Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 241 / Friday, December 14, 2001 / Notices 64855

Rate class

(• denotes proposed rate or fee adjustment)

Present

rate

Proposed

rate

Minimum charge, or ...................................................................................................................................... 132.00 132.00

Charge per horsepower ................................................................................................................................ 6.00 6.00

Monthly charge per rated horsepower of pump ................................................................................................... 11.05 11.05

Energy charge per kilowatt-hour .......................................................................................................................... 0.03586 0.03586

Area lighting rate class, monthly charge:

Install on existing pole or structure: 6.87 7.20

• 7,000 lumen, mercury vapor unit (existing only) .............................................................................................. 9.82 10.30

• 20,000 lumen, mercury vapor unit (existing only) ............................................................................................ 6.36 6.70

• 9,000 lumen, high-pressure sodium unit .......................................................................................................... 8.60 9.00

• 22,000 lumen, high-pressure sodium unit.

Install with new pole: 8.62 9.05

• 7,000 lumen, mercury vapor unit (existing only) .............................................................................................. 11.28 11.85

• 20,000 lumen, mercury vapor unit (existing only) ............................................................................................ 8.12 8.50

• 9,000 lumen, high-pressure sodium unit .......................................................................................................... 10.32 10.85

• 22,000 lumen, high-pressure sodium unit.

Street lighting service:

Metered Service (not including street light fixtures):

Basic monthly charge .................................................................................................................................... 5.00 5.00

Energy charge ............................................................................................................................................... 0.05495 0.05495

Unmetered Service:

This rate class is available only to municipalities or communities for ten or more lighting units in a group.

The charges for this service are subject to a negotiated contract with MVP. ................................................. (2) (2)

Unmetered service charge per month:

• Charges for an unmetered service under the present rate structure are determined on an individual basis.

The rate proposed for this service is a flat monthly charge (unmetered street light service is not part of

this rate class). .................................................................................................................................................. (2) 15.00

1 Not used.

2 Negotiated.

Consultation and Coordination With

Tribal Governments (Executive Order

13175)

The CSKT operates the utility under

a Public Law 93–638 contract. As part

of the contractual relationship, there are

continuing consultations between the

CSKT and the BIA. These consultations

meet the spirit and intent of the

Executive Order.

Actions Concerning Regulations That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use (Executive Order

13211)

This is a notice for a proposed rate

adjustment at a BIA owned electric

power utility. These rate adjustments

will have no adverse effects on energy

supply, distribution, or use (including a

shortfall in supply, price increases, and

increased use of foreign supplies)

should the proposed rate adjustment be

implemented.

Regulatory Planning and Review

(Executive Order 12866)

This rate adjustment is not a

significant regulatory action and does

not need to be reviewed by the Office

of Management and Budget under

Executive Order 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This rate adjustment is not a rule for

the purposes of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act because it is ‘‘a rule of

particular applicability relating to

rates’’. 5 U.S.C. 601(2)(1996).

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995

This rate adjustment imposes no

unfunded mandates on any

governmental or private entity and is in

compliance with the provisions of the

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995.

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

The Department has determined that

this rate adjustment does not have

significant ‘‘takings’’ implications. The

rate adjustment does not deprive the

public, state, or local governments of

rights or property.

Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

The Department has determined that

this rate adjustment does not have

significant Federalism effects because it

pertains solely to Federal-tribal relations

and will not interfere with the roles,

rights, and responsibilities of states.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order

12988)

In accordance with Executive Order

12988, the Office of the Solicitor has

determined that this rule does not

unduly burden the judicial system and

meets the requirements of sections 3(a)

and 3(b)(2) of the Order.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

This rate adjustment does not affect

the collections of information which

have been approved by the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB), under the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995. The OMB control number

is 1076–0141 and expires November 30,

2002.

National Environmental Policy Act

The Department has determined that

this rate adjustment does not constitute

a major Federal action significantly

affecting the quality of the human

environment and that no detailed

statement is required under the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42

U.S.C. 4321) et. seq. (1996).

Dated: December 3, 2001.

Neal A. McCaleb,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 01–30882 Filed 12–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Indian Gaming

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of approved Tribal-State

Compact.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 11 of the

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988

(IGRA), Public Law 100–497, 25 U.S.C.

2710, the Secretary of the Interior shall

publish, in the Federal Register, notice

64856 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 241 / Friday, December 14, 2001 / Notices

of approved Tribal-State Compacts for

the purpose of engaging in Class III

gaming activities on Indian lands. The

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs,

Department of the Interior, through his

delegated authority, has approved the

Class III Gaming Agreement between the

Confederated Salish and Kootenai

Tribes of the Flathead Nation and the

State of Montana, which was executed

on October 12, 2001.

DATES: This action is effective December

14, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George T. Skibine, Director, Office of

Indian Gaming Management, Bureau of

Indian Affairs, Washington, DC 20240;

(202) 219–4066.

Dated: November 30, 2001.

Neal A. McCaleb,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 01–30906 Filed 12–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Indian Gaming

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of approved Tribal-State

Compacts.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 11 of the

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988

(IGRA), Public Law 100–497, 25 U.S.C.

2710, the Secretary of the Interior shall

publish, in the Federal Register, notice

of approved Tribal-State Compacts for

the purpose of engaging in Class III

gaming activities on Indian lands. The

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs,

Department of the Interior, through his

delegated authority, has approved the

Tribal-State Compacts between the

Pueblos of Isleta, Laguna, Sandia, San

Juan, Santa Ana, Santa Clara and Acoma

and the State of New Mexico, which

were executed on or about October 3,

2001.

DATES: This action is effective December

14, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George T. Skibine, Director, Office of

Indian Gaming Management, Bureau of

Indian Affairs, Washington, DC 20240;

(202) 219–4066.

Dated: November 30, 2001.

Neal A. McCaleb,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 01–30908 Filed 12–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Indian Gaming

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of approved Tribal-State

Compacts.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 11 of the

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988

(IGRA), Public Law 100–497, 25 U.S.C.

2710, the Secretary of the Interior shall

publish, in the Federal Register, notice

of approved Tribal-State Compacts for

the purpose of engaging in Class III

gaming activities on Indian lands. The

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs,

Department of the Interior, through his

delegated authority, has approved the

Tribal-State Compacts between the

Pueblos of Tesuque and San Felipe and

the State of New Mexico, which were

executed on October 12, 2001.

DATES: This action is effective December

14, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George T. Skibine, Director, Office of

Indian Gaming Management, Bureau of

Indian Affairs, Washington, DC 20240;

(202) 219–4066.

Dated: November 30, 2001.

Neal A. McCaleb,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 01–30907 Filed 12–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–M

INTERNATIONAL TRADE

COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337–TA–448]

In the Matter of Certain Oscillating

Sprinklers, Sprinkler Components, and

Nozzles; Request for Written

Submissions on Remedy, the Public

Interest, and Bonding

AGENCY: International Trade

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the U.S. International Trade

Commission is requesting briefing on

remedy, the public interest, and

bonding in the above-captioned

investigation. The Commission

previously found the only remaining

respondent in the investigation to be in

default.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laurent de Winter, Esq., Office of the

General Counsel, U.S. International

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202–

708–5452. General information

concerning the Commission may also be

obtained by accessing its Internet server

(http://www.usitc.gov). The public

record for this investigation may be

viewed on the Commission’s electronic

docket (EDIS–ON–Line) at http://

dockets.usitc.gov/eol.public. Hearingimpaired persons are advised that

information on the matter can be

obtained by contacting the

Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–

205–1810. Copies of all nonconfidential

documents filed in connection with this

investigation are or will be available for

inspection during official business

hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the

Office of the Secretary, U.S.

International Trade Commission, 500 E

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436,

telephone 202–205–2000.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Commission instituted this

investigation, which concerns

allegations of unfair acts in violation of

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in

the importation and sale of certain

oscillating sprinklers, sprinkler

components, and nozzles, on February

9, 2001. 66 FR 9721.

On June 12, 2001, the Commission

determined not to review the presiding

administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’)

initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No.

7) finding respondent Watex

International Co. Ltd., (‘‘Watex’’) to be

in default for claims pending against it

relating to U.S. Letters Patent 5,645,218,

(‘‘the ‘218 patent’’) and U.S. Letters

Patent 5,511,727 (‘‘the ‘727 patent’’). On

October 1, 2001, complainant L.R.

Nelson Corp. (‘‘Nelson’’) filed a

declaration seeking, pursuant to section

337(g)(1) and rule 210.16(c)(1), entry of

a limited exclusion order against Watex

barring importation into the United

States of Watex sprinklers infringing the

claims in issue of the ‘218 and ‘727

patents. In its declaration, Nelson did

not seek issuance of a cease and desist

order against Watex.

On September 13, 2001, Nelson

moved to withdraw all allegations

related to U.S. Letters Patent 6,036,117

(‘‘the ‘117 patent’’) from the

investigation. On September 25, 2001,

the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 26)

granting the motion to withdraw the

allegations relating to the ‘117 patent,

and on October 26, 2001, the

Commission determined not to review

that ID. This withdrawal terminated the

investigation with respect to all

respondents except Watex, which still

has claims relating to the ‘218 and ‘727

patents pending against it.

Section 337(g)(1), 19 U.S.C. (g)(1),

authorizes the Commission to order