Updated Collision Risk Model Priors for Estimating Eagle Fatalities at Wind Energy Facilities, 23978-23979 [2021-09362]
Download as PDF
23978
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 5, 2021 / Notices
Request for Information
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
To ensure that a 5-year review is
complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we request new
information from all sources. See What
Information Do We Consider in Our
Review? for specific criteria. If you
submit information, please support it
with documentation such as maps,
bibliographic references, methods used
to gather and analyze the data, and/or
copies of any pertinent publications,
reports, or letters by knowledgeable
sources.
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2017–0092;
91200–FF09M20300–189–
FXMB123109EAGLE]
Updated Collision Risk Model Priors
for Estimating Eagle Fatalities at Wind
Energy Facilities
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
Before including your address, phone
number, email 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.
This notice announces our
adoption of updated species-specific
eagle exposure and collision
probabilities used to generate fatality
estimates for consideration in issuing
eagle incidental take permits to windenergy facilities under the Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act. This action
will improve our ability to carry out our
statutory responsibility to ensure
conservation of bald eagles and golden
eagles when issuing those permits.
DATES: May 6, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Information related to this
notice, including the public comments
received in response to the previous
Federal Register notices, is available at
the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov in Docket No.
FWS–HQ–MB–2017–0092.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Millsap, at 505–559–3963
(telephone), or brian_a_millsap@fws.gov
(email). Individuals who are hearing
impaired or speech impaired may call
the Federal Relay Service at 800–877–
8337 for TTY assistance.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Completed and Active Reviews
Background
How do I ask questions or provide
information?
If you wish to provide information for
any species listed above, please submit
your comments and materials to the
appropriate contact in the table above.
You may also direct questions to those
contacts. Individuals who are hearing
impaired or speech impaired may call
the Federal Relay Service at 800–877–
8339 for TTY assistance.
Public Availability of Comments
A list of all completed and currently
active 5-year reviews can be found at
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/speciesfive-year-review.
Authority
This document is published under the
authority of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.).
Amy L. Lueders,
Regional Director, Southwest Region, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2021–09379 Filed 5–4–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:06 May 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
SUMMARY:
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection
Act (16 U.S.C. 668–668d; ‘‘Act’’)
prohibits take of bald eagles and golden
eagles except pursuant to Federal
regulations. The Act authorizes the
Secretary of the Interior to issue
regulations to permit the ‘‘taking’’ of
eagles for various purposes, provided
the taking is compatible with the
preservation of eagles. Under
regulations in part 22 of title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, we, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(hereafter, ‘‘the Service’’), issue permits
to authorize take of eagles that is
incidental to an activity (50 CFR 22.26).
In carrying out our responsibility to
issue these types of permits for windenergy facilities, we use a collision-risk
model (CRM) to predict the number of
bald and golden eagles that may be
taken at facilities (USFWS 2013; New et
al. 2015). The CRM allows the Service
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to produce conservative initial take
estimates for new wind energy facilities,
as well as to produce more precise
updated estimates for operating
facilities that have collected fatality
monitoring data. The take estimates
provided by the CRM allow the Service
to ensure authorized eagle take numbers
are within the eagle management unit
take limits, and provide the data
necessary to assess effects of take
permits on local area eagle populations,
both required actions under our
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement for eagle take permits
(USFWS 2016a). The CRM incorporates
prior information (priors) on eagle
exposure and eagle collision probability,
and these priors are updated as new
information becomes available as part of
the adaptive management process
associated with eagle take permitting
(USFWS 2016b).
In 2017 the Service undertook a
review of newly available information
and generated updated priors for the
CRM. The Service announced the
updated priors and availability of a
report summarizing the analysis in a
June 21, 2018, Federal Register notice
(83 FR 28858) that solicited public
comment on the proposed priors and
how the Service should use the updated
bald eagle priors in the CRM. The report
is available at: https://www.fws.gov/
migratorybirds/pdf/management/
crmpriorsreport2018.pdf or as described
above in ADDRESSES (at
www.regulations.gov in Docket No.
FWS–HQ–MB–2017–0092). At the
request of wind-industry
representatives, the Service reopened
the comment period for another 30 days
on November 13, 2018 (83 FR 56365).
Alternatives Considered and Summary
of Responses
In our notice of availability, we
presented updated priors for golden
eagle exposure and golden eagle
collision probability. We also developed
and presented for the first time priors
for bald eagle exposure and collision
probability. These updated and new
priors incorporate substantial new
information, and their adoption thus
constitutes an improvement in the
scientific information used by the
Service to estimate the effects of our
take permits on eagle populations.
The alternatives for both eagle species
that we considered and presented for
public comment are as follows:
Alternative 1—Use the updated
species-specific priors, and use the 80th
quantile of the CRM fatality estimates as
the initial permitted take number for
permits, as is the current practice.
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 5, 2021 / Notices
Alternative 2—Use the updated
species-specific priors, and because bald
eagle populations are increasing and
additional take is sustainable (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service 2016a,c), accept a
more risk-tolerant CRM approach for the
initial permitted take number for bald
eagles.
Alternative 3—Given the limitations
in data available to inform the bald
eagle priors, initiate an expertelicitation process to further refine the
bald eagle priors.
Of the 58 comments received during
the two comment periods, we received
substantive comments from several
entities, including States, environmental
organizations, and wind-energy
organizations or companies. Many of the
comments stated that the Service’s CRM
either overestimated or underestimated
eagle fatalities, or stated that another
method for estimating exposures and
collisions should be adopted. Because
the CRM has been the subject of three
prior peer reviews and three rounds of
public comment (February 18, 2011;
May 2, 2013; May 6, 2016 [U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 2011, 2013, 2016]),
including being considered in detail as
part of the 2016 revisions to the
regulations pertaining to incidental take
of eagles and eagle nests (81 FR 91494,
December 16, 2016), we regarded these
comments as outside the scope of this
notice and we did not consider them
further.
Most of the comments were in
support of Alternative 1, use of the 80th
quantile of the species-specific fatality
distributions. However, many comments
from the wind industry opposed
Alternative 1 and asserted that approach
was not based on best available science
and results in unduly burdensome
higher costs for eagle take that is
unlikely to occur.
Industry largely objected to
Alternative 2 because the underlying
priors are still based on data that does
not represent all locations in the United
States. One energy coalition suggested
that Alternative 2 should not be used
because a confidence interval should
not be prematurely selected until the
Service has validated the model. This
validation process should include
public input to ensure that those
impacted by the take estimates have an
opportunity to evaluate and opine on
the impacts of any confidence interval
selected. A major trade association
commented that Alternative 2 using the
50th or 60th quantile of the fatality
distribution for bald eagles as the
permitted take number would be
preferable to the current use of the 80th
quantile.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:06 May 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
Industry rejected Alternative 3 on the
grounds that available data and reports
on eagle and wind interaction exist that
could be used to inform a reasonable
risk assessment approach without the
need for eliciting scientific and
technical judgments from experts.
However, of the State fish and wildlife
agencies that commented, most
supported Alternative 3 because a
further refined national bald eagle prior
using expert elicitation would help to
inform the uncertainty in the exposure
and collision probability for bald eagles
given their variable densities across the
landscape.
Service Decision
The Service is adopting Alternative 2
as the best approach given currently
available data and status of eagle
populations. We will use the 80th
quantile of the fatality distribution as
the initial permitted take number for
golden eagles and the 60th quantile of
the fatality distribution as the initial
permitted take number for bald eagles.
We regard this approach as a suitable
balance between the more secure status
of bald eagles and the uncertainty in
their take estimates that is consistent
with our 2016 Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement
(USFWS 2016a).
With regard to initiating an expert
elicitation process, we agree with many
States that gathering additional
information from either experts or
industry has the potential to further
refine the bald eagle priors. For this
reason, we may choose to engage in an
expert elicitation process in the future.
In the meantime, the best method to
gain the information needed to develop
a more accurate assessment is through
fatality monitoring of permitted
projects. The fatality-estimation process
using the CRM is an exercise in adaptive
management, and as more data are
collected the Service will continue to
revise and update the priors over time.
Should it become apparent that a
different risk balance is appropriate
based on additional data, we will
address that scenario in conjunction
with a future update of the CRM. In
order to streamline the adaptive
management process and ensure rapid
adoption of new scientific information
going forward, in the future the Service
will update and implement the updated
priors for both eagle species as soon as
sufficient new information becomes
available to warrant an update. We will
notify the public of future updates by
posting them on the Service’s Eagle
Management web page (https://
www.fws.gov/birds/management/
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23979
managed-species/eaglemanagement.php) or the equivalent.
Upon publication of this notice, we
will use the following data and risk
tolerances for initial fatality predictions
at wind energy facilities: The updated
species-specific exposure and collision
priors for both eagle species; the 80th
quantile of the fatality distribution as
the permitted take number for golden
eagles; and the 60th quantile of the
fatality distribution as the permitted
take number for bald eagles. We will use
the updated priors for all eagle
incidental take permits issued to wind
facilities, including those issued under
the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) when eagles are covered in
a habitat conservation plan as a nonlisted species. (See 50 CFR 22.11(a).)
Literature Cited
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011.
Migratory Birds; Draft Eagle Conservation
Plan Guidance. 76:9529–9530.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013.
Migratory Birds; Eagle Conservation Plan
Guidance: Module 1—Land-Based Wind
Energy, Version 2. Federal Register 78:25758.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016a.
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement for the Eagle Rule Revision.
Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC
USA. https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/
pdf/management/FINAL-PEIS-Permits-toIncidentally-Take-Eagles.pdf.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016b.
Eagle Permits; Revisions to Regulations for
Eagle Incidental Take and Take of Eagle
Nests. Federal Register 242:91494–91553.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016c. Bald
and golden eagles: Population demographics
and estimation of sustainable take in the
United States, 2016 update. Status Reports,
Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC
USA. https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/
pdf/management/EagleRuleRevisionsStatusReport.pdf.
Martha Williams,
Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the
Delegated Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2021–09362 Filed 5–4–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLHQ310000.L13100000.PP0000; OMB
Control No. 1004–0179]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Helium Contracts
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of information collection;
request for comment.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 5, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23978-23979]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09362]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2017-0092; 91200-FF09M20300-189-FXMB123109EAGLE]
Updated Collision Risk Model Priors for Estimating Eagle
Fatalities at Wind Energy Facilities
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces our adoption of updated species-specific
eagle exposure and collision probabilities used to generate fatality
estimates for consideration in issuing eagle incidental take permits to
wind-energy facilities under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
This action will improve our ability to carry out our statutory
responsibility to ensure conservation of bald eagles and golden eagles
when issuing those permits.
DATES: May 6, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Information related to this notice, including the public
comments received in response to the previous Federal Register notices,
is available at the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2017-0092.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Millsap, at 505-559-3963
(telephone), or [email protected] (email). Individuals who are
hearing impaired or speech impaired may call the Federal Relay Service
at 800-877-8337 for TTY assistance.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d;
``Act'') prohibits take of bald eagles and golden eagles except
pursuant to Federal regulations. The Act authorizes the Secretary of
the Interior to issue regulations to permit the ``taking'' of eagles
for various purposes, provided the taking is compatible with the
preservation of eagles. Under regulations in part 22 of title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(hereafter, ``the Service''), issue permits to authorize take of eagles
that is incidental to an activity (50 CFR 22.26).
In carrying out our responsibility to issue these types of permits
for wind-energy facilities, we use a collision-risk model (CRM) to
predict the number of bald and golden eagles that may be taken at
facilities (USFWS 2013; New et al. 2015). The CRM allows the Service to
produce conservative initial take estimates for new wind energy
facilities, as well as to produce more precise updated estimates for
operating facilities that have collected fatality monitoring data. The
take estimates provided by the CRM allow the Service to ensure
authorized eagle take numbers are within the eagle management unit take
limits, and provide the data necessary to assess effects of take
permits on local area eagle populations, both required actions under
our Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for eagle take permits
(USFWS 2016a). The CRM incorporates prior information (priors) on eagle
exposure and eagle collision probability, and these priors are updated
as new information becomes available as part of the adaptive management
process associated with eagle take permitting (USFWS 2016b).
In 2017 the Service undertook a review of newly available
information and generated updated priors for the CRM. The Service
announced the updated priors and availability of a report summarizing
the analysis in a June 21, 2018, Federal Register notice (83 FR 28858)
that solicited public comment on the proposed priors and how the
Service should use the updated bald eagle priors in the CRM. The report
is available at: https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/crmpriorsreport2018.pdf or as described above in ADDRESSES (at
www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2017-0092). At the request
of wind-industry representatives, the Service reopened the comment
period for another 30 days on November 13, 2018 (83 FR 56365).
Alternatives Considered and Summary of Responses
In our notice of availability, we presented updated priors for
golden eagle exposure and golden eagle collision probability. We also
developed and presented for the first time priors for bald eagle
exposure and collision probability. These updated and new priors
incorporate substantial new information, and their adoption thus
constitutes an improvement in the scientific information used by the
Service to estimate the effects of our take permits on eagle
populations.
The alternatives for both eagle species that we considered and
presented for public comment are as follows:
Alternative 1--Use the updated species-specific priors, and use the
80th quantile of the CRM fatality estimates as the initial permitted
take number for permits, as is the current practice.
[[Page 23979]]
Alternative 2--Use the updated species-specific priors, and because
bald eagle populations are increasing and additional take is
sustainable (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2016a,c), accept a more
risk-tolerant CRM approach for the initial permitted take number for
bald eagles.
Alternative 3--Given the limitations in data available to inform
the bald eagle priors, initiate an expert-elicitation process to
further refine the bald eagle priors.
Of the 58 comments received during the two comment periods, we
received substantive comments from several entities, including States,
environmental organizations, and wind-energy organizations or
companies. Many of the comments stated that the Service's CRM either
overestimated or underestimated eagle fatalities, or stated that
another method for estimating exposures and collisions should be
adopted. Because the CRM has been the subject of three prior peer
reviews and three rounds of public comment (February 18, 2011; May 2,
2013; May 6, 2016 [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2011, 2013, 2016]),
including being considered in detail as part of the 2016 revisions to
the regulations pertaining to incidental take of eagles and eagle nests
(81 FR 91494, December 16, 2016), we regarded these comments as outside
the scope of this notice and we did not consider them further.
Most of the comments were in support of Alternative 1, use of the
80th quantile of the species-specific fatality distributions. However,
many comments from the wind industry opposed Alternative 1 and asserted
that approach was not based on best available science and results in
unduly burdensome higher costs for eagle take that is unlikely to
occur.
Industry largely objected to Alternative 2 because the underlying
priors are still based on data that does not represent all locations in
the United States. One energy coalition suggested that Alternative 2
should not be used because a confidence interval should not be
prematurely selected until the Service has validated the model. This
validation process should include public input to ensure that those
impacted by the take estimates have an opportunity to evaluate and
opine on the impacts of any confidence interval selected. A major trade
association commented that Alternative 2 using the 50th or 60th
quantile of the fatality distribution for bald eagles as the permitted
take number would be preferable to the current use of the 80th
quantile.
Industry rejected Alternative 3 on the grounds that available data
and reports on eagle and wind interaction exist that could be used to
inform a reasonable risk assessment approach without the need for
eliciting scientific and technical judgments from experts. However, of
the State fish and wildlife agencies that commented, most supported
Alternative 3 because a further refined national bald eagle prior using
expert elicitation would help to inform the uncertainty in the exposure
and collision probability for bald eagles given their variable
densities across the landscape.
Service Decision
The Service is adopting Alternative 2 as the best approach given
currently available data and status of eagle populations. We will use
the 80th quantile of the fatality distribution as the initial permitted
take number for golden eagles and the 60th quantile of the fatality
distribution as the initial permitted take number for bald eagles. We
regard this approach as a suitable balance between the more secure
status of bald eagles and the uncertainty in their take estimates that
is consistent with our 2016 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement
(USFWS 2016a).
With regard to initiating an expert elicitation process, we agree
with many States that gathering additional information from either
experts or industry has the potential to further refine the bald eagle
priors. For this reason, we may choose to engage in an expert
elicitation process in the future. In the meantime, the best method to
gain the information needed to develop a more accurate assessment is
through fatality monitoring of permitted projects. The fatality-
estimation process using the CRM is an exercise in adaptive management,
and as more data are collected the Service will continue to revise and
update the priors over time. Should it become apparent that a different
risk balance is appropriate based on additional data, we will address
that scenario in conjunction with a future update of the CRM. In order
to streamline the adaptive management process and ensure rapid adoption
of new scientific information going forward, in the future the Service
will update and implement the updated priors for both eagle species as
soon as sufficient new information becomes available to warrant an
update. We will notify the public of future updates by posting them on
the Service's Eagle Management web page (https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/eagle-management.php) or the equivalent.
Upon publication of this notice, we will use the following data and
risk tolerances for initial fatality predictions at wind energy
facilities: The updated species-specific exposure and collision priors
for both eagle species; the 80th quantile of the fatality distribution
as the permitted take number for golden eagles; and the 60th quantile
of the fatality distribution as the permitted take number for bald
eagles. We will use the updated priors for all eagle incidental take
permits issued to wind facilities, including those issued under the
Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) when eagles are covered
in a habitat conservation plan as a non-listed species. (See 50 CFR
22.11(a).)
Literature Cited
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Migratory Birds; Draft
Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance. 76:9529-9530.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Migratory Birds; Eagle
Conservation Plan Guidance: Module 1--Land-Based Wind Energy,
Version 2. Federal Register 78:25758.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016a. Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement for the Eagle Rule Revision. Division
of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Washington, DC USA. https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/FINAL-PEIS-Permits-to-Incidentally-Take-Eagles.pdf.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016b. Eagle Permits; Revisions
to Regulations for Eagle Incidental Take and Take of Eagle Nests.
Federal Register 242:91494-91553.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016c. Bald and golden eagles:
Population demographics and estimation of sustainable take in the
United States, 2016 update. Status Reports, Division of Migratory
Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC USA.
https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/EagleRuleRevisions-StatusReport.pdf.
Martha Williams,
Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the Delegated Authority of the
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-09362 Filed 5-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P