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

41921

Vol. 62, No. 149

Monday, August 4, 1997

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

[Docket No. FV97–930–3 NC]

Notice of Request for Revision of a

Currently Approved Information

Collection

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44

U.S.C. Chapter 35], this notice

announces the Agricultural Marketing

Service’s (AMS) intention to request a

revision to a currently approved

information collection for tart cherries

grown in the States of Michigan, New

York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah,

Washington and Wisconsin, Marketing

Order No. 930.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be

received by October 3, 1997 to be

assured of consideration.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS:

Contact Kenneth G. Johnson, Marketing

Order Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Division, Agricultural

Marketing Service, U. S. Department of

Agriculture, P.O. Box 96456, room

2525–S, Washington DC 20090, Tel:

(202) 720–5053, Fax (202) 720–5698.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Tart Cherries Grown in the

States of Michigan, New York,

Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah,

Washington and Wisconsin, Marketing

Order No. 930.

OMB Number: 0581–0177.

Expiration Date of Approval: October

31, 1997.

Type of Request: Revision and

approval of the collection of information

under the marketing order for tart

cherries.

Abstract: Marketing order programs

provide an opportunity for producers of

fresh fruits, vegetables and specialty

crops, in a specified production area, to

work together to solve marketing

problems that cannot be solved

individually. Order regulations help

ensure adequate supplies of high quality

product and adequate returns to

producers. Under the Agricultural

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 (7

U.S.C. 601–674), (AMAA), as amended,

industries enter into marketing order

programs. The Secretary of Agriculture

is authorized to oversee the orders’

operations and issue regulations

recommended by a committee of

representatives from each commodity

industry.

Under the order, the Cherry Industry

Administrative Board (Board) was

established. The Board is the

organization responsible for local

administration of the marketing order.

The Order is administered by the 18-

member Board, comprised of 17

producers and handlers and one public

member, plus alternates for each. The

members will each serve for a three-year

term of office. The consecutive terms of

office for all members and alternates

will be limited to two three-year terms.

Since the Board terms will be staggered,

approximately one-third of the Board

positions will be up for reelection each

year. Nominations and elections will be

conducted in a two-part process via the

U.S. Mail on an annual basis. The

public member and alternate will be

selected by the Board every three years.

Members and alternates are appointed

by the Secretary to administer the

marketing order program locally, and

are selected from nominees submitted

by tart cherry producers and handlers in

the production area. The marketing

order, and rules and regulations issued

thereunder, authorize the Board to

require producers, handlers and

processors to submit certain

information.

The Board has developed forms as a

convenience to persons who are

required to file information with the

Board relating to tart cherry inventories,

shipments, diversions, and other

information needed to carry out the

purposes of the Act and the Order.

Since this Order regulates the canned

and frozen form of tart cherries,

reporting requirements will be in effect

all year. These forms require a

minimum of information necessary to

effectively carry out the requirements of

the Order, and their use is necessary to

fulfill the intent of the Act as expressed

in the Order.

The form being added to the currently

approved tart cherry information

collection is a producer list for

referendum form. This form will be

used by handlers to report the names,

addresses, and tonnage of tart cherries

produced by the growers whose cherries

the handler handles. This information

will be used by the Secretary to verify

that referendum ballots are distributed

to the greatest number of tart cherry

growers possible. This form will be

completed by the 45 handlers regulated

under the marketing order. The time

required to complete this form is

estimated to average 20 minutes per

response. Using this form increases the

estimated total annual burden on

handlers, by 14 hours, from 990 hours

to 1004 hours. Also, the number of total

annual responses supplied by handlers

for the entire tart cherry information

collection increases from 5,772 to 5,817.

The information collected is used

only by authorized representatives of

the Department of Agriculture (USDA),

including AMS, Fruit and Vegetable

Division regional and headquarter’s

staff, and authorized employees of the

Board. AMS is the primary user of the

information and authorized committee

employees are the secondary user.

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting

burden for this collection of information

is estimated to average 0.1726 hours per

response.

Respondents: Tart cherry producers

and for-profit businesses handling fresh

and processed tart cherries produced in

Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania,

Oregon, Utah, Washington, and

Wisconsin.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

1,268.

Estimated Number of Responses per

Respondent: 4.587.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on

Respondents: 1004 hours.

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether

the proposed collection of information

is necessary for the functioning of the

proposed tart cherry marketing order

program and USDA’s oversight of that

program; (2) the accuracy of the

collection burden estimate and the

validity of methodology and

assumptions used in estimating the

burden on respondents; (3) ways to

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
41922 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 1997 / Notices

of the information requested; and (4)

ways to minimize the burden, including

use of automated or electronic

technologies.

Comments should reference OMB No.

0581–0177 and Marketing Order No.

930, and be mailed to Docket Clerk,

Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS,

USDA, Post Office Box 96456, room

2525–S, Washington, DC 20090–6456.

Comments should reference the docket

number and page number of this issue

of the Federal Register. All comments

received will be available for public

inspection in the Office of the Docket

Clerk during regular USDA business

hours at 14th & Independence Avenue

SW., Washington, DC, room 2525–S.

All responses to this notice will be

summarized and included in the request

for OMB approval. All comments will

also become a matter of public record.

Dated: July 29, 1997.

Ronald L. Cioffi,

Acting Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 97–20460 Filed 8–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Environmental Statements;

Availability, etc.: Eldorado National

Forest, CA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Revision of notice of intent to

prepare an environmental impact

statement.

SUMMARY: On November 7, 1989, the

Forest Service filed a notice of intent in

the Federal Register to prepare an

environmental impact statement (EIS) to

analyze management of off-highway

vehicle use in the Rock Creek area,

Eldorado National Forest, Georgetown

Ranger District, El Dorado County,

California. An update was filed in the

Federal Register on March 5, 1996 to

update the expected date for release of

the draft EIS (DEIS), provide a list of

issues and alternatives considered, and

to note that the scope was expanded to

include non-motorized uses (hiking,

equestrians, and mountain bikes) in

response to public comments. Notice of

availability of the Rock Creek

Recreational Trails DEIS was filed in the

Federal Register on April 26, 1996. In

addressing comments on the DEIS, the

Forest Service has made some changes

to alternatives and is preparing a revised

draft EIS (RDEIS). Changes to the

alternatives include the addition of

some new routes, addition of vegetation

treatments to enhance deer habitat, and

a modified seasonal closure of the

critical deer winter range in the

preferred alternative. This notice is

being filed to update the notice of intent

and to notify interested parties that the

RDEIS will soon be available for

comment.

DATES: The RDEIS is expected to be filed

with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and available for public

review in September 1997. At that time

EPA will publish a notice of availability

in the Federal Register. The public

comment period on the RDEIS will be

45 days from the date of EPA’s notice of

availability in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Raymond LaBoa, District

Ranger, Georgetown Ranger District,

Eldorado National Forest, ATTN: Rock

Creek EIS, 7600 Wentworth Springs

Road, Georgetown, California 92634.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions about the EIS to Linda

Earley, Interdisciplinary Team Leader,

Georgetown Ranger District, 7600

Wentworth Springs Road, Georgetown,

California 95634; phone (916) 333–4312.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Work on

the EIS began in 1989 with a study of

impacts to the Pacific Deer Herd. Since

that time the deer study has been

completed, issues identified, alternative

management plans developed, and

extensive data collection and analysis

conducted. The draft Rock Creek

Recreational Trails EIS was released for

public comment in April 1996.

The draft EIS analyzed alternative

management plans for all types of

recreation uses on the trails: hiking,

equestrians, mountain bikes, and OHVs.

The need to look at all uses of the trails

arose from concerns that other types of

recreation use may have some of the

same impacts as OHVs; as well as

concerns about compatibility of uses.

Another concern identified in the

analysis is open road densities which

exceed limits established in the

Eldorado National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan (LRMP).

Because the EIS analyzes road and trail

densities, and because the EIS proposes

designation of both open and closed

roads for OHV use, it was decided that

proposals for road closures to meet the

LRMP management direction would be

also analyzed in this EIS.

The following issues identified during

scoping for this EIS were used to

develop and compare alternative

management plans.

1. Erosion: The bare soils on road and

trail surfaces create a potential for

erosion. The amount of erosion may be

affected by total miles of roads and

trails, soil type, trail location, design,

maintenance, grade, vegetative cover,

and use in excessively wet or dry

conditions.

2. Water Quality: Erosion of soils can

impact water quality by adding

sedimentation to streams.

Sedimentation may be affected by trail

location and design, stream crossings,

and proximity of trails to the stream.

Another potential impact to water

quality from use of trails is the risk of

oil or fuel spills at stream crossings.

3. Wildlife Species: Use of the trails

has the potential to impact wildlife

species primarily through disturbance

by human presence or noise. Road and

trail densities influence the potential

disturbance by providing increased or

decreased access into the area.

4. Air Quality: Air quality may be

affected by emissions from motorized

vehicles as well as dust from use of

roads and trails.

5. Noise: The sound of OHVs is

unacceptable to many people, and

therefore may have a negative impact on

adjacent landowners and the experience

of their Forest users. The sound of

OHVs may also contribute to

disturbance of wildlife.

6. Opportunity and Quality of the

Recreation Experience: The quality of

the recreation experience may be

affected by: the condition, variety, and

level of challenge of the trails; the

availability of staging areas and the level

of development there; other uses

allowed on the trails; and the aesthetics

of the trail experience. Opportunity for

recreation is determined by the trail

mileage available and uses allowed on

each; the number and size of recreation

events allowed; and the frequency and

duration of trail closures.

7. Health and Safety: Safety may be

affected by a variety of factors. Width of

trails may affect speeds traveled, and

therefore risk of accidents. Intersections

of roads and trails may pose increased

risks of accidents. Combination of

equestrian and mountain bike use on

trails may pose a risk since bikes come

up quietly and may startle horses. Twoway traffic poses a risk for OHVs since

they cannot hear each other coming,

which could result in a head-on

collision. Chipsealing of road surfaces

poses a risk to equestrians due to the

slippery contact between the chipseal

and the horseshoes. Trail structures

such as gabions and cinderblocks may

also pose a risk to horses. Health may

be affected by availability of drinking

water and sanitation facilities for

recreationists; or by impacts to air

quality and water quality.

8. Risk of Fire: Risk of fire is increased

by human activity such as campfires

and smoking that may be associated

with use of trails. Internal combustion