6622 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Notices

traditional attachment that the place

held for many tribes, it was not

surprising that many groups should be

considered culturally affiliated.

On hearing all of the evidence

presented, the Review Committee finds

that the complaints made by the Hopi

Tribe have merit. While the Review

Committee recognizes the efforts made

in the area of tribal consultation, tribes

were not given adequate opportunity to

consult on a one-to-one basis and to

make their concerns known outside of a

public forum. The Review Committee

also agrees with the Hopi Tribe that

more is needed in the evaluating and

weighing of the evidence for

establishing cultural affiliation. Rather

than a rigorous determination of

cultural affiliation, the park seems to

have applied a much looser criterion of

cultural relationship to geographical

place, as a basis for determining

culturally affiliated tribes. The park’s

global approach to the assessment

Chaco archeological sites, effectively

precluded any realistic assessment of

cultural affiliation based on specific site

features, dates, or cultural practices.

Likewise, sites with virtually no

contextual information were treated as

culturally affiliated. The global

approach to site assessment and

affiliation resulted in a determination of

cultural affiliation for all Chaco Canyon

remains with all groups expressing

cultural relationship to the region.

It is the recommendation of the

Review Committee that the Chaco

Culture National Historical Park

withdraw its published Notice if

Inventory Completion and reassess its

determination of cultural affiliation. The

Review Committee recommends that

this reassessment specifically consider

the following issues:

1. Determination of cultural affiliation

should be made on a site-by-site basis,

assessing each site based on the specific

data available;

2. While collective consultation can

be useful, it should not be used in lieu

of individual tribal consultation when

requested by an Indian tribe;

3. A proper determination of cultural

affiliation necessarily requires the

critical evaluation and careful weighing

of all available evidence. This weighing

should emphasize group identity, time

period, specific cultural practices, and

traceable cultural continuity;

4. The park should take steps to

ensure the objective character of the

determinations of cultural affiliation of

the human remains and other cultural

items in the control of the park. The

process the park follows in making

cultural affiliation determinations also

must be seen by others to have been

objective. For example, the Review

Committee believes that the park should

engage a qualified independent

contractor to re-evaluate the information

from the Chaco sites and offer specific

recommendation for cultural affiliation.

Review Committee member James

Bradley did not participate in the

Review Committee’s deliberations nor

in the formulation of these advisory

findings and recommendations.

These advisory findings and

recommendations do not necessarily

represent the views of the National Park

Service or the Secretary of the Interior.

The National Park Service and the

Secretary of the Interior have not taken

a position on these matters.

Dated: January 10, 2000.

Martin Sullivan,

Chair, Native American Graves Protection

and Repatriation Review Committee.

[FR Doc. 00–3053 Filed 2–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–F

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Notice of Inventory Completion for

Native American Human Remains

From Rockbridge County, VA in the

Possession of the Virginia Department

of Historic Resources, Richmond, VA

AGENCY: National Park Service.

ACTION: Notice.

Notice is hereby given in accordance

with provisions of the Native American

Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

(NAGPRA), 43 CFR 10.9, of the

completion of an inventory of human

remains from Rockbridge County, VA in

the possession of the Virginia

Department of Historic Resources,

Richmond, VA.

A detailed assessment of the human

remains was made by Virginia

Department of Historic Resources

professional staff in consultation with

representatives of the Chickahominy,

the Eastern Chickahominy, the

Mattaponi, the Monacan Indian Nation,

the Nansemond, the Pamunkey, the

United Rappahannock, the Upper

Mattaponi, all non-Federally recognized

Indian groups which are formally

recognized by the Commonwealth of

Virginia.

In 1901, human remains representing

a minimum of 105 individuals were

excavated from the Hayes Creek Mound,

Rockbridge County, VA by Edward P.

Valentine, an amateur archeologist with

the Valentine Museum, Richmond, VA.

In 1989, these human remains were

donated to the Virginia Department of

Historic Resources by the Valentine

Museum. No known individuals were

identified. No associated funerary

objects are present.

Based on material culture and

archeological evidence, the Hayes Creek

Mound site has been identified as a Late

Woodland (c. 900–1600 A.D.)

occupation. Based on the material

culture and condition of the human

remains, these individuals have been

identified as Native American.

Archeological and ethnohistoric

research indicates the Monacan and

Mannahoac were loosely confederated

with each other and linked to the earlier

mound-building peoples in the Virginia

piedmont and eastern mountain regions

generally known as the Lewis Creek

Mound Culture. Consultation evidence

presented by the present-day Monacan

indicates a direct lineal connection with

the Monacan and related tribes

occupying Rockbridge County in the

early 17th century. Based on

continuities of mound construction and

site arrangement, there appears to be a

shared ideology and cultural continuity

which underlayed and defined not only

the Monacan east of the Blue Ridge, but

also includes related groups on the

immediate west side of the Blue Ridge.

On October 29, 1999, the Virginia

Department of Historic Resources

requested a finding from the NAGPRA

Review Committee concerning the

Monacan Indian Nation’s request for

repatriation for these 105 individuals

listed as ‘‘culturally unidentifiable’’ on

the Department’s NAGPRA inventory.

At its November 18–20, 1999 meeting,

the NAGPRA Review Committee

recommended that the Department

proceed with repatriation of these

Native American human remains to the

Monacan Indian Nation following

publication of this Notice of Inventory

Completion in the Federal Register.

Based on the above mentioned

information, officials of the Virginia

Department of Historic Resources have

determined that, pursuant to 43 CFR

10.2 (d)(1), the human remains listed

above represent the physical remains of

a minimum of 105 individuals of Native

American ancestry. Officials of the

Virginia Department of Historic

Resources have determined that,

pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), no

relationship of shared group identity

can be reasonably traced between these

Native American human remains and a

Federally recognized Indian tribe.

However, officials of the Virginia

Department of Historic Resources have

determined that a relationship of shared

group identity can be reasonably traced

between these Native American human

remains and the Monacan Indian

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Notices 6623

Nation, a non-Federally recognized

Indian group.

This notice has been sent to officials

of the Chickahominy, the Eastern

Chickahominy, the Mattaponi, the

Monacan Indian Nation, the

Nansemond, the Pamunkey, the United

Rappahannock, the Upper Mattaponi.

Representatives of any other Federally

recognized Indian tribe or other valid

claimant under NAGPRA that believes

itself to be culturally affiliated with

these human remains should contact M.

Catherine Slusser, State Archaeologist,

Department of Historic Resources, 2801

Kensington Ave., Richmond, VA 23221;

telephone: (804) 367-2323, before March

13, 2000. Repatriation of the human

remains to the Monacan Indian Nation

may begin after that date if no Federally

recognized Indian tribes or other valid

claimant under NAGPRA makes a claim.

The National Park Service is not

responsible for the determinations

within this notice.

Dated: January 19, 2000.

Francis P. McManamon,

Departmental Consulting Archeologist,

Manager, Archeology and Ethnography

Program.

[FR Doc. 00–3054 Filed 2–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–F

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation

Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent

License

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice is issued in

accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and

37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(I). The Bureau of

Reclamation (Reclamation) is

contemplating the granting of an

exclusive license in the United States to

practice the invention embodied in U.S.

Patent No. 5,544,973 titled ‘‘Concrete

Step Embankment Protection’’. The

exclusive license is to be granted to Lee

Masonary Products, L.L.C., DBA

Armortec, having a place of business in

Bowling Green, Kentucky. The patent

rights in this invention has been

assigned to the United States of

America.

The prospective exclusive license will

be royalty-bearing and will comply with

the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C.

209 and 37 CFR 404.7. While the

primary purpose of this notice is to

announce Reclamation’s intent to grant

an exclusive license to practice the

invention listed above, it also serves to

publish the availability of this invention

for licensing in accordance with law.

The prospective license may be granted

unless Reclamation receives written

evidence and argument which establish

that the grant of the license would not

be consistent with the requirements of

35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7

DATES: Written evidence and arguments

against granting the prospective license

must be received by May 10, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Inquiries, comments, and

other materials relating to the

contemplated license may be submitted

to Donald E. Ralston, Bureau of

Reclamation, Research and Technology

Transfer, MS–7620, 1849 C Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20240.

A copy of the above-identified patent

may be purchased from the NTIS Sales

Desk by telephoning 1–800–553–NTIS

or by writing NTIS at 5285 Port Royal

Road, Springfield, VA 22161.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald Ralston by telephone at (202)

208–5671.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

present invention relates to a dam

spillway system for embankment dam

overtopping protection comprising a

layer of freedraining, angular, gravel

filter material, a plurality of rows of

overlapping, tapered, concrete blocks

assembled over the filter material in

shingle-fashion, from the toe of the dam,

up the slope to the top of the dam, and

a plurality of fixed concrete toe blocks

located at the toe of the dam, usually

beneath the tailwater, and supporting

each of the rows of concrete blocks. The

invention has particular application to

providing erosion protection for

embankment dams that may be subject

to overtopping flows.

Properly filed competing applications

received by Reclamation in response to

this notice will be considered as

objections to the grant of the

contemplated license.

Dated: January 12, 2000.

Stanley L. Ponce,

Director, Research and Technology Transfer.

[FR Doc. 00–3110 Filed 2–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–94–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

Notice of Proposed Information

Collection

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement.

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement (OSM) is announcing

that the information collection request

for 30 CFR 783, Underground Mining

Permit Applications—Minimum

Requirements for Information on

Environmental Resources has been

forwarded to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for review and

comment. The information collection

request describes the nature of the

information collection and the expected

burden and cost.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before March 13, 2000, to be assured

of consideration.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To

request a copy of the information

collection request, explanatory

information and related form, contact

John A. Trelease at (202) 208–2783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office

of Management and Budget (OMB)

regulations at 5 CFR 1320, which

implement provisions of the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13),

require that interested members of the

public and affected agencies have an

opportunity to comment on information

collection and recordkeeping activities

(see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). OSM has

submitted a request to OMB to renew its

approval of the collection of information

found at 30 CFR 783, Underground

Mining Permit Applications—Minimum

Requirements for Information on

Environmental Resources. OSM is

requesting a 3-year term of approval for

this information collection activity.

An agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control

number for this collection of

information is listed in 30 CFR Part 783,

which is 1029–0038.

As required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), a

Federal Register notice soliciting

comments on these collections of

information was published on

November 30, 1999 (64 FR 66932). No

comments were received. This notice

provides the public with an additional

30 days in which to comment.

The following information is provided

for the information collection: (1) title of

the information collection; (2) OMB

control number; (3) summary of the

information collection activity; and (4)

frequency of collection, description of

the respondents, estimated total annual

responses, and the total annual

reporting and recordkeeping burden for

the collection of information. Where

appropriate, OSM has revised burden