28860 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Notices 

permits to make updates to the priors in 

the future. 

Alternative 1 would mean that for a 

similar level of eagle use observed at a 

project site, the Service would use 

higher fatality estimates for bald eagles 

than for golden eagles. Alternative 2 

would be a decision by the Service to 

be more ‘risk-tolerant’ for bald eagles. 

This would mean that initial fatality 

predictions would be lower, however it 

would also likely mean that more 

permits would have to be amended to 

increase the permitted take over time 

(i.e., the Service would be 

underestimating take more often). 

Alternative 3 would be a decision by the 

Service that more information is needed 

to understand the potential variability of 

exposure and collision probability for 

bald eagles. Such a process could result 

in either higher or lower (or more 

variable) priors. With this notice, we are 

soliciting input from the public on these 

three alternatives, and we will take 

those comments into consideration in 

making a final decision. 

Many commenters on the draft 2016 

rule urged the Service to adopt changes 

to the golden eagle CRM priors based on 

a recent peer-reviewed scientific article 

by Bay et al. (2016). Service staff 

coordinated with authors of the Bay et 

al. paper in development of this update, 

and all data used in the Bay et al. paper 

that were available to us and that met 

our criteria were incorporated. The 

Service decided not to incorporate the 

results of the Bay et al. paper directly, 

however, for two main reasons. First, 

the Service could access and utilize 

more data than were used in the Bay et 

al. paper, and so our updated priors 

incorporate more recent information 

from a wider range of projects and sites 

than were used by Bay et al. Second, the 

Bay et al. analysis used a fatality 

estimator that did not account for the 

possibility of undetected eagle deaths 

during mortality monitoring when no 

dead eagles were found. The Service 

uses models in our update that account 

for imperfect detection when dead 

eagles are not encountered during 

monitoring, because there is ample 

evidence that finding no dead eagles 

does not mean there were no eagle 

fatalities. Thus, although the Service’s 

updated collision probability for golden 

eagles is higher than that reported by 

Bay et al., our approach is more accurate 

and consistent with our risk-averse 

policy with respect to estimating and 

managing eagle take. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Written comments we receive become 

part of the public record associated with 

this action. Before including your 

address, phone number, email address, 

or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, you 

should be aware that the 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. All submissions from 

organizations or businesses, and from 

individuals identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses, will be 

made available for public disclosure in 

their entirety. 

Literature Cited 

Bay, K., Nasman, K., Erickson, W., Taylor, 

K., Kosciuch, K. (2016). Predicting Eagle 

Fatalities at Wind Facilities, Journal of 

Wildlife Management 80:1000–1010. 

New, L., Bjerre, E., Millsap, B., Otto, M.C., 

Runge, M.C. (2015). A Collision Risk Model 

to Predict Avian Fatalities at Wind Facilities: 

An Example Using Golden Eagles, Aquila 

chrysaetos, PLOS ONE, 

journal.pone.0130978. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Eagle 

conservation plan guidance. Module 1–landbased wind energy. Version 2. Division of 

Migratory Bird Management, Washington, 

DC. URL http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/ 

pdf/management/eagleconservationpla

nguidance.pdf. 

Dated: April 6, 2018. 

Susan Combs, 

Senior Advisor to the Secretary, Exercising 

the Authority of the Assistant Secretary for 

Fish and Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13358 Filed 6–20–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Geological Survey 

[GX18LC00BM3FD00; OMB Control Number 

1028–0079] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; North American Breeding 

Bird Survey 

AGENCY: U.S. Geological Survey, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of information collection; 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is 

proposing to renew an information 

collection (IC). 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before August 

20, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Send your comments on the 

information collection request (ICR) by 

mail to the U.S. Geological Survey, 

Information Collections Clearance 

Officer, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS 

159, Reston, VA 20192; or by email to 

gs-info_collections@usgs.gov. Please 

reference OMB Control Number 1028– 

0079 in the subject line of your 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request additional information about 

this ICR, contact Keith Pardieck by 

email at kpardieck@usgs.gov or by 

telephone at 301–497–5843. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the 

U.S. Geological Survey, in accordance 

with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, provide the general public and 

other Federal agencies with an 

opportunity to comment on proposed, 

revised, and continuing collections of 

information. This helps us assess the 

impact of our information collection 

requirements and minimize the public’s 

reporting burden. It also helps the 

public understand our information 

collection requirements and provide the 

requested data in the desired format. 

We are soliciting comments on the 

proposed ICR that is described below. 

We are especially interested in public 

comment addressing the following 

issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to 

the proper functions of the USGS; (2) 

will this information be processed and 

used in a timely manner; (3) is the 

estimate of burden accurate; (4) how 

might the USGS enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (5) how might the 

USGS minimize the burden of this 

collection on the respondents, including 

through the use of information 

technology. 

Comments that you submit in 

response to this notice are a matter of 

public record. We will include or 

summarize each comment in our request 

to OMB to approve this ICR. 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 may 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. 

Abstract: Respondents supply the 

U.S. Geological Survey with avian 

population data for more than 600 North 

American bird species. The survey data, 

resulting population trend estimates, 

and relative abundance estimates will 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Notices 28861 

be made available via the internet and 

through special publications, for use by 

Government agencies, industry, 

education programs, and the general 

public. We will protect information 

from respondents considered 

proprietary under the Freedom of 

Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and its’ 

implementing regulations (43 CFR part 

2), and under regulations at 30 CFR 

250.197, ‘‘Data and information to be 

made available to the public or for 

limited inspection.’’ Responses are 

voluntary. No questions of a ‘‘sensitive’’ 

nature are asked. 

Title of Collection: North American 

Breeding Bird Survey. 

OMB Control Number: 1028–0079. 

Form Number: None. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents/Affected Public: 

Individuals. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Respondents: 1,600. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Responses: 2,600. 

Estimated Completion Time per 

Response: 11 minutes. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Burden Hours: 28,600. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. 

Frequency of Collection: Annually. 

Total Estimated Annual Non-hour 

Burden Cost: $141,700. Mileage costs 

are on average $54.50 per response, 

based on approximate 100-mile round 

trip for data collection per response and 

2018 federal mileage rate of $0.545 per 

mile. 

An agency 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. 

The authorities for this action are the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). 

John French, 

Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Director. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13274 Filed 6–20–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4338–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Reclamation 

[RR01016000; XXXR4524KK; 

RX.41129361.1010000] 

Notice of Intent To Contract for 

Hydroelectric Power Development on 

the Bureau of Reclamation’s North Unit 

Main Canal, Deschutes Project, 

Madras, Oregon 

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to accept 

proposals, select lessee(s), and contract 

for hydroelectric power development. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Reclamation 

(Reclamation) has received a proposal to 

allow hydroelectric power development 

on the North Unit Main Canal (NUMC) 

under a Lease of Power Privilege 

(LOPP). To ensure fair and open 

competition, Reclamation is soliciting 

competing proposals at this time. 

DATES: Submit the written proposal on 

or before November 19, 2018. Late 

proposals will not be considered. 

Delayed delivery to the Regional Power 

Manager’s office due to failures or 

misunderstandings of the entity and/or 

of mail, overnight, or courier services 

will not excuse lateness, and 

accordingly, are advised to provide 

sufficient time for delivery. 

ADDRESSES: Send eight copies of the 

written proposal to Mr. Joseph 

Summers, Regional Power Manager, 

Bureau of Reclamation, 1150 North 

Curtis Road, Suite 100, Boise, ID 83706; 

telephone (208) 378–5290. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Questions regarding proposal 

requirements or technical data available 

for the North Unit Main Canal may be 

directed to Mr. Jake Nink, Bureau of 

Reclamation, 1150 North Curtis Road, 

Suite 100, Boise, ID 83706; telephone 

(208) 378–5090; email jnink@usbr.gov. 

Upon receipt of written request, Mr. 

Nink will also arrange an informational 

meeting and/or site visit with interested 

entities. In this regard, Reclamation 

reserves the right to schedule a single 

meeting and/or visit to address the 

questions of all entities that have 

submitted questions or requested site 

visits. 

Specific information related to 

operations and maintenance of the canal 

system may be obtained from Mr. Mike 

Britton, Bureau of Reclamation, North 

Unit Irrigation District Manager, 2024 

Northwest Beech Street, Madras, OR 

97741; telephone (541) 475–3625; email 

to mbritton@northunit.com. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

General Overview. The North Unit 

Irrigation District (NUID) operates and 

maintains the NUMC on the Deschutes 

Project located in the Deschutes River 

Basin, which supplies irrigation water 

to nearly 59,000 acres of farmland in 

Jefferson County, Oregon. Reclamation 

is considering allowing hydroelectric 

power development on the NUMC 

under a Lease of Power Privilege 

(LOPP). 

A LOPP is a congressionally 

authorized alternative to Federal 

hydroelectric power development. It is 

a contractual right given to a non-federal 

entity to use a Reclamation asset for 

electric power generation consistent 

with Reclamation project purposes. 

Terms of a LOPP shall not exceed 40 

years. General authority under 

Reclamation law for a LOPP includes, 

among others, the Town Sites and 

Power Development Act of 1906 (43 

U.S.C. 522), the Reclamation Project Act 

of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485h(c)) (1939 Act), 

and the Bureau of Reclamation Small 

Conduit Hydropower Development and 

Rural Jobs Act of 2013 (Act of August 

9, 2013, 127 Stat. 498). 

Reclamation will be responsible for 

compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

related to any project selected for 

consideration pursuant to this Notice of 

Intent. Reclamation will also lead 

necessary consultation with American 

Indian Tribal Governments and 

compliance with the National Historic 

Preservation Act, Endangered Species 

Act, and other related environmental 

regulations for all elements of the 

proposed project. A LOPP may be 

issued only after Reclamation has 

determined that NEPA and any other 

regulatory compliance requirements are 

completed. 

Project Definition and Location 

On August 7, 2017, Reclamation 

received a formal proposal for nonfederal hydroelectric power 

development from Kinet Inc. at 12 sites 

on the NUMC. Kinet Inc. proposes to 

develop these sites utilizing a new 

technology called linear Pelton turbines. 

This solicitation is exclusive to the 

following 12 NUMC sites: 

Site Name—Mile 2 South. 

Latitude Longitude—44.082201– 

121.286401. 

Canal Mile Maker—1.78 

Head (m)—6.1. 

Flow (cms)—20. 

Site Name—Mile 2 North. 

Latitude Longitude—44.086971– 

121.274233. 

Canal Mile Marker—2.11. 

Head (m)—6.1. 

Flow (cms)—20. 

Site Name—Mile 3. 

Latitude Longitude—44.092839– 

121.256296. 

Canal Mile Marker—3.52. 

Head (m)—6.1. 

Flow (cms)—20. 

Site Name—Mile 18. 

Latitude Longitude—44.251184– 

121.128517. 

Canal Mile Marker—18.34. 

Head (m)—6.71. 

Flow (cms)—21. 

Site Name—Mile 19. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1