Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 73121 

Activity Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses 

Completion time 

per response 

Total annual 

burden hours 

FWS Form 3–XXXX ......................................................................... 1,200 1,200 4 hours 4,800 

FWS Form 3–YYYY ......................................................................... 300 300 4 hours 1,200 

Totals ........................................................................................ 15,000 15,000 ............................ 19,500 

III. Comments 

We invite comments concerning this 

information collection on: 

• Whether or not the collection of 

information is necessary, including 

whether or not the information will 

have practical utility; 

• The accuracy of our estimate of the 

burden for this collection of 

information; 

• Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents. 

Comments that you submit in 

response to this notice are a matter of 

public record. We will include or 

summarize each comment in our request 

to OMB to approve this IC. 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: November 23, 2010. 

Hope Grey, 

Information Collection Clearance Officer, 

Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29977 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R1–R–2010–N230; 10137–1265–0000 

S3] 

Bandon Marsh, Nestucca Bay, and 

Siletz Bay National Wildlife Refuges, 

Coos, Tillamook, and Lincoln 

Counties, OR; Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan and Environmental 

Assessment 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Intent; announcement 

of three public open house meetings; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), intend to 

prepare a comprehensive conservation 

plan (CCP) for the Bandon Marsh, 

Nestucca Bay, and Siletz Bay National 

Wildlife Refuges (NWRs), in or near the 

towns of Bandon, Pacific City, 

Neskowin, and Lincoln City, Oregon. 

We will also prepare an environmental 

assessment (EA) to evaluate the 

potential effects of various CCP 

alternatives. We provide this notice in 

compliance with our CCP policy to 

advise other Federal and State agencies, 

Tribes, and the public of our intentions 

and to obtain suggestions and 

information on the scope of issues to 

consider during the planning process. 

We are also announcing public meetings 

and requesting public comments. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, please 

send your written comments by 

December 31, 2010. We will hold public 

meetings to begin the CCP planning 

process; see Public Meetings under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for dates, 

times, and locations. 

ADDRESSES: Send your comments or 

requests for more information by any of 

the following methods: 

E-mail: oregoncoastCCP@fws.gov. 

Include ‘‘Bandon Marsh, Nestucca Bay, 

and Siletz Bay CCP’’ in the subject line 

of the message. 

Fax: Attn: Project Leader, 541–867– 

4551. 

U.S. Mail: Oregon Coast National 

Wildlife Refuge Complex, 2127 SE. 

Marine Science Drive, Newport, OR 

97365. 

In-Person Drop-off: You may drop off 

comments during regular business hours 

at the above address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roy 

W. Lowe, Project Leader, Oregon Coast 

National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 2127 

SE. Marine Science Drive, Newport, OR 

97365; phone (541) 867–4550, and fax 

(541) 867–4551. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

With this notice, we initiate our 

process for developing a CCP for 

Bandon Marsh, Nestucca Bay, and Siletz 

Bay National Wildlife Refuges in Coos, 

Tillamook, and Lincoln Counties, 

Oregon. This notice complies with our 

CCP policy to (1) advise other Federal 

and State agencies, Tribes, and the 

public of our intention to conduct 

detailed planning on these refuges, and 

(2) obtain suggestions and information 

on the scope of issues to consider in the 

environmental document and during 

development of the CCP. 

Background 

The CCP Process 

The National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee) (Refuge Administration 

Act), as amended by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement 

Act of 1997, requires us to develop a 

CCP for each national wildlife refuge. 

The purpose for developing a CCP is to 

provide refuge managers with a 15-year 

plan for achieving refuge purposes and 

contributing toward the mission of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System, 

consistent with sound principles of fish 

and wildlife management, conservation, 

legal mandates, and our policies. We 

will review and update the CCP at least 

every 15 years in accordance with the 

Refuge Administration Act. 

Each unit of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System was established for 

specific purposes. These purposes are 

the foundation for developing and 

prioritizing the conservation and 

management goals and objectives for 

each refuge within the National Wildlife 

Refuge System, and determining 

compatible public uses for each refuge. 

The planning process is a way for us 

and the public to evaluate management 

goals and objectives for refuge wildlife, 

plant, and habitat conservation, while 

providing for wildlife-dependent 

recreation opportunities that are 

compatible with the refuge’s 

establishing purposes and the mission 

of the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

Our CCP process provides 

participation opportunities for Tribal, 

State, and local governments; agencies; 

organizations; and the public. At this 

time we encourage input in the form of 

issues, concerns, ideas, and suggestions 

for the future management of Bandon 

Marsh, Nestucca Bay, and Siletz Bay 

Refuges. 

We will conduct an environmental 

review of this project and prepare an EA 

in accordance with the requirements of 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969, as amended (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

73122 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 

4321 et seq.); NEPA regulations (40 CFR 

parts 1500–1508); other appropriate 

Federal laws and regulations; and our 

policies and procedures for compliance 

with those laws and regulations. 

Bandon Marsh, Nestucca Bay, and 

Siletz Bay National Wildlife Refuges 

Bandon Marsh NWR was established 

in 1983, with the acquisition of 289 

acres of salt marsh, mudflats, and tidal 

sloughs. The Bandon Marsh Unit is 

located near the mouth of the Coquille 

River, with approximately 75 percent of 

the Unit within the city limits of 

Bandon, Oregon. The 582-acre Niles’tun Unit, established in 2000, 

includes 400 acres of historic salt marsh 

that is currently being restored to tidal 

action. The Ni-les’tun Unit is located on 

the east side of Highway 101 on the 

north bank of the Coquille River. The 

total land base of Bandon Marsh NWR 

is 889 acres. 

The purpose for establishing Bandon 

Marsh NWR was ‘‘for the preservation 

and enhancement of the highly 

significant wildlife habitat of the area 

known as Bandon Marsh, in the estuary 

of the Coquille River * * * for the 

protection of migratory waterfowl, 

numerous species of shorebirds, and 

fish, including Chinook and silver 

salmon, and to provide opportunity for 

wildlife-oriented recreation and nature 

study on the marsh * * *’’ (95 Stat. 

1709, dated Dec 29, 1981). The Niles’tun Unit was added to Bandon 

Marsh NWR in order to (1) protect and 

restore intertidal marsh, freshwater 

marsh, and riparian areas to provide a 

diversity of habitats for migratory birds, 

including waterfowl, shorebirds, wading 

birds, and songbirds; (2) restore 

intertidal marsh habitat for anadromous 

fish such as the threatened coho salmon, 

chinook, chum salmon, steelhead, and 

cutthroat trout; (3) protect and restore 

habitat for species listed under the 

Endangered Species Act as threatened 

or endangered; and (4) provide wildlifedependent public use opportunities 

compatible with refuge purposes. 

Nestucca Bay NWR is located near 

Pacific City and Neskowin in Tillamook 

County, Oregon. The refuge was 

established in 1991 with the acquisition 

of a 384-acre dairy farm, and has since 

expanded to 818.5 acres. The primary 

need for establishing Nestucca Bay 

NWR was to protect high-quality coastal 

habitats for dusky Canada geese and 

threatened Aleutian Canada geese 

(delisted in 2001); other endangered and 

threatened species; and a variety of 

other migratory waterfowl, shorebirds, 

raptors, songbirds, anadromous fish, 

and other wildlife while preserving part 

of Oregon’s biodiversity. In 2002, the 

refuge was expanded to include the 

Neskowin Marsh Unit (222.6 acres 

acquired), located about 2.5 miles south 

of the Nestucca Bay Refuge Unit near 

the community of Neskowin, Oregon. 

Neskowin Marsh incorporates unique 

freshwater wetland and bog habitats and 

wildlife resources not found within the 

initial refuge boundary. 

Siletz Bay NWR is located near 

Lincoln City on the central coast of 

Oregon. The refuge was established in 

1991 with a donation of 46 acres of 

tidally muted salt marsh. The approved 

acquisition refuge boundary totals 1,936 

acres and encompasses the northern tip 

of the Siletz spit, vegetated and 

unvegetated tidelands of the bay, and a 

portion of the diked former tidelands of 

the Siletz River floodplain. 

Approximately 1,060 acres within the 

authorized boundary are State-owned 

tidelands. Currently, refuge lands total 

568 acres. The primary need for 

establishing this refuge was to protect 

coastal wetland habitats and upland 

buffers for a variety of waterfowl, 

shorebirds, marine mammals, 

endangered species, raptors, songbirds, 

fish, and other wildlife. The refuge 

serves to protect the remaining coastal 

wetlands and uplands adjacent to Siletz 

Bay from rapidly encroaching 

development, and management 

emphasis has been to enhance and 

restore wetland and upland habitats for 

a variety of estuarine-dependent fish 

and wildlife species. 

Scoping: Preliminary Issues, Concerns, 

and Opportunities 

We have identified preliminary 

issues, concerns, and opportunities that 

we may address in the CCP. We have 

briefly summarized these issues below. 

During public scoping, we may identify 

additional issues. 

Bandon Marsh NWR Preliminary 

Issues: What actions should the Service 

take to sustain and restore priority 

species and habitats on this refuge over 

the next 15 years? Based upon the 

refuge’s priority fish and wildlife 

species, which habitats would be 

monitored and managed to control 

invasive species? What management 

options should the refuge consider for 

restoration of the degraded upland 

forest and grassland? What possibilities 

exist for enhancing existing or adding 

additional wildlife-dependent 

recreational opportunities, including 

wildlife observation trails and/or 

photography points? Which areas/ 

habitats of the refuge should be 

managed as undisturbed wildlife 

sanctuary areas (closed to the public) 

and which areas should be open to 

public use? Should the refuge consider 

changes to the Bandon Marsh NWR 

waterfowl hunting program? Would 

allowing hunting and other wildlifedependent recreational uses in new 

areas (e.g., Ni-les’tun Unit) have 

detrimental effects on the refuge’s 

ability to provide adequate undisturbed 

quality wintering habitat for waterfowl 

and other wildlife? Is there enough use 

of the refuge by migrating waterfowl to 

provide a quality hunting program? 

Nestucca Bay NWR Preliminary 

Issues: What actions should the Service 

take to sustain and restore priority 

species and habitats on this refuge over 

the next 15 years? Based upon the 

refuge’s priority fish and wildlife 

species, which are the priority habitats 

to monitor for invasive species, and 

what is the range of Integrated Pest 

Management strategies that should be 

considered to reduce the incidence and 

spread of invasive species? Should the 

Service consider restoring some 

pastures at Nestucca Bay NWR to tidal 

marsh, and what effect would this have 

on the refuge’s ability to provide 

wintering habitat for geese and reduce 

goose depredation on neighboring 

private lands? Should the Cannery Hill 

Unit at Nestucca Bay NWR be managed 

specifically to restore former coastal 

prairie, and if so, how much emphasis 

should be placed on specific needs of 

the threatened Oregon silverspot 

butterfly within a larger coastal prairie 

restoration plan? What options should 

be considered for the old roadbed 

through Neskowin Marsh (tsunami 

escape route) if it is found to be 

impacting water flows through 

Neskowin Marsh? Should the Service 

consider designating Neskowin Marsh 

as a Research Natural Area? What 

possibilities exist for adding or 

enhancing existing wildlife-dependent 

recreational opportunities on Nestucca 

Bay NWR? Are existing refuge access 

points and uses adequate and do they 

provide a quality experience? Should 

the refuge consider establishing 

waterfowl hunting programs at Nestucca 

Bay NWR? Can the level of migrating 

waterfowl use on Nestucca Bay NWR 

support a quality hunting program? 

Siletz Bay NWR Preliminary Issues: 

What actions should the Service take to 

sustain and restore priority species and 

habitats on this refuge over the next 15 

years? Based upon the refuge’s priority 

fish and wildlife species, which habitats 

are most important to monitor for 

invasive species? What partnering 

possibilities exist for treatment of 

aquatic invasive species such as smooth 

cordgrass and New Zealand mud snail? 

Can wetlands currently hampered by 

fish passage barriers and other issues be 

restored, and if so, how should the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 73123 

Service prioritize them? What 

opportunities exist for adding or 

enhancing existing wildlife-dependent 

recreational opportunities and access 

points? Which areas of the refuge 

should be managed as undisturbed 

sanctuary areas and which areas should 

be considered for public access? Should 

the refuge consider establishing a 

waterfowl hunting program at Siletz Bay 

NWR? Would waterfowl hunting and 

other wildlife-dependent recreational 

activities have detrimental effects on the 

refuge’s ability to provide adequate 

undisturbed quality wintering habitat 

for waterfowl? Is there enough use of the 

refuge by migrating waterfowl to 

support a quality hunting program? 

Should the refuge consider enhancing 

the currently offered seasonal 

opportunities to observe wildlife via 

guided canoe/kayak excursion through 

the refuge? 

Public Meetings 

We will hold the following public 

meetings. For more information, contact 

the person under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Date Time Location 

November 29, 2010 ............................................................................... 6–9 p.m. .. Lincoln City Community Center, 2150 NE. Oar Place, Lincoln City, OR 97367. 

November 30, 2010 ............................................................................... 6–9 p.m. .. Kiawanda Community Center, 34600 Cape Kiawanda 

Drive, Pacific City, OR 97135. 

December 2, 2010 ................................................................................. 6–9 p.m. .. Bandon Community Center, 1200 11th Street SW., 

Bandon, OR 97411. 

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. 

Dated: October 28, 2010. 

Theresa E. Rabot, 

Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, 

Oregon. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30063 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLCO–921000–L13200000–EL0000– 

LVELC10CC770; COC–74219] 

Notice of Correction to Notice of 

Availability of the Environmental 

Assessment and Notice of Public 

Hearing for the Sage Creek Holdings, 

LLC, Federal Coal Lease Application, 

COC–74219 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Correction. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) is correcting the 

Notice of Availability of the 

Environmental Assessment (EA) and 

Notice of Public Hearing for the Sage 

Creek Holdings, LLC, Federal Coal Lease 

Application, COC–74219 published in 

the Federal Register on August 13, 2010 

[75 FR 49512]. The BLM incorrectly 

stated that the EA was complete and 

available for release. The BLM 

subsequently determined that additional 

information should have been included 

in the cumulative impact section of the 

EA. The BLM will be issuing a revised 

EA, which will be available for a 30-day 

comment period upon completion. After 

the end of the comment period, the BLM 

will hold a public hearing on the EA, 

the fair market value and the maximum 

economic recovery of the proposed 

leased tract. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kurt 

M. Barton, Land Law Examiner, 2850 

Youngfield Street, Lakewood, CO 80215 

at (303) 239–3714, 

Kurt_Barton@blm.gov, or Jennifer 

Maiolo, Mining Engineer, 455 Emerson 

Street, Craig, CO 81625 at 970–826– 

5077, Jennifer_Maiolo@blm.gov. 

Helen M. Hankins, 

State Director. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29864 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–JB–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

[2462–PYB] 

Information Collection Sent to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for Approval; OMB Control 

Number 1024–0022; Backcountry Use 

Permit 

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Notice; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We (National Park Service, 

NPS) have sent an Information 

Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for 

review and approval. We summarize the 

ICR below and describe the nature of the 

collection and the estimated burden and 

cost. This ICR is scheduled to expire on 

November 30, 2010. We may not 

conduct or sponsor and a person is not 

required to respond to a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

However, under OMB regulations, we 

may continue to conduct or sponsor this 

information collection while it is 

pending at OMB. 

DATES: You must submit comments on 

or before December 29, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send your comments and 

suggestions on this information 

collection to the Desk Officer for the 

Department of the Interior, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

OMB, at (202) 395–5806 (fax) or 

OIRA_DOCKET@OMB.eop.gov (e-mail). 

Please provide a copy of your comments 

to Garry Oye, Chief of Wilderness 

Stewardship Division, National Park 

Service, 1201 Eye Street NW., (Room 

1004), Washington DC 20005; via fax at 

(202) 371–6623; or via e-mail at 

Garry_Oye@nps.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request additional information about 

this ICR, contact Garry Oye by mail, fax, 

or e-mail (see ADDRESSES) or by phone 

at (202) 513–7090. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control Number: 1024–0022. 

Title: Backcountry Use Permit (36 

CFR 1.5, 1.6, and 2.10). 

Form Number: 10–404A. 

Type of Request: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Description of Respondents: 

Individuals wishing to use backcountry 

areas within national parks. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Required to 

obtain or retain a benefit. 

Frequency of Collection: On occasion. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

285,000. 

Estimated Number of Responses: 

285,000. 

Completion Time per Response: 0.083 

hours. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES