Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 211 / Wednesday, November 2, 2005 / Notices 66403 

considering whether to hold a public 

hearing on the matter. 

DATES: Comments and information on 

this matter, and any request that a 

public hearing be held, must be received 

by January 3, 2006. EPA will consider 

all timely comments and information 

that pertain to the Indian country status 

of the land in question. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be submitted to David Albright, Ground 

Water Office Manager, at U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, Mail 

Code: WTR–9, San Francisco, CA 94105. 

You may also submit comments by fax 

at 415.947.3549 or by e-mail at 

albright.david@epa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Albright, at 

albright.david@epa.gov, or 

415.972.3971. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Hydro 

Resources, Inc. (HRI) proposes to 

operate a uranium in-situ leach mine on 

an approximately 160-acre parcel of 

land located in the southeast portion of 

Section 8, Township 16N, Range 16W in 

the State of New Mexico (‘‘Section 8 

land’’). HRI must apply for and receive 

an underground injection control (UIC) 

permit under the Safe Drinking Water 

Act (SDWA) to conduct its mining 

activities. The State of New Mexico has 

been authorized by EPA to administer 

the SDWA UIC program in the State, but 

that authorization does not extend to 

Indian country. Due to the State’s lack 

of authorization in Indian country and 

as a result of a court decision discussed 

below, EPA must determine whether or 

not the Section 8 land is Indian country 

as defined by 18 U.S.C. 1151. EPA is 

seeking comments and information from 

the public and all interested parties 

regarding the Indian country status of 

the land HRI intends to use for its 

mining activities. Additionally, 

recognizing the U.S. Department of the 

Interior’s expertise in these matters, 

EPA is soliciting the views of and 

working with the Department. 

In the late 1980s, HRI sought an UIC 

permit for its property located within 

Section 8. The land is located in an area 

commonly referred to as the ‘‘Eastern 

Agency of the Navajo Nation’’ and the 

Navajo Nation has historically asserted 

that the land in question is a dependent 

Indian community. After considering 

materials submitted by the Navajo 

Nation and the New Mexico 

Environment Department (NMED), EPA 

determined that the Indian country 

status of the Section 8 land was in 

dispute and, thus, that EPA would be 

the appropriate agency to issue the 

SDWA UIC permit. The State of New 

Mexico and HRI challenged EPA’s 

determination with respect to the Indian 

country status of the land in question. 

In 2000, in HRI v. EPA, 198 F.3d 1224 

(10th Cir. 2000), the United States Court 

of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld 

EPA’s decision to implement the UIC 

program throughout HRI’s Section 8 

land because the Indian country status 

of that land was in dispute. The Court 

remanded the matter to EPA to make a 

final administrative decision on the 

Indian country status of the disputed 

land. 

Recently NMED received a request 

from HRI for an UIC permit to operate 

a uranium in-situ leach mine in Section 

8. As a result, NMED has formally 

requested that EPA make a decision on 

the Indian country status of the Section 

8 land. EPA’s decision whether the land 

at issue is Indian country will determine 

whether EPA or NMED is the 

appropriate agency to consider the 

permit request from HRI. 

The United States Supreme Court in 

Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie 

Tribal Government, 522 U.S. 520 (1998), 

identified two requirements for 

determining whether land constitutes a 

dependent Indian community under 18 

U.S.C. 1151(b): (1) Whether land has 

been validly set aside by the Federal 

government for the use of Indians and 

(2) whether that land is subject to 

federal supervision. Additionally, the 

court in HRI v. EPA noted that, prior to 

Venetie, the Tenth Circuit Court of 

Appeals required a community of 

reference determination as the first step 

in determining a dependent Indian 

community. It also concluded that, 

because the Supreme Court in Venetie 

was not presented with the question of 

the proper community of reference and 

did not speak directly to the propriety 

of a community of reference analysis, 

Tenth Circuit precedent continues to 

require a community of reference 

analysis. 

To ensure EPA has all possible 

relevant information for making its 

determination on the Section 8 land 

status, EPA requests that the public 

submit information on the following 

items: the nature of the area in question; 

Indian and non-Indian land uses; 

relevant aquifer uses; land ownership 

patterns; use of area infrastructure and 

services by Indians and non-Indians; the 

relationship of inhabitants in the area to 

Indian tribes and to the Federal 

government; activities of government 

agencies toward the area; elements of 

cohesiveness manifested either by 

economic pursuits in the area, common 

interests, or needs of inhabitants 

supplied by the locality; whether any 

lands have been set apart for the use, 

occupancy, and protection of dependent 

Indian peoples; whether that land is 

subject to Federal supervision; and any 

other relevant information that might 

assist EPA in making its determination. 

EPA welcomes written comments and 

information from the public and 

interested parties on whether the 

Section 8 land constitutes a dependent 

Indian community in whole or in part. 

At this time, EPA is limiting its analysis 

to the question of whether the Section 

8 land is a dependent Indian 

community and, thus, Indian country 

and will not consider any issues, 

information, or comments regarding the 

permitting of mine operations on the 

Section 8 land. As part of the 

determination process, EPA is also 

consulting with the Navajo Nation. 

If there is sufficient public interest 

and a request is made, EPA may 

consider holding a public hearing to 

elicit further input from the public on 

this matter. Such a hearing would not 

constitute a formal adjudication, but 

rather would provide an informal 

opportunity for the public and 

interested parties to provide additional 

comments and information. 

Dated: October 24, 2005. 

Wayne Nastri, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 05–21822 Filed 11–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Notice of Public Information 

Collection(s) Being Submitted for 

Review to the Office of Management 

and Budget 

October 19, 2005. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burden 

invites the general public and other 

Federal agencies to take this 

opportunity to comment on the 

following information collection(s), as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104–13. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor 

a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid control 

number. No person shall be subject to 

any penalty for failing to comply with 

a collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that 

does not display a valid control number. 

Comments are requested concerning (a) 

whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

66404 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 211 / Wednesday, November 2, 2005 / Notices 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 

burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on the respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) comments should be 

submitted on or before December 2, 

2005. If you anticipate that you will be 

submitting PRA comments, but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, you should 

advise the contact listed below as soon 

as possible. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA) comments to 

Leslie F. Smith, Federal 

Communications Commission, Room 1–

A804, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554 or via the 

Internet to Leslie.Smith@fcc.gov. If you 

would like to obtain or view a copy of 

this new or revised information 

collection, you may do so by visiting the 

FCC PRA Web page at: http:// 

www.fcc.gov/omd/pra. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information or copies of the 

information collection(s), contact Leslie 

F. Smith at (202) 418–0217 or via the 

Internet at Leslie.Smith@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control Number: 3060–0329. 

Title: Equipment Authorization—

Verification, 47 CFR § 2.955. 

Form Number: N/A. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Not-for-profit 

institutions; Business or other for-profit 

entities. 

Number of Respondents: 5,655. 

Estimated Time per Response: 18 

hours (avg.). 

Frequency of Response: 

Recordkeeping; One-time and on 

occasion reporting requirements; and 

Third party disclosure. 

Total Annual Burden: 101,790 hours. 

Total Estimated Cost: $1,131,000. 

Privacy Impact Assessment: No 

impact(s). 

Needs and Uses: The Commission 

rules 47 CFR Parts 15 and 18 require 

manufacturers of radio frequency (RF) 

equipment devices to gather and retain 

technical data on their equipment to 

verify compliance with established 

technical standards for each device 

operated under the applicable Rule part. 

Testing and verification aid in 

controlling potential interference to 

radio communications. The information 

may be used to determine that the 

equipment marketed complies with the 

applicable Commission rules and that 

the operation of the equipment is 

consistent with the initially 

documented test results. The 

information is essential to controlling 

potential interference to radio 

communications. 

OMB Control Number: 3060–0812. 

Title: Assessment and Collection of 

Regulatory Fees. 

Form Number: N/A. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Not-for-profit 

institutions, and State, local, or tribal 

governments. 

Number of Respondents: 4,500. 

Estimated Time per Response: 0.5 

hours. 

Frequency of Response: 

Recordkeeping; On occasion and onetime reporting requirements. 

Total Annual Burden: 2,475 hours. 

Total Annual Cost: N/A. 

Privacy Impact Assessment: No 

impact(s). 

Needs and Uses: In accordance with 

the Telecommunications Act of 1934, as 

amended, and Congressional 

requirements, the FCC is required to 

assess and collect regulatory fees from 

licensees and regulatees in order to 

recover its costs incurred in conducting 

enforcement, policy and rulemaking, 

international, and user information 

activities. The purpose of the 

requirements are to facilitate: (1) the 

statutory provisions that ‘‘non-profit 

entity’’ may be exempt from payment of 

regulatory fees, and (2) the FCC’s ability 

to audit regulatory fee payment 

information from all regulatees. The 

FCC must estimate as accurately as 

possible the number of payment units 

and distribute the costs to develop a 

Regulatory Fee Schedule. These 

estimates must be adjusted to account 

for any licensee or regulatee that is 

exempt from payment of regulatory fees. 

Therefore, the FCC requires all licensees 

and regulatees, which claim exemption 

as a non-profit entity, to provide onetime documentation sufficient to 

establish their non-profit status. 

Additionally, any newly licensed or 

operating non-profit entities must 

submit documentation of their exempt 

status within 60 days of receipt of the 

license, authorization, permit, or 

commencing operation. Further, the 

FCC is requesting that it be similarly 

notified if there are any status changes. 

Documentation that supports a 

regulatee’s exempt status as a non-profit 

includes, but is not limited to, an 

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 

Determination Letter, a state charter 

granting non-profit status, proof of 

church affiliation, articles of 

incorporation, and 501(c)(3) letters, et 

al. The FCC may require licensees to 

submit business data they used to 

calculate their regulatory fee payments 

to facilitate the Commission’s audit of 

regulatory fee payment compliance. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 05–21469 Filed 11–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Notice of Public Information 

Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the 

Federal Communications Commission, 

Comments Requested 

October 19, 2005. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burden, 

invites the general public and other 

Federal agencies to take this 

opportunity to comment on the 

following information collection(s), as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law No. 104–

13. An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid 

control number. No person shall be 

subject to any penalty for failing to 

comply with a collection of information, 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

that does not display a valid control 

number. Comments are requested 

concerning (a) whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the Commission, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

Commission’s burden estimate; (c) ways 

to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information collected; and 

(d) ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on the 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) comments should be 

submitted on or before January 3, 2006. 

If you anticipate that you will be 

submitting comments, but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, you should 

advise the contact listed below as soon 

as possible. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit your 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)