32246 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 113 / Friday, June 12, 1998 / Notices

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

National Park Service (NPS) administers

a number of concession contracts which

grant the concessioner a ‘‘possessory

interest’’ in authorized capital

improvements made to park lands by

the concessoner in furtherance of their

authorized operations. Possessory

interest grants the concessioner a

compensable interest in such

improvements should it cease to be

authorized to utilize them under the

term of a concession contract.

Concession contracts vary with respect

to the measure of this compensation.

The February 17, 1998, notice concerns

the NPS interpretation of ‘‘sound value’’

possessory interest, one measure of

possessory interest compensation.

Several comments were received in

response to that notice. One comment

was submitted by an organization

representing concessioners, and the

remainder were received from licensed

real estate appraisers.

Several of the comments received

concerned matters which were not

within the scope of the request for

comments. Particularly, a number of

questions were raised about how NPS

intends to address more specific issues

regarding possessory interest appraisals

and how a concessioner’s possessory

interest relates to a concessioner’s right

of preference in contract renewal. These

questions have been noted by NPS but

are not responded to here as they are

beyond the scope of the proposed

policy. The proposed policy,

correspondingly, has been renamed

‘‘Interpretation of Sound Value

Possessory Interest.’’ In addition, its

description of specific appraisal

methods has been deleted as it is more

appropriate to address such

methodology in NPS appraisal

instructions rather than in a policy

statement. Finally, several clarifying

editorial changes have been made.

One commenter asked how the

proposed policy relates to previous NPS

internal guidance. The final policy

supersedes all previous NPS guidance

inconsistent with its terms.

Most of the relevant comments

received raised questions about the

meaning of the last paragraph of the

proposed policy, which read as follows:

The NPS may choose to consider, based on

professional and knowledgeable analysis,

therefore, that in some circumstances a less

than formal appraisal value may be needed

for internal purposes. In those instances, NPS

appraisers may provide estimates of value

which will clearly disclose that said

estimates do not conform to appraisal

standards and are subject to change based on

execution of a formal appraisal.

This paragraph was included in the

proposed policy to cover instances

where, for internal purposes, an

estimate of value might be made by an

NPS appraiser with less than a complete

Summary Appraisal report. As such an

estimate would be for internal purposes

only, NPS has removed this paragraph

from its final policy.

NPS points out, however, that on

occasion it may make and publicly

release estimates of the value of a

concessioner’s possessory interest for

contract administration and/or other

purposes. Such estimates, unless they

are developed in conformance with

appraisal practices and standards, will

make clear that they have not been

made by a licensed appraiser nor under

usual appraisal practices and standards.

Two sentences to this effect have been

added to the final policy.

One commenter questioned the use of

the Third Edition of The Appraisal of

Real Estate in defining the term ‘‘fair

market value,’’ stating that the

definition NPS used is from the 11th

edition. The final policy deletes

reference to a particular source for the

definition and notes that the definition

is subordinate if inconsistent with law

in particular circumstances. However,

in light of the express legislative history

of Public Law 89–249, the definition of

reproduction cost to be used by NPS is

the definition used in such legislative

history which cites the first paragraph of

page 188 of the Third Edition of The

Appraisal of Real Estate.

In consideration of comments

received, the final NPS policy is as

follows:

Interpretation of Sound Value

Possessory Interest

NPS will construe the term

‘‘reconstruction cost’’ as used in NPS

concession contracts to be synonymous

with the term ‘‘reproduction cost’’

defined as follows consistent with the

legislative history of Public Law 89–245:

Reproduction cost of improvements in

which an NPS concessioner has a possessory

interest is the present cost of replacing the

improvements with as nearly an exact replica

as modern materials and equipment will

permit.

When an NPS concession contract

utilizes the term ‘‘fair market value’’

with respect to possessory interest, NPS

will construe the term as follows unless

otherwise inconsistent with law in

particular circumstances:

The most probable price, as of a specific

date, in cash, or in terms equivalent to cash,

or in other precisely revealed terms, for

which the property rights should sell after

reasonable exposure in a competitive market

under all conditions requisite to a fair sale,

with the buyer and seller each acting

prudently, knowledgeably, and for selfinterest, and assuming that neither is under

undue duress.

In circumstances where NPS

considers it necessary, it will undertake

appraisals of improvements in which an

NPS concessioner has a possessory

interest. In making such appraisals, it

will utilize or cause its appraiser to

utilize, where applicable, the preceding

definitions in arriving at the appraised

value of possessory interest. In addition,

when appropriate, NPS may make

estimates of the value of a

concessioner’s possessory interest for

contract administration and/or other

purposes. Such estimates will make

clear that they have not been made by

an appraiser nor under usual appraisal

practices and standards.

Dated: June 3, 1998.

Wendelin M. Mann,

Acting Concession Program Manager.

[FR Doc. 98–15693 Filed 6–11–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Golden Gate National Recreation Area;

the Presidio of San Francisco, CA;

Notice of Transfer of Administrative

Jurisdiction to the Presidio Trust

This notice announces a transfer of

administrative jurisdiction over a

portion of The Presidio of San Francisco

to the Presidio Trust, effective July 1,

1998.

Notice is hereby provided that

administrative jurisdiction over

approximately 80 percent of The

Presidio of San Francisco will be

transferred from the National Park

Service to the Presidio Trust on July 1,

1998 in accordance with Title 1 of

Public Law 104–333. The precise area

which is being transferred is depicted as

Area B on the map entitled ‘‘Presidio

Trust Number 1, dated December 7,

1995,’’ copies of which are available for

inspection at the National Park Service,

William Penn Mott Jr. Visitor Center,

Building 102, Main Post, Presidio of San

Francisco and at the Presidio Trust,

Building 10, Main Post, Presidio of San

Francisco, CA 94129.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

B. J. Griffin, General Manager, Presidio

of San Francisco (415–561–4401) or

James E. Meadows, Executive Director,

Presidio Trust (415–561–5300).
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 113 / Friday, June 12, 1998 / Notices 32247

Dated: June 2, 1998.

B.J. Griffin,

General Manager, Presidio of San Francisco.

[FR Doc. 98–15694 Filed 6–11–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Acadia National Park; Bar Harbor,

Maine; Acadia National Park Advisory

Commission, Notice of Meeting

Notice is hereby given in accordance

with the Federal Advisory Committee

Act (Public Law 92–463, 86 Stat. 770, 5

U.S.C. App. 1, Sec. 10), that the Acadia

National Park Advisory Commission

will hold a meeting on Monday, June

29, 1998. There will be no meeting on

Monday, June 22, 1998.

The Commission was established

pursuant to Public Law 99–420, Sec.

103. The purpose of the commission is

to consult with the Secretary of the

Interior, or his designee, on matters

relating to the management and

development of the park, including but

not limited to the acquisition of lands

and interests in lands (including

conservation easements on islands) and

termination of rights of use and

occupancy.

The meeting will convene at park

Headquarters, McFarland Hill, Bar

Harbor, Maine, at 1:00 p.m. to consider

the following agenda:

1. Review and approval of minutes

from the meeting held October 27, 1997.

2. Committee reports.

3. Old business.

4. Superintendent’s report.

5. Public comments.

6. Proposed agenda and date of next

Commission meeting.

The meeting is open to the public.

Interested persons may make oral/

written presentations to the Commission

or file written statements. Such requests

should be made to the Superintendent

at least seven days prior to the meeting.

Further information concerning this

meeting may be obtained from the

Superintendent, Acadia National Park,

P.O. Box 177, Bar Harbor, Maine 04609,

tel: (207) 288–3338.

Dated: June 3, 1998.

Paul F. Haertel

Superintendent, Acadia National Park.

[FR Doc. 98–15692 Filed 6–11–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Appalachian National Scenic Trail

AGENCY: National Park Service; Interior.

ACTION: Record of decision.

SUMMARY: This action announces a

decision on a proposed exchange of

federally-owned lands for privately

owned lands near Cloud Bank Road,

Township of Philipstown, Putnam

County, New York.

The National Park Service’s

Appalachian National Scenic Trail will

continue with negotiations to exchange

federally-owned lands for privatelyowned lands near Cloud Bank Road in

the Garrison, New York area. The

federally-owned lands include the Colt

Estate Dam. The authority for this

exchange is Section 5(b) of the Land and

Water Conservation Fund Act

Amendments in Public Law 90–401

approved July 15, 1968 and Section 7(f)

of the National Trails System Act,

Public Law 90–543, as amended.

The proposal to exchange lands has

generated a significant amount of public

interest. On June 28, 1997, the National

Park Service (NPS) published a Notice

of Realty Action describing the lands to

be exchanged. The National Park

Service subsequently conducted a

public meeting concerning the proposed

exchange in Garrison, New York on

December 16, 1997.

Written comments both in favor of

and in opposition to the proposed

exchange were received from concerned

citizens and local, state and federal

officials. Comments from the public at

the Garrison meeting also were recorded

for review and evaluation.

The comments expressed can be

characterized as fitting into four main

themes: (1) Concern over transferring

lands protected by the NPS to private

citizens, (2) Concern over development

over the exchanged lands, (3) Concern

with the condition of the Colt Estate

Dam, and (4) Concern with land

valuation.

In response to the concerns expressed

by the public, the Appalachian Trail

Park Manager has directed the

Appalachian Trail Land Acquisition

Office to continue with negotiations to

exchange the federally-owned lands for

privately-owned lands. The conditions

of the exchange now will include

conservation restrictions to be held by a

third party, non-profit entity on the

property to be exchanged, and deed

provisions whereby the owners, his

heirs and assigns agree to maintain

liability insurance with assurances that

dam repairs and maintenance are

performed to the satisfaction of New

York State dam safety officials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chief, Acquisition Division, National

Park Service, AT/LAFO, PO Box 908,

Martinsburg, WV 25402, 304–263–4943.

Dated: May 19, 1998.

Pamela Underhill,

Park Manager, Appalachian National Scenic

Trail.

[FR Doc. 98–15690 Filed 6–11–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of the Secretary

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

June 9, 1998.

The Department of Labor (DOL) has

submitted the following public

information collection requests (ICRs) to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and approval in

accordance with the Paperwork

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

44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of each

individual ICR, with applicable

supporting documentation, may be

obtained by calling the Department of

Labor, Departmental Clearance Officer,

Todd R. Owen ((202) 219–5096 ext. 143)

or by E-Mail to Owen-Todd@dol.gov.

Individuals who use a

telecommunications device for the deaf

(TTY/TDD) may call (202) 219–4720

between 1:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern

time, Monday–Friday.

Comments should be sent to Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Attn: OMB Desk Officer for BLS, DM,

ESA, ETA, MSHA, OSHA, PWBA, or

VETS, Office of Management and

Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC

20503 ((202) 395–7316), on or before

July 13, 1998.

The OMB is particularly interested in

comments which:

• evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

• evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

• enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

• minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who