine days of the first harvest.
Both action alternatives would manage harvest activities under the
guidelines of a harvest management plan cooperatively developed by the
NPS and the HIA. NPS would conduct monitoring activities to ensure that
park resources and values were not impacted. The Superintendent would
retain the authority to close gull colonies to harvest.
Victor W. Knox,
Acting Regional Director, Alaska.
[FR Doc. 2010-12608 Filed 5-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-HX-P
