Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Proposed Rules 29047

the tribal revenue allocation plan

according to your governing document.

§ 290.19 Where should the Indian tribe

submit the tribal revenue allocation plan?

You must submit your tribal revenue

allocation plan to your respective

Superintendent. The Superintendent

will review the tribal revenue allocation

plan to make sure it has been properly

adopted and contains all information

needed. The Superintendent will then

transmit the tribal revenue allocation

plan promptly to the Appropriate

Bureau Official.

§ 290.20 What action must the Appropriate

Bureau Official take?

The Appropriate Bureau Official must

approve any tribal revenue allocation

plan that is sufficiently detailed to allow

the Appropriate Bureau Official to

determine that it complies with § 290.11

and the IGRA.

§ 290.21 How long will the review by the

Appropriate Bureau Official take?

(a) Within 90 days after the

Appropriate Bureau Official receives the

tribal revenue allocation plan, or such

shorter time as may be provided in the

tribes’ governing documents approved

by the Secretary, the Appropriate

Bureau Official must review and

approve the tribal revenue allocation

plan if it conforms with this part and

the IGRA.

(b) If the tribal revenue allocation

plan does not conform to the

requirements of IGRA or this part, the

Appropriate Bureau Official will send

you a written notice within the time

periods set forth in paragraph (a) of this

section. The notice will explain why the

tribal revenue allocation plan does not

comply with this part or the IGRA and

tell you how to bring it into compliance.

§ 290.22 What action will the Appropriate

Bureau Official take if the tribal revenue

allocation plan cannot be approved?

The Appropriate Bureau Official will

not approve any tribal revenue

allocation plan for distribution of net

gaming revenues from a tribal gaming

activity if:

(a) The tribal revenue allocation plan

is inadequate, particularly with respect

to the requirements described in

§ 290.11 and IGRA, and you fail to bring

it into compliance; or

(b) The tribal revenue allocation plan

is not adopted in compliance with your

governing documents; or

(c) The tribal revenue allocation plan

does not include a reasonable

justification for limiting per capita

payments to certain groups of members;

or

(d) The tribal revenue allocation plan

violates the Indian Civil Rights Act of

1968, any other provision of Federal

law, or the United States’ trust

obligations.

§ 290.23 May an Indian tribe appeal the

Appropriate Bureau Official’s decision?

Yes, the Appropriate Bureau Official’s

decision may be appealed in accordance

with the regulations at 25 CFR part 2.

§ 290.24 What happens if an Indian tribe

makes per capita payments without an

approved tribal revenue allocation plan?

The Department of Justice may

enforce the per capita approval

requirements of IGRA for any tribe

refusing to comply with the law.

§ 290.25 How does the Indian tribe assure

compliance with its tribal revenue allocation

plan?

You must establish a process in the

tribal revenue allocation plan for

reviewing expenditures of net gaming

revenues and explain how you will

correct deficiencies.

§ 290.26 How does the Indian tribe resolve

disputes arising from per capita

distributions?

You must establish a process to

resolve disputes arising from per capita

distributions.

§ 290.27 Do changes/amendments to a

tribal revenue allocation plan require

approval?

Yes, the Appropriate Bureau Official

must approve any changes/amendments

to a tribal revenue allocation plan to

ensure that the changes/modifications

conform to § 290.11 and the IGRA.

§ 290.28 What is the liability of the United

States under this part?

The United States is not liable for the

manner in which a tribe distributes

funds from net gaming revenues.

Dated: May 22, 1996.

Ada E. Deer,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 96–14061 Filed 6–6–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–P

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Reopening of Comment

Period and Notice of Public Hearing on

Proposed Endangered Status for the

Least Chub (Iotichthys Phlegethontis)

and Proposed Designation of Its

Critical Habitat

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of public

hearing and reopening of comment

period.

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service

(Service) provides notice that a public

hearing will be held on the proposed

determination of endangered status with

critical habitat for the least chub

(Iotichthys phlegethontis). To

accommodate the public hearing, the

comment period on the proposal is

reopened. The least chub is a small fish

in the minnow family endemic to the

Bonneville Basin in Utah. All interested

parties are invited to submit comments

on this proposal.

DATES: The public hearing will be held

from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 8

p.m., with registration beginning at 2:30

p.m., on Thursday, June 27, 1996.

Comments will be accepted until July

15, 1996.

ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be

held at the Wendover High School, 110

Wildcat Blvd., Wendover, Utah. Written

comments and materials should be sent

to the Field Supervisor, Fish and

Wildlife Service, 145 East 1300 South,

Suite 404, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84115.

Comments and materials received will

be available for inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours, at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert D. Williams, Assistant Field

Supervisor, telephone 801/524–5001

(see ADDRESSES Section).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The least chub (Iotichthys

phlegethontis) is a small monotypic

minnow endemic to the Bonneville

Basin of Utah where it was once

common and widely distributed.

Populations of least chub have declined

and continue to be threatened by habitat

loss and degradation, and the

introduction of nonactive species which

compete with and predate least chub.

The species is now restricted to several

spring systems in the Snake Valley of

western Utah, with one additional

population recently discovered in

eastern Juab County near Mona, Utah.

Listing the least chub as endangered

would afford the species protection

under the Endangered Species Act (Act)

of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et

seq.).

On September 29, 1995, the Service

published a proposed rule (60 FR

50518) to list the least chub as an

endangered species with critical habitat.

Section 4(b)(5)(E) of the Act requires

that a public hearing be held if

requested within 45 days of publication
29048 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Proposed Rules

of the proposal in the Federal Register.

During the open comment period a

public hearing request was received

from private land owners in the vicinity

of the species proposed critical habitat.

The Service originally scheduled a

hearing on December 18, 1995.

However, this hearing was canceled due

to the listing moratorium enacted by

Congress. This moratorium has now

been lifted and the Service is

proceeding with the public hearing.

Public Comments Solicited

The Service has scheduled this

hearing on Thursday, June 27, 1996

from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 8

p.m., with registration beginning at 2:30

p.m. mountain daylight time (see

ADDRESSES above). Anyone wishing to

make an oral statement for the record is

encouraged to provide a written copy of

their statement to be presented to the

Service at the start of the hearing. In the

event there is a large attendance, the

time allotted for oral statements may

have to be limited.

Oral and written statements

concerning the proposed rule will

receive equal consideration by the

Service. There are no limits to the

length of written comments presented at

this hearing or mailed to the Service.

Comments particularly are sought

concerning:

(1) Biological, commercial trade, or

other relevant data concerning any

threat (or lack thereof) to the least chub;

(2) The location of any additional

populations of least chub and the

reasons why any habitat should or

should not be determined to be critical

habitat as provided in section 4 of the

Act;

(3) Additional information concerning

the range, distribution, and population

size of this species;

(4) Current or planned activities

which may adversely modify the area

that is being considered for critical

habitat; and

(5) Any foreseeable economic or other

impacts resulting from the proposed

designation of critical habitat.

Legal notices and news releases

announcing the date, time, and location

of the hearing are being published in

newspapers concurrently with this

Federal Register notice.

The previous comment period on this

proposal closed on January 19, 1996. To

accommodate this hearing, the Service

reopens the comment period. Written

comments may now be submitted until

July 15, 1996, to the Service office

identified in the ADDRESSES section

above. All comments must be received

before the close of the comment period

to be considered.

Author

The author of this notice is Janet

Mizzi, Utah Field Office (see ADDRESSES

above), telephone 801/524–5001.

Authority

Authority for this action is the

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: May 31, 1996.

Terry T. Terrell,

Deputy Regional Director, Region 6, Fish and

Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 96–14336 Filed 6–6–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–M