Notices. Notice of Final Fair Market Rents (FMRs) for Fiscal Year 2006, Additional Revision

2,830 words·~13 min read·/register/2006/06/02/06-4918

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 4210-67-M DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-4995-N-06] Final Fair Market Rents for the Housing Choice Voucher Program and Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy Program for Fiscal Year 2006; Additional Revision AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research, HUD. ACTION: Notice of Final Fair Market Rents

(FMRs)for Fiscal Year 2006, Additional Revision. SUMMARY: This notice updates the FMRs for the metropolitan areas of Aquadilla, Arecibo, Barranquitas, Caguas, Fajardo, Guayama, Ponce, and San Juan, PR. DATES: *Effective Date:* June 2, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: For technical information on the methodology used to develop FMRs or a listing of all FMRs, please call the HUD USER information line at

(800)245-2691 or access the information on the HUD Web site, *http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html.* FMRs are listed at the 40th or 50th percentile in Schedule B. For informational purposes, a table of 40th percentile recent mover rents for those areas currently at the 50th percentile FMRs will be provided on the same website noted above. Any questions related to use of FMRs or voucher payment standards should be directed to the respective local HUD program staff. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at

(800)877-8339. (Other than the HUD USER information line and TTY numbers, telephone numbers are not toll-free.) Update In response to numerous public comments about Puerto Rico's FY2006 FMRs, HUD conducted a detailed analysis of the Random Digit Dialing rent surveys

(RDDs)that were used in setting Puerto Rico's FY2006 FMRs. According to the RDD surveys, 57 percent of all Puerto Rico rental units lacked hot and cold piped water in the kitchen, which makes them substandard units that would be ineligible for inclusion in the voucher program. HUD also compared the housing characteristics of the RDD sample with detailed information from the 2000 Census to correct for sampling bias. The bias occurs because HUD can only survey land-line telephones and yet, in Puerto Rico, there is a greater percentage of households using cell-phones instead of land-line telephones compared to the United States. A detailed analysis of the RDD surveys and weighting corrections to compensate for these factors produces changes in the FY2006 FMR estimates that HUD is implementing with this notice. FMRs for the affected areas are increased as follows: 2006 Fair market rent area Number of bedrooms 0 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4 BR Aguadilla-Isabela-San Sebastian, PR MSA $300 $325 $361 $464 $519 Arecibo, PR HMFA 316 343 381 520 609 Barranquitas-Aibonito-Quebradillas, PR HMFA 311 336 374 476 547 Caquas, PR MSA 347 375 418 579 698 Fajardo, PR MSA 360 392 435 632 763 Guayama, PR MSA 316 341 380 539 668 Ponce, PR MSA 368 399 442 614 700 San Juan-Guaynabo, PR HMFA 385 419 465 607 723 Dated: May 24, 2006. Darlene F. Williams, Assistant Secretary for Policy, Development and Research. [FR Doc. E6-8532 Filed 6-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Initiation of a 5-Year Review of the Northern Distinct Population Segment of the Copperbelly Water Snake AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of review. SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service, we), announces a 5-year review of the northern distinct population segment

(DPS)( *i.e.* , in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana north of 40 degrees north latitude) of the copperbelly water snake ( *Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta* ) under section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973

(Act)(16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). We request any information on the snake that has become available since its original listing in 1997 (62 FR 4183) that has a bearing on its classification as threatened. A 5-year review is a periodic process conducted to ensure that the classification of a listed species is appropriate. It is based on the best scientific and commercial data available at the time of the review. Based on the results of this 5-year review, we will make a finding of whether this species is properly classified under section 4(c)(2)(B) of the Act. DATES: Information must be received no later than August 1, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit information to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Supervisor, 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101, East Lansing, Michigan 48823-6316, or electronic information to: *fw3copperbellywatersnake5year@fws.gov* . See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for file formats and other information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carrie Tansy, East Lansing Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES ); telephone

(517)351-6289; facsimile

(517)351-1443. Individuals who are hearing impaired or speech impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at

(800)877-8337 for TTY assistance. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Act, the Service maintains a list of endangered and threatened wildlife and plant species

(List)at 50 CFR 17.11 and 17.12. Amendments to the List through final rules are published in the **Federal Register** . The Lists of wildlife and plants are available on our Internet site at *http://www.fws.gov/endangered/wildlife/html#species* . Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act requires that we conduct a review of listed species at least once every five years. Section 4(c)(2)(B) requires that we determine

(1)whether a species no longer meets the definition of threatened or endangered and should be removed from the List (delisted);

(2)whether a species more properly meets the definition of threatened and should be reclassified from endangered to threatened; or

(3)whether a species more properly meets the definition of endangered and should be reclassified from threatened to endangered. Using the best scientific and commercial data available, a species will be considered for delisting if the data substantiate that the species is neither endangered nor threatened for one or more of the following reasons:

(1)The species is considered extinct;

(2)the species is considered to be recovered; and/or

(3)the original data available when the species was listed, or the interpretation of such data, were in error. Any change in Federal classification requires a separate rulemaking process. The regulations in 50 CFR 424.21 require that we publish a notice in the **Federal Register** announcing those species currently under active review. This announces our active review of the northern DPS of the copperbelly water snake. Public Solicitation of New Information To ensure that the 5-year review is complete and based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we are soliciting new information from the public, concerned governmental agencies, tribes, the scientific community, industry, environmental entities, and any other interested parties concerning the status of the northern DPS of the copperbelly water snake. A 5-year review considers the best scientific and commercial data and all new information that has become available since the listing determination or most recent status review. Requested information includes

(A)species biology, including but not limited to population trends, distribution, abundance, demographics, and genetics;

(B)habitat conditions, including but not limited to amount, distribution, and suitability;

(C)conservation measures that have been implemented that benefit the species;

(D)threat status and trends; and

(E)other new information, data, or corrections, including but not limited to taxonomic or nomenclature changes, identification of erroneous information contained in the List, and improved analytical methods. The copperbelly water snake was listed as a distinct population segment of a vertebrate taxon. The listed DPS occurs in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana north of 40 degrees north latitude (approximately Indianapolis, Indiana). A distinct vertebrate population segment is defined in the February 7, 1996, Policy Regarding the Recognition of Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments (61 FR 4722). For a population to be listed under the Act as a DPS, three elements are considered:

(1)The discreteness of the population segment in relation to the remainder of the species to which it belongs;

(2)the significance of the population segment to the species to which it belongs; and

(3)the population segment's conservation status in relation to the Act's standards for listing ( *i.e.* , is the population segment endangered or threatened?). Distinct population segments of vertebrate species, as well as subspecies of all listed species, may be proposed for separate reclassification or for removal from the List. As required by the DPS policy, we will assess the validity of the current DPS designation during the 5-year review. The southern population ( *i.e.* , in Illinois, Kentucky, and Indiana south of 40 degrees north latitude) is not listed as a threatened species at this time and is not part of this 5-year review. Electronic Access and Filing You must submit electronic information (see ADDRESSES ) in MS Word, Rich Text format, or Plain Text format, and include “Copperbelly Water Snake 5-Year Review Comments” in the title line. You may submit your comments and materials to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Supervisor (see ADDRESSES ) no later than the close of the comment period (see DATES ) to allow us adequate time to conduct this 5-year review. If you do not respond to this request for information but subsequently possess information on the status of this species, we are eager to receive new information regarding federally listed species at any time. Our practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Respondents may request that we withhold a respondent's identity, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name or address, you must state this request prominently at the beginning of your comment. We will not, however, consider anonymous comments. To the extent consistent with applicable law, 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. Information received in response to this notice and review will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours (see ADDRESSES ). Authority: This document is published under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). Dated: May 19, 2006. Wendi Weber, Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, Region 3. [FR Doc. E6-8565 Filed 6-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Paiute Cutthroat Trout Restoration Project, Carson-Iceberg Wilderness, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, Alpine County, CA AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent of public scoping. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321, *et seq.* ), the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) as the lead agency, advises the public that we intend to gather information necessary to prepare, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service (Forest Service), an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)on the proposed Paiute Cutthroat Trout Restoration Project (Project). The Forest Service is a cooperating agency because activities within designated wilderness on National Forest System lands require Forest Service approval (36 CFR 261.9f, 293.6c). The Service provides this notice to:

(1)Describe the proposed action and possible alternatives;

(2)advise other Federal and State agencies, affected Tribes, and the public of our intent to prepare an EIS;

(3)announce the initiation of a 30-day public scoping period; and

(4)obtain suggestions and information on the scope of issues and alternatives to be included in the EIS. DATES: A public meeting will be held on: June 19, 2006 from 4 to 7 p.m. Written comments should be received on or before July 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at Turtle Rock Park Community Center 17300 State Route 89 Markleeville, California 96120. Information, written comments, or questions related to the preparation of the EIS and the NEPA process should be submitted to Robert D. Williams, Field Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service, Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office, 1340 Financial Boulevard, Suite 234, Reno, Nevada 89502; or FAX

(775)861-6301. Comments may be submitted electronically to *fw8pctcomments@fws.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chad Mellison (See ADDRESSES ) at

(775)861-6300. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Reasonable Accommodation Persons needing reasonable accommodations in order to attend and participate in the public meeting should contact Chad Mellison (See ADDRESSES ) at

(775)861-6300 as soon as possible. In order to allow sufficient time to process requests, please call no later than one week before the public meeting. Information regarding this proposed action is available in alternative formats upon request. Authority This action is done in accordance with Recovery implementation section 4(f)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). Background At the time of its original listing as endangered under the Endangered Species Protection Act of 1966, non-native trout were considered a threat to the Paiute cutthroat trout (PCT; *Oncorhynchus clarki seleniris* ). In 1975, PCT were reclassified as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and a 4(d) rule was issued to facilitate management between California Department of Fish and Game and the Service. In order to recover the subspecies, non-native trout need to be removed from their historic habitat and PCT reintroduced as specified in the 2004 Revised PCT Recovery Plan. Without this project, PCT in the Silver King drainage will continue to be at risk from an illegal introduction of non-native trout and/or stochastic (one time) events such as a large fire or flood. Recovery of the species cannot be achieved without this project and the long-term survival of the species will be in doubt. We propose to eradicate non-native trout with the piscicide rotenone from 14.7 kilometers (9.1 miles) of historic PCT habitat, in Silver King Creek, from Llewellyn Falls downstream to Silver King Canyon as well as the accessible reaches of three small named tributaries: Tamarack Creek, Tamarack Lake Creek, the lower reaches of Coyote Valley Creek downstream of barrier falls, and Tamarack Lake. Environmental Impact Statement The Service has selected Entrix to prepare the EIS. Entrix will prepare the EIS under the supervision of the Service, which will be responsible for the scope and content of the NEPA document. NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* ) requires that Federal agencies conduct and environmental analysis of their proposed actions to determine if the actions may significantly affect the human environment. Under NEPA, a reasonable range of alternatives to proposed projects is developed and considered in the Services' environmental review. Alternatives considered for analysis in an EIS may include: Variations in the scope of proposed activities; variations in the location, amount, and types of conservation; variations in activity duration; or, a combination of these elements. In addition, the EIS will identify potentially significant direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on biological resources, land use, air quality, water quality, water resources, socio-economics, and other environmental issues that could occur with the implementation of the proposed action and alternatives. For all potentially significant impacts, the EIS will identify avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to reduce these impacts, where feasible, to a level below significance. The EIS will consider the proposed action, no action, and a reasonable range of alternatives. A detailed description of the impacts of the proposed action and each alternative will be included in the EIS. The alternatives to be considered for analysis in the EIS may include: Various fish removal methods; variations in timing; or, a combination of these elements. Request for Comments The primary purpose of the scoping process is for the public to assist the Services in developing the EIS by identifying important issues and alternatives related to the proposed action. A public meeting will be held on June 19, 2006 as noted in the DATES section above. Written comments from interested parties are welcome to ensure that the full range of issues related to the proposed action are identified. All comments and materials received, including names and addresses, will become part of the administrative record and may be released to the public. Comments and materials received will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Service requests that comments be specific. In particular, we request information regarding: Direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of implementation of the proposed action; other possible alternatives that meet the purpose and need; potential adaptive management and/or monitoring provisions; existing environmental conditions in the project area; other plans or projects that might be relevant to this proposed project; and minimization and mitigation efforts. The environmental review of this project will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the NEPA of 1969 as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* ), Council on the Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1518), other applicable Federal laws and regulations, and applicable policies and procedures of the Services. This notice is being furnished in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.7 to obtain suggestions and information from other agencies and the public on the scope of issues and alternatives to be addressed in the EIS. Dated: May 23, 2006. John Engbring, Acting Deputy Manager, California/Nevada Operations Office, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. 06-4918 Filed 6-1-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 3

Traces to 3 documents

U.S. Code

CFR