Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices 48595 

Estimated Reporting and 

Recordkeeping Non-Hour Cost Burden: 

There are three non-hour cost burdens 

to industry. They are as follows: 

• § 285.111—$4,000: This section 

requires respondents to pay a processing 

fee of $4,000 for MMS document or 

study preparation when necessary for 

MMS processing of applications and 

requests. 

• § 285.111(b)(3)—$950,000: This 

section allows respondents to pay a 

contractor instead of MMS for all or part 

of any document, study, or other 

activity, and provide the results to MMS 

to reduce MMS processing costs. We 

estimate the non-hour cost burden of 

this payment could range from $100,000 

to $2,000,000; therefore, we are 

estimating the cost at $950,000. 

• § 285.417(b)—$950,000: This 

section requires respondents to pay for 

a site-specific study to evaluate the 

cause of harm or damage to natural 

resources, and submit a report to MMS. 

We estimate the non-hour cost burden 

of this study could range from $100,000 

to $2,000,000, depending on the nature 

of the study; therefore, we are 

estimating the cost at $950,000. 

Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA 

(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an 

agency may not conduct or sponsor a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. Until OMB approves a 

collection of information, you are not 

obligated to respond. 

Comments: Before submitting an ICR 

to OMB, PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) 

requires each agency ‘‘* * * to provide 

notice * * * and otherwise consult 

with members of the public and affected 

agencies concerning each proposed 

collection of information * * *’’. 

Agencies must specifically solicit 

comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the 

proposed collection of information is 

necessary for the agency to perform its 

duties, including whether the 

information is useful; (b) evaluate the 

accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the 

burden of the proposed collection of 

information; (c) enhance the quality, 

usefulness, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

minimize the burden on the 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Agencies must also estimate the nonhour paperwork cost burdens to 

respondents or recordkeepers resulting 

from the collection of information. 

Therefore, if you have costs to generate, 

maintain, and disclose this information, 

you should comment and provide your 

total capital and startup cost 

components or annual operation, 

maintenance, and purchase of service 

components. You should describe the 

methods you use to estimate major cost 

factors, including system and 

technology acquisition, expected useful 

life of capital equipment, discount 

rate(s), and the period over which you 

incur costs. Capital and startup costs 

include, among other items, computers 

and software you purchase to prepare 

for collecting information, monitoring, 

and record storage facilities. You should 

not include estimates for equipment or 

services purchased: (i) before October 1, 

1995; (ii) to comply with requirements 

not associated with the information 

collection; (iii) for reasons other than to 

provide information or keep records for 

the Government; or (iv) as part of 

customary and usual business or private 

practices. 

We will summarize written responses 

to this notice and address them in our 

submission for OMB approval. As a 

result of your comments, we will make 

any necessary adjustments to the burden 

in our submission to OMB. 

Public Comment Procedures: 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. 

MMS Information Collection 

Clearance Officer: Arlene Bajusz, (202) 

208–7744. 

Dated: September 16, 2009. 

William S. Hauser, 

Acting Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory 

Programs. 

[FR Doc. E9–22834 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R2–ES–2009–N174; 92220–1113– 

0000–C6] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Draft Post-Delisting 

Monitoring Plan for the Concho Water 

Snake 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of draft 

post-delisting monitoring plan. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of our Post-Delisting 

Monitoring Plan for the Concho water 

snake (Nerodia paucimaculata). The 

draft post-delisting monitoring (PDM) 

plan describes the methods we propose 

to monitor the status of the snake and 

its habitat, in cooperation with the State 

of Texas and other conservation 

partners, for a 15-year period if we 

remove this species from the Federal list 

of endangered and threatened wildlife 

under another pending action. The draft 

PDM plan also provides a strategy for 

identifying and responding to any future 

population declines or habitat 

alterations. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, please 

send your written comments on the 

draft PDM plan for Concho water snake 

by October 23, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: The draft PDM plan is 

available for review on the Internet at 

http://endangered.fws.gov and http:// 

www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ 

AustinTexas/. To request a copy of the 

draft PDM plan, write to U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological 

Services Field Office, 10711 Burnet 

Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758; 

telephone 512–490–0057; facsimile 

512–490–0974. Supporting 

documentation we used in preparing the 

draft PDM plan is available for public 

inspection, by appointment, during 

normal business hours, at the above 

office. You may submit comments by 

mail to the above office address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin 

Ecological Services Field Office (see 

ADDRESSES). If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD), call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 800/877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Concho water snake is a reptile 

endemic to central Texas. We listed this 

species as threatened under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), 

effective September 3, 1986, because of 

threats from habitat modification and 

destruction (51 FR 31412). On July 8, 

2008, we published a proposed rule to 

remove the Concho water snake from 

the list of threatened species (73 FR 

38956). We based the proposal on our 

finding that the best available scientific 

and commercial data, including new 

information, indicate that the Concho 

water snake has recovered because 

threats have been eliminated or reduced 

to the point that the species no longer 

meets the definition of threatened or 

endangered under the Act. We are in the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

48596 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices 

process of making a final determination 

on whether or not to delist the Concho 

water snake. 

For more background information on 

the Concho water snake, refer to our 

1986 final listing rule published in the 

Federal Register (51 FR 31412), our 

2008 proposed delisting rule published 

in the Federal Register (73 FR 38956), 

Werler and Dixon (2000, pp. 209–216), 

Campbell (2003, pp. 1–4), Forstner et al. 

(2006, pp. 1–22), Whiting et al. (2008, 

pp. 438–445), and the 1993 Concho 

Water Snake Recovery Plan (Service 

1993, available online at http:// 

endangered.fws.gov). 

Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us 

to implement a system, in cooperation 

with the States, to effectively monitor 

the status of each species we remove 

from the Federal List of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants due to 

recovery. The monitoring must occur for 

at least 5 years. The purpose of postdelisting monitoring (PDM) is to verify 

that a species we delist due to recovery 

remains secure from risk of extinction 

after we remove the protections of the 

Act. 

To fulfill the PDM requirement, we 

drafted a monitoring plan for the 

Concho water snake in cooperation with 

the Texas Parks and Wildlife 

Department and the Colorado River 

Municipal Water District. Over a 15-year 

period, we propose to conduct surveys 

to measure the presence and abundance 

of snakes 2 times a year at 18 sample 

sites across the range of the snake. 

Biological monitoring frequency will 

occur in three phases, decreasing over 

time, resulting in 7 years of surveys over 

the 15-year PDM period. Evaluation of 

stream conditions will consist of 

analysis of hydrologic data collected at 

eight existing stream gages from across 

the snake’s range. The PDM plan 

describes specific monitoring triggers 

where certain outcomes of monitoring 

will result in specific actions. For 

example, if snakes are not captured from 

at least 75 percent of sample sites in any 

year, sampling effort will be intensified 

the following year beyond the minimum 

called for in the PDM plan. The 

monitoring triggers (both quantitative 

and qualitative) are based on the snake’s 

distribution, presence, reproduction, 

and abundance, as well as evaluation of 

instream flow conditions. 

The draft PDM plan includes annual 

reporting requirements. If PDM results 

in concern regarding the status of the 

snake or increasing threats, possible 

responses may include an extended or 

intensified monitoring effort, additional 

research (such as modeling 

metapopulation dynamics or assessing 

the status of the fish prey base), 

enhancement of riverine or shoreline 

habitats, or an increased effort to 

improve habitat connectivity by 

additional translocation of snakes 

between reaches. If future information 

collected from the PDM, or any other 

reliable source, indicates an increased 

likelihood that the species may become 

in danger of extinction, we will initiate 

a status review of the Concho water 

snake and determine if relisting the 

species is warranted. 

In addition to public review of the 

draft PDM plan, we concurrently are 

requesting independent expert peer 

review from knowledgeable individuals 

with scientific expertise that includes 

ecology of water snakes and 

conservation biology principles. Peer 

review of the draft PDM plan is in 

accordance with our policy published 

on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270). 

Viewing Documents 

Comments and materials we receive 

from the public and peer reviewers, as 

well as supporting documentation we 

used in preparing the draft PDM Plan, 

will be available for public inspection 

by appointment, during normal business 

hours at the Austin Ecological Services 

Field Office (see ADDRESSES). Once 

approved, the final PDM plan for the 

Concho water snake and any future 

revisions to the PDM plan will be 

available on our Web page (http:// 

endangered.fws.gov) and the Austin 

Ecological Services Field Office Web 

page (http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ 

AustinTexas/). We will announce our 

final decision on whether to delist the 

snake with a final rule in a future 

Federal Register publication, and we 

will also make this final decision 

available on the above-referenced Web 

pages. 

Request for Public Comments 

We intend for our final PDM plan to 

be as accurate and as effective as 

possible. Therefore, we request 

comments or suggestions on the Concho 

water snake draft PDM plan from the 

public, concerned governmental 

agencies, the scientific community, 

industry, or any other interested party. 

We will take into consideration 

substantive comments we receive by the 

comment due date (see DATES). These 

comments, and any additional 

information we receive, may lead us to 

adopt a final PDM plan that differs from 

this draft PDM plan. Please note that 

comments merely stating support or 

opposition to the action under 

consideration without providing 

supporting information, although noted, 

will not be considered in making a 

determination. 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire document—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you may request at the top of 

your document that we withhold this 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references we 

cited in this notice is available upon 

request from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Austin Ecological Services 

Field Office (see ADDRESSES). 

Authors 

The primary authors of this document 

are staff at the Austin Ecological 

Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES). 

Authority 

The authority for this action is the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

Dated: August 7, 2009. 

Benjamin N. Tuggle, 

Regional Director, Region 2, Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–22872 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Reclamation 

Walker River Basin Acquisition 

Program Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS), Nevada 

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Reopening of comment period 

for review of the Draft Environmental 

Impact Statement (DEIS). 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Reclamation is 

reopening the comment period for the 

DEIS to Monday, October 5, 2009. The 

notice of availability of the DEIS was 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 24, 2009 (74 FR 36737). The public 

review period ended on September 14, 

2009. 

DATES: Written comments on the DEIS 

will be accepted on or before October 5, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments on 

the DEIS to Mrs. Caryn Huntt DeCarlo, 

Bureau of Reclamation, 705 N Plaza, 

Room 320, Carson City, NV 89701 or 

e-mail to chunttdecarlo@usbr.gov. 

Copies of the DEIS may be requested 

from Mrs. Caryn Huntt DeCarlo by 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES