Golden Eagles; Programmatic Take Permit Decision; Finding of No Significant Impact of Final Environmental Assessment; Shiloh IV Wind Project, Solano County, California, 36552-36553 [2014-14953]

Download as PDF 36552 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 124 / Friday, June 27, 2014 / Notices amend the Appendices. This information is also available upon request from the Division of Scientific Authority at ScientificAuthority@ fws.gov, or via mail from CITES Division of Scientific Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 110, Arlington, Virginia 22203. wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES What information should be submitted? In response to this notice, to provide us with information and recommendations on species subject to international trade for possible proposals to amend the Appendices, please include as much of the following information as possible in your submission: (1) Scientific name and common name; (2) Population size estimates (including references if available); (3) Population trend information; (4) Threats to the species (other than trade); (5) The level or trend of international trade (as specific as possible but without a request for new searches of our records); (6) The level or trend in total take from the wild (as specific as reasonable); and (7) A short summary statement clearly presenting the rationale for inclusion in, or removal or transfer from, one of the Appendices, including which of the criteria in Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16) are met. If you wish to submit more complete proposals for us to consider, please consult Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16) for the format for proposals and a detailed explanation of each of the categories. Proposals to transfer a species from Appendix I to Appendix II, or to remove a species from Appendix II, must also be in accordance with the precautionary measures described in Annex 4 of Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16). are included in the U.S. approach to CoP17, described above in this notice. We will carefully consider all factors of the U.S. approach when deciding which species the United States should propose for inclusion in the Appendices. We will consult range countries for foreign species, and for species we share with other countries, after receiving and analyzing the information provided by the public in response to this notice as well as other information available to us. One important function of the CITES Scientific Authority of each Party country is monitoring the international trade in plant and animal species, and ongoing scientific assessments of the impact of that trade on species. For native U.S. species listed in Appendices I and II, we monitor trade and export permits authorized so that we can prevent over-utilization and restrict exports if necessary. We also work closely with the States to ensure that species are correctly listed in the CITES Appendices (or not listed, if a listing is not warranted). For these reasons, we actively seek information about U.S. and foreign species subject to international trade. States to the CITES Secretariat for consideration at CoP17. Through a series of additional notices and Web site postings in advance of CoP17, we will inform you about preliminary negotiating positions on resolutions, decisions, and amendments to the Appendices proposed by other Parties for consideration at CoP17, and about how to obtain observer status from us. We will also publish an announcement of a public meeting tentatively to be held approximately 3 months prior to CoP17; that meeting will enable us to receive public input on our positions regarding CoP17 issues. The procedures for developing U.S. documents and negotiating positions for a meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES are outlined in 50 CFR 23.87. As noted, we may modify or suspend the procedures outlined there if they would interfere with the timely or appropriate development of documents for submission to the CoP and of U.S. negotiating positions. Future Actions Authority The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). As stated above, the next regular meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP17) is tentatively scheduled to be held in South Africa, in 2016. The United States must submit any proposals to amend Appendix I or II, or any draft resolutions, decisions, or agenda items for discussion at CoP17, to the CITES Secretariat 150 days prior to the start of the meeting. In order to meet this deadline and to prepare for CoP17, we have developed a tentative U.S. schedule. We plan to publish a Federal Register notice approximately 15 months prior to CoP17; in that notice, we intend to What will we do with the information we request potential resolutions, decisions, receive? and agenda items for discussion at CoP17, and to announce the tentative The information that you submit will species proposals that the United States help us decide if we should submit, or is considering submitting for CoP17 and co-sponsor with other Parties, a solicit further information and proposal to amend the CITES comments on them. Appendices. However, there may be Approximately 9 months prior to species that might qualify for CITES listing but for which we may decide not CoP17, we plan to publish a Federal Register notice announcing proposed to submit a proposal to CoP17. Our resolutions, decisions, and agenda items decision will be based on a number of the United States is considering factors, including available scientific submitting for CoP17. and trade information; whether or not Approximately 4 months prior to the species is native to the United CoP17, we will post on our Web site an States; and for foreign species, whether announcement of the species proposals, or not a proposal is supported or codraft resolutions, draft decisions, and sponsored by at least one range country for the species. These factors and others agenda items submitted by the United VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:30 Jun 26, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Author The primary author of this notice is Jon Siemien, Division of Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Dated: May 20, 2014. Rowan W. Gould, Acting Director. [FR Doc. 2014–15024 Filed 6–26–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS–R8–MB–2014–N098; FXMB12320100000P2–123–FF01M01000] Golden Eagles; Programmatic Take Permit Decision; Finding of No Significant Impact of Final Environmental Assessment; Shiloh IV Wind Project, Solano County, California Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. AGENCY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announces the availability of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and final Environmental Assessment (FEA) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the issuance of a take permit for golden eagles pursuant to the Bald and Golden SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\27JNN1.SGM 27JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 124 / Friday, June 27, 2014 / Notices wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act), in association with the operation of the Shiloh IV Wind Project in Solano County, California. The FEA was prepared in response to an application from Shiloh IV Wind Project, LLC (applicant), an affiliate of EDF Renewable Development, Incorporated, for a 5-year programmatic take permit for golden eagles under the Eagle Act. The applicant will implement a conservation program to avoid, minimize, and compensate for the project’s impacts to eagles, as described in the applicant’s Eagle Conservation Plan (ECP). We solicited comments on the draft Environmental Assessment (Draft EA) and have reviewed those comments in the course of preparing our findings for this project. Based on the FEA the Service concludes that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. Based on the FONSI and findings we prepared associated with the permit application, we intend to issue the permit after 30 days. ADDRESSES: Obtaining Documents: You may download copies of the FONSI, FEA, our Response to Comments on the Draft EA, and the Final ECP for Shiloh IV Wind Project on the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/cno/conservation/ migratorybirds.html. Alternatively, you may use one of the methods below to request a CD–ROM of the document. • Email: ShilohIV_comments@ fws.gov. • U.S. Mail: Heather Beeler, Migratory Bird Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Southwest Regional Office, 2800 Cottage Way, W– 2605, Sacramento, CA 95825. • Fax: Heather Beeler, Migratory Bird Program; Fax: 916–414–6486, Attn: Shiloh IV FONSI. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Beeler, Migratory Bird Program, at the address shown above or at (916) 414–6651 (telephone). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Introduction The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service evaluated an application under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668a–d; Eagle Act) for a programmatic golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) take permit from the Shiloh IV Wind Project LLC, (applicant) an affiliate of EDF Renewable Development, Incorporated, for a 5-year programmatic take permit for golden eagles. The Shiloh IV Wind Project is an operational wind facility in the Montezuma Hills Wind Resource Area (WRA) within Solano County, California. The application includes an VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:30 Jun 26, 2014 Jkt 232001 Eagle Conservation Plan (ECP) as the foundation of the applicant’s permit application, as well as a Bird and Bat Conservation Strategy (BBCS). The ECP and BBCS describe actions taken and proposed future actions to avoid, minimize, and mitigate adverse effects on eagles, birds, and bats. We prepared this FEA to evaluate the impacts of several alternatives associated with this permit application for compliance with our Eagle Act permitting regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 22.26, as well as impacts of implementation of the supporting ECP, which is included as an appendix to the FEA. Public Comments on the Draft EA We invited public comment on the Draft EA. In response, we received 32 comment letters: One from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 3 from Native American tribes, 6 from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and 22 from the general public. Three NGO comment letters combined comments from multiple organizations, the first letter representing two environmental groups, the second representing six environmental groups, and the third representing two industry associations. In total, the 32 comment letters contained approximately 125 individual comments. These comments generally fell under one of five main categories: (1) Effects (addressing a variety of issues including age of the birds killed, number of fatalities, local population effects, cumulative effects, other sources of fatalities, and overall population numbers), (2) advanced conservation practices (ACPs) (addressing the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), seasonal shutdowns, transparency of the process and future ACPs, project design, and seasonal curtailment), (3) mitigation (addressing methods for calculating mitigation requirements, monitoring of retrofits, location of retrofits, biological value of retrofits, and additional alternative measures, such as using new technologies, capturing and relocating eagles, and promoting establishment of new eagle nests), (4) monitoring and reporting (addressing frequency and length of the monitoring program, the reporting system, study design, and the desire to have third-party verification), or (5) general comments about the permitting program (including comments opposing the issuance of an eagle take permit). Overall, the comments raised issues regarding the opportunities and challenges associated with issuing eagle take permits. We made minor changes to PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 36553 three topic areas of the FEA based on these comments. First, under the adaptive management process, we clarified that the TAC was intended to include only Service staff as overseers of the permit. We added more detailed information on the compensation program (utility electric pole retrofitting) and the resource equivalency analysis process used to calculate compensation. We also expanded our discussion of climate change with respect to its potential effects to eagles. After considering the comments, and in light of the record, we determined that neither substantial revisions nor a new analysis are required for the FEA. Detailed responses to specific comments are included in the FONSI (Attachment 2). Decision The Service has selected Alternative 3, issuance of a 5-year permit based on the applicant’s ECP with additional mitigation and monitoring, and has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate for this action. Based on the FONSI and findings prepared associated with the permit application, we intend to issue a permit after 30 days. Authority We provide this notice under Section 668a of the Eagle Act (16 U.S.C. 668– 668c) and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). Dated: June 19, 2014. Alexandra Pitts, Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Southwest, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. 2014–14953 Filed 6–26–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS–R5–R–2014–N078; BAC–4311–K9] Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, Chatham, MA; Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability; extension of public comment period. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), advise the public that we are extending the public review and comment period for the draft comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and environmental impact statement (EIS) for Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\27JNN1.SGM 27JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 124 (Friday, June 27, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36552-36553]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14953]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R8-MB-2014-N098; FXMB12320100000P2-123-FF01M01000]


Golden Eagles; Programmatic Take Permit Decision; Finding of No 
Significant Impact of Final Environmental Assessment; Shiloh IV Wind 
Project, Solano County, California

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announces the availability 
of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and final Environmental 
Assessment (FEA) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for 
the issuance of a take permit for golden eagles pursuant to the Bald 
and Golden

[[Page 36553]]

Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act), in association with the operation of 
the Shiloh IV Wind Project in Solano County, California. The FEA was 
prepared in response to an application from Shiloh IV Wind Project, LLC 
(applicant), an affiliate of EDF Renewable Development, Incorporated, 
for a 5-year programmatic take permit for golden eagles under the Eagle 
Act. The applicant will implement a conservation program to avoid, 
minimize, and compensate for the project's impacts to eagles, as 
described in the applicant's Eagle Conservation Plan (ECP). We 
solicited comments on the draft Environmental Assessment (Draft EA) and 
have reviewed those comments in the course of preparing our findings 
for this project. Based on the FEA the Service concludes that a Finding 
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. Based on the FONSI and 
findings we prepared associated with the permit application, we intend 
to issue the permit after 30 days.

ADDRESSES: Obtaining Documents: You may download copies of the FONSI, 
FEA, our Response to Comments on the Draft EA, and the Final ECP for 
Shiloh IV Wind Project on the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/cno/conservation/migratorybirds.html. Alternatively, you may use one of the 
methods below to request a CD-ROM of the document.
     Email: ShilohIV_comments@fws.gov.
     U.S. Mail: Heather Beeler, Migratory Bird Program, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Southwest Regional Office, 2800 
Cottage Way, W-2605, Sacramento, CA 95825.
     Fax: Heather Beeler, Migratory Bird Program; Fax: 916-414-
6486, Attn: Shiloh IV FONSI.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Beeler, Migratory Bird 
Program, at the address shown above or at (916) 414-6651 (telephone).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service evaluated an application under 
the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668a-d; Eagle Act) 
for a programmatic golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) take permit from 
the Shiloh IV Wind Project LLC, (applicant) an affiliate of EDF 
Renewable Development, Incorporated, for a 5-year programmatic take 
permit for golden eagles. The Shiloh IV Wind Project is an operational 
wind facility in the Montezuma Hills Wind Resource Area (WRA) within 
Solano County, California. The application includes an Eagle 
Conservation Plan (ECP) as the foundation of the applicant's permit 
application, as well as a Bird and Bat Conservation Strategy (BBCS). 
The ECP and BBCS describe actions taken and proposed future actions to 
avoid, minimize, and mitigate adverse effects on eagles, birds, and 
bats.
    We prepared this FEA to evaluate the impacts of several 
alternatives associated with this permit application for compliance 
with our Eagle Act permitting regulations in the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 22.26, as well as impacts of implementation 
of the supporting ECP, which is included as an appendix to the FEA.

Public Comments on the Draft EA

    We invited public comment on the Draft EA. In response, we received 
32 comment letters: One from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
3 from Native American tribes, 6 from nongovernmental organizations 
(NGOs), and 22 from the general public. Three NGO comment letters 
combined comments from multiple organizations, the first letter 
representing two environmental groups, the second representing six 
environmental groups, and the third representing two industry 
associations. In total, the 32 comment letters contained approximately 
125 individual comments. These comments generally fell under one of 
five main categories: (1) Effects (addressing a variety of issues 
including age of the birds killed, number of fatalities, local 
population effects, cumulative effects, other sources of fatalities, 
and overall population numbers), (2) advanced conservation practices 
(ACPs) (addressing the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), seasonal 
shutdowns, transparency of the process and future ACPs, project design, 
and seasonal curtailment), (3) mitigation (addressing methods for 
calculating mitigation requirements, monitoring of retrofits, location 
of retrofits, biological value of retrofits, and additional alternative 
measures, such as using new technologies, capturing and relocating 
eagles, and promoting establishment of new eagle nests), (4) monitoring 
and reporting (addressing frequency and length of the monitoring 
program, the reporting system, study design, and the desire to have 
third-party verification), or (5) general comments about the permitting 
program (including comments opposing the issuance of an eagle take 
permit).
    Overall, the comments raised issues regarding the opportunities and 
challenges associated with issuing eagle take permits. We made minor 
changes to three topic areas of the FEA based on these comments. First, 
under the adaptive management process, we clarified that the TAC was 
intended to include only Service staff as overseers of the permit. We 
added more detailed information on the compensation program (utility 
electric pole retrofitting) and the resource equivalency analysis 
process used to calculate compensation. We also expanded our discussion 
of climate change with respect to its potential effects to eagles. 
After considering the comments, and in light of the record, we 
determined that neither substantial revisions nor a new analysis are 
required for the FEA. Detailed responses to specific comments are 
included in the FONSI (Attachment 2).

Decision

    The Service has selected Alternative 3, issuance of a 5-year permit 
based on the applicant's ECP with additional mitigation and monitoring, 
and has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is 
appropriate for this action. Based on the FONSI and findings prepared 
associated with the permit application, we intend to issue a permit 
after 30 days.

Authority

    We provide this notice under Section 668a of the Eagle Act (16 
U.S.C. 668-668c) and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).

    Dated: June 19, 2014.
Alexandra Pitts,
Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Southwest, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. 2014-14953 Filed 6-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P