51678 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 1997 / Notices

TABLE 2.—INDIVIDUAL PERMITS ISSUED BY REGION 4, SEPTEMBER 1996 THROUGH AUGUST 1997—Continued

Permittee Permit No. Action 1 Issuance

date

D. Patrick Ferral .................................................................................................................................. 824729 N 17–Mar–97.

Roy S. DeLotelle ................................................................................................................................. 825431 N 20–May–97.

Roy S. DeLotelle ................................................................................................................................. 825431 A 27–Aug–97.

Jonathan Milberg ................................................................................................................................. 826913 N 27–Mar–97.

Kevin W. Markham .............................................................................................................................. 826915 N 20–Jun–97.

Kathleen McKeown ............................................................................................................................. 827365 N 21–May–97.

Kathleen McKeown ............................................................................................................................. 827365 A 27–Aug–97.

James Kaehn ...................................................................................................................................... 827371 N 21–Apr–97.

Robert J. Bruce ................................................................................................................................... 828143 N 21–Apr–97.

Gregory Crenko ................................................................................................................................... 828147 N 21–Apr–97.

Gregory Crenko ................................................................................................................................... 828147 A 23–Jun–97.

Wendell Neal ....................................................................................................................................... 828153 N 17–Jun–97.

Gordon Bailey ...................................................................................................................................... 828931 N 08–Jul–97.

Grant L. Kemmerer ............................................................................................................................. 829991 N 23–Jun–97.

Rob Carmichael ................................................................................................................................... 829992 N 23–Jun–97.

Kenneth Abramowitz ........................................................................................................................... 831195 N 02–Jul–97.

Graham T. Hall .................................................................................................................................... 831710 N 23–Jul–97.

Gregg Shalan ...................................................................................................................................... 832542 N 31–Jul–97.

Steve Hollaway .................................................................................................................................... 832544 N 31–Jul–97.

Rich Chomiczewski ............................................................................................................................. 832868 N 07–Aug–97.

Robert James Bruce ........................................................................................................................... 833250 N 18–Aug–97.

Michael Hinds ...................................................................................................................................... 833251 N 18–Aug–97.

1—A, amend existing permit.

N, issue new permit.

R, renew existing permit.

Additional information on these

permit actions may be requested by

contacting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite

200, Atlanta, Georgia 30345 (Attn: David

Dell, Permit Biologist). Telephone: 404/

679-7313; Facsimile: 404/679–7081.

Dated: September 25, 1997.

Judy L. Jones,

Acting Regional Director.

[FR Doc. 97–26126 Filed 10–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

Notice of Availability of an Application

Submitted by South Carolina

Department of Natural Resources for a

Statewide Incidental Take Permit

Associated With Implementation of a

‘‘Safe Harbor’’ Program

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The South Carolina

Department of Natural Resources

(Applicant) has applied to the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service (Service) for an

incidental take permit (ITP) pursuant to

Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).

The proposed ITP would authorize the

incidental take of a federally

endangered species, the red-cockaded

woodpecker, Picoides borealis (RCW).

The permit would authorize incidental

take only on land that is enrolled in the

proposed ‘‘safe harbor’’ program. (See

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section below.)

The Service also announces the

availability of an environmental

assessment (EA) and habitat

conservation plan (HCP) for the

incidental take application. Copies of

the EA and/or HCP may be obtained by

making a request to the Regional Office

(see ADDRESSES). Requests must be in

writing to be processed. This notice also

advises the public that the Service has

made a preliminary determination that

issuing the ITP is not a major Federal

action significantly effecting the quality

of the human environment within the

meaning of Section 102(2)(C) of the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969, as amended (NEPA). The Finding

of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is

based on information contained in the

EA and HCP. The final determination

will be made no sooner than 30 days

from the date of this notice. An excerpt

of the FONSI appears in the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of

this notice. This notice is provided

pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Act and

National Environmental Policy Act

Regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).

Although an EA has been prepared for

this permit application, the Service is

considering a Categorical Exclusion on

the action (see SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION). The Service is soliciting

public comments and review on the

applicability of a Categorical Exclusion

to this application and HCP.

The Service specifically requests

comment on the appropriateness of the

‘‘No Surprises’’ assurances should the

Service determine that an ITP will be

granted based upon the submitted HCP.

Although not explicitly stated in the

Service’s EA or HCP, the Service has,

since August 1994, announced its

intention to honor a ‘‘No Surprises’’

policy for applicants seeking ITPs.

Copies of the Service’s ‘‘No Surprises’’

policy may be obtained by making a

written request to the Regional Office

(see ADDRESSES).

DATES: Written comments on the permit

application, EA/FONSI, and HCP

should be sent to the Service’s Regional

Office (see ADDRESSES) and should be

received on or before November 3, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to review

the application, HCP, and EA may

obtain a copy by writing the Service’s

Southeast Regional Office, Atlanta,

Georgia. Documents will also be

available for public inspection by

appointment during normal business

hours at the Regional Office, 1875

Century Boulevard, Suite 200, Atlanta,

Georgia 30345 (Attn: Endangered

Species Permits), or at the following

Field Offices: Field Supervisor, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, Post Office

Box 12559, Charleston, South Carolina

29422–2559 (telephone 803/727–4707);

Red-cockaded Woodpecker Recovery

Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 1997 / Notices 51679

Service, College of Forest and

Recreational Resources, 261 Lehotsky

Hall, Box 341003, Clemson, South

Carolina 29634–1003 (telephone 864/

656–2432). Written data or comments

concerning the application, EA, or HCP

should be submitted to the Regional

Office. Comments must be submitted in

writing to be processed. Please reference

permit number PRT–834071 in such

comments, or in requests of the

documents discussed herein.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Rick G. Gooch, Regional Permit

Coordinator, (see ADDRESSES above),

telephone: 404/679–7110; or Ms. Lori

Duncan, Fish and Wildlife Biologist,

Charleston Field Office, (see ADDRESSES

above), telephone: 803/727–4707 ext.

21.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The RCW

is a territorial, nonmigratory cooperative

breeding bird species. RCWs live in

social units called groups which

generally consist of a breeding pair, the

current year’s offspring, and one or

more helpers (normally adult male

offspring of the breeding pair from

previous years). Groups maintain yearround territories near their roost and

nest trees. The RCW is unique among

the North American woodpeckers in

that it is the only woodpecker that

excavates its roost and nest cavities in

living pine trees. Each group member

has its own cavity, although there may

be multiple cavities in a single pine tree.

The aggregate of cavity trees is called a

cluster. RCWs forage almost exclusively

on pine trees and they generally prefer

pines greater than 10 inches diameter at

breast height. Foraging habitat is

contiguous with the cluster. The

number of acres required to supply

adequate foraging habitat depends on

the quantity and quality of the pine

stems available.

The RCW is endemic to the pine

forests of the Southeastern United States

and was once widely distributed across

16 States. The species evolved in a

mature fire-maintained ecosystem. The

RCW has declined primarily due to the

conversion of mature pine forests to

young pine plantations, agricultural

fields, and residential and commercial

developments, and to hardwood

encroachment in existing pine forests

due to fire suppression. The species is

still widely distributed (presently

occurs in 13 southeastern States), but

remaining populations are highly

fragmented and isolated. Presently, the

largest known populations occur on

federally owned lands such as military

installations and national forests.

In South Carolina, there are an

estimated 1,000 active RCW clusters as

of 1992; 53 percent are on Federal lands,

7 percent are on State lands, and 40

percent are on private lands.

There has not been a complete

inventory of RCWs in South Carolina so

it is difficult to precisely assess the

species’ overall status in the State.

However, the known populations on

public lands are regularly monitored

and generally considered stable. While

several new active RCW clusters have

been discovered on private lands over

the past few years, many previously

documented RCW clusters have been

lost. It is expected that the RCW

population on private lands in South

Carolina will continue to decline,

especially those from small tracts

isolated from other RCW populations.

The Service and several other

agencies/organizations are working

cooperatively to develop an overall

conservation strategy for the RCW

population and the ecosystem upon

which it depends. One component of

this strategy is the proposed HCP that

will implement the ‘‘safe harbor’’

program. The Service recognizes that

landowners presently have no legal or

economic incentive to undertake

proactive management actions, such as

hardwood midstory removal, prescribed

burning, or protecting future cavity

trees, that will benefit and help recover

the RCW. Indeed, landowners actually

have a disincentive to undertake these

actions because of land use limitations

that could result if their management

activities attract RCWs. However, some

of South Carolina’s private landowners

may be willing to take or permit actions

that would benefit the RCW on their

property if the possibility of future land

use limitations could be reduced or

eliminated.

Thus, the Service is proposing the

‘‘safe harbor’’ program, which is

designed to encourage voluntary RCW

habitat restoration or enhancement

activities by relieving a landowner who

enters into a cooperative agreement with

the Service from any additional

responsibility under the Act beyond that

which exists at the time he or she enters

into the agreement; i.e., to provide a

‘‘safe harbor.’’ The cooperative

agreement will identify any existing

RCW clusters and will describe the

actions that the landowner commits to

take (e.g., hardwood midstory removal,

cavity provisioning, etc.) or allows to be

taken to improve RCW habitat on the

property, and the time period within

which those actions are to be taken and

maintained. Participating landowners

who enter into cooperative agreements

with the Service will be included within

the scope of the ITP by Certificates of

Inclusion administered by the South

Carolina Department of Natural

Resources. A participating landowner

must maintain the baseline habitat

requirements on his/her property (i.e.,

any existing RCW groups and associated

habitat), but will be allowed to

incidentally take RCWs at some point in

the future on other habitat on the

property if RCWs are attracted to the site

by the proactive management measures

undertaken by the landowner. No

incidental taking of any existing RCW

group is permitted under this program

except under the special circumstances

that are described in the HCP. Further

details about this program are found in

the HCP.

The EA considers the environmental

consequences of three alternatives,

including the preferred alternative—to

implement the ‘‘Safe Harbor’’ program.

The likely effects of the no-action

alternative are the continued decline of

the RCW on private land and the

continued lack of management of many

of the natural pine stands that remain in

the State. The third alternative involves

offering interested landowners financial,

rather than regulatory, incentives to

undertake the desired land management

activities for RCWs. This alternative is

not being pursued because the Service

is presently unable to fund such a

program. The proposed action

alternative is the issuance of an

incidental take permit and

implementation of the ‘‘Safe Harbor’’

program.

On Thursday, January 16, 1997, the

Service published a notice in the

Federal Register announcing the Final

Revised Procedures for implementation

of NEPA (NEPA Revisions), (62 FR

2375–2382). The NEPA Revisions

update the Service’s procedures,

originally published in 1984, based on

changing trends, laws, and

consideration of public comments. Most

importantly, the NEPA Revisions reflect

new initiatives and Congressional

mandates for the Service, particularly

involving new authorities for land

acquisition activities, expansion of grant

programs and other private land

activities, and increased Endangered

Species Act permit and recovery

activities. The revisions promote

cooperating agency arrangements with

other Federal agencies; early

coordination techniques for

streamlining the NEPA process with

other Federal agencies, Tribes, the

States, and the private sector; and

integrating the NEPA process with other

environmental laws and executive

orders. Section 1.4 of the NEPA

Revisions identify actions that may

qualify for Categorical Exclusion.

Categorical exclusions are classes of
51680 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 1997 / Notices

actions which do not individually or

cumulatively have a significant effect on

the human environment. Categorical

exclusions are not the equivalent of

statutory exemptions. If exceptions to

categorical exclusions apply, under 516

DM 2, Appendix 2 of the Departmental

Manual, the departmental categorical

exclusions cannot be used. Among the

types of actions available for a

Categorical Exclusion is for a ‘‘low

effect’’ HCP/incidental take permit

application. A ‘‘low effect’’ HCP is

defined as an application that,

individually or cumulatively, has a

minor or negligible effect on the species

covered in the HCP [Section 1.4(C)(2)].

The Service may consider the

Applicant’s project and HCP such a

Categorical Exclusion. The Service is

soliciting for public comments on this

determination. Based upon public

comments, the Service may make a final

determination that this action is

categorically excluded.

The Service has made a preliminary

determination that the issuance of the

ITP is not a major Federal action

significantly effecting the quality of the

human environment within the meaning

of Section 102(2)(C) of NEPA. This

preliminary information may be revised

due to public comment received in

response to this notice and is based on

information contained in the EA and

HCP. An appropriate excerpt from the

FONSI reflecting the Service’s finding

on the application is provided below:

Based on the analysis conducted by

the Service, it has been determined that:

1. Issuance of an ITP would not have

significant effects on the human

environment in the project area.

2. The proposed take is incidental to

an otherwise lawful activity.

3. The Applicant has minimized

impacts on the project site to the extent

practicable.

4. Other than impacts to the

threatened species as outlined in the

documentation of this decision, the

indirect impacts which may result from

issuance of the ITP are addressed by

other regulations and statutes under the

jurisdiction of other government

entities. The validity of the Service’s

ITP is contingent upon the Applicant’s

compliance with the terms of the permit

and all other laws and regulations under

the control of State, local, and other

Federal governmental entities.

The Service will also evaluate

whether the issuance of a Section

10(a)(1)(B) ITP complies with Section 7

of the Act by conducting an intraService Section 7 consultation. The

results of the biological opinion, in

combination with the above findings,

will be used in the final analysis to

determine whether or not to issue the

ITP.

Dated: September 25, 1997.

Judy L. Jones,

Acting Regional Director.

[FR Doc. 97–26125 Filed 10–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

Issuance of Permit for Marine

Mammals

On July 24, 1997, a notice was

published in the Federal Register, Vol.

62, No. 142, Page 39854, that an

application had been filed with the Fish

and Wildlife Service by Maurice

Sterner, Spring Grove, PA for a permit

(PRT–832102) to import a sport-hunted

polar bear (Ursus maritimus) trophy,

taken from the Baffin Bay population,

Northwest Territories, Canada for

personal use.

Notice is hereby given that on

September 17, 1997, as authorized by

the provisions of the Marine Mammal

Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16

U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) the Fish and

Wildlife Service authorized the

requested permit subject to certain

conditions set forth therein.

Documents and other information

submitted for these applications are

available for review by any party who

submits a written request to the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of

Management Authority, 4401 North

Fairfax Drive, Rm 430, Arlington,

Virginia 22203. Phone (703) 358–2104

or Fax (703) 358–2281.

Dated: September 26, 1997.

Karen Anderson,

Acting Chief, Branch of Permits, Office of

Management Authority.

[FR Doc. 97–26098 Filed 10–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Operation and Maintenance Rate

Adjustment: Fort Belknap Irrigation

Project, Montana

ACTION: Notice of proposed irrigation

operation and maintenance (O&M) rate

adjustment.

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Indian Affairs

proposes to change the assessment rates

for operating and maintaining the Fort

Belknap Irrigation Project for 1998,

1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and subsequent

years. The following table illustrates the

impact of the rate adjustment.

FORT BELKNAP IRRIGATION PROJECT; IRRIGATION RATE PER ASSESSABLE ACRE

[N/A—Not Applicable]

Year Present

1997

Proposed

1998

Proposed

1999

Proposed

2000

Proposed

2001

Proposed

2002

Non-Indian ......................................................................... $12.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Indian ................................................................................ 6.25 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Rate (all) ........................................................................... N/A $12.50 $13.00 $13.50 $14.00 $14.50

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Area

Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Billings Area Office, 316 North 26th

Street, Billings, Montana 59101–1362,

telephone (406) 247–7998.

DATES: Interested parties may submit

comments on the proposed rate

adjustment. Comments must be

submitted on or before November 3,

1997.

ADDRESSES: All comments concerning

the proposed rate change must be in

writing and addressed to: Director,

Office of Trust Responsibilities, Attn:

Irrigation and Power, MS#4513–MIB,

Code 210, 1849 ‘‘C’’ Street, NW,

Washington, D.C. 20240, Telephone

(202) 208–5480.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

authority to issue this document is

vested in the Secretary of the Interior by

5 U.S.C. 301 and the Act of August 14,

1914 (38 Stat. 583, 25 U.S.C. 385). The

Secretary has delegated this authority to

the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs