Notices. Solicitation for membership

12,589 words·~57 min read·/register/2007/07/02/07-3205

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

BILLING CODE 4162-20-M DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [CGD08-07-013] Gulf of Mexico Area Maritime Security Committee; Vacancies AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Solicitation for membership. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard seeks applications for membership in the Gulf of Mexico Area Maritime Security Committee (GOMAMSC). The Committee assists the Captain of the Port/Federal Maritime Security Coordinator (Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District) for the portion of the Gulf of Mexico that is within the Eighth Coast Guard District and outside of state waters in developing, reviewing, exercising, and updating the Area Maritime Security Plan.

DATES: Requests for membership should reach Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District on or before August 1, 2007. ADDRESSES: Requests for membership should be submitted to the following address: Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District(dxc), *Attn:* Mr. Guy Tetreau, Hale Boggs Federal Building, 500 Poydras Street, Rm 1341, New Orleans, LA 70130-3310. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Guy Tetreau at

(504)671-2155. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee The Gulf of Mexico Area Maritime Security Committee (GOMAMSC) is established under, and governed by, 33 CFR part 103, subpart C. The functions of the Committee include, but are not limited to, the following:

(1)Identifying critical port infrastructure and operations;

(2)Identifying risks (i.e. threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences);

(3)Determining mitigation strategies and implementation methods;

(4)Developing and describing the process to continually evaluate overall port security by considering consequences and vulnerabilities, how they may change over time, and what additional mitigation strategies can be applied;

(5)Advising and assisting the Captain of the Port in developing, reviewing, and updating the Area Maritime Security Plan under 33 CFR part 103, subpart E.

(6)Participating in the development and evaluation of the required annual exercise of the Area Maritime Security Plan. Positions Available on the Committee Up to seven persons may be selected for the committee Members may be selected from:

(1)The Federal, Territorial, or Tribal government;

(2)The State government and political subdivisions of the State;

(3)Local public safety, crisis management, and emergency response agencies;

(4)Law enforcement and security organizations;

(5)Maritime industry, including labor;

(6)Other port stakeholders having a special competence in maritime security; and

(7)Port stakeholders affected by security practices and policies. In support of the Coast Guard's policy on gender and ethnic diversity, we encourage qualified women and members of minority groups to apply. Qualification of Members Members should have at least 5 years of experience related to maritime or port security operations. Applicants may be required to pass an appropriate security background check prior to appointment to the committee. Normal terms of office will be 5 years; however, some members may receive shorter terms to establish a reasonable rotation to avoid a major turnover every five years. Members may serve additional terms of office and current members are encouraged to reapply. Members are expected to register in Homeport, the Coast Guard maritime security information system for providing information (including sensitive security information) and services to the public over the internet, and regularly participate in meetings and standing/ad-hoc sub-committees/work groups including the development and evaluation teams for the annual security exercise of the Area Maritime Security Plan. Members will not receive any salary or other compensation for their service on the GOMAMSC. Format of Applications Those seeking membership are not required to submit formal applications, however, because a specific number of members must have prerequisite maritime security experience, submission of resumes highlighting experience in the maritime and security industries is encouraged. Authority Section 102 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act

(MTSA)of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-295) added section 70112 to Title 46 of the U.S. Code, and authorizes the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is operating to establish Area Maritime Security Committees for any port area of the United States. (See 33 U.S.C. 1226; 46 U.S.C.; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.01; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1). The MTSA includes a provision exempting these Area Maritime Security

(AMS)Committees from the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92-436). Dated: June 12, 2007. J.R. Whitehead, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7-12684 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [USCG-2007-28579] Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of open teleconference meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference of the Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee (MERPAC). The purpose of the teleconference is for MERPAC to discuss and prepare recommendations for the Coast Guard concerning its notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM)on the Transportation Worker Identification Credential

(TWIC)Biometric Reader Requirements. DATES: The teleconference call will take place on Thursday, July 19th, 2007, from 10 a.m. until 1 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time. ADDRESSES: Members of the public may participate by dialing 1-866-917-8653. You will then be prompted to dial your participant number, which is 9264498#. Please ensure that you enter the # sign after the participant number. Public participation is welcomed; however, the number of teleconference lines is limited, and lines are available first-come, first-served. Members of the public may also participate by coming to Room 1303, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001. We request that members of the public who plan to attend this meeting notify Mr. Mark Gould at 202-372-1409 so that he may notify building security officials. You may also gain access to this docket at *http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm* . The task statement may be accessed as a supplement to this docket. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mark Gould, Assistant Executive Director of MERPAC, telephone 202-372-1409, fax 202-372-1426. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the **Federal Register** [5 U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92-463)]. MERPAC is chartered under that Act. It provides advice and makes recommendations to the Assistant Commandant for Operations on issues concerning merchant marine personnel such as implementation of the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978, and developing standards of competency for ship's security officers. Tentative Agenda Thursday, July 19th, 2007. 10 a.m.-10:05 p.m. Welcome and Opening Remarks—MERPAC Chairman Captain Andrew McGovern. 10:05 a.m.-12 p.m. Open discussion concerning the Transportation Worker Identification Credential

(TWIC)Biometric Reader Requirements. 12 p.m.-12:15 p.m. Public comment period. 12:15 p.m.-1 p.m. MERPAC vote on recommendations for the Coast Guard. 1 p.m. Adjourn. This tentative agenda is subject to change and the meeting may adjourn early if all committee business has been completed. Public Participation The Chairman of MERPAC is empowered to conduct the teleconference in a way that will, in his judgment, facilitate the orderly conduct of business. During its teleconference, the committee welcomes public comment. The committee will make every effort to hear the views of all interested parties, including the public. Written comments may be submitted to Mr. Mark Gould, Assistant Executive Director, MERPAC, Commandant (CG-3PSO-1), 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington DC 20593-0001. Information on Services for Individuals With Disabilities For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact Mr. Gould as soon as possible. Dated: June 25, 2007. H.L. Hime, Acting Director of National and International Standards Assistant Commandant for Prevention. [FR Doc. E7-12685 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [USCG-2007-28520] Towing Safety Advisory Committee AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of open teleconference meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference of the Towing Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC). The purpose of the teleconference is for TSAC to discuss and prepare recommendations for the Coast Guard concerning its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM)on the Transportation Worker Identification Credential

(TWIC)Biometric Reader Requirements. DATES: The teleconference call will take place on Tuesday, July 17th, 2007, from 9 a.m. until noon Eastern Daylight Savings Time. ADDRESSES: Committee members and members of the public may participate by dialing 1-866-917-9053 on a touch-tone phone. You will then be prompted to enter your “participant code number,” which is 5344122#. Please ensure that you enter the # mark after the participant code. Public participation is welcomed; however, the number of teleconference lines is limited, and lines are available first-come, first-served. Members of the public may also participate by coming to Room 3317 U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters; 2100 Second Street, SW.; Washington, DC 20593-0001. We request that members of the public who plan to attend this meeting notify Mr. Gerald Miante at 202-372-1407 so that he may notify building security officials. You may also gain access to this docket at *http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm.* The task statement may be accessed as a supplement to this docket. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gerald Miante, Assistant Executive Director of TSAC, telephone 202-372-1407, fax 202-372-1426. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the **Federal Register** [5 U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92-463)]. TSAC is chartered under that Act. It provides advice and makes recommendations to the Secretary on issues regarding shallow-draft inland and coastal waterway navigation and towing safety. Tentative Agenda Tuesday, July 17th, 2007 *9 a.m.-9:05 a.m.* Welcome and Opening Remarks —TSAC Chairman Mr. Mario Muñoz. *9:05 a.m.-11 a.m.* Open discussion concerning the Transportation Worker Identification Credential

(TWIC)Biometric Reader Requirements. *11a.m.-11:15 a.m.* Public comment period. *11:15 a.m.-12 noon* TSAC vote on recommendations for the Coast Guard. 12 noon Adjourn. This tentative agenda is subject to change and the meeting may adjourn early if all Committee business has been completed. Public Participation The Chairman of TSAC is empowered to conduct the teleconference in a way that will, in his judgment, facilitate the orderly conduct of business. During its teleconference, the Committee welcomes public comment. The Committee will make every effort to hear the views of all interested parties, including the public. Written comments may be submitted to Mr. Gerald Miante, Assistant Executive Director, TSAC; Commandant (CG-3PSO-1); 2100 Second Street, SW.; Washington, DC 20593-0001. Information on Services for Individuals With Disabilities For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact Mr. Miante as soon as possible. Dated: June 25, 2007. H.L. Hime, Acting Director of National and International Standards, Assistant Commandant for Prevention. [FR Doc. E7-12689 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a proposed continuing information collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning the adequacy of two forms FEMA uses to gather certain information about the floodplain management activities of communities that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The Community Contact Report form and the Community Visit Report form are used to gather information about a community's floodplain management regulations, administrative and enforcement procedures, Flood Insurance Studies, and basic information pertaining to names, addresses, and phone numbers of individuals responsible for a community's floodplain management program. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information gathered on the subject forms pertain to a community's participation in the NFIP. The NFIP was established by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (the Act). Section 1315 of the Act requires the adoption of permanent land use and control measures which are consistent with the comprehensive criteria of land management and use under section 1361. 44 CFR 59.24 establishes requirements for continued eligibility to participate in the NFIP based upon implementing an adequate community based floodplain management program. The information gathered with the forms is used to evaluate the adequacy of a community's floodplain management program as it relates to continued participation in the NFIP. Collection of Information *Title:* Effectiveness of a Community's Implementation of the NFIP Community Assistance Program CAC and CAV Reports. *Type of Information Collection:* Revision of Currently Approved Collection. *OMB Number:* 1660-0023. *Form Numbers:* Form 81-68 (Community Assistance Report); Form 81-69 (Community Contact Report). *Abstract:* The data obtained from the Community Assistance Contact

(CAC)and Community Assistance Visit

(CAV)forms information collection effort is used to assist with the management of the NFIP. A major objective of the NFIP is to assure that participating communities are achieving the flood loss reduction objectives of the program. To achieve this objective, FEMA's Mitigation Division implemented a process to evaluate the floodplain management assistance needed by communities and how well communities are implementing their floodplain management programs. By determining the assistance needed and how well communities are performing their responsibilities, FEMA can identify, prevent, and resolve floodplain management issues before problems arise that require enforcement actions. The two key methods FEMA uses in determining community assistance needs are through the CAC and CAV, which serve to provide a systematic means of monitoring community NFIP compliance. Through the CAC and CAV, FEMA can also determine to what extent communities are achieving the flood loss reduction objectives of the NFIP. By providing assistance to communities, the CAC and CAV also serve to enhance FEMA's goals of reducing future flood losses, thereby achieving the cost-containment objectives of the NFIP. *Affected Public:* Federal, State, Local, or Tribal Government. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 168 hours. Data collection activity/instrument Nunber of respondents Frequency of responses Hour burden per response Annual responses Total annual hour burden

(D)= (A×B)

(E)= (C×D) FF 81-68

(CAV)56 1 2 56 112 FF 81-69

(CAC)56 1 1 56 56 Total 56 1 56 168 *Estimated Cost:* $8,400. *Comments:* Written comments are solicited to

(a)evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

(b)evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(c)enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(d)minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Comments must be submitted on or before August 31, 2007. Interested persons should submit written comments to Chief, Records Management and Privacy, Information Resources Management Branch, Information Technology Services Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Room 316, Washington, DC 20472. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Rachel Sears, Program Specialist, at 202-646-2977 for additional information. You may contact the Records Management Branch for copies of the proposed collection of information at facsimile number

(202)646-3347 or e-mail address: *FEMA-Information-Collections@dhs.gov.* Dated: June 27, 2007. John A. Sharetts-Sullivan, Chief, Records Management and Privacy Office of Management Directorate, Information Technology Services Division, Information Resources Management Branch, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security [FR Doc. E7-12722 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a proposed revised information collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning the National Incident Management System

(NIMS)Compliance Assistance Support Tool (NIMSCAST), a self-assessment tool for State, territorial, tribal, and local governments to evaluate and report on their jurisdiction's achievement with regards to NIMS implementation activities issued by FEMA Incident Management Systems Division (formerly known as the NIMS Integration Center). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 (HSPD-5) Management of Domestic Incidents called for the establishment of a single, comprehensive NIMS. The NIMS is a system that improves response operations through the use of the Incident Command System

(ICS)and other standard procedures and preparedness measures. It also promotes development of multi-jurisdictional, statewide and interstate regional mechanisms for coordinating incident management and obtaining assistance during large-scale or complex incidents. HSPD-5 dictated that Federal departments and agencies shall make adoption of the NIMS a requirement for the provision of Federal preparedness assistance funds. HSPD-5 also established and designated FEMA's Incident Management Systems Division as the lead Federal agency to coordinate NIMS compliance. One of the primary functions of the NIMS Integration Center is to ensure NIMS remains an accurate and effective management tool through refining and adapting compliance requirements to address ongoing preparedness needs. To accomplish this, FEMA's Incident Management Systems Division relies on input from Federal, state, local, tribal, multi-discipline and private authorities to assure continuity and accuracy of ongoing efforts. NIMS compliance must be an ongoing effort since new personnel must be trained and plans must be revised to reflect lessons learned. States play an important role in ensuring the effective implementation of the NIMS. They must ensure that the systems and processes are in place to communicate the NIMS requirements to local jurisdictions and support them in implementing the NIMS. The long-term benefit of adopting and implementing the NIMS is that it strengthens our nation's capabilities to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from any incident. The NIMSCAST is designed to reflect the newly-released FY 2007 implementation activities and metrics and to inform FEMA's Incident Management Systems Division and the Department of Homeland Security of any given jurisdiction's compliance with the NIMS. Collection of Information *Title:* NIMS Compliance Assistance Support Tool (NIMSCAST). *Type of Information Collection:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *OMB Number:* 1660-0087. *Form Numbers:* None. *Abstract:* The NIMSCAST is the tool utilized to

(a)evaluate a State, territory, tribal, and local government's compliance with standards and requirements established in the NIMS and/or FEMA Incident Management Systems Division,

(b)determine eligibility for Federal preparedness assistance, and

(c)strengthen incident management programs at the department, agency, or jurisdiction level. *Affected Public:* States, local, or tribal government. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 280. Data collection activity/instrument No. of respondents Frequency of responses Hour burden per response Annual responses Total annual hour burden NIMSCAST: States and Territories 56 1 5 56 280 Total 56 1 5 56 280 *Estimated Cost:* The annual cost to respondents is calculated based on 280 hours of annual burden completed by State emergency management specialists with a median wage of $22.10 per hour for a total burden of $6,188.00. *Comments:* Written comments are solicited to

(a)evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

(b)evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(c)enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(202)646-2687. You may contact the Records Management Branch for copies of the proposed collection of information at facsimile number

(202)646-3347 or e-mail address: *FEMA-Information-Collections@dhs.gov.* Dated: June 20, 2007. John A. Sharetts-Sullivan, Chief, Records Management and Privacy Office of Management Directorate, Information Technology Services Division, Information Resources Management Branch, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E7-12725 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-09-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA-1705-DR] Iowa; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Iowa (FEMA-1705-DR), dated May 25, 2007, and related determinations. DATES: *Effective Date:* June 22, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472,

(202)646-2705. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Iowa is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of May 25, 2007. Audubon, Crawford and Monona Counties for Individual Assistance (already designated for Public Assistance.) (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers

(CFDA)are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-12726 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA-1699-DR] Kansas; Amendment No. 10 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the State of Kansas (FEMA-1699-DR), dated May 6, 2007, and related determinations. DATES: *Effective Date:* June 19, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472,

(202)646-2705. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated June 19, 2007, the President amended the cost-sharing arrangements concerning Federal funds provided under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (Stafford Act), in a letter to R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, as follows: I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of Kansas resulting from severe storms, tornadoes, and flooding during the period of May 4-18, 2007, is of sufficient severity and magnitude that special cost sharing arrangements are warranted regarding Federal funds provided under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act). Therefore, I amend my declaration of May 6, 2007, to authorize Federal funds for debris removal and emergency protective measures, including direct Federal assistance, at 100 percent Federal funding of total eligible costs for a period of up to 72 hours. This adjustment to cost-sharing applies only to Public Assistance costs and direct Federal assistance eligible for such adjustments under applicable law. The Stafford Act prohibits a similar adjustment for funds provided for Other Needs Assistance (Section 408) and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (Section 404). Those funds will continue to be reimbursed at 75 percent of total eligible costs. This cost share is effective as of the date of the President's major disaster declaration. (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers

(CFDA)are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-12695 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA-1699-DR] Kansas; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Kansas (FEMA-1699-DR), dated May 6, 2007, and related determinations. DATES: *Effective Date:* June 19, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472,

(202)646-2705. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Kansas is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of May 6, 2007. Brown County for Public Assistance. (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers

(CFDA)are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 Individuals and Households Program-Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-12699 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Agency Information Collection Activities: Extension of an Existing Information Collection; Comment Request ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Form I-602, Application by Refugee for Waiver of Grounds of Excludability; OMB No. 1615-0069. The Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** on April 27, 2007, at 72 FR 21033 allowing for a 60-day public comment period. USCIS did not receive any comments. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until August 1, 2007. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), USCIS, Chief, Regulatory Management Division, Clearance Office, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, 3rd floor, Washington, DC 20529. Comments may also be submitted to DHS via facsimile to 202-272-8352 or via e-mail at *rfs.regs@dhs.gov,* and to the OMB USCIS Desk Officer via facsimile at 202-395-6974 or via e-mail at *kastrich@omb.eop.gov.* When submitting comments by e-mail please make sure to add OMB Control Number 1615-0069 in the subject box. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

(1)Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques, or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

(1)*Type of Information Collection:* Extension of a currently approved information collection.

(2)*Title of the Form/Collection:* Application by Refugee for Waiver of Grounds of Excludability.

(3)Ag *ency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Homeland Security sponsoring the collection:* Form I-602. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

(4)*Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:* *Primary:* Individuals and households. This form is necessary to establish eligibility for waiver of excludability based on humanitarian, family unity, or public interest.

(5)*An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond:* 2,500 responses at 15 minutes (.25) per response.

(6)*An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection:* 625 annual burden hours. If you have additional comments, suggestions, or need a copy of the information collection instrument, please visit the USCIS Web site at: * http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=29227b58fa16e010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD&vgnextchannel=29227b58fa16e010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD. * If you have additional questions please contact Richard A. Sloan, Chief, Regulatory Management Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529; Telephone 202-272-8377. Dated: June 27, 2007. Richard Sloan, Chief, Regulatory Management Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E7-12723 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5124-N-11] Notice of Proposed Information Collection for Public Comment; Public and Indian Housing ENERGY STAR and Energy Audit Survey AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal. DATES: *Comments Due Date:* August 31, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name/or OMB Control number and should be sent to: Aneita Waites, Reports Liaison Officer, Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room 4116, Washington, DC 20410-5000; e-mail at *Aneita_l._Waites@hud.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aneita Waites,

(202)402-0713, extension 4114, for copies of the proposed forms and other available documents. (This is not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department will submit the proposed information collection to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended). This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to:

(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

(3)enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses. *This Notice also lists the following information:* *Title of Proposal:* Public and Indian Housing ENERGY STAR and Energy Audit Survey. *OMB Control Number:* *Description of the need for the information and proposed use:* A survey is needed in order to respond to Congress and the mandate under the Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8251 *et seq.* ) The information collected from the survey will be used to accurately create reports and strategies to reduce utility expenses through energy conservation measures within public housing. Thereafter, reports will be updated and sent to Congress every 2 years indicating energy strategies for energy reduction goals and how the Department of Housing and Urban Development will monitor the energy usage of public housing agencies. *Agency form number, if applicable:* HUD-52465. *Members of affected public:* Public Housing Agencies, State and local governments, individuals and households. *Estimation of the total number of hours needed to prepare the information collection including number of respondents, frequency of response, and hours of response:* • *Total annual burden hours:* 533. • *Indicate number of respondents:* 3,200. • *Frequency of response:* 1/ year. • *Annual hour burden:* 10 minutes per respondent. • *Explanation of how burden was estimated:* In-house trial and sampling of two local PHAs. Information requested should be available as part of customary and usual business practices. Estimated Burden of Hours of the Proposed Information Collection Respondent Burden PHA plan elements and regulation No. of respondents PH/HCV HCV only × Frequency of response Total responses × Estimated hours = Total annual burden hours ENERGY STAR and Energy Audit Survey 3,200 1 3,200 .167 533 Totals 3,200 1 3,200 .167 533 Burden hours estimates are based on a total of 3,200 PHAs. *Status of proposed information collection:* New collection. Authority: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. Dated: June 22, 2007. Bessy Kong, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Policy, Program and Legislative Initiatives. [FR Doc. E7-12694 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5117-N-53] Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMB; Ginnie Mae Mortgage-Backed Securities Programs AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described below has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal. The information collected is needed by Ginnie Mae for the participation of issuers/customers in its Mortgage-Backed Securities programs and to monitor performance and compliance with established rules and regulations. DATES: *Comments Due Date:* August 1, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB approval Number (2503-0033) and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-6974. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lillian Deitzer, Departmental Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410; e-mail *Lillian_L._Deitzer@HUD.gov* or telephone

(202)708-2374. This is not a toll-free number. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Deitzer or from HUD's Web site at *http://www5.hud.gov:63001/po/i/icbts/collectionsearch.cfm.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice informs the public that the Department of Housing and Urban Development has submitted to OMB a request for approval of the information collection described below. This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affecting agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to:

(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *This notice also lists the following information:* *Title of Proposal:* Ginnie Mae Mortgage-Backed Securities Programs. *OMB Approval Number:* 2503-0033. *Form Numbers:* 11701, 11702, 11700, 11704, 11707, 11709, 11709-A, 11715, 11720, 11705, 11706, 11711-A, 11711-B, 11732, 11708, 11710-A, 11710E, 1710B, 1710C, 11710-D, 11714, 11714SN, 11748-A, 11748-C, 11714, 11717-ll, 11747, 11747-11, 11712, 11712-ll, 1734, 11728, 11728-ll, 1724, 1731, 11772-ll. *Description of the Need for the Information and Its Proposed Use:* The information collected is needed by Ginnie Mae for the participation of issuers/customers in its Mortgage-Backed Securities programs and to monitor performance and compliance with established rules and regulations. *Frequency of Submission:* On occasion, Quarterly, Monthly, Annually. Number of respondents × Annual responses × Hours per response = Burden hours Reporting Burden 230 176.5 0.362 14,720 *Total Estimated Burden Hours:* 14,720. *Status:* Revision of a currently collection. Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as amended. Dated: June 25, 2007. Lillian L. Deitzer, Departmental Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E7-12696 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Information Collection Submission to OMB for Reinstatement Under Paperwork Reduction Act AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces that an information collection request was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget's

(OMB)Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for review and reinstatement. The collection expired during the renewal process. DATES: Written comments must be received by August 1, 2007. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for Department of the Interior. You may submit comments by facsimile to 202-395-6566 or by e-mail to *OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov* . Send a copy of your comments to Lynn Forcia, Chief, Division of Workforce Development, Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development, 951 Constitution Street, NW., Mail Stop 20-SIB, Washington, DC 20245. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or additional copies of the information collection instructions and the October 18, 2006 **Federal Register** notice should be directed to Lynn Forcia, Chief, Division of Workforce Development, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, 1951 Constitution Avenue, NW., MS-20-SIB, Washington, DC 20245; Telephone 202-219-5270. (This is not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information collection for A Reporting System for the Public Law 102-477 Demonstration Project needs renewal. The 60-day notice requesting comments on OMB Control Number 1076-0135, “Public Law 102-477 Reporting,” was published in the **Federal Register** on October 18, 2006 (71 FR 61505). We have held meetings with both tribal and Federal partners regarding the existing Public Law 102-477 tribal report forms. We have also shared the changes mandated by the government-wide employment and training OMB requirements with Federal partners and tribal representatives. *Abstract:* The information collection is needed to document satisfactory compliance with statutory, regulatory and OMB requirements of the various integrated programs. Public Law 102-477 authorizes tribal governments to integrate federally-funded employment, training and related services programs into a single, coordinated, comprehensive service delivery plan. Funding agencies include the Department of the Interior, Department of Labor, and the Department of Health and Human Services. The Bureau of Indian Affairs is statutorily required to serve as the lead agency. Section 11 of this Act requires that the Secretary of the Interior make available a single universal report format which shall be used by a tribal government to report on integrated activities and expenditures undertaken. The Bureau of Indian Affairs shares the information collected from these reports with the Department of Labor and the Department of Health and Human Services. *Method of Collection:* *Current Forms:* These forms have been developed incorporating comments from the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Labor which provide program funds to tribes for portions of Public Law 102-477. The revised forms have also incorporated many of the comments from tribal grantees and other interested parties. The revised forms include a one page financial form which is a slightly modified SF-269-A (short form). The financial report also now adds one additional financial page at the request of the Department of Health and Human Services, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families

(TANF)report. The form is accompanied by four pages of instructions. The additional form and instructions are only to be completed by those tribes receiving TANF funds under Public Law 102-477. A portion of the report is optional as requested by DHHS. Secondly, the revised forms include a revised and expanded program statistical report. These report forms and narrative are limited but should satisfy the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Labor and the Department of the Interior. Both the existing and revised forms reduce the burden on tribal governments by consolidating data collection for employment, training, education, child care and related service programs. The reports are due annually. These forms have been developed within a partnership between tribes and representatives of all three Federal agencies to standardize terms and definitions, eliminate duplication and reduce frequency of collection. *Action:* Reinstatement. *Collection:* OMB Control # 1076-0135, A Reporting System for Pub. L. 102-477 Demonstration Project. *Respondents:* Tribes participating in Public Law 102-477 will report annually. Currently there are 51 grantees representing 240 tribes participating in the program. *Burden:* The hourly burden for present forms is 58 hours per respondent without TANF; 58 hours × 21 grantees estimated equals 1,218 annual burden hours. If a tribe does include TANF the annual burden hours is 60 hours with an estimated 30 grantees including TANF equals 1,800 annual burden hours. The total estimated annual burden hours for the Pub. L. 102-477 initiative equals 3,018. *Public Comments and Responses:* No comments were received to our 60 day notice published in the **Federal Register** October 18, 2006 (71 FR 61505): One written comment was received on February 1, 2006 while meeting with tribes. The tribe summarized by stating, we “can find no fault with the current reporting requirements and forms.” *Request for Comments:* The Department of the Interior requests your comments on this collection concerning:

(a)The necessity of this information collection for the proper performance of functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(b)The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (hours and cost) of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(c)Ways we could enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(d)Ways we could minimize the burden of the collection of the information on the respondents, such as through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. You are reminded that an agency may not request or sponsor a collection of information unless OMB has approved the collection; you are not required to answer a collection of information that is not approved, and you will not be harmed by your refusal. The Office of Management and Budget has 60 days in which to make a decision on this request for renewal, but may decide after 30 days. Therefore, your comments should arrive by the 30 day comment date to be sure of getting full consideration. Dated: June 20, 2007. Carl J. Artman, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. [FR Doc. E7-12658 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-XN-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Draft Environmental Assessment/Habitat Conservation Plan; Issuance of Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit for Incidental Take of Nine Listed Species in Cochise County, AZ and Hidalgo County, NM (Malpai Borderlands) AGENCY: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability; receipt of application. SUMMARY: Malpai Borderlands Group (Applicant) has applied to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for an incidental take permit (TE-155587-0) pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act

(Act)of 1973, as amended. The requested permit, which is for a period of 30 years, would authorize incidental take of the following listed endangered species: Yaqui chub ( *Gila purpurea* ), Yaqui topminnow ( *Poeciliopsis occidentalis sonoriensis* ), Huachuca water-umbel ( *Lilaeopsis schaffneriana recurva* ), Northern Aplomado falcon ( *Falco femoralis septentrionalis* ); listed threatened species: Yaqui catfish ( *Ictalurus pricei)* , beautiful shiner ( *Cyprinella formosa* ), Chiricahua leopard frog ( *Rana chiricahuensis* ), Mexican spotted owl ( *Strix occidentalis lucida* ), New Mexico ridge-nosed rattlesnake ( *Crotalus willardi obscurus)* ; candidate species: western yellow-billed cuckoo ( *Coccyzus americanus* ); and unlisted species: Yaqui sucker ( *Catostomus bernardini* ), longfin dace—Yaqui form ( *Agosia chrysogaster* ), Mexican stoneroller ( *Campostoma ornatum* ), lowland leopard frog ( *Rana yavapaiensis* ), northern Mexican gartersnake ( *Thamnophis eques megalops* ), black-tailed prairie dog ( *Cynomys ludovicianus* ), western burrowing owl ( *Athene cunicularia hypugaea* ), white-sided jackrabbit ( *Lepus callotis* ), and western red bat ( *Lasiurus blosseveillii* ). The proposed incidental take would occur as a result of grassland improvement and ranch management activities on non-Federal lands within approximately 828,000 acres of the Malpai borderlands region of Cochise County, Arizona and Hidalgo County, New Mexico. We invite public comment. DATES: To ensure consideration, written comments must be received on or before August 31, 2007. ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to review the application, draft Malpai Borderlands Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP), or other related documents may obtain a copy by written request to the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological Services Office, 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 (602/242-0210). Electronic copies of these documents will also be available for review on the Arizona Ecological Services Office Web site, *http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/* . The application and documents related to the application will be available for public inspection, by appointment only, during normal business hours (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) at the Service's Phoenix office. Comments concerning the application, draft HCP, or other related documents should be submitted in writing to the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological Services Office, 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951. Please refer to permit number TE-XXXXXX-0 when submitting comments. All comments received, including names and addresses, will become a part of the official administrative record. Public Availability of Comments Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marty Tuegel at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Tucson office, 201 N. Bonita Avenue, Suite 141, Tucson, Arizona 85745 (520/670-6150) ext. 232, or by e-mail at *Marty_Tuegel@fws.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Applicant has applied to the Service for a Section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit for a period of 30 years in order to gain authorization for incidental take of 19 listed, candidate, and unlisted species. The proposed incidental take could occur as a result of grassland improvement and ranch management activities on non-Federal lands within approximately 828,000 acres of the Malpai borderlands region of Cochise County, Arizona and Hidalgo County, New Mexico. Background The Malpai Borderlands Group is proposing grassland improvement activities and general ranch management activities on non-Federal lands within the Malpai Borderlands area of Cochise County, Arizona and Hidalgo County, New Mexico. This area encompasses approximately 828,000 acres of primarily open rangeland. The covered area would include all the private and state trust lands within the area defined by the U.S./Mexico border on the south; on the west from milepost 10 on Geronimo Trail following current ranch boundaries north to Hwy 80, then north-east along Hwy 80 to the point where the section line between Township 21 South and Township 22 South crosses the highway, then north-west along current ranch boundaries to the National Forest boundary, then north-east along the National Forest boundary to the section line between Township 19 South and Township 20 South, then east to Hwy 80, then north along Hwy 80 to its junction with Hwy 9; along Hwy 9 on the north side; and on the east side along the Continental Divide (to where it enters Diamond A Ranch) and then along the east boundary of the Diamond A Ranch to its junction with the U.S./Mexico border. The grassland improvement activities include returning fire onto the landscape as an ecological factor that maintains the grassland ecosystem, erosion control structures to reduce soil loss and downstream sedimentation, and mechanical brush control to reduce shrub invasion of upland habitats. All three of these general activity types can have short-term impacts on species and their habitats, but through these activities, a long-term benefit is anticipated for the watersheds in the covered area and for the covered species. In addition, MBHCP includes provisions for individual ranchers to elect to enroll under the conservation plan for coverage of routine ranch management activities, including construction of linear facilities (fences, pipelines, and roads), livestock management, and use and maintenance of livestock ponds/tanks. These activities are included because in some cases incidental take of some covered species may occur. However, improved ranch management also can improve the watershed and habitats of covered species. In addition to these two broad categories of covered activities, Malpai Borderlands Group proposes actions to minimize the impacts of the activities and assist in recovery of the covered species. These actions are also proposed to be covered by the associated section 10(a)(1)(B) permit. To meet the requirements of a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit, Malpai Borderlands Group has developed and will implement the MBHCP, which provides measures to minimize and mitigate for incidental take of the 19 proposed covered species to the maximum extent practicable, and which ensures that the incidental take will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of these species in the wild. Section 9 of the Act and its implementing regulations prohibit the “taking” of threatened and endangered species. However, the Service, under limited circumstances, may issue permits to take listed wildlife species incidental to, and not the purpose of, otherwise lawful activities. We provide this notice under section 10(c) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.22), and the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.) and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). C. Todd Jones, Acting Regional Director, Region 2, Albuquerque, New Mexico. [FR Doc. E7-12720 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs Final Determination against Federal Acknowledgment of the St. Francis / Sokoki Band of Abenakis of Vermont AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Final Determination. SUMMARY: Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.10(l)(2), notice is hereby given that the Department of the Interior (Department) declines to acknowledge the group known as the St. Francis/Sokoki Band of Abenakis of Vermont (SSA), P.O. Box 276, Swanton, Vermont 05488, c/o Ms. April Merrill, as an Indian tribe within the meaning of Federal law. This notice is based on a determination that the petitioner does not satisfy four of the seven mandatory criteria for acknowledgment, specifically 83.7(a), 83.7(b), 83.7(c), and 83.7(e), as defined in 25 CFR part 83. Consequently, the SSA petitioner does not meet the requirements for a government-to-government relationship with the United States. DATES: This determination is final and will become effective 90 days from publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** on October 1, 2007 pursuant to section 83.10(l)(4), unless a request for reconsideration is filed pursuant to section 83.11. ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of the Summary Evaluation under the Criteria should be addressed to the Office of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, Attention: Office of Federal Acknowledgment, 1951 Constitution Avenue, NW., MS: 34B-SIB, Washington, DC 20240. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. Lee Fleming, Director, Office of Federal Acknowledgment,

(202)513-7650. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 9, 2005, the Department issued a proposed finding

(PF)that the SSA petitioner was not an Indian tribe within the meaning of Federal law because the petitioner did not meet four of the seven mandatory criteria for Federal acknowledgment as an Indian tribe. The Department published a notice of the PF in the **Federal Register** on November 17, 2005 (70 FR 69776). Publishing notice of the PF initiated a 180-day comment period during which time the petitioner, interested and informed parties, and the general public, could submit arguments and evidence to support or rebut the PF. This initial comment period ended on May 16, 2006. The petitioner requested that the Department extend the comment period, and the Department extended it for an additional 90 days. The comment period closed on August, 14, 2006. The petitioner again requested an extension of the comment period. In reply, the Department stated that it would consider doing so if the petitioner submitted, as soon as possible, a more thorough work plan and justification for the extension. The Department noted that pending the receipt of such a request, the 60-day response period, described in the regulations, would close on October 13, 2006. On October 13, 2006, the response period closed, without the Department receiving a response from the petitioner. During the comment period, the petitioner, several individuals associated with the petitioner, and an informed party submitted materials to the Department. During both the original comment period and the extended comment period, the petitioner did not submit critical materials that the PF requested. In particular, the petitioner did not submit any of the materials that would help the petitioner establish descent from a historical Indian tribe. Overall, given the petition's deficiencies in meeting criteria 83.7(a), (b), (c), and (e), together with the explicit requests in the PF, the petitioner's comments were few in number and did not substantively address the PF. None of the material submitted changed the conclusions of the PF. The SSA petitioner claims descend as a group mainly from a Western Abenaki Indian tribe, most specifically, the Missisquoi Indians. During the colonial period (approximately 1600-1800), the Missisquoi Indians lived in northwestern Vermont, near the present-day town of Swanton. The available evidence indicates that by 1800 the disruption caused by colonial wars and non-Indian settlement had forced almost all the Western Abenakis in northern New England (including Vermont) to relocate to the Saint Francis River area of Quebec, Canada, and become part of the St. Francis, or Odanak, village of Canadian Western Abenaki Indians. The petitioner, however, contends that its ancestors remained behind in northwestern Vermont after 1800, or moved to Canada until it was “safe” to return. The petitioner also maintains that its ancestors lived “underground,” hiding their Indian identity to avoid drawing the attention of their non-Indian neighbors, until the 1970's. Some of the available documentation indicates that, over the course of the 19th century, a few of the group's ancestors moved from various locations in Quebec, Canada, to the United States, but not as a group. Of the petitioner's 1,171 members with enrollment files completed to the petitioner's satisfaction, only 8 (less than 1 percent) demonstrated descent from a Missisquoi Abenaki Indian ancestor. By 1800, most of the historical Missisquoi Abenaki Indian tribe had migrated to St. Francis, or Odanak, in Quebec, Canada. The available evidence demonstrates that these eight members descend from Simon Obomsawin, who once belonged to the St. Francis, or Odanak, Indian community, and who can be traced to the historical Missisquoi Abenaki Indian tribe through lists of Indians belonging to St. Francis, or Odanak. The available evidence does not demonstrate that these eight members were associated with the SSA petitioner before the 1990's. Furthermore, the available evidence does not demonstrate that the other remaining 1,163 members, or their claimed ancestors, descend from an earlier Missisquoi Abenaki entity in Vermont or any other historical Indian tribe. Instead, the available evidence indicates that the petitioner is a collection of individuals of claimed but mostly undemonstrated Indian ancestry with little or no social or historical connection with each other before the early 1970's. Criterion 83.7(a) requires that external observers identify the petitioner as an American Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis since 1900. The PF found that for the period from 1900 to 1975, no external observers identified either the SSA petitioner group or a group of the petitioner's ancestors as an American Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis. From 1976 afterward, however, the PF found sufficient evidence that external observers identified the petitioning group as an American Indian entity. The Department received three sets of comments on the PF's conclusions that pertain to criterion 83.7(a). The petitioner submitted the first set of comments using a DVD video presentation entitled “Against the Darkness” that contained two interviews discussing Indians in Vermont in the 20th century. A second set of comments came from several individuals associated with the petitioning group. A third set of comments came from an informed party who contested the PF's analysis of a document in a Vermont Eugenics Survey “Pedigree” file compiled around 1927 to 1930. None of the comments submitted during the comment period supplied new evidence that an external observer identified the petitioner or an antecedent group before 1975 as an American Indian entity. The two interviews on the “Against the Darkness” video provide secondhand accounts of Indian individuals living in, or at least traveling through, Vermont in the first third of the 20th century. However, they are not first-hand observations of American Indian entity, and the evidence does not demonstrate that the observed Indians were either the petitioner or an antecedent group. The second set of documents contained material that relates to the petitioner's activities after 1975. This material does not affect the FD because the PF concluded that the petitioner met criterion 83.7(a) for the period following 1975. The informed party's comments disputing the PF's interpretation of the Vermont Eugenics Survey are plausible, especially if further corroborating evidence were available. The informed party argued, without providing additional corroborating evidence, that “the St. Francis Indians” identified in the survey were a family in Vermont, as opposed to an Indian group in Canada, as the PF concluded. However, the informed party's argument does not satisfy criterion 83.7(a) because the Department does not accept references to individual Indian descendents or Indian families as satisfactory evidence for criterion 83.7(a). The FD concludes, as the PF did, that external observers identified the petitioner as an as Indian entity only after 1975. The evidence does not demonstrate substantially continuous identification of the petitioner as an American Indian entity from 1900 to the present; therefore, the petitioner does not meet the requirements of criterion 83.7(a). Criterion 83.7(b) requires that a predominant portion of the petitioning group comprises a distinct community and has existed as a community from historical times until the present. The PF found, based on the available evidence, that the petitioner did not meet criterion 83.7(b) at any point in time. The PF noted that much of the available evidence from the 19th century demonstrated that the Abenakis of northern Vermont left the state by around 1800, rather than supporting the petitioner's claims about the existence of a 19th-century community. Based on the available evidence, the PF concluded that the petitioner is a collection of individuals with little or no social connection with each other before the early 1970's. The PF also concluded that these claimed ancestors did not maintain at least a minimal distinction from the population of northwestern Vermont and the surrounding area from historical times until the present. As comments, the petitioner submitted a video presentation entitled “Against the Darkness,” four essays that are principally about 20th century material culture, four Internet essays entitled “Abenaki History,” an unannotated map, membership lists from 1975 and 1983, and a collection of meeting minutes from the 1970's, 1980's, and 1990's. An informed party also submitted comments on two 18th-century document sets that are allegedly “missing,” an 1835 newspaper article from the *Green Mountain Democrat,* and the Vermont Eugenics Survey of the early 20th century. The “Against the Darkness” video presentation and the four essays on material culture argued that the existence of woven baskets, a pocket watch on which the phrase “from Abenaki tribe” was inscribed, a century-old postcard of a “chief” in a canoe, and some handmade fish-spears demonstrated the existence of an Abenaki community. The PF discussed the difficulties in inferring the existence of a community from a few pieces of material culture, and the FD concludes that these objects have unknown provenances and questionable relevancy and do not demonstrate the existence of a distinct community comprised of the petitioner or its ancestors. The available evidence does not show that the Internet essays discuss the petitioner's ancestors. The petitioner submitted an unannotated black and white map that had numbers assigned to various houses; however, the materials did not explain the meaning of the numbers, or what the numbers are supposed to indicate. The map did not provide evidence of a distinct community within Swanton consisting of the claimed ancestors of the group. The membership lists from 1975 and 1983 and the meeting minutes from the 1970's, 1980's, and 1990's provide evidence that the group first created and organized itself in the 1970's, and established its membership rules after that period. They also show the group lacked a clear understanding of its membership or knowledge of who its members were. Generally, the petitioner was able to document some activities of the petitioner's council and the Abenaki Self-Help Association, Incorporated (ASHAI), but did not document the existence of an interacting social community composed of its members. The informed party discussed two sets of 18th-century documents that are, at present, not locatable or do not exist. The informed party speculated that, if found, these documents might help describe Abenaki community in northwestern Vermont. These speculations, however, cannot be verified and thus do not provide evidence for purposes of 83.7(b). The Department makes its decisions based on available evidence. The informed party also contested the PF's interpretation of an 1835 article from the *Green Mountain Democrat* newspaper. The PF noted several problems with using this article as evidence in support of criterion 83.7(b). However, the informed party's comments do not address those problems, and the comments do not help the petitioner satisfy the criterion. The informed party asserted that the Vermont Eugenics Survey identified a few of the petitioner's claimed ancestors as Abenaki Indians. No party, however, submitted any additional documentation during the comment period to support this claim. Based on the available record, the FD concludes, as the PF did, that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that, at any point in time, a predominant portion of the petitioning group comprised a distinct community or has existed as a community from historical times until the present. Therefore, the petitioner does not meet criterion 83.7(b). Criterion 83.7(c) requires that the petitioner has maintained political influence or authority over its members as an autonomous entity from historical times until the present. The PF found, based on the available evidence, that the petitioner did not meet criterion 83.7(c) at any point in time. The PF concluded that there was an Abenaki entity in or around northwestern Vermont through the late 18th century but that the available evidence did not show that the petitioner's ancestors had a historical connection to these Abenaki Indians. The petitioner did not submit evidence to demonstrate what its claimed ancestors were doing as a group from 1800 to 1875 to exercise political influence or authority. For the period from 1875 to 1900, the petitioner named an ancestor who provided food and clothes to children and another who was a midwife, arguing that these two ancestors served as informal community leaders. The PF concluded, however, that these activities did not constitute an exercise of political authority, but encouraged the petitioner to investigate the activities of these individuals further. For the period from 1900 to 1975, the PF concluded the petitioner presented little evidence demonstrating informal leadership among any group of the petitioner's claimed ancestors. For the period since 1975, the PF noted the creation of the SSA as a political organization. However, the PF concluded that there was not sufficient evidence showing widespread participation by the group's members in these political processes; instead, the evidence suggested the “political influence is limited to the actions of a few group members pursuing an agenda with little input from the membership” (Abenaki PF 2005, 108). In its comments on the FD, the petitioner submitted an essay about a souvenir postcard of a “chief” in a canoe, a set of photocopied treaty documents, four Internet essays entitled “Abenaki History,” and a collection of meeting minutes from the 1970's, 1980's, and 1990's. Several individuals associated with the petitioner submitted several other pages of information, including two photographs and some Internet printouts. An informed party submitted several pages of comments together with some photocopies of primary sources. The essay on the 100-year old souvenir postcard of a “chief” in a canoe does not provide evidence of political influence for the petitioner during this time, especially since the petitioner did not include a name for him or describe any actions carried out under his leadership. The treaty documents generally refer Indians in non-specific, generic terms and do not link the petitioner to any specific Abenaki Indians from northwestern Vermont. The Internet essays support the PF's conclusions that there was an Abenaki entity in or around northern Vermont before 1800 that exercised political authority. However, the available evidence does not show that the Internet essays discuss the petitioner's ancestors. The meeting minutes that the petitioner submitted show that a small number of the petitioner's members engaged in political activity and that the rest of the claimed members had little or no awareness of or participation in the council's actions. Thus, the group's leaders were not interacting bilaterally with the group's members. The submission from the individuals associated with the petitioner included a letter referring to oral tradition materials, but during an extended comment period, the individuals did not submit these materials, and their comments generally lacked supporting documentation and explanation of the political processes of the petitioner as defined under criterion 83.7(c). Comments from the informed party discussed two sets of 18th-century documents that are, at present, either not locatable or do not exist; this party speculated that, if found, these documents might help describe Abenaki leadership in northwestern Vermont. These speculations, however, cannot be verified and thus do not provide evidence for the purposes of criterion 83.7(c). The Department makes its decisions based on available evidence. In sum, the commenting parties did not submit any evidence that allowed the petitioner to satisfy the criterion. Criterion 83.7(d) requires that the petitioning group submit a copy of the group's present governing document that includes its membership criteria. The PF found that the petitioner satisfied criterion 83.7(d) by submitting a copy of its governing document that described the group's membership criteria and current governing procedures. The Department received no comments, from either the petitioner or any other party, on the PF's conclusions under criterion 83.7(d). Therefore, based on the available evidence, the FD affirms the PF's conclusion that the petitioner meets criterion 83.7(d). Criterion 83.7(e) requires that the petitioner's membership consist of individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe or from historical Indian tribes that combined and functioned as a single autonomous political entity. To satisfy this criterion, the petitioner must

(1)properly identify its current members, and

(2)provide evidence that those members descend from a historical Indian tribe. The PF concluded that the petitioner did not properly identify its current members as required by the regulations because its membership list was incomplete and was not certified by the group's governing body. The PF also concluded that although the petitioner claimed descent from the historical “Western Abenaki” Indian tribe, the petitioner did not document descent from that historical Indian tribe or any other historical Indian tribe, except possibly for the eight members mentioned above. On November 1, 2005, just before the November 9, 2005, issuance of the PF, the Department received a submission from the petitioner that properly certified the petitioner's 2005 membership list. The Department evaluated this list for the PF, despite its not being certified. This submission arrived too late to evaluate in the PF. Instead, the Department's FD notes that the petitioner's current membership list has been properly certified. During the comment period, the petitioner submitted a copy of the video presentation entitled “Against the Darkness” which makes the argument that seven generations of Abenaki Indians have survived in northern Vermont, from the late 18th century to the present. However, “Against the Darkness” does not properly attribute its alleged sources, thus effectively shielding the video's evidence from independent evaluation and verification. Furthermore, because it uses aliases and approximate birth dates for its subjects, the video presents no real genealogy that the Department can evaluate. Several individuals associated with the petitioning group submitted an undated proposed amendment to the State of Vermont's bill regarding state recognition of the “Abenaki People.” The proposed legislation states that, “[a]t least 1,700 Vermonters claim to be direct descendents of the several indigenous Native American peoples, now known as Western Abenaki tribes.” The bill states that 1,700 unnamed Vermonters claim to be direct descendents of “several indigenous Native American peoples,” not that 1,700 Vermonters are direct descendents of a specific Abenaki Indian tribe in northwestern Vermont. An assertion that is not supported by relevant documentation, about the ancestry of a group, by a contemporary state legislature or other source, is not a form of evidence that is acceptable to the Secretary to meet the requirements of the regulations. More specifically, the acknowledgment regulations in section 83.7(e)(1) generally expect “evidence identifying present members or ancestors of present members as being descendents of a historical Indian tribe.” The assertion expressed in the Vermont bill does not identify present members or name the ancestors of the “1,700 Vermonters.” It only asserts that at least 1,700 unnamed, unspecified Vermonters “claim” to descend from “several indigenous Native American peoples.” An informed party claimed that two “missing” document sets from the late 18th century might provide names of specific historical Abenaki Indians from whom the petitioner can claim descent. There is no reason to believe that the two alleged “missing” document sets from the late 18th century would demonstrate that the petitioner's membership descends from a historical Indian tribe. The informed party's speculations cannot be verified and thus do not provide evidence for the purposes of 83.7(e), and the Department makes its decisions based on available evidence. The petitioner did certify its current membership list; however, neither the petitioner nor any other party submitted new evidence that demonstrates that the group's membership descends from a historical Indian tribe. The FD affirms the PF's conclusion that the petitioner did not meet criterion 83.7(e). Criterion 83.7(f) requires that the membership of the petitioning group be composed principally of persons who are not members of any acknowledged North American Indian tribe. A review of the available documentation for the PF and the FD shows that the SSA petitioner is composed principally of persons who are not members of any acknowledged North American Indian tribe. Therefore, the petitioner meets the requirements of criterion 83.7(f). Criterion 83.7(g) requires that neither the petitioner nor its members be the subject of congressional legislation that has expressly terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship. The available documentation for the PF and the FD provided no evidence that the petitioning group was the subject of congressional legislation to terminate or prohibit a Federal relationship as an Indian tribe. Therefore, the petitioner meets the requirements of criterion 83.7(g). A report summarizing the evidence, reasoning, and analyses that are the bases for the FD will be provided to the petitioner and interested parties, and is available to other parties upon written request. After the publication of notice of the FD, the petitioner or any interested party may file a request for reconsideration with the Interior Board of Indian Appeals

(IBIA)under the procedures set forth in section 83.11 of the regulations. The IBIA must receive this request no later than 90 days after the publication of the FD in the **Federal Register** . The FD will become effective as provided in the regulations 90 days from the **Federal Register** publication, unless a request for reconsideration is received within that time. Dated: June 22, 2007. Carl J. Artman, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. [FR Doc. E7-12727 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-G1-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)for the Special Resource Study

(SRS)for Sites Related to the Civil War Battle of Franklin, Near Franklin, Tennessee SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and National Park Service policy in Director's Order 2 (Park Planning) and Director's Order 12 (Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-making) the National Park Service

(NPS)will prepare an EIS for the SRS for sites related to the Civil War Battle of Franklin

(BoF)located in Franklin, Tennessee. The statement will assess potential environmental impacts associated with various types and levels of visitor use and resources management for sites related to the BoF. The authority for publishing this notice is contained in 40 CFR 1506.6 which prescribes the regulations for implementing the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. The process by which the Secretary of the Interior will conduct SRSs is contained in 16 U.S.C. 1a-5. New areas are typically added to the National Park System by an Act of Congress. The National Park Service is often tasked by Congress to evaluate potential new areas for compliance with the established criteria for designation. The NPS documents its findings in a SRS Report. On December 1, 2005, Congress passed the Franklin National Battlefield Study Act (Pub. L. 109-120) directing the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a SRS for certain sites in Tennessee including the cities of Brentwood, Franklin, Triune, Thompson Station, and Spring Hill, Tennessee. The NPS is currently accepting comments from interested parties on issues, concerns, and suggestions pertinent to the BoF. Suggestions and ideas for managing the cultural and natural resources associated with the BoF are encouraged. Comments may be submitted in writing to the address listed at the end of this notice or through the NPS Planning, Environment, and Public Comment

(PEPC)Web site at *http://parkplanning.nps.gov.* The NPS will publish periodic newsletters on the PEPC Web site to present scoping issues and preliminary management concepts to the public as they are developed. Public meetings to present management concepts will be conducted in the local area. Specific locations, dates, and times will be announced in local media and on the PEPC Web site. If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments by any one of several methods. You may mail comments to: Tim Bemisderfer, Battle of Franklin SRS, NPS Southeast Regional Office, Planning and Compliance Division, 100 Alabama Street, 6th Floor 1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. You may also comment via the Internet to *http://parkplanning.nps.gov/sero.* Please submit Internet comments as a plain text file, avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Please also include your name and return address in your Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have received your Internet message, contact us directly at 404-562-3124, extension 693. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will always make submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives of or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. DATES: Locations, dates, and times of public meetings will be published in local newspapers and may also be obtained by contracting the NPS Southeast Regional Office, Planning and Compliance Division. This information will also be published on the PEPC Web site. ADDRESSES: Tim Bemisderfer, Battle of Franklin SRS, NPS Southeast Regional Office, Planning and Compliance Division, 100 Alabama Street, 6th Floor 1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Telephone: 404-562-3124 extension 693. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Bemisderfer, Battle of Franklin SRS, NPS Southeast Regional Office, Planning and Compliance Division, 100 Alabama Street, 6th Floor 1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Telephone: 404-562-3124 extension 693. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Draft and Final SRS and EIS will be made available to all known interested parties and appropriate agencies. Full public participation by Federal, State, and local agencies as well as other concerned organizations and private citizens is invited throughout the preparation process of this document. The responsible official for this EIS is the Regional Director for the Southeast Region, Patricia A. Hooks. Dated: May 29, 2007. Patricia A. Hooks, Regional Director, Southeast Region. [FR Doc. 07-3205 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 7

Traces to 7 documents

U.S. Code

CFR

13 references not yet in our index