82618 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 198 / Friday, October 11, 2024 / Notices 

Send comments to SAMHSA Reports 

Clearance Officer, 5600 Fisher Lane, 

Room 15E57A, Rockville, MD 20852 or 

email a copy to samhsapra@

samhsa.hhs.gov. Written comments 

should be received by December 10, 

2024. 

Alicia Broadus, 

Public Health Advisor. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23611 Filed 10–10–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4162–20–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

[Docket No. USCG–2024–0784] 

Information Collection Request to 

Office of Management and Budget; 

OMB Control Number: 1625–0013 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an 

Information Collection Request (ICR) to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an 

extension of its approval for the 

following collection of information: 

1625–0013, Plan Approval and Records 

for Load Lines; without change. Our ICR 

describes the information we seek to 

collect from the public. Before 

submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast 

Guard is inviting comments as 

described below. 

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast 

Guard on or before December 10, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Coast Guard docket 

number [USCG–2024–0784] to the Coast 

Guard using the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. 

See the ‘‘Public participation and 

request for comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

A copy of the ICR is available through 

the docket on the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov. Additionally, 

copies are available from: Commandant 

(CG–6P), ATTN: Paperwork Reduction 

Act Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 

Martin Luther King Jr. Ave SE, Stop 

7710, Washington, DC 20593–7710. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.L. 

Craig, Office of Privacy Management, 

telephone 202–475–3528, fax 202–372– 

8405, or email hqs-dg-m-cg-61-pii@

uscg.mil for questions on these 

documents. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

This notice relies on the authority of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., chapter 35, as 

amended. An ICR is an application to 

OIRA seeking the approval, extension, 

or renewal of a Coast Guard collection 

of information (Collection). The ICR 

contains information describing the 

Collection’s purpose, the Collection’s 

likely burden on the affected public, an 

explanation of the necessity of the 

Collection, and other important 

information describing the Collection. 

There is one ICR for each Collection. 

The Coast Guard invites comments on 

whether this ICR should be granted 

based on the Collection being necessary 

for the proper performance of 

Departmental functions. In particular, 

the Coast Guard would appreciate 

comments addressing: (1) the practical 

utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy 

of the estimated burden of the 

Collection; (3) ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of 

information subject to the Collection; 

and (4) ways to minimize the burden of 

the Collection on respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

In response to your comments, we 

may revise this ICR or decide not to seek 

an extension of approval for the 

Collection. We will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period. 

We encourage you to respond to this 

request by submitting comments and 

related materials. Comments must 

contain the OMB Control Number of the 

ICR and the docket number of this 

request, USCG–2024–0784, and must be 

received by December 10, 2024. 

Submitting Comments 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov. If your material 

cannot be submitted using https://

www.regulations.gov, contact the person 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document for 

alternate instructions. Documents 

mentioned in this notice, and all public 

comments, are in our online docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov and can be 

viewed by following that website’s 

instructions. We review all comments 

received, but we may choose not to post 

off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate 

comments that we receive. Additionally, 

if you go to the online docket and sign 

up for email alerts, you will be notified 

when comments are posted. 

We accept anonymous comments. 

Comments we post to https://

www.regulations.gov will include any 

personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

submissions in response to this 

document, see DHS’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

Information Collection Request 

Title: Plan Approval and Records for 

Load Lines—Title 46 CFR Subchapter E. 

OMB Control Number: 1625–0013. 

Summary: This information collection 

is required to ensure that certain vessels 

are not overloaded—as evidenced by the 

submerging of their assigned load line. 

In general, vessels over 150 gross tons 

or 24 meters (79 feet) in length engaged 

in commerce on international or 

coastwise voyages by sea are required to 

obtain a Load Line Certificate. 

Need: 46 U.S.C. 5101 to 5116 provides 

the Coast Guard with the authority to 

enforce provisions of the International 

Load Line Convention, 1966. Title 46 

CFR subchapter E—Load Lines, contains 

the relevant regulations. 

Forms: None. 

Respondents: Owners and operators 

of vessels. 

Frequency: On occasion. 

Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated 

burden has increased from 687 hours to 

782 hours a year, due to an increase in 

the estimated annual number of 

respondents. 

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as 

amended. 

Dated: October 3, 2024. 

Kathleen Claffie, 

Chief, Office of Privacy Management, U.S. 

Coast Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23593 Filed 10–10–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2023–0084; 

FXES11140800000–245–FF08ECAR00] 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

for a General Conservation Plan for the 

Desert Tortoise in California 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; notice of 

public meetings; request for comments. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 198 / Friday, October 11, 2024 / Notices 82619 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), provide this 

notice to open a public review period 

and announce public meetings in 

accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act. We have 

prepared a draft environmental impact 

statement to evaluate the impacts on the 

human environment related to our 

proposal to approve and use a general 

conservation plan for the federally 

threatened desert tortoise (Gopherus 

agassizii) in California to streamline the 

incidental take permitting process under 

the Endangered Species Act. We invite 

comment from the public and local, 

State, Tribal, and Federal agencies. 

DATES: Submitting Comments: You may 

submit comments via U.S. mail or 

https://www.regulations.gov/. 

• Online: Comments submitted at 

https://www.regulations.gov/ must be 

received by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on 

December 10, 2024. 

• U.S. mail: Hardcopy comments 

must be received or postmarked on or 

before December 10, 2024. (See 

ADDRESSES.) 

Virtual Public Meetings: The Service 

will hold virtual public meetings on 

November 12, 2024, from 10 a.m. to 

11:30 a.m. Pacific Time, and on 

November 13, 2024, from 6 p.m. to 8:30 

p.m. Pacific Time. For more 

information, see Public Comments and 

Virtual Public Meetings under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

ADDRESSES: 

Obtaining Documents: The document 

this notice announces, as well as any 

comments and other materials that we 

receive, will be available for public 

inspection online in Docket No. FWS– 

R8–ES–2023–0084 at https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Submitting Comments: You may 

submit comments by one of the 

following methods: 

• Online: https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

on Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2023–0084. 

• U.S. mail: Public Comments 

Processing; Attn: Docket No. FWS–R8– 

ES–2023–0084; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service; MS: PRB/3W; 5275 Leesburg 

Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041–3803. 

We will post all comments on https:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post online any 

personal information that you provide. 

We request that you submit comments 

by only one of the methods above. For 

additional information about submitting 

comments, see Public Comments and 

Virtual Public Meetings under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

Public Meetings: A link and access 

instructions for the virtual public 

meetings will be posted to https://

www.fws.gov/office/carlsbad-fish-andwildlife at least 1 week prior to the 

public meeting dates. 

Reviewing U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Comments on the 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement: 

See EPA’s Role in the EIS Process under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter Sanzenbacher, by telephone at 

442–222–0165 or by email at peter_

sanzenbacher@fws.gov. Individuals in 

the United States who are deaf, 

deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a 

speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, 

TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), 

have prepared a draft environmental 

impact statement (DEIS) pursuant to the 

requirements of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

amended (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.), to analyze the effects on the 

human environment of approving and 

using a general conservation plan (GCP) 

for the federally threatened desert 

tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) to 

streamline the incidental take 

permitting process in California. This 

notice of availability opens a public 

comment period on the DEIS and 

announces public meetings. The U.S. 

Bureau of Land Management (Bureau) is 

serving as a cooperating agency under 

NEPA, as some lands under 

consideration for mitigation activities 

are administered by the Bureau. 

Background 

Section 9 of the Endangered Species 

Act, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 

et seq.), prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of fish and 

wildlife species listed as endangered 

under section 4 (16 U.S.C. 1538 and 16 

U.S.C. 1533, respectively). The ESA’s 

implementing regulations extend, under 

certain circumstances, the prohibition of 

take to threatened species (50 CFR 

17.31). Under section 3 of the ESA, the 

term ‘‘take’’ means to ‘‘harass, harm, 

pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, 

capture, or collect, or attempt to engage 

in any such conduct’’ (16 U.S.C. 

1532(19)). The regulations define 

‘‘harm’’ as ‘‘an act which actually kills 

or injures wildlife. Such act may 

include significant habitat modification 

or degradation where it actually kills or 

injures wildlife by significantly 

impairing essential behavioral patterns, 

including breeding, feeding, or 

sheltering’’ (50 CFR 17.3). Regulations at 

50 CFR 17.3 further define ‘‘harass’’ as 

‘‘an intentional or negligent act or 

omission which creates the likelihood of 

injury to wildlife by annoying it to such 

an extent as to significantly disrupt 

normal behavioral patterns which 

include, but are not limited to, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering.’’ 

Under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA, 

the Service may issue permits to 

authorize incidental take of listed fish 

and wildlife species. The implementing 

regulations for incidental take permits 

define ‘‘incidental taking’’ as ‘‘any 

taking otherwise prohibited, if such 

taking is incidental to, and not the 

purpose of, the carrying out of an 

otherwise lawful activity’’ (50 CFR 

17.3). Section 10(a)(2)(B) of the ESA 

lists the criteria for the Service’s 

issuance of incidental take permits to 

non-Federal entities. If the applicant 

meets the following criteria, the Service 

must issue an incidental take permit: 

1. The taking will be incidental; 

2. The applicant will, to the 

maximum extent practicable, minimize 

and mitigate the impacts of such taking; 

3. The applicant will ensure that 

adequate funding for the plan will be 

provided; 

4. The taking will not appreciably 

reduce the likelihood of the survival 

and recovery of the species in the wild; 

and 

5. The applicant will carry out any 

other measures that the Service may 

require as being necessary or 

appropriate for the purposes of the 

conservation plan in support of issuance 

of an incidental take permit. 

Desert Tortoise General Conservation 

Plan 

The Service proposes to approve and 

use a GCP that would provide specific 

direction regarding how to best 

minimize, mitigate, and monitor the 

effects of incidental take to applicants 

seeking ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permits 

for the desert tortoise within a defined 

permit area. Under standard practices, 

applicants are responsible for 

developing the ‘‘conservation plan’’ 

required by section 10(a)(2)(A) of the 

ESA; the development of the 

conservation plans and iterative reviews 

require substantial time and effort, both 

for the applicant and Service staff. The 

Service then must prepare a NEPA 

document for public review, address 

any comments received from the public, 

conduct an internal consultation 

pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, 

and conclude the NEPA process before 

reaching a decision on whether to issue 

the incidental take permit. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
82620 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 198 / Friday, October 11, 2024 / Notices 

In almost every incidental take permit 

that the Service has processed since the 

listing of the desert tortoise in 1990 

(April 2, 1990; 55 FR 12178), the 

applicant and Service agreed on the 

most appropriate means of minimizing, 

mitigating, and monitoring the effects of 

take on desert tortoises soon after the 

applicant contacted us. However, the 

standard practices described in the 

previous paragraph generally require at 

least 12 to 24 months to complete. A 

streamlined approach to the process, 

with more direction upfront from 

Service staff, would result in more 

effective means of minimizing and 

mitigating impacts to desert tortoises 

and allow staff to expend more time on 

implementing recovery work, with 

overall concomitant positive effects on 

the recovery of the species. Such a 

process would also provide a higher 

degree of certainty to applicants. 

Within the GCP planning area, we 

propose to cover commercial, 

agricultural, residential, industrial, and 

infrastructure activities within the 

defined permit area. The permit area 

generally encompasses non-Federal 

lands outside of desert tortoise 

conservation areas. The GCP would also 

cover the operations and maintenance of 

existing non-Federal facilities, such as 

utilities’ transmission and distribution 

lines. The Service intends the covered 

activities to be inclusive; that is, we will 

consider for coverage any future activity 

that has the same general effects on the 

desert tortoise as those described in the 

GCP. The Service will retain the right to 

recommend that the non-Federal entity 

pursue an individual incidental take 

permit if the scope of the proposed 

activity is likely to affect desert tortoises 

in a manner that we have not 

considered in the GCP. 

Additionally, the permit area includes 

existing rights-of-way in the California 

desert where the Federal agency no 

longer has discretionary authority; 

consequently, interagency consultation, 

pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, 

does not apply in these areas. The GCP 

would apply to such rights-of-way that 

lie within conservation areas. Within 

conservation areas, the GCP would be 

available only for projects intended to 

improve the safety and functionality of 

the existing right-of-way; the Service 

will not consider its use appropriate if 

the proposed project changes the basic 

function of the existing right-of-way. 

We define ‘‘permit area’’ and 

‘‘mitigation area’’ in the GCP. The 

permit area includes the locations 

where the incidental take permits 

deriving from the GCP would be 

available to applicants. The permit area 

is comprised of non-Federal lands 

outside of desert tortoise conservation 

areas in southern Inyo County, eastern 

Kern County, northern Los Angeles 

County, the desert portion of San 

Bernardino County, eastern Riverside 

County, eastern San Diego County, and 

portions of Imperial County and the 

existing non-Federal rights-of-way 

across Federal lands under certain 

circumstances. 

The required mitigation for issuance 

of an incidental take permit would 

occur within the boundaries of the 

mitigation area. The mitigation area 

generally includes ‘‘desert tortoise 

conservation areas,’’ which the recovery 

plan for the desert tortoise describes as 

Bureau conservation lands (e.g., 

California Desert National Conservation 

Lands and areas of critical 

environmental concern) as identified in 

the California Desert Conservation Area 

Plan, as amended by the Desert 

Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, 

National Park Service lands, and other 

conservation areas or easements 

managed for desert tortoises. 

The Mojave population of desert 

tortoise is the only species proposed for 

coverage under the GCP. The Service 

listed the Mojave population of desert 

tortoise (all desert tortoises north and 

west of the Colorado River in Arizona, 

Utah, Nevada, and California) as 

threatened on April 2, 1990. We 

designated critical habitat for the desert 

tortoise in California, Nevada, Arizona, 

and Utah in a final rule published 

February 8, 1994 (59 FR 5820). 

The GCP would include an analysis of 

impacts to the desert tortoise that are 

likely to result from covered activities. 

We anticipate that incidental take 

permits under the GCP would result in 

the take of few desert tortoises. We have 

reached that conclusion because, since 

the listing of the desert tortoise in 1990, 

we have issued 14 incidental take 

permits for the desert tortoise in the 

planning area that have resulted in the 

translocation of approximately 52 desert 

tortoises. We are unaware of any desert 

tortoises that died during permitted 

activities. 

Additionally, we have limited the 

GCP’s permit area to portions of the 

desert where conservation of the desert 

tortoise in the long term is infeasible, 

with the exception of non-Federal 

rights-of-way that comprise a negligible 

portion of the planning area. Based on 

analysis in the original and revised 

recovery plans for the desert tortoise, we 

consider recovery of the desert tortoise 

to be infeasible in the permit area 

because most of the land there is in 

private ownership. It would be 

practically and financially impossible to 

secure and manage habitat in that area, 

which also frequently includes rural 

development and its associated impacts 

to desert tortoises. 

We have not proposed a numerical 

limit on the number of desert tortoises 

that use of the GCP may affect. Instead, 

if five large desert tortoises die because 

of activities for which incidental take 

was permitted under the GCP in any 

calendar year, we will assess the 

adequacy of the minimization measures 

in the GCP and the specific measures 

associated with individual incidental 

take permits. If administrative changes 

to the minimization measures in the 

GCP or the specific measures associated 

with the individual incidental take 

permits are not practical, we will not 

approve additional incidental take 

permits in that calendar year unless we 

amend the GCP. We would track the 

aggregate amount of incidental take and 

make that information available to the 

public. 

The biological goals of the GCP would 

focus on minimizing the amount of take 

of desert tortoises and maximizing the 

conservation benefits of the mitigation 

that results from the issuance of 

incidental take permits. To minimize 

the number of desert tortoises that 

proposed actions would kill or injure, 

the Service would require permittees to 

implement standard methods, such as 

fencing work areas, surveying for 

individuals within project areas, 

translocating desert tortoises to suitable 

off-site habitat, implementing worker 

education programs, implementing 

measures to manage predators on site, 

and contributing to the regional 

management program for common 

ravens (Corvus corax). Over the period 

of time that the GCP would be available 

for use, the Service would update 

protocols for various protective 

measures, such as testing for disease as 

new information and improved methods 

become available. 

To mitigate the effects of take and 

maximize conservation benefits for 

desert tortoises, the GCP would provide 

applicants with several options, such as 

land acquisition (securing and 

conserving habitat), non-acquisition 

(restoration and enhancement of 

habitat), purchase of mitigation bank 

credits, other actions needed to protect 

and conserve desert tortoises, or a 

combination of these activities. The 

Service would require that all mitigation 

occur within the conservation areas, as 

defined in the recovery plan for the 

desert tortoise and mapped in the GCP, 

that will contribute to long-term 

conservation of desert tortoise. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 198 / Friday, October 11, 2024 / Notices 82621 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Compliance 

Public Scoping Period 

On July 17, 2023 (88 FR 45437), in 

accordance with NEPA, we published a 

Federal Register notice to open a public 

scoping period and announce our 

intention to prepare an EIS to evaluate 

the impacts on the human environment 

related to our proposal to approve and 

use a GCP for the federally threatened 

desert tortoise. We took comments until 

August 31, 2023, and also held three 

public meetings during the scoping 

period. 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

The Service, with input from the 

Bureau as a cooperating agency, and 

after full consideration of all comments 

received during the public scoping 

period and during the meetings, has 

prepared a DEIS to evaluate the impacts 

of the proposed GCP action on the 

human environment, consistent with 

the purpose and goals of NEPA. This 

DEIS was prepared pursuant to the 

Council on Environmental Quality’s 

(CEQ) implementing NEPA regulations 

at 40 CFR parts 1500–1508, which 

became effective on May 20, 2022 (April 

20, 2022, 87 FR 23453), and in 

compliance with the amendments to 

NEPA included in the Fiscal 

Responsibility Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 118– 

5, 137 Stat. 10 (2023)). The DEIS 

analyzes the proposed action and a 

reasonable range of alternatives to the 

proposed action. The environmental 

consequences of each alternative, 

including the direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects, were analyzed to 

determine if significant impacts to the 

human environment would occur. On 

May 1, 2024, CEQ published a final rule 

amending the NEPA implementing 

regulations (89 FR 35442). The final rule 

became effective on July 1, 2024, and 

applies to NEPA processes that begin 

after that date (40 CFR 1506.12). The 

NEPA process for this GCP began in July 

2023. 

We analyzed three alternatives in 

detail in the DEIS. 

Alternative 1—No-Action Alternative: 

Under the no-action alternative, the 

Service would not approve and use the 

GCP to streamline the incidental take 

permit process for the desert tortoise in 

California. The Service would continue 

to evaluate and process individual 

applications for incidental take permits 

on a case-by-case basis and prepare a 

NEPA document for each incidental 

take permit application; this process 

generally takes 12 to 24 months to 

complete. 

Alternative 2—Proposed Action: The 

proposed action is the Service’s 

approval and use of the GCP for the 

desert tortoise in California. The GCP 

would streamline the permitting process 

for incidental take permits by providing 

clear direction to project proponents 

regarding the appropriate measures to 

minimize the incidental take of desert 

tortoises in the permit area and to 

mitigate incidental take in the 

mitigation area. The approximately 

15.2-million-acre (ac) planning area to 

be covered by the GCP comprises a large 

portion of the desert tortoise’s range in 

California, including portions of Inyo, 

Kern, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, 

Riverside, San Diego, and Imperial 

Counties. Within the planning area, the 

Service has identified a permit area, 

which includes approximately 2.6 

million ac of non-Federal lands outside 

of desert tortoise conservation areas and 

existing non-Federal rights-of-way 

across Federal lands where proponents 

can apply for incidental take permits for 

the desert tortoise for covered activities. 

The Service also has identified an 

approximately 8.6-million-ac mitigation 

area on Bureau conservation lands (e.g., 

areas of critical environmental concern, 

California Desert National Conservation 

Lands), National Park Service lands, and 

other conservation areas or easements 

managed for desert tortoises where 

mitigation resulting from issuance of 

incidental take permits under the GCP 

would occur. 

Alternative 3—Action Alternative: 

Under alternative 3, the Service would 

pursue approval of a GCP for the desert 

tortoise to facilitate the issuance of 

incidental take permits, as described 

under alternative 2. The permit area, 

covered activities in the permit area, 

and measures to reduce the level of 

impact from covered activities would be 

as described under the proposed action. 

Under this alternative, mitigation would 

only occur on lands within desert 

tortoise conservation areas within 

National Park Service lands, California 

Desert National Conservation Lands 

administered by the Bureau, and nonFederal lands that either are in 

conservation management or that are 

acquired for conservation management. 

Other lands included in the mitigation 

area for the proposed action, such as 

areas of critical environmental concern, 

would not be eligible for mitigation; this 

would reduce mitigation area lands to 

approximately 7.7 million ac. 

EPA’s Role in the EIS Process 

The EPA is charged under section 309 

of the Clean Air Act with reviewing all 

Federal agencies’ EISs and commenting 

on the adequacy and acceptability of the 

environmental impacts of proposed 

actions. Under the CEQ NEPA 

regulations, EPA is also responsible for 

administering the EIS filing process. 

EPA is also publishing a notice in the 

Federal Register announcing this DEIS. 

The publication date of EPA’s notice of 

availability is the official beginning of 

the public comment period. EPA serves 

as the repository (EIS database) for EISs 

prepared by Federal agencies. You may 

search for EPA comments on EISs, along 

with EISs themselves, at https://

cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/ 

action/eis/search. 

Public Comments and Virtual Public 

Meetings 

Submitting Comments 

You may submit your comments and 

materials on the draft GCP and the DEIS 

by one of the methods in ADDRESSES. We 

specifically request information on the 

following: 

1. Biological information, analysis, 

and relevant data concerning the desert 

tortoise, other wildlife, and ecosystems. 

2. Potential effects that the proposed 

GCP could have on the desert tortoise, 

and other endangered or threatened 

species, and their habitats, including the 

interaction of the effects of covered 

activities with climate change and other 

stressors. 

3. Adequacy of the GCP to minimize 

and mitigate the impact of the taking on 

desert tortoise, including but not limited 

to conservation measures, conditions on 

covered activities, and adaptive 

management procedures. 

4. Potential effects that the proposed 

action could have on other aspects of 

the human environment, including 

effects on plants and animals, water 

resources, and aesthetic, historic, 

cultural, economic, social, 

environmental justice, climate change, 

or health effects. 

5. The alternatives analysis conducted 

by the Service, including the 

alternatives analyzed, the range of 

alternatives analyzed, and the 

alternatives considered but not analyzed 

in detail. 

6. The presence of historic 

properties—including archaeological 

sites, buildings and structures, historic 

events, sacred and traditional areas, and 

other historic preservation concerns—in 

the proposed permit area, which are 

required to be considered in project 

planning by the National Historic 

Preservation Act. 

7. Cumulative effects, which are 

effects on the environment that result 

from the incremental effects of the 

action when added to the effects of 

other past, present, and reasonably 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
82622 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 198 / Friday, October 11, 2024 / Notices 

foreseeable actions, as well as any 

connected actions that are closely 

related and should be discussed in the 

same DEIS. 

8. The alternatives, information, and 

analyses submitted during the public 

scoping period and the summary 

thereof. 

9. Other information relevant to the 

GCP and its impacts on the human 

environment. 

Virtual Public Meetings 

We will conduct two virtual public 

meetings. See DATES and ADDRESSES for 

the dates and times. During the virtual 

public meetings, the Service and Bureau 

will present information pertinent to the 

GCP and give the public the opportunity 

to ask questions about the draft GCP and 

DEIS. Oral or written comments will not 

be accepted during the meeting; written 

comments may be submitted by one of 

the methods listed in ADDRESSES. 

Reasonable Accommodations 

Persons needing reasonable 

accommodations to participate in the 

public meetings should contact the 

Service’s Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife 

Office, using one of the methods listed 

in ADDRESSES. To allow sufficient time 

to process requests, please make contact 

at least 15 days before the public 

meetings. Information regarding this 

proposed action is available in 

alternative formats upon request. 

Public Availability of Comments 

You may submit your comments and 

materials by one of the methods listed 

in ADDRESSES. Before including your 

address, phone number, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—might 

be made publicly available at any time. 

Although 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. Comments and materials 

we receive, as well as references for 

supporting documentation we used in 

preparing the DEIS, will be available for 

public inspection online in Docket No. 

FWS–R8–ES–2023–0084 at https://

www.regulations.gov/ (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Next Steps and Decision To Be Made 

After public review and comment, the 

Service will evaluate the GCP, DEIS, 

and any comments received to 

determine whether the GCP provides an 

adequate basis for meeting the 

requirements of section 10(a)(2)(B) of 

the ESA for future permit applications 

submitted under the GCP. The decision 

whether to approve and use the GCP 

will also be informed by the data, 

analyses, and findings in the EIS and 

public comments received on the DEIS 

and GCP. The Service will document its 

determinations in an ESA section 10 

findings document, ESA section 7 

biological opinion, and NEPA record of 

decision that will be developed at the 

conclusion of the ESA and NEPA 

compliance processes. FWS expects to 

submit a final EIS (FEIS) for publication 

in the Federal Register by May 2025. At 

least 30 days after the FEIS is published, 

we expect that the Service will complete 

a record of decision on the GCP in 

accordance with applicable timeframes 

established in 40 CFR 1506.11 (2022) 

and issue a decision on the GCP. The 

current estimate for the issuance of 

record of decision is July 2025. 

Authority 

We provide this notice in accordance 

with the requirements of NEPA and its 

implementing regulations (40 CFR 

1503.1 and 1506.6; 2022). 

Michael J. Senn, 

Assistant Regional Director—Ecological 

Services, California-Great Basin Region, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, 

California. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23573 Filed 10–10–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[BLM_NM_FRN_MO4500183052] 

Notice of Availability for the Organ 

Mountains-Desert Peaks National 

Monument Proposed Resource 

Management Plan and Final 

Environmental Impact Statement, New 

Mexico 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (NEPA), as amended, and the 

Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act of 1976, as amended, the Bureau of 

Land Management (BLM) has prepared 

a Proposed Resource Management Plan 

(RMP) and Final Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) for the Organ 

Mountains-Desert Peaks National 

Monument (Monument) and by this 

notice is announcing the start of the 30- 

day protest period for the Proposed 

RMP. 

DATES: This notice announces a 30-day 

protest period to the BLM on the 

Proposed RMP beginning on the date 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) publishes its Notice of 

Availability (NOA) of the Proposed RMP 

and Final EIS in the Federal Register. 

The EPA usually publishes its NOAs on 

Fridays. Protests must be postmarked or 

electronically submitted on the BLM’s 

ePlanning website during the 30-day 

protest period. 

ADDRESSES: The Proposed RMP, Final 

EIS, and associated documents are 

available on the BLM ePlanning project 

website at: https://eplanning.blm.gov/ 

eplanning-ui/project/92170/510. 

Documents pertinent to this proposal 

may also be examined at the BLM Las 

Cruces District Office, 1800 Marquess 

Street, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88005. 

Instructions for filing a protest with 

the BLM for the Proposed RMP and 

Final EIS for the Monument can be 

found at: https://www.blm.gov/ 

programs/planning-and-nepa/publicparticipation/filing-a-plan-protest and at 

43 CFR 1610.5–2. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

BLM RMP Project Manager Patrick Rich 

at 405–579–7154 or prich@blm.gov or 

acting Monument Manager Lane Hauser 

at 575–525–4358 or lhauser@blm.gov. 

Individuals in the United States who are 

deaf, deaf-blind, hard of hearing, or 

have a speech disability may dial 711 

(TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services for 

contacting Patrick Rich. Individuals 

outside the United States should use the 

relay services offered within their 

country to make international calls to 

the point-of-contact in the United 

States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

decision area is located in Don ̃ a Ana 

County, New Mexico, and encompasses 

approximately 496,591 acres of BLMmanaged public lands. Resources on 

Monument lands administered by the 

BLM within the decision area are 

currently managed under the 1993 

Mimbres RMP, as amended, and 

additional guidance directed in 

Presidential Proclamation 9131. 

The BLM identified, analyzed, and 

considered mitigation to address 

reasonably foreseeable impacts 

associated with land use allocations and 

resource management goals and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1