22616 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices 

are proposed as part of this renewal. No 

third party notification or public 

disclosure burden is associated with 

this collection. There is no change to the 

approved burden hours for this 

information collection. 

II. Request for Comments 

OFA requests that you send your 

comments on this collection to the 

location listed in the ADDRESSES section. 

Your comments should address: (a) The 

necessity of the information collection 

for the proper performance of the 

agencies, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of our estimate of the 

burden (hours and cost) of the collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(c) ways we could enhance the quality, 

utility and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (d) ways we could 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

the information on the respondents, 

such as through the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

Please note that an agency may not 

sponsor or conduct, and an individual 

need not respond to, a collection of 

information unless it has a valid OMB 

Control Number. This information 

collection expires April 30, 2010. 

It is our policy to make all comments 

available to the public for review at the 

location listed in the ADDRESSES section 

during the hours of 9 a.m.–5 p.m., 

Eastern Time, Monday through Friday 

except for legal holidays. Before 

including your address, phone number, 

e-mail address or other personally 

identifiable information, be advised that 

your entire comment—including your 

personally identifiable information— 

may be made public at any time. While 

you may request that we withhold your 

personally identifiable information, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

III. Data 

OMB Control Number: 1076–0104. 

Title: Documented Petitions for 

Federal Acknowledgment as an Indian 

Tribe, 25 CFR Part 83. 

Brief Description of Collection: 

Submission of this information allows 

OFA to review applications for the 

Federal acknowledgment of a group as 

an Indian Tribe. The acknowledgment 

regulations at 25 CFR part 83 contain 

seven criteria that unrecognized groups 

seeking Federal acknowledgment as 

Indian Tribes must demonstrate that 

they meet. Information collected from 

petitioning groups under these 

regulations provide anthropological, 

genealogical and historical data used by 

the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs 

to establish whether a petitioning group 

has the characteristics necessary to be 

acknowledged as having a governmentto-government relationship with the 

United States. Respondents are not 

required to retain copies of information 

submitted to OFA but will probably 

maintain copies for their own use; 

therefore, there is no recordkeeping 

requirement included in this 

information collection. Response is 

required to obtain a benefit. 

Type of Review: Extension without 

change of a currently approved 

collection. 

Respondents: Groups petitioning for 

Federal acknowledgment as Indian 

Tribes. 

Number of Respondents: 10 per year, 

on average. 

Total Number of Responses: 10 per 

year, on average. 

Frequency of Response: Once. 

Estimated Time per Response: 2,075 

hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 

20,750 hours. 

Dated: April 20, 2010. 

Alvin Foster, 

Acting Chief Information Officer—Indian 

Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2010–9909 Filed 4–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–G1–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLAK927000 L54200000 FR0000 

LVDIL09L0410; FF–94683] 

Notice of Application for a Recordable 

Disclaimer of Interest for Lands 

Underlying the Tanana River in Alaska 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The State of Alaska has filed 

an application with the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) for a Recordable 

Disclaimer of Interest from the United 

States in those lands underlying the 

Tanana River in Interior Alaska. The 

State asserts that the Tanana River was 

navigable and unreserved at the time of 

Statehood; therefore title to the 

submerged lands passed to the State at 

the time of Statehood (1959). 

DATES: All comments to this action 

should be received on or before July 28, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the State of 

Alaska’s application or the BLM Draft 

Summary Report must be filed with the 

Chief, Branch of Survey Planning and 

Preparation (AK–927), Division of 

Cadastral Survey, BLM Alaska State 

Office, 222 W. 7th Avenue, #13, 

Anchorage, Alaska 99513–7599. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Callie Webber, Navigability Section 

Chief, at the above address, (907) 271– 

3167, or cwebber@blm.gov, or visit the 

BLM Recordable Disclaimer of Interest 

Web site at http://www.blm.gov/ak/st/ 

en/prog/rdi.html. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 

10, 2006, the State of Alaska filed an 

application for a Recordable Disclaimer 

of Interest pursuant to section 315 of the 

Federal Lands Policy and Management 

Act and the regulations contained in 43 

CFR subpart 1864 for the lands 

underlying the Tanana River (FF– 

94683). A Recordable Disclaimer of 

Interest, if issued, will confirm that the 

United States has no valid interest in 

the subject lands. The notice is intended 

to notify the public of the pending 

application and the State’s reasons for 

supporting it. The State asserts that this 

river was navigable at the time of 

Statehood, and therefore, ownership of 

the lands underlying the river 

automatically passed from the United 

States to the State at the time of 

Statehood in 1959, pursuant to the 

Equal Footing Doctrine, the Submerged 

Lands Act of 1953, the Submerged 

Lands Act of 1988, the Alaska Statehood 

Act, or any other legally cognizable 

reason. 

The State’s application, FF–94683, is 

for ‘‘all submerged lands lying within 

the bed of the Tanana River, between 

the ordinary high water lines of the left 

and right banks from its origins at the 

confluence with the Chisana and the 

Nabesna Rivers within Section 29 and 

30, Township 15 North, Range 19 East, 

Copper River Meridian, Alaska, flowing 

generally northwesterly to all points of 

confluence with the Yukon River in 

Section 23, Township 4 North, Range 22 

West, Fairbanks Meridian, Alaska.’’ The 

State did not identify any known 

adverse claimant or occupant of the 

affected lands. 

A final decision on the merits of the 

application will not be made before July 

28, 2010. During the 90-day period, 

interested parties may comment on the 

State’s application, FF–94683, and 

supporting evidence. Interested parties 

may also comment during this time on 

the BLM’s Draft Summary Report. 

Comments, including names and 

street addresses of commenters, will be 

available for public review at the Alaska 

State Office (see ADDRESSES above), 

during regular business hours 7:30 a.m. 

to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except holidays. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices 22617 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

If the evidence is sufficient to find a 

determination of navigability for title 

purposes, and the records do not 

disclose a reason not to issue the 

disclaimer, and there is no valid 

objection by another Federal agency, 

then the application may be approved. 

Authority: 43 CFR subpart 1864. 

Michael H. Schoder, 

Deputy State Director, Division of Cadastral 

Survey. 

[FR Doc. 2010–10014 Filed 4–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–JA–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLCAC07000 L10200000 EE0000] 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Assessment for 

Domestic Sheep Grazing on the Dog 

Creek and Green Creek Allotments, 

Mono County, CA, and Possible Land 

Use Plan Amendment 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) of 1969, as amended, and the 

Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act (FLPMA) of 1976, as amended, the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

Bishop Field Office, Bishop, California 

intends to prepare an Environmental 

Assessment (EA), which may include an 

amendment to the Bishop Resource 

Management Plan (RMP), dated March 

25, 1993. By this notice the Bishop Field 

Office is announcing the beginning of 

the scoping process to solicit public 

comments and identify issues. 

DATES: This notice initiates the public 

scoping process for the EA and possible 

plan amendment. Comments on issues 

may be submitted in writing until June 

1, 2010. The date(s) and location(s) of 

any scoping meetings will be 

announced at least 15 days in advance 

through local media and the BLM Web 

site at: http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/ 

bishop.html. In order to be considered 

in the EA, all comments must be 

received before the close of the scoping 

period or 15 days after the last public 

meeting, whichever is later. The BLM 

will provide additional opportunities 

for public participation upon 

publication of the EA. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on issues and planning criteria related 

to the EA and possible plan amendment 

by any of the following methods: 

• Web site: http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/ 

en/fo/bishop.html. 

• E-mail: Jeffrey_Starosta@blm.gov. 

• Fax: (760) 872–5050. 

• Mail: BLM Bishop Field Office, 351 

Pacu Lane, Suite 100, Bishop, California 

93514, Attn: Jeff Starosta, Rangeland 

Management Specialist. 

Documents pertinent to this proposal 

may be examined at the Bishop Field 

Office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information and/or to have your 

name added to our mailing list, contact 

Jeff Starosta, Rangeland Management 

Specialist, telephone (760) 872–5032; 

mail BLM Bishop Field Office, 351 Pacu 

Lane, Suite 100, Bishop, California 

93514; or e-mail 

Jeffrey_Starosta@blm.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BLM 

Bishop Field Office intends to prepare 

an EA that will evaluate a range of 

alternatives for grazing domestic sheep 

on the Dog Creek and Green Creek 

allotments in Mono County, California. 

The purpose of this action is to consider 

whether or not, or under what terms and 

conditions, to issue 10-year grazing 

permits for these two allotments. The 

selection of any alternative that would 

modify the mandatory terms and 

conditions of the allotments, or that 

would make all or portions of the 

allotments unavailable for grazing by 

domestic livestock, would not conform 

to the Bishop RMP, and would therefore 

require a plan amendment. 

The Dog Creek allotment consists of 

approximately 6,527 acres of public 

land and 1,148 acres of private land. 

The Green Creek allotment consists of 

approximately 3,861 acres of public 

land, 160 acres of state land, and 364 

acres of private land. The Dog Creek 

allotment includes the majority of the 

Conway Summit Area of Critical 

Environmental Concern. No threatened 

or endangered species are known to 

occur in the allotments and there is no 

designated critical habitat for any listed 

species in either allotment. 

Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep (Ovis 

canadensis sierrae), a federally listed 

endangered species, inhabit the Sierra 

Nevada Range south and west of the two 

allotments. In the final Recovery Plan 

for the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep 

(SNBS Recovery Plan), the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (FWS) recommended 

that the Dog Creek and Green Creek 

allotments be closed to domestic sheep 

grazing due to the risk of disease 

transmission between domestic sheep 

and bighorn sheep. These two 

allotments were specifically identified 

by the FWS as posing a high risk for 

disease transmission because of their 

proximity to occupied Sierra Nevada 

bighorn sheep habitat. 

The purpose of the public scoping 

process is to determine relevant issues 

that will influence the scope of the 

environmental analysis, including 

alternatives, and guide the process for 

developing the EA. At present, the BLM 

has identified the following preliminary 

issues: livestock management; specially 

designated areas; cultural resources; 

recreation; invasive, non-native species; 

social and economic values; wetlands 

and riparian habitats; and vegetation 

and wildlife, including threatened, 

endangered, and sensitive species. 

Preliminary planning criteria include: 

• Incorporating the Central California 

Standards for Rangeland Health and 

Guidelines for Livestock Grazing 

Management; 

• Complying with Appendix C of the 

BLM Land Use Planning Handbook (H 

1601–1) in making resource specific 

determinations; 

• Analyzing allotment closure 

recommendations provided by the FWS 

in the SNBS Recovery Plan; 

• Developing any required plan 

amendment in compliance with the 

FLPMA, all other applicable laws, 

regulations, executive orders, and BLM 

supplemental program guidance; 

• Considering the extent to which the 

action alternative and any required plan 

amendment supports the recovery goals 

outlined in the SNBS Recovery Plan; 

and 

• Assuring that any required plan 

amendment is compatible, to the extent 

possible, with existing plans and 

policies of adjacent local, state, Tribal, 

and Federal agencies. 

Authorization of any alternative 

analyzed in the EA may require 

amendment of the Bishop RMP, dated 

March 25, 1993. By this notice, the BLM 

is complying with requirements in 43 

CFR 1610.2(c) to notify the public of 

potential amendments to land use plans, 

predicated on the findings of the EA. If 

a land use plan amendment is 

necessary, the BLM will integrate the 

land use planning process with the 

NEPA process for this project. The BLM 

will use and coordinate the NEPA 

commenting process to satisfy the 

public involvement process for Section 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES