Notices. Notice and request for comments
12,594 words·~57 min read·
/register/2007/09/06/07-4340A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 4910-15-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)has submitted the following information collection to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission describes the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden ( *i.e.* , the time, effort and resources used by respondents to respond) and cost, and includes the actual data collection instruments FEMA will use. This collection was modified during the 60 day comment period to change the type of information collection from an extension, without change, of a currently approved collection, to a revision of a currently approved collection. This change was included to capture the change in burden hour cost to respondents. *Title:* FEMA Mitigation Success Story Database. *OMB Number:* 1660-0089. *Abstract:* FEMA uses the information in the database to document and disseminate first-hand experiences of State, communities, private businesses, and homeowners that incorporate mitigation and flood insurance activities that are cost effective and promote strategic partnerships. By sharing information, communities and individuals can learn about available federal programs to support the implementation of noteworthy local activities. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households, Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit institutions, Farms, Federal Government, and State, Local or Tribal government. *Number of Respondents:* 150. *Estimated Time per Respondent:* 5.5 hours. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 563 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion. *Comments:* Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/FEMA, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to
(202)395-6974. Comments must be submitted on or before October 9, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection should be made to Chief, Records Management, FEMA, 500 C Street, SW., Room 609, Washington, DC 20472, facsimile number
(202)646-3347, or e-mail address *FEMA-Information-Collections@dhs.gov.* Dated: August 30, 2007. John A. Sharetts-Sullivan, Chief, Records Management and Privacy Information Resources Management Branch, Information Technology Services Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E7-17623 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-11-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA-1717-DR] Minnesota; 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 Minnesota (FEMA-1717-DR), dated August 23, 2007, and related determinations. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 28, 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 Minnesota 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 August 23, 2007. Dodge County for Public Assistance. Fillmore, Houston, Olmsted, Steele, Wabasha, and Winona Counties for Public Assistance (already designated for Individual Assistance and Public Assistance Category B [emergency protective measures], including direct Federal 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. E7-17622 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA-1720-DR] Ohio; Major Disaster and Related Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Ohio (FEMA-1720-DR), dated August 27, 2007, and related determinations. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 27, 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 August 27, 2007, the President declared a major disaster under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act), as follows: I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of Ohio resulting from severe storms, flooding, and tornadoes beginning on August 20, 2007, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the State of Ohio. In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses. You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance in the designated areas, Hazard Mitigation throughout the State, and any other forms of assistance under the Stafford Act that you deem appropriate. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. If Public Assistance is later requested and warranted, Federal funds provided under that program also will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, except for any particular projects that are eligible for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the FEMA Public Assistance Pilot Program instituted pursuant to 6 U.S.C. 777. Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act. The time period prescribed for the implementation of section 310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed six months after the date of this declaration. The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Jesse Munoz, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this declared disaster. I do hereby determine the following areas of the State of Ohio to have been affected adversely by this declared major disaster: Allen, Crawford, Hancock, Putnam, Richland, and Wyandot Counties for Individual Assistance. All counties within the State of Ohio are eligible to apply for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. (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. E7-17604 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA-1719-DR] Wisconsin; Major Disaster and Related Determinations AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Wisconsin (FEMA-1719-DR), dated August 26, 2007, and related determinations. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 26, 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 August 26, 2007, the President declared a major disaster under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act), as follows: I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of Wisconsin resulting from severe storms and flooding beginning on August 18, 2007, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the State of Wisconsin. In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses. You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance in the designated areas, Hazard Mitigation throughout the State, and any other forms of assistance under the Stafford Act that you deem appropriate. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. If Public Assistance is later requested and warranted, Federal funds provided under that program also will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, except for any particular projects that are eligible for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the FEMA Public Assistance Pilot Program instituted pursuant to 6 U.S.C. 777. Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act. The time period prescribed for the implementation of section 310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed six months after the date of this declaration. The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, Department of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Michael Bolch, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this declared disaster. I do hereby determine the following areas of the State of Wisconsin to have been affected adversely by this declared major disaster: Crawford, La Crosse, Richland, Sauk, and Vernon Counties for Individual Assistance. All counties within the State of Wisconsin are eligible to apply for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. (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, Individual and Household Housing; 97.049, Individual and Household Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individual and Household Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-17605 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Transportation Security Administration [Docket No. TSA-2002-11334] Extension of Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review; Aviation Security Infrastructure Fee
(ASIF)Records Retention AGENCY: Transportation Security Administration (TSA), DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces that the Transportation Security Administration
(TSA)has forwarded the Information Collection Request
(ICR)abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval of an extension of the currently approved collection under the Paperwork Reduction Act. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected burden. TSA published a **Federal Register** notice, with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments, of the following collection of information on May 9, 2007, 72 FR 26417. The collection requires air carriers to retain any and all documents, records, or information related to the amount of the ASIF, including all information applicable to the carrier's calendar year 2000 security costs and information reasonably necessary to complete an audit. DATES: Send your comments by October 9, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/TSA, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to
(202)395-6974. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanna Johnson, Communications Branch, Business Management Office, Operational Process and Technology, TSA-32, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220; telephone
(571)227-3651; facsimile
(571)227-3588. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et. seq.* ), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information, unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The ICR documentation is available at *http://www.reginfo.gov.* Therefore, in preparation for submission for OMB clearance of the information collection discussed in this notice, TSA solicits comments in order to—
(1)Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement 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;
(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, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Information Collection Requirement *Title:* Aviation Security Infrastructure Fee Records Retention (ASIF). *Type of Request:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *OMB Control Number:* 1652-0018. *Forms:* NA. *Affected Public:* Air Carriers. *Abstract:* The Aviation Transportation and Security Act
(ATSA)authorizes the Assistant Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to set the ASIF provided the ASIF not exceed industry aggregate Calendar Year 2000 security expenditures nor exceed an individual carrier's Calendar Year 2000 security expenditures. Under 49 CFR Part 1511, carriers must retain any and all documents, records, or information related to the amount of the ASIF, including all information applicable to the carrier's calendar year 2000 security costs and information reasonably necessary to complete an audit. This requirement includes retaining the source information for the calendar year 2000 screening costs reported to TSA; the calculations and allocations performed to assign costs submitted to TSA; information and documents reviewed and prepared for the required independent audit; the accountant's working papers, notes, worksheets, and other relevant documentation used in the audit; and, if applicable, the specific information leading to the accountant's opinion, including any determination that the accountant could not provide an audit opinion. *Number of Respondents:* 196. *Estimated Annual Burden Hours:* An estimated 392 hours annually. Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on August 30, 2007. Fran Lozito, Director, Business Management Office, Operational Process and Technology. [FR Doc. E7-17571 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-05-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5130-N-10] Privacy Act of 1974; Supplemental Information and Technical Correction to Notice of Computer Matching Program Between the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD)and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)—Matching Tenant Data in Assisted Housing Programs AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD. ACTION: Notice of Supplementary Information and Technical Corrections. SUMMARY: This notice provides Supplementary Information and Technical Corrections to the Computer Matching Notice published in the **Federal Register** on August 8, 2006. This information changes the anticipated effective date of the computer matching program; removes the term “applicants” cited in the prior notice since disclosure of applicant information is not authorized; provides date and pertinent information about HUD's statutorily required evaluation document and its Enterprise Income Verification
(EIV)system; provides citations for HUD requirements described in the prior notice; and, clarifies the system of records in the program description and records to be matched. The authority, objectives, and the period of the match under the existing HUD and HHS computer matching program remain unchanged. A more detailed description about the current matching program is contained in the Supplemental Information section. DATES: *Effective Date:* The effective date of the matching program shall be *October 9, 2007* , providing no comments are received which would result in a contrary determination or 40 days after notice of the matching program is provided to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)and Congress, whichever is later. *Comments Due Date:* October 9, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Departmental Privacy Act Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Room 4178, Washington, DC 20410-3000, telephone number
(202)708-2374. A telecommunications device for hearing- and speech-impaired individuals
(TTY)is available at
(800)877-8339 (Federal Information Relay Service). For program information: Gail Williamson, Office of Housing, Director of the Housing Assistance Policy Division, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Room 6138, Washington, DC 20410, telephone number
(202)708-3000, ext. 2473. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The matching program will be carried out only to the extent necessary to:
(1)Verify the employment and income of individuals participating in the programs identified below to correctly determine the amount of their rent and level of rental assistance; and
(2)after removal of personal identifiers, to conduct analyses of the employment and income reporting of individuals participating in HUD's rental assistance programs. Currently, HUD makes the results of the computer match available to public housing agencies
(PHAs)administering HUD rental assistance programs to enable them to verify employment and income and correctly determine the rent and assistance levels for individuals participating in those programs. This information is also being disclosed to the HUD Inspector General (HUD/IG), and the Attorney General in connection with the administration of the programs identified below. Based on
(1)an evaluation of the costs and benefits of disclosures made to PHAs; and
(2)the adequacy of measures used to safeguard the security and confidentiality of information so disclosed, HUD will disclose employment and income information of tenants to private housing owners and management agents (O/As) and contract administrators
(CAs)that administer HUD rental assistance programs under agreements with HUD. The evaluation was conducted by HUD and signed by HUD and Office of Child Support Enforcement
(OCSE)authorized officials on May 11, 2007. HUD and its third party administrators will use this matching authority to reduce or eliminate improper assistance payments in the housing programs authorized by:
(i)The United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 *et seq.* );
(ii)Section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q);
(iii)Section 221(d)(3), 221(d)(5) or 236 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715l d and 1715z-1);
(iv)Section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013); or
(v)Section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s). The Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act (CMPPA) of 1988, an amendment to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), OMB's guidance on this statute entitled “Final Guidance Interpreting the Provisions of Public Law 100-503,” and OMB Circular No. A-130 require publication of notices of computer matching programs. Appendix I to OMB's Revision of Circular No. A-130, “Transmittal Memorandum No. 4, Management of Federal Information Resources,” prescribes Federal agency responsibilities for maintaining records about individuals. In accordance with the CMPPA and Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, copies of this notice are being provided to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the United States Senate, and OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. I. Authority This matching program is being conducted pursuant to section 453(j)(7) of the Social Security Act; sections 3003 and 13403 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-66, approved August 10, 1993); section 542(b) of the 1998 Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 105-65); section 904 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 3544); section 165 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 3543); the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1701-1750g); the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437-1437z); section 101 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s); the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 *et seq.* ); and the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(f)). The Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 authorizes HUD to require applicants and participants in HUD-administered programs involving rental assistance to disclose to HUD their social security numbers
(SSNs)as a condition of initial or continued eligibility for participation in the programs. Subsection 453(j) of the Social Security Act, as amended by Section 217 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-199), authorizes HUD to provide to HHS information on persons participating in any programs authorized by:
(i)The United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 *et seq.* );
(ii)Section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q);
(iii)Section 221(d)(3), 221(d)(5) or 236 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715ld and 1715z-1);
(iv)Section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013); or
(v)Section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s). HHS shall then compare this information provided by HUD with data contained in the National Directory of New Hires
(NDNH)and report the results of the data match to HUD. The Act gives HUD the authority to disclose this information to PHAs, O/As, CAs under contract with HUD, the HUD/IG, and the Attorney General for the purpose of verifying the employment and income of individuals receiving benefits in the above programs. HUD shall not seek, use, or disclose information relating to an individual without the prior written consent of the individual, and HUD has the authority to require consent as a condition of participating in these programs. HHS' disclosure of data from the NDNH is authorized by subsection 453(j) of the Social Security Act, as amended by Section 217 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004. The disclosures from the HHS system of records, “Location and Collection System of Records,” No. 09-90-0074, will be made pursuant to routine use
(17)identified in the **Federal Register** on June 3, 2004 (69 FR 31399). This routine use authorizes HHS to “disclose to HUD information in the NDNH portion of this system for purposes of verifying employment and income of individuals participating in specified programs and, after removal of personal identifiers, to conduct analyses of the employment and income reporting of these individuals.” II. Objectives To Be Met by the Matching Program HUD's primary objective in implementing the computer matching program is to verify the employment and income of individuals participating in multifamily housing programs identified in paragraph I above to determine the appropriate level of rental assistance, and to deter and correct abuse in rental assistance programs. In meeting these objectives, HUD is also carrying out a responsibility under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1437f(k) to ensure that income data provided to O/As and CAs by household members is complete and accurate. HUD's various rental assistance programs require that applicants meet certain income and other criteria to be eligible for rental assistance. In addition, tenants participating in multifamily housing programs generally are required to report and recertify the amounts and sources of their income at least annually. III. Program Description In this computer matching program, records from HUD's system of records, known as the EIV System, published at 71 FR 45066 on August 8, 2006, will be compared to OCSE's database NDNH. The NDNH contains new hire, quarterly wage and unemployment insurance information and is maintained in OCSE's system of records, “Location and Collection System”, No. 9-90-0074, last published at 70 FR 21200, April 25, 2005. HUD will only transmit to HHS for computer matching those tenant personal identifies (i.e., full name, SSN, and date of birth) that have been validated by the Social Security Administration (SSA). HHS will match the HUD-provided personal identifiers to personal identifiers included in their systems of records known as “Location and Collection System of Records,” No. 09-90-0074. HHS will provide income data to HUD only for individuals with matching personal identifiers. HUD will place matching data into EIV, which will receive:
(1)New hires (W-4), wage, and unemployment insurance claim data from HHS' NDNH database; and
(2)Social Security
(SS)and Supplemental Security Income
(SSI)benefits data from the SSA. This will allow PHAs and O/As to verify the income of tenants at the time of mandatory annual and/or interim recertifications. A. Income Verification Any match ( *i.e.* , a “hit”) will be further reviewed by HUD, the program administrator, or the HUD Office of Inspector General
(OIG)to determine whether the income reported by tenants to the program administrator is correct and complies with HUD and program administrator requirements. Specifically, current or prior wage information and other data will be sought directly from employers. B. Administrative or Legal Actions Regarding the matching described in this notice, HUD anticipates that program administrators will take appropriate action in consultation with tenants to:
(1)Resolve income discrepancies between tenant-reported and independent income source data; and
(2)use correct income amounts in determining rental assistance, in accordance with Chapter 5, Sections 3 and 4 of the Occupancy Requirements of Subsidized Multifamily Housing Programs, 4350.3 REV-1. Program administrators must compute the rent in full compliance with all applicable occupancy regulations. Program administrators must ensure that they use the correct income and correctly compute the rent. The program administrator may not suspend, terminate, reduce, or make a final denial of any rental assistance to any tenant as a result of information produced by this matching program until:
(a)The tenant has received notice from the program administrator of its findings and informing the tenant of the opportunity to contest such findings; and
(b)either the notice period provided in applicable regulations of the program, or 30 days, whichever is later, has expired. In most cases, program administrators will resolve income discrepancies in consultation with tenants. Additionally, serious violations, which program administrators, HUD Program staff, or HUD/IG verify, should be referred for full investigation and appropriate civil and/or criminal proceedings. IV. Records To Be Matched HHS will match HUD-provided tenant SSNs and personal identifiers (such as surnames and dates of birth) in HUD's system of records known as EIV, amended August 8, 2006, 71 FR 45066 to NDNH records contained in its “Location and Collection System of Records”, No. 09-90-0074. HUD will place the resulting matched data into its EIV system. The tenant records (one record for each family member) include these data elements: Full name, SSN, and date of birth. Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and purposes of such uses are identified in **Federal Register** Notice Privacy Act of 1974; Amendment to an Existing System of Records, Enterprise Income Verification, HUD/PIH 5 (71 FR 45066). V. Period of the Match The computer matching program will be conducted according to agreements between HUD and HHS. The computer matching agreement for the planned match will terminate either when the purpose of the computer matching program is accomplished, or 18 months from the date the agreement is signed, whichever comes first. The agreements may be extended for one 12-month period, with the mutual agreement of all involved parties, if the following conditions are met:
(1)Within 3 months of the expiration date, all Data Integrity Boards review the agreement, find that the program will be conducted without change, and find a continued favorable examination of benefit/cost results; and
(2)all parties certify that the program has been conducted in compliance with the agreement. The agreement may be terminated prior to accomplishment of the computer matching purpose or 18 months from the date the agreement is signed (whichever comes first), by the mutual agreement of all involved parties within 30 days of written notice. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a; 88 Stat. 1896; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). Dated: August 17, 2007. Bajinder Paul, Acting, Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E7-17589 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Construction of a Residential Community in Lake County, FL AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice: Receipt of application for an incidental take permit; request for comments. SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of an Incidental Take Permit
(ITP)Application and Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). Zenodro Homes, Inc. (applicant) requests an ITP for a duration of 10 years under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The applicant anticipates taking approximately 3.5 acres of sand skink (Neoseps reynoldsi)—occupied habitat incidental to constructing a 100-unit multi-family development in Lake County, Florida (project). The applicant's HCP describes the mitigation and minimization measures the applicant proposes to address the effects of the project to the sand skink. DATES: We must receive any written comments on the ITP application and HCP on or before October 9, 2007. ADDRESSES: If you wish to review the application and HCP, you may write the Field Supervisor at our Jacksonville Field Office, 6620 Southpoint Drive South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, FL 32216, or make an appointment to visit during normal business hours. If you wish to comment, you may mail or hand deliver comments to the Jacksonville Field Office, or you may e-mail comments to *paula_sisson@fws.gov.* For more information on reviewing documents and public comments and submitting comments, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paula Sisson, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Jacksonville Field Office (see ADDRESSES ); telephone: 904/232-2580, ext. 126. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 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. Please reference permit number TE132333-0 for Zenodro Homes, Inc. in all requests or comments. Please include your name and return address in your e-mail message. If you do not receive a confirmation from us that we have received your e-mail message, contact us directly at the telephone number listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Background The sand skink is known to occur in Lake County, primarily within the Lake Wales Ridge, and much less frequently within the Mt. Dora Ridge. Although originally thought to inhabit xeric, scrub habitat exclusively, the sand skink is currently being identified in nontraditional areas with sub-marginal habitat, including pine plantation, abandoned citrus groves, and disturbed areas. Sand skinks require soil moisture for thermoregulation, egg incubation, and prey habitat. High activity periods, which have been associated with the breeding season for this species, range from mid-February to early May, with egg-hatching typically occurring from June through July. Due to the reduction in quality and acreage and the rapid development of xeric upland communities, the sand skink is reportedly declining throughout most of its range. However, biological information regarding the sand skink is limited, due to the cryptic nature of the species. Applicant's Proposal The applicant is requesting take of approximately 3.5 ac of occupied sand skink habitat incidental to the project. The 10-acre project is located approximately 1.25 miles northeast of the intersection of U.S. Highway 192 and U.S. Highway 27 within Section 25, Township 24 South, Range 26 East. The project currently includes 100 units (25 buildings with 4 units per building), associated infrastructure, and a stormwater retention pond encompassing 10.0 ac. The applicant proposes to mitigate for 3.5 ac of impacts by purchasing 7.0 ac of occupied sand skink habitat at the Morgan Lake Wales Preserve (Preserve) in Polk County. The Preserve lies within the boundaries of the Lake Wales Ridge and covers approximately 487 ac. The occupied sand skink habitat identified for this project will be protected under a conservation easement and a trust fund has been established for perpetual management. We have determined that the applicant's proposal, including the proposed mitigation and minimization measures, would have minor or negligible effects on the species covered in the HCP. Therefore, the ITP is a “low-effect” project and qualifies for categorical exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as provided by the Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and 516 DM 6 Appendix 1). This preliminary information may be revised based on our review of public comments that we receive in response to this notice. A low-effect HCP is one involving
(1)minor or negligible effects on federally listed or candidate species and their habitats, and
(2)minor or negligible effects on other environmental values or resources. We will evaluate the HCP and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). If we determine that the application meets those requirements, we will issue the ITP for incidental take of the sand skink. We will also evaluate whether issuance of the section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP complies with section 7 of the Act by conducting an intra-Service section 7 consultation. We will use the results of this consultation, in combination with the above findings, in the final analysis to determine whether or not to issue the ITP. Authority: We provide this notice under Section 10 of the Act and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). Dated: August 30, 2007. David L. Hankla, Field Supervisor, Jacksonville Field Office. [FR Doc. E7-17598 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Copperbelly Water Snake (Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta) Draft Recovery Plan AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of document availability for review and comment. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce availability of the draft recovery plan for the Copperbelly Water Snake ( *Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta* ) for public review and comment. This species is federally listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Copperbelly Water Snake is listed as a Distinct Population Segment in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana, north of 40 degrees north latitude. The purpose of this plan is to recover this species so that it can be removed from the list of Threatened and Endangered Wildlife. We solicit review and comment from the public on this draft plan. DATES: In order to consider your comments on the draft recovery plan, we must receive them on or before November 5, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy by the following means: 1. *World Wide Web: http://midwest.fws.gov/endangered;* or 2. *U.S. mail or in-person pickup:* Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office, 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101, East Lansing, MI 48823-6316; telephone,
(517)351-2555. You may submit electronic comments on the recovery plan to this e-mail address: *copperbellyplan@fws.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mike DeCapita by U.S. mail, e-mail, or telephone (see ADDRESSES ). TTY users may contact Mr. DeCapita through the Federal Relay Service at
(800)877-8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Recovery of endangered or threatened animals or plants is a primary goal of our endangered species program. Recovery plans describe actions considered necessary for conservation of the species, establish criteria for reclassification and delisting, and provide estimates of the time and costs for implementing the recovery measures. The Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ) requires the development of recovery plans for listed species unless such a plan would not promote the conservation of a particular species. Section 4(f) of the Act, as amended in 1988, requires that public notice and opportunity for public review and comment be provided during recovery plan development. We will consider all information presented during a public comment period prior to approval of each new or revised recovery plan. We and other Federal agencies will also take these comments into consideration in the course of implementing approved recovery plans. The northern Distinct Population Segment
(DPS)of the Copperbelly Water Snake was listed as threatened on January 29, 1997. The northern DPS occurs in Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio, north of 40 degrees north latitude. The current distribution of the Copperbelly Water Snake is limited to only a few small, scattered, and isolated population clusters in south central Michigan, northeastern Indiana, and northwestern Ohio. Surveys have indicated that the species is in decline throughout these areas. Copperbelly Water Snakes have both wetland and terrestrial habitat requirements. The species is associated with wetland complexes characterized by a preponderance of shallow wetlands, many of which draw down seasonally. Such complexes may predominantly occur as isolated wetlands distributed in a forested upland matrix, floodplain wetlands fed by seasonal flooding, or a combination of both. Fishless wetlands, suitable for high anuran (frog and toad) productivity, are required to provide habitat and a suitable prey base. The principal limiting factor for copperbellies appears to be sufficient extent of suitable habitat. Individuals move hundreds of meters or more between wetlands and routinely use multiple wetlands over the course of an active season. They also spend substantial periods of time in upland habitat aestivating, foraging, and shedding. Populations may require many hundreds of hectares of contiguous habitat in order to persist. Delisting Criteria The objective of the recovery plan is to provide a framework for the recovery of the Copperbelly Water Snake so that protection by the Act is no longer necessary. Copperbelly Water Snake will be considered for delisting when the likelihood of the species becoming extinct in the foreseeable future has been reduced or eliminated by the achievement of the following criteria. The population sizes and metapopulation numbers and sizes needed for delisting and reclassification may be updated based on further research ( *e.g.* , population viability analysis) on viable population sizes of Copperbelly Water Snake or surrogate species.
(1)Multiple population viability is assured through the following:
(a)At least 1 population of Copperbelly Water Snake must exceed a population size of 1000 adults;
(b)Either 5 geographically distinct populations have population sizes of more than 500 individuals or 3 metapopulations must have a total population size of 3000, with none less than 500; and
(c)Populations described in
(a)and
(b)above must persist at these levels for at least 10 years.
(2)Sufficient habitat is conserved and managed such that for each population described in Criterion 1:
(a)Wetland/upland habitat complexes sufficient to support each population are permanently conserved, and
(b)Two suitable hibernation sites are permanently conserved within one kilometer of all suitable summer habitat.
(3)Significant threats due to lack of suitable management, adverse land features and uses, collection, and persecution have been reduced or eliminated through the following means:
(a)Habitat management and protection guidelines will be developed, distributed, and maintained;
(b)Adverse land features and uses such as row crops and roads and accompanying traffic are removed, minimized, or managed within occupied Criterion-1 landscape complexes to the extent possible; and
(c)A comprehensive education and outreach program that addresses persecution and collection deterrence will be developed and implemented. These criteria will be met through the following actions:
(1)Identify and protect habitat landscape sufficient for recovery;
(2)Monitor known Copperbelly Water Snake populations and their habitat;
(3)Improve baseline understanding of Copperbelly Water Snake ecology;
(4)Develop recovery approaches to enhance recruitment and population size;
(5)Develop and implement public education and outreach efforts;
(6)Review and track recovery progress; and
(7)Develop a plan to monitor Copperbelly Water Snake after it is delisted. Reclassification Criteria Copperbelly Water Snake will be considered for reclassification from Threatened to Endangered if surveys indicate either of the following criteria have occurred:
(1)There are no metapopulations of more than 500 adults.
(2)The cumulative population size is less than 1000. If classified as Endangered, the species may be reclassified as Threatened when the reclassification criteria are no longer occurring. Additional detail on delisting and reclassification criteria is available in the draft recovery plan. Public Comments Solicited The Service solicits written comments on the draft recovery plan. All comments received by the date specified will be considered prior to approval of the plan. Written comments and materials regarding the plan should be addressed to the Field Supervisor (see ADDRESSES ). Comments and materials received will be available for public inspection by appointment during normal business hours at the above address. Authority: The authority for this action is section 4(f) of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1533(f). Dated: July 25, 2007. Wendi Weber, Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, Region 3, Fort Snelling, Minnesota. [FR Doc. E7-17582 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Proposed Low Effect Habitat Conservation Plan for the Bellota Landslide Repair and Shorecliffs Mobile Home Neighborhood Expansion, City of San Clemente, County of Orange, CA AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. SUMMARY: Seaview Repair LLC (applicant) has applied to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for a 10-year incidental take permit for one covered species pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The application addresses the potential for “take” of the threatened coastal California gnatcatcher ( *Polioptila californica californica,* “gnatcatcher”) associated with the proposed landslide remediation project in the City of San Clemente, Orange County, California. A conservation program to minimize and mitigate for the project activities would be implemented as described in the proposed Bellota Landslide Repair and Shorecliffs Mobile Home Neighborhood Expansion Low Effect Habitat Conservation Plan (proposed HCP), which would be implemented by the applicant. We are requesting comments on the permit application and on the preliminary determination that the proposed HCP qualifies as a “Low-effect” Habitat Conservation Plan, eligible for a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)of 1969, as amended. The basis for this determination is discussed in the Environmental Action Statement
(EAS)and the associated Low Effect Screening Form, which are also available for public review. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before October 9, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to the Field Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Carlsbad, California 92011. Written comments may be sent by facsimile to
(760)918-0638. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Karen Goebel, Assistant Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES ); telephone:
(760)431-9440. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability of Documents Individuals wishing copies of the application, proposed HCP, and EAS should immediately contact the Service by telephone at
(760)431-9440 or by letter to the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office. Copies of the proposed HCP and EAS also are available for public inspection during regular business hours at the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office [see ADDRESSES ]. Background Section 9 of the Act and its implementing Federal regulations prohibit the take of animal species listed as endangered or threatened. Take is defined under the Act as to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect listed animal species, or attempt to engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C. 1538). However, under section 10(a) of the Act, the Service may issue permits to authorize incidental take of listed species. “Incidental take” is defined by the Act as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. Regulations governing incidental take permits for threatened and endangered species, respectively, are found in the Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 17.22 and 50 CFR 17.32. The applicant is seeking a permit for take of the coastal California gnatcatcher during the life of the permit. The applicant proposes to repair a landslide within a 16.33-acre project site that occurred on a slope adjacent to Via Bellota in the City of San Clemente, California. The proposed landslide remediation would involve remedial grading and construction of a landslide buttress at the westerly end of the canyon to stabilize the slide area. The slope would be graded and stabilized with shear pins every 10 feet. A collapsed underground stormdrain pipe that currently extends through the canyon bottom would be replaced to minimize the risk of pipe failures that could result in soil saturation and additional slope instability. An additional slope failure at the southwest end of the proposed landslide repair would be graded, excavated, filled, compacted and have hydroaugers (horizontal drains) installed which would outlet to the stormdrain being constructed for the landslide repair. Construction of a gunite terrace and down drains, which would outlet at the bottom of the slope, would occur on the surface of the finished slope. The repair of this slope failure would be concurrent with the stabilization of the landslide. Additionally, the proposed project would include the construction and sale of 20 graded lots within the Shorecliffs Mobile Home Park. The applicant proposes to minimize and mitigate the effects to the gnatcatcher associated with the covered activities by fully implementing the HCP. The purpose of the proposed HCP's conservation program is to promote the biological conservation of the gnatcatcher. The HCP includes measures to minimize impacts to gnatcatcher by scheduling vegetation removal outside of the breeding season (February 15 to August 15). The project may result in take of one
(1)pair of gnatcatchers and will permanently impact 5.36 acres of coastal sage scrub
(CSS)and temporarily impact 6.71 acres of CSS. The applicant proposes to mitigate impacts to the gnatcatcher by revegetating 8.01 acres of the disturbed CSS onsite and restoring 9.42 acres of CSS offsite. The Proposed Action consists of the issuance of an incidental take permit and implementation of the proposed HCP, which includes measures to minimize and mitigate impacts of the project on the gnatcatcher. Three alternatives to the taking of the listed species under the Proposed Action are considered in the proposed HCP. Under the No Action Alternative, no permit would be issued, and no construction or conservation would occur. This alternative would not comply with the settlement agreement to repair the landslide. The Offsite Alternative is not feasible because the proposed project involves an existing landslide which occurs within the proposed project site. A Reduce Project Alternative is also not feasible because the proposed project represents the minimum grading and construction footprint necessary to reconstruct the slope and permanently stabilize the slide. The Service has made a preliminary determination that approval of the proposed HCP qualifies as a categorical exclusion under NEPA, as provided by the Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM8) and as a “low-effect” plan as defined by the Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook (November 1996). Determination of Low-effect Habitat Conservation Plans is based on the following three criteria:
(1)Implementation of the proposed HCP would result in minor or negligible effects on federally listed, proposed, and candidate species and their habitats;
(2)Implementation of the proposed HCP would result in minor or negligible effects on other environmental values or resources; and
(3)Impacts of the proposed HCP, considered together with the impacts of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable similarly situated projects, would not result, over time, in cumulative effects to environmental values or resources which would be considered significant. Based upon this preliminary determination, we do not intend to prepare further NEPA documentation. We will consider public comments in making the final determination on whether to prepare such additional documentation. 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. This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(c) of the Act. We will evaluate the permit application, the proposed HCP, and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the Act. If the requirements are met, we will issue a permit to Seaview Repair LLC for the incidental take of the coastal California gnatcatcher from landslide remediation in the City of San Clemente, Orange County, California. Dated: August 30, 2007. Jim A. Bartel, Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California. [FR Doc. E7-17592 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Restoration of Habitat for Utah Prairie Dogs on Private Land in Utah AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability: Safe harbor agreement and receipt of application for an enhancement of survival permit. SUMMARY: The Panoramaland Resources Conservation and Development Council (applicant) has applied to the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service, us) for an enhancement of survival permit (permit) for the Utah prairie dog within the species' range in Utah under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). This permit application includes a safe harbor agreement
(SHA)between the applicant and us, with the ability for the applicant to issue certificates of inclusion to private landowners. We request information, views, and opinions from the public via this notice. Further, we are soliciting information regarding the adequacy of the SHA as measured against our Safe Harbor Policy and the regulations that implement it. DATES: We must receive any written comments on the permit application and SHA on or before October 9, 2007. ADDRESSES: • *Mail:* Utah Field Office, 2369 West Orton Circle, West Valley City, Utah 84119. • *Internet: http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/mammals/utprairiedog/.* • *E-mail: utahprairiedogSHA@fws.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Crist, Utah Field Supervisor (see ADDRESSES ), telephone
(801)975-3330. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Utah prairie dog is the westernmost member of the genus *Cynomys.* The species' range, which is limited to the southwestern quarter of Utah, is the most restricted of all prairie dog species in the United States. Distribution of the Utah prairie dog has been greatly reduced due to disease (plague), poisoning, drought, and human-related habitat alteration. Protection of this species and enhancement of its habitat on private land will benefit recovery efforts. The primary objective of this SHA is to promote conservation of a threatened species through voluntary conservation, enhancement, and management of the species on private land throughout the range of the species. Through this SHA, the applicant receives the ability to oversee a safe harbor program working under a permit. We will authorize the applicant to enroll willing individual landowners (cooperators) into the program, which will require that each cooperator enter a cooperative agreement with the Panoramaland Resource Conservation and Development Council, with associated management activities, in exchange for a certificate of inclusion under the permit. This certificate will provide relief from any additional section 9 liabilities under the Act beyond those which exist at the time the cooperative agreement is signed (“regulatory baseline”). All cooperative agreements shall include the following:
(1)Use of pesticides within 100 feet (31 meters) of an active Utah prairie dog colony must be limited to only those approved for this purpose by the Service;
(2)All applied practices (see below) must be planned and applied in a manner that will not adversely affect other wildlife, including threatened or endangered species;
(3)Monitoring of habitat restoration activities (see below) must occur to assess the general condition of the habitat, use of the habitat by the Utah prairie dog, progress of ongoing management activities, and satisfaction of the cooperator with the project. In addition to the above management activities, at least two of the following activities must be included in all cooperative agreements:
(1)Brush management to restore plant community balance, increase visual surveillance, and increase forage quantity and quality;
(2)Prescribed grazing to increase visual surveillance, increase forage quantity and quality and deferment to create vegetative varies to limit expansion to undesirable locations;
(3)Seeding to restore degraded rangelands or pasturelands and bare ground and increase forage quantity and quality;
(4)Prescribed burning to increase forage quantity and quality; or
(5)Noxious weed control to facilitate restoration of rangelands or pasturelands, increase visual surveillance, and increase forage quantity and quality. The habitat improvements will be maintained throughout the term of the cooperative agreement. The cooperator will receive a certificate of inclusion that authorizes implementation of the conservation actions and other provisions of the cooperative agreement and authorizes incidental take and limited control of the covered species above the cooperator's baseline responsibilities, as defined in the cooperative agreement. The SHA and permit would become effective upon signature of the SHA, and issuance of the permit and would remain in effect for 50 years. We have evaluated the impacts of this action under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)and determined that it warrants categorical exclusion as described in 516 DM 8.5, and/or 516 DM 2, Appendix 1. This notice is provided pursuant to NEPA, section 10 of the Act, and our Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717, June 17, 1999). We will evaluate whether the issuance of the permit complies with section 7 of the Act by conducting an intra-Service section 7 consultation. We will use the result of the biological opinion, in combination with our finding that will take into consideration any public comments, in the final analysis to determine whether or not to issue the requested permit, pursuant to the regulations that guide permit issuance. Public Review of Documents Persons wishing to review the SHA and the application may obtain a copy by writing our Utah Field Office (see ADDRESSES ) or by visiting during normal business hours. The SHA also will be posted on the Internet at *http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/mammals/utprairiedog/.* Public Comments Send any written data or comments concerning the SHA or application to the Utah Field Office (see ADDRESSES ). Comments must be submitted in writing to be adequately considered in the Service's decisionmaking process. Please reference permit number TE-155376 in your comments, or in the request for the documents discussed herein. 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. Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). Dated: August 8, 2007. James J. Slack, Deputy Regional Director, Denver, Colorado. [FR Doc. E7-17590 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Tidal Restoration of the Cullinan Ranch Unit of San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement; request for public comment. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are preparing an environmental impact statement
(EIS)for the tidal restoration of the Cullinan Ranch Unit of the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge, located in Solano County, California. This notice advises the public that we intend to gather information necessary to prepare an EIS pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). We encourage the public and other agencies to participate in the planning process by sending written comments on management actions we should consider. DATES: To ensure that we have adequate time to evaluate and incorporate suggestions and other input into the planning process, we must receive your comments on or before October 22, 2007. ADDRESSES: Send written comments or requests to be added to the mailing list to: Christy Smith, Refuge Manager, San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge, 7715 Lakeville Highway, Petaluma, CA 94954. Alternatively, fax written comments to
(707)769-8106, or send comments by e-mail to *christy_smith@fws.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christy Smith, Refuge Manager,
(707)769-4200. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Cullinan Ranch restoration project would restore approximately 1,500 acres
(ac)of diked baylands back to historic tidal conditions by reintroducing tidal flow into the project area. Cullinan Ranch is located in an area of the Napa River Delta that was historically defined by a network of meandering sloughs and extensive estuarine tidal marshes. Reintroduction of tidal flow will restore vital salt marsh habitat for endangered species, including the salt marsh harvest mouse ( *Reithrodontomys raviventris* ) and the California clapper rail ( *Rallus longirostris obsoletus* ), as well as provide foraging and roosting habitat for fish, migratory waterfowl, and waterbirds. In keeping with one of the purposes of the Refuge—“to conserve fish, wildlife, or plants which are listed as endangered species or threatened species”—the Cullinan Ranch restoration project would restore historic salt marsh habitat for the benefit of threatened and endangered species, as well as many other estuarine-dependent species. We published a notice of intent to prepare an environmental assessment
(EA)and hold a public meeting on July 15, 2002 (67 FR 46538). We held public meetings on August 7, 2002, and March 9, 2007. All meetings were announced in local newspapers. Four members of the public attended the first meeting and provided comments. One person attended the second meeting and provided no comments. All of the comments we received on the EA will go forward into the EIS planning process. During the EA planning process, we determined that possible impacts to traffic flows on Highway 37 required that we complete an environmental impact statement. In addition, since some of the project would take place on State lands belonging to California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), an environmental impact report
(EIR)under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA)will be prepared. California Department of Fish and Game is the lead State agency for this project under the CEQA. Thus far, the Service and CDFG have identified and analyzed a total of eight alternatives based on a set of criteria including the following factors: effects to adjacent habitats, effects to the existing levees, effects on the hydrology of the existing slough channels and adjacent water bodies, costs of implementing restoration activities and long-term maintenance, and effects of project construction on existing uses on and adjacent to the Cullinan Ranch Site. Five of these alternatives were removed from further consideration because they did not meet the cost and engineering feasibility criteria as set forth by the lead agencies. Many of the alternatives considered were formulated with optional implementation features in order to minimize effects on adjacent habitats (such as the fringe marshes along Dutchman Slough and Pritchett Marsh), such as staging the Proposed Action and/or limiting the amount of tidal exchange. These features were analyzed but removed from further consideration because hydrologic modeling revealed that they would not significantly reduce adverse effects to adjacent habitats. The lead agencies will carry forward three possible restoration alternatives to environmental analysis: the No-Action Alternative, the Preferred Restoration Alternative, and the Partial Restoration Alternative. The lead agencies will consider public input from the scoping period to determine whether any modification should be made to the alternatives or whether any additional issues should be addressed in the EIS. Summary of Alternatives No-Action Alternative Under the No-Action Alternative, the lead agencies would take no action to restore tidal influence to the Site; however, the lead agency would be required to maintain the northern levee along Dutchman and South Sloughs in perpetuity. Maintenance activities would likely be increased as the levees age and erosive action increases in response to activities undertaken by the Napa Sonoma Restoration Project, a tidal restoration project conducted by the State of California adjacent to Cullinan Ranch. Preferred Restoration Alternative The Preferred Restoration Alternative would restore the entire 1,525-ac Cullinan Ranch Site, with implementation of the following project components: *Component 1:* Construct boardwalk to provide access to existing electrical towers. *Component 2:* Block drainage ditches to promote redevelopment of natural sloughs. *Component 3:* Improve the CDFG Pond 1 levee and install water control structures. *Component 4:* Protect Highway 37 from project induced flooding and erosion. *Component 5:* Construct public access areas. *Component 6:* Breach the levees along Dutchman and South Sloughs and Guadalcanal Village. *Component 7:* Implement long-term monitoring. Partial Restoration Alternative The Partial Restoration Alternative would restore 300 ac of the Cullinan Ranch Site. The Service developed the Partial Restoration Alternative in order to limit potential impacts to the hydrology of Dutchman Slough. While it would meet the purpose and need of the project, a smaller overall area within Cullinan Ranch would be restored, and connectivity with other adjacent restoration projects would be limited. The Partial Restoration Alternative would include implementation of the following project components: *Component 1:* Block drainage ditches to promote redevelopment of the natural sloughs. *Component 2:* Construct internal levee. *Component 3:* Protect Highway 37 from project-induced flooding and erosion. *Component 4:* Breach the levee along Dutchman Slough. *Component 5:* Long-term monitoring. Public Comment Comments we receive will help us identify key concerns and issues to be evaluated in the EIS. Opportunities for public participation will occur throughout the process. 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. Dated: August 30, 2007. Kenneth McDermond, Acting Manager, California/Nevada Operations, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. E7-17587 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat Conservation Plan for the Santa Clara Valley, Santa Clara County, CA AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) and notice of public meeting. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), we, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), advise the public that we intend to gather information necessary to prepare, in coordination with Santa Clara County, a joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) on the Habitat Conservation Plan for the Santa Clara Valley (Plan). The Plan is being prepared under Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, (Act). Santa Clara County (County) is facilitating preparation of the Plan with local partners and is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The County in accordance with CEQA is publishing a similar notice. The County and their local partners intend to apply for a 50-year incidental take permit from the Service and from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). These permits are needed to authorize the incidental take of threatened and endangered species that could result from activities covered under the Plan. We provide this notice to
(1)describe the proposed action and possible alternatives;
(2)advise other Federal and State agencies, affected Tribes, and the public of our intent to prepare an EIS/EIR;
(3)announce the initiation of a public scoping period; and
(4)obtain suggestions and information on the scope of issues and alternatives to be included in the EIS/EIR. DATES: Submit written comments on or before October 22, 2007. One public scoping meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 26, 2007, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. The public scoping meeting will be combined with a pre-scheduled community meeting for the Plan. ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the Morgan Hill Community and Cultural Center, 17000 Monterey Road, Morgan Hill, CA 95037. Submit written comments to Lori Rinek, Chief, Conservation Planning and Recovery Division, Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605, Sacramento, CA 95825. Comments may also be sent by facsimile to
(916)414-6713. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cori Mustin, Senior Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office at
(916)414-6600. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Reasonable Accommodation Persons needing reasonable accommodations in order to attend and participate in the public meeting should contact Cori Mustin at
(916)414-6600 as soon as possible. In order to allow sufficient time to process requests, please call no later than one week before the public meeting. Information regarding this proposed action is available in alternative formats upon request. Background The Plan is both a habitat conservation plan (HCP), intended to fulfill the requirements of the Endangered Species Act, and a natural community conservation plan (NCCP), to fulfill the requirements of the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCP Act). The Plan is being prepared under the combined efforts of eight local and state agencies: Santa Clara County, the City of San José, the City of Morgan Hill, the City of Gilroy, the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority, and the California Department of Parks and Recreation, collectively referred to as the Local Partners. Furthermore, efforts have included coordination with the California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG)as a CEQA Responsible and Trustee Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NMFS is a Cooperating Agency under NEPA. Species proposed for coverage in the Plan are species that are currently listed as federally threatened or endangered or have the potential to become listed during the life of this Plan and have some likelihood to occur within the project area. Should any of these unlisted covered wildlife species become listed under the Act during the term of the permit, take authorization for those species would become effective upon listing. The Plan will provide long-term conservation and management of these species. Species may be added or deleted during the course of the development of the Plan based on further analysis, new information, agency consultation, and public comment. The Plan addresses 30 listed and non-listed species: 15 wildlife species and 15 plant species. Federally listed species proposed for coverage under the Plan include: the bay checkerspot butterfly ( *Euphydryas editha bayensis* ), south-central California coastal steelhead ( *Oncorhynchus mykiss* ), central California coastal steelhead ( *O. mykiss* ), central valley fall-run Chinook salmon ( *O. tshawytscha* ), California tiger salamander ( *Ambystoma californiense* ), California red-legged frog ( *Rana aurora draytonii* ), least Bell's vireo ( *Vireo bellii pusillus* ), San Joaquin kit fox ( *Vulpes macrotis mutica* ), Tiburon Indian paintbrush ( *Castilleja affinis* ssp. *neglecta* ), coyote ceanothus ( *Ceanothus ferrisae* ), Santa Clara Valley dudleya ( *Dudleya setchellii* ), and Metcalf Canyon jewelflower ( *Streptanthus albidus* ssp. *albidus* ). The unlisted species proposed for coverage under the Plan include: Pacific lamprey ( *Lampetra tridentata* ), foothill yellow-legged frog ( *Rana boylii* ), western pond turtle ( *Clemmys marmorata* ), golden eagle ( *Aquila chrysaetos* ), western burrowing owl ( *Athene cunicularia hypugaea* ), tricolored blackbird ( *Agelaius tricolor* ), Pacific Townsend's [=western] big-eared bat ( *Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii* ), big scale balsamroot ( *Balsamorhiza macrolepis* ), chaparral harebell ( *Campanula exigua* ), Mount Hamilton thistle ( *Cirsium fontinale* var. *campylon* ), San Francisco collinsia ( *Collinsia multicolor* ), fragrant fritillary ( *Fritillaria liliacea* ), Loma Prieta hoita ( *Hoita strobilina* ), smooth lessingia ( *Lessingia micradenia* var. *glabrata* ), Hall's bush mallow ( *Malacothamnus hallii* ), robust monardella ( *Monardella villosa* ssp. *globosa* ), rock sanicle ( *Sanicula saxatilis* ), and most beautiful jewelflower ( *Streptanthus albidus* ssp. *peramoenus* ). Section 9 of the Act and Federal regulations prohibit the “take” of wildlife species listed as endangered or threatened (16 U.S.C. 1538). The Act defines the term “take” as: to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed species, or to attempt to engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C. 1532). Harm includes significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills or injures listed wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering [50 CFR 17.3(c)]. Pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, we may issue permits to authorize “incidental take” of listed species. “Incidental take” is defined by the Act as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. Service regulations governing permits for threatened species and endangered species, respectively, are promulgated in 50 CFR 17.32 and 50 CFR 17.22. NMFS regulations governing permits for threatened and endangered species of salmonids that may be covered in the Plan are promulgated in 50 CFR 222.22. Take of listed plant species is not prohibited under the Act, and cannot be authorized under a Section 10 permit. We propose to include plant species on the permit in recognition of the conservation benefits provided for them under an HCP. For the purposes of the Plan, certain plant species are further included to meet regulatory obligations under Section 7 of the Act and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). All species included on an incidental take permit would receive assurances under the Service's “No Surprises” regulations found in 50 CFR 17.22(b)(5) and 17.32(b)(5). The Plan would result in take authorization for otherwise lawful actions, such as public and private development that may incidentally take or harm animal species or their habitats within the Plan area, and the formation and management of a conservation program for covered species. The Local Partners will request incidental take coverage for the following seven categories of covered activities:
(1)Urban development,
(2)in-stream capital projects,
(3)in-stream operation and maintenance activities,
(4)rural capital projects,
(5)rural operations and maintenance activities,
(6)rural development, and
(7)conservation strategy implementation. The study area includes approximately 518,819 acres, or approximately 62 percent of Santa Clara County. The study area was defined as the area in which covered activities would occur, impacts would be evaluated, and conservation activities would be implemented. The boundary of the study area was based on political, ecological, and hydrologic factors. The study area includes the Pajaro River watershed within Santa Clara County including all or a portion of the Llagas, Uvas, Pescadero and Pacheco sub-watersheds and the Coyote Creek watershed with the exception of the Baylands region. A large portion of the Guadalupe watershed is within the study area, as well as small areas outside of each of these watersheds. Environmental Impact Statement/Report The EIS/EIR will consider the proposed action (i.e., the issuance of a Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit under the Act), no action (no project/no Section 10 permit), and a reasonable range of alternatives. A detailed description of the proposed action and alternatives will be included in the EIS/EIR. The alternatives to be considered for analysis in the EIS/EIR may include: Modified lists of covered species, land coverage areas, and extent of future conservation efforts. The EIS/EIR will also identify potentially significant impacts on biological resources, land use, air quality, water quality, economics, and other environmental resource issues that could occur directly or indirectly with implementation of the proposed action and alternatives. Different strategies for avoiding, minimizing and mitigating the impacts of incidental take may also be considered. Environmental review of the EIS/EIR will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 *et. seq* .), its implementing regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), other applicable regulations, and Service procedures for compliance with those regulations. This notice is being furnished in accordance with 40 CFR Section 1501.7 and 1508.22 to obtain suggestions and information from other agencies and the public on the scope of issues and alternatives to be addressed in the EIS/EIR. The primary purpose of the scoping process is to identify important issues raised by the public related to the proposed action. Written comments from interested parties are invited to ensure that the full range of issues related to the permit application is identified. Comments will only be accepted in written form. You may submit written comments by mail, facsimile transmission, or in person (see ADDRESSES ). All comments received, including names and addresses, will become part of the official administrative record and may be made available to the public. Our practice is to make comments, including names, home addresses, home phone numbers, and email addresses of respondents available for public review. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their names and/or home addresses, etc., but if you wish us to consider withholding this information you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. In addition, you must present a rationale for withholding this information. This rationale must demonstrate that disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy. Unsupported assertions will not meet this burden. In the absence of exceptional, documentable circumstances, this information will be released. We will always make submissions from organization or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives of or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. Dated: August 30, 2007. Ken McDermond, Deputy Manager, California/Nevada Operations Office, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. E7-17588 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [NV-910-07-1990-EX, 7-08808] Notice of Availability of Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Newmont Mining Corporation's Leeville Project, Nevada AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Availability. SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321, *et seq.* ), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Elko Field Office has prepared a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
(SEIS)for Newmont Mining Corporation's Leeville gold mine in Eureka and Elko counties, Nevada, and by this notice is announcing the opening of the comment period. DATES: To assure they will be considered, the BLM must receive written comments on the Draft SEIS within 60 days following the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes their Notice of Availability in the **Federal Register** . ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by the following methods: Fax:
(775)753-0255, Mail: Leeville Project Manager, BLM Elko Field Office, 3900 East Idaho Street, Elko, NV 89801. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deb McFarlane, BLM Elko Field Office, 3900 East Idaho Street, Elko, NV 89801,
(775)753-0200. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BLM signed a Record of Decision
(ROD)for Newmont Mining Corporation's Leeville Project, an underground gold mine located on the Carlin Trend in northeastern Nevada, on September 25, 2002. The Leeville Mine includes three main ore bodies located approximately 2,500 feet below ground surface. Newmont is authorized to construct ancillary mine facilities, including construction of five shafts to access the ore bodies, shaft hoists, waste rock disposal facility, refractory ore stockpiles, facilities to support mine dewatering, and facilities to support backfill operations. Surface disturbance totals 486 acres. Four years of legal review resulted in a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit holding that portions of the cumulative effects analysis were insufficient. In response, the BLM has updated the cumulative effects analyzed in Chapter 4 of the 2002 EIS, including information on any new or proposed projects that could contribute cumulative effects, and has issued this Draft SEIS which analyzes the cumulative effects analysis for Newmont Mining Corporation's Leeville gold mine in Eureka and Elko counties, Nevada. A copy of the Draft SEIS may be obtained from: Bureau of Land Management, Elko Field Office, 3900 Idaho Street, Elko, Nevada 89801. The Draft SEIS may also be found on the Elko Field Office Internet site at: *http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/elko_field_office/blm_information/nepa.htm.* Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the above address during regular business hours 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays, and may be published as part of the Final SEIS. 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 your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Ron Wenker, State Director, Nevada. [FR Doc. 07-4340 Filed 8-31-07; 2:38 pm]
Connectionstraces to 21
Traces to 21 documents
U.S. Code
- Public assistance pilot program§ 777
- Priority to certain applications for public facility and public housing assistance§ 5153
- Purposes§ 3501
- Declaration of policy and public housing agency organization§ 1437
- Supportive housing for the elderly§ 1701q
- Housing for moderate income and displaced families§ 1715l
- Supportive housing for persons with disabilities§ 8013
- Rent supplement payments for qualified lower income families§ 1701s
- Records maintained on individuals§ 552a
- Preventing fraud and abuse in housing and urban development programs§ 3544
- Preventing fraud and abuse in Department of Housing and Urban Development programs§ 3543
- Congressional findings§ 4101
- Rental payments§ 1437a
- Low-income housing assistance§ 1437f
- Administrative provisions§ 3535
- Congressional findings and declaration of purposes and policy§ 1531
- Determination of endangered species and threatened species§ 1533
- Prohibited acts§ 1538
- Definitions§ 1532
- Congressional declaration of purpose§ 4321
register
17 references not yet in our index
- 42 USC 5121-5206
- 49 CFR 1511
- Pub. L. 100-503
- Pub. L. 103-66
- Pub. L. 105-65
- 12 USC 1701-1750g
- 42 USC 1437-1437z
- Pub. L. 108-199
- 12 USC 1715ld
- 88 Stat. 1896
- 40 CFR 1506.6
- 50 CFR 17.22
- 50 CFR 17.32
- 50 CFR 17.3(c)
- 50 CFR 222.22
- 50 CFR 17.22(b)(5)
- 40 CFR 1501.7
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice and request for comments
Cite42 USC 5121-5206
Cite49 CFR 1511
Pub. L.Pub. L. 100-503
Cites 38 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources