19684 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 63 / Monday, April 2, 2012 / Notices 

construction studies conducted at 

project sites, bird and bat conservation 

strategies, or any other record that 

supports a developer’s adherence to the 

Guidelines. The extent of the 

documentation will depend on the 

conditions of the site being developed. 

Sites with greater risk of impacts to 

wildlife and habitats will likely involve 

more extensive communication with the 

Service and longer durations of pre- and 

post-construction studies than sites with 

little risk. 

Distributed or community-scale wind 

energy projects are unlikely to have 

significant adverse impacts to wildlife 

and their habitats. The Guidelines 

recommend that developers of these 

small-scale projects do the desktop 

analysis described in Tier 1 or Tier 2 

using publicly available information to 

determine whether they should 

communicate with the Service. Since 

such project designs usually include a 

single turbine associated with existing 

development, conducting a Tier 1 or 

Tier 2 analysis for distributed or 

community-scale wind energy projects 

should incur limited nonhour burden 

costs. These analyses are conducted 

using readily available existing 

information, so the nature of these costs 

may include travel to project sites. For 

such projects, if there is no potential 

risk identified, a developer will have no 

need to communicate with the Service 

regarding the project or to conduct 

studies described in Tiers 3, 4, and 5. 

Adherence to the Guidelines is 

voluntary. Following the Guidelines 

does not relieve any individual, 

company, or agency of the responsibility 

to comply with applicable laws and 

regulations. Developers of wind energy 

projects have a responsibility to comply 

with the law; for example, they must 

obtain incidental take authorization for 

species protected by the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) and/or Bald and 

Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA). 

II. Data 

OMB Control Number: 1018–0148. 

Title: Land-Based Wind Energy 

Guidelines. 

Service Form Number: None. 

Type of Request: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Description of Respondents: 

Developers and operators of wind 

energy facilities. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. 

Frequency of Collection: On occasion. 

ACTIVITY (reporting and recordkeeping) NUMBER of 

respondents 

NUMBER of 

responses 

COMPLETION 

time per response 

TOTAL annual 

burden hours 

NONHOUR 

burden cost 

per response 

TOTAL annual 

nonhour burden cost 

Tier 1 (Desktop Analysis) ........................ 150 150 83 12,450 $2,000 $300,000 

Tier 2 (Site Characterization) ................... 110 110 375 41,250 $4,000 $440,000 

Tier 3 (Pre-construction studies) ............. 80 80 2,880 230,400 $23,000 $1,840,000 

Tier 4 (Post-construction fatality monitoring and habitat studies) .................... 50 50 2,550 127,500 $95,000 $4,750,000 

Tier 5 (Other post-construction studies ... 10 10 2,400 24,000 $191,000 $1,910,000 

TOTALS ............................................ 400 400 ........................ 435,600 ........................ $9,240,000 

Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden 

Cost: $9,240,000. Costs will depend on 

the size and complexity of issues 

associated with each project. These 

expenses may include, but are not 

limited to: Travel expenses for site 

visits, studies conducted, and meetings 

with the Service and other Federal and 

State agencies; training in survey 

methodologies; data management; 

special transportation such as all-terrain 

vehicle or helicopter; equipment needed 

for acoustic, telemetry, or radar 

monitoring, and carcass storage. 

III. Comments 

We invite comments concerning this 

information collection on: 

• Whether or not the collection of 

information is necessary, including 

whether or not the information will 

have practical utility; 

• The accuracy of our estimate of the 

burden for this collection of 

information; 

• Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• 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. We will include or 

summarize each comment in our request 

to OMB to approve this IC. 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. 

Dated: March 26, 2012. 

Tina A.Campbell, 

Chief, Division of Policy and Directives 

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7840 Filed 3–30–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLCAD01000 L12200000.AL 0000] 

Meeting of the California Desert 

District Advisory Council 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, in 

accordance with Public Laws 92–463 

and 94–579, that the California Desert 

District Advisory Council (DAC) to the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 

U.S. Department of the Interior, will 

meet in formal session on Saturday, 

April 21, 2012, from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

in Ridgecrest, Calif. at a location to be 

noticed at least 15 days prior to the 

meeting. There also will be a field trip 

on Friday, April 20, from 8 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m. on BLM-administered lands. 

Field trip details will be posted on the 

DAC web page, http://www.blm.gov/ca/ 

st/en/info/rac/dac.html, when finalized. 

Agenda topics for the Saturday 

meeting will include updates by council 

members, the BLM California Desert 

District manager, five field office 

managers, and council subgroups. Final 

agenda items will be posted on the DAC 

web page listed above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: All DAC 

meetings are open to the public. Public 

comment for items not on the agenda 

will be scheduled at the beginning of 

the meeting Saturday morning. Time for 

public comment may be made available 

by the council chairman during the 

presentation of various agenda items, 

and is scheduled at the end of the 

meeting for topics not on the agenda. 

While the Saturday meeting is 

tentatively scheduled from 8 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., the meeting could conclude 

prior to 4:30 p.m. should the council 

conclude its presentations and 

discussions. Therefore, members of the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 63 / Monday, April 2, 2012 / Notices 19685 

public interested in a particular agenda 

item or discussion should schedule 

their arrival accordingly. 

Written comments may be filed in 

advance of the meeting for the 

California Desert District Advisory 

Council, c/o Bureau of Land 

Management, External Affairs, 22835 

Calle San Juan de Los Lagos, Moreno 

Valley, CA 92553. Written comments 

also are accepted at the time of the 

meeting and, if copies are provided to 

the recorder, will be incorporated into 

the minutes. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Briery, BLM California Desert 

District External Affairs, (951) 697– 

5220. 

Dated: March 19, 2012. 

Raymond Lee, 

Acting Associate District Manager, California 

Desert District. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7785 Filed 3–30–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–40–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

[NPS–NCRO–MONO–0811–7948; 3130–SZM] 

Notice of a Record of Decision; 

Monocacy National Battlefield 

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of a Record of Decision 

on the Final Environmental Impact 

Statement for the General Management 

Plan, Monocacy National Battlefield. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the 

National Park Service (NPS) announces 

the availability of the Record of 

Decision for the General Management 

Plan, Monocacy National Battlefield. 

Maryland. As soon as practicable, the 

NPS will begin to implement the 

preferred alternative as contained in the 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

issued by the NPS on August 27, 2010, 

and summarized in the Record of 

Decision. Copies of the Record of 

Decision may be obtained from the 

contact listed below or online at 

www.nps.gov/mono. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Hayes, National Park Service, 

1100 Ohio Drive SW, Washington, DC 

20242, (202) 619–7277, 

DavidHayes@nps.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Record of Decision includes a statement 

of the decision made, synopses of other 

alternatives considered, the basis for the 

decision, a description of the 

environmentally preferable alternative, 

a finding on impairment of park 

resources and values, a listing of 

measures to minimize environmental 

harm and an overview of public 

involvement in the decision-making 

process. 

Alternative 4 is the Selected 

Alternative. The following course of 

action will occur under Alternative 4: 

All historic structures will be 

preserved and maintained, and the 

historic farmlands will continue to be 

leased to retain their use in agriculture. 

The outbuildings on the Best Farm will 

remain open. The Worthington House 

will be rehabilitated inside and be open 

to visitors with exhibits. 

Monocacy National Battlefield 

administration will be moved into the 

rehabilitated Thomas House. The stone 

tenant house on the Thomas farm will 

contain exhibits and restrooms. 

Monocacy National Battlefield 

maintenance will continue to operate 

from its current location in a 

nonhistoric structure near the Gambrill 

Mill and be redesigned to meet the 

needs for office, vehicle storage, and 

work space. 

Three nonhistoric structures will be 

removed from the landscape—two 

structures are houses constructed of 

cinderblocks, and the third is a historic 

toll house that was moved to the site 

from its original location. It is in 

severely deteriorated condition and 

lacks integrity, and its proximity to the 

intersection of Araby Church Road and 

Maryland Highway 355 (MD–355) 

makes it a safety concern. 

The entrance to the 14th New Jersey 

Monument will be shifted south to 

allow better sight distances entering and 

exiting MD–355. An existing informal 

parking area on the east side of MD–355 

used by fishermen will be closed and 

the area relandscaped. River access will 

continue from the 14th New Jersey 

Monument parking area. A landscaped 

commemorative area will be created at 

the site of the Pennsylvania and 

Vermont Monuments as a location for 

any new memorials that may be added 

to the Monocacy National Battlefield in 

the future. 

Visitors will use their own vehicles to 

drive around the Monocacy National 

Battlefield using existing roadways 

(Baker Valley Road, Araby Church Road, 

and MD–355). The possibility of a 

pedestrian deck spanning Interstate 270 

(I–270) is being evaluated in 

consultation with the Maryland 

Department of Transportation (MDOT) 

as mitigation for MDOT widening of I– 

270 through the Monocacy National 

Battlefield. If the deck proves feasible 

and if an agreement can be worked out, 

it will provide a trail spanning I–270 

that connects the Worthington and 

Thomas farms. 

A new trail extension of the Gambrill 

Mill Trail will enable visitors to walk to 

the railroad junction and on to the sites 

of the Union entrenchments and 

Wallace’s headquarters, all important 

interpretive locations within the 

Monocacy National Battlefield. 

Upgraded interpretation using new 

signs, wayside markers and brochures 

will be developed. Natural resource 

areas along rivers and drainages and 

along the heights behind the 

Worthington farmhouse will remain 

undeveloped and protected. 

This course of action and three 

alternatives were analyzed in the Draft 

and Final Environmental Impact 

Statements. Three actions were key in 

the decision to make Alternative 4 the 

selected alternative. 

First, moving the maintenance and 

administrative functions from the park 

into rental space in nearby Frederick, as 

would have occurred in Alternative 2, 

would have allowed the removal of the 

existing metal maintenance structure 

from the battlefield landscape and the 

commercial leasing of the Thomas 

House. However, this would have 

increased the amount of driving by park 

staff on busy MD–355 and would have 

unduly separated park staff from the 

resources managed and interpreted. It 

would also have placed a commercial 

use within the heart of the national 

battlefield (the lease of the Thomas 

House). 

Second, an alternative transportation 

system in Alternative 2 would have 

decreased visitor driving within the 

park, made visitor access to park areas 

safer by obviating the use of busy MD– 

355, and decreased the size of parking 

areas at each site. This system weighed 

heavily in the selection of Alternative 2 

as the environmentally preferable 

alternative. However, current visitation 

does not make such a system financially 

feasible as a commercial operation and 

there is no guarantee that such a system 

would be financially feasible in the 

future. Both Alternatives 3 and 4 utilize 

personal vehicles to access the park. 

Third, Alternatives 2 and 4 include a 

connection of the Thomas and 

Worthington farms via a deck over I– 

270, while Alternative 3 does not. A 

connection of the two farms is an 

important interpretive tool allowing 

visitors and park staff to easily move 

back and forth between the two 

properties. 

As a result Alternative 4 was selected 

to better connect park staff to the 

resource, (2) to more fully consider the 

financial feasibility of alternative 

transportation at this time, and (3) to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES