45682 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 1997 / Notices

BURDEN BREAKDOWN—Continued

Citation

30 CFR

Part 256

Reporting

requirement

Annual

Number of

responses

Burden

per

response

(hours)

Annual

burden

hours

256.56 ...................................................... Provide plan to fund lease-specific

abandonment account and related information.

3 submissions ........ 8 24

256.57 ...................................................... Provide third-party guarantee, related

notices, and annual update.

10 submissions ...... .5 5

256.58(a) ................................................. Request termination of period of liability

and cancellation of bond.

50 requests ............ .5 25

Subpart J: 256.62; 256.64; 256.67 ......... File application for assignment or transfer.2,275 applications .. 5 11,375

256.64(a)(8) ............................................. Submit non-required documents for

record purposes.

Voluntary, non-required submissions

of documents the lessee wants MMS to

file with the lease.

0

Subpart K: 256.76 ................................... File written request for relinquishment .. 505 relinquishments.5 2,525

Total Reporting ............................. ................................................................ 5,824 ...................... ............................ 17,525

Estimated Annual Reporting and

Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $420,875

for transfer application fees

(approximately 2,275 applications ×

$185 fee) and $62,500 for non-required

documents filing fees (approximately

2,500 requests × $25 fee).

Comments: The MMS will summarize

written responses to this notice and

address them in its submission for OMB

approval. All comments will become a

matter of public record. As a result of

comments we receive and our

consultations with a representative

sample of respondents, we will make

any necessary adjustments to the burden

in our submission to OMB. In

calculating the burden shown in the

chart above, MMS assumed that

respondents perform many of the

requirements and maintain records in

the normal course of their activities. The

MMS considers these to be usual and

customary and took that into account in

estimating the burden.

(1) The MMS specifically solicits

comments on the following questions:

(a) Is the proposed collection of

information necessary for MMS to

properly perform its functions, and will

it be useful?

(b) Are the estimates of the burden

hours of the proposed collection

reasonable?

(c) Do you have any suggestions that

would enhance the quality, clarity, or

usefulness of the information to be

collected?

(d) Is there a way to minimize the

information collection burden on

respondents, including through the use

of appropriate automated electronic,

mechanical, or other forms of

information technology?

(2) In addition, the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 requires agencies

to estimate the total annual cost burden

to respondents or recordkeepers

resulting from the collection of

information. We need to know if you

have any other cost burdens in addition

to the filing fees required in 30 CFR part

256. Your response should split the cost

estimate into two components:

(a) total capital and startup cost

component, and

(b) annual operation, maintenance,

and purchase of services component.

Your estimates should consider the

costs to generate, maintain, and disclose

or provide the information. 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,

sampling, drilling, and testing

equipment; and record storage facilities.

Generally, your estimates should not

include 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.

MMS Information Collection

Clearance Officer: Jo Ann Lauterbach,

(202) 208–7744.

Dated: August 19, 1997.

E.P. Danenberger,

Chief, Engineering and Operations Division.

[FR Doc. 97–22874 Filed 8–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service

Notice and Agenda for Meeting of the

Royalty Policy Committee of the

Minerals Management Advisory Board

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Secretary of the

Department of the Interior (Department)

has established a Royalty Policy

Committee, on the Minerals

Management Advisory Board, to provide

advice on the Department’s management

of Federal and Indian minerals leases,

revenues, and other minerals related

policies.

Committee membership includes

representatives from States, Indian

Tribes and allottee organizations,

minerals industry associations, the

general public, and Federal

Departments.

At this fifth meeting, the Minerals

Management Service (MMS) will be

prepared to respond to questions

concerning plans to implement

previously approved reports.

The Committee will consider progress

reports and recommendations by the

Net Receipts Sharing and Coal

subcommittees. Additionally, the

Committee will hear status reports from

some of the current efforts being

undertaken by the Royalty Management

Program.

DATES: The meeting will be held on

Thursday, September 25, 1997, 8:30

a.m.–4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at

the Embassy Suites, Denver Southeast,

7525 East Hampden Avenue, Denver,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 1997 / Notices 45683

Colorado 80231, telephone number

(303) 696–6644.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Michael A. Miller, Chief, Program

Services Office, Royalty Management

Program, Minerals Management Service,

P.O. Box 25165, MS 3060, Denver, CO

80225–0165, telephone number (303)

231–3413, fax number (303) 231–3362.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

location and dates of future meetings

will be published in the Federal

Register.

The meetings will be open to the

public without advanced registration.

Public attendance may be limited to the

space available.

Members of the public may make

statements during the meeting, to the

extent time permits, and file written

statements with the Committee for its

consideration.

Written statements should be

submitted to Mr. Michael A. Miller, at

the address listed above. Minutes of

Committee meetings will be available 10

days following each meeting for public

inspection and copying at the Royalty

Management Program, Building No. 85,

Denver Federal Center, Denver,

Colorado.

These meetings are being held by the

authority of the Federal Advisory

Committee Act, Pub. L. No. 92–463, 5

U.S.C. Appendix 1, and Office of

Management and Budget Circular No.

A–63, revised.

Dated: August 22, 1997.

Donald T. Sant,

Acting Associate Director for Royalty

Management.

[FR Doc. 97–22897 Filed 8–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation

Programmatic Environmental Impact

Statement/Environmental Impact

Report on the CALFED Bay-Delta

Program, San Francisco Bay/

Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta,

California

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation,

Interior.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of intent to

prepare an environmental impact

statement/environmental impact report.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c)

of the National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA), the Bureau of Reclamation

(Reclamation) is issuing this

supplemental notice of intent (NOI).

The original NOI titled, ‘‘Programmatic

Environmental Impact Statement/

Environmental Impact Report on the

CALFED Bay-Delta Program, San

Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin

River Delta, California’’ was published

in the Federal Register at 61 FR 10379,

Mar. 13, 1996. The NOI summarized the

CALFED Program, the Programmatic

Environmental Impact Statement/

Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR),

and provided a list of scoping meeting

dates and locations.

This notice supplements the original

NOI to expand the scope of the

Programmatic EIS/EIR to include the

preparation of a Habitat Conservation

Plan (HCP) as defined under Section 10

of the Federal Endangered Species Act

(FESA) and satisfying the requirements

of the California Endangered Species

Act (CESA). The CALFED agencies

intend to prepare an HCP and the State

agencies intend to apply for an

incidental take permit, pursuant to

FESA and CESA. Both FESA and CESA

require permits for any activity which

could result in ‘‘take’’ of threatened and

endangered species. The HCP planning

process is intended to ensure that the

effects of the incidental take are

avoided, minimized, or mitigated to the

extent practicable. In addition, the

Federal agencies will consult with the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the

National Marine Fisheries Service

(Services) pursuant to Section 7 of

FESA. This consultation will be

coordinated with the HCP planning

process. NEPA requires that Federal

agencies assess the environmental

impacts of agency actions. A joint

programmatic EIS/EIR will be prepared

pursuant to NEPA and the California

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to

evaluate potential impacts associated

with the actions contained within an

HCP and subsequent issuance of an

incidental take permit.

Upon receipt of an application or

request for an incidental take permit,

the Services must evaluate whether to

issue an incidental take permit for the

Bay-Delta Program under section

10(a)(1)(B) of the FESA and the

California Department of Fish and Game

(DFG) must evaluate whether to

authorize take under CESA or the

Natural Community Conservation

Program Act (NCCPA). The

Programmatic EIS/EIR will include an

analysis of the HCP and Program

alternatives as part of the Bay-Delta

Program and the action of the Services’

issuance of an incidental take permit

and DFG’s approval of a management

authorization. If an HCP is approved

and an incidental take permit issued,

non-Federal members of CALFED would

receive assurances, pursuant to the

Department of the Interior’s No

Surprises Policy. The purpose of this

HCP is to provide comprehensive, longterm conservation of threatened and

endangered species such that the plan

participants can be assured that in the

event of unforeseen circumstances, no

additional land, funds, or restrictions on

covered program actions will be

required.

DATES: Written public comments on the

options for structuring an HCP and the

potential of granting assurances by way

of the HCP process should be sent to

CALFED by October 20, 1997.

Three CALFED status/HCP and NEPA

scoping meetings are scheduled to

solicit public input. Specific times and

locations of these meetings will be sent

to individuals, agencies, and

organizations on the CALFED mailing

list and will be published in local

newspapers prior to the meeting dates.

• September 16, 1997, Redding,

California.

• September 23, 1997, Sacramento,

California.

• October 2, 1997, Los Angeles,

California.

In addition, the CALFED Bay-Delta

Program will hold public meetings or

workshops to discuss the development

of the HCP and the Programmatic EIS/

EIR. These meetings will occur in

advance of the Program’s issuing a draft

Programmatic EIS/EIR for the CALFED

Bay-Delta Program.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the

proposal to prepare an HCP for the

CALFED Bay-Delta Program should be

sent to Ms. Sharon Gross, CALFED BayDelta Program, 1416 Ninth Street, Suite

1155, Sacramento, California 95814.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Sharon Gross at the above address or

call at the CALFED Bay-Delta Program

Office at (916) 657–2666.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

The Federal Ecosystem Directorate

(FED) and the Governor’s Water Policy

Council of the State of California

(Council), are jointly known as

CALFED. The CALFED Bay-Delta

Program is a joint effort among State and

Federal agencies with management and

regulatory responsibilities in the

Sacramento-San Joaquin River Bay-Delta

system of California. The Federal colead agencies include the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Bureau of

Reclamation, National Marine Fisheries

Service, and the National Resources

Conservation Service. The U.S. Forest

Service, Western Area Power

Administration, Bureau of Land