3344 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 14 /Thursday, January 22, 1998 / Notices

Forest Service. During the past

clearance cycle the BLM conducted 17

customer surveys and the Forest Service

conducted 9 surveys by telephone and

mail. (Examples of previously

conducted customer surveys are

available upon request.) Our planned

activities in the next three fiscal years

reflect our increased emphasis on and

expansion of these activities.

III. Methodology

The BLM and Forest Service survey

customers in the following general

categories: (1) Use requiring

authorization; (2) state and private

forestry; (3) timber sales; (4) wild horse

and burro; (5) research; (6) law

enforcement; (7) fire and aviation; (8)

wildlife and fisheries; (9) recreation;

(10) information [general, land, title,

and technology-based]; (11) pilot

programs; (12) stakeholders and

partners; and (13) state and local

governments.

A stratified sampling technique is

employed for categories 1 through 8;

categories 9 and 10 use intercept

surveys; and a general sampling

technique is employed for categories 11

through 13. The randomized sample

pulled from the databases will include

an estimated 1200 persons unless the

population is less than 1200, at which

point the entire user population will be

surveyed. An 80% response rate goal

has been set; for this reason, whenever

possible telephone surveys are chosen

over mail surveys.

Parallel to this effort, comment cards

will be solicited from all of the above

groups on an intercept basis—

accompanying transaction performed

with the agencies.

The questionnaires are developed

with the help of focus groups from

around the country. We ask questions in

the following general areas: (1) Program

specific (i.e., processing permits,

recordation of mining claims, facilities

and access to public land for recreation);

(2) service delivery; (3) management

practices; (4) resource protection; (5)

rules, regulations, and policies; (6)

communication with the public; (7)

overall satisfaction; and (8) general

demographics.

IV. Requests for Comments

Prospective respondents and other

interested parties should comment on

the actions discussed in items II & III.

The following guidelines are provided

to assist you in responding.

General Issues

A. Is the proposed collection of

information necessary, taking into

account its accuracy, adequacy, and

reliability, and the agency’s ability to

process the information it collects in a

useful and timely fashion?

B. What enhancements can the BLM

and Forest Service make to the quality,

utility, and clarity of the information to

be collected?

As a Potential Respondent

A. The average public reporting

burden for a customer survey is

estimated to be .25 hours per response

(13,000 respondents per year ×15

minutes per response =3250 hours

annually). For comment cards, the

average public reporting burden is

estimated to be 3 minutes per response

(30,000 respondents per year × 3

minutes per response =1500 hours

annually). Burden includes the total

time, effort, or financial resources

expended to generate, maintain, retain,

or disclose or provide the information

including: (1) Reviewing instructions;

(2) developing, acquiring, installing, and

utilizing technology and systems for

purposes of collecting, validating,

verifying, processing, maintaining,

disclosing, and providing information;

(3) adjusting the existing ways to

comply with any previously applicable

instructions and requirements; (4)

training personnel to respond to a

collection of information; (5) searching

data sources; (6) completing and

reviewing the collection of information;

and (7) transmitting or otherwise

disclosing the information.

Please comment on (1) the accuracy of

our estimate and (2) how the agencies

could minimize the burden of the

collection information, including the

use of automated collection techniques.

B. The BLM and Forest Service

estimate that respondents will incur no

additional costs for reporting other than

the time required to complete the

collection. What is the estimated (1)

total dollar amount annualized for

capital and start-up costs and (2)

recurring annual dollar amount of

operation and maintenance and

purchase of services costs associated

with this data collection? The estimates

should take into account the costs

associated with generating, maintaining,

and disclosing or providing information.

C. Do you know of any other Federal,

State, or local agency that collects

similar data? If you do, specify the

agency, collection element (s), and the

methods of collection.

As a Potential User

Are there any alternative sources of

data and do you use them? If so, what

are their deficiencies and/or strengths?

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and/or

included in the request for OMB

approval of the survey. They also will

become a matter of public record.

Dated: January 15, 1998.

Carole Smith,

Bureau of Land Management, Information

Collection Officer.

Dated: January 8, 1998.

William Delaney,

U.S. Forest Service, Management

Improvement.

[FR Doc. 98–1458 Filed 1–21–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–84–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[NV–010–1990–09]

Notice of Intent; Nevada

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a

supplemental Environmental Impact

Statement for the Barrick Goldstrike

Mines Inc. Betze Project in the Elko and

Eureka Counties, Nevada.

SUMMARY: On August 31, 1994 pursuant

to Section 102(2)(c) of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as

amended, the Bureau of Land

Management, Elko Field Office

published a Notice of Intent to prepare

a supplemental environmental impact

statement (EIS) with respect to Barrick

Goldstrike Mines Inc.’s (Barrick) Betze

Project. At that time, the Bureau had

determined the need to prepare the

Supplemental EIS to assess the

environmental impacts of the pumping

and water management operations

associated with Barrick’s mining

operations. Since the Notice of Intent

was published, Barrick has begun

discharging water produced by

groundwater pumping operations to the

Humboldt River under a permit from the

Nevada Division of Environmental

Protection. In addition, Barrick and Elko

Land and Livestock Company (ELLCO)

submitted an application to amend an

existing water pipeline right-of-way

from 40 feet to 80 feet in width to

accommodate installation of

approximately 4,000 linear feet of

buried 48-inch steel pipeline. The

additional pipeline would be used to

increase the operational efficiency of

discharging water to either the

Humboldt River or to irrigation and

infiltration. The Bureau of Land

Management is publishing this

supplemental Notice of Intent to advise

the public of the application to amend

the right-of-way and to seek any
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 14 /Thursday, January 22, 1998 / Notices 3345

additional comments or concerns to be

addressed in preparation of the

Supplemental EIS.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This notice re-initiates

public scoping for the supplemental

Betze EIS. A scoping meeting will be

held on February 5, 1998, at the Bureau

of Land Management, Elko Field Office,

3900 E. Idaho, Elko, Nevada. The public

is invited to attend the meeting

scheduled from 4:30 pm until 6:30 pm

to review the project and identify issues

and concerns which need to be

addressed in the Supplemental EIS.

Representatives from the Bureau of

Land Management and Barrick will be

available during the meeting to answer

questions. Written comments on the

scope of the EIS will also be accepted

until February 16, 1998. A draft

supplemental environmental impact

statement (DSEIS) is expected to be

completed by the summer of 1998 and

made available for public review and

comment. At that time a Notice of

Availability of the DSEIS will be

published in the Federal Register. The

comment period on the DSEIS will be

60 days from the date the Notice of

Availability is published.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scoping comments may be sent to:

District Manager, Bureau of Land

Management, 3900 E. Idaho St., Elko,

NV 89801. ATTN: Supplemental Betze

EIS Coordinator. For additional

information, write to the above address

or call Nick Rieger at (702) 753–0200.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In

response to a Plan of Operations

submitted in April 1989, the Bureau of

Land Management, Elko Field Office

prepared an environmental impact

statement (EIS) with respect to Barrick’s

Betze Project. The Final EIS and Record

of Decision for the Betze Project were

issued on June 10, 1991. The Final EIS

included a description of the

environmental impacts projected to

result from groundwater pumping

conducted by Barrick to lower the local

groundwater elevations below the

proposed Betze mining operations.

Since the Betze EIS was issued,

Barrick’s implementation of the

pumping operations and its monitoring

of groundwater elevations have

provided new information regarding the

pumping requirements and potential

environmental impacts of pumping

operations. This new information

indicates that the highly transmissive

area from which the groundwater is to

be pumped is more extensive than

projected at the time the Betze EIS was

prepared. As a result, Barrick has been

pumping groundwater at higher rates

than projected in the Betze EIS, and a

greater volume of water has been

produced. In addition to delivering

water to a local rancher for irrigation

uses as described in the Betze EIS,

Barrick has implemented reinjection

and infiltration programs to return more

water to the groundwater system, and

has obtained approval to discharge

water to the Humboldt River from the

state of Nevada. Barrick and ELLCO are

now proposing to install approximately

4,000 linear feet of buried 48-inch steel

pipeline next to an existing pipeline

they are using to discharge water to

improve operational flexibility of the

existing Boulder Valley water

management system. The second

pipeline would allow Barrick to by-pass

a water treatment plant when the water

is discharged for irrigation and

infiltration.

In the Notice of Intent published on

August 31, 1994, the Bureau proposed

preparation of a supplement to the Betze

EIS that would describe the new

information gathered since the Betze EIS

was prepared and would describe any

changes in the projected environmental

impacts as a result of the new

information. In addition, the Bureau

stated that the supplemental EIS would

assess the cumulative impacts of

groundwater pumping to lower

elevations and for longer periods of time

than is associated with mining of other

deposits situated on lands within the

area in which groundwater levels are

being lowered. By this notice, the

Bureau is proposing to expand the

original scope to evaluate the

environmental impacts of installing the

proposed pipeline and to determine

whether there may be any adverse

environmental impacts that were not

specifically identified in the Betze EIS

that may be mitigated under the terms

of the Betze Record of Decision.

In response to the initial Notice of

Intent and a Dear Interested Party letter

dated September 2, 1994, the Bureau

received eleven written and nine oral

comments. Based on these comments

and the BLM’s internal review, five

issues of concern were identified and

are currently the focus of the

supplemental EIS:

Potential impacts to surface and

ground water resources, including the

Humboldt River;

Potential impacts to livestock

operations;

Potential impacts to threatened and

endangered species;

Potential impacts to riparian and

wetland vegetation; and

Potential impacts to wildlife and

fisheries resources.

Through this supplemental Notice,

the Bureau is soliciting any additional

comments on the scope of the

supplemental EIS to assist the Bureau in

identifying and considering additional

issues and concerns to be analyzed in

the supplemental EIS. Comments

submitted in response to this

supplemental Notice of Intent should be

directed to the attention of Nick Rieger,

Project Manager at the Bureau of Land

Management, Elko Field Office, 3900

East Idaho Street, Elko, Nevada 89801.

Comments must be received by the close

of business on February 16, 1998.

Dated: January 7, 1998.

Helen Hankins,

District Manager.

[FR Doc. 98–1517 Filed 1–21–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–HC–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[WY–930–1060–04]

Notice of Public Hearing and Intent to

Remove Wild Horses

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

SUMMARY: A public meeting is

scheduled for February 25, 1998 at the

White Mountain Library, Rock Springs,

Wyoming. A formal hearing will be

conducted to receive statements from

the public concerning the use of

helicopters and motor vehicles in wild

horse management operations within

Wyoming for calendar year 1998. Prior

to the hearing, planned removal

operations for the year will be

discussed. Periodic removals are

necessary in order to maintain the

populations within the AML

(Appropriate Management Levels)

established through the planning

process as a result of monitoring and

analysis of that data in accordance with

the National Environmental Policy Act

and BLM Policies. This document

serves as a Notice of Intent to remove

excess wild horses from the following

Herd Management Areas (HMA):

Great Divide Resource Area

Cyclone Rim HMA—remove 260

horses from an estimated 330. AML is

70 and this action would reduce the

population to AML. Begin

approximately March 1, end April 10.

Decision Record EA# WY–037–EA4–

121/122 dated July 11, 1994.

Stewart Creek HMA—remove 100

horses from an estimated 250. AML is

150 and this action would reduce the

population to AML. Begin

approximately August 1. Decision