Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2006-11-02 · Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior · Notices

Notices. Notice of availability of record of decision

12,345 words·~56 min read·/register/2006/11/02/06-9022

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

BILLING CODE 6820-PE-M DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Record of Decision for the Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for the San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge (Sweetwater Marsh and South San Diego Bay Units) AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability of record of decision. SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announces the decision and availability of the Record of Decision
(ROD)for the Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (Final CCP/EIS) for the Sweetwater Marsh and South San Diego Bay Units of the San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge (NWR or Refuge). A thorough analysis of the environmental, social, and economic considerations was completed and presented in the Final CCP/EIS. The Final CCP/EIS was released to the public and a Notice of Availability was published in the **Federal Register** on August 25, 2006. The ROD documents the Service's decision to adopt and implement Alternative C (Implement Habitat Enhancement and Restoration and Improve Existing Public Uses) for the Sweetwater Marsh Unit and Alternative D (Expand Habitat Management, Enhance Nesting Opportunities, Maximize Habitat Restoration, and Provide Additional Public Use Opportunities) for the South San Diego Bay Unit. DATES: The ROD was signed by the Manager, California/Nevada Operations, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on September 29, 2006. ADDRESSES: A copy of the ROD may be obtained by writing to: Victoria Touchstone, Refuge Planner, San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Carlsbad, CA 92011 or by e-mailing *Victoria_Touchstone@fws.gov.* A copy of the Final CCP/EIS and associated Appendices is available at the following Web site address: *http://sandiegorefuges.fws.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victoria Touchstone, Refuge Planner, at the above street and e-mail address, or via telephone at
(760)431-9440 extension 349, or by fax at
(760)930-0256. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The San Diego Bay NWR, which consists of the Sweetwater Marsh and South San Diego Bay Units, is located approximately 10 miles north of the United States Mexico border in southwestern San Diego County, California. Collectively, the two Refuge Units encompass approximately 2,620 acres of land and water in and around the south end of San Diego Bay. The coastal wetlands protected within this Refuge annually provide essential foraging and resting habitat for tens of thousands of migratory shorebirds and wintering waterfowl traveling along the Pacific Flyway. The South San Diego Bay Unit also provides nesting habitat for a variety of colonial nesting seabirds. The Sweetwater Marsh Unit was established as a National Wildlife Refuge in 1988. Encompassing approximately 316 acres, this Refuge was established to protect federally listed endangered and threatened species. The South San Diego Bay Unit was established in 1999 as a unit of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge for the purpose of protecting, managing, and restoring habitats for federally listed endangered and threatened species and migratory birds. The Service currently manages approximately 2,300 acres of the 3,940 acres included within the Unit's approved acquisition boundary. The majority of this management area is leased to the Service by the California State Lands Commission. The Final CCP will provide guidance for how the refuge, its resources, and compatible public uses should be managed over the next 15 years. Three alternatives for the Sweetwater Marsh Unit and four alternatives for the South San Diego Bay Unit, along with the consequences of implementing each alternative, were described in detail in the Draft and Final CCP/EIS. The Draft CCP/EIS was distributed for public review and comment on July 22, 2005 and comments were accepted through September 19, 2005. The Service received 38 written comment letters and four individuals presented verbal comments at a public meeting held on August 30, 2005. All substantive issues raised in these comments were addressed through changes incorporated into the Final CCP/EIS and/or through responses to the comments, which are included in Appendix P, Responses to Comments, of the Final CCP/EIS. The ROD for the San Diego Bay NWR Final CCP/EIS has been prepared by the Service in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended. It documents the decision of the Service, based on the information contained in the San Diego Bay NWR Final CCP/EIS and the entire Administrative Record. The Service adopted and plans to implement Alternative C (Implement Habitat Enhancement and Restoration and Improve Existing Public Uses) for the Sweetwater Marsh Unit and Alternative D (Expand Habitat Management, Enhance Nesting Opportunities, Maximize Habitat Restoration, and Provide Additional Public Use Opportunities) for the South San Diego Bay Unit. These alternatives have been identified by the Service as the alternatives that would best achieve refuge purposes and contribute toward the mission of the NWRS, consistent with sound principles of fish and wildlife science, conservation, legal mandates, and Service policies. The selected alternatives recognize the need to provide high quality habitat for the Refuge's federally listed species, while also maintaining, and in some cases enhancing, the habitats needed to support the overall biological diversity of the Refuge. The selected alternatives also include expanded opportunities for compatible public use including wildlife observation, environmental education, and interpretation; provisions to protect cultural resources; recommendations for addressing existing contaminant issues; and proposals for establishing partnerships to address issues such as water quality, the accumulation of discarded fishing line around the bay, and stewardship of Refuge resources. Alternative C for the Sweetwater Marsh Unit would improve habitat quality and restore intertidal and upland habitats to support six federally listed species, along with the Refuge's other plant and animal resources. The existing trail system on Gunpowder Point would be redesigned and new interpretive elements would be provided to better complement the existing environmental education programs supported by the Refuge. Alternative D for the South San Diego Bay Unit would enhance nesting opportunities in and around the salt ponds for the California least tern, western snowy plover, and various other colonial seabirds; restore to native coastal habitats the former agricultural lands in the Otay River floodplain; restore 650 acres of commercial solar salt ponds to tidal influence to support intertidal mudflat and coastal salt marsh habitats; and manage the water and salinity levels in an additional 275 acres of salt ponds. Opportunities for wildlife observation, photography, and environmental interpretation would be expanded; a pedestrian pathway would be constructed along the southern end of the Refuge to improve wildlife observation opportunities for Refuge visitors; and the other public uses (i.e., fishing, environmental education, and boating) currently provided on the Refuge would be maintained. The Service considered the environmental and relevant concerns presented by agencies, organizations, and individuals and believes that implementing Alternative C for the Sweetwater Marsh Unit and Alternative D for the South San Diego Bay Unit is the best way to achieve the vision and goals for the Refuge. The selected alternatives are also the most consistent with the purposes of the Refuge, the mission of the NWRS, the recovery actions proposed for those federally listed species that are supported by the Refuge, and the bird conservation recommendations relevant to this part of the Pacific Flyway. These alternatives recognize the need to restore habitat essential to the recovery of listed species, while also protecting those habitats and conditions that currently support a diverse and abundant array of migratory birds. The selected alternatives also balance the need to protect habitat with the need to provide the public with the opportunity to experience and enjoy the resources being protected. Dated: October 18, 2006. Steve Thompson, Manager, California/Nevada Operations, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. E6-18373 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Final Environmental Impact Statement and Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability of record of decision. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce our decision and the availability of the Record of Decision
(ROD)for the Final Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)and Comprehensive Conservation Plan
(CCP)for Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge in accordance with National Environmental Policy Act requirements (NEPA). ADDRESSES: The ROD and Final EIS/CCP may be viewed at Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge Headquarters or at Refuge District Offices in Winona, Minnesota; La Crosse, Wisconsin; McGregor, Iowa; and Savanna, Illinois. You may obtain a copy of the ROD on the planning Web site at *http://www.fws.gov/midwest/planning/uppermiss* or by writing to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Conservation Planning, Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don Hultman,
(507)452-4232. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce our decision and the availability of the Record of Decision
(ROD)for the Final Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)and Comprehensive Conservation Plan
(CCP)for Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge in accordance with NEPA requirements (40 CFR 1506.6(b)). We completed a thorough analysis of the environmental, social, and economic considerations, which we included in the Final EIS/CCP. We released the Final EIS/CCP to the public and a published a notice of availability in the **Federal Register** (71 FR 39125, July 11, 2006). The ROD documents the selection of Alternative E, the Preferred Alternative in the Final EIS/CCP, with one modification. The ROD was signed by the Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Midwest Region, on August 24, 2006. The CCP for the Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge (Refuge) will guide the management and administration of the Refuge for the next 15 years. Alternative E, as described in the Final EIS, is the foundation for the CCP, with one modification. The modification designates 215 acres west of the Rieck's Lake area of Pool 4, in the area between Highway 35 and the railroad tracks, as a No Hunting Zone to avoid impacts to persons using the Buffalo River Access, access to the main river, and anglers desiring to fish in the area. Four alternatives and their consequences were developed for the Draft EIS and CCP. A fifth alternative, Alternative E, was developed based on extensive public input and comment, and was released as a Supplement to the Draft EIS (71 FR 2561, January 17, 2006). *Alternative A—No Action or Current Direction.* Continue current level of effort on fish and wildlife and habitat management. Public use programs would remain virtually unchanged. *Alternative B—Wildlife Focus.* Increase level of effort on fish and wildlife and habitat management. Some public use opportunities and programs would remain the same, others reduced in favor of wildlife and habitat protection. *Alternative C—Public Use Focus.* Increase level of effort on public use opportunities and programs. Continue current level of effort on many fish and wildlife and habitat management activities, and decrease effort on others in favor of public use. *Alternative D—Wildlife and Integrated Public Use Focus.* Increase level of effort on fish and wildlife and habitat management. Take a more proactive approach to public use management to ensure a diversity of opportunities for a broad spectrum of users, both for wildlife-dependent uses and traditional and appropriate non-wildlife-dependent uses. *Alternative E—Modified Wildlife and Integrated Public Use Focus (Preferred Alternative).* Increase level of effort on fish and wildlife and habitat management. Take a proactive but balanced approach to public use management to ensure a diversity of opportunities for a broad spectrum of users, both for wildlife-dependent uses and traditional and appropriate non-wildlife-dependent uses. Elements common to all alternatives included interagency coordination, agency access to restricted areas, NEPA compliance for projects (42 U.S.C. 4371 *et seq.* and 40 CFR 1500-1508), protection of threatened and endangered species and cultural resources, fire management, a continuation of general water-based recreation, mosquito management in the event of a health emergency, fish and wildlife disease control, and the fostering of volunteers and friends groups. *The Service's Basis for Decision:* Based on a review of the environmental consequences of each alternative, we judged Alternative E to be the environmentally preferable alternative. Although all alternatives have positive physical and biological environmental consequences, Alternatives D and E also address a variety of social, economic, and cultural issues. Alternative E is the most positive in terms of addressing human environmental issues, because it reflects input received during scores of public meetings and workshops, and through several thousand written comments. The Final EIS identified three broad needs:
(1)Contribute to the Refuge System mission;
(2)fulfill the purposes of the Refuge; and
(3)achieve Refuge goals for landscape conservation, environmental health, wildlife and habitat health, and recreation. Alternative E meets these needs through the most balanced and integrated approach. Alternative E reflects substantive changes to earlier preferred alternatives. These changes were in response to agency review and comment, 30 public meetings and workshops on the draft documents, and more than 3,000 written comments. Alternative E in the Final EIS is the alternative most responsive to agency and public comment and suggestion. It identifies objectives and strategies for completing land acquisition, habitat improvements, water quality improvements, invasive species control, fish and wildlife monitoring, and forest management, and providing targeted resting and feeding areas for waterfowl and other wildlife. These measures will help ensure the biological health of the Refuge beyond the 15-year scope of the CCP. Alternative E also strikes a balance between the needs of fish and wildlife and needs of people for recreation through reasonable restrictions on a portion of the Refuge. This approach may prove more sustainable, both in terms of resource values and economic values, than the status quo, and help sustain the greatest diversity of opportunity for the greatest number of people. Alternative E reflects a large body of scientific and management knowledge and experience on the river environment and the needs of the system to improve and thrive. It reflects numerous studies and reports from the U.S. Geological Survey, States, interagency teams, and Refuge-specific monitoring and studies. Changes in public use programs reflect numerous studies on wildlife and human interaction and disturbance, and the latest thinking in recreation management. The Refuge Improvement Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105-57) requires that all uses on a national wildlife refuge must be compatible with the purposes of the refuge and the mission of the Refuge System. Alternative E, with its various stipulations for certain uses, ensures that these uses remain compatible. All current recreational uses ( *e.g.* , hunting, fishing, observation and photography, and interpretation and environmental education) and wildlife-dependent economic uses ( *e.g.* , commercial fishing, guiding, fishing tournaments, and trapping) will continue, and opportunities will remain abundant in terms of the amount of land and water available and seasons of use. Adjustments in time, space, and period of use will help ensure the highest quality experience for the greatest number of users, and ensure each use remains compatible. Recreation is the main economic driver on the Refuge, and Alternative E will continue to have a positive economic impact since all current public use opportunities will continue, and are expected to grow, even though means, timing, and location of recreation will change in some areas to protect wildlife, habitat, and the recreation experience. In the long -term, providing for a greater diversity of recreational opportunities should strengthen local and regional economies. Alternative E identifies staffing needs tied to objectives and strategies to increase the capacity of the Refuge to meet its purpose and the Refuge System mission. Alternative E also addresses infrastructure needs for effective and efficient administration and management of the Refuge while serving the needs of the visiting public. Although differences of opinion will remain, Alternative E is the strongest alternative in terms of fostering cooperative conservation. Virtually every objective and associated strategy in Alternative E stresses a cooperative approach with the States, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the public. *Public Comments on Final EIS:* During the 30-day waiting period, we received 50 written comments. With one exception, the comments did not raise any issues not addressed in the Final EIS, and the comments did not result in changes to the analysis of environmental consequences or affect our response to similar comments in the Final EIS. The exception was a comment requesting retention of the Waterfowl Hunting Closed Area near Rieck's Lake, Pool 4, due to its proximity to residences, school bus stop locations, and a marina. This comment provided new information and resulted in the modification to Alternative E, as noted above. All written comments received during the waiting period are available for review at the Refuge headquarters in Winona, Minnesota ( *see* ADDRESSES Section). *Measures to Minimize Environmental Harm:* We addressed public concerns, potential impacts, and measures and stipulations to mitigate impacts in various sections of the Final EIS. We made 17 major changes to Alternative E between the Draft and Final EIS to mitigate public and agency concerns. Since the focus of the CCP is the improvement of the Refuge environment, there is little mitigation for physical environmental impacts. Also, many objectives in the CCP are programmatic in nature and local impacts unknown. Thus, we will identify mitigation for any project-specific impacts during detailed project planning and design. We prepared a biological assessment to address any impacts to federally-listed threatened or endangered species. The biological assessment concluded that implementation of Alternative E is not likely to appreciably reduce the survival and recovery of listed species. We also prepared compatibility determinations for all uses identified in Alternative E, and these determinations contain stipulations to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any environmental impacts from these uses and associated facilities. The Refuge Manager and District Managers will be responsible for ensuring that monitoring and stipulations identified in the CCP are completed or followed. Dated: September 13, 2006. Robyn Thorson, Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Snelling, Minnesota. [FR Doc. E6-18470 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Notice of Intent To Conduct Public Scoping and Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement Regarding the Coyote Springs Investments Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, Lincoln County, NV AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent; reopening of public comment period. 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 an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)regarding the proposed Coyote Springs Investment LLC (Applicant) Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and issuance of an incidental take permit (Permit) for endangered and threatened species in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Applicant proposes to develop a planned community in southern Lincoln County and implement conservation features (Project). The Applicant intends to request a Permit for incidental take of federally-listed threatened or endangered species, including desert tortoise ( *gopherus agassizii* ) as well as Evaluation List species. Evaluation List species include species that have been petitioned for listing; State-listed species; species that have been nominated for inclusion by technical specialists; and other species of concern that co-occur with federally listed species. The Service plans to refine the species list as a part of the scoping process. In accordance with the Act, the Applicant will prepare a MSHCP containing proposed measures to minimize and mitigate incidental take that could result from the Project. The Service provides this notice to:
(1)Announce the opening of an additional 30-day public scoping period;
(2)correct inaccurate contact information provided in the previous notice (71 FR 530704, September 12, 2006);
(3)describe the proposed action and possible alternatives;
(4)advise other Federal and State agencies, affected tribes, and the public of our intent to prepare an EIS;
(5)obtain suggestions and information on the scope of issues to be included in the EIS. The proposed action is approval of the MSHCP and issuance of the Permit. DATES: Written comments from all interested parties must be received on or before December 4, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for information related to the preparation of the EIS should be sent 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 and materials received will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the above address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeannie Stafford, Public Affairs Specialist, Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office, at 775-861-6300. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS was published in the **Federal Register** for this project on December 4, 2001 (66 FR 63065). A second notice was published on September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53704) because the amount of land included in the proposed MSHCP was modified. The MSHCP described in the 2001 notice included privately-owned, developable lands, and leased land in Lincoln County and Clark County, Nevada. The proposed MSHCP described in this, and the September 12, 2006, notice include private, developable lands in Lincoln County only, and leased lands in both Lincoln and Clark Counties. This notice is being published to allow for an additional 30-day comment period and to correct inaccurate contact information provided in the September 12, 2006 notice. In that notice, an invalid e-mail address was provided as a way to submit comments. For the purposes of this reopening of the scoping period, please submit comments in writing to the contact identified in the ADDRESSES section. The Applicant has initiated discussions with the Service regarding preparation of an MSHCP and issuance of a Permit for their activities, which include residential and commercial development, construction, and maintenance. The Applicant has also initiated discussions with the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)regarding land leases, and with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding project wetland permitting. Land leased and owned by the Applicant occupies most of the eastern portion of Coyote Springs Valley straddling the Pahranagat Wash and the Kane Springs Wash in Lincoln County. It consists of approximately 13,800 acres of land leased from the BLM in Lincoln and Clark Counties, and approximately 22,140 acres of developable private land in Lincoln County. The area is bordered by the Delamar Mountains to the north, the Meadow Valley Mountains to the east, and U.S. 93 to the west. The development area extends approximately 9 miles (14.48 kilometers) north of the Lincoln County/Clark County line. Leased land is bordered by SR 168 to the south in Clark County. Accordingly, BLM will be a cooperating agency for the environmental review. These lands are located in portions of Townships 11, 12, and 13 South and Ranges 63 and 64 East. The surrounding land is primarily owned and managed by the BLM and the Service. South of the development area, the Applicant's lands are being developed in Clark County and are not covered under this MSHCP. Some of the Applicant's future activities have the potential to impact species subject to protection under the Act. Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1538) and Federal regulations prohibit the “take” of a fish or wildlife species listed as endangered or threatened. Under the Act, the following activities are defined as take: to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect listed animal species, or to attempt to engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C. 1532). However, under section 10(a) of the Act, we may issue permits to authorize “incidental take” of listed species. “Incidental take” is defined by the ESA as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. Regulations governing permits for threatened species and endangered species are at 50 CFR 17.32 and 50 CFR 17.22, respectively. An applicant for a Permit under section 10 must prepare and submit to the Service for approval a Plan containing a multifaceted strategy for minimizing and mitigating all take associated with the proposed activities to the maximum extent practicable. The applicant must also ensure that adequate funding for the Plan will be provided. The Service will conduct an environmental review of the MSHCP and prepare an EIS. ENTRIX has been selected as the lead consultant to prepare the EIS under the supervision of the Service, which will be responsible for the scope and content of the NEPA document. NEPA requires that Federal agencies conduct an 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 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 measures; 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, socioeconomic conditions, and other environmental issues that could occur with implementation of the proposed action and alternatives. For all potentially significant impacts, the EIS identifies 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 address combinations of covered species, different permit effective periods, or a combination of elements. Written comments from interested parties are welcome to ensure that the issues of public concern related to the proposed action are identified. 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. Our practice is to make comments, including names, home addresses, home phone numbers, and email addresses of respondents, available for public review. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their names and /or homes addresses, etc., but if you wish us to consider withholding this information you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. In addition, you must present a rationale for withholding this information. This rationale must demonstrate that disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy. Unsupported assertions will not meet this burden. In the absence of exceptional, documentable circumstances, this information will be released. We will always make submissions from organization or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives of or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. The Service requests that comments be specific. In particular, the Service is requesting information regarding
(1)potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of implementation of the proposed action;
(2)other possible alternatives that meet the purpose and need;
(3)potential adaptive management and/or monitoring provisions;
(4)existing environmental conditions in the area;
(5)other plans or projects that might be relevant to this proposed project; and
(6)potential 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 Service. 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. It is estimated that the draft EIS will be available for public review during the first quarter of 2007. Dated: October 27, 2006. Ken McDermond, Deputy Manager, California/Nevada Operations Office, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. E6-18463 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [NV-020-2110-IW-F202] Notice to the Public of Temporary Public Lands Closures and Prohibitions of Certain Activities on Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management, Winnemucca Field Office, Nevada AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of temporary closure. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that certain lands located in northwestern Nevada are temporarily closed or restricted and certain activities are temporarily prohibited in and around an area near the city of Winnemucca known as Water Canyon and administered by the BLM Winnemucca Field Office in Humboldt County, Nevada. DATES: September 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006, inclusive. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Hays, Assistant Field Manager, Nonrenewable Resources, Winnemucca Field Office, Bureau of Land Management, 5100 E. Winnemucca Blvd., Winnemucca, NV 89445-2921, telephone:
(775)623-1500. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The specified closures, restrictions, and prohibitions are made in the interest of public and employee safety during the period of heavy construction equipment usage at and around the public lands in an area known as Water Canyon Recreation Area, Zone 1. The temporary closure is needed during the construction phase of the implementation of the “Water Canyon Implementation Plan Amendment” (Decision Record was signed 11/16/05). These lands are closed or restricted during the following times: • September 1, 2006, through December 31, 2006 inclusive: Restricted entry by the public into Zone 1 of the Water Canyon Recreation Area during certain time periods as outlined in the sections below, to provide for safety of individuals. Authority: 43 CFR 8364.1. 1. Public Closure Area: Within the following legally described locations: Mount Diablo Meridian T. 35 N., R. 38 E., Section 02, S 1/2 SW 1/4 portion inside barbed wire fence; Section 11; NE 1/4 and N 1/2 NW 1/4 portion inside barbed wire fence; Section 12, SW 1/4 NW 1/4 , N 1/2 SW 1/4 , and NW 1/4 SE 1/4 portion inside barbed wire fence. 1.0 Between September 1, 2006 and December 31, 2006 Inclusive 1.1 Motorized Use Motor vehicle use of any kind by the public is prohibited in Zone 1 of the Water Canyon Recreation Area. The following exceptions apply: Any administrative use authorized by BLM. Any authorized law enforcement or emergency personnel may enter as needed to perform their official duties. 1.2 Public Entry Public entry of any persons or individuals is prohibited in Zone 1, during working hours from Monday through Friday. The following exceptions apply: Any administrative use authorized by BLM. Any authorized law enforcement or emergency personnel may enter as needed to perform their official duties. 1.3 Public Camping Public camping is prohibited in Zone 1 during this period of construction. *Penalty:* Any person failing to comply with the closure orders may be subject to imprisonment for not more than 12 months, or a fine in accordance with the applicable provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3571, or both. Dated: August 2, 2006. Gail G. Givens, Field Manager. [FR Doc. E6-18500 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [OR-026-1040-PH-021H: G6-0168] Closure of Public Lands in Harney County, OR AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Burns District, Hines, Oregon. ACTION: Notice of Realty Action. SUMMARY: Pursuant to 43 CFR 8364.1, this closure order is hereby given that public lands, described herein and managed by the BLM, located in Harney County, Oregon, are permanently closed to public use for the purpose of discharging firearms. This action is being taken to provide for public safety by establishing a no hunting zone around the community of Frenchglen, Oregon. DATES: The closure order is effective July 16, 2006, and continues for perpetuity. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karla Bird, Andrews Resource Area Field Manager, BLM, Burns District Office, 28910 Hwy 20 West, Hines, Oregon 97738,
(541)573-4400. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 15, 2006, the final decision was signed by an authorized officer of the BLM, permanently closing public lands, managed by the BLM, within one-quarter to one-half mile of Frenchglen, Oregon, to public use for the purpose of discharging firearms. During a temporary closure period, the BLM prepared an Environmental Assessment, OR-06-026-023, to consider a permanent closure. It was determined that the discharging of firearms within the “No Shooting or Safety Zone” is a safety hazard to the residents of the Frenchglen community. *Notice:* Pursuant to 43 CFR 8364.1, discharging firearms or other devices capable of firing a projectile into or within the closed area posted “No Shooting or Safety Zone” is prohibited on lands administered by BLM within the closed area of Andrews Resource Area. The public lands, managed by the BLM, closed by this order are described as follows: Willamette Meridian, Oregon T. 32 S., R. 32 E., Sec. 2, lots 3 and 4, that portion lying east of transmission line, S 1/2 NW 1/4 east of transmission line, N 1/2 SW 1/4 north of Hwy 205, and the E 1/2 SW 1/4 , SW 1/4 SE 1/4 east of Elbow Springs Road. The public land, managed by the BLM, described above contains 167 acres in Harney County, Oregon. Closure signs have been posted at main entry points to the closed area and along the boundary as necessary. Maps of the closure area and information may be obtained from the BLM Burns District Office and at various locations in Burns, Hines, and Frenchglen. *Penalties:* The authority of this closure is found under Section 303(a) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1733(a)) and 43 CFR 8364.1. Any person who violates this closure may be tried before a United States Magistrate and fined no more than $1,000 or imprisoned for no more than 12 months, or both. (43 CFR 8360.0-7) Such violations may also be subject to the enhanced fines provided for by 18 U.S.C. 3571. (Authority: 43 CFR 8364.1(c)) Dated: August 30, 2006. Mark Sherbourne, Acting Andrews Resource Area Field Manager. [FR Doc. E6-18499 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-33-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [ES-960-1420-BJ-TRST] Group No. 175, Wisconsin Eastern States: Filing of Plat of Survey AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of filing of plat of survey; Wisconsin. SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)will file the plat of survey of the lands described below in the BLM-Eastern States, Springfield, Virginia, 30 calendar days from the date of publication in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bureau of Land Management, 7450 Boston Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 22153. Attn: Cadastral Survey. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This survey was requested by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The lands we surveyed are: Fourth Principal Meridian, Wisconsin T. 38 N., R. 9 W. The plat of survey represents the dependent resurvey of a portion of the north boundary, a portion of the east boundary, a portion of the subdivisional lines; and the subdivision of section 1 Township 38 North, Range 9 West, of the 4th Principal Meridian, in the State of Wisconsin, and was accepted October 12, 2006. We will place a copy of the plat we described in the open files. It will be available to the public as a matter of information. If BLM receives a protest against this survey, as shown on the plat, prior to the date of the official filing, we will stay the filing pending our consideration of the protest. We will not officially file the plat until the day after we have accepted or dismissed all protests and they have become final, including decisions on appeals. Dated: October 12, 2006. Michael W. Young, Chief Cadastral Surveyor. [FR Doc. E6-18464 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-GJ-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, Los Angeles, CA AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items in the possession of the Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, Los Angeles, CA, that meet the definition of “sacred objects” under 25 U.S.C. 3001. This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. The 14 cultural items are 8 katsina kwatsi (masks), 5 wooden war gods, and 1 flute altar. In 1960, the Southwest Museum purchased seven katsina kwatsi (masks) from Mr. Andrew T. Johnston with financial assistance provided by the Southwest Museum Acquisition Fund. According to museum documentation, Mr. Johnston acquired all seven masks from Old Oraibi, AZ. No further information has been found to clarify means of acquisition by the donor. The seven katsina kwatsi are one Tasaf, one Koyemsi, one Piftuka, one Cohnina, one Angakchina, and one Heotos. On May 10, 1934, the Southwest Museum acquired one katsina mask from Miss Rose Dougan. Museum records identify the cultural item as an “old Hopi bearded mask.” No further information has been found to clarify means or location of acquisition by the donor. The katsina kwatsi is an Angakchina. On March 8, 1941, the Southwest Museum acquired five wooden war gods or prayer effigies from Mrs. Ina Sizer Cassidy. According to donor correspondence, the “Old Prayer effigies” were found in 1920 by Mrs. Cassidy's husband, Gerald Cassidy, at a war gods' shrine near Old Oraibi, AZ, during Snake Dance ceremonies. On June 28, 1950, the Southwest Museum purchased one flute altar from Mr. William Neil Smith with financial assistance provided by the General Charles McCormack Reeve Fund. According to museum documentation, Mr. Smith acquired the altar in Old Oraibi, AZ. No further information has been found to clarify means of acquisition by the donor. Museum documentation indicates that the 14 cultural items originated from Old Oraibi, which is located within the Hopi Reservation. Archeological and ethnographic evidence suggests that the Hopi have continuously inhabited the Old Oraibi since A.D. 1150. In 1900, Old Oraibi was the largest Hopi settlement. Consultation and physical inspection of the cultural items described above by the knowledgeable traditional cultural authorities of the Hopi Tribe of Arizona, the Katsinmomngwit (Kachina Priest) and Lenmomngwit (Flute Priest), have identified the cultural items as culturally affiliated with the Hopi Tribe of Arizona. According to the traditional cultural authorities, the cultural items have ongoing historical, traditional, and cultural importance to the Hopi Tribe of Arizona. As part of continuing religious practice, the cultural items must be cared for by current members of the Kachina and Flute Societies of the Hopi. Officials of the Southwest Museum have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(C), the 14 cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents. Officials of the Southwest Museum also have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the 14 sacred objects and the Hopi Tribe of Arizona. Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the sacred objects should contact Dr. Duane H. King, Executive Director, or Jamie Hebert, NAGPRA Research Associate for Collections, Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, 234 Museum Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90065, telephone
(323)221-2164 extension 241, before December 4, 2006. Repatriation of the 14 sacred objects to the Hopi Tribe of Arizona may proceed after that date if no additional claimants come forward. The Southwest Museum is responsible for notifying the Hopi Tribe of Arizona that this notice has been published. Dated: September 28, 2006 Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E6-18476 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-50-S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Notice of Inventory Completion: Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, Los Angeles, CA AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains in the control of the Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, Los Angeles, CA. The human remains were removed from Ontario County, NY. This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by Southwest Museum professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Cayuga Nation of New York, Oneida Nation of New York, Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin, Onondaga Nation of New York, Seneca Nation of New York, Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma, St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians of New York, Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York, and Tuscarora Nation of New York, as well as the Haudenosaunee Standing Committee on Burial Rights and Regulations, a non-federally recognized Indian group. In 1885, human remains representing a minimum of two individuals were removed from a grave near Canandaigua, Ontario County, NY. The museum has no additional information regarding the circumstances of removal. Mrs. Phyllis Lockley, mother of Robert Campbell Lockley, acquired the human remains as part of her son's estate. On January 18, 1962, Mrs. Lockley signed the original Deed of Gift and transferred the human remains to the museum, which accessioned the human remains into its collection the same year. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present. On the original Deed of Gift, the credit line identifies all objects donated by Mrs. Lockley as “materials collected by Mrs. Hope Gans Lockley, 1885.” However, in a letter written after the Deed of Gift, Mrs. Lockley asks the museum to correct the deed to attribute only one donated item to Mrs. Hope Gans Lockley as “all of the other items were from the estate of
(her)son, Robert Campbell Lockley.” The museum responded to this request on February 9, 1962, to assure her that the required change in the last line of the deed would be executed. It is unclear why this correction was not made before Mrs. Lockley signed the final document. Museum records and physical anthropological assessment have determined the human remains to be of probable Native American descent. Archeological and historical evidence indicate that the Owasco culture occupied central and eastern New York and the Glaciated Alleghany Plateau during the Woodland Stage (1000 B.C.-A.D. 1600). Around A.D. 1600, the Owasco culture underwent a cultural transition. Between A.D. 1450 and 1600, diagnostic characteristics indicative of the Seneca culture begin to become evident in the archeological record. From the early 16th century until the American Revolution, the Seneca occupied a region between the Genesee River and Canandaigua Lake, which includes Livingstone and Ontario Counties, NY, as well as the southern portion of Monroe County, NY. A cultural connection can be reasonably traced from the Owasco people to the present-day Seneca Nation of New York, Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma, and Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York. Officials of the Southwest Museum have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9-10), the human remains described above represent the physical remains of two individuals of Native American ancestry. Officials of the Southwest Museum also have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Seneca Nation of New York, Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma, and Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York. Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the human remains should contact Dr. Duane H. King, Executive Director, or Jamie Hebert, NAGPRA Research Associate for Collections, Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, 234 Museum Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90065, telephone
(323)221-2164, before December 4, 2006. Repatriation of the human remains to the Seneca Nation of New York, Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma, and Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York may proceed after that date if no additional claimants come forward. Southwest Musuem is responsible for notifying the Cayuga Nation of New York, Oneida Nation of New York, Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin, Onondaga Nation of New York, Seneca Nation of New York, Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma, St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians of New York, Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York, and Tuscarora Nation of New York, as well as the Haudenosaunee Standing Committee on Burial Rights and Regulations, a non-federally recognized Indian group, that this notice has been published. Dated: September 28, 2006 Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E6-18483 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-50-S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, Los Angeles, CA AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items in the possession of the Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, Los Angeles, CA, that meet the definitions of “sacred objects” and “objects of cultural patrimony” under 25 U.S.C. 3001. This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.> The 55 cultural items are 42 pieces of Dilzini Gaan dance material, 6 Dilzini Gaan headdresses, 2 Dilzini Gaan dance wands, 2 crosses, 1 shirt, 1 medicine bundle, and 1 cap. Southwest Museum officials identified the cultural items and assessed the cultural affiliation of the cultural items at the request of the San Carlos Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, Arizona; Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona; White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, Arizona; and Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, Arizona, which are members of the Western Apache NAGPRA Working Group. Southwest Museum officials also consulted with representatives of the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Jicarilla Apache Nation, New Mexico; and Mescalero Apache Tribe of the Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico. At an unknown time, the Southwest Museum purchased 42 painted and carved wooden pieces of Dilzini Gaan dance material from an unknown person at an unknown location with money provided by the General Charles McCormack Reeve Fund. No further information has been found to clarify means of acquisition by the donor. The 42 wooden pieces of Dilzini Gaan dance material range from 4 to 30 inches in length, and average 2 inches in breadth and .25 inches in depth. Some of the wooden pieces have been sharpened to a point at each end, others remain squared and blunt, while others exhibit notched, flattened or broken edges. On May 24, 1940, the Southwest Museum acquired one Dilzini Gaan headdress from Miss Rose Dougan. Museum records identify the cultural item as an Apache “Devil Dance” headdress with a cloth mask. No further information has been found to clarify means or location of acquisition by the donor. The Dilzini Gaan headdress is composed of wooden slats arranged in a fan shape measuring approximately 38 inches wide and 23 inches high. The slats are decorated with green, blue, orange, and white paint. Two tassels made of four slender, blue wooden rods are attached to the laterally projecting slats, one tassel on the right side and one on the left side. The mask is approximately 11 inches wide and 17.5 inches long. It is made of a flour sack painted black. One side of the mask is imprinted with the words, “Loveland flour...Love Me.” Two slits have been made near the wearer's eyes. Above these holes are a feather and four white triangles. On December 3, 1935, the Southwest Museum purchased three Dilzini Gaan headdresses from Ms. Bonnie Gray of Burbank, CA, with money provided by the General Charles McCormack Reeve Fund. According to correspondence found in the museum records, Ms. Gray and a companion unearthed the masks in Arizona from the floor of a deserted Apache cabin during the middle of the night. Museum records identify all four headdresses as Apache “Devil Dance” material. The first of the three Dilzini Gaan headdresses is made of wooden slats tied together with sinew arranged in a fan shape measuring approximately 31 inches wide and 35 inches high. The slats are decorated with small mirrors and red, black, blue and yellow painted zigzags, arrows, birds, and geometric designs. A black cloth mask is attached to the frame with two slits made for the wearer's eyes. The second Dilzini Gaan headdress is made of wooden slats tied together with sinew arranged in a fan shape measuring approximately 30.5 inches wide and 36 inches high. Blue, red-orange, black, purple, green, and yellow triangles, diamonds, circles, and other geometric shapes have been painted on both sides of the wooden slats. The third Dilzini Gaan headdress is made of long wooden slats divided into three groups and connected by smaller wooden slats to create a fan shaped arc tied together with sinew. It measures approximately 26 inches wide and 40 inches high. Red, yellow, blue, purple, and green diamonds, scallops, triangles, and dots have been painted on both sides of the slats. Mirrors adhere to the longer slats and one mirror appears to be missing. Two tassels made of four slender yellow wooden rods are attached to the laterally projecting slats. There is no mask for the headdress. On December 31, 1941, the Southwest Museum received one Dilzini Gaan headdress and two Dilzini Gaan dance wands from Mr. M.R. Harrington, Director of Research, Southwest Museum, originating from an unspecified area in Arizona. Museum records identify the material as Apache “Devil Dance” material. No further information has been found to clarify means of acquisition by the donor. The Dilzini Gaan headdress is made of long wooden slats tied together with sinew and arranged in a fan shape. It measures approximately 30 inches wide and 31 inches high. Blue, red, and orange triangles, diamonds, and dots have been painted on the slats. Two tassels made of four slender wooden rods are attached to the laterally projecting slats. A black cloth mask is attached to the wooden frame. Two slits have been made for the wearer's eyes, and silver buttons are sewn in the same vicinity. The two Dilzini Gaan dance wands are made of six pointed wooden slats tied together horizontally and attached perpendicularly to a long wooden handle. Red diamonds have been painted onto the plane created by the horizontal wooden slats. On December 12, 1950, the Southwest Museum acquired one Dilzini Gaan headdress from Mr. Owen L. Gothard of Clark County, NV. Museum records identify the item as Apache “Devil Dance” material. No further information has been found to clarify means of acquisition by the donor. The Dilzini Gaan headdress is made of wooden slats of various lengths tied together with sinew in both a horizontal and vertical direction. The slats form a rectangle approximately 19 inches wide and 20.25 inches high. Black, yellow, red, and blue geometric designs have been painted on both surfaces. A dark cloth face mask is attached to the frame. The mask measures approximately 18.75 inches in long. On March 5, 1943, the Southwest Museum received two cultural items from Mr. John W. Ennis, Jr., of Los Angeles, CA. Museum records identify the items as a Western Apache medicine shirt and a medicine bundle composed of a plaque and deerskin bag. According to database records, the two cultural items were originally obtained by a missionary. It is unclear how Mr. Ennis, Jr., came to possess the cultural items. No further information has been found to clarify means or location of acquisition by the donor. The medicine shirt, or shaman's garment, is a painted deer hide with a scalloped border measuring approximately 25.5 inches wide and 30 inches long. A slit has been cut near the center for the wearer's neck. Black, yellow, and green designs have been painted on both sides of the hide. The medicine bundle is composed of two items. The first item is a wooden plaque measuring approximately 9.5 inches wide and 4 inches long. An orange, black, and white figure has been painted on the plaque surface. A deerskin thong and feathers are attached to a center perforation. The second item is a deerskin bag with shoulder strap. The bag measures approximately 9.75 inches wide and 4.75 inches long. A green, black, and yellow figure has been painted on the bag, similar to the one on the wooden plaque. Eight groups of feathers are attached to the bag and along the length of the strap. On an unknown date, the Southwest Museum purchased two wooden crosses from Mr. Bill Smith with money provided by the General Charles McCormack Reeve Fund. No further information has been found to clarify means of acquisition by the donor. The first cross is 56 inches high, 33.5 inches across, and .25 inches thick. The cross is composed of five long wooden slats tapered to a point distally, traversed horizontally by five shorter wooden slats. Blue, black, and white zigzagged lines have been painted on the surface. A circular appendage has been attached to the top of the cross. Two dark brown feathers measuring 12 inches in length remain tied to the cross by a cloth cord. The second cross is 52 inches high, 24 inches across, and .25 inches thick. The cross is composed of five long wooden slats tapered to a point distally, traversed horizontally by five shorter wooden slats. Blue, black, and white zigzagged lines have been painted on the surface. On February 2, 1959, the Southwest Museum acquired one cap from Mr. Julian Adams of Marino, CA, as part of the Mary E. Adams ethnological collection. Museum records identify the cap as Apache. The cap is a man's buckskin cap and exhibits white, black, and dark red beads sewn in a star pattern. Seven eagle feathers are attached to the top. No further information has been found to clarify the means or location of acquisition by the donor. Consultation and physical inspection of the cultural items described above by knowledgeable Western Apache traditional cultural authorities of the San Carlos Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, Arizona; Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona; White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, Arizona; and Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, Arizona have identified the cultural items as culturally affiliated with Western Apache Indian tribes. According to the traditional cultural authorities, the cultural items have ongoing historical, traditional, and cultural importance to the Western Apache, and today, must be returned to the tribes representing the Western Apache to fully complete the ceremonial cycle into which they were introduced; as such, the cultural items are objects of cultural patrimony. According to Western Apache traditional cultural authorities, the 55 cultural items are made and handled according to instructions received from the Creator. The Creator is the only One who has the right to possess the cultural items after their use by humans. The cultural items must be put away properly to return them to the Creator; as such, the cultural items are sacred objects. The Western Apache are represented today by the federally recognized San Carlos Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, Arizona; Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona; White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, Arizona; and Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, Arizona. These four tribes are members of the Western Apache NAGPRA Working Group. Officials of the Southwest Museum have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(C), the 55 cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents. Officials of the Southwest Museum have also determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(D), the 55 cultural items described above have ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group or culture itself, rather than property owned by an individual. Lastly, officials of the Southwest Museum have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the objects of cultural patrimony and sacred objects and the San Carlos Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, Arizona; Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona; White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, Arizona; and Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, Arizona. Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the objects of cultural patrimony and sacred objects should contact Dr. Duane H. King, Executive Director, or Jamie Hebert, NAGPRA Research Associate for Collections, Southwest Museum of the American Indian, Autry National Center, 234 Museum Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90065, telephone
(323)221-2164 extension 241, before December 4, 2006. Repatriation of the objects of cultural patrimony and scared objects to the San Carlos Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, Arizona; Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona; White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, Arizona; and Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, Arizona may proceed after that date if no additional claimants come forward. Southwest Museum is responsible for notifying the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Jicarilla Apache Nation, New Mexico; Mescalero Apache Tribe of the Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico; San Carlos Reservation, Arizona; Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona; White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, Arizona; and Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, Arizona that this notice has been published. Dated: September 28, 2006. Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E6-18509 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-50-S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Notice of Inventory Completion: Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, University of Washington, Seattle, WA AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects in the control of the Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum (Burke Museum), University of Washington, Seattle, WA. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from Yakima County, WA. This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Burke Museum professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington; Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Washington; Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, Oregon; and Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. In 1959, human remains representing a minimum of one individual were removed from Bergen site #30 at the junction of Wenas Creek and Yakima River, Yakima County, WA, by Dr. Harold Bergen, an avocational archeologist. In 1989, the human remains and cultural items were donated by Dr. Bergen to the Burke Museum (Burke Accn. # 1989-57). No known individual was identified. The 102 associated funerary objects are 1 basketry fragment, 2 unmodified stones, 46 mammal remains, 1 point, 1 scraper, 49 shell and shell bead fragments, 1 elk tooth pendant, and 1 utilized flake. The human remains were collected from a talus area in a shallow depression of a talus slide with basalt rocks mounded around the depression. Dr. Bergen excavated a single burial. The burial contained no evidence of burning, however, other burials at the site, but not removed, showed signs of burning and appeared to be cremations. This burial pattern is consistent with Yakama burial practices (Schuster 1990: 338). The Yakama Treaty, signed on June 9, 1855, included the area surrounding the junction of Wenas Creek and Yakima River in the aboriginal territory of the present-day Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington. Other ethnographic and historic documentation confirms that this area is in the aboriginal territory of the Yakama (Daugherty 1973; Ray 1936; Schuster 1990). According to Swanton (1952), the Yakama group Si'la-hlama occupied the area along the Yakima River between Wenas Creek and Umtanum Creek. Furthermore, the Lower Yakama village ts'kik was located on the Yakima River, just downstream from the junction of Wenas Creek and the Yakima River. Descendants of the Yakama are members of the present-day Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington. Officials of the Burke Museum have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9-10), the human remains described above represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry. Officials of the Burke Museum also have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(A), the 102 objects described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony. Lastly, officials of the Burke Museum have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington. Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the human remains and associated funerary objects should contact Dr. Peter Lape, Burke Museum, University of Washington, Box 353010, Seattle, WA 98195-3010, telephone
(206)685-2282, before December 4, 2006. Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington may proceed after that date if no additional claimants come forward. The Burke Museum is responsible for notifying the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington; Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Washington; Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, Oregon; and Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon that this notice has been published. Dated: September 28, 2006 Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E6-18479 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-50-S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, University of Washington, Seattle, WA AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items in the possession of the Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum (Burke Museum), University of Washington, Seattle, WA, that meet the definition of “unassociated funerary objects” under 25 U.S.C. 3001. This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. The 1,549 cultural items are 1 copper ore, 5 abalone shell gorgets, 5 shell pendants, 2 shell fragments, 1 steatite pipe, 2 points, 1,530 beads, 1 basketry fragment with leather, 1 iron spear, and 1 iron axehead. Between 1950 and 1960, Dr. Harold Bergen, an avocational archeologist, collected funerary objects from the Bergen site #20, along the foot of a rocky bluff outside of Selah, Yakima County, WA. Ten burials were found in a flexed position with stones placed on the human remains. The human remains were in a fragile condition and were not collected with the exception of two crania. The crania were not accessioned by the Burke Museum and the whereabouts of the two individuals are unknown. In 1989, the unassociated funerary objects were donated to the Burke Museum (Burke Accession #1989-57). The 1,546 unassociated funerary objects are 1 copper ore, 5 abalone shell gorgets, 5 shell pendants, 2 shell fragments, 1 steatite pipe, 2 points, and 1,530 beads. Ethnographic and archeological evidence indicates that rockslide burials in talus slopes were customary burial practices of the Yakama. It was also customary for the Yakama to bury individuals with many of their personal belongings. The burial practices and funerary objects are consistent with practices of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington. Selah is within the aboriginal territory of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington and within the land claims boundaries of Indian Claims Commission decisions (12 ICC 301 (1963); 7 ICC 794 (1959)). In 1995, one cultural item was accessioned by the museum when it was found in collections (Burke Accession #1995-64). The circumstances surrounding how the cultural item came into Burke Mueum's collection is unknown. According to museum documentation, the cultural item was collected from a burial immediately south of Priest Rapids Dam, Yakima County, WA. The one unassociated funerary object is a fragment of leather attached to a basketry fragment. Museum documentation includes a note indicating it was from the Earnest Combes Collection, that copper was also found with the burial, and the human remains were those of a child. The human remains and copper are not located at the Burke Museum and no further information could be located. Ethnographic and archeological data suggests that deceased Yakama people were commonly wrapped in buckskin, blankets, and tule mats in preparation for burial. The leather and basketry fragments are consistent with this information. Priest Rapids Dam is within the aboriginal territory of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington. In 1896, two cultural items were acquired through trade with the Hudson Bay Company by Dr. R.E Stewart. According to museum documentation, the cultural items were found on a grave and are from Satus Creek, WA. In 1905, the cultural items were donated to the Burke Museum (Burke Accession #40). The two unassociated funerary objects are one iron spear and one iron axe head. The two cultural items are consistent with other funerary objects known to be associated with Yakama burials. The Se'tas-lema and Lower Yakama bands were the groups ethnographically noted to have occupied the Satus Creek area. Satus Creek is within the aboriginal territory of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington. Satus Creek falls within the lands ceded in the Yakama Treaty of 1855. Officials of the Burke Museum have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(B), the cultural items described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual. Officials of the Burke Museum also have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the 1,549 unassociated funerary objects and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington. Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the unassociated funerary objects should contact Dr. Peter Lape, Burke Museum, University of Washington, Box 353010, Seattle, WA 98195-3010, telephone
(206)685-2282, before December 4, 2006. Repatriation of the unassociated funerary objects to the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington may proceed after that date if no additional claimants come forward. The Burke Museum is responsible for notifying the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington that this notice has been published. Dated: September 28, 2006 Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E6-18482 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-50-S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Justice Management Division; No FEAR Act Notice AGENCY: Justice Management Division, Department of Justice. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice fulfills the Department of Justice's “No FEAR Act Notice” **Federal Register** publication obligations, as required by the Act and by the Office of Personnel Management implementing regulations at 5 CFR 724.202. DATES: This notice is effective November 2, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcus Williams, Acting Director, Equal Employment Opportunity Staff, Department of Justice, Suite 10001, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20530. Telephone:
(202)616-4800. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 15, 2002, Congress enacted the “Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002” which is now known as the No FEAR Act. One purpose of the Act is to “require that Federal agencies be accountable for violations of antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws.” Public Law 107-174. In support of this purpose, Congress found that “agencies cannot be run effectively if those agencies practice or tolerate discrimination.” Public Law 107-174, Title I, General Provisions, section 101(1). The Act also requires Federal agencies, including the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), to provide this notice to Federal employees, former Federal employees and applicants for Federal employment to inform you of the rights and protections available to you under Federal antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws. Antidiscrimination Laws The Department of Justice cannot discriminate against an employee or applicant for Federal employment with respect to the terms, conditions or privileges of employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status or political affiliation. Discrimination on these bases is prohibited by one or more of the following statutes: 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(1), 29 U.S.C. 206(d), 29 U.S.C. 631, 29 U.S.C. 633a, 29 U.S.C. 791 and 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16. If you believe that you have been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or disability, you must contact an Equal Employment Opportunity
(EEO)counselor within 45 calendar days of the alleged discriminatory action, or, in the case of a personnel action, within 45 calendar days of the effective date of the action, before you can file a formal complaint of discrimination with your agency. *See* , e.g., 29 CFR part 1614. If you believe that you have been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the basis of age, you must either contact an EEO counselor, as noted above, or give notice of intent to sue to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC)within 180 calendar days of the alleged discriminatory action. If you are alleging discrimination based on marital status or political affiliation, you may file a written complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel
(OSC)(see contact information below). In the alternative (or in some cases, in addition), you may pursue a discrimination complaint by filing a grievance through the DOJ's administrative or negotiated grievance procedures, if such procedures apply and are available. Whistleblower Protection Laws A DOJ employee with authority to take, direct others to take, recommend or approve any personnel action must not use that authority to take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take, a personnel action against an employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that individual that is reasonably believed to evidence violations of law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, unless disclosure of such information is specifically prohibited by law and such information is specifically required by Executive Order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or the conduct of foreign affairs. Retaliation against an employee or applicant for making a protected disclosure is prohibited by 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8). If you believe that you have been the victim of whistleblower retaliation, you may file a written complaint (Form OSC-11) with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel at 1730 M Street, NW., Suite 218, Washington, DC 20036-4505 or online through the OSC Web site— *http://www.osc.gov.* Retaliation for Engaging in Protected Activity The DOJ cannot retaliate against an employee or applicant for employment because that individual exercises his or her rights under any of the Federal antidiscrimination or whistleblower protection laws listed above. If you believe that you are the victim of retaliation for engaging in protected activity, you must follow, as appropriate, the procedures described in the Antidiscrimination Laws and Whistleblower Protection Laws sections or, if applicable, the administrative or negotiated grievance procedures in order to pursue any legal remedy. Disciplinary Actions Under the existing laws, the DOJ retains the right, where appropriate, to discipline an employee for conduct that is inconsistent with Federal Antidiscrimination and Whistleblower Protection Laws up to and including removal. If OSC has initiated an investigation under 5 U.S.C. 1214, however, according to 5 U.S.C. 1214(f), the DOJ must seek approval from the Special Counsel to discipline employees for, among other activities, engaging in prohibited retaliation. Nothing in the No FEAR Act alters existing laws or permits the DOJ to take unfounded disciplinary action against a Federal employee or to violate the procedural rights of a Federal employee who has been accused of discrimination. Additional Information For further information regarding the No FEAR Act regulations, refer to 5 CFR part 724, as well as the Equal Employment Opportunity Staff at the Department of Justice. Additional information regarding Federal antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection and retaliation laws can be found at the EEOC Web site— *http://www.eeoc.gov* and the OSC Web site— *http://www.osc.gov.* Existing Rights Unchanged Pursuant to section 205 of the No FEAR Act, neither the Act nor this notice creates, expands or reduces any rights otherwise available to any employee, former employee or applicant under the laws of the United States, including the provisions of law specified in 5 U.S.C. 2302(d). Dated: October 16, 2006. Lee J. Lofthus, Acting Assistant Attorney General for Administration. [FR Doc. 06-9022 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 16
13 references not yet in our index
  • 40 CFR 1506.6(b)
  • 40 CFR 1500
  • Pub. L. 105-57
  • 50 CFR 17.32
  • 50 CFR 17.22
  • 40 CFR 1501.7
  • 43 CFR 8364.1
  • 43 CFR 8360.0-7
  • 43 CFR 8364.1(c)
  • 5 CFR 724.202
  • Pub. L. 107-174
  • 29 CFR 1614
  • 5 CFR 724
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of availability of record of decision
U.S.C.§ 4371
U.S.C.§ 4321
U.S.C.§ 1538
U.S.C.§ 1532
U.S.C.§ 3571
U.S.C.§ 1733
U.S.C.§ 3005
U.S.C.§ 3001
U.S.C.§ 3003
Cite40 CFR 1506.6(b)
Cite40 CFR 1500
Pub. L.Pub. L. 105-57
Cites 29 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.