19212 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 73 / Tuesday, April 17, 2007 / Notices 

SUMMARY: Under HUD’s regulations for 

the Public Housing Operating Fund 

Program, public housing agencies 

(PHAs) with 250 or more units are 

required to convert to asset 

management. PHAs with less than 250 

units may elect to convert but are not 

required to do so. On September 6, 

2006, HUD published a Federal Register 

notice providing interim guidance to 

assist PHAs in the conversion to asset 

management. On that same date, HUD 

posted on its Web site Public and Indian 

Housing (PIH) Notice 2006–33, Changes 

in Financial Management and Reporting 

Requirements for Public Housing 

Agencies Under the New Operating 

Fund Rule (24 CFR part 990), that 

provided interim guidance on changes 

in PHA financial management and 

reporting necessitated by the conversion 

to asset management. Both the 

September 6, 2006, Federal Register 

notice and PIH Notice 2006–33 were 

issued for public comment. This notice 

advises the public that HUD has posted 

its final guidance for both subject areas 

on the HUD Web site. The final 

guidance takes into consideration the 

public comments received on both sets 

of interim guidance, and responds to the 

significant issues raised by the public 

commenters. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Hanson, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary, Departmental Real Estate 

Assessment Center, Office of Public and 

Indian Housing, Department of Housing 

and Urban Development, 451 Seventh 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410; 

telephone 202–475–7949 (this is not a 

toll-free number). Individuals with 

speech or hearing impairments may 

access this number through TTY by 

calling the toll-free Federal Information 

Relay Service at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

HUD’s regulations for the Public 

Housing Operating Fund Program at 24 

CFR part 990 provide the formula for 

distributing operating subsidy to public 

housing agencies (PHAs) and establish 

requirements for PHAs to convert to 

asset management. Subpart H of the part 

990 regulations (§§ 990.255 to 990.290) 

establishes the requirements regarding 

asset management. Under § 990.260(a), 

PHAs that own and operate 250 or more 

dwelling rental units must operate using 

an asset management model consistent 

with the subpart H regulations. PHAs 

with fewer than 250 dwelling rental 

units may elect to transition to asset 

management, but are not required to do 

so. PHAs are required to implement 

property-based management, propertybased budgeting, and property-based 

accounting, which are all defined in the 

subpart H regulations and are essential 

components of asset management. 

On September 6, 2006 (71 FR 52710), 

HUD published a notice in the Federal 

Register providing interim guidance 

pertaining to various aspects of a PHA’s 

conversion to asset management. Also 

on September 6, 2006, HUD posted on 

its Web site Public and Indian Housing 

(PIH) Notice 2006–33, providing interim 

guidance on changes in PHA financial 

management and reporting that result 

from the conversion to asset 

management. Both the September 6, 

2006, Federal Register notice and PIH 

Notice 2006–33 were issued for public 

comment. 

II. This Notice 

This notice advises the public that 

HUD has posted its final guidance on 

the HUD Web site. The final guidance 

takes into consideration the public 

comments received on the interim 

guidance. Given the similarity in subject 

matter, the posted guidance 

incorporates the subject matter of the 

September 6, 2006, Federal Register 

notice and PIH Notice 2006–33. HUD 

has also posted a summary of the 

comments received on the two interim 

guidance documents, and HUD’s 

responses to the comments. 

The final guidance and public 

comment summary may be downloaded 

at HUD’s asset management Web page: 

www.hud.gov/offices/pih/programs/ph/ 

am/. 

Dated: March 29, 2007. 

Paula O. Blunt, 

General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public 

and Indian Housing. 

[FR Doc. E7–7218 Filed 4–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Notice of Availability of a Draft 

Environmental Assessment for the 

Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge 

Horse and Burro Management Program 

and Announcement of a Public 

Meeting 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability and 

announcement of a public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service 

(Service) announces that a draft 

environmental assessment (EA) for an 

interim Sheldon National Wildlife 

Refuge (Refuge) Horse and Burro 

Management Program (Program) is 

available for review and comment. The 

EA provides a consolidated and updated 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) evaluation of the Sheldon 

Refuge Program. The EA analyzes the 

environmental effects of various 

alternatives for managing the Refuge’s 

horses and burros until a 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

(CCP) for the Refuge is completed. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

May 17, 2007 (see addresses). A public 

meeting will be held on May 8, 2007 in 

Lakeview, Oregon (details of the 

meeting will be posted on Internet). 

ADDRESSES: Address comments on the 

draft EA by e-mail to SheldonHart@fws.gov or in writing to: Sheldon 

National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 111, 

Lakeview, OR 97630. The EA will be 

available on the Internet at http:// 

www.fws.gov/pacific/news/2006/ 

Sheldon_Horse_EA_draft.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Steblein, Project Leader, Sheldon 

National Wildlife Refuge, at e-mail 

Sheldon-Hart@fws.gov, fax (541) 947–

4414, or phone (541) 947–3315. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Sheldon Refuge encompasses 

approximately 572,900 acres of semiarid 

desert in the northwestern corner of 

Nevada, and approximately 630 acres 

across the State line, in Oregon. 

The Sheldon Refuge was established 

in the 1930’s for the conservation of 

antelope (American pronghorn), 

migratory birds, and other species of 

wildlife. By law, the Service must 

manage its refuges to achieve the 

purpose(s) of the refuge and accomplish 

the mission of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System, which focuses on the 

conservation, management, and, where 

appropriate, restoration of native fish, 

wildlife, plants, and their habitats. The 

terrain of Sheldon Refuge is 

characterized by flat, open expanses of 

sagebrush lands, narrow canyons that 

empty into rolling valleys, and broad 

rimrock tables that end abruptly in 

vertical cliffs. Surface water supplies are 

severely limited. Annual precipitation 

averages less than 13 inches in the 

western portions of the Refuge, and 

decreases to 6 inches in the easterly 

parts. With elevations averaging 

approximately 6,000 feet, the area has 

been appropriately labeled high-desert 

country. 

Alternatives 

The draft EA for Sheldon Refuge’s 

Horse and Burro Management Program 

identifies and describes four 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 73 / Tuesday, April 17, 2007 / Notices 19213 

alternatives. Program objectives for all 

of the alternatives are based on the 

Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge 

Renewable Natural Resources 

Management Plan (Management Plan) 

and associated NEPA document 

published in 1980, and include: (1) 

Maintaining a manageable feral horse 

and burro population (75 to 125 horses, 

30 to 60 burros) in balance with other 

wildlife species for the enjoyment of 

Refuge visitors; (2) stopping range 

deterioration and improving wildlife 

habitat and watershed conditions, and 

reducing impacts on existing water 

resources; (3) ensuring that the Refuge 

range provides ample forage for all 

wildlife populations endemic to the 

area; and (4) reducing the spread of feral 

horses and burros into key wildlife 

areas. Alternative B, the Status Quo 

Alternative, is the Service’s preferred 

alternative. The alternatives are briefly 

discussed below. 

Alternative A, No Agency Action on 

Horse and Burro Management. Under 

Alternative A, the Refuge would 

discontinue the ongoing program of 

horse and burro population 

management. Program objectives from 

the 1980 Management Plan would not 

be met. Program elements such as 

gathering, providing interim care for 

and adoptions of the Refuge’s horses 

and burros would no longer be 

conducted. Without any control, horse 

and burro populations on the Refuge 

could double approximately every four 

years, severely impacting Refuge lands, 

water sources, wildlife habitats and 

associated fish, wildlife and plant 

populations, and posing a safety risk 

along major public roads. 

Implementation of this alternative 

would likely prevent the Refuge from 

being managed to achieve the purposes 

for which it was established. The 

environmental effects of this alternative 

contrast with those of the three actionbased alternatives; B, C, and D. 

Alternative B, Status Quo. Under 

Alternative B, the Refuge’s current horse 

and burro management program would 

continue until a CCP has been 

completed for the Refuge. Implementing 

this alternative would include minor 

improvements to the program through 

an adaptive management process. This 

alternative would place horses and 

burros up for adoption through several 

private adoption agents. Agents are 

screened and certified based on 

adequate facilities, appropriate 

knowledge on horse care and handling, 

successful record of prior horse 

adoptions, and interviews with 

character witnesses and a veterinarian. 

The adoption agents would screen 

potential homes for the horses and 

burros, care for them in the intervening 

time, and coordinate transportation. The 

horses and burros would be shipped to 

the agents from the Refuge and then 

transported to their adopted homes. 

Refuge staff would use three methods to 

gather horses and burros: (1) Corrals set 

with bait (such as hay) to draw in 

burros; (2) horseback riders to herd 

horses into corrals; and (3) helicopters 

to herd horses into corrals. Management 

of horses and burros consumes staff 

time and funding, detracting from the 

Refuge’s ability to conduct other 

programs necessary to achieve Refuge 

purposes as well as Refuge management 

objectives associated with native 

wildlife species and wildlife dependant 

public use. However, implementation of 

Alternative B would best accomplish 

current management objectives for horse 

and burro management and would be 

the most cost effective program. 

Alternative C, Adoption of Horses and 

Burros through Individuals. Under 

Alternative C, Refuge staff would: 

screen individuals and organizations for 

suitability for potential adoption of 

gathered horses and burros; care for 

them until they are picked up by the 

adopter; coordinate brand inspections; 

secure health certificates; and facilitate 

transportation. Other aspects of the 

program would be the same as under 

Alternative B. Refuge staff would use 

three methods to gather horses and 

burros: (1) Corrals set with bait to draw 

in burros; (2) horseback riders to herd 

horses into corrals; and (3) helicopters 

to herd horses into corrals. 

Implementing this Alternative would 

require allocation of more staff time and 

resources which would detract from 

other Refuge programs, such as facility 

maintenance, working and meeting with 

the public, wildlife monitoring and 

studies, range and fire management, and 

law enforcement. 

Alternative D, Conduct Horse and 

Burro Gathering by Bait and Horseback 

Techniques Only. Under Alternative D, 

using wranglers on horseback only to 

gather horses and burros is proposed, 

rather than using both helicopters and 

horseback. In addition, burros would be 

drawn into corrals with bait. An 

adoption agent would screen and select 

the adopters to ensure good homes, and 

care for the horses and burros in the 

intervening time. This Alternative, 

using bait and horseback gathering only, 

would be less efficient and less effective 

than using both helicopters and 

horseback riders. This approach would 

delay completion of the gather and 

achievement of other Refuge 

conservation objectives. Selection of 

this alternative would allow impacts 

from horse and burro populations to 

continue for longer periods, and reduce 

funds available for other Refuge 

management and operations. 

Public Comments 

Public comments are requested on the 

draft Environmental Assessment for the 

Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge Horse 

and Burro Management Program and its 

evaluation of the environmental effects 

of the four alternatives. Comments on 

the draft EA will be analyzed and 

addressed in final documents. All 

comments received from individuals 

become part of the official public record 

available for public review. Requests for 

copies of comments will be handled in 

accordance with the Administrative 

Procedure Act, Freedom of Information 

Act, NEPA regulations, and Service and 

Department of the Interior policies and 

procedures. 

Dated: April 11, 2007. 

Don Weathers, 

Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, 

Oregon. 

[FR Doc. E7–7243 Filed 4–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[OR 038–1220–AL–24–1A; HAG07–0036] 

Call for Nominations for National 

Historic Oregon Trail Interpretive 

Center Advisory Board 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Solicitation of applications. 

SUMMARY: This notice is to request 

nominations for the National Historic 

Oregon Trail Interpretive Center 

Advisory Board. The seven member 

terms on the Board expired December 

29, 2006. The Board provides advice 

and recommendations to the Bureau of 

Land Management (BLM) on resource 

management issues associated with the 

Oregon Trail Interpretive Center. 

DATES: Submit completed nomination 

forms and nomination letters to the 

address listed below no later than May 

17, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Applications are available 

from, and candidates should send 

nominations to: Pam Robbins, OR–912, 

Bureau of Land Management, 

(pam_robbins@blm.gov), P.O. Box 2965, 

Portland, Oregon 97208, (503) 808–

6306. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam 

Robbins, (503) 808–6306. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Individuals and organizations may 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES