Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 1997 / Notices 9443

until the MTW Agreement is executed.

HUD invites HAs to state and justify, in

their proposed MTW schedules, the

minimum period of time which they

believe is necessary to implement their

MTW plans;

(c) The December 18, 1996 notice

recognized that HA plans might not be

finalized by the application deadline,

and requested that HAs identify any

outstanding issues and the process and

schedule for resolving those issues. In

other words, HUD does not expect all

MTW plans to be ready for

implementation at the time HAs are

selected for MTW. Rather, at this stage

of the demonstration, HUD expects an

HA’s MTW plan to be conceptually and

analytically sound in that it identifies

local needs and explains how the HA

believes its assets and resources can be

deployed to most effectively and

efficiently address those needs. In

scoring applications under evaluation

criterion 3, ‘‘Quality and Feasibility of

MTW Plan’’, HUD will reward plans

that demonstrate an HA’s capacity to

operate in a deregulated program

environment, where the HA has broad

discretion to use Federal funds flexibly

and creatively based on its

understanding of local conditions. The

level of detail provided in an HA’s plan

will help HUD to assess the HA’s

capacity in that regard. At the same

time, HUD encourages HA’s to be

creative and to make full use of the

broad local discretion that this

demonstration permits. Accordingly,

HAs should provide as much detail as

they can at this point. HUD seeks a wide

variety of approaches in making

selections for MTW, and does not

expect plans that are highly innovative

(in that they depart significantly from

current program rules) to have as much

detail as plans that are less innovative.

However, as the December 18, 1996

notice provided, where a plan lacks

detail, HUD does expect an HA to

describe the process and schedule by

which the HA will resolve the

outstanding issues.

(3) Extension of Submission Deadline

For several reasons, HUD has found

that it is in the best interests of the

demonstration to allow HAs additional

time to prepare their applications.

Because the notice appeared in the

Federal Register during the winter

holiday season, some HAs were not

aware that it had been published until

several weeks after the application

period had already begun to run.

Further, HUD has concluded that

additional time would be helpful so that

HAs can give proper notice of and hold

the required public hearing, and to

otherwise conduct a thorough and

constructive planning process in their

communities. Most importantly, HUD

recognizes that the degree of

programmatic innovation which MTW

allows, and which HUD hopes to

encourage through this demonstration

program, may require a level of

deliberation and analysis that the

original 90-day application period does

not permit. Extending the deadline will

give HAs more time to conduct this

process, resulting in higher-quality

applications and a more valuable

demonstration program.

Dated: February 25, 1997.

Kevin Emanuel Marchman,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Public and

Indian Housing.

[FR Doc. 97–5298 Filed 2–27–97; 2:41 pm]

BILLING CODE 4210–33–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

Preparation of a Habitat Conservation

Plan and Environmental Impact

Statement on a Permit To Incidentally

Take Threatened and Endangered

Species in Association With the Clark

County Multiple Species Conservation

Plan in Clark County, NV

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of intent and public

scoping meeting.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service) has been notified by

Clark County (County), Nevada, that the

County, and certain cities within the

County, intend to prepare a Clark

County Multiple Species Conservation

Plan (Multi-Species Conservation Plan)

to conserve species and their habitats

throughout the County. The MultiSpecies Conservation Plan would be

prepared pursuant to the Endangered

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).

The proposed Multi-Species

Conservation Plan would identify those

actions necessary to maintain the

viability of natural habitats in the

County for approximately 225 species

residing in those habitats, including five

species listed as endangered (Peregrine

Falcon, Falco peregrinus; Southwestern

Willow Flycatcher, Empidonax trailli

extimus; Moapa Dace, Moapa coriacea;

Woundfin, Plagopterus argentissimus;

Virgin River Chub, Gila seminuda ssp.).

The Multi-Species Conservation Plan

would treat all of the approximately 75

proposed covered species as listed and

all covered species would be subject to

the standards set forth in section

10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, and 50 CFR 17.22

and 17.32. In addressing the habitat

needs of the covered species the MultiSpecies Conservation Plan would

benefit other species utilizing the same

habitats. In addition, the Multi-Species

Conservation Plan would establish a

process to assure the maintenance of the

viability of natural habitats for

approximately 150 other species and to

eventually extend coverage to those

species. It would function as a multiple

species conservation plan that could

establish the basis for maintaining the

viability of the remaining natural

ecosystems throughout the County.

If the Multi-Species Conservation

Plan is approved by the Service, the

Service would authorize incidental take

of the listed species covered by the plan

through the issuance of a section

10(a)(1)(B) permit. The Multi-Species

Conservation Plan, coupled with an

Implementation Agreement which

includes prelisting provisions, would

form the basis for an incidental take

permit for additional species if these

species become listed.

DATES: A public scoping meeting will be

held from 7 to 9 p.m. on March 11,

1997, in the Cafeteria at the Clark

County Government Center, 500 S.

Grand Central Parkway, 6th Floor, Las

Vegas, Nevada 89155–8270, to identify

potential issues and alternatives for the

Clark County Multiple Species

Conservation Plan and Environmental

Impact Statement.

Interested persons are encouraged to

attend the public meeting to identify

and discuss issues and alternatives that

should be addressed in the

Environmental Impact Statement. The

proposed agenda for the public scoping

meeting includes a summary of the

proposed action, status of and threats to

subject species, tentative issues,

concerns, opportunities, and

alternatives. Identified issues of concern

include effects of plan implementation

on the fish and wildlife resources of

Clark County, land use and activities on

public and private lands, growth, and

social and economic health of the

County.

Persons attending the Scoping

Meeting will have an opportunity to

present their comments and suggestions

regarding the scope of issues to be

addressed in the Environmental Impact

Statement. Submittal of independent

written comments is encouraged.

Written comments related to the

scope and content of the Multi-Species

Conservation Plan and Environmental

Impact Statement should be received by

the Service at the address below by

April 2, 1997.
9444 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 1997 / Notices

ADDRESSES: Information, comments, or

questions related to the preparation of

the Multi-Species Conservation Plan

and Environmental Impact Statement

should be submitted to U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, State Supervisor, 4600

Kietzke Lane, Suite 125C, Reno Nevada

89502–5055.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Persons wishing to review background

material may obtain it by contacting the

Clark County Desert Conservation Plan

Administrator, Clark County

Government Center, 500 S. Grand

Central Parkway, 6th Floor, P.O. Box

558270, Las Vegas, Nevada 89155–8270.

Documents also will be available for

public inspection by appointment

during normal business hours (8 a.m. to

5 p.m. Monday–Friday) at the above

address or by telephone (702–455–

3536).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July

11, 1995, the Service issued a 10(a)(1)(B)

incidental take permit effective August

1, 1995, to Clark County, the Cities of

Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Boulder

City, Henderson, Mesquite, and the

Nevada Department of Transportation

for the Clark County Desert

Conservation Plan (Desert Conservation

Plan), a habitat conservation plan for the

Mojave Desert Tortoise, a species listed

as threatened by the Service in 1990.

The Desert Conservation Plan provides

for conservation measures for the desert

tortoise in the County and for incidental

take consistent with the long-term

viability of the species in this portion of

its range.

The Desert Conservation Plan

includes provisions for a proactive

approach to conservation planning for

multiple species in the County. The

specified intent of this approach was to

reduce the likelihood of future listing of

plants and wildlife as threatened or

endangered. While the proposed MultiSpecies Conservation Plan is the direct

outgrowth of provisions of the Desert

Conservation Plan, it will not replace or

modify the approved Desert

Conservation Plan. The Multi-Species

Conservation Plan will provide standalone conservation measures for species

included in the plan. Implementation of

the conservation measures in the MultiSpecies Conservation Plan is anticipated

to be a cooperative effort among the

County, the Cities of Las Vegas, North

Las Vegas, Boulder City, Henderson,

and Mesquite, the Service, the Bureau of

Land Management, U.S. Forest Service,

National Park Service, Nevada Division

of Wildlife, and other Federal and State

land managers and regulators.

Environmental review of the MultiSpecies Conservation Plan will be

conducted in accordance with the

requirements of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as

amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.),

National Environmental Policy Act

regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508),

other appropriate regulations, and

Service procedures for compliance with

those regulations. This notice is being

furnished in accordance with section

1501.7 of the National Environmental

Policy Act to obtain suggestions and

information from other agencies and the

public on the scope of issues to be

addressed in the Environmental Impact

Statement.

Dated: February 24, 1997.

Thomas J. Dwyer,

Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland,

Oregon

[FR Doc. 97–5135 Filed 2–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Tribal Consultation on Indian

Education Topics

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of tribal consultation

meetings.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) will

conduct consultation meetings to obtain

oral and written comments concerning

potential issues in Indian Education

Programs. The potential issues which

will be set forth in a tribal consultation

booklet to be issued prior to the

meetings are as follows:

1. Facilities Operation and

Maintenance—Tribal Priority

Allocation

2. Facilities Operation and Maintenance

Formula Modifications

3. Office of Indian Education Programs

Draft Strategic Plan

4. Other Consultation Items

5. Displacement Costs for Schools

Converting to Grant Status

6. Indian School Equalization Program:

Ongoing Study

7. Office of Indian Education Programs:

Draft School Technology Plan

8. Revisions to IASA/Goals 2000

Consolidated State Plan

9. Executive Order 13021 of October 19,

1996—Tribal Colleges and

Universities

DATES: April 10, 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23,

24, 25, 1997 for all locations listed.

Several dates and locations were

scheduled to coincide with meetings of

various Indian education organizations.

All meetings will begin at 9:00 a.m. and

continue until 3:00 p.m. (local time) or

until all meeting participants have an

opportunity to make comments.

MEETING SCHEDULE

Date Location Local contact Phone numbers

Apr. 10, 1997 ............................................................................. New Orleans, LA ......................... LaVonna, Weller .......... (703) 235–3233

Apr. 15, 1997 ............................................................................. Phoenix, AZ ................................ Angelita Felix ............... (520) 562–3557

Apr. 16, 1997 ............................................................................. Albuquerque, NM ........................ Ben Atencio ................. (505) 766–3034

Apr. 17, 1997 ............................................................................. Anchorage, AK ............................ Robert Pringle .............. (907) 271–4115

Apr. 18, 1997 ............................................................................. Billings, MT .................................. Larry Parker ................. (406) 247–7953

Apr. 22, 1997 ............................................................................. Oklahoma City, OK ..................... Joy Martin .................... (405) 945–6051

Apr. 23, 1997 ............................................................................. Gallup, NM .................................. Andrew Tah ................. (520) 283–2221

Apr. 23, 1997 ............................................................................. Portland, OR ............................... John Reimer ................ (503) 872–2745

Apr. 24, 1997 ............................................................................. Cloquet, MN ................................ Terry Portra .................. (612) 373–1090

Apr. 24, 1997 ............................................................................. Rapid City, SD ............................ Cherie Farlee ............... (605) 964–8722

Apr. 25, 1997 ............................................................................. Sacramento, CA .......................... Fayetta Babby .............. (916) 979–2560

Written comments should be mailed,

to be received, on or before June 2, 1997,

to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of

Indian Education Programs, MS–3512–

MIB, OIE–32, 1849 C. Street, NW,

Washington, D.C. 20240, Attn: Joann

Sebastian Morris: or, may be hand

delivered to Room 3512 at the same

address. Comments may also be

telefaxed to (202) 273–0030.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

James Martin or Goodwin K. Cobb III at