Notices. Notice of a Modified or Altered System of Records (SOR)
24,112 words·~110 min read·
/register/2006/04/06/06-3336A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; Privacy Act of 1974; Report of a Modified or Altered System AGENCY: Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). ACTION: Notice of a Modified or Altered System of Records (SOR). SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, we are proposing to modify or alter an existing SOR, “Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MEDPAR), System No. 09-70-0009.” Notice for this system was published at 65 **Federal Register**
(FR)50548 (August 18, 2000). CMS is reorganizing its databases because of the impact of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003
(MMA)(Public Law (Pub. L.) 108-173) provisions and the large volume of information the Agency collects to administer the Medicare program. We propose to assign a new CMS identification number to this system to simplify the obsolete and confusing numbering system originally designed to identify the Bureau, Office, or Center that maintained the system. The new assigned identifying number for this system should read: System No. 09-70-0514. We propose to establish a new routine use to provide disclosure of data to hospitals that may be entitled to disproportionate share hospital payments. This new routine use will implement the disclosure provisions of Section 951 of the MMA. Section 951 will provide hospitals with a data set that will span the 2 Federal Fiscal Years that encompass the hospital's cost reporting period. This modification will carry out the purposes of the MEDPAR and enable hospitals to calculate and verify their Supplemental Security Income
(SSI)ratio without the need for additional processing on the part of CMS. This new routine use will be published at routine use number 3. We are modifying the language in some of the remaining routine uses to provide clarity to CMS' intention to disclose individual-specific information contained in this system. The routine uses will then be prioritized and reordered according to their usage. We will also take the opportunity to update any sections of the system that were affected by recent reorganizations and to update language in the administrative sections to correspond with language used in other CMS SORs. The primary purpose of the system is to collect and maintain information for all services rendered during Medicare beneficiary stays in an inpatient hospital and/or Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF), so as to enable CMS and its contractors to facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided, update annual hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System
(IPPS)rates, and to calculate Supplemental Security Income
(SSI)ratios for hospitals that are paid under the hospital IPPS and serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients (hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients are entitled to increased reimbursement under the IPPS). Information retrieved from this system will also be disclosed to:
(1)Support regulatory, reimbursement, and policy functions performed within the agency or by a contractor or consultant;
(2)provide system data to a hospital that has an appeal properly pending before the Provider Reimbursement Review Board
(PRRB)or before an intermediary;
(3)provide system data when all requirements have been met to a hospital that may be entitled to disproportioned share hospital payments and makes a request in accordance with section 951 of the MMA;
(4)assist another Federal or state agency with information to enable such agency to administer a Federal health benefits program, or to enable such agency to fulfill a requirement of a Federal statute or regulation that implements a health benefits program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds;
(5)support constituent requests made to a Congressional representative;
(6)support litigation involving the agency;
(7)facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided; and
(8)combat fraud and abuse in certain Federally-funded health benefits programs. We have provided background information about the modified system in the “Supplementary Information” section below. Although the Privacy Act requires only that CMS provide an opportunity for interested persons to comment on the proposed routine uses, CMS invites comments on all portions of this notice. See “Effective Dates” section for comment period. DATES: *Effective Dates:* CMS filed a modified or altered system report with the Chair of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, the Chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, and the Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)on *3/30/2006* . To ensure that all parties have adequate time in which to comment, the modified system, including routine uses, will become effective 30 days from the publication of the notice, or 40 days from the date it was submitted to OMB and Congress, whichever is later, unless CMS receives comments that require alterations to this notice. ADDRESSES: The public should address comments to: CMS Privacy Officer, Division of Privacy Compliance Data Development, CMS, Room N2-04-27, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. Comments received will be available for review at this location, by appointment, during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 9 a.m.-3 p.m., eastern time zone. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Molly Smith, Division of Acute Care, Hospital and Ambulatory Provider Group, Center for Medicare Management, CMS, Room C4-08-06, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. The telephone number is
(410)786-8354; she can also be reached via e-mail at *Molly.Smith@cms.hhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this system was last published at 65 FR 50548 (August 18, 2000). The MEDPAR contains a summary of all services rendered to a Medicare beneficiary, from the time of admission through discharge, for a stay in an inpatient hospital and/or SNF, SSI eligibility information that CMS receives from the Social Security Administration
(SSA)on Medicare beneficiaries who have had stays in inpatient hospitals and SNF, and enrollment data on Medicare beneficiaries. Under section 1886 (d)(5)(F)(vi)(I) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(5)(F)(vi)(I), hospitals that are paid under the IPPS and serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients may be entitled to increased reimbursement under Part A of the Medicare program. Such disproportionate share hospital payments, which became effective for discharges occurring on or after May 1, 1986, depend in part on a hospital's “SSI ratio.” CMS determines a hospital's SSI ratio by comparing, for the same period,
(1)the hospital's total number of its Medicare inpatient days to
(2)the hospital's “Medicare/SSI days,” *i.e.* , inpatient days attributable to Medicare patients who for such days were eligible for SSI payments under Title XVI of the Act. In determining a hospital's SSI ratio, CMS uses information from the National Claims History (CMS System No. 09-70-0005), in conjunction with SSI eligibility information that CMS receives from SSA. CMS notifies each hospital of the total number of its Medicare/SSI days for a given Federal fiscal year, or cost reporting period, but does not identify which of the hospital's Medicare patients had Medicare/SSI days. Section 951 of the MMA requires the Secretary of HHS to arrange to furnish the data necessary for hospitals to compute the number of patient days used in calculating their disproportionate patient percentage. Beginning with cost reporting periods that include December 8, 2004, CMS will arrange to furnish, consistent with the Privacy Act, the MEDPAR limited data set data for a hospital's Medicare patients at the hospital's request, regardless of whether there is a properly pending appeal relating to disproportionate share hospital payments. We will make the information available for either the Federal fiscal year or, if the hospital's fiscal year differs from the Federal fiscal year, for the months included in the 2 Federal fiscal years that encompass the hospital's cost reporting period. Under this provision, the hospital will be able to use these data to calculate and verify its SSI ratio, and to decide whether it prefers to have the fraction determined on the basis of its fiscal year rather than a Federal fiscal year. I. Description of the Modified or Altered System of Records A. Statutory and Regulatory Basis for System of Records Authority for maintenance of this system is given under sections 1102(a), 1871, and 1886(d)(5)(F) of the Social Security Act, (Title 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) §§ 1302(a), 1395hh, and 1395ww(d)(5)(F)). Authority is also given under section 951 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-173). B. Scope of the Data Collected The MEDPAR contains a summary of all services rendered to a Medicare beneficiary, from the time of admission through discharge, for a stay in an inpatient hospital and/or SNF, SSI entitlement information that CMS receives from SSA on Medicare beneficiaries who have had stays at inpatient hospitals and SNF, and enrollment data on Medicare beneficiaries. The MEDPAR contains information necessary for appropriate Medicare claim processing. It also contains, but is not limited to, the Medicare health insurance claim number, gender, race, age (no date of birth), zip code, state and county for Medicare beneficiaries who have received inpatient hospital and SNF services. II. Collection and Maintenance of Data in the System A. Agency Policies, Procedures, and Restrictions on the Routine Use The Privacy Act permits us to disclose information without an individual's consent if the information is to be used for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose(s) for which the information was collected. Any such disclosure of data is known as a “routine use.” The government will only release MEDPAR information that can be associated with an individual as provided for under “Section III. Proposed Routine Use Disclosures of Data in the System.” Both identifiable and non-identifiable data may be disclosed under a routine use. We will only collect the minimum personal data necessary to achieve the purpose of MEDPAR. CMS has the following policies and procedures concerning disclosures of information that will be maintained in the system. Disclosure of information from this system will be approved only to the extent necessary to accomplish the purpose of the disclosure and only after CMS: 1. Determines that the use or disclosure is consistent with the reason that the data is being collected, *e.g.* , to collect and maintain information for all services rendered during Medicare beneficiary stays in an inpatient hospital and/or SNF, so as to enable CMS and its contractors to facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided, update annual hospital IPPS rates, and to calculate SSI ratios for hospitals that are paid under the hospital IPPS and serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients. 2. Determines: a. That the purpose for which the disclosure is to be made can only be accomplished if the record is provided in individually identifiable form; b. That the purpose for which the disclosure is to be made is of sufficient importance to warrant the potential effect and/or risk on the privacy of the individual that additional exposure of the record might bring; and c. That there is a strong probability that the proposed use of the data would in fact accomplish the stated purpose(s). 3. Requires the information recipient to: a. Establish administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized use of disclosure of the record; and b. Remove or destroy at the earliest time all patient-identifiable information. 4. Determines that the data are valid and reliable. III. Proposed Routine Use Disclosures of Data in the System A. The Privacy Act allows us to disclose information without an individual's consent if the information is to be used for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose(s) for which the information was collected. Any such compatible use of data is known as a “routine use.” The proposed routine uses in this system meet the compatibility requirement of the Privacy Act. We are proposing to establish the following routine use disclosures of information maintained in the system: 1. To agency contractors, or consultants who have been engaged by the agency to assist in the performance of a service related to this system of records and who need to have access to the records in order to perform the activity. We contemplate disclosing information under this routine use only in situations in which CMS may enter into a contractual or similar agreement with a third party to assist in accomplishing CMS function relating to purposes for this system. CMS occasionally contracts out some of its functions when doing so would contribute to more effective and efficient operations. CMS must be able to give a contractor or consultant whatever information is necessary for the contractor or consultant to fulfill its duties. In these situations, safeguards are provided in the contract prohibiting the contractor or consultant from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than that described in the contract and requires the contractor or consultant to return or destroy all information at the completion of the contract. 2. To a hospital that has an appeal properly pending before the Provider Reimbursement Review Board, or before an intermediary, on the issue of whether it is entitled to disproportionate share hospital payments, or the amount of such payments. As a condition of disclosure under this routine use, CMS will require the recipient of the information to: a. Establish reasonable administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of the record or any part thereof; b. Remove or destroy the information that allows the subject individual(s) to be identified at the earliest time at which removal or destruction can be accomplished consistent with the purpose of the request; c. Refrain from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than the stated purpose under which the information was disclosed; and d. Attest in writing that it understands the foregoing provisions, and is willing to abide by the foregoing provisions and any additional provisions that CMS deems appropriate in the particular circumstances. Disclosure under this routine use shall be for the purpose of assisting the hospital to verify or challenge CMS' determination of the hospital's SSI ratio ( *i.e.,* the total number of Medicare days compared to the number of Medicare/SSI days). Disclosure shall be limited to data concerning the total number of patient days, the number of SSI/Medicare days, if any, and the number of Medicare covered days, if any, associated with each stay at the hospital's facility during the cost reporting period under appeal or, where the hospital does not report on a Federal Fiscal Years basis, during the 2 Federal Fiscal Years in which the hospital's cost reporting period falls. The data disclosed will relate to stays at the hospital's IPPS units as well as any IPPS-excluded units in order to assist the hospital in verifying that all qualifying stays ( *i.e.,* those in the IPPS units) were included in CMS' determination of the hospital's SSI ratio. The routine use would permit disclosure only to a hospital that has a proper appeal pending before the PRRB or before an intermediary. This routine use is applicable to appeals of determinations of a hospital's SSI ratio for cost reporting periods ending prior to December 8, 2004. 3. To a hospital that may be entitled to disproportionate share hospital payments, or the amount of such payments, for cost reporting periods that span December 8, 2004, and beyond. As a condition of disclosure under this routine use, CMS will require the recipient of the information to: a. Establish reasonable administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized access, use or disclosure of the record or any part thereof; b. Remove or destroy the information that allows the subject individual(s) to be identified at the earliest time at which removal or destruction can be accomplished consistent with the purpose of the request; c. Refrain from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than the stated purpose under which the information was disclosed; and d. Attest in writing that it understands the foregoing provisions, and is willing to abide by the foregoing provisions and any additional provisions that CMS deems appropriate in the particular circumstances. Disclosure under this routine use shall be for the purpose of assisting the hospital to verify or challenge CMS' determination of the hospital's SSI ratio ( *i.e.,* the total number of Medicare days compared to the number of Medicare/SSI days). Disclosure shall be limited to data concerning the total number of patient days, the number of SSI/Medicare days, if any, and the number of Medicare covered days, if any, associated with each stay at the hospital's facility during the cost reporting period for which the hospital has requested the data, or, where the hospital does not report on a Federal Fiscal Years basis, during the 2 Federal Fiscal Years in which the hospital's cost reporting period falls. The data disclosed will relate to stays at the hospital's IPPS units as well as any IPPS-excluded units in order to assist the hospital in verifying that all qualifying stays ( *i.e.* , those in the IPPS units) were included in CMS' determination of the hospital's SSI ratio. This routine use is applicable for cost reporting periods ending on or after December 8, 2004. 4. To another Federal or state agency to: a. Contribute to the accuracy of CMS' proper payment of Medicare benefits, and/or b. Enable such agency to administer a Federal health benefits program, or as necessary to enable such agency to fulfill a requirement of a Federal statute or regulation that implements a health benefits program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds. Other Federal or state agencies in their administration of a Federal health program may require MEDPAR information in order to support evaluations and monitoring of Medicare claims information of beneficiaries who have had stays at inpatient hospitals and SNF, including proper reimbursement for services provided. In addition, other state agencies in their administration of a Federal health program may require MEDPAR information for the purpose of determining, evaluating and/or assessing cost effectiveness, and/or the quality of health care services provided in the state. 5. To an individual or organization for research, evaluation, or epidemiological projects related to the prevention of disease or disability, or the restoration or maintenance of health, and for payment related projects. The MEDPAR data will provide the research, evaluation and epidemiological projects a broader, longitudinal, national perspective of the MEDPAR and inpatient data. CMS anticipates that many researchers will have legitimate requests to use these data in projects that could ultimately improve the care provided to Medicare patients and the policy that governs the care. 6. To a member of Congress or to a Congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the Congressional office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained. Beneficiaries sometimes request the help of a member of Congress in resolving an issue relating to a matter before CMS. The member of Congress then writes CMS, and CMS must be able to give sufficient information to be responsive to the inquiry. 7. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), court or adjudicatory body when: a. The agency or any component thereof, or b. Any employee of the agency in his or her official capacity, or c. Any employee of the agency in his or her individual capacity where the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee, or d. The United States Government is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, CMS determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation and that the use of such records by the DOJ, court or adjudicatory body is compatible with the purpose for which the agency collected the records. Whenever CMS is involved in litigation, and occasionally when another party is involved in litigation and CMS' policies or operations could be affected by the outcome of the litigation, CMS would be able to disclose information to the DOJ, court or adjudicatory body involved. 8. To a CMS contractor (including, but not necessarily limited to fiscal intermediaries and carriers) that assists in the administration of a CMS-administered health benefits program, or to a grantee of a CMS-administered grant program, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such program. We contemplate disclosing information under this routine use only in situations in which CMS may enter into a contractual relationship or grant with a third party to assist in accomplishing CMS functions relating to the purpose of combating fraud and abuse. CMS occasionally contracts out certain of its functions and makes grants when doing so would contribute to effective and efficient operations. CMS must be able to give a contractor or grantee whatever information is necessary for the contractor or grantee to fulfill its duties. In these situations, safeguards are provided in the contract prohibiting the contractor or grantee from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than that described in the contract and requiring the contractor or grantee to return or destroy all information. 9. To another Federal agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or under the control of the United States (including any State or local governmental agency), that administers, or that has the authority to investigate potential fraud or abuse in, a health benefits program funded in whole or in part by Federal funds, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such programs. Other agencies may require MEDPAR information for the purpose of combating fraud and abuse in such Federally-funded programs. B. Additional Provisions Affecting Routine Use Disclosures To the extent this system contains Protected Health Information
(PHI)as defined by HHS regulation “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information” (45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, Subparts A and E) 65 FR 82462 (12-28-00). Disclosures of such PHI that are otherwise authorized by these routine uses may only be made if, and as, permitted or required by the “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information.” (See 45 CFR 164-512 (a)(1)). In addition, our policy will be to prohibit release even of data not directly identifiable, except pursuant to one of the routine uses or if required by law, if we determine there is a possibility that an individual can be identified through implicit deduction based on small cell sizes (instances where the patient population is so small that individuals who are familiar with the enrollees could, because of the small size, use this information to deduce the identity of the beneficiary). IV. Safeguards CMS has safeguards in place for authorized users and monitors such users to ensure against excessive or unauthorized use. Personnel having access to the system have been trained in the Privacy Act and information security requirements. Employees who maintain records in this system are instructed not to release data until the intended recipient agrees to implement appropriate management, operational and technical safeguards sufficient to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the information and information systems and to prevent unauthorized access. This system will conform to all applicable Federal laws and regulations and Federal, HHS, and CMS policies and standards as they relate to information security and data privacy. These laws and regulations may apply but are not limited to: The Privacy Act of 1974; the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002; the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986; the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996; the E-Government Act of 2002, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996; the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, and the corresponding implementing regulations. OMB Circular A-130, Management of Federal Resources, Appendix III, Security of Federal Automated Information Resources also applies. Federal, HHS, and CMS policies and standards include but are not limited to: All pertinent National Institute of Standards and Technology publications; the HHS Information Systems Program Handbook and the CMS Information Security Handbook. V. Effects of the Modified or Altered System of Records on Individual Rights. CMS proposes to establish this system in accordance with the principles and requirements of the Privacy Act and will collect, use, and disseminate information only as prescribed therein. Data in this system will be subject to the authorized releases in accordance with the routine uses identified in this system of records. CMS will take precautionary measures to minimize the risks of unauthorized access to the records and the potential harm to individual privacy or other personal or property rights of patients whose data are maintained in the system. CMS will collect only that information necessary to perform the system's functions. In addition, CMS will make disclosure from the proposed system only with consent of the subject individual, or his/her legal representative, or in accordance with an applicable exception provision of the Privacy Act. CMS, therefore, does not anticipate an unfavorable effect on individual privacy as a result of the disclosure of information relating to individuals. Dated: March 29, 2006. Charlene Fizzera, Acting Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. SYSTEM NO. 09-70-0514 SYSTEM NAME: “Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MEDPAR) HHS/CMS/OIS.” SECURITY CLASSIFICATION: Level Three Privacy Act Sensitive Data. SYSTEM LOCATION: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
(CMS)Data Center, 7500 Security Boulevard, North Building, First Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM: The MEDPAR contains a summary of all services rendered to a Medicare beneficiary, from the time of admission through discharge, for a stay in an inpatient hospital and/or Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF), Supplemental Security Income
(SSI)entitlement information that CMS receives from the Social Security Administration on Medicare beneficiaries who have had stays at inpatient hospitals and SNF, and enrollment data on Medicare beneficiaries. CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: The MEDPAR contains information necessary for appropriate Medicare claim processing. It also contains, but is not limited to, the Medicare health insurance claim number (HICN), gender, race, age (no date of birth), zip code, state and county for Medicare beneficiaries who have received inpatient hospital and SNF services. AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: Authority for maintenance of this system is given under sections 1102(a), 1871, and 1886(d)(5)(F) of the Social Security Act, (Title 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) §§ 1302(a), 1395hh, and 1395ww(d)(5)(F)). Authority is also given under section 951 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-173). PURPOSE(S) OF THE SYSTEM: The primary purpose of the system is to collect and maintain information for all services rendered during Medicare beneficiary stays in an inpatient hospital and/or Skilled Nursing Facilities, so as to enable CMS and its contractors to facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided, update annual hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System
(IPPS)rates, and to calculate Supplemental Security Income ratios for hospitals that are paid under the hospital IPPS and serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients, (hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients are entitled to increased reimbursement under the IPPS). Information retrieved from this system will also be disclosed to:
(1)Support regulatory, reimbursement, and policy functions performed within the agency or by a contractor or consultant;
(2)provide system data to a hospital that has an appeal properly pending before the Provider Reimbursement Review Board
(PRRB)or before an intermediary;
(3)provide system data when all requirements have been met to a hospital that may be entitled to disproportioned share hospital payments and makes a requests in accordance with section 951 of the MMA;
(4)assist another Federal or state agency with information to enable such agency to administer a Federal health benefits program, or to enable such agency to fulfill a requirement of a Federal statute or regulation that implements a health benefits program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds;
(5)support constituent requests made to a Congressional representative;
(6)support litigation involving the agency;
(7)facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided; and,
(8)combat fraud and abuse in certain Federally-funded health benefits programs. Routine Uses of Records Maintained in the System, Including Categories or Users and the Purposes of Such Uses: A. The Privacy Act allows us to disclose information without an individual's consent if the information is to be used for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose(s) for which the information was collected. Any such compatible use of data is known as a “routine use.” The proposed routine uses in this system meet the compatibility requirement of the Privacy Act. We are proposing to establish the following routine use disclosures of information maintained in the system: 1. To agency contractors, or consultants who have been engaged by the agency to assist in the performance of a service related to this system of records and who need to have access to the records in order to perform the activity. 2. To a hospital that has an appeal properly pending before the Provider Reimbursement Review Board, or before an intermediary, on the issue of whether it is entitled to disproportionate share hospital payments, or the amount of such payments. As a condition of disclosure under this routine use, CMS will require the recipient of the information to: a. Establish reasonable administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of the record or any part thereof; b. Remove or destroy the information that allows the subject individual(s) to be identified at the earliest time at which removal or destruction can be accomplished consistent with the purpose of the request; c. Refrain from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than the stated purpose under which the information was disclosed; and d. Attest in writing that it understands the foregoing provisions, and is willing to abide by the foregoing provisions and any additional provisions that CMS deems appropriate in the particular circumstances. 3. To a hospital that may be entitled to disproportionate share hospital payments, or the amount of such payments, for cost reporting periods that span December 8, 2004, and beyond. As a condition of disclosure under this routine use, CMS will require the recipient of the information to: a. Establish reasonable administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized access, use or disclosure of the record or any part thereof; b. Remove or destroy the information that allows the subject individual(s) to be identified at the earliest time at which removal or destruction can be accomplished consistent with the purpose of the request; c. Refrain from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than the stated purpose under which the information was disclosed; and d. Attest in writing that it understands the foregoing provisions, and is willing to abide by the foregoing provisions and any additional provisions that CMS deems appropriate in the particular circumstances. 4. To another Federal or state agency to: a. Contribute to the accuracy of CMS' proper payment of Medicare benefits, and/or b. Enable such agency to administer a Federal health benefits program, or as necessary to enable such agency to fulfill a requirement of a Federal statute or regulation that implements a health benefits program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds. 5. To an individual or organization for research, evaluation, or epidemiological projects related to the prevention of disease or disability, or the restoration or maintenance of health, and for payment related projects. 6. To a member of Congress or to a Congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the Congressional office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained. 7. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), court or adjudicatory body when: a. The agency or any component thereof, or b. Any employee of the agency in his or her official capacity, or c. Any employee of the agency in his or her individual capacity where the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee, or d. The United States Government is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, CMS determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation and that the use of such records by the DOJ, court or adjudicatory body is compatible with the purpose for which the agency collected the records. 8. To a CMS contractor (including, but not necessarily limited to fiscal intermediaries and carriers) that assists in the administration of a CMS-administered health benefits program, or to a grantee of a CMS-administered grant program, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such program. 9. To another Federal agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or under the control of the United States (including any State or local governmental agency), that administers, or that has the authority to investigate potential fraud or abuse in, a health benefits program funded in whole or in part by Federal funds, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such programs. B. Additional Provisions Affecting Routine Use Disclosures To the extent this system contains Protected Health Information
(PHI)as defined by HHS regulation “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information” (45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, Subparts A and E) 65 FR 82462 (12-28-00). Disclosures of such PHI that are otherwise authorized by these routine uses may only be made if, and as, permitted or required by the “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information.” (See 45 CFR 164-512
(a)(1)). In addition, our policy will be to prohibit release even of data not directly identifiable, except pursuant to one of the routine uses or if required by law, if we determine there is a possibility that an individual can be identified through implicit deduction based on small cell sizes (instances where the patient population is so small that individuals who are familiar with the enrollees could, because of the small size, use this information to deduce the identity of the beneficiary). POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: STORAGE: All records are stored on magnetic media. RETRIEVABILITY: The Medicare records are retrieved by HICN of the beneficiary. SAFEGUARDS: CMS has safeguards in place for authorized users and monitors such users to ensure against excessive or unauthorized use. Personnel having access to the system have been trained in the Privacy Act and information security requirements. Employees who maintain records in this system are instructed not to release data until the intended recipient agrees to implement appropriate management, operational and technical safeguards sufficient to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the information and information systems and to prevent unauthorized access. This system will conform to all applicable Federal laws and regulations and Federal, HHS, and CMS policies and standards as they relate to information security and data privacy. These laws and regulations may apply but are not limited to: the Privacy Act of 1974; the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002; the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986; the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996; the E-Government Act of 2002, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996; the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, and the corresponding implementing regulations. OMB Circular A-130, Management of Federal Resources, Appendix III, Security of Federal Automated Information Resources also applies. Federal, HHS, and CMS policies and standards include but are not limited to: all pertinent National Institute of Standards and Technology publications; the HHS Information Systems Program Handbook and the CMS Information Security Handbook. RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: CMS will retain identifiable MEDPAR data for a total period not to exceed 25 years. All claims-related records are encompassed by the document preservation order and will be retained until notification is received from DOJ. SYSTEM MANAGER AND ADDRESS: Director, Division of Acute Care, Hospital and Ambulatory Provider Group, Center for Medicare Management, CMS, Room C4-08-06, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: For purpose of access, the subject individual should write to the system manager who will require the system name, HICN, address, age, gender, and for verification purposes, the subject individual's name (woman's maiden name, if applicable) and social security number (SSN). Furnishing the SSN is voluntary, but it may make searching for a record easier and prevent delay. RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURE: For purpose of access, use the same procedures outlined in Notification Procedures above. Requestors should also reasonably specify the record contents being sought. (These procedures are in accordance with Department regulation 45 CFR 5b.5(a)(2)). CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: The subject individual should contact the system manager named above, and reasonably identify the record and specify the information to be contested. State the corrective action sought and the reasons for the correction with supporting justification. (These procedures are in accordance with Department regulation 45 CFR 5b.7). RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: CMS's National Claims History system of records, enrollment data on Medicare beneficiaries, and SSI eligibility information from the Social Security Administration. SYSTEMS EXEMPTED FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE ACT: None. [FR Doc. E6-4953 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. 2006D-0112] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Topical Oxygen Chamber for Extremities; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is announcing the availability of the draft guidance for industry and FDA entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Topical Oxygen Chamber for Extremities.” It was developed as a special control to support the reclassification of the topical oxygen chamber for extremities
(TOCE)from class III (premarket approval) into class II (special controls). Elsewhere in this issue of the **Federal Register** , FDA is publishing a proposed rule to reclassify the TOCE device from class III into class II (special controls). This draft guidance is neither final nor is it in effect at this time. DATES: Submit written or electronic comments on this draft guidance by July 5, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Topical Oxygen Chamber for Extremities to the Division of Small Manufacturers, International, and Consumer Assistance (HFZ-220), Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., Rockville, MD 20850. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your request, or fax your request to 301-443-8818. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written comments concerning this draft guidance to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Submit electronic comments to *http://www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments* . Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles N. Durfor, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ-410), Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850, 301- 594-3090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry and FDA staff entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Topical Oxygen Chamber for Extremities.” Following the effective date of any final reclassification rule based on this proposal, any firm submitting a premarket notification (510(k)) for the TOCE will need to address the issues covered in the special controls guidance document. However, the firm need only show that its device meets the recommendations of the guidance document or in some other way provides equivalent assurances of safety and effectiveness. II. Significance of Guidance This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the agency's current thinking on the TOCE. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statute and regulations. III. Electronic Access To receive “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Topical Oxygen Chamber for Extremities” by fax, call the CDRH Facts-On-Demand system at 800-899-0381 or 301-827-0111 from a touch-tone telephone. Press 1 to enter the system. At the second voice prompt, press 1 to order a document. Enter the document number
(1582)followed by the pound sign (#). Follow the remaining voice prompts to complete your request. Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may also do so by using the Internet. CDRH maintains an entry on the Internet for easy access to information including text, graphics, and files that may be downloaded to a personal computer with Internet access. Updated on a regular basis, the CDRH home page includes device safety alerts, **Federal Register** notices, information on premarket submissions (including lists of approved applications and manufacturers' addresses), small manufacturers' assistance, information on video conferencing and electronic submissions, Mammography Matters, and other device-oriented information. The CDRH web site may be accessed at * http://www.fda.gov/cdrh* . A search capability for all CDRH guidance documents is available at *http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/guidance.html* . Guidance documents are also available on the Division of Dockets Management Internet site at *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets* . IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) (the PRA). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart E, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 801 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0485. V. Comments Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ), written or electronic comments regarding this document. Submit a single copy of electronic comments or two paper copies of any mailed comments, except that individuals may submit one paper copy. Comments are to be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Dated: March 27, 2006. Linda S. Kahan, Deputy Director, Center for Devices and Radiological Health. [FR Doc. E6-4961 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Transportation Security Administration Aviation Security Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY: Transportation Security Administration (TSA), DHS. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a public meeting of the Aviation Security Advisory Committee (ASAC). DATES: The meeting will take place on May 3, 2006, from 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., or until the conclusion of the committee's business. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Residence Inn by Marriott Pentagon City, 550 Army Navy Drive, Arlington VA 22202. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Corrao, Office of Transportation Sector Network Integration, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220; telephone 571-227-2980, e-mail *joseph.corrao@dhs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This meeting is announced pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.). The agenda for the meeting will include— • Final report on the actions of the Airport Security Design Guidelines Working Group; • Status reports on the actions of the Air Cargo Security Working Group, the Aviation Security Impact Assessment Working Group, and the Baggage Security Investment Study Working Group; and • Other aviation security topics. This meeting is open to the public but attendance is limited to space available. Doors open at 8:30 a.m. Members of the public must make advance arrangements to present oral statements at the meeting. Written statements may be presented to the committee by providing copies of them to the person listed under the heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT prior to or at the meeting. Anyone in need of assistance or a reasonable accommodation for the meeting should contact the person listed under the heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . In addition, sign and oral interpretation, as well as a listening device, can be made available at the meeting if requested 10 calendar days before the meeting. Arrangements may be made by contacting the person listed under the heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on March 31, 2006. Charlotte Bryan, Acting Assistant Administrator, Transportation Sector Network Management. [FR Doc. E6-5032 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-62-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5042-N-02] Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control Programs Data Collection—Progress Reporting AGENCY: Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control, HUD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The revised information collection requirement described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal. DATES: *Comments Due Date:* June 5, 2006. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Katina Flythe, Reports Liaison Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room P-3206, Washington, DC 20410. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lillian Deitzer, Reports Management Officer, Q, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410;
(202)708-2374. (This is not a toll-free number. Hearing- or speech-impaired persons may access the number above via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department will submit the proposed information collection to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended). This Notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affecting agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. This Notice also lists the following information: *Title of Proposal:* Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control Programs Data Collection—Progress Reporting. *OMB Control Number:* 2539-0008. *Need for the Information and Proposed Use:* This data collection is designed to provide timely information to HUD regarding the implementation progress of the grantees on carrying out Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control Grant Programs. The information collection will also be used to provide Congress with status reports as required by the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act (Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992). *Agency Form Numbers:* HUD-96006. *Members of Affected Public:* State, tribal, local governments, not-for-profit institutions and for-profit firms located in the U.S. *Total Burden Estimate (First Year):* Number of respondents: 250; Frequency of response: 4; Hours per response: 8; Total Burden Hours: 8,000. *Status of the Proposed Information Collection:* Revision. *Additional Information:* The obligation to respond to this information collection is mandatory. Authority: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. Dated: March 31, 2006. Warren Friedman, Deputy Director, Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control. [FR Doc. E6-4955 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5041-N-10] Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Comment Request; Title I Property Improvement and Manufactured Home Loan Programs AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal. DATES: *Comments Due Date:* June 5, 2006. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Lillian Deitzer, Reports Management Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., L'Enfant Plaza Building, Room 8001, Washington, DC 20410 or *Lillian_Deitzer@hud.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret Burns, Director, Office of Single Family Program Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410, telephone
(202)708-2121 (this is not a toll free number) for copies of the proposed forms and other available information. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department is submitting the proposed information collection to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended). This Notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to:
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. This Notice also lists the following information: *Title of Proposal:* Title I Property Improvement and Manufactured Home Loan Programs. *OMB Control Number, if applicable:* 2502-0328. *Description of the need for the information and proposed use:* Title I loans are made by private sector lenders and insured by HUD against loss from defaults. HUD uses this information to evaluate individual lenders on their overall program performance. The information collected is also used to determine claim eligibility. *Agency form numbers, if applicable:* HUD-637, 646, 27029, 27030, 55013, 55014, 56001, 56001-MH, 56002, 56002-MH, 56004, 92802. *Estimation of the total numbers of hours needed to prepare the information collection including number of respondents, frequency of response, and hours of response:* The estimated number of hours needed to prepare the information collection is 27,401; the number of respondents is 14,300 generating approximately 129,040 annual responses; the frequency of response is on occasion; and the estimated time needed to prepare the responses varies from three minutes to two hours. *Status of the proposed information collection:* This is an extension of a currently approved collection. Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35, as amended. Dated: March 31, 2006. Frank L. Davis, General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing-Deputy Federal Housing Commissioner. [FR Doc. E6-4956 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5033-FA-03] Announcement of Funding Awards for Fiscal Year 2004 for the Housing Choice Voucher Program AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD. ACTION: Announcement of Fiscal Year 2004 awards. SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989, this document notifies the public of funding awards for Fiscal Year
(FY)2004 to housing agencies
(HAs)under the Section 8 housing choice voucher program. The purpose of this notice is to publish the names, addresses, and the amount of the awards to HAs for non-competitive funding awards for housing conversion actions, public housing relocations and replacements, and HOPE VI voucher awards. Due to Congressional mandates and limited staff, these awards were not published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David A. Vargas, Director, Office of Housing Voucher Programs, Office of Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 4226, Washington, DC 20410-5000, telephone
(202)708-2815. Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may call HUD's TTY number at
(800)927-7589. (Only the “800” telephone number is toll-free.) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The regulations governing the housing choice voucher program are published at 24 CFR 982. The regulations for allocating housing assistance budget authority under Section 213(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 are published at 24 CFR Part 791, Subpart D. The purpose of this rental assistance program is to assist eligible families to pay the rent for decent, safe, and sanitary housing. The FY2004 awardees announced in this notice were provided Section 8 funds on an as-needed, non-competitive basis, i.e., not consistent with the provisions of a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFAs). Awards published under this notice were provided:
(1)To assist families living in HUD-owned properties that are being sold;
(2)to assist families affected by the expiration or termination of their project-based Section 8 contracts;
(3)to assist families in properties where the owner has prepaid the HUD mortgage;
(4)to provide relocation and replacement housing in connection with the demolition of public housing;
(5)to provide replacement housing assistance for single room occupancy
(SRO)units that fail housing quality standards (HQS); and
(6)to assist families in public housing developments that are scheduled for demolition in connection with a HUD-approved HOPE VI Revitalization or Demolition Grant. Administrative fees were added to each assignment for the administration of housing choice vouchers awarded under this notice. In addition, special housing fees were included for applicable Housing tenant protection awards. A total of $229,205,510 in budget authority for 29,296 housing choice vouchers was awarded to recipients under all of the above-mentioned categories. In accordance with Section 102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (103 Stat. 1987, 42 U.S.C. 3545), the Department is publishing the names, addresses, and amounts of those awards as shown in Appendix A. Dated: March 29, 2006. Orlando J. Cabrera, Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing. Appendix A—Section 8 Rental Assistance Programs Announcement of Awards for Fiscal Year 2004 Housing agency Address Units Award Hope VI Vouchers: HA of Birmingham Dist 1826 3rd Ave. South, Birmingham, AL 35233 353 2,096,820 Mobile Housing Board PO Box 1345, Mobile, AL 36633 481 2,447,328 HA Decatur PO Box 878, Decatur, AL 35602 100 402,000 Wilmington HA 400 Walnut St, Wilmington, DE 19801 180 1,274,400 Miami Dade HA 1401 NW 7th St, Miami, FL 33125 450 3,733,800 HA Daytona Beach 118 Cedar St, Daytona Beach, FL 32114 277 1,579,908 HA Lake Wales 10 W. Sessoms Ave, Lake Wales, FL 33859 100 630,000 HA Tallahassee 2940 Grady Rd, Tallahassee, FL 32312 47 302,868 HA Tampa 1514 Union St., Tampa, FL 33607 155 1,222,020 Clearwater HA 210 South Ewing, Clearwater, FL 33757 284 1,755,120 HA Atlanta GA 230 John Wesley Dobbs Ave., NE, Atlanta, GA 30303 434 3,853,920 HA Marietta PO Drawer K, Marietta, GA 30061 124 1,199,328 HA Americus 825 N Mayo St, Americus, GA 31709 62 273,792 Menard County HA PO Box 168, Petersburg, IL 62675 13 55,692 Louisville HA 420 South Eighth St, Louisville, KY 40203 75 488,550 New Orleans HA PO Box 6409, New Orleans, LA 70174 50 346,200 Shreveport HA 2500 Line Ave, Shreveport, LA 71104 100 492,000 Boston HA 52 Chauncy St, Boston, MA 02111 196 2,648,352 HA of the City of Frederick 209 Madison St, Frederick, MD 21701 40 381,120 Benton Harbor HSG Comm 721 Natewells Sr. Dr, Benton Harbor, MI 49022 20 82,560 Raleigh HA PO Box 28007, Raleigh, NC 27611 141 1,067,652 HA Charlotte 1301 South Blvd, Charlotte, NC 28236 309 2,476,188 Jersey City HA 400 U.S. Highway #1, Jersey City, NJ 07306 96 791,424 Camden HA 1300 Admiral Wilson Blvd, Camden, NJ 08101 188 1,743,888 Atlantic City HA 227 Vermont Ave, Atlantic City, NJ 08404 30 232,560 County of Clark HA 5390 East Flamingo Rd, Las Vegas, NV 89122 66 498,960 The Muni HA City of Yonkers 1511 Central Park Ave, Yonkers, NY 10710 200 2,121,600 Chester HA 1010 Madison St, Chester, PA 19016 184 1,552,224 Fayette County HA 624 Pittsburgh Rd, Uniontown, PA 15401 40 159,360 HA Columbia 1917 Harden St, Columbia, SC 29204 214 1,250,616 City of Spartanburg HA PO Box 2828, Spartanburg, SC 29304 156 835,536 Metropolitan Dev & HSG 701 South Sixth St, Nashville, TN 37202 200 1,214,400 Galveston HA 4700 Broadway, Galveston, TX 77551 20 122,160 HA City of Seattle 120 Sixth Ave North, Seattle, WA 98109 267 2,499,120 HA County of King 600 Andover Park West, Seattle, WA 98188 300 2,530,800 HA of the City of Milwaukee 809 North Broadway, Milwaukee, WI 53201 151 784,596 Total for Hope VI Vouchers 6,103 $45,146,862 Housing Tenant Protection: HA Phenix City PO Box 338, Phenix City, AL 36867 64 286,702 HA City of Montgomery 1020 Bell St, Montgomery, AL 36104 64 339,364 HA Guntersville PO Box 4, Guntersville, AL 35976 46 187,022 HA Albertville PO Box 1126, Albertville, AL 35950 50 178,076 Benton Public HA 1200 West Pine St, Benton, AR 72015 93 368,890 Oakland HA 1619 Harrison St, Oakland, CA 94612 120 1,667,490 City of Los Angeles HA 2600 Wilshire Blvd, 3rd Fl, Los Angeles, CA 90057 48 417,504 Sacramento HSG & Redev PO Box 1834, Sacramento, CA 95812 156 924,755 City of Fresno HA 1331 Fulton Mall, Fresno, CA 93776 39 216,606 Sacramento HSG & Redev PO Box 1834, Sacramento, CA 95812 0 1,045,431 Kern County HA 601 24th St, Bakersfield, CA 93301 24 113,232 San Bernardino County HA 715 E. Brier Dr, San Bernardino, CA 92408 40 441,616 County of San Joaquin HSG 448 South Center St, Stockton, CA 95203 54 357,588 Riverside County HA 5555 Arlington Ave, Riverside, CA 92504 64 451,456 County of Fresno HA 1331 Fulton Mall, Fresno, CA 93776 31 174,778 County of Monterey HA 123 Rico St, Salinas, CA 93907 48 380,640 County of Butte HA 2039 Forest Ave, Ste 10, Chico, CA 95928 18 92,760 City of Alameda HA 701 Atlantic Ave, Alameda, CA 94501 0 171,864 Long Beach HA 521 E 4th St, Long Beach, CA 90802 72 675,284 Glendale HA 141 North Glendale Ave #202, Glendale, CA 91206 8 62,096 Denver 777 Grant St, Denver, CO 80203 5 50,680 Colorado Springs HAO PO Box 1575, MC 1490, Colorado Springs, CO 80901 24 186,000 Lakewood 445 S. Allison Pkwy, Lakewood, CO 80226 18 174,624 Garfield County 2128 Railrd Ave, Rifle, CO 81650 42 237,384 CO Div of HSG 1313 Sherman St, Room 518, Denver, CO 80203 7 52,030 Waterbury HA 2 Lakewood Rd, Waterbury, CT 06704 65 484,250 Conn Dept of Social Services 25 Sigourney St 9th Fl, Hartford, CT 06105 248 2,391,194 DC HA 1133 North Capitol St NE, Washington, DC 20002 302 3,093,476 HA of Jacksonville 1300 Broad St, Jacksonville, FL 32202 24 156,354 HA Tampa 1514 Union St, Tampa, FL 33607 116 1,000,150 NW Florida Regional HA PO Box 218, Graceville, FL 32440 5 27,800 Bradenton HA 1307 5th St West, Bradenton, FL 34205 100 815,050 Gainesville HA PO Box 1468, Gainesville, FL 32602 172 950,992 Broward County HAI 1773 North State Rd 7, Lauderhill, FL 33313 113 861,490 City of Fort Myers 1700 Medical Lane, Fort Myers, FL 30 179,580 HA Savannah 200 East Brd St, Savannah, GA 31402 13 140,942 HA Atlanta GA 230 John Wesley Dobbs Ave. NE, Atlanta, GA 30303 531 5,412,468 HA Macon PO Box 4928, Macon, GA 31208 46 255,622 HA Jonesboro PO Box 458, Jonesboro, GA 30237 68 570,248 City and County of Honolulu 715 South King St, Ste 311, Honolulu, HI 96813 126 1,005,938 City of Mason City 10 1st St NW, Mason City, IA 50401 0 39,876 Area XV Multi-County HA 417 North College, Agency, IA 52530 20 77,000 Chicago HA 626 West Jackson Blvd, Chicago, IL 60661 132 1,116,380 Champaign County HA 205 West Park Ave, Champaign, IL 61820 92 648,096 Quincy HA 540 Harrison St, Quincy, IL 62301 130 309,782 HA of Cook County 310 South Michigan Ave, 15th Fl, Chicago, IL 60604 96 1,125,804 HA of the County of Lake 33928 N Route 45, Grayslake, IL 60030 151 1,329,580 Dupage HA 128A South County Farm Rd, Wheaton, IL 60187 34 329,496 McHenry County HA 1108 North Seminary Ave, Woodstock, IL 60098 80 629,810 McLean County HA 104 East Wood, Bloomington, IL 61701 198 1,004,406 Gary HA 578 Broadway, Gary, IN 46402 86 613,900 Bloomington HA 1007 N Summit, Bloomington, IN 47402 27 178,748 Indiana Dept of Human Services PO Box 6116, Indianapolis, IN 46206 5 26,400 Kansas City HA 1124 North Ninth St, Kansas City, KS 66101 136 842,084 Nek-Cap, Inc PO Box 380, Hiawatha, KS 66434 12 38,102 Ellis County PHA c/o DSNWK, PO Box 1016, Hays, KS 67601 12 35,856 Covington HA 638 Madison Ave, First Fl, Covington, KY 41011 16 88,038 Kentucky Housing Corp 1231 Louisville Rd, Frankfort, KY 40601 53 236,872 St Landry Parish HA PO Box 276, Washington, LA 70589 100 305,972 Holyoke HA 475 Maple St, Holyoke, MA 01040 44 293,079 Comm Dev Prog Comm of MAE.O 100 Cambridge St, Boston, MA 02114 0 35,582 HA of Baltimore City 417 East Fayette St, Baltimore, MD 21201 207 1,439,516 HA of Prince George's County 9400 Peppercorn Pl, Ste 200, Largo, MD 20774 114 1,183,702 Howard County HSG Comm 6751 Columbia Gtwy Dr, 3rd Fl, Columbia, MD 162 1,537,085 Co. Commissioners Charles Co. 8190 Port Tobacco Rd, Port Tobacco, MD 20677 60 576,024 Harford County HSG Agency 15 South Main St, Ste 106, Bel Air, MD 21014 12 75,432 Washington County HA PO Box 2944, Hagerstown, MD 21741 24 118,898 Baltimore Co. Housing Office 6401 York Rd, 1st Fl, Baltimore, MD 21201 82 520,256 Sanford HA PO Box 1008, Sanford, ME 04073 104 606,281 Augusta HA 33 Union St, Ste 3, Augusta, ME 04330 86 342,578 Maine State HA 353 Water St, Augusta, ME 04330 54 304,152 Pontiac HSG Comm 132 Franklin Blvd, Pontiac, MI 48341 50 429,140 Saginaw HSG Comm PO Box 3225, Saginaw, MI 48605 56 267,344 River Rouge HSG Comm PO Box 18174, River Rouge, MI 48218 135 975,080 Ypsilanti HSG Comm 601 Armstrong Dr, Ypsilanti, MI 48197 0 679,602 Inkster HSG Comm 4500 Inkster Rd, Inkster, MI 48141 196 1,230,061 Port Huron HSG Comm 905 Seventh St, Port Huron, MI 48060 64 398,464 Lansing HSG Comm 310 North Seymour St, Lansing, MI 48933 310 1,431,563 Grand Rapids HSG Comm 1420 Fuller Ave SE, Grand Rapids, MI 49507 166 1,053,532 Taylor HSG Comm 15270 Plaza South Dr, Taylor, MI 48180 46 357,184 Ferndale HSG Comm 415 Withington, Ferndale, MI 48220 87 894,783 Lapeer HSG Comm 544 North Saginaw, Ste 109, Lapeer, MI 48446 102 623,208 Wyoming HSG Comm 2450 36th St, SW, Wyoming, MI 49509 127 804,418 Michigan State HSG Dev Auth PO Box 30044, Lansing, MI 48909 1,201 8,277,220 St. Cloud HRA 1225 West St. Germain, St. Cloud, MN 56301 12 61,752 St Louis Park HRA 5005 Minnetonka Blvd, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 0 8,000 NW MN Multi-County HRA PO Box 128, Mentor, MN 56736 24 81,240 Southeast MN Multi-County HRA 134 East Second St, Wabasha, MN 55981 0 2,750 Washington County HRA 321 Broadway Ave, St. Paul Park, MN 55071 60 476,654 South Central Multi County HRA 410 Jackson St, Ste 300, Mankato, MN 56002 64 255,264 St. Louis HA 4100 Lindell Blvd, St. Louis, MO 63108 68 390,606 St. Louis County HAO 8865 Natural Bridge, St. Louis, MO 63121 53 321,110 Lees Summit HA 111 South Grand, Lees Summit, MO 64063 36 283,048 Pulaski County PHA PO Box 69, Richland, MO 65556 48 207,985 HA Mississippi Regional No. 5 PO Box 419, Newton, MS 39345 56 226,698 Miss Regional HA VIII PO Box 2347, Gulfport, MS 39505 10 51,580 Jackson Hous Auth 2747 Livingston Rd, Jackson, MS 39283 69 380,187 Whitefish 100 East Fourth St, Whitefish, MT 59937 16 86,852 MDOC 836 Front St, Helena, MT 59620 50 241,100 HA Winston-Salem 901 Cleveland Ave, Winston-Salem, NC 27101 150 922,450 HA Wadesboro 200 W Short Plaza, Wadesboro, NC 28170 7 25,946 Isothermal Planning & Dev Comm PO Box 841, Rutherfordton, NC 28139 34 167,702 Grand Forks 1405 1st Ave North, Grand Forks, ND 58203 198 950,004 Omaha HA 540 South 27th St, Omaha, NE 68105 259 1,678,716 Jersey City HA 400 U.S. Highway #1, Jersey City, NJ 07306 20 113,240 Edison HA Willard Dunham Dr, Edison, NJ 08837 233 1,668,424 East Orange HA 160 Halsted St, East Orange, NJ 07018 0 398,452 Fort Lee HA 1403 Teresa Dr, Fort Lee, NJ 07024 85 847,636 Bernalillo County HSG Dept 1900 Bridge Blvd, SW, Albuquerque, NM 87105 152 974,018 North Las Vegas HA 1632 Yale St, North Las Vegas, NV 89030 44 407,016 County of Clark HA 5390 East Flamingo Rd, Las Vegas, NV 89122 138 1,066,956 HA of Rochester 675 West Main St, Rochester, NY 14611 365 1,869,328 HA of Ithaca 800 S Plain St, Ithaca, NY 14850 99 556,474 Town of Amherst 1195 Main St, Buffalo, NY 14209 37 175,888 The City of New York DHPD 100 Gold St Room 5N, New York, NY 10007 1,816 26,707,500 Town of Babylon HAA 281 Phelps Lane, Rm 9, North Babylon, NY 11703 120 1,517,520 City of Buffalo 470 Franklin St, Buffalo, NY 14202 194 1,165,538 Town of Glenville 242 Union St, Schenectady, NY 12305 7 32,914 New York State HSG Fin Agency 25 Beaver St, Rm 674, New York, NY 10004 515 5,967,602 Columbus Metro. HA 880 East 11th Ave, Columbus, OH 43211 309 1,955,106 Cuyahoga MHA 1441 West 25th St, Cleveland, OH 44113 18 130,610 Cincinnati Metropolitan HA 16 West Central Pkwy, Cincinnati, OH 45210 30 152,661 Akron MHA 100 W. Cedar St, Akron, OH 44307 6 39,720 Mansfield MHA 150 Park Ave West, Mansfield, OH 44901 32 139,712 Greene Metro HA 538 North Detroit St, Xenia, OH 45385 46 265,682 Chillicothe Met HA 178 West Fourth St, Chillicothe, OH 45601 80 397,198 Medina MHA 850 Walter Rd, Medina, OH 44256 24 140,578 Wayne MHA 200 South Market St, Wooster, OH 44691 81 365,649 Hamilton County PHA 630 Main St, 1st Fl, Cincinnati, OH 45202 17 133,592 Parma PHA 5983 W. 54th St #124, Cleveland, OH 44129 0 320,340 Seneca MHA 150 Park Ave West, Mansfield, OH 44901 10 36,030 Marion Metro HA 150 Park Ave West, Mansfield, OH 44901 40 190,722 Tulsa PO Box 6369, Tulsa, OK 74148 60 380,420 Clackamas County HA PO Box 1510, Oregon City, OR 97045 18 128,918 HA of Douglas County 902 West Stanton St, Roseburg, OR 97470 1 4,037 HA of Lincoln County PO Box 1470, Newport, OR 97365 5 24,214 Linn-Benton HA 1250 SE Queen Ave, Albany, OR 97322 10 58,340 HA of Malheur County 959 Fortner St, Ontario, OR 97914 10 48,718 HA City of Pittsburgh 200 Ross St, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 87 523,946 McKeesport HA 2901 Brownlee Ave, McKeesport, PA 15132 7 32,436 Allegheny County HA 625 Stanwix St, 12th Fl, Pittsburgh, PA 15222 18 103,452 Reading HA 400 Hancock Blvd, Reading, PA 19611 1 5,578 HA of the County of Butler 114 Woody Dr, Butler, PA 16001 52 250,744 Erie City HA 606 Holland St, Erie, PA 16501 106 425,110 Westmoreland County HAOR 223 South Greengate Rd, Greensburg, PA 15601 8 39,708 Wilkes Barre HA 50 Lincoln Plz S. Wilkes-Barre, Wilkes Barre, PA 0 346,846 Municipality of Trujillo Alto PO Box 1869, Trujillo Alto, PR 00977 80 528,800 Puerto Rico HSG Finance Co Call Box 71361-GPO, San Juan, PR 00936 69 441,018 HA Columbia 1917 Harden St, Columbia, SC 29204 228 1,193,954 City of Rock Hill PO Box 11579, Rock Hill, SC 29731 70 396,294 Pennington County 1805 West Fulton St, Rapid City, SD 57702 19 109,696 Mobridge HA PO Box 370, Mobridge, SD 57601 24 94,332 Yankton HSG & Redev Comm PO Box 176, Yankton, SD 57078 24 81,890 HA Memphis 700 Adams Ave, Memphis, TN 38105 104 546,965 Metropolitan Dev & HSG 701 South Sixth St, Nashville, TN 37202 1 6,346 Kingsport HSG and Redev PO Box 44, Kingsport, TN 37662 26 121,316 EL Paso HA 5300 Paisano, El Paso, TX 79905 150 878,564 Corpus Christi HA 3701 Ayers St, Corpus Christi, TX 78415 101 639,734 Dallas HA 3939 N. Hampton Rd, Dallas, TX 75212 44 408,992 Waco HA 1001 Washington, Waco, TX 76703 50 268,468 Brownwood HA 1500 Terrace Dr., Brownwood, TX 76804 20 73,380 Beaumont HA 4925 Concord Rd, Beaumont, TX 77708 39 215,286 Georgetown HA PO Box 60, Georgetown, TX 78627 3 16,133 Abilene HA 555 Walnut, Abilene, TX 79604 0 660,680 Tarrant County HA 2100 Cir Dr, Ste 200, Fort Worth, TX 76119 0 529,914 Harris County HA 8410 Lantern Point, Houston, TX 77054 214 1,786,962 Tyler 213 N. Bonner, Tyler, TX 75710 56 366,391 Dallas County 2377 N. Stemmons Frwy, Ste 200-LB 16, Dallas, TX 171 1,323,640 Norfolk Redevelopment & HA 201 Granby St, Norfolk, VA 23501 49 294,240 Richmond Redevelopment & HA PO Box 26887, Richmond, VA 23261 378 2,888,910 Roanoke Redev & HA 2624 Salem Trnpk, NW, Roanoke, VA 24017 153 714,574 Lynchburg Redev & HA 918 Commerce St, Lynchburg, VA 24505 149 621,926 Harrisonburg Redev & HA 286 Kelley St, Harrisonburg, VA 22801 143 734,350 Fairfax Co. Redev and HA 3700 Pender Dr, Ste 300, Fairfax, VA 22030 22 235,180 Waynesboro Redev & HA 1700 New Hope Rd, Waynesboro, VA 22980 100 390,472 City of Virginia Beach 2424 Courthouse Dr, Virginia Beach, VA 23456 131 871,544 Prince William County 15941 Donald Curtis Dr Ste 112, Woodbridge, VA 22191 14 Virginia HSG Dev Auth 601 South Belvidere St, Richmond, VA 23220 323 1,598,939 HA County of King 600 Andover Park West, Seattle, WA 98188 16 150,701 HA City of Yakima 810 N 6th Ave, Yakima, WA 98902 30 151,820 HA City of Spokane West 55 Mission St, Ste 104, Spokane, WA 99201 109 448,723 HA City of Walla Walla 501 Cayuse St, Walla Walla, WA 99362 50 231,319 Mason County HA PO Box 4460, Bremerton, WA 98312 5 25,826 HA of the City of Milwaukee 809 North Brdway, Milwaukee, WI 53201 23 122,758 Milwaukee Co. HA 2711 W Wells St, Room 102, Milwaukee, WI 53208 72 439,382 Janesville CDA 18 North Jackson St, Janesville, WI 53547 93 496,434 Marinette Co. HA 926 Main St, Wausaukee, WI 54177 20 62,700 Wisconsin HSG & Econ Dev Auth PO Box 1728, Madison, WI 53701 12 51,770 Total for Housing Tenant Protection 17,463 $138,330,028 Public Housing Tenant Protection: County of Contra Costa HA 3133 Estudillo St, Martinez, CA 94553 94 1,134,768 HA Sarasota 1300 Blvd of the Arts, Sarasota, FL 34236 36 261,360 HA Punta Gorda 420 Myrtle St, Punta Gorda, FL 33950 200 1,113,600 HA Savannah PO Box 1179 200 East Brd St, Savannah, GA 31402 210 1,385,268 HA Atlanta GA 230 John Wesley Dobbs Ave. NE, Atlanta, GA 30303 712 6,599,232 Des Moines Municipal HA 100 East Euclid, Ste 101, Des Moines, IA 50313 100 563,170 HA of the City of East STL 700 North 20th St, East St Louis, IL 62205 28 178,080 Chicago HA 626 West Jackson Blvd, Chicago, IL 60661 2,794 23,795,492 Peoria HA 100 South Sheridan Rd, Peoria, IL 61605 214 1,123,448 Menard County HA PO Box 168, Petersburg, IL 62675 16 64,926 Appalachian Foothills HA 1214 Riverside Blvd, Wurtland, KY 41144 50 218,400 Boston HA 52 Chauncy St, Boston, MA 02111 295 3,378,426 Moorhead Pub HSG Agency 800 Second Ave North, Moorhead, MN 56560 46 192,096 Miss Regional HA VIII PO Box 2347, Gulfport, MS 39505 100 506,856 HA High Point 500 E Russell Ave, High Point, NC 27261 47 677,040 North Las Vegas HA 1632 Yale St, North Las Vegas, NV 89030 44 389,568 Cuyahoga MHA 1441 West 25th St, Cleveland, OH 44113 125 888,960 Trumbull MHA 4076 Youngstown Rd SE, Warrne, OH 44484 84 400,836 Clinton Metropolitan HA 478 Thorne Ave, Wilmington, OH 45177 30 141,120 Washington County HA 100 Crumrine Tower Franklin St, Washington, PA 15301 56 Metropolitan Dev & HSG 701 South Sixth St, Nashville, TN 37202 100 617,940 HA Jackson PO Box 3188, Jackson, TN 38301 270 1,273,320 Midland County 1710 Edwards, Midland, TX 79701 35 161,490 HA City of Seattle 120 Sixth Ave North, Seattle, WA 98109 44 444,840 Total for Public Housing Tenant Protections 5,730 $45,728,620 Grand Total 29,296 $229,205,510 [FR Doc. E6-4957 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Issuance of Permits AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of issuance of permit for endangered species. SUMMARY: The following permit was issued. ADDRESSES: Documents and other information submitted with this application is available for review, subject to the requirements of the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act, by any party who submits a written request for a copy of such documents to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, Virginia 22203; fax 703/358-2281. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Division of Management Authority, telephone
(703)358-2104. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that on the dates below, as authorized by the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ), the Fish and Wildlife Service issued the requested permit(s) subject to certain conditions set forth therein. For each permit for an endangered species, the Service found that
(1)the application was filed in good faith,
(2)the granted permit would not operate to the disadvantage of the endangered species, and
(3)the granted permit would be consistent with the purposes and policy set forth in Section 2 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Endangered Species Permit No. Applicant Receipt of application Federal Register notice Permit issuance date 113778 William G. Hatcher 70 FR 2562; January 17, 2006 March 1, 2006. Dated: March 17, 2006. Michael L. Carpenter, Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, Division of Management Authority. [FR Doc. E6-5018 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Receipt of Applications for Permit AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications for permit. SUMMARY: The public is invited to comment on the following applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species. DATES: Written data, comments or requests must be received by May 8, 2006. ADDRESSES: Documents and other information submitted with these applications are available for review, subject to the requirements of the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act, by any party who submits a written request for a copy of such documents within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, Virginia 22203; fax 703/358-2281. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Division of Management Authority, telephone 703/358-2104. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Endangered Species The public is invited to comment on the following applications for a permit to conduct certain activities with endangered species. This notice is provided pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). Written data, comments, or requests for copies of these complete applications should be submitted to the Director (address above). PRT-119840 *Applicant:* William G. Leffler, Jr., Palm Beach Gardens, FL The applicant requests a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy of one male bontebok ( *Damaliscus pygargus pygargus* ) culled from a captive herd maintained under the management program of the Republic of South Africa, for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species. PRT-119843 *Applicant:* Daniel S. Mac Curdy, Jupiter, FL The applicant requests a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy of one male bontebok ( *Damaliscus pygargus pygargus* ) culled from a captive herd maintained under the management program of the Republic of South Africa, for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species. Dated: March 17, 2006. Michael L. Carpenter, Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, Division of Management Authority. [FR Doc. E6-5024 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Receipt of an Application for an Incidental Take Permit for Proposed Construction of a Single-Family Home in Charlotte County, FL AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Robert Aulbach and Elizabeth Aulbach (Applicants) request an incidental take permit
(ITP)for a one-year term pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Applicants anticipate taking about 0.46 acre of Florida scrub-jay ( *Aphelocoma coerulescens* ) (scrub-jay) foraging, sheltering, and possibly nesting habitat, incidental to lot preparation for the construction of a single-family home and supporting infrastructure in Charlotte County, Florida (Project). The Applicants' Habitat Conservation Plan
(HCP)describes the mitigation and minimization measures proposed to address the effects of the Project to the Florida scrub-jay. These measures are outlined in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. DATES: Written comments on the ITP application and HCP should be sent to the Service's Regional Office (see ADDRESSES ) and should be received on or before May 8, 2006. ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to review the application and HCP may obtain a copy by writing the Service's Southeast Regional Office at the address below. Please reference permit number TE113867-0 in such requests. Documents will also be available for public inspection by appointment during normal business hours at the Southeast Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200, Atlanta, Georgia 30345 (Attn: Endangered Species Permits), or Field Supervisor, South Florida Ecological Services Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1339 20th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3559. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Dell, Regional HCP Coordinator, Southeast Regional Office (see ADDRESSES above), telephone: 404/679-7313, facsimile: 404/679-7081; or Mr. Mark Salvato, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, South Florida Ecological Services Field Office, Vero Beach, Florida (see ADDRESSES above), telephone: 772/562-3909, extension 340. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you wish to comment, you may submit written comments by any one of several methods. Please reference permit number TE113867-0 in such comments. You may mail comments to the Service's Southeast Regional Office (see ADDRESSES ). You may also comment via the Internet to *david_dell@fws.gov.* Please include your name and return address in your internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation from us that we have received your internet message, contact us directly at either telephone number listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). Finally, you may hand-deliver comments to either Service office listed above (see ADDRESSES ). Our practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home addresses from the administrative record. We will honor such requests to the extent allowable by law. There may also be other circumstances in which we would withhold from the administrative record a respondent's identity, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. We will not, however, consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. The Florida scrub-jay (scrub-jay) is geographically isolated from other species of scrub-jays found in Mexico and the western United States. The scrub-jay is found exclusively in peninsular Florida and is restricted to xeric uplands (mostly consisting of oak-dominated scrub). Increasing urban and agricultural development has resulted in habitat loss and fragmentation, which has adversely affected the distribution and numbers of scrub-jays. The total estimated population is between 7,000 and 11,000 individuals (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990. Recovery plan for the Florida scrub-jay, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia). The scrub-jays using the Applicants' residential lot and adjacent properties are part of a larger complex of scrub-jays located in a matrix of urban and natural settings in Charlotte County. Construction of the Project's infrastructure and facilities will result in the destruction of 0.46 acre of foraging, sheltering, and possibly nesting habitat and is expected to result in the take, in the form of harm, of one family of scrub-jays, incidental to the carrying out of these otherwise lawful activities. The Applicants propose to minimize and avoid incidental take by conducting clearing activities outside of the nesting season, removal of exotic vegetation from the lot, and maintenance of the remaining area in native vegetation for use by the resident scrub-jays. The Applicants propose to replace any scrub oaks and wax myrtles that might be removed during land clearing. The Applicants propose to avoid landscaping with trees that will grow greater than 30 feet tall and potentially provide perch trees for predators that may prey on scrub-jays on this lot and surrounding unimproved lots. The Applicants propose to implement measures to remove and to discourage the presence of free-roaming cats on the lot as they can be a potential predator on young scrub-jays. The Applicants propose to mitigate the take of scrub-jays through contribution of $25,822 to the Charlotte County Florida Scrub-Jay Conservation Fund or other appropriate conservation fund approved by the Service. Funds in this account are earmarked for use in the conservation and recovery of scrub-jays and may include habitat acquisition, restoration, and management. A similar account is also in development between the Service and The Nature Conservancy. The Service has determined that the Applicants' proposal, including the proposed mitigation and minimization measures, will individually and cumulatively have a minor or negligible effect on the species covered in the HCP. Therefore, the ITP is a “low-effect” project and qualifies as a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as provided by the Department of Interior Manual (516 DM 2, Appendix 1 and 516 DM 6, Appendix 1). This preliminary information may be revised based on our review of public comments that we receive in response to this notice. Low-effect HCPs are those involving:
(1)Minor or negligible effects on federally listed or candidate species and their habitats, and
(2)minor or negligible effects on other environmental values or resources. The Applicants' HCP qualifies for the following reasons: 1. Approval of the HCP would result in minor or negligible effects on the Florida scrub-jay population as a whole. The Service does not anticipate significant direct or cumulative effects to the Florida scrub-jay population as a result of the project. 2. Approval of the HCP would not have adverse effects on known unique geographic, historic, or cultural sites, or involve unique or unknown environmental risks. 3. Approval of the HCP would not result in any significant adverse effects on public health or safety. 4. The project does not require compliance with Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management), Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), or the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, nor does it threaten to violate a Federal, State, local, or tribal law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment. 5. Approval of the Plan would not establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision in principle about future actions with potentially significant environmental effects. The Service will evaluate the HCP and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). If it is determined that those requirements are met, the ITP will be issued for incidental take of the Florida scrub-jay. The Service will also evaluate whether issuance of the section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP complies with section 7 of the Act by conducting an intra-Service section 7 consultation. The results of this consultation, in combination with the above findings, will be used in the final analysis to determine whether or not to issue the ITP. This notice is provided pursuant to section 10 of the Endangered Species Act and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). Dated: March 24, 2006. Cynthia K. Dohner, Acting Regional Director, Southeast Region. [FR Doc. E6-4988 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Receipt of an Application and Availability of an Environmental Assessment for an Incidental Take Permit for Florida Scrub-Jays During Construction for the Expansion of the Deltona Regional Library, Deltona, Volusia County, FL AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The County of Volusia, Environmental Management Division (Applicant) requests an incidental take permit
(ITP)pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Applicant anticipates taking two families of Florida scrub-jays ( *Aphelocoma coerulescens* ) (scrub-jay) over the requested 30-year permit term as a result of the destruction of 1.9 acres of foraging, sheltering, and possible nesting habitat, incidental to land clearing for the expansion of the Deltona Regional Library and supporting infrastructure in Volusia County, Florida (Project). The Applicant's Habitat Conservation Plan
(HCP)describes the mitigation and minimization measures proposed to address the effects of the Project to the Florida scrub-jay. These measures are outlined in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. We announce the availability of the ITP application and HCP and an environmental assessment. DATES: Written comments on the ITP application and HCP should be sent to the Service's Regional Office (see ADDRESSES ) and should be received on or before June 5, 2006. ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to review the application, environmental assessment, and HCP may obtain a copy by writing the Service's Southeast Regional Office, Atlanta, Georgia. Please reference permit number TE103648-0 in such requests. Documents will also be available for public inspection by appointment during normal business hours at the Regional Office, 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200, Atlanta, Georgia 30345 (Attn: Endangered Species Permits), or Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 6620 Southpoint Drive South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, Florida 32216-0912. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Dell, Regional HCP Coordinator, (see ADDRESSES above), telephone: 404/679-7313, facsimile: 404/679-7081; or Mr. Michael Jennings, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Jacksonville Field Office, Jacksonville, Florida (see ADDRESSES above), telephone: 904/232-2580, ext. 113. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you wish to comment, you may submit comments by any one of several methods. Please reference permit number TE103648-0 in such comments. You may mail comments to the Service's Regional Office (see ADDRESSES ). You may also comment via the Internet to “ *david_dell@fws.gov* ”. Please submit comments over the Internet as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Please also include your name and return address in your Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation from us that we have received your Internet message, contact us directly at either telephone number listed below (see *Further Information* ). Finally, you may hand deliver comments to either Service office listed below (see ADDRESSES ). Our practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address from the administrative record. We will honor such requests to the extent allowable by law. There may also be other circumstances in which we would withhold from the administrative record a respondent's identity, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. We will not, however, consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. The Florida scrub-jay (scrub-jay) is geographically isolated from other species of scrub-jays found in Mexico and the western United States. The scrub-jay is found exclusively in peninsular Florida and is restricted to xeric uplands (predominately in oak-dominated scrub). Increasing urban and agricultural development has resulted in habitat loss and fragmentation that has adversely affected the distribution and numbers of scrub-jays. The total estimated population is between 7,000 and 11,000 individuals. The decline in the number and distribution of scrub-jays in east-central Florida has been exacerbated by tremendous urban growth in the past 50 years. Much of the historic commercial and residential development has occurred on the dry soils that previously supported scrub-jay habitat. Based on existing soils data, much of the historic and current scrub-jay habitat of coastal east-central Florida occurs proximal to the current shoreline and larger river basins. Much of this area of Florida was settled early because few wetlands restricted urban and agricultural development. Due to the effects of urban and agricultural development over the past 100 years, much of the remaining scrub-jay habitat is now relatively small and isolated. What remains is largely degraded due to the exclusion of fire that is needed to maintain xeric uplands in conditions suitable for scrub-jays. Surveys conducted during the summer of 2004 found two scrub-jay family groups using a total of about 2.5 acres that will be impacted by the Project. The remaining habitat for these two families of scrub-jays is protected within the Lyonia Preserve, a county-owned and managed parcel dedicated to scrub and scrub-jay conservation. Lyonia Preserve is contiguous with the Project site and contains another 18 families of scrub-jays. Scrub-jays using the Project site are part of a larger complex of scrub-jays located in a matrix of urban and natural settings in areas of western Volusia County. Scrub-jays in urban areas are particularly vulnerable and typically do not successfully produce young that survive to adulthood. Persistent urban growth in this area will likely result in further reductions in the amount of suitable habitat for scrub-jays. Increasing urban pressures are also likely to result in the continued degradation of scrub-jay habitat as fire exclusion slowly results in vegetative overgrowth. Thus, over the long-term, scrub-jays are unlikely to persist in urban settings, and conservation efforts for this species should target acquisition and management of large parcels of land outside the direct influence of urbanization. The retention of small patches of habitat similar to the onsite mitigation proposed by the Applicant can provide benefits to scrub-jays by creating “stepping stones” used by scrub-jays dispersing between larger parcels of conservation lands in Volusia County. Construction of the Project's infrastructure and facilities will result in harm to scrub-jays, incidental to the carrying out of these otherwise lawful activities. Habitat alteration associated with the proposed expansion of the regional library and associated infrastructure will reduce the availability of foraging, sheltering, and possible nesting habitat for two families of scrub-jays. The Applicant proposes to minimize impacts to scrub-jays by reducing the Project's footprint and avoiding active nest sites during the breeding season. The Applicant proposes to mitigate the take of scrub-jays by protecting and managing scrub-jay habitat within Lyonia Preserve pursuant to an agreement between the Service and County of Volusia. In that agreement, Volusia County agreed to provide long-term protection of scrub-jay habitat and to implement land management activities that will enhance habitat for this species. Until the Service and County of Volusia entered into this agreement, no such protection was afforded to scrub-jays in Lyonia Preserve. In return for their commitment to protect and manage scrub-jay habitat within Lyonia Preserve, the agreement stipulates that the County of Volusia's Public Works Department and Volusia County School District may use the Lyonia Preserve as a scrub-jay mitigation site for locally sponsored projects, such as the expansion of the regional library. The Applicant proposes to use a portion of their scrub-jay enhancement credits as mitigation for the Project. The Service has made a preliminary determination that issuance of the requested ITP is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This preliminary information may be revised due to public comment received in response to this notice and is based on information contained in the EA and HCP. This notice is provided pursuant to section 10 of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ) and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). We will evaluate the HCP and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the Act. If it is determined that those requirements are met, the ITP will be issued for the incidental take of the Florida scrub-jay. We will also evaluate whether issuance of the section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP complies with section 7 of the Act by conducting an intra-Service section 7 consultation. The results of this consultation, in combination with the above findings, will be used in the final analysis to determine whether or not to issue the ITP. Dated: January 27, 2006. Cynthia K. Dohner, Acting Regional Director, Southeast Region. [FR Doc. E6-4985 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Availability of an Environmental Assessment and Umbrella Incidental Take Permit Coverage for Small Lot Developments Throughout 34 Florida Counties AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared, and proposes to make available for use by the public for a term of seven years, a combined Habitat Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment (HCP/EA) that addresses incidental take of the threatened Florida scrub-jay ( *Aphelocoma coerulescens* ) (scrub-jay) that would result from residential, commercial, industrial, and similar development activities on properties one acre or smaller in size located in urban areas. The Service anticipates that the HCP/EA will act as an “umbrella” document for qualifying landowners who might need an incidental take permit
(ITP)pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act
(Act)on an estimated total of 14,928 acres of scrub-jay foraging, sheltering, and nesting habitat throughout 34 counties. The HCP portion of this document identifies minimization and mitigation measures that will be required of individual landowners wishing to participate under the umbrella HCP/EA. A more detailed description of the mitigation and minimization measures required pursuant to section 10 of the Act is provided in the HCP/EA and in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. DATES: Written comments on the HCP/EA should be sent to the Service's Regional Office (see ADDRESSES ) and received on or before June 5, 2006. ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to review the HCP/EA may obtain a copy by writing the Service's Southeast Regional Office, Atlanta, Georgia. Requests must be in writing to be processed. Please reference permit number TE109021-0 in such requests. The document will also be available for public inspection by appointment during normal business hours at the Regional Office, 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200, Atlanta, Georgia 30345 (Attn: Endangered Species Permits); Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 6620 Southpoint Drive South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, Florida 32216; or Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1339 20th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, 32960. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Dell, Regional HCP Coordinator, (see ADDRESSES above), telephone: 404/679-7313, facsimile: 404/679-7081; Mr. Michael Jennings, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Jacksonville Field Office, Jacksonville, Florida (see ADDRESSES above), telephone: 904/232-2580, ext. 113.; or Ms. Trish Adams, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, South Florida Ecological Services Office, Vero Beach, Florida (see ADDRESSES above). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you wish to comment, you may submit written comments by any one of several methods. Please reference permit number TE109021-0 in such comments. You may mail comments to the Service's Regional Office (see ADDRESSES ). You may also request documents or comment via the Internet to “ *david_dell@fws.gov* ”. Please include your name and return address in your Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation from us that we have received your Internet message, contact us directly at either telephone number listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). Finally, you may hand deliver comments to any Service office listed above (see ADDRESSES ). Our practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address from the administrative record. We will honor such requests to the extent allowable by law. There may also be other circumstances in which we would withhold from the administrative record a respondent's identity, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. We will not, however, consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. The Florida scrub-jay (scrub-jay) is geographically isolated from other species of scrub-jays found in Mexico and the western United States. The scrub-jay is found exclusively in peninsular Florida and is restricted to xeric uplands (predominately in oak-dominated scrub). Increasing urban and agricultural development, and subsequent fire suppression, has resulted in habitat degradation, loss and fragmentation which have adversely affected the distribution and numbers of scrub-jays. The total estimated population is between 7,000 and 11,000 individuals (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990. Recovery plan for the Florida scrub-jay, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia). Since the listing of the scrub-jay in 1987 (52 FR 42661), owners of property in urban areas that are occupied by scrub-jays have been challenged with the difficulty of complying with section 9 of the Endangered Species of 1973, as amended (Act), which prohibits the take of scrub-jays. The majority of land owners with property in urban areas that is occupied by scrub-jays have been faced with the choice of complying with the Act by not clearing or constructing in occupied scrub-jay habitat, complying with the Act by obtaining a section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit
(ITP)prior to land clearing, or potentially violating the take prohibitions under section 9 of the Act by clearing lots without coverage from an ITP. Each of these alternatives has limitations; land owners may incur costs associated with ongoing property tax burdens and local government assessments for infrastructure improvements while not developing property they own, or they may incur costs and time constraints associated with obtaining an ITP. Lot owners who choose not to pursue an ITP for land clearing, may be faced with violating section 9 of the Act, which can result in fines and/or imprisonment. The cost and complexity of complying with the Act is thought to have precluded many individual lot owners from seeking ITPs for otherwise lawful activities, such as land clearing and construction. Additionally, most local governments have not embraced large-scale scrub-jay conservation planning efforts and have not encouraged their residents to comply with the Act because of perceived legal and fiscal constraints the Act may impose on them. The failure of individual lot owners to seek regulatory relief from the prohibitions of take has also resulted in the continued degradation of scrub-jay habitat because their properties remain unmanaged and impacts are not mitigated. Indian River County and the City of Sebastian successfully completed an ITP application and received authorization, TE026007-0, to take scrub-jays resulting from residential and commercial development. This planning effort resulted in the only area-wide HCP that is currently available to land owners whose property is occupied by scrub-jays. However, the plan area for this HCP and area covered by the incidental take authorization is restricted to the city limits of the City of Sebastian and, therefore, offers no regulatory or financial relief to landowners in other areas of the state. Recognizing the limitations that the above-mentioned alternatives place on owners of property in urban areas, the Service considered methods to streamline the section 10(a)(1)(B) permitting process, while still providing conservation benefits to the Florida scrub-jay. This umbrella HCP/EA is the culmination of our review of streamlining options. Although the focus of this HCP/EA is on modifications to existing permitting processes, the premise for these modifications is based on available biological information indicating that Florida scrub-jays in some urban areas will not persist long-term and are unlikely to substantially contribute to the recovery of the species. The umbrella HCP/EA is intended to result in conservation benefits to the scrub-jay through minimization and mitigation of impacts. To minimize take of the scrub-jay, land clearing activities would not take place during the scrub-jay nesting season (March 1 through June 30). To mitigate for the loss of up to 14,928 acres of scrub-jay habitat, participating landowners would have the option of providing funding to acquire and perpetually manage two acres of habitat for every one acre of habitat that will be impacted, or of acquiring scrub-jay habitat in a Service-approved conservation bank. Funds provided by participating landowners would be used to purchase or otherwise encumber scrub-jay habitat, manage and restore scrub-jay habitat, monitor scrub-jays or their habitat, or conduct applied research for the benefit of scrub-jays. Landowners would provide funding to a dedicated account managed by The Nature Conservancy (TNC). The TNC would subsequently use these mitigation funds to purchase scrub-jay habitat based on priority areas identified by the Service, fund habitat management or restoration projects. At this time, no scrub-jay conservation banks have been approved by the Service. We include conservation banks as a mitigation option in the umbrella HCP/EA in order to maintain incentives for private interests that may want to develop a scrub-jay conservation bank in the future. Conservation banks have been established for a few other listed species throughout the Southeast, as well as in other regions of the country. A conservation bank typically comprises a tract of land managed to restore, enhance, and protect a listed species' habitat with the purpose of making units of habitat value available for sale to third-party project applicants who need to compensate for impacts to listed species that would result from their projects. Ideally, a conservation bank would make listed species mitigation practicable for project proponents who otherwise would find it difficult to develop their own mitigation plan. The Service has made a preliminary determination that issuance of incidental take permits in accordance with the proposed HCP/EA is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This preliminary determination is based on information contained in the HCP/EA and may be revised, however, due to public comment received in response to this notice. The Service will also evaluate whether issuance of section 10(a)(1)(B) ITPs in accordance with the proposed HCP/EA complies with section 7 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ) by conducting an intra-Service section 7 consultation. The results of the biological opinion, in combination with the above findings, will be used in our final analysis to determine whether or not to make the HCP/EA available for use by qualifying landowners and to issue ITPs. This notice is provided pursuant to section 10 of the Endangered Species Act and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). Dated: March 21, 2006. Cynthia K. Dohner, Acting Regional Director. [FR Doc. E6-5036 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Draft Safe Harbor Agreement With Assurances and Application for an Enhancement of Survival Permit for the Houston Toad in Bastrop County, TX AGENCY: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability; receipt of application. SUMMARY: Small Family Investments, Ltd. (Applicant) has applied to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for an enhancement of survival permit pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act
(Act)of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The requested permit, which is for a period of 12 years, includes a draft Safe Harbor Agreement
(SHA)for the endangered Houston toad ( *Bufo houstonensis* ) in Bastrop County, Texas. We invite the public to review and comment on the permit application and the associated SHA. DATES: To ensure consideration, written comments must be received on or before May 8, 2006. ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to review the application may obtain a copy by writing to the Regional Director, P.O. Box 1306, Room 4102, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87103. Persons wishing to review the draft SHA or other related documents may obtain a copy by written or telephone request to Paige Najvar, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, Texas 78758 (512-490-0057; Fax 512-490-0974). The documents will also be available for public inspection, by appointment only, during normal business hours (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) at the Service's Austin office. The Draft Agreement may also be obtained from the Internet at *http://www.fws.gov/ifw2es/Documents/R2ES/Small_SHA_for_notice.pdf.* Comments concerning the draft SHA or other related documents should be submitted in writing to the Field Supervisor at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, Texas 78758. Please refer to permit number TE-120475-0 when submitting comments. All comments received will become a part of the official administrative record and may be made available to the public. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paige Najvar at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, Texas 78758 (512-490-0057; Fax 512-490-0974), or *Paige_Najvar@fws.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Applicant has applied to the Service for a section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of survival permit for the endangered Houston toad in Bastrop County, Texas for a period of 12 years. The Applicant intends to work collaboratively with Environmental Defense and the Service to implement conservation measures that are expected to provide a net conservation benefit to the Houston toad and will improve the quality of Houston toad habitat on the 836-acre property in Bastrop County, Texas. The Applicant has agreed to undertake conservation measures such as prescribed burning and brush thinning activities in order to control invasive woody understory species and decrease existing fuel load. These conservation measures are expected to facilitate the establishment of native, herbaceous vegetation while expanding and enhancing potential breeding, foraging, and hibernating habitats for the Houston toad currently occupying the property and the adjacent Bastrop State Park. Incidental take of toads may occur on the property due to habitat management actions conducted in accordance with the conservation measures in the SHA, on-going ranch activities, and the possible cessation of management activities by the Applicant. We provide this notice pursuant to section 10(c) of the Act, the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C 4371 et seq.), and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). Geoffrey L. Haskett, Acting Regional Director, Region 2, Albuquerque, New Mexico. [FR Doc. E6-4993 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs Proposed Finding for Federal Acknowledgment of the Mashpee Wampanoag Indian Tribal Council, Incorporated of Massachusetts AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Proposed Finding. SUMMARY: Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.10(h), notice is hereby given that the Associate Deputy Secretary
(ADS)proposes to determine that the Mashpee Wampanoag Indian Tribal Council, Inc., P.O. Box 1048, Mashpee, Massachusetts 02649, c/o Mr. Glenn Marshall, is an Indian tribe within the meaning of Federal law. This notice is based on a determination that the petitioner satisfies all seven mandatory criteria, and thus, meets the requirements for a government-to-government relationship with the United States. DATES: Comments are due on or before October 3, 2006. Publication of this notice of the proposed finding in the **Federal Register** initiates a 180-day comment period during which the petitioner, interested and informed parties, and the public may submit arguments and evidence to support or rebut the evidence relied upon in the proposed finding. Interested or informed parties must provide a copy of their comments to the petitioner. ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed finding or requests for a copy of the summary evaluation of the evidence should be addressed to the Office of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, Attention: Office of Federal Acknowledgment, 1951 Constitution Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 34B-SIB, Washington, DC 20240. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. Lee Fleming, Director, Office of Federal Acknowledgment,
(202)513-7650. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published in the exercise of authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the ADS by Secretarial Order 3259, of February 8, 2005, as amended on August 11, 2005. The acknowledgment process is based on the regulations at 25 CFR Part 83. Under these regulations, the petitioner has the burden to present evidence that it meets the seven mandatory criteria in section 83.7. The Mashpee petition is being considered under time-frame set by a July 22, 2005, Joint Settlement Agreement and Stipulated Dismissal (Agreement) entered into by the petitioner and the Department in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The Mashpee Wampanoag Indian Tribal Council, Inc. of Massachusetts (MWT, petitioner #15) submitted a letter of intent to petition for Federal acknowledgment on July 7, 1975. As per the Agreement, the ADS placed the petitioner on active consideration on October 1, 2005. The Mashpee petitioner is located in the town of Mashpee, Barnstable County, Massachusetts, on the southeastern portion of Cape Cod along Nantucket Sound. Criterion 83.7(a) requires that the petitioner be identified as an American Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis since 1900. The available evidence demonstrates that since 1900 external observers identified the petitioning group now known as the Mashpee Wampanoag Indian Tribal Council, Incorporated, or a group of the petitioner's ancestors as an American Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis since 1900. Criterion 83.7(b) requires that a predominant portion of the petitioning group comprises a distinct community and has existed as a community from historical times until the present. The Mashpee petitioner is located in an area that was traditionally Wampanoag. Based on the evaluation of its 1,462 members, the petitioner represents a group of lineal descendants of the Wampanoag Indians who have inhabited this area since first sustained contact with non-Indians in the early colonial period. From 1665 to 1720, the Mashpee inhabited a praying town that provided considerable political autonomy. In 1720, the colony established a proprietary system for the Mashpee, a system of government that also afforded them significant political authority. In 1746, the colonial legislature limited this self-rule by assigning three guardians to the Mashpee proprietors. For the next 16 years, the Mashpee frequently petitioned the legislature with complaints about the overseers, and were able to govern their affairs despite the presence of the overseers. In 1763, the colony, in response to the Mashpee complaints made the settlement a self-governing “Indian” district. This political structure remained until after the American Revolution. The evidence shows that almost all of the Mashpee maintained a distinct community during the colonial and revolutionary eras. Colonial officials regularly described the Mashpee as being a distinct Indian entity. Other available evidence of shared religious activities by the Mashpee also demonstrates the existence of a social community distinct from that of surrounding populations. There is also good evidence from the colonial and revolutionary periods to demonstrate that much more than 50 percent, in fact almost all, of the Mashpee resided in a defined geographical area, the town of Mashpee, exclusively, or almost exclusively, composed of its members. This residential patterns provides evidence which, under 83.7(b)(2)(i), is sufficient by itself to demonstrate community during the colonial and revolutionary eras. From 1788 to 1834, when State overseers were again assigned to the group, the Mashpee remained set apart from surrounding populations. A large portion, as many as two-thirds, of the members demonstrated shared religious practices through the Mashpee Baptist church from 1788 to 1834, which is also good evidence of community. State officials in reports consistently described the distinct Indian character of the Mashpee at this time, thereby providing good evidence of community from 1788 to 1834. This evidence is sufficient under criterion 83.7(b)(i). The available evidence further shows that virtually all the Mashpee from 1802 to 1834 lived in a defined geographical area composed almost exclusively of its members. Evidence shows that the Mashpee who lived outside the town usually did so only on a temporary basis, thereby retaining contact with the majority. This evidence is sufficient in itself to show community during this period under criterion 83.7(b)(2) for the period from 1802 to 1834. The petitioner also provided significant evidence under 83.7(c) of political influence or authority for this period that demonstrates interaction and social ties and thus provides additional evidence of community. During the period, 1834 to 1870, when the State of Massachusetts designated the town of Mashpee an Indian district, the State generated records, particularly the 1849 Briggs Report and the 1861 Earle Report, which showed the Mashpee settlement was a distinct Indian community with significant social relationships and interactions. Through the district government, the Mashpee controlled most of the social and economic behavior of the Indian community. The Baptist church also maintained its position as an important social institution for a large portion of the Mashpee. The available evidence also shows that a large majority of the Mashpee during this time, as high as 82 percent in the late 1860's, lived in a defined geographical area composed almost exclusively of its members. There is also evidence that those few who lived outside of the town either lived very close by or were doing so only temporarily and were likely to return, thereby maintaining social ties to the majority in the town. This evidence is sufficient in itself to show community during these years under criterion 83.7(b)(2)(i). Moreover, the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate the exercise of political authority from 1834 to 1870, using evidence described in 83.7(c)(2). This evidence shows Mashpee leaders using the district government to allocate group resources on common lands and fisheries and to exert influence on the behavior of the Mashpee, including through law enforcement by the district constables. Under 83.7(b)(2)(v), this political evidence is also sufficient evidence of community during this period. In 1870, the Mashpee Indian District became an incorporated town, which the Mashpee controlled politically for the next 100 years. From 1870 to 1930, the town records showed that almost all the political offices were held by the Mashpee and contemporary records described a distinct Mashpee Indian community in and around the town of Mashpee. Early in this period, evidence of conflict among the Mashpee over the sale of collective land demonstrated both social interactions among the Mashpee and their distinct character from that of other populations in the area. The Baptist church and Parish Committee remained important social institutions for a majority of the Mashpee from 1870 to 1930. The available evidence further shows a large majority of the Mashpee during this time, as many as 87 percent by the early 1930's, lived in a defined geographical area composed almost exclusively of its members. There is also evidence during this period that those few Mashpee who lived outside of the town, often in adjacent towns or other areas on the Cape, maintained contact with those in the town through a high rate of return migration. This evidence is sufficient in itself to show community during these years, under criterion 83.7(b)(2)(i). There is also good evidence for this period of significantly high patterns of intra-group marriages, as described in 83.7(b)(1), from 1860 to 1930. These high rates of intra-group marriage resulted in extensive kinship ties among the Mashpee that have fostered social interaction and relationships within the Mashpee to this day. During the remainder of the town period, 1930 to 1974, contemporary records described the Mashpee in a way that demonstrated the group constituted a distinct entity with significant social relationships and interactions among a predominant portion of the membership. It was a community bounded by a common ancestry, politics, geography, culture, and extensive kinship ties. The available evidence shows that the Parish Committee and Baptist church functioned as important social organizations for a significant portion of the group into the early 1970's, although the significance of the latter declined after the 1960's. There is also good evidence of socials and other activities that involved Mashpee from many family lines and multiple generations throughout the period. Significant kinship ties provided by still high intra-group marriage rates also facilitated social relationships and interactions within the group during this time. In addition, the petition record contains evidence of concentrated residential patterns that show a significant part of the group still lived in an exclusive settlement in the town of Mashpee from 1930 to 1974. These residency patterns are good evidence of community. Moreover, the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate the exercise of political influence or authority from 1870 to 1965, using evidence described in 83.7(c)(2). This evidence shows Mashpee selectmen and public officials using the town government to regulate fisheries, including the catching of herring, shellfish, and trout obtained from streams and waterways and exerting influence on the behavior of the Mashpee on a consistent basis through their control of the police department. The Mashpee provided this leadership for a town in which they continued to make up the large majority of the year-round population up to 1965. Under 83.7(b)(2)(v), this political evidence is also sufficient evidence of community during that period. In 1974, the Mashpee lost control of the town government to non-Indians. For the period since 1974, when the group has been governed by an incorporated council, the petitioner presented good evidence of social interactions and relationships connected to the Mashpee's land claim suit (1976-1983) that mobilized the support of a significant portion of the group. The petition record also contains evidence of social distinction by non-members towards the Mashpee because of the land-claim suit and other controversial events that show distinct community. For this period, the majority of group members have continued to reside in or near their historical territory of the town of Mashpee. In addition to geographic proximity around an area of exclusive settlement within the town of Mashpee, social relationships and informal social interactions within the community are facilitated by kinship patterns that include substantial rates of intra-group marriage among Mashpee members and a persistent and extensive network of extended family connections. Different family lines are well represented in various Mashpee events and activities, some of which are sponsored by the incorporated council. Group involvement is additionally expressed through a historically recognized political division within its membership of “traditionals” and “non-traditionals.” The petitioner also provided significant evidence under 83.7(c) of political influence or authority since the middle 1970's that demonstrates interaction and social ties and thus provides additional evidence of community. The petitioner presented sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it has comprised a distinct community since first sustained contact with non-Indians. Therefore, the petitioner meets the requirements of criterion 83.7(b). Criterion 83.7(c) requires that the petitioner has maintained political influence or authority over its members as an autonomous entity from historical times until the present. Wampanoag leadership at the time of first sustained contact in the 1620's was provided by a hereditary chief or sachem. The area around what is now the town of Mashpee, Massachusetts, had a number of these sachems controlling several villages joined in a loose confederacy. For the period between 1665 and 1746, after the formation of the praying town, there is evidence that the Mashpee exerted political authority over its members, first through a six-member council and then later through a proprietorship. Native religious leaders also exercised important political influence during this period. After the Massachusetts colony appointed guardians in 1746, the Mashpee proprietors regularly petitioned the colonial authorities of Massachusetts for the next 16 years, demanding a change in government. In 1763, shortly after sending one of their members to petition the King of England and his ministers with a list of their grievances, they persuaded the colonial legislature to give them full self-rule once again, a form of government that lasted until 1788. Therefore, the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it meets 83.7(c) for the colonial and revolutionary periods. In addition, the group supplied evidence of community through the Mashpee's residential patterns during the colonial and revolutionary periods to meet the requirements of paragraph 83.7(b)(2)(i), which is also sufficient to demonstrate political influence, under 83.7(c)(3) during that period. Following the American Revolution a number of Mashpee women provided notable leadership in defending standards of behavior and opposing outside control of land and resources in the town of Mashpee. Between 1788 and 1834, when Massachusetts again appointed overseers to supervise the group, the Mashpee frequently petitioned State authorities complaining about the activities of these overseers. State records acknowledged that despite the presence of overseers between 1788 and 1834, the Mashpee remained essentially autonomous and self-governing. Indeed, one State investigation report from 1827 stated that the Mashpee had been running their “municipal affairs” for the past hundred years. In 1834, the State, in response to their entreaties, gave the Mashpee greater self-government by establishing an “Indian District” in Mashpee, Massachusetts. Therefore, the petitioner provided good evidence to demonstrate that it meets 83.7(c) for 1788 to 1834. In addition, the group supplied evidence of community through the Mashpee's residential patterns during the overseer period to meet the requirements of paragraph 83.7(b)(2)(i) that is also sufficient to demonstrate political influence, under 83.7(c)(3), during that period. As an Indian District, between 1834 and 1870, the Mashpee gained complete control of political, legal, and economic affairs in the town once again. District status gave the Mashpee control over government, local justice, schools, roads, parish, and welfare. The Mashpee allocated group resources by regulating common lands and waterways. This regulation included laws regarding grazing of livestock, cutting of timber, and the catching of herring, trout, eels, and shellfish. They also controlled group behavior through law enforcement by the local constables. The consistent allocation of group resources and control of individual behavior are sufficient evidence in themselves, under 83.7(c)(2)(i) and (iii), of political influence, and therefore, under 83.7(b)(2)(v), are also sufficient to demonstrate community during this time as well. In addition, the group supplied evidence of community through the Mashpee's residential patterns during the district period to meet the requirements of paragraph 83.7(b)(2)(i) that is also sufficient to demonstrate political influence, under 83.7(c)(3), during that period. In 1870, the State of Massachusetts incorporated the Indian district of Mashpee as a town. The evidence shows that from 1870 to 1974, the Mashpee adapted the principal elements of the town governmental system for their own political needs. The Mashpee employed the town government as the primary structure by which they maintained political influence and/or authority over members. The Department's Final Determination for Federal Acknowledgment of the Wampanoag Tribal Council of Gay Head, Inc. provides precedent for evaluating such a governmental form as meeting 83.7(c). This type of government also provided the Mashpee with the means to continue the allocation of group resources through the regulation of fisheries and the ability to control individual behavior of members through the local police department from 1870 to 1965, when they represented much more than a majority of the year-round population in the town. The consistent allocation of group resources and control of individual behavior are sufficient evidence in themselves, under 83.7(c)(2)(i) and (iii), of political influence for those years and, therefore, under 83.7(b)(2)(v), is also sufficient to demonstrate community during this time as well. In addition, the group supplied evidence of community through the Mashpee's residential patterns from 1870 to 1930 to meet the requirements of paragraph 83.7(b)(2)(i) that is also sufficient to demonstrate political influence during that period under 83.7(c)(3). Since 1974, the petitioner maintained political influence and authority over its members in the following ways. First, the incorporated council, formed in 1974, mobilized significant numbers of members and resources to meet group purposes through ongoing programs, events, and associations. Extended family networks play an important role in facilitating communication and political involvement among members. Second, while there are notable political divisions within the group, most members consider the actions taken by the incorporated council's leaders to be important. Within the incorporated council, leadership is multifaceted including both traditional and business positions. During this period, informal leadership within the group also existed along with the authority of the incorporated council. Third, there is widespread knowledge and communication regarding political processes, which disseminates mostly through family networks. And fourth, there are intense intra-group conflicts that demonstrate controversy over valued group goals, policies, and decisions. Since the late 1990's, internal disputes have intensified because the incorporated council changed its administrative processes and style of leadership, which culminated with the adoption of a new constitution in 2004. The petitioner meets the requirements of 83.7(c) from historical times to the present. Criterion 83.7(d) requires that the petitioner provide a copy of the group's present governing document including its membership criteria. The petitioner submitted a certified copy of its constitution, and bylaws, which were adopted on June 26, 2004. The constitutional requirements for membership include tracing descent from a Mashpee Indian on the 1861 Earle Report, or from Charles or Leander Peters, who were Christiantown Indians identified on the Earle Report, and maintaining “affiliation with the tribe.” The constitution also describes the duties of the governing body, which is composed of elected officers and council members, and a “chief” and “medicine man” who are “selected by the general Tribal membership according to Tribal custom.” The 2004 constitution also describes the composition and duties of a newly instituted “Tribal Judiciary” branch. The petitioner also sent copies of its previous governing documents and a description of the enrollment practices in place before the adoption of the 2004 constitution. The petitioner submitted a copy of its current governing document, which includes its membership criteria and the processes by which it governs itself. Therefore, the petitioner meets criterion 83.7(d). Criterion 83.7(e) requires that the petitioner's membership consist of individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe or from historical Indian tribes which combined and functioned as a single autonomous political entity. The historical tribe is determined to be Wampanoag Indians or “South Sea Indians” generally residing in and around the area of the Indian villages of Massipee (later Mashpee), Santuit, and Cotuit, Barnstable County, Massachusetts, at the time of first sustained historical contact in the 1620's. The membership of the historical tribe, for purposes of calculating descent from that tribe, consists of the “Marshpee” Indians identified in the 1861 Earle Report on the Indians in Massachusetts. The analysis for this proposed finding shows that the Mashpee Indians identified by Earle were the same individuals, or descendants of individuals, who had been identified previously in 1833, 1842, and 1849 as members of the Mashpee tribe living in the Mashpee Indian District. Thus, the evidence supports Earle's identification of the Mashpee Indian entity as it continued to exist in 1861. The petitioner's documented ancestors were among the 391 “Marshpee Indians” who were named in the 1861 Earle Report as members of the tribe and residents of the “Marshpee Indian District.” The petitioner claims that about 98 percent of the members (1,427 of 1,462) descend from Mashpee Indians identified on the 1861 Earle Report and that about 2 percent of the group descend from two Christiantown Indians, Charles H. and Leander Peters, who according to the petitioner's governing document, are eligible ancestors. The petitioner submitted evidence which shows that about 90 percent of the current members (1,323 of 1,462) have documented their claimed ancestry and meet the group's own membership requirements in its 2004 governing document: 88 percent from the historical Mashpee tribe as defined by the 1861 Earle Report, and 2 percent solely from two Christiantown Indians. Based on precedents in previous findings, this 88 percent is sufficient to meet the requirements of 83.7(e)(1) for descent from the historical tribe. However, the petitioner is urged to submit the necessary evidence to document the ancestry for the remaining 139 individuals (10 percent of 1,462). The petitioner submitted a membership list dated November 15, 2002, with the full names, birth dates, and addresses of 1,462 members, which was separately certified by the current governing body on February 23, 2006. The MWT submitted a separately certified membership list, and documented that 88 percent of its members descend from the historical Mashpee tribe. Based on precedents, the MWT meets the requirements of criterion 83.7(e). Criterion 83.7(f) requires that the membership of the petitioning group be composed principally of persons who are not members of any acknowledged North American Indian tribe. A review of the available documentation revealed that the membership is composed principally of persons who are not members of any acknowledged North American Indian tribe. The petitioner meets criterion 83.7(f). Criterion 83.7(g) requires that neither the petitioner nor its members be the subject of congressional legislation that has expressly terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship. A review of the available documentation showed no evidence that the petitioning group was the subject of congressional legislation to terminate or prohibit a Federal relationship as an Indian tribe. The petitioner meets the requirements of criterion 83.7(g). Based on this preliminary finding, the Department proposes to acknowledge as an Indian Tribe under 25 CFR Part 83 the petitioner known as the Mashpee Wampanoag Indian Tribal Council, Incorporated. As provided by 25 CFR 83.1(h), a report summarizing the evidence, reasoning, and analyses that are the basis for the proposed decision will be provided to the petitioner and interested parties, and is available to other parties upon written request. Publishing notice of the proposed finding in the **Federal Register** initiates a 180-day comment period during which the petitioner, interested and informed parties, and the public may submit arguments and evidence to support or rebut the evidence used in the proposed finding. Interested or informed parties must provide copies of their submissions to the petitioner. The regulations, 25 CFR 83.10(k), provide the petitioner a minimum of 60 days to respond to any submissions by interested and informed parties on the proposed finding during the comment period. The Agreement modifies this time-frame, providing the MWT a 30-day response period. If the MWT wants the 60-day response period, it must notify the Department in writing prior to the expiration of the 30-day response period. If the interested or informed parties do not provide submissions during the 180-day comment period, the MWT may submit a written waiver of its response period to the Department. As provided in the Agreement, the Department will issue a final determination on the MWT petition on or before March 30, 2007. If the Mashpee petitioner does not request the full 60-day response period, the Department will work to issue the final determination before March 30, 2007. The Department, as per the Agreement, will exercise due diligence to publish notice of the proposed finding in the **Federal Register** within 5 business days of being issued. After the publication of notice of the final determination, the petitioner or any interested party may file a request for reconsideration with the Interior Board of Indian Appeals
(IBIA)under the procedures set forth in section 83.11 of the regulations. This request must be received by the IBIA no later than 90 days after the publication of the final determination in the **Federal Register** . The final determination will become effective as provided in the regulations 90 days from the **Federal Register** publication unless a request for reconsideration is filed within that time period. Dated: March 31, 2006. James E. Cason, Associate Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-5017 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-G1-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation Liquor Code AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice publishes the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Tribal Liquor Code (Code). The Code regulates and controls the possession, sale and consumption of liquor within the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. The Reservation is located on trust land and this Code allows for the possession and sale of alcoholic beverages within the exterior boundaries of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. This Code will increase the ability of the tribal government to control the community's liquor distribution and possession, and at the same time will provide an important source of revenue for the continued operation and strengthening of the tribal government and the delivery of tribal services. DATES: *Effective Date:* This Code is effective on April 6, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Betty Scissons, Division of Tribal Government Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Northwest Regional Office, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-4169, Telephone
(503)231-6723, Fax 503-231-2201; or Ralph Gonzales, Office of Tribal Services, 1951 Constitution Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 320-SIB, Washington, DC 20240, Telephone
(202)513-7629. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Act of August 15, 1953, Public Law 83-277, 67 Stat. 586, 18 U.S.C. 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in *Rice* v. *Rehner* , 463 U.S. 713 (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall certify and publish in the **Federal Register** notice of adopted liquor codes for the purpose of regulating liquor transactions in Indian country. The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Board of Trustees adopted its Liquor Code by Resolution No. 05-127 on December 19, 2005. The purpose of this Code is to govern the sale, possession and distribution of alcohol within the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. This notice is published in accordance with the authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I certify that this Liquor Code of the Confederated Tribes of Coos was duly adopted by the Board of Trustees on December 19, 2005. Dated: March 31, 2006. Michael D. Olsen, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Tribal Liquor Code reads as follows: Liquor Code Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Liquor Code Chapter 1. Liquor Code Section 1.01. Title This Code shall be the Liquor Code of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (Confederated Tribes) and shall be referenced as the Liquor Code. Section 1.02. Findings and Purpose A. The introduction, possession, and sale of liquor on Indian reservations have historically been recognized as a matter of special concern to Indian tribes and to the United States. The control of liquor on the Umatilla Indian Reservation remains exclusively subject to the legislative enactments of the Confederated Tribes in its exercise of its governmental powers over the Reservation, and the United States. B. Federal law currently prohibits the introduction of liquor into Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1154), leaving tribes the decision regarding when and to what extent liquor transactions, sales, possession and service shall be permitted on their reservation (18 U.S.C. 1161). C. The Board of Trustees, as the governing body of the Confederated Tribes pursuant to Article VI, § 1 of the Constitution and Bylaws of the Confederated Tribes, discussed and approved a Resolution to permit the sale and service of liquor at the Wildhorse Resort & Casino, but at no other location, at the Board of Trustee meeting held on October 3, 2005. D. Pursuant to the authority in Article VI, § 1(a) of the Confederated Tribes' Constitution, the Board of Trustees has the authority “to represent the [Confederated] Tribes and to negotiate with the Federal, State and local governments * * * on * * * projects and legislation that affect the [Confederated] Tribes”. E. Pursuant to the authority in Article VI, § 1(d) of the Confederated Tribes' Constitution, the Board of Trustees has the authority “to promulgate and enforce ordinances governing the conduct of all persons and activities within the boundaries of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, providing for the procedure of the Board of Trustees, and carrying out any powers herein conferred upon the Board of Trustees”. F. The enactment of this Liquor Code to govern liquor sales and service on the Umatilla Indian Reservation, and the limitation of such liquor sales and service at the Wildhorse Resort & Casino, will increase the ability of the Confederated Tribes to control Reservation liquor distribution and possession, and at the same time will provide an important source of revenue for the continued operation of tribal government and the delivery of governmental services, as well as provide an amenity to customers at the Wildhorse Resort & Casino. G. The Confederated Tribes will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU)with the Oregon Liquor Control Commission to deal with governmental issues associated with the licensing and regulation of liquor sales on the Umatilla Indian Reservation. Section 1.03. Definitions A. Unless otherwise required by the context, the following words and phrases shall have the designated meanings. 1. *“Alcohol”.* That substance known as ethyl alcohol, hydrated oxide or ethyl, spirits or wine as defined herein, which is commonly produced by the fermentation or distillation of grain, starch, molasses, or sugar, or other substances including all dilutions and mixtures of those substances. 2. *“Wildhorse Chief Operating Officer”.* That person appointed by the Confederated Tribes to manage the Wildhorse Resort & Casino. 3. *“Liquor” or “Liquor Products”.* Includes the four varieties of liquor herein defined (alcohol, spirits, wine, and beer) and all fermented, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquor, or a combination thereof, and mixed liquor, a part of which is fermented, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquor or otherwise intoxicating in every liquid or solid or semi-solid or other substance patented or not containing alcohol, spirits, wine, or beer, and all drinks of potable liquids and all preparations or mixtures capable of human consumption, and any liquid, semi-solid, solid, or other substance, which contains more than one percent (1%) of alcohol by weight shall be conclusively deemed to be intoxicating. 4. *“Wildhorse Resort & Casino”.* Shall be the casino, hotel, golf course, and RV park located on the 640 acre Wildhorse site located on the Umatilla Indian Reservation which is more specifically described in Exhibit 1 to the Tribal-State Compact between the Confederated Tribes and the State of Oregon. 5. *“Sale” and “Sell”.* Includes exchange, barter, and traffic; and also the supplying or distribution by any means whatsoever, of liquor or any liquid known or described as beer or by any name whatever commonly used to describe malt or brewed liquor or wine, by any person to any other person; and also includes the supply and distribution to any other person. 6. *“Spirits”.* Any beverage which contains alcohol obtained by distillation, including wines exceeding seventeen percent (17%) of alcohol by weight. 7. *“Wine”.* Any alcoholic beverage obtained by fermentation of fruits, grapes, berries, or any other agricultural product containing sugar, to which any saccharin substances may have been added before, during or after fermentation, and containing not more than seventeen percent (17%) of alcohol by weight, including sweet wines fortified with wine spirits, such as port, sherry, muscatel, and anglican, not exceeding seventeen percent (17%) of alcohol by weight. Section 1.04. Jurisdiction To the extent permitted by applicable law, the Confederated Tribes asserts jurisdiction to determine whether liquor sales and service are permitted within the boundaries of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. As provided in section 1.06 of this Code, liquor sales and service is only permitted at the Wildhorse Resort & Casino facilities under this Code. Nothing in this Code is intended nor shall be construed to limit the jurisdiction of the Confederated Tribes to all lands within the boundaries of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. Section 1.05. Relation to Other Laws All prior codes, ordinances, resolutions and motions of the Confederated Tribes regulating, authorizing, prohibiting, or in any way dealing with the sale or service of liquor are hereby repealed and are of no further force or effect to the extent they are inconsistent or conflict with the provisions of this Code. Specifically, amendments to the Criminal Code to make it consistent with this Liquor Code have been approved by Resolution 05-095 (October 3, 2005). No Tribal business licensing law or other Tribal law shall be applied in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of this Code. Section 1.06. Authorized Sale and Service of Liquor A. Liquor may be offered for sale and may be served on the Umatilla Indian Reservation only at the following Wildhorse Resort & Casino facilities: Casino, hotel, golf course, and RV park. The sales and service of liquor at Wildhorse Resort & Casino facilities may only be permitted in the following areas. 1. *Casino.* Lounge(s), restaurant(s), bingo/multipurpose hall when used for entertainment, food service, or convention/meeting purposes, conference/meeting room facility, entertainment facilities constructed within or adjacent to the Casino building and on casino premises in connection with special events (i.e., concert, rodeo event, car shows, etc.). All such sales and service of liquor shall be consistent with the Tribal-State Compact. 2. *Golf course.* Clubhouse and on the golf course. 3. *Hotel.* Hotel meeting room and in hotel rooms by guest use of room service, etc. 4. *RV park.* In common area at special events and in individual RVs. B. The Board of Trustees hereby authorizes the Wildhorse Chief Operating Officer to apply for and maintain the appropriate license(s) from the Oregon Liquor Control Commission
(OLCC)for the sales and service of liquor at the Wildhorse Resort & Casino as provided in this Code. The Wildhorse Chief Operating Officer is further authorized to treat as a casino expense any license fees associated with the OLCC liquor license. Section 1.07. Prohibitions A. *General Prohibitions.* The commercial introduction of liquor for sales and service, other than by the Confederated Tribes through its Wildhorse Resort & Casino as permitted by this Code, is prohibited within the Umatilla Indian Reservation, and is hereby declared an offense under Tribal law. Federal liquor laws applicable to Indian Country shall remain applicable to any person, act, or transaction which is not authorized by this Code and violators of this Code shall be subject to federal prosecution as well as to legal action in accordance with the law of the Confederated Tribes. B. *Age Restrictions.* No person shall be authorized to serve liquor to casino patrons unless they are at least 21 years of age. No person may be served liquor unless they are 21 years of age. C. *No Consumption of Liquor Outside of Wildhorse Resort & Casino Premises.* All liquor sales and service authorized by this Code shall be fully consumed within the areas of the Wildhorse Resort & Casino as set forth in § 1.06 of this Code. No open containers of liquor, or unopened containers of liquor in bottles, cans, or otherwise may be permitted outside of the above-described premises. D. *No Credit Liquor Sales.* The sales and service of liquor authorized by this Code shall be upon a cash basis only. Payment for liquor shall be by cash, credit card, or check. Section 1.08. Conformity With State Law Authorized liquor sales and service on the Umatilla Indian Reservation shall comply with Oregon State liquor law standards to the extent required by 18 U.S.C. 1161. The Wildhorse Chief Operating Officer shall be responsible for ensuring that all OLCC license requirements are satisfied, that the license(s) is renewed on an annual basis, and that all reasonable and necessary actions are taken to sell and serve liquor to Wildhorse patrons in a manner consistent with this Code, applicable State law, and the Tribal-State Compact. The Wildhorse Chief Operating Officer shall also be authorized to purchase liquor from the State or other source for sale and service within the Wildhorse Resort & Casino. Section 1.09. Penalty Any person or entity possessing, selling, serving, bartering, or manufacturing liquor products in violation of any part of this Code shall be subject to a civil fine of not more than $500 for each violation involving possession, but up to $5,000 for each violation involving selling, bartering, or manufacturing liquor products in violation of this Code, and violators may be subject to exclusion from the Umatilla Indian Reservation. In addition, persons or entities subject to the criminal jurisdiction of the Confederated Tribes who violate this Code shall be subject to criminal punishment as provided in the Criminal Code. All contraband liquor shall be confiscated by the Umatilla Tribal Police Department (UTPD). The Umatilla Tribal Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to enforce this Code and the civil fines, criminal punishment and exclusion authorized by this section. Section 1.10. Sovereign Immunity Preserved Nothing in this Code is intended or shall be construed as a waiver of the sovereign immunity of the Confederated Tribes. No manager or employee of the Wildhorse Resort & Casino shall be authorized, nor shall they attempt, to waive the sovereign immunity of the Confederated Tribes pursuant to this Code. Section 1.11. Severability If any provision or provisions in this Code are held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, this Code shall continue in effect as if the invalid provision(s) were not a part hereof. Section 1.12. Effective Date This Code shall be effective following approval by the Board of Trustees and approval by the Secretary of the Interior or his/her designee and publication in the **Federal Register** as provided by Federal law. Appendix A Legislative History Liquor Code Legislative History The Board of Trustees enacted the Liquor Code in Resolution No. 05-094 (October 3, 2005). In Resolution No. 05-127 (December 19, 2005), the Board amended section 1.12 of the Code. No further amendments or revisions have been enacted. [FR Doc. 06-3336 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 11
Traces to 11 documents
U.S. Code
CFR
14 references not yet in our index
- Pub. L. 108-173
- 45 CFR 164
- 45 CFR 5
- 44 USC 3501-3520
- 21 CFR 807
- 21 CFR 801
- 24 CFR 982
- 24 CFR 791
- 103 Stat. 1987
- 40 CFR 1506.6
- 25 CFR 83
- Pub. L. 83-277
- 67 Stat. 586
- 463 U.S. 713
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of a Modified or Altered System of Records (SOR)
SCOTUS463 U.S. 713
Pub. L.Pub. L. 108-173
Cite45 CFR 164
Cites 25 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources