1028-New iCoast 30-day FRN published

44858

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 148 / Friday, August 1, 2014 / Notices

associated with the construction,
operation, maintenance, repair, and
decommissioning of oil and gas
pipelines and related well field
activities in Oklahoma. If approved, the
permits would be issued to the
applicants under the Oil and Gas
Industry Conservation Plan Associated
with Issuance of Endangered Species
Act Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permits for the
American Burying Beetle in Oklahoma
(ICP). The ICP was made available for
comment on April 16, 2014 (79 FR
21480), and approved on May 21, 2014
(publication of the FONSI & Canyon
Creek Energy Operating application
notice was on July 25, 2014, 79 FR
43504). The ICP and the associated
environmental assessment/finding of no
significant impact are available on the
Web site at http://www.fws.gov/
southwest/es/oklahoma/ABBICP.
However, we are no longer taking
comments on these documents.
Applications Available for Review and
Comment
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, invite local, State, Tribal, and
Federal agencies, and the public to
comment on the following applications
under the ICP, for incidental take of the
federally listed American burying beetle
(Nicrophorus americanus; ABB). Please
refer to the appropriate permit number
(e.g., Permit No. TE–123456) when
requesting application documents and
when submitting comments. Documents
and other information the applicants
have submitted with this application are
available for review, subject to the
requirements of the Privacy Act (5
U.S.C. 552a) and Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Permit TE–40328B
Applicant: ScissorTail Energy, LLC and
Subsidiaries, Tulsa, OK.
Applicant requests a new permit for
oil and gas upstream and midstream
production, including geophysical
exploration (seismic) and construction,
maintenance, operation, repair, and
decommissioning of oil and gas well
field infrastructure, as well as
construction, maintenance, operation,
repair, decommissioning, and
reclamation of oil and gas gathering,
transmission, and distribution pipeline
infrastructure within Oklahoma.
Permit TE–40320B
Applicant: Enable Midstream Partners,
LP, Oklahoma City, OK.
Applicant requests a new permit for
oil and gas upstream and midstream
production, including geophysical
exploration (seismic) and construction,
maintenance, operation, repair, and

VerDate Mar<15>2010

22:09 Jul 31, 2014

Jkt 232001

decommissioning of oil and gas well
field infrastructure, as well as
construction, maintenance, operation,
repair, decommissioning, and
reclamation of oil and gas gathering,
transmission, and distribution pipeline
infrastructure within Oklahoma.
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 your entire
comment—including your personal
identifying information—may be made
publicly available at any time. While
you can request in your comment that
we withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so. We will not consider anonymous
comments. 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.
Authority
We provide this notice under section
10(c) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
and its implementing regulations (50
CFR 17.22) and NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.) and its implementing
regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).
Dated: July 17, 2014.
Joy E. Nicholopoulos,
Acting Regional Director, Southwest Region.
[FR Doc. 2014–18165 Filed 7–31–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Geological Survey
[GX14MN00CO0000]

Agency Information Collection
Activities: Request for Comments on
iCoast—Did the Coast Change?
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of a new information
collection, iCoast—Did the Coast
Change?
AGENCY:

We (the U.S. Geological
Survey) are notifying the public that we
have submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) the
information collection request (ICR)
described below. To comply with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
and as part of our continuing efforts to

SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00121

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, we invite the general public and
other Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on this ICR.
DATES: To ensure that your comments
on this ICR are considered, we must
receive them on or before September 2,
2014.
ADDRESSES: Please submit written
comments on this information
collection directly to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attention: Desk Officer for the
Department of the Interior, via email:
([email protected]); or
by fax (202) 395–5806; and identify your
submission with ‘OMB Control Number
1028–NEW: iCoast—Did the Coast
Change?’. Please also forward a copy of
your comments and suggestions on this
information collection to the
Information Collection Clearance
Officer, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201
Sunrise Valley Drive MS 807, Reston,
VA 20192 (mail); (703) 648–7195 (fax);
or [email protected] (email).
Please reference ‘OMB Information
Collection 1028–NEW: iCoast—Did the
Coast Change?’ in all correspondence.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sophia B. Liu, Research Geographer,
Center for Coastal and Watershed
Studies, US Geological Survey, 600 4th
Street South, Saint Petersburg, FL
33705, [email protected]. You may
also find information about this
Information Collection Request (ICR) at
www.reginfo.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
As part of its mission to document
coastal change, the USGS has been
acquiring aerial photographs of the coast
before and after each major storm for the
past 18 years to assess damages to the
natural landscape and the built
environment. A typical mission consists
of approximately 2,500 photographs.
The digital photo-archive maintained by
the USGS is a valuable environmental
record containing approximately
140,000 photographs taken before and
after 23 extreme storms along the Gulf
and Atlantic Coasts. At the same time,
the USGS has been developing
mathematical models that predict the
likely interactions between storm surge
and coastal features, such as beaches
and dunes, during extreme storms, with
the aim of predicting areas that are
vulnerable to storm damage. Currently
the photographs are not used to inform
the mathematical models. The models
are based primarily on pre-storm dune
height and predicted wave behavior.

E:\FR\FM\01AUN1.SGM

01AUN1

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 148 / Friday, August 1, 2014 / Notices
If scientists could ‘‘ground truth’’
coastal damage by comparing before and
after photographs of the coast, the
predictive models might be improved. It
is not physically or economically
possible for USGS scientists to examine
all aerial photographs related to each
storm, however, and automation of this
process is also problematic. Image
analysis software is not yet
sophisticated enough to automatically
identify damages to the natural
landscape and the built environment
that are depicted in these photographs;
human perception and local knowledge
are required. ‘iCoast—Did the Coast
Change?’ (hereafter referred to as
‘iCoast’) is a USGS research project to
construct a web-based application that
will allow citizen volunteers to compare
these before and after photographs of
the coast and identify changes that
result from extreme storms through a
process known as ‘crowdsourcing’
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Crowdsourcing). In concept, this
application will be similar to those of
other citizen science image comparison
and classification projects such as the
Citizen Science Alliance’s Cyclone
Center project, (see
www.cyclonecenter.org), which asks
people to classify types of cyclones by
comparing satellite images.
There are two distinct purposes to
‘iCoast’:
• To allow USGS scientists to ‘ground
truth’ or validate their predictive storm
surge models. These mathematical
models, which are widely used in the
emergency management community for
locating areas of potential vulnerability
to incoming storms, are currently based
solely on pre-storm beach morphology
as determined by high-resolution
elevation data, and predicted wave
behavior derived from parameters of the
approaching storm. The on-the-ground
post-storm observations provided by
citizens using ‘iCoast’ will allow
scientists to determine the accuracy of
the models for future applications, and
• to serve as a repository of images
that enables citizens to become more
aware of their vulnerability to coastal
change and to participate in the
advancement of coastal science.
The application consists of sets of
before-and-after photographs from each
storm with accompanying educational
material about coastal hazards. Since
the photographs of a given area are
taken on different dates following
slightly different flight paths, the
geographic orientation of before and
after images will differ slightly. Often
there will be more than one image
covering approximately the same

VerDate Mar<15>2010

22:09 Jul 31, 2014

Jkt 232001

geographic area and showing the same
coastal features. Participants are asked
to identify which post-storm image best
covers the same geographic area and
shows the same natural and man-made
features as the image taken after the
storm. After the best match between
before-and-after aerial photographs is
established, participants will classify
post-storm coastal damage using simple
one-or-two word descriptive tags. This
type of tagging is similar to that used in
commercial photo-sharing Web sites
such as Flickr (www.flickr.com). Each
participant will classify photographs of
their choice. They may classify as many
photographs as they wish in as many
sessions as they choose.
In order for a citizen to participate in
classifying the photographs, the
following information must be collected
by this application:
(1) Participants will register for the
‘iCoast’ application using externally
issued credentials via the Federally
approved ‘‘Open Identity Exchange’’
(www.openid.net) method. This Federal
Government program benefits users by
accelerating their sign up, reducing the
frustration of maintaining multiple
passwords, allowing them to control
their own identity, and minimizing
password security risks. User
credentials will be managed and
authenticated by Google, an Identity
Provider approved by the Federal
Government. During the login process
participants will be redirected to a
Google owned and operated login page.
Following successful authentication of
Id and password, participants are asked
by Google to confirm agreement to their
Google email address being shared with
‘iCoast’. Users have the option to
decline this and halt the login process
with no information shared to ‘iCoast’.
If a participant accepts the sharing of
their email address then the USGS will
store the address within the ‘iCoast’
database. ‘iCoast’ is never supplied nor
does it request a participant’s password
directly. Storing of the participant’s
email address by ‘iCoast’ is necessary to
permit the pairing of Google login
credentials with their ‘iCoast’ profile.
The USGS will encrypt all stored
participant email addresses. No other
information or Google account access is
shared by Google to ‘iCoast’ and nothing
is shared from ‘iCoast’ to Google at any
time.
(2) Level of expertise: At initial log in
to ‘iCoast’, the participant will be asked
to indicate what type of ‘crowd’ or
group he or she belongs to by picking
from a pre-determined list (e.g. coastal
scientist, coastal planner, coastal
resident, general public etc.). The
participant may also optionally

PO 00000

Frm 00122

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

44859

contribute his or her professional
affiliation in an open text box, but this
is not required. Professional affiliation
may provide additional information to
the scientists to more fully assess the
accuracy of a participant’s
classifications. Provision of level of
expertise alone will not allow an
individual to be personally identified.
(3) Keyword tagging: After comparing
pre-and post-storm aerial photographs,
participants can select predefined
keyword tags OR they can submit their
own in a free-form text field. The
keyword tags will help the USGS
determine classification accuracy, and
confirm or refute pre-storm predictions
of coastal inundation and damage
derived from the mathematical storm
surge models.
This application will have many
benefits. It will serve the cause of open
government and open data, in that these
images will be available to the public in
an easily accessible online format for
the first time. It will enhance the
science of coastal change and allow for
more accurate storm surge predictions,
benefitting emergency managers and
coastal planners. It will also familiarize
coastal communities with coastal
processes and increase their awareness
of vulnerabilities to extreme storms. We
anticipate that this application will be
used by educators to further science,
technology, engineering and
mathematics (STEM) education;
outreach to educators is planned.
II. Data
OMB Control Number: 1028–NEW.
Title: iCoast—Did the Coast Change?
Type of Request: Approval of new
information collection.
Respondent Obligation: None
(participation is voluntary).
Frequency of Collection: Occasional.
Description of Respondents: Coastal
scientists, coastal managers, marine
science students, emergency managers,
citizens/residents of coastal
communities.
Estimated Total Number of Annual
Responses: 2500.
Estimated Time per Response: We
estimate that it will take 30 minutes per
person to log into the system, read the
introductory and help material and tag
2–3 photo comparisons.
Estimated Annual Burden Hours:
1250.
Estimated Reporting and
Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-Hour Cost’’
Burden: There are no ‘‘non-hour cost’’
burdens associated with this collection
of information.
Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor and

E:\FR\FM\01AUN1.SGM

01AUN1

44860

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 148 / Friday, August 1, 2014 / Notices

you are not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Until the OMB approves a
collection of information, you are not
obliged to respond.
Comments: On February 28, 2014 we
published a Federal Register notice (79
FR 11461) announcing that we would
submit this ICR to OMB for approval
and soliciting comments. The comment
period closed on April 22, 2014. We
received no comments.
III. Request for Comments
We again invite comments concerning
this ICR as to: (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) how to
enhance the quality, usefulness, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) how to minimize the
burden on the respondents, including
the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology.
Please note that comments submitted
in response to this notice are a matter
of public record. Before including your
personal mailing address, phone
number, email address, or other
personally identifiable information in
your comment, you should be aware
that your entire comment, including
your personally identifiable
information, may be made publicly
available at any time. While you can ask
the OMB in your comment to withhold
your personal identifying information
from public review, we cannot
guarantee that it will be done.
Richard Z. Poore,
Center Director, USGS Coastal and Marine
Science Center.
[FR Doc. 2014–18148 Filed 7–31–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4311–AM–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[NPS–NCR–NACA–15266;
PX.XDESC0047.00.1]

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Final Environmental Impact Statement
for the Antietam, Monocacy, Manassas
White-Tailed Deer Management Plan
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice of Availability.

AGENCY:
ACTION:

Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C)
of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 and the Council on
Environmental Quality regulations, the

SUMMARY:

VerDate Mar<15>2010

22:09 Jul 31, 2014

Jkt 232001

National Park Service (NPS) has
prepared a Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) for the White-tailed
Deer Management Plan (Plan), Antietam
National Battlefield, Maryland;
Monocacy National Battlefield,
Maryland; and Manassas National
Battlefield Park, Virginia. The plan
would manage white-tailed deer
populations in order to support
preservation of the natural and cultural
landscape.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Antietam
National Battlefield, Monocacy National
Battlefield, and Manassas National
Battlefield Park are all located in the
NPS National Capital Region within
about an hour’s drive from Washington,
DC. The U.S. Congress set aside these
park units to represent outstanding
aspects of our natural and cultural
heritage. All three battlefields
commemorate one or more Civil War
battles and the history associated with
these battles.
The purpose of the FEIS and Plan is
to develop a deer management strategy
that supports preservation of the natural
and cultural landscape through the
protection and restoration of native
vegetation. Although relatively rare at
the turn of the twentieth century, whitetailed deer have grown abundant in the
Mid-Atlantic region during recent years.
Current deer densities of 130–230 deer
per square mile are substantially larger
than commonly accepted sustainable
densities for this region, estimated at
about 15–25 deer per square mile. In
addition, the NPS needs to plan for the
potential threat posed by chronic
wasting disease (CWD), which could
spread to these park units.
The NPS has developed the FEIS
under section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and
consistent with laws, regulations, and
policies applicable to NPS units, and
with the purposes of these three parks.
The FEIS describes and analyzes three
action alternatives (B, C, and D) to guide
management actions and strategies for
white-tailed deer. The alternatives
include lethal and non-lethal actions to
manage and reduce the impacts of
white-tailed deer. Included in the
alternatives is the no-action alternative
(alternative A), which would continue
current deer management. Under
Alternative A, the parks would also take
no new actions with respect to CWD.
Alternative B of the Plan provides a
nonlethal deer reduction option to
implement nonsurgical reproductive
control of does when an acceptable
reproductive control agent is available
that meets NPS established criteria.
Large constructed exclosures would also

PO 00000

Frm 00123

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

protect 5–20% of the forested area of the
parks to allow reforestation. Additional
techniques include fencing of crops and
woodlots, crop protection through
sacrificial rows, and aversive
conditioning.
Alternative C of the Plan provides a
lethal deer reduction option through the
use of sharpshooting with firearms,
possible capture and euthanasia to
reduce deer populations to the target
density and maintain that level.
Donation of meat would also occur,
subject to any concerns or restrictions
related to CWD.
Alternative D of the Plan provides a
combined lethal and nonlethal deer
reduction option through the use of
sharpshooting with firearms, possible
capture, and euthanasia to reduce deer
populations to a desirable level and
maintain that level. Once the target
density has been reached, it may use
nonsurgical reproductive control of does
when an acceptable reproductive
control agent is available that meets
NPS established criteria.
Under all three of the action
alternatives (Alternatives B, C, and D),
the parks would also implement a longterm CWD response plan. Under this
plan, if CWD is confirmed in or within
5 miles of a park, the park would
lethally reduce the deer population to
decrease potential for CWD transmittal
and spread. Deer populations could be
reduced to 15–20 deer per square mile
or as needed to cooperate with state
programs and testing requirements, but
would be reduced to no less than 10
deer per square mile. Deer will be tested
for CWD.
The FEIS evaluates potential
environmental consequences of
implementing the alternatives. Impact
topics include the natural, cultural, and
socioeconomic resources.
The Draft EIS was released in July
2013 and was available for public and
agency review and comment beginning
with publication of the Notice of
Availability in the Federal Register.
Comments were accepted during the 60day public comment period. After this
public review, NPS revised this
document in response to public
comments.
The FEIS is now available. Interested
persons and organizations may obtain
the FEIS online at http://
parkplanning.nps.gov/anti. A 30-day
no-action period will follow this Notice
of Availability in the Federal Register.
After this period, the selected
alternative will be documented in a
Record of Decision that will be signed
by the Regional Director of the National
Capital Region of the NPS. Notice of
approval of the EIS would be published

E:\FR\FM\01AUN1.SGM

01AUN1