17496 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 

Applicant: James Young, Issaquah, WA; 

PRT–68172A 

Applicant: James McNicol, Chandler, 

AZ; PRT–66555A 

Brenda Tapia, 

Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch 

of Permits, Division of Management 

Authority. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7094 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R9–FHC–2011–N244; 94300–1122– 

0000–Z2] 

RIN 1018–AX45 

Fisheries and Habitat Conservation 

and Migratory Birds Programs; Final 

Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of the final voluntary LandBased Wind Energy Guidelines 

(Guidelines). These Guidelines 

supersede the Service’s 2003 voluntary 

interim guidelines for land-based wind 

energy development. They respond to 

accelerated development of land-based 

wind energy generation projects in the 

United States. These voluntary 

Guidelines provide developers and 

agency staff with an iterative process to 

make sound decisions in selecting sites 

to avoid, minimize and compensate for 

adverse effects to wildlife, particularly 

birds and bats, and their habitats 

resulting from construction, operation, 

and maintenance of land-based wind 

energy facilities. 

DATES: These voluntary Guidelines are 

effective March 26, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: The Guidelines may be 

downloaded from http://www.fws.gov/ 

windenergy. To request a copy of the 

draft Guidelines by U.S. Mail, write: 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 

North Fairfax Drive; Room 840, 

Arlington, VA 22203. You may also 

send an email request to: 

windenergy@fws.gov. Please specify 

whether you want to receive a hard 

copy by U.S. mail or an electronic copy 

by email. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christy Johnson-Hughes, Division of 

Habitat and Resource Conservation, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Department 

of the Interior, (703) 358–1922. 

Individuals who are hearing-impaired or 

speech-impaired may call the Federal 

Relay Service at 1–800–877–8337 for 

TTY assistance, 24 hours a day, 7 days 

a week. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service is to work with others to 

conserve, protect, and enhance fish, 

wildlife, plants, and their habitats for 

the continuing benefit of the American 

people. As part of this mission, we 

implement statutes including the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.), the Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act (MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 703–711), and the 

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 

(BGEPA; 16 U.S.C. 668–668d). These 

statutes prohibit taking of federally 

listed species, migratory birds, and 

eagles unless otherwise authorized. 

Increased energy demands and the 

nationwide goal to increase energy 

production from renewable sources 

have intensified the development of 

renewable energy facilities, including 

wind energy. The Service supports 

renewable energy development that is 

compatible with wildlife conservation. 

The voluntary Guidelines will 

provide Service staff, developers, 

landowners and other stakeholders with 

a tool to assist in avoiding, minimizing, 

and compensating for significant 

adverse impacts to wildlife and their 

habitats. Adherence to the Guidelines is 

voluntary and does not relieve any 

individual, company, or agency of the 

responsibility to comply with laws and 

regulations. However, if a violation of 

law occurs, the Service will consider a 

developer’s documented efforts to 

communicate with the Service and 

adhere to the Guidelines. The 

Guidelines include a Communications 

Protocol that provides guidance to both 

developers and Service personnel 

regarding expectations of appropriate 

communication and documentation. 

The Service anticipates that these 

Guidelines, when used in concert with 

appropriate regulatory tools and other 

existing policies, provide the best 

practical approach for wildlife 

conservation. 

Background 

In July 2003, the Service released 

voluntary interim guidelines for landbased wind energy projects to assist 

developers in avoiding, minimizing, 

and/or compensating for effects to 

wildlife and their habitats related to 

land-based wind energy facilities. In 

2007, the Secretary of the Interior 

(Secretary) established the Wind 

Turbine Guidelines Advisory 

Committee (Committee) under the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 

U.S.C. App.). The Committee submitted 

final recommendations to the Secretary 

on March 4, 2010. The Service 

appreciates all the time and effort that 

members of the Committee devoted to 

developing their recommendations, as 

well as since that time, as the Service 

developed these final Guidelines. The 

Service used the recommendations as a 

basis to develop the Service’s draft 

Guidelines, which we circulated for 

comment in February 2011 (76 FR 9590, 

February 18, 2011). 

We announced several opportunities 

for the public to attend Committee 

meetings and to submit comments or 

otherwise participate in the 

development of the Guidelines as 

follows: 

Federal Register citation Date of publication Purpose of notice 

76 FR 18238 .................................................. April 1, 2011 .................................................. Announced Committee meeting of April 27, 2011. 

76 FR 20006 .................................................. April 11, 2011 ................................................ Announced availability of teleconference line for 

April 27, 2011, Committee meeting. 

76 FR 38677 .................................................. July 1, 2011 ................................................... Announced Committee meeting of July 20–21, 

2011. 

76 FR 48174 .................................................. August 8, 2011 .............................................. Announced Committee meeting of August 23, 

2011. 

76 FR 54481 .................................................. September 1, 2011 ........................................ Announced Committee meeting of September 20– 

21, 2011. 

The Service received more than 

30,000 comments (summarized below) 

on the draft Guidelines from a wide 

range of interests, including Federal, 

State, and local agencies; tribes; wind 

energy developers; utilities; national 

and local wildlife conservation 

organizations; universities; and 

concerned citizens. The Service made 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 17497 

subsequent revisions of draft Guidelines 

available on July 13, 2011, and 

September 13, 2011, for additional 

public comment. Following circulation 

of both revised drafts, we reconvened 

the Committee to obtain input from 

Committee members as well as the 

public attending the Committee 

meetings (July 20–21 and September 

20–21, 2011). Approximately an 

additional 1,000 comments were 

received on the revised drafts. 

The final Guidelines incorporate 

elements from the Committee’s 

recommendations, the draft Guidelines, 

as well as extensive public comment 

received during comment periods and 

the public Committee meetings. The 

majority of the comments focused on 

either the need to make the Guidelines 

mandatory or to keep them strictly 

voluntary. The following is a succinct 

summary of comments received and our 

responses. 

Comment: The Service received a 

large number of comments stating that 

the Guidelines should be made 

mandatory. We also received a large 

number of comments supporting 

voluntary Guidelines. 

Response: The Service believes that 

voluntary initiatives to avoid and 

minimize impacts to species of concern 

can be effective. The wind industry has 

clearly expressed its willingness to take 

seriously the need to site and operate 

projects in a responsible manner. 

Furthermore, under existing authorities, 

the Service cannot mandate compliance 

with the Guidelines as currently 

written. Mandatory application would 

require a significant narrowing of the 

scope of the Guidelines. As currently 

written, the Guidelines contemplate a 

process in which developers consider 

proposed wind energy projects in the 

context of the entire landscape, focusing 

on species and habitats that may be 

significantly impacted by their proposed 

project. The Guidelines anticipate that 

developers will include in their review 

species beyond the scope of Service 

jurisdiction, such as prairie chickens 

and non-ESA-listed bat species, which 

can be negatively affected by wind 

energy development. The Guidelines 

also contemplate that developers will 

include in their review impacts to rare 

habitats that are currently unprotected 

but that are important to conserve. The 

Service believes that the comprehensive 

approach described by the Guidelines in 

combination with use of existing tools 

such as Habitat Conservation Plans, Bird 

and Bat Conservation Strategies, and 

Eagle Conservation Plans will provide 

robust conservation of wildlife and their 

habitats. If appropriate, based on 

experience gained under these 

Guidelines, the Service can revisit their 

voluntary nature in the future. 

Comment: The Guidelines should 

clarify consultation requirements and 

Service decision-making. 

Response: The final Guidelines clarify 

that wind energy developers may decide 

to move from one tier to the next, but 

that this decision should be made in 

two-way communication with Service 

field offices. The final Guidelines 

commit the Service to providing 

feedback to wind project developers 

within 60 days of receiving such 

communications, and to respond in 

writing to developers before or during 

Tier 3 of a project (prior to initiating 

construction) with any concerns or 

recommendations. 

Comment: The Service received many 

comments supporting a phase-in period 

of 6 months to 2 years for currently 

operating projects and those under 

development. Other comments 

supported immediate use of the final 

Guidelines. 

Response: The Service has decided 

not to ‘‘phase-in’’ the implementation of 

the Guidelines, but rather to employ 

them immediately with publication of 

this notice. To address concerns about 

the lack of a phase-in period, the final 

Guidelines clarify that: (a) All projects 

that commence after the effective date 

should apply them; (b) developers are 

not expected to go back to earlier tiers 

for projects in development or 

operation; and (c) operating projects 

should adhere to Tiers 4 and 5 as 

appropriate. The Service believes that 

because the Guidelines are voluntary, 

there is no need to delay 

implementation beyond publication. 

Many developers and the Service are 

currently discussing numerous wind 

energy projects and how to reduce the 

impacts of those projects on species of 

concern. 

Comment: The Guidelines should 

include species-specific science 

information rather than have the 

information provided elsewhere, such 

as on the Service’s Web site. 

Response: While the draft version of 

the Guidelines did place speciesspecific information on the Service’s 

Web site, this process was cumbersome 

for reviewers and inefficient for 

practitioners. Therefore, we moved the 

recommended methods and metrics to 

be used for bird and bat species back 

into the Guidelines in the Chapters 

focused on pre- and post-construction 

studies. 

Comment: The Guidelines should 

discuss the appropriateness of the 

various methods and metrics available, 

rather than list them. 

Response: The Service agreed with 

commenters that providing context and 

discussion of the methods and metrics 

within the Guidelines is helpful to the 

reader. The final Guidelines provide 

discussion of the various methods and 

metrics available for pre- and postconstruction studies, as had been 

recommended by the Committee. 

Comment: The Guidelines should be 

peer reviewed, and the Committee 

recommendations should also be peer 

reviewed. 

Response: The draft Guidelines were 

peer reviewed by the Wildlife Society. 

We have posted the peer review on the 

FWS Wind Energy Web site. The 

Committee recommendations were not 

separately peer reviewed. The Service 

determined that it is not necessary to 

conduct a peer review on the 

recommendations prepared by the 

Committee because the final Guidelines 

have evolved since the 

recommendations were provided to the 

Secretary in 2010. 

Comment: The Guidelines should 

differentiate between emerging issues 

and established science. Commenters 

felt that while there may be valid 

concern over certain issues such as the 

effects of wind turbine noise on 

wildlife, these issues have not been 

widely studied and are not yet 

understood well enough to be addressed 

by individual wind energy developers. 

Response: Tiers 3 and 4 (pre- and 

post-construction studies and 

monitoring) point to topics typically 

considered when determining what to 

study, including: Collision, habitat loss 

and degradation, displacement and 

behavioral changes, and indirect effects. 

The Guidelines include collision and 

habitat loss as topics for wind project 

developers to assess and monitor in the 

tiered approach. Others, such as the 

effects of sound, are mentioned in Tier 

5 in the context of research. These are 

topics that the Service would not expect 

a developer to assess except in rare 

circumstances. However, the tiered 

approach does not preclude them from 

consideration during preconstruction 

studies if they are determined to be a 

viable concern. 

Comment: Several comments 

pertained to how the Service should 

incorporate new science as it becomes 

available. We received suggestions to 

create an advisory panel that meets 

annually; open any new information to 

public comment; and ensure that the 

addition of any new information 

conforms to the principles outlined in 

the Committee’s recommendations. 

Response: The final Guidelines do not 

establish an advisory panel to 

incorporate new information. A process 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
17498 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 

for recommending which new studies or 

methods/metrics developers should use 

is not identified in the Guidelines. The 

Service will consider the best way to 

incorporate new science as it becomes 

available. 

Comment: The Guidelines should 

adopt a risk-based approach to study 

duration as opposed to requiring a 

minimum of 3 years of preconstruction 

studies. 

Response: The Service received many 

differing opinions on the appropriate 

duration of preconstruction studies in 

Tier 3. While some felt that a minimum 

of 3 years is prohibitive, others felt that 

it was not long enough. The final 

Guidelines remove the default of 3 years 

of preconstruction monitoring and 

instead recommend that studies be of 

sufficient duration and intensity to 

ensure that adequate data are collected 

to characterize wildlife use of the 

proposed project area as determined in 

communication with the Service. This 

approach allows for data collection 

commensurate with the level of risk, as 

opposed to an across-the-board standard 

that does not take into consideration the 

circumstances at individual sites. 

Comment: The scope of the 

Guidelines should be ‘‘species of 

concern’’ as originally used by the 

Committee in their recommendations, as 

opposed to ‘‘fish, wildlife and their 

habitats.’’ 

Response: After reviewing the 

definition of ‘‘species of concern,’’ the 

Service agrees that this term is most 

appropriate as it narrows the focus of 

developer’s studies to species that may 

potentially be significantly impacted by 

a wind energy project. The final 

Guidelines use the term ‘‘species of 

concern’’ for scope of species covered. 

Comment: The Guidelines should not 

apply to distributed and communityscale wind energy projects. The costs 

associated with adhering to the 

Guidelines are prohibitive for smaller 

scale projects and will stall or prevent 

the development of small-scale wind 

energy. 

Response: The Service recognizes that 

studies have not shown small-scale 

wind energy projects to have significant 

adverse impacts to wildlife. However, 

the Service also recognizes that a poorly 

sited project, no matter the size, has the 

potential to cause significant impacts. 

For this reason, distributed and 

community-scale projects are not 

‘‘exempted’’ from the Guidelines. The 

Guidelines are voluntary. No wind 

energy developer is bound to follow 

them. The final Guidelines clarify that, 

in most cases, small-scale wind energy 

projects will not have significant 

adverse impacts, but developers should 

still do a Tier 1 and/or Tier 2 analysis 

using publicly available information 

(e.g., internet searches) to ensure that 

the risk for potential impacts is low. 

The final Guidelines preserve many 

elements from the previous drafts 

including descriptions of the 

information needed to identify, assess, 

mitigate, and monitor the potential 

adverse effects of wind energy projects 

on wildlife and their habitats; and 

flexibility to accommodate the unique 

circumstances of each project. The 

framework helps developers understand 

how to avoid or minimize effects to 

certain species, which is important for 

compliance with a number of laws, 

including MBTA, BGEPA, and ESA. 

The levels of surveying, monitoring, 

assessing, and collecting other 

information will vary among different 

wind-energy projects due to the diverse 

geographic, climatological, and 

ecological features of potential wind 

development sites. Founded upon a 

‘‘tiered approach’’ for assessing 

potential effects to species of concern 

and their habitats, the guidelines are 

intended to promote: Compliance with 

relevant laws and statutes; the use of 

scientifically rigorous survey, 

monitoring, assessment, and research 

designs proportionate to the potential 

risk to affected species; the 

accumulation of comparable data across 

the landscape; the identification of 

trends and patterns of effects; and, 

ultimately, the improved ability to 

predict and resolve effects locally, 

regionally, and nationally. 

Authority: The authorities for this action 

are the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 703–711); and the Bald 

and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 668–668d). 

Dated: March 20, 2012. 

Daniel M. Ashe, 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7011 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R4–ES–2012–N032; 

FXES11130400000C2] 

Recovery Plan for the Endangered 

Spigelia gentianoides (Gentian 

Pinkroot) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of document availability. 

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service, announce the availability of the 

final recovery plan for Spigelia 

gentianoides (Gentian pinkroot), a 

threatened species restricted to six 

locations within three counties in the 

Florida Panhandle and two counties in 

Alabama. The recovery plan includes 

specific recovery objectives and criteria 

to be met in order to reclassify this 

species from endangered to threatened 

status under the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (Act). 

ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of 

the recovery plan by contacting the 

Panama City Field Office (PCFO), by 

U.S. mail at U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 1601 Balboa Ave, Panama City, 

FL 32405, or by telephone at (850) 769– 

0552. Alternatively, you may visit the 

Fish and Wildlife Service’s recovery 

plan Web site at http://www.fws.gov/ 

endangered/species/recovery-plans.html 

or the PCFO Web site at http:// 

www.fws.gov/panamacity/ 

listedplants.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Vivian Negro ́n-Ortiz, at the above 

address, or by telephone at (850) 769– 

0552, ext. 231. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

We listed Spigelia gentianoides 

(Gentian pinkroot) as an endangered 

species under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.) on November 26, 1990 (55 FR 

49046). Spigelia gentianoides is a small 

herbaceous plant and has two varieties: 

Var. gentianoides is restricted to five 

locations within three counties in the 

Florida Panhandle and southern 

Alabama, and var. alabamensis is 

limited to Bibb County, Alabama. The 

loss or alteration of habitat is thought to 

be the primary reason for the species’ 

decline. The extant plants of var. 

gentianoides are located in firedependent longleaf pine-wiregrass and 

pine-oak-hickory ecosystems. Much of 

this habitat has been reduced in its 

range, converted to pine plantation, and 

managed without fire. Variety 

alabamensis is a narrow endemic, 

restricted to the Bibb County Glades 

(open, almost treeless areas within 

woodlands). Some of the glades are 

owned and protected by The Nature 

Conservancy. However, this variety is 

threatened by potential development of 

privately owned glades. 

Restoring an endangered or 

threatened animal or plant to the point 

where it is again a secure, selfsustaining member of its ecosystem is a 

primary goal of the endangered species 

program. To help guide the recovery 

effort, we are preparing recovery plans 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES