Notices. Public Land Order

2,801 words·~13 min read·/register/2007/08/10/07-3916

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

BILLING CODE 4310-33-M DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [CACA 14340] Public Land Order No. 7679; Extension of Public Land Order No. 6652; California AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior. ACTION: Public Land Order. SUMMARY: This order extends the withdrawal created by Public Land Order No. 6652 for an additional 20-year period. This extension is necessary to continue protection of the Petersburg Administrative Site in Siskiyou County.

DATES: *Effective Dates:* July 22, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Duane Marti, BLM, California State Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, California 95825, 916-978-4675. Order By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior by section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714 (2000), it is ordered as follows: 1. Public Land Order No. 6652 (52 FR 27552), which withdrew 30 acres of National Forest System land within the Klamath National Forest from the mining laws to protect the Petersburg Administrative Site, is hereby extended for an additional 20-year period. 2.

Public Land Order No. 6652 will expire on July 21, 2027, unless, as a result of a review conducted prior to the expiration date pursuant to section 204(f) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714(f) (2000), the Secretary determines that the withdrawal shall be extended. Dated: July 3, 2007. C. Stephen Allred, Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management. [FR Doc. E7-15623 Filed 8-9-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management, Interior [CA680-1220-FU] Notice of Intent To Collect Fees on Public Land in San Bernardino County, CA Under the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act

(REA)AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Intent to Collect Fees on Public Land in the El Mirage Cooperative Management Area, in San Bernardino County, California. SUMMARY: Pursuant to applicable provisions of the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (REA), 16 U.S.C. 6801 *et seq.* , the Bureau of Land Management's

(BLM)Barstow Field Office proposes to begin collecting fees in fiscal year 2008 at the El Mirage Cooperative Management Area in San Bernardino County, California. (SBBM, T.7N., R.7W., Sec. 11 through 14, 22 through 28, 33 through 36, SBBM, T.7N., R.6W., Sec. 18 through 24, 26 through 34, SBBM, T.6N., R.7W., Sec. 1 through 4, 12, SBBM, T.6N., R.6W., Sec. 4 through 9). DATES: The public is encouraged to participate during the public comment period that will expire 30 days after publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . Effective six months after the publication of this notice, the BLM's Barstow Field Office would initiate fee collection in the El Mirage Cooperative Management Area, unless the BLM publishes a **Federal Register** notice to the contrary. The Pacific Southwest Region Recreation Resource Advisory Committee

(RRAC)will review the new fee well in advance of the proposed initiation date. Future adjustments in the fee amount will be modified in accordance with the BLM Barstow Field Office Business Plan, consultation with the Pacific Southwest Region RRAC, and other public notices prior to a fee increase. ADDRESSES: Mail: Field Manager, Bureau of Land Management, Barstow Field Office, 2601 Barstow Road, Barstow, CA 92311. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roxie C. Trost, Field Manager, Barstow Field Office, 2601 Barstow Road, Barstow, CA 92311. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The El Mirage Cooperative Management Area qualifies as a site wherein visitors can be charged a “Special Recreation Permit Fee” authorized under section 3(h) of the Federal Lands Recreation and Enhancement Act (REA), 16 U.S.C. 6801 *et seq.* In accordance with REA, and implementing regulations at 43 CFR Part 2930, visitors participating in OHV use (e.g., 4-wheel drive vehicles, ATVs, motorcycles, quads, wind sails), would purchase a Special Recreation Permit

(SRP)to operate their vehicle within the cooperative use area. The operators of each primary entry vehicle operating within the recreation area would be required to purchase and display the permit. Permits would expire on September 30 following issuance, regardless of when the permit was purchased. An opportunity to purchase an individual SRP pass either for the day or for a 7-day period would be available onsite to facilitate less frequent users. The BLM provides individual special recreation permits for management of special areas as specified in 43 CFR 2932.11. and in REA under section 3(h). The America the Beautiful—The National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass ( *i.e.,* the Interagency Annual Pass, Interagency Senior Pass, Interagency Access Pass, and Interagency Volunteer Pass) would not be honored and do not apply to the SRP fee. The National Parks Pass with Golden Eagle Hologram, Golden Eagle, Golden Age, and Golden Access Passports would also not be honored and do not apply to the SRP fee. The El Mirage Cooperative Management Area is a popular off-highway vehicle recreation area offering significant opportunities for outdoor recreation and has received substantial Federal investment. The BLM's commitment is to find the proper balance between public use and the protection of resources. The BLM's policy is to collect fees at all specialized recreation sites, or where the BLM at Federal expense provides facilities, equipment or services in connection with outdoor use. In an effort to meet increasing demands for services and maintenance of existing facilities, routes and trails, the BLM would implement a fee program for the El Mirage Cooperative Management Area. The BLM's mission for the El Mirage Cooperative Management Fee Collection Project (Project) is to ensure that funding is available to maintain existing facilities and recreational opportunities, to provide for law enforcement presence, to develop additional services, and to protect resources. This mission entails communication with those who will be most directly affected by the Project, including recreationists, other recreation providers, neighbors, and those who will have a stake in solving concerns that may arise throughout the life of the Project, such as elected officials and other agencies. On August 24, 1990, the BLM published the final Management Plan and Environmental Assessment

(EA)for the El Mirage Cooperative Management Area. This Management Plan and EA considered various ways to minimize the potential for resource damage from authorized uses, including cross-country OHV use. The BLM signed a decision record for this EA on January 19, 1990 and subsequently signed a Decision Record approving the proposed action in the Management Plan on June 29, 1990. The County of San Bernardino, County of Los Angeles, and California Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission and Division, as cooperators to the El Mirage Cooperative Management Area, signed their concurrence with the actions in the Management Plan in June 1990. In December 2004, REA was signed into law. REA provides authority for 10 years for the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to establish, modify, charge, and collect recreation fees for use of some Federal recreation lands and waters, and contains specific provisions addressing public involvement in the establishment of recreation fees, including a requirement that Recreation Resource Advisory Committees or Councils have the opportunity to make recommendations regarding establishment of such fees. REA also directs the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to publish advance notice in the **Federal Register** whenever new recreation fee areas are established under their respective jurisdictions. The 1990 Management Plan allows for recreation opportunities, the issuance of use permits, and the charging of fees for each primary vehicle for use of the El Mirage Cooperative Management Area. The Barstow Field Office Business Plan prepared pursuant to REA and BLM recreation fee program policy also addresses the establishment of a permit process and the collection of user fees. This Business Plan, in conjunction with the Management Plan, establishes the rationale for charging recreation fees. In accordance with the BLM recreation fee program policy, the Business Plan explains the fee collection process, and outlines how the fees will be used at the El Mirage Cooperative Management Area. The BLM has notified and involved the public at each stage of the planning process, including the proposal to collect fees. Fee amounts will be posted on-site, and at the Barstow Field Office, and copies of the Business Plan will be available at the Barstow Field Office and the BLM California State Office. The BLM welcomes public comments on this proposal. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, be advised 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 from public review your personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 6803(b); 43 CFR 2932.13. Roxie C. Trost, Field Manager, Barstow Field Office. [FR Doc. E7-15618 Filed 8-9-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-40-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service 30-Day Notice of Submission to the Office of Management and Budget; Opportunity for Public Comment AGENCY: Department of the Interior, National Park Service. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: Under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and 5 CFR Part 1320, Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, the National Park Service

(NPS)invites public comments on a proposed new collection of information (OMB #1024-XXXX). DATES: Public comments on this Information Collection Request

(ICR)will be accepted on or before September 10, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments directly to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior (OMB #1024-XXXX), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, by fax at 202/395-6566, or by electronic mail at *oira_docket@omb.eop.gov.* Please also send a copy of your comments to Susan Johnson, Air Resources Division, NPS, 12795 W. Alameda Parkway, P.O. Box 25287, Denver, Colorado 80225; or electronically at *Susan_Johnson@nps.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Johnson, Air Resources Division, NPS, 12795 W. Alameda Parkway, P.O. Box 25287, Denver, Colorado 80225; or via phone at 303/987-6694; or via fax at 303/969-2822; or via e-mail address at *Susan_Johnson@nps.gov.* You are entitled to a copy of the entire ICR package free-of-charge. The NPS published a 60-Day Notice to solicit public comments on this ICR in the **Federal Register** on October 10, 2006 (Vol. 71, No. 195, Pages 59521-59522). The comment period closed on December 11, 2006. The NPS received one comment as a result of the publication of this 60-Day **Federal Register** Notice. *Comment:* The commenter questioned why the visibility study was necessary. The commenter noted that regulations that protect air quality are already in place, but are not stringent enough or inadequately enforced. The commenter also added that the most important air quality-related issue is human health, particularly the health of children. *Response:* Regulations to protect and improve air quality are currently in place, and new regulations may be proposed in the future. Periodic economic information is necessary to determine whether these regulations are efficient. Visibility is a valued component of air quality, but current information is outdated, and lacks the benefit of recent advances in measuring such values. The information proposed in this collection will assist regulators in making better-informed air policy decisions. Human health related issues are outside the purview of this proposed effort, but are well recognized as the predominant economic benefit of improved air quality. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Visibility Valuation in National Parks and Wilderness Areas: Pre-Test and Pilot Test. *Bureau Form Number(s):* None. *OMB Number:* To be requested. *Expiration Date:* To be requested. *Type of Request:* New Collection. *Description of Need:* The Clean Air Act includes provisions designed to maintain and enhance visibility at national parks and wilderness areas (Sections 169A, 169B, and 110(a)(2)(j)). The NPS is directed by its Organic Act to “conserve the scenery * * * unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations” (16 U.S.C. 1) and the Clean Air Act charges the NPS with an “affirmative responsibility to protect air quality related values (including visibility)” (42 U.S.C. 7475(d)(2)(B)). Therefore, the NPS believes it is imperative that the value of visibility changes is adequately represented in cost-benefit analyses related to State and Federal efforts that may affect visibility (including the Regional Haze Rule, 40 CFR Part 51). Although several studies were conducted to estimate visibility benefits in the 1970s and 1980s, methodologies for estimating the benefits of improvements in environmental goods have advanced signifcantly since that time. Furthermore, baseline visibility conditions in national parks and wilderness areas have changed significantly over the last few decades. As a result, updated estimates of benefits are required. Current evaluation of Federal and state air quality legislation or regulations, as well as regional plans or policies that impact NPS-managed areas, is based on virility valuation information in Chestnut and Rowe, 1990 (e.g., see EPA, 2005). The vintage of this study aside, several limitations have been identified by regulators and stakeholders alike, including its limited sample frame (EPA, 2005; Leggett et al., 2004). Thus, the NPS seeks current visibility valuation information that will permit accurate evaluation of programs and policies affecting visibility in NPS-managed areas. The NPS plans to conduct a nationwide stated preference survey to estimate the value of visibility changes in national parks and wilderness areas. Stated-preference surveys use carefully designed questions to elicit respondents' willingness to pay for improvements in environmental quality. A general population stated-preference survey is required in this case, as many U.S. citizens may be willing to pay to improve visibility at national parks and wilderness areas, even if they do not use these areas. Stated-preference surveys are the only methodology available to estimate these non-use values. But to ensure that the nationwide survey is unbiased and readily understood by respondents, and that the likely effect of non-response on benefit estimates is known, the pre-test and pilot test must first be conducted. The pre-testing will be done through focus groups, which will be used to develop and refine a survey instrument for the pilot study. Twelve focus groups will be conducted, with approximately 10 participants in each group (120 in total). Thus, a sufficient number of responses will be gathered to evaluate the information presentation, reliability, internal consistency, response variability, and other properties of the draft survey. Results will be used to make improvements to the survey instrument. NPS will proceed iteratively, modifying the draft survey instrument after each focus group to ensure that the wording of the questions is clear and unbiased, and effectively address the relevant issues. The pilot study will be designed to account for the potential impact of mail survey non-response on benefit estimates. The pilot study will involve a split-sample comparison between a mail and in-person survey. Respondents will be asked to complete the survey instrument developed during the pre-testing stage. The results will ultimately be used to adjust the benefit estimates obtained in the nationwide survey for potential non-response bias. The final content of the pilot survey instrument will depend on the pre-testing results. At a minimum, the survey will describe the characteristics of various visibility improvement programs and ask respondents to select a preferred program. The survey will also include socio-demographic questions and questions designed to evaluate the respondents' motivation in selecting a preferred program. Surveys will be conducted with approximately 800 individuals. For this pilot study, 16 neighborhoods will be selected in two metropolitan areas (Phoenix, AZ and Syracuse, NY). Each neighborhood sample will be split into two groups, with 50 households assigned to a mail survey group and 50 households assigned to an in-person survey group. The in-person survey will be conducted in a manner that minimizes the differences between the two survey modes. Comments are invited on:

(1)The practical utility of the information being gathered;

(2)the accuracy of the burden hour estimate;

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

(4)ways to minimize the burden to respondents, including use of automated information collection techniques or other forms of information technology. 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. *Frequency of collection:* Once. *Description of Respondents:* Residents of Atlanta, GA, Chicago, IL, Sacramento, CA (focus groups) and Phoenix, AZ and Syracuse, NY (response rate pilot study). *Estimated average number or respondents:* Focus groups: 1,200 in recruitment and 120 in pre-testing activities. Pilot study: 480 mail refusals, 320 in-person refusals, and 800 respondents. *Estimated average number of responses:* 920 (120 responses for focus groups; 800 responses for pilot study). *Estimated average time burden per respondent:* 2.5 hours for focus group respondents, 20 minutes for pilot survey respondents. *Frequency of response:* 1 time per respondent. *Estimated total annual reporting burden:* 567 hours. Dated: July 12, 2007. Leonard E. Stowe, NPS, Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. 07-3916 Filed 8-9-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 5

Traces to 5 documents

U.S. Code

5 references not yet in our index