61524 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 222 / Tuesday, November 18, 1997 / Notices

a biologist and the area enclosed by the

fence would be systematically searched.

All desert tortoises found would be

relocated to adjacent habitat in a

manner consistent with current

handling procedures and guidelines.

Workers at the mine site would be

educated about the status of the desert

tortoise and what to do if desert

tortoises are found on access roads or

during work activities. The applicant

would ensure that trash is handled in a

way that does not lure predators of the

desert tortoise into the area.

The phasing of mining would reduce

the numbers of Mojave ground squirrels

killed at any given time. The acquisition

and management of off-site habitat

would be the primary means of

compensating for the loss of this habitat

and individual Mojave ground squirrels.

Nest tree buffers and grading season

restrictions would protect any

loggerhead shrikes nesting on site.

During reclamation of the site, trees

would be planted that provide nesting

habitat for the loggerhead shrike.

Environmental Assessment

The environmental assessment

considers the environmental

consequences of the proposed action

and no action alternatives. A no take

alternative was not feasible due to the

size of the proposed mine and the

unpredictable distribution of desert

tortoises in the project area. Under the

no action alternative, the Service would

not issue an incidental take permit to

the applicant and a habitat conservation

plan would not be implemented. The

applicant would not be able to proceed

legally with mining as planned due to

the presence of listed animal species in

the area.

Authority

This notice is provided pursuant to

section 10(c) of the ESA and Service

regulations for implementing the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (40 CFR 1506.6). The Service will

evaluate the application, its associated

documents, and comments submitted

thereon to determine whether the

application meets the requirements of

the ESA. If the Service determines that

the requirements are met, a permit will

be issued for the incidental take of the

listed species. A final decision on

permit issuance will be made no sooner

than 30 days from the date of this

notice.

Dated: November 12, 1997.

Thomas Dwyer,

Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland,

Oregon.

[FR Doc. 97–30200 Filed 11–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Geological Survey

Federal Geographic Data Committee

(FGDC); Public Review of Utilities Data

Content Standard

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: The FGDC is conducting a

public review of the Utilities Data

Content Standard. The purpose of this

public review is to provide data users

and producers with an opportunity to

comment on this standard in order to

ensure that it meets their needs.

Specifically, the FGDC request

responses in three areas: (1) Identify any

‘‘ad hoc’’ or ‘‘defacto’’ standards being

used that address data content for

utilities systems; (2) identify additional

feature classes, feature types, attributes,

and domains not contained in this

standard that are necessary to meet a

user’s requirements; (3) identify any

issues that a user may have in

implementing the information

contained in the utilities standard into

a system’s feature schema.

Participants in the public review are

encouraged to provide comments that

address specific issues/changes/

additions that may result in revisions to

the draft utilities standard. All

participants who make comments

during the public review period will

receive an acknowledgment of the

receipt of their comment. After

comments have been considered,

participants will receive notification of

how their comments were addressed.

After the formal adoption of the

standard by the FGDC, the revised

standard and a summary analysis of the

changes will be made available.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 6, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The

standard can be downloaded from the

following Internet address: http://

www.fgdc.gov/Standards/Documents/

Standards/Utility.

Requests for written copies of the

standard should be addressed to

‘‘Utilities Data Content Standard’’,

FGDC Secretariat (attn: Jennifer Fox),

U.S. Geological Survey, 590 National

Center, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive,

Reston, Virginia, 20192; or telephone

703–648–5514; facsimile 703–648–5755;

or Internet ‘‘gdc@usgs.gov.’’

Reviewer’s comments may be sent to

the FGDC via Internet mail to:

gdc.util@www.fgdc.gov. Reviewer

comments may also be sent to the FGDC

Secretariat at the above address. Please

send one hardcopy version of the

comments and a soft copy version,

preferably on a 3.5×3.5 diskette in

WordPerfect 5.0 or 6.0/6.1 format.

For answers to questions related to

the content of the standard please

contact the Federal Geographic Data

Committee (FGDC) Facilities Working

Group, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

General Engineering Branch 20

Massachusetts Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20314–1000; voice

telephone numbers: Kevin Backe (703)

428–6505, Nancy Blyler facsimile

telephone number: (703) 428–6991.

Dated: October 10, 1997.

John Fischer,

Acting Chief, National Mapping Division, U.S.

Geological Survey.

[FR Doc. 97–30167 Filed 11–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–31–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Homestead National Monument of

America, NE

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C)

of the National Environmental Policy

Act, the National Park Service,

Department of the Interior will prepare

an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) to assess the impact of alternative

management concepts in a revised

General Management Plan (GMP) for

Homestead National Monument of

America. The purpose of revising the

GMP is to set forth the basic

management philosophy for the next 10

to 15 years, and provide the strategies

for addressing issues and achieving

identified management objectives. Some

of the issues needing addressing are:

flooding threats to the park’s developed

infrastructure and operations much of

which resides or occurs in a floodplain;

the restored tallgrass prairie’s

relationship to the park’s purpose;

cultural landscape alterations

misrepresenting the historic scene and

integrity; adequacy of domestic water

and sewerage infrastructure; Highway 4

and traffic safety; Freeman School’s

interpretive relationship and safe public

access thereto; unfulfilled legislative

mandates to serve as a repository for