9726 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 42 / Monday, March 5, 2007 / Notices 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg 

Clark, District Ranger, at the Big Piney 

Ranger District at 307–276–3375. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

revised notice updates the original NOI, 

which appeared Wednesday January 11, 

2006, in the Federal Register (71 FR 

pages 1731–1732). There will be no 

additional scoping on this revised NOI. 

The next opportunity to comment will 

be on the DEIS (see discussion below). 

Comments on the DEIS will be 

requested during the 45 day comment 

period following the Notice of 

Availability (NOA), anticipated to be 

published in the Federal Register in 

March 2007. The publication date of the 

NOA in the Federal Register is the 

exclusive means for calculating the 

comment period for a proposed action 

documented in a DEIS. Those wishing 

to comment should not rely on dates or 

timeframe information provided by any 

other source. 

Reviewers should provide the Forest 

Service with their comments during the 

review period of the DEIS. This will 

enable the Forest Service to analyze and 

respond to the comments at one time 

and to use information acquired in the 

preparation of the FEIS, thus avoiding 

undue delay in the decisionmaking 

process. Reviewers have an obligation to 

structure their participation in the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

process so that it is meaningful and 

alerts the agency to the reviewers’

position and contentions. Vermont 

Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 

435 U.S. 519, 533 (1978). Environmental 

objections that could have been raised at 

the draft stage may be waived if not 

raised until after completion of the 

FEIS. City of Angoon v. Hodel (9th 

Circuit, 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, 

Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 

(E.D. Wis. 1980). Comments on the DEIS 

should be specific and should address 

the adequacy of the Statement and the 

merits of the alternatives discussed (40 

CFR 1503.3). 

Responsible Officials 

Greg Clark, District Ranger; Big Piney 

Ranger District; P.O. Box 218; Big Piney, 

Wyoming 83113. 

Robert A. Bennett, State Director, 

BLM—Wyoming State Office 5353 

Yellowstone (P.O. Box 1828), Cheyenne, 

Wyoming 82009. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The decisions, which will be based on 

the EIS analysis, will be to make the 

final decisions on the Applications for 

Permits to Drill (APDs) and Surface Use 

Plans of Operation (SUPOs) submitted 

by PXP for the Eagle # 1–8, Eagle # 2–

8, and Eagle # 3–8 wells, and to specify 

the access route, project design criteria, 

best management practices, and agency 

requirements that will be included as 

conditions of approval for these wells. 

The decisions made will include 

reasonable measures identified as being 

needed during the EIS analysis in 

addition to any prescribed in the Forest 

Plan for the Bridger-Teton National 

Forest. 

Dated: February 26, 2007. 

Greg W. Clark, 

District Ranger, Big Piney Ranger District, 

Bridger-Teton National Forest. 

[FR Doc. 07–987 Filed 3–2–07; 8:45am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

CHEMICAL SAFETY AND HAZARD 

INVESTIGATION BOARD 

Sunshine Act Meeting 

In connection with its investigation 

into the cause of an explosion and fire 

which occurred at BP’s Texas City 

refinery on March 23, 2005, the United 

States Chemical Safety and Hazard 

Investigation Board (CSB) announces 

that it will convene a public meeting on 

March 20, 2007 starting at 6 p.m. at The 

Nessler Center, Wings of Heritage Room, 

2010 5th Avenue North, Texas City, 

Texas 77590. At the meeting, CSB staff 

will present to the Board the results of 

their investigation into this incident. 

There will be a public comment period 

after the investigators’ presentation. 

At approximately 1:20 p.m. on 

Wednesday, March 23rd, a series of 

explosions occurred at the BP Texas 

City refinery during the restarting of an 

isomerization unit processing 

flammable hydrocarbons. Fifteen 

workers were killed and about 180 

others were injured. Many of the victims 

were in or around work trailers located 

near a blowdown drum and stack that 

were open to the atmosphere. The 

explosions occurred when a distillation 

tower flooded with hydrocarbons and 

was over pressurized, resulting in a 

release of flammable hydrocarbons from 

the blowdown stack and a subsequent 

vapor cloud explosion. After the staff 

presentation, the Board will allow time 

for public comment. Following the 

conclusion of the public comment 

period, the Board will consider whether 

the preliminary facts presented 

necessitate any recommendations prior 

to the final completion of the Board’s 

investigative report. 

At the meeting, CSB staff will present 

the Board with the results of their 

investigation into this incident, 

including a discussion of key findings, 

root and contributing causes, and 

proposed recommendations. The CSB 

staff presentation will focus on four key 

safety issues: safety culture, regulatory 

oversight, process safety metrics, and 

human factors. 

After the staff presentation, the Board 

will ask for public comments. Following 

the conclusion of the public comment 

period, the Board will consider whether 

to approve the final report and 

recommendations. All staff 

presentations are preliminary and are 

solely intended to allow the Board to 

consider in a public forum the issues 

and factors involved in this case. No 

factual analyses, conclusions or findings 

of the staff should be considered final. 

Only after the Board has considered the 

staff presentation and approved the staff 

report will there be an approved final 

record of this incident investigation. 

The meeting will be open to the 

public, and there is no fee or preregistration required. Please notify CSB 

if a translator or interpreter is needed, 

at least 5 business days prior to the 

public meeting. For more information, 

please contact the Chemical Safety and 

Hazard Investigation Board at (202) 

261–7600, or visit our Web site at: 

http://www.csb.gov. 

Christopher W. Warner, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 07–1010 Filed 3–1–07; 2:10 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6350–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

DOC will submit to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

clearance the following proposal for 

collection of information under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). 

Agency: U.S. Census Bureau. 

Title: Construction Progress Reporting 

Surveys. 

Form Number(s): C–700, Private 

Construction Projects; C–700 (SL), State 

and Local Governments Projects; C–700 

(R), Multi-Family Residential Projects. 

Agency Approval Number: 0607–

0153. 

Type of Request: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Burden: 50,700 hours. 

Number of Respondents: 19,500. 

Average Hours Per Response: 15 

minutes for mailed responses; 5 minutes 

for telephone responses. 

Needs and Uses: The U.S. Census 

Bureau is requesting an extension of a 

currently approved collection for forms 

C–700, Private Construction Projects; C–


erjones on PRODPC74 with NOTICES