This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

69199 

Vol. 71, No. 230 

Thursday, November 30, 2006 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

November 21, 2006. 

The Department of Agriculture has 

submitted the following information 

collection requirement(s) to OMB for 

review and clearance under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13. Comments 

regarding (a) whether the collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of burden including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; (d) ways to 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 should be addressed to: Desk 

Officer for Agriculture, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), 

OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV or 

fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental 

Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail 

Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250– 

7602. Comments regarding these 

information collections are best assured 

of having their full effect if received 

within 30 days of this notification. 

Copies of the submission(s) may be 

obtained by calling (202) 720–8958. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor a collection of information 

unless the collection of information 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number and the agency informs 

potential persons who are to respond to 

the collection of information that such 

persons are not required to respond to 

the collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

Foreign Agricultural Service 

Title: Dairy Tariff-Rate Import Quota 

Licensing Regulation. 

OMB Control Number: 0551–0001. 

Summary of Collection: The 

Importation of most cheese made from 

cow’s milk and certain non-cheese dairy 

articles (butter, dried milk, and butter 

substitutes) are subject to Tariff-rate 

Quotas (TRQs) and must be 

accompanied by an import license issue 

by the Department to enter at the lower 

tariff. Licenses are issued in accordance 

with the Department’s Import Licensing 

Regulation (7 CFR Part 6). Importers 

without licenses may enter these dairy 

articles, but are required to pay the 

higher tariff. The Foreign Agricultural 

Service (FAS) will collect information 

using several forms. 

Need and Use of the Information: FAS 

will use the information to assure that 

the intent of the legislation is correctly 

administered and to determine 

eligibility to obtain benefits under the 

Import Regulation. If the information 

were collected less frequently, FSA 

would be unable to issue licenses on an 

annual basis in compliance with the 

Import Regulation. 

Description of Respondents: Business 

or other-for-profit; Individuals or 

households. 

Number of Respondents: 680. 

Frequency of Responses: Record 

keeping, Reporting: Annually. 

Total Burden Hours: 291. 

Ruth Brown, 

Departmental Information Collection 

Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. E6–20267 Filed 11–29–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–10–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Fishtrap EIS, Lolo National Forest, 

Sanders County, Montana 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare 

supplemental environmental impact 

statement. 

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will 

prepare a supplemental environmental 

impact statement (EIS) for the Fishtrap 

project. The original Fishtrap Record of 

Decision, signed on November 22, 2005, 

was litigated in May 2006. The primary 

issue of the lawsuit was related to 

treatments intended to maintain and/or 

enhance old growth stands. As a result 

of a Court-ordered settlement agreement 

with Plaintiffs, the Lolo National Forest 

Supervisor agreed to: (a) Withdraw the 

project decision; (b) monitor past 

maintenance/restorative treatments 

within old growth stands and evaluate 

the effects of these activities; and (c) 

prepare a supplemental environmental 

impact statement (SEIS), incorporating 

this new information, before proceeding 

with the project. Over the last several 

months, Lolo National Forest personnel 

have been monitoring the effects of past 

maintenance/restorative treatments in 

old growth stands and are currently 

evaluating the information they 

collected. The Fishtrap SEIS will 

incorporate the results of this 

monitoring work. 

The project proposes to implement 

timber harvest, pre-commercial 

thinning, prescribed burning, herbicide 

treatment of noxious weeds, temporary 

road construction, road improvement 

work, and road decommissioning in the 

Fishtrap Creek drainage, Lolo National 

Forest, Plains/Thompson Falls Ranger 

District, Sanders County, Montana. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Randy Hojem, District Ranger (406–826– 

4308), or Pat Partyka, Team Leader 

(406–826–4314), at the Plains/ 

Thompson Falls Ranger District, Lolo 

National Forest, P.O. Box 429, Plains, 

Montana 59859. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Fishtrap analysis area of approximately 

36,400 acres is located approximately 20 

air miles north of Thompson Falls, 

Montana, Sanders County, in T23N, 

R28W; T23N, R29W; T24N, R27W; 

T24N, R28W; T24N, R29W; and T25N, 

R28W; PMM. Within this area, the Lolo 

National Forest proposes: (1) 

Approximately 2260 acres of timber 

harvest; (2) approximately 437 acres of 

pre-commercial thinning; (3) 

approximately 984 acres of prescribed 

burning; (4) approximately 0.75 miles of 

temporary road construction to access 

two harvest units; (5) approximately 151 

miles of road decommissioning; (6) 

approximately 36 miles of road 

reconstruction; (7) approximately 40 

miles of road maintenance of existing 

roads that would be used for timber 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with NOTICES
69200 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 230 / Thursday, November 30, 2006 / Notices 

haul; (8) approximately 124 miles of 

herbicide treatment of noxious weeds 

along roadsides. 

The Lolo National Forest Plan 

provides overall guidance for land 

management activities in the project 

area. The purposes for these actions are 

to: (1) Improve water quality, fish 

habitat and fish passage. (2) Improve 

grizzly bear habitat within the CabinetYaak Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone. (3) 

Restore, maintain or enhance native ‘‘at 

risk’’ vegetative communities. (4) 

Provide for ecological sustainability and 

community stability through the use of 

forest products. (5) Improve and 

maintain big game winter range. (6) 

Provide for a transportation system that 

better reflects current access and 

resource concerns and reduces 

economic burdens associated with 

maintaining unneeded roads. 

Issues currently identified for analysis 

in the SEIS include potential effects on 

old growth, soils, wildlife (particularly 

grizzly bear), water quality, fisheries, 

and forest access. 

The Forest Service will consider a 

range of alternatives. A No Action 

alternative and other alternatives, which 

respond to significant issues, will be 

analyzed and compared to the Draft 

SEIS. 

The Draft SEIS is expected to be filed 

with the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) and available for public 

review in June 2007. Comments on the 

Draft SEIS will be considered and 

responded to in the Final SEIS, 

scheduled to be completed by October 

2007. 

The comment period on the draft 

environmental impact statement will be 

45 days from the date the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

publishes the notice of availability in 

the Federal Register. 

The Forest Service believes, at this 

early stage, it is important to give 

reviewers notice of several court rulings 

related to public participation in the 

environmental review process. First, 

reviewers of draft environmental impact 

statements must structure their 

participation in the environmental 

review of the proposal so that it is 

meaningful and alerts an agency to the 

reviewer’s position and contentions. 

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. 

NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also 

environmental objections that could be 

raised at the draft environmental impact 

statement stage but that are not raised 

until after completion of the final 

environmental impact statement may be 

waived or dismissed by the courts. City 

of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 

1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin 

Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 

1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of 

these court rulings, it is very important 

that those interested in this proposed 

action participate by the close of the 45- 

day comment period so that substantive 

comments and objections are made 

available to the Forest Service at a time 

when it can meaningfully consider them 

and respond to them in the final 

environmental impact statement. 

To assist the Forest Service in 

identifying and considering issues and 

concerns on the proposed action, 

comments on the draft environmental 

impact statement should be as specific 

as possible. It is also helpful if 

comments refer to specific pages or 

chapters of the draft statement. 

Comments may also address the 

adequacy of the draft environmental 

impact statement or the merits of the 

alternatives formulated and discussed in 

the statement. Reviewers may wish to 

refer to the Council on Environmental 

Quality Regulations for implementing 

the procedural provisions of the 

National Environmental Policy Act at 40 

CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. 

Responsible Official: Deborah L.R. 

Austin, Forest Supervisor, Lolo National 

Forest, Building 24—Fort Missoula, 

Missoula, MT 59804, is the responsible 

official. In making the decision, the 

responsible official will consider 

comments, responses, disclosure of 

environmental consequences, and 

applicable laws, regulations, and 

policies. The responsible official will 

state the rationale for the chosen 

alternative in the Record of Decision. 

Dated: November 21, 2006. 

Deborah L.R. Austin, 

Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. 06–9462 Filed 11–29–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Rural Telephone Bank 

Determination of the 2006 Fiscal Year 

Interest Rate on Rural Telephone Bank 

Loans 

AGENCY: Rural Telephone Bank, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of 2006 fiscal year 

interest rate determination. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with 7 CFR 

1610.10, the Rural Telephone Bank 

(Bank) cost of money rate has been 

established as 5.49% for all advances 

made during fiscal year 2006 (the period 

beginning October 1, 2005 and ending 

September 30, 2006). All advances made 

during fiscal year 2006 were under Bank 

loans approved on or after October 1, 

1992. These loans are sometimes 

referred to as financing account loans. 

The calculation of the Bank’s cost of 

money rate for fiscal year 2006 is 

provided in Table 1. Since the 

calculated rate is greater than or equal 

to the minimum rate (5.00%) allowed 

under 7 U.S.C. 948(b)(3)(A), the cost of 

money rate is set at 5.49%. The 

methodology required to calculate the 

cost of money rates is established in 7 

CFR 1610.10(c). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jonathan P. Claffey, Deputy Assistant 

Governor, Rural Telephone Bank, STOP 

1590—Room 5151, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–

1590. Telephone: (202) 720–9556. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The cost 

of money rate methodology develops a 

weighted average rate for the Bank’s cost 

of money considering total fiscal year 

loan advances, debentures and other 

obligations, and the costs to the Bank of 

obtaining funds from these sources. 

Dissolution of the Bank 

At its quarterly meeting on August 4, 

2005, the Board of Directors (the 

‘‘Board’’) approved a resolution to 

dissolve the Bank. On November 10, 

2005, the liquidation and dissolution 

process was initiated with the signing 

by President Bush of the 2006 

Agriculture Appropriations bill, which 

contained a provision lifting the 

restriction on the retirement of more 

than 5 percent of the Class A stock held 

by the Government. 

In accordance with the Board’s 

resolution and the terms of the Loan 

Transfer Agreement between the Bank 

and the Government, dated August 4, 

2005, the Bank’s liquidating account 

loan portfolio (the portfolio of Bank 

loans approved before October 1, 1992) 

was transferred to the Government on 

October 1, 2005. As a result of that 

transfer, there are no more advances of 

liquidating account loan funds. 

The dissolution of the Bank will not 

affect future advances of financing 

account loan funds. Requests for 

financing account advances will 

continue to be processed by employees 

of USDA Rural Development’s 

Telecommunications Program, just as 

they were while the Bank remained in 

operation. The terms and conditions of 

the financing account loans will not 

change, nor will the method for 

determining the interest rates, including 

the determination of the cost of money 

rates after the end of each fiscal year. 

The only significant change to the 

financing account advances is that 

beginning October 1, 2005, Class B stock 

in the Bank is no longer being 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with NOTICES