70632 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Notices 

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: 

USCIS Case Status Service Online. 

(3) Agency form number, if any, and 

the applicable component of the 

Department of Homeland Security 

sponsoring the collection: No Agency 

Form No. (File No. OMB–33). U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services. 

(4) Affected public who will be asked 

or required to respond, as well as a brief 

abstract: Primary: Individuals or 

households. This system allows 

individuals or their representatives to 

request case status of their pending 

application through the USCIS website. 

(5) An estimate of the total number of 

respondents and the amount of time 

estimated for an average respondent to 

respond: 24,000,000 respondents at 2.75 

minutes (.046) per response. 

(6) An estimate of the total public 

burden (in hours) associated with the 

collection: 1,104,000 annual burden 

hours. 

If you have additional comments, 

suggestions, or need a copy of the 

proposed information collection 

instrument with instructions, or 

additional information, please visit the 

USCIS Web site at: http://uscis.gov/ 

graphics/formsfee/forms/pra/index.htm. 

If additional information is required 

contact: USCIS Regulatory Management 

Division, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, 

3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20529, (202) 

272–8377. 

Dated: November 17, 2005. 

Richard A. Sloan, 

Director, Regulatory Management Division, 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. 

[FR Doc. 05–23060 Filed 11–21–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–10–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Draft Document Reassessing Methods 

To Estimate Population Size and 

Sustainable Mortality Limits for the 

Yellowstone Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos 

horribilis) Population 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of document availability; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service 

(Service) announces the availability for 

public review of the draft document 

Reassessing Methods to Estimate 

Population Size and Sustainable 

Mortality Limits for the Yellowstone 

Grizzly Bear. Once comments are 

received, analyzed, and addressed, the 

final revised population methodology 

will be appended to the Grizzly Bear 

Recovery Plan and the Final 

Conservation Strategy for the Grizzly 

Bear in the Greater Yellowstone Area. 

The Service solicits review and 

comment from the public on this draft 

information prior to appending it to the 

Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan. 

DATES: Comments on the draft 

document Reassessing Methods to 

Estimate Population Size and 

Sustainable Mortality Limits for the 

Yellowstone Grizzly Bear must be 

received on or before February 21, 2006 

to ensure that they will be received in 

time for our consideration prior to 

finalization of the revised methodology. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

materials regarding this information 

should be sent to the Recovery 

Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, University Hall, Room 309, 

University of Montana, Missoula, 

Montana 59812. Comments and 

materials received are available on 

request for public inspection, by 

appointment, during normal business 

hours at the above address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Christopher Servheen, Grizzly Bear 

Recovery Coordinator (see ADDRESSES

above), at telephone (406) 243–4903. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Document Availability 

Persons wishing to review this 

document may obtain a copy by 

contacting the Grizzly Bear Recovery 

Coordinator, at the above address, 

contacting the above official by 

telephone, or by viewing it online at 

http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/ 

mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm. You 

also may make an appointment to view 

the documents at the above address 

during normal business hours. 

Background 

Restoring an endangered or 

threatened animal or plant to the point 

where it is again a secure, selfsustaining member of its ecosystem is a 

primary goal of the Service’s 

endangered species program. To help 

guide the recovery effort, the Service 

prepares recovery plans for most of the 

listed species native to the United 

States. Recovery plans describe actions 

considered necessary for conservation of 

the species; establish criteria for 

recovery levels for downlisting or 

delisting them, and estimate time and 

cost for implementing the recovery 

measures needed. Under the provisions 

of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 

as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the 

Service approved the revised Grizzly 

Bear Recovery Plan on September 10, 

1993. 

In 1994, The Fund for Animals, Inc., 

and 42 other organizations and 

individuals filed suit over the adequacy 

of the 1993 Recovery Plan (Fund for 

Animals v. Babbitt, 903 F. Supp. 96 (D. 

D.C. 1995); 967 F. Supp. 6 (D. D.C. 

1997). In 1995, the U.S. District Court 

for the District of Columbia issued an 

order which remanded for further study 

and clarification four issues that are 

relevant to the Yellowstone grizzly bear 

population, including—(1) The methods 

used to measure the status of bear 

populations; (2) the impacts of genetic 

isolation; (3) how mortalities related to 

livestock are monitored; and (4) the 

monitoring of disease. The Service also 

agreed to append habitat-based recovery 

criteria to the Recovery Plan prior to any 

delisting action. All of these issues, 

except the draft revised methodology for 

calculating total population size and 

establishing sustainable mortality limits 

for the Yellowstone grizzly bear 

population, have been addressed prior 

to publication of this Notice and were 

made available for public review and 

comment previously (62 FR 19777, 

April 23, 1997; 62 FR 47677, September 

10, 1997; 64 FR 38464, July 16, 1999; 64 

FR 38465, July 16, 1999). 

As recommended by Grizzly Bear 

Recovery Plan Task Y11 and as per the 

Court Opinion, the Service has worked 

to ‘‘determine population conditions at 

which the species is viable and self 

sustaining’’ and ‘‘reevaluate and refine 

population criteria as new information 

becomes available’’ for the Yellowstone 

population of grizzly bears (Service 

1993 p. 44). At the request of the Service 

beginning in 2000, the Interagency 

Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST), led 

by the U.S. Geological Survey in 

cooperation with various University 

specialists, began a comprehensive 

evaluation of the demographic data and 

the methodology used to estimate 

population size and establish the 

sustainable level of mortality for grizzly 

bears in the Yellowstone Ecosystem. 

Accordingly, the IGBST (2005) 

produced a critical review of the current 

methods for estimating population size 

and calculating the sustainable 

mortality levels for the Yellowstone 

grizzly population. This product is a 

report compiled by the IGBST that 

evaluates current methods, reviews 

recent scientific literature, examines 

alternative methods, and recommends 

the most valid technique based on the 

best available science (IGBST 2005). The 

end result of this review is the draft 

document Reassessing Methods to 

Estimate Population Size and 

Sustainable Mortality Limits for the 

Yellowstone Grizzly Bear. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Notices 70633 

The method for calculating 

population size using females with cubs 

sightings (Keating et al. 2002) and the 

method for calculating the unknown 

and unreported mortalities (Cherry et al. 

2002) have been published in peerreviewed scientific journals. We are 

seeking comments only on the 

document Reassessing Methods to 

Estimate Population Size and 

Sustainable Mortality Limits for the 

Yellowstone Grizzly Bear, which 

applies these peer-reviewed methods to 

the Yellowstone grizzly bear population. 

Based on the comments received, the 

Service will finalize this methodology 

for calculating total population size and 

establishing sustainable mortality limits 

for the Yellowstone grizzly bear 

population and append it to the Grizzly 

Bear Recovery Plan prior to publishing 

a final rule to designate the Greater 

Yellowstone Ecosystem population of 

grizzly bears as a distinct population 

segment and to remove the Yellowstone 

distinct population segment of grizzly 

bears from the Federal list of 

endangered and threatened wildlife. 

Public Comments Solicited 

Section 4(f) of the Endangered Species 

Act, as amended in 1988, requires that 

public notice and an opportunity for 

public review and comment be provided 

during recovery plan development. We 

consider all information presented 

during a public comment period prior to 

approval of each new or revised 

recovery plan. We and other Federal 

management agencies also will take 

these comments into account in the 

course of implementing approved 

recovery plans. We now seek public 

comment on the draft document 

Reassessing Methods to Estimate 

Population Size and Sustainable 

Mortality Limits for the Yellowstone 

Grizzly Bear to address both Task Y11 

in the Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan and 

the Court Opinion (Fund for Animals v. 

Babbitt, 903 F. Supp. 96 (D. D.C. 1995); 

967 F. Supp. 6 (D. D.C. 1997)). All 

comments received by the date specified 

in the DATES section above will be 

considered prior to finalization of the 

information. Appropriate portions of the 

information will be appended to, and 

become part of, the 1993 Grizzly Bear 

Recovery Plan and the Final 

Conservation Strategy for the Grizzly 

Bear in the Greater Yellowstone Area. 

Literature Cited 

Cherry, S., M.A. Haroldson, J. Robison-Cox, 

and C.C. Schwartz. 2002. Estimating total 

human-caused mortality from reported 

mortality using data from radioinstrumented grizzly bears. Ursus 

13:175–184. 

Keating, K.A., C.C. Schwartz, M.A. 

Haroldson, and D. Moody. 2002. 

Estimating numbers of females with 

cubs-of-the-year in the Yellowstone 

grizzly bear population. Ursus 13:161–

174. 

Authority: The authority for this Notice is 

under section 4(f) of the Endangered Species 

Act, 16 U.S.C. 1533(f). 

Dated: July 11, 2005. 

Ralph O. Morgenweck, 

Regional Director, Denver, Colorado. 

[FR Doc. 05–23057 Filed 11–21–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Minerals Management Service 

Preparation of an Environmental 

Assessment for Proposed Outer 

Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Lease 

Sale 200 in the Western Gulf of Mexico 

(2006) 

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Preparation of an environmental 

assessment. 

SUMMARY: The Minerals Management 

Service (MMS) is issuing this notice to 

advise the public, pursuant to the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (NEPA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq., that MMS intends to 

prepare an environmental assessment 

(EA) for proposed Outer Continental 

Shelf (OCS) oil and gas Lease Sale 200 

in the Western Gulf of Mexico (GOM) 

(Lease Sale 200) scheduled for August 

2006. The MMS is issuing this notice to 

facilitate public involvement. The 

preparation of this EA is an important 

step in the decision process for Lease 

Sale 200. The proposal and alternatives 

for Lease Sale 200 were identified by the 

MMS Director in January 2002 following 

the Call for Information and 

Nominations/Notice of Intent to Prepare 

an Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) and were analyzed in the Gulf of 

Mexico OCS Oil and Gas Lease Sales: 

2003–2007; Central Planning Area Sales 

185, 190, 194, 198, and 201; Western 

Planning Area Sales 187, 192, 196, and 

200—Final Environmental Impact 

Statement; Volumes I and II (Multisale 

EIS, OCS EIS/EA MMS 2002–052). This 

EA will reexamine the potential 

environmental effects of the proposed 

action (the offering of all available 

unleased acreage in the Western 

Planning Area (WPA)) and its 

alternatives (the proposed action 

excluding the unleased blocks near 

biologically sensitive topographic 

features; and no action) based on any 

new information regarding potential 

impacts and issues that were not 

available at the time the Multisale EIS 

was prepared. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Dennis Chew, Minerals Management 

Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, 

1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, MS 

5410, New Orleans, Louisiana 70123–

2394. You may also contact Mr. Chew 

by telephone at (504) 736–2793. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

November 2002, MMS prepared a 

Multisale EIS that addressed nine 

proposed Federal actions that offer for 

lease areas on the GOM OCS that may 

contain economically recoverable oil 

and gas resources. Federal regulations 

allow for several related or similar 

proposals to be analyzed in one EIS (40 

CFR 1502.4). Since each proposed lease 

sale and its projected activities are very 

similar each year for each planning area, 

a single EIS was prepared for the nine 

Central Planning Area (CPA) and WPA 

lease sales scheduled in the OCS Oil 

and Gas Leasing Program: 2002–2007 (5- 

Year Program, OCS EIS/EA MMS 2002–

006). Under the current 5-Year Program, 

five annual areawide lease sales were 

scheduled for the CPA (Lease Sales 185, 

190, 194, 198, and 201) and five annual 

areawide lease sales were scheduled for 

the WPA (Lease Sales 184, 187, 192, 

196, and 200). Lease Sale 184 was not 

addressed in the Multisale EIS; a 

separate EA was prepared for that 

proposal. The Multisale EIS addressed 

CPA Lease Sales 185, 190, 194, 198, and 

201 scheduled for 2003, 2004, 2005, 

2006, and 2007, respectively, and WPA 

Lease Sales 187, 192, 196, and 200 

scheduled for 2003, 2004, 2005, and 

2006, respectively. Although the 

Multisale EIS addresses nine proposed 

lease sales, decisions were made only 

for proposed CPA Lease Sale 185 and 

proposed WPA Lease Sale 187 based on 

the EIS. For the subsequent sales, an 

additional NEPA review (an EA) will be 

conducted the year prior to each 

proposed lease sale, to address any new 

information relevant to that proposed 

action. After completion of the EA, 

MMS will determine whether to prepare 

a Finding of No New Significant Impact 

(FONNSI) or a Supplemental EIS. The 

MMS will then prepare and send 

Consistency Determinations (CD’s) to 

the affected States to determine whether 

the lease sale is consistent with their 

federally-approved State coastal zone 

management programs. Finally, MMS 

will solicit comments via the Proposed 

Notice of Sale (PNOS) from the 

governors of the affected States on the 

size, timing, and location of the lease 

sale. The tentative schedule for the 

prelease decision process for Lease Sale