Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Notices 9611 

system as it is not used by many States, 

unless it could be modified to allow 

XML upload and aggregate-only data. 

Response: XML is beneficial since it 

is a commonly used method of 

electronically encoding documents, 

usable over the Internet, and compatible 

with many programming interfaces that 

can be used to extract data. HUD will be 

using a system similar to TRACS to 

accept data files from the State housing 

finance agencies. This system accepts a 

variety of file formats, including XML. 

HUD plans to modify the system for this 

data collection effort to ensure that it 

accepts the requested file formats. 

Comment: HUD should make clear 

that responses to race, ethnicity, and 

disability status data are voluntary; 

whether the requirement to collect data 

exists for the 15-year tax credit 

compliance period or the extended 

period as well, arguing that the data 

collection should not apply after the 

initial 15 year period; and that, since 

there is no built-in enforcement 

mechanism, a good-faith effort to collect 

the data should suffice for compliance. 

One commenter stated that HUD should 

address how the data collection 

methodology will be coordinated with 

the authority HERA grants for State tax 

credit agencies to waive annual 

recertification requirements. 

Response: Data collection will include 

all low-income units monitored for 

compliance as long as they remain in 

the program, including those in the 

extended-use period. Tying the 

collection of information to the actual 

technical use of the credit makes little 

sense as most tax-credit owners actually 

sell or syndicate their credits at the 

outset. The key, rather, is that the units 

have received the benefit of tax credits 

and continue to remain in the program 

as low-income units, and it is those 

complying units that Congress seeks 

information about. 

Data collection will be consistent with 

new HERA re-certification rules for 100 

percent low-income unit properties. As 

to the race, ethnicity, and disability 

questions, a household cannot be forced 

to provide this information. If the 

household does not provide the 

information, the State agency shall make 

its best efforts to report the information 

based on observation or derived from 

other sources. 

Comment: Commenters stated that 

HUD should make available a 

guidebook, procedures manual, or other 

informational guidance. 

Response: HUD is specifying the data 

it is collecting in this notice and in the 

paperwork approval request published 

in the Federal Register. In addition, the 

information contact listed in this rule 

can provide copies of the actual revised 

notices. HUD may publish additional 

guidance in the near future. 

Comment: HUD should make 

development-level data available as 

soon as possible after it is collected so 

that it can be analyzed, for example, to 

determine Fair Housing Act compliance 

or whether families with incomes below 

the poverty line are being served. 

Response: The statute requires HUD 

to compile and make the information 

collected available ‘‘not less than 

annually.’’ HUD plans to fulfill that 

statutory requirement. 

Comment: One commenter stated that 

data elements should be precisely 

defined so there is no variability from 

State to State. For example, all States 

should follow the same rounding rules. 

Response: HUD believes that most of 

the data being collected, such as age, 

ethnicity, family composition, disability 

status and age, is expressible in whole 

integers and will not require rounding. 

If it appears that rounding rules could 

affect the data in a statistically 

significant way, HUD may provide 

further guidance as needed. 

Comment: One commenter sought 

additional data collections for civilrights related purposes. This commenter 

stated that HUD should collect racial 

and ethnic data on applicants for LIHTC 

housing to better assess affirmative 

marketing compliance. This commenter 

also stated that when initial data is 

released, HUD should contract with 

‘‘reputable and independent research 

organizations to analyze the civil rights 

performance of LIHTC State agencies 

and project managers/developers’’ to 

identify possible patterns of civil rights 

violations for further action by HUD’s 

Office of Fair Housing and Equal 

Opportunity. This commenter states that 

there has been a ‘‘longstanding failure’’ 

to collect racial and ethnic data in the 

LIHTC program. 

Response: HUD does not have 

statutory authority to collect data on 

applicants. While generally HUD 

supports improved civil rights 

performance in assisted housing, this 

particular statute is limited to collecting 

specified information. This information 

includes race, ethnicity, and disability 

status on households residing in 

properties receiving credits under the 

low-income housing tax credit program. 

Congress has not currently provided 

HUD with the authorization or funding 

to conduct the study suggested. 

Comment: Some commenters state 

that there should be transition periods 

of various times to give State agencies 

time to launch their new systems. 

Commenters also stated that compliance 

costs would be significant and that HUD 

should provide or petition Congress to 

provide additional funding to cover the 

extra costs. 

Response: HUD understands that 

States may encounter difficulty in 

completing the data collection requests. 

HUD will address on a State-by-State 

basis the need for additional time and 

is procuring services to assist States in 

their transition. However, while 

Congress has authorized funds for this 

data collection, funds were not 

appropriated for this specific purpose in 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. The authorized 

funding amounts are limited to 

$2,500,000 for FY 2009 and $900,000 for 

each of FYs 2010 through 2013. States 

should be aware of this limited funding. 

III. Information Collection 

Parties interested in viewing and 

commenting on the information 

collection requirements may do so by 

responding to the separate notice of 

information collection published in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 8392). 

Dated: February 22, 2010. 

Jean Lin Pao, 

General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy 

Development and Research. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4386 Filed 3–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLMT926000–10–L19100000–BJ0000– 

LRCM08RS4045] 

Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey: 

Montana 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of filing of plats of 

survey. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) will file the plat of 

survey of the lands described below in 

the BLM Montana State Office, Billings, 

Montana, thirty (30) days from the date 

of publication in the Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steve Toth, Cadastral Surveyor, Branch 

of Cadastral Survey, Bureau of Land 

Management, 5001 Southgate Drive, 

Billings, Montana 59101–4669, 

telephone (406) 896–5121 or (406) 896– 

5009. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

survey was executed at the request of 

the Superintendent, Fort Peck Agency, 

through the Rocky Mountain Regional 

Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and 

was necessary to determine boundaries 

of Trust or Tribal Interest lands. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

9612 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Notices 

The lands we surveyed are: 

Principal Meridian, Montana 

T. 26 N., R. 43 E. 

The plat, in 2 sheets, representing the 

dependent resurvey of a portion of the 

subdivisional lines, a portion of the 

subdivision of sections 11, 12, 13, and 14, the 

adjusted original meanders of the former left 

bank of the Missouri River, downstream, 

through sections 11, 14, 15, and a portion of 

section 13, and a certain division of accretion 

line in section 13, and the subdivision of 

sections 11, 12, and 14, and the survey of the 

meanders of the present left bank of the 

Missouri River, downstream, through 

sections 11, 12, 14, and a portion of section 

13, and certain division of accretion lines in 

sections 13 and 14, Township 26 North, 

Range 43 East, Principal Meridian, Montana, 

was accepted February 3, 2010. 

We will place a copy of the plat, in 

2 sheets, and related field notes we 

described in the open files. They will be 

available to the public as a matter of 

information. If the BLM receives a 

protest against this survey, as shown on 

this plat, in 2 sheets, prior to the date 

of the official filing, we will stay the 

filing pending our consideration of the 

protest. We will not officially file this 

plat, in 2 sheets, until the day after we 

have accepted or dismissed all protests 

and they have become final, including 

decisions or appeals. 

Authority: 43 U.S.C. Chap. 3. 

Dated: February 25, 2010. 

Michael T. Birtles, 

Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Division of 

Resources. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4438 Filed 3–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–DN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Minor Boundary Revision of Pinnacles 

National Monument 

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Announcement of boundary 

revision. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

revision to the boundary of Pinnacles 

National Monument, pursuant to the 

authority specified below, to include 

three adjacent and contiguous tracts of 

land in San Benito County, California, 

totaling 114.79 acres. Tract 02–105 

contains 31.58 acres and is further 

identified by Assessor’s Parcel Number 

(APN) 028–130–012. Tract 02–106 

contains 81.71 acres and is further 

identified by APNs 028–130–032 and 

028–130–033. Tract 02–107 contains 1.5 

acres and is further identified by APN 

028–130–018. 

The tracts are depicted on Drawing 

No. 114/80,014, Sheet 2 of 3, Segment 

Map 01 (Consolidated 01–02), revised 

March 11, 2009. This map is on file and 

available for inspection at the following 

locations: National Park Service, Land 

Resources Program Center, Pacific West 

Region, 1111 Jackson St., Suite 700, 

Oakland, CA 94607, and National Park 

Service, Department of the Interior, 

Washington, DC 20240. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 16 U.S.C. 

460l–9(c)(1) provides that after notifying 

the House Committee on Natural 

Resources and the Senate Committee on 

Energy and Resources, the Secretary of 

the Interior is authorized to make this 

boundary revision. This action will add 

three tracts containing a total of 114.79 

acres to the Pinnacles National 

Monument. The National Park Service 

proposes to acquire these parcels from 

the individual tract owners, who have 

consented to the acquisition. 

The National Park Service has 

determined that it will be feasible to 

administer these lands. The views of 

and impacts on local communities have 

been considered. Other alternatives for 

the management and protection of 

resources on these lands are not 

adequate. 

DATES: The effective date of this 

boundary revision is March 3, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

National Park Service, Chief, Pacific 

Land Resources Program Center, Pacific 

West Region, 1111 Jackson St., Suite 

700, Oakland, CA 94607, (510) 817– 

1414. 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 request in your comment 

that your personal identifying 

information be withheld from public 

review, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. 

Dated: February 25, 2010. 

Rory D. Westberg, 

Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4413 Filed 3–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–EP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree 

Under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

Consistent with Section 122 of the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act of 1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 

42 U.S.C. 9622(d), and 28 CFR 50.7, 

notice is hereby given that on February 

24, 2010, the United States lodged a 

Partial Consent Decree with South 

Tahoe Refuse Company, Inc. (‘‘STR’’) in 

United States of America v. El Dorado 

County, California, et al, Civil No. S– 

01–1520 MCE GGH (E.D. Cal.), with 

respect to the Meyers Landfill Site, 

located in Meyers, El Dorado County, 

California (the ‘‘Site’’). 

On August 3, 2001, Plaintiff United 

States of America (‘‘United States’’), on 

behalf of the United States Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service (‘‘Forest 

Service’’), filed a complaint in this 

matter pursuant to Section 107 of the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9607, against 

Defendants, El Dorado County, 

California (the ‘‘County’’) and the City of 

South Lake Tahoe, California (‘‘the 

City’’). The complaint filed by the 

United States seeks recovery of 

environmental response costs incurred 

by the Forest Service related to the 

release or threatened release and/or 

disposal of hazardous substances at or 

from the Meyers Landfill Site, a former 

municipal waste disposal facility 

located on National Forest Service 

System lands administered by the Lake 

Tahoe Basin Management Unit of the 

Forest Service, with accrued interest, 

and a declaration of the County’s and 

the City’s liability for future response 

costs incurred by the United States 

related to the Site. The County filed a 

Third Party Complaint for contribution 

against a number of third party 

defendants, including STR. 

Under the proposed Partial Consent 

Decree STR will pay $1.0 million, 

which will be deposited into a Forest 

Service Special account to fund future 

response actions at the Site. The amount 

of the proposed settlement is based 

upon financial information provided by 

STR indicating a limited ability to pay. 

In exchange for STR’s payment, STR 

will receive from the United States a 

covenant not to sue or to take 

administrative action pursuant to 

Sections 106 or 107 of CERCLA, 42 

U.S.C. 9606 and 9607, as amended, for 

the performance of response actions at 

Operable Unit One (‘‘OU–1’’) at the Site 

and the United States’ past response 

costs, interim response costs, and future 

OU1 response costs at the Site. 

The Department of Justice will receive 

for a period of thirty (30) days from the 

date of this publication comments 

relating to the Partial Consent Decree. 

Comments should be addressed to the 

Acting Assistant Attorney General, 

Environment and Natural Resources 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES