30 Day FR Notice

jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES

36248

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices

Comment: Twenty-five percent
decline is too large of an interval to
serve as a trigger mechanism for review.
Response: The goal of the Plan is to
detect a 25-percent or greater change in
occupied bald eagle nests over any
period, measured at 5–year intervals
based on an 80 percent chance of
detecting such a change. We believe this
is a goal that both ensures continued
recovery under the ESA and is costeffective. If a 25-percent decline is
detected, it means a reduction to a level
still recognized as recovered under the
ESA. If such declines are detected, we,
in conjunction with the States, will
investigate causes of those declines. At
the end of the 20–year monitoring
program, we will coordinate with States
and our other partners to conduct a final
review and provide recommendations to
ensure a properly managed population
of the recovered bald eagle.
Comment: Implementation involves
potential sampling bias due to variable
observer experience and familiarity with
nesting territories.
Response: We have structured
training, pre-survey preparation, and
survey protocols to minimize potential
sampling bias. Though experienced bald
eagle observers may be familiar with
specific nests, pilot studies showed that
the observers were able to change
mindsets from ‘‘searching habitat’’ in
Area plots to ‘‘determining the status of
specific known list nests’’ in List plots,
without issue. Using the dual-observer
method to determine individual
detection probabilities for observers will
help account for differences in observer
experience. In planning Area plots
survey routes, observers will be given
maps that show habitat, but not the
location of nests, allowing survey route
planning to be based on habitat
characteristics.
Comment: Conducting a large-scale
monitoring project every 5 years could
create staffing problems.
Response: Staffing will require open
and clear communication among the
States, tribes, and the Service. If State
staff are not available for surveys, we
will draw upon local Service offices,
tribal biologists, retired Service and
State employees, and experienced
volunteers to fill in as observers.
Comment: There is a lack of a
comprehensive monitoring program for
environmental contaminants.
Response: We worked with the U.S.
Geological Survey to develop a
searchable database/library dedicated to
contaminants investigations of bald
eagle, osprey, and peregrine falcons.
The objective was to create a readily
available source of information to
consider should the bald eagle (or

VerDate Nov<24>2008

16:04 Jul 21, 2009

Jkt 217001

peregrine) population decline. This
database provides biologists an
overview of the most recent findings of
contaminant effects on these species. If
additional studies are needed during
post-delisting monitoring, the database
will clarify what has been studied and
what has not.
Comment: The phrase ‘‘broad
geographic areas’’ in the section on
Habitat implies that the analysis of
survey data may be accomplished on
something less than a rangewide scale.
Response: This is correct. If trends in
nest occupancy significantly decline
over broad geographic areas, whether
rangewide or more regionally, we will
investigate a change in available nesting
habitat as a possible cause and take
appropriate actions, as feasible.
Comment: Customized parameters
may be required in certain local
situations.
Response: We agree and have
modified the Plan accordingly.
Comment: The definition of bald eagle
habitat in the Plan, especially the size
of water bodies required, may not be
appropriate for some geographic
regions, especially the Southwest.
Response: We modified the Plan to
reflect that local conditions may warrant
modifications to the habitat being
considered. Input from local eagle
biologists will be necessary in these
unique or localized conditions.
Comment: Surveys based on Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) will not
work in some States (e.g., eagle
distribution is linear and follows major
waterways which cross multiple BCRs).
Response: We recognize some of the
limitations of this approach, but still
maintain it is the most appropriate for
application across broad geographic
areas. We will work with local biologists
to further refine the stratification on a
local level.
Comment: The boundary between the
Northern Pacific Rainforest BCR and the
Great Basin BCR, although correctly
mapped in the Plan, is an incorrect
depiction of the margin between the two
ecoregions. This has resulted in
inappropriate numbers being used in
calculations of nests in the BCR tables
in the Plan.
Response: We have modified this
portion of the Plan to reflect that we
will work with local biologists and
others to further refine the BCR
boundaries to more accurately reflect
habitat groupings and, as appropriate,
modify calculations of nests and nest
densities per BCR.
We again invite comments concerning
this information collection on:
(1) Whether or not the collection of
information is necessary, including

PO 00000

Frm 00086

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

whether or not the information will
have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the
burden for this collection of
information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on
respondents.
Comments that you submit in
response to this notice are a matter of
public record. 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 OMB in your comment to
withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that it will be done.
Dated: June 23, 2009
Hope Grey,
Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Fish and Wildlife Service.
FR Doc. E9–17387 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am
BILLING CODE 4310–55–S

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
U.S. Geological Survey
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Comment Request
AGENCY: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of an extension of an
information collection (1028–0082).
SUMMARY: To comply with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), we are notifying the public that
we have submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) an
information collection request (ICR) for
the extension of the currently approved
paperwork requirements for Bird
Banding and Recovery Reports. This
collection consists of two forms
(Application for Federal Bird Banding
or Marking Permit and Reporting
Encounter of Marked Bird with a Metal
Federal Band (Recovery Report) and an
electronic database (Bandit). We may
not conduct or sponsor and a person is
not required to respond to a collection
of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
DATES: You must submit comments on
or before August 21, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Please submit written
comments on this information
collection directly to the Office of

E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM

22JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices
Management and Budget (OMB) Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attention: Desk Officer for the
Department of the Interior via e-mail to
OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov or fax at
202–395–5806; and identify your
submission as 1028–1082. Please also
submit a copy of your written comments
to Phadrea Ponds, USGS Information
Collection Clearance Officer, 2150–C
Center Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80525
(mail); (970) 226–9230 (fax); or
pponds@usgs.gov (e-mail). Use OMB
Control Number 1028–0082 in the
subject line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bruce Peterjohn by mail at USGS
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center,
12100 Beech Forest Rd., Laurel, MD
20708, or by telephone at (301) 497–
5646.

jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES

I. Supplementary Information
Abstract: The primary role of the Bird
Banding Laboratory (BBL) is to support
the use of bird banding and banding
data by researchers and managers
engaged in science, conservation, and
management of birds. The BBL collects
information using two forms and one
electronic database: (1) Application for
Federal Bird Banding or Marking
Permit, (2) Reporting Encounter of
Marked Bird with a Metal Federal Band
(Recovery Report), and (3) Bandit.
Application for Federal Bird Banding or
Marking Permit is used to identify
individuals and evaluate their purpose,
need, and qualifications to hold a
permit. The Recovery Report is used by
individuals that encounter a banded
bird to report the information to the
banding lab. All of the information on
the bird and the person reporting the
bird are stored in the Bandit database.
Bandit is an electronic database and is
the latest in a long series of programs
aimed at helping bird banders manage
and submit their data for any number of
banded birds. The principal use of
Bandit is to store and transfer banding
data to the BBL and the Canadian Bird
Banding Office (BBO) during bird
banding operations.
II. Data
OMB Control Number: 1028–0082.
Title: Bird Banding and Recovery
Reports.
Type of Request: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondent Obligation: The Recovery
Report is voluntary. The Permit
Application and Bandit are required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Frequency of Collection: On occasion.
Affected Public: Individuals,
businesses, universities, organizations,
and States.

VerDate Nov<24>2008

16:04 Jul 21, 2009

Jkt 217001

Estimated Number of Responses:
89,378.
Annual Burden Hours: 28,048 (275 for
applications; 4,250 for recovery reports;
and 23,523 for Bandit).
Estimated Reporting and
Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-Hour Cost’’
Burden: We have not identified any
‘‘non-hour cost’’ burdens associated
with this collection of information.
III. Request for Comments
On February 6, 2009, we published a
Federal Register notice (74 FR 6304)
announcing that we would submit this
ICR to OMB for approval and soliciting
comments. The comment period closed
on April 7, 2009. We did not receive any
comments in response to that notice.
We again invite comments concerning
this ICR on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the agency to perform its duties,
including whether the information is
useful; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, usefulness, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden on the respondents, including
the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology.
Comments that you submit in
response to this notice are a matter of
public record. 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 anytime. 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.
USGS Information Collection
Clearance Officer: Phadrea Ponds, 970–
226–9445.
Dated: July 14, 2009.
Susan D. Haseltine,
Associate Director for Biology, U.S. Geological
Survey.
[FR Doc. E9–17370 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4311–AM–P

PO 00000

Frm 00087

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

36249

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R1–R–2009–N110]; [1265–0000–
10137–S3]

Guam National Wildlife Refuge, Yigo,
Guam
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: draft
comprehensive conservation plan and
environmental assessment; notification
of open house meetings; request for
comments.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of our draft comprehensive
conservation plan and environmental
assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for the Guam
National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) for
public review and comment. It describes
our proposal for managing the Refuge
for the next 15 years. In the Draft CCP/
EA we describe alternatives, including
our preferred alternative, to manage the
Refuge for the 15 years following
approval of the final CCP.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we
need to receive your written comments
by August 24, 2009.
We will hold two public meetings; see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for details.
ADDRESSES: Additional information
concerning the Refuge can be found on
the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/
guam/. You may submit comments,
requests for more information, or
request for copies of the Draft CCP/EA
by any of the following methods.
E-mail:
FW1PlanningComments@fws.gov.
Include ‘‘Guam Refuge’’ in the subject
line of the message.
Fax: Attn: Project Leader, (671) 335–
5098.
U.S. Mail: Project Leader, Guam
National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box
8134, MOU–3, Dededo, Guam 96912.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Project Leader, (671) 355–5096.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction
The unincorporated U.S. territory of
Guahan (Guam) is the largest and
southernmost island in the Marianas
Archipelago, a chain of volcanic islands
in Micronesia. Guahan Island is situated
in the western Pacific Ocean,
approximately 3,800 miles west of
Honolulu and 1,500 miles south of
Tokyo. The Refuge was established in
1993. It is comprised of three units: The
Andersen Air Force Base Overlay
Refuge Unit, the Navy Overlay Refuge

E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM

22JYN1