60-day Notice published

25690

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2016 / Notices

it meets the requirements for an ETP.
Alternative 3 represents an example of
a different development scenario PCW
could present in a new application if the
Service were to determine that the
Phase I CCSM Project would meet all
the criteria for issuing an ETP, but not
at the scale proposed. Alternative 3 is
for the Service to issue ETPs for the
construction of Phase I infrastructure
and the construction and operation of
wind turbines only in the Sierra Madre
Wind Development Area (WDA) (298
turbines total). The alternative includes
avoidance and minimization measures,
best management practices, and
compensatory mitigation described in
PCW’s application as they apply to the
Sierra Madre WDA.
Alternative 4: No Action. Under
Alternative 4, the Service would deny
PCW standard and programmatic ETPs
for construction and operation of the
Phase I CCSM Project. In addition to
being a potential outcome of the permit
review process, analysis of the No
Action alternative is required by CEQ
regulation (40 CFR 1502.14) and
provides a baseline against which to
compare the environmental impacts of
the Proposed Action and other
reasonable alternatives. ETPs are not
required in order for PCW to construct
and operate the project; therefore, if we
deny the ETPs, PCW may choose to
construct and operate the Phase I CCSM
Project without ETPs and without
adhering to an ECP. Alternative 4
analyzes both a ‘‘No Build’’ scenario
and a ‘‘Build Without ETPs’’ scenario.

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

National Environmental Policy Act
Compliance
Our decision whether to issue
standard and programmatic ETPs to
PCW triggers compliance with NEPA,
which requires the Service to analyze
the direct, indirect, and cumulative
impacts of the CCSM Phase I project
before we make our decision, and to
make our analysis available to the
public. We have prepared the draft EIS
to inform the public of our proposed
permit action, alternatives to that action,
the environmental impacts of the
alternatives, and measures to minimize
adverse environmental effects.
EPA’s Role in the EIS Process
The EPA is charged under section 309
of the Clean Air Act to review all
Federal agencies’ EISs and to comment
on the adequacy and the acceptability of
the environmental impacts of proposed
actions in the EISs.
EPA also serves as the repository (EIS
database) for EISs prepared by Federal
agencies and provides notice of their
availability in the Federal Register. The

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:31 Apr 28, 2016

Jkt 238001

EIS database provides information about
EISs prepared by Federal agencies, as
well as EPA’s comments concerning the
EISs. All EISs are filed with EPA, which
publishes a notice of availability on
Fridays in the Federal Register.
For more information, see http://
www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/
eisdata.html. You may search for EPA
comments on EISs, along with EISs
themselves, at https://
cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/
action/eis/search.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Public Comment Procedures

SUMMARY:

In accordance with CEQ’s regulations
for implementing NEPA and DOI’s
NEPA regulations, the Service requests
public comments on the draft EIS.
Timely comments will be considered by
the Service in preparing the final EIS.
Written comments, including email
comments, should be sent to the Service
at one of the addresses given in the
ADDRESSES section of this notice.
Comments should be specific and
pertain only to issues relating to the
proposals. The Service will include all
comments in the administrative record.
If you would like to be placed on the
mailing list to receive future
information, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Public Availability of Submissions
Before including your address, phone
number, email 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.
Comments and materials received will
be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the office where the comments
are being submitted.
Authorities
This notice is published in
accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969; the
CEQ’s regulations for implementing
NEPA, 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508;
and the Department of the Interior’s
NEPA regulations, 43 CFR part 45.
Matt Hogan,
Regional Director, Mountain-Prairie Region.
[FR Doc. 2016–09783 Filed 4–28–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

PO 00000

Frm 00051

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Geological Survey
[GX16EF00PMEXP00]

Agency Information Collection
Activities: Request for Comments
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of a renewal of a
currently approved information
collection (1028–0092).
AGENCY:

We (the U.S. Geological
Survey) will respectfully request the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) renew the information collection
(IC) and/or data detailed below. To
comply with the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (PRA) and as part of our
continuing efforts to reduce paperwork
and perspective recipient burden, we
invite the general public and other
Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on the IC. This
collection is scheduled to expire on 9/
30/2016.
DATES: To ensure that your comments
are considered, we must receive them
on or before June 28, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this information collection to the
Information Collection Clearance
Officer, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201
Sunrise Valley Drive MS 807, Reston,
VA 20192 (mail); (703) 648–7197 (fax);
or [email protected] (email).
Please reference ‘Information Collection
1028–0092, The National Map:
Topographic Data Grants Program’ in all
correspondence.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anthony Martin, National Geospatial
Program, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201
Sunrise Valley Drive, Mail Stop 511,
Reston, VA 20192 (mail); 703–648–4542
(phone); or [email protected] (email).
You may also find information about
this ICR at www.reginfo.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
The National Geospatial Program
(NGP) of the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) contributes funding for the
collection of geospatial data which
increases the development of The
National Map and other national
geospatial databases. NGP will accept
applications from State, local or tribal
governments to offset present data
collection programs in order to meet the
growing and present need for current
and accurate geospatial data. To submit
a proposal a completed project narrative
and application must be submitted via
Grants.gov. Recipients who are selected

E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM

29APN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2016 / Notices

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

for grants must supply a final technical
report at the end of the project period.
All application instructions and forms
are available on the Internet through
Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov).
Hard/paper submissions will not be
accepted under any circumstances. All
reports will be accepted electronically
via email.
II. Data
OMB Control Number: 1028–0092.
Form Number: N/A.
Title: The National Map: Topographic
Data Grants Program.
Type of Request: Renewal of existing
information collection.
Affected Public: State, Local, Tribal
Government.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Frequency of Collection: Annually.
Estimated Total Number of Annual
Responses: 40 applications and 20 final
reports.
Estimated Time per Response: The
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) foresees
60 hours of time will be needed to
complete the necessary submissions
which will include the narrative and
supporting documentation. We believe
that reading the requirements as well as
development, proposal writing,
reviewing and submission of the
proposal application via Grants.gov will
require 47 hours. Quarterly and final
project reports must be submitted by the
award recipient. The prior quarter’s
progress must be submitted within the
report 7 days following the start of the
new quarter. The quarterly report will
take at least 1 hour to prepare. The final
report must be submitted within 90
calendar days of the end of the project
period. USGS estimates that
approximately 10 hours will be needed
to complete the final report.
Estimated Annual Burden Hours:
2,140 Hours per response.
Estimated Reporting and
Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-Hour Cost’’
Burden: There are no ‘‘non-hour cost’’
burdens related to the collection of this
data.
Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor and
you are not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number and current expiration date.
III. Request for Comments
We are soliciting comments as to: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the agency
to perform its duties, including whether
the information is useful; (b) the
accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:31 Apr 28, 2016

Jkt 238001

burden of the proposed collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d) how
to minimize the burden on the
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Please note that the comments
submitted in response to this notice are
a matter of public record. Before
including your personal mailing
address, phone number, email address,
or other personally identifiable
information in your comment, you
should be aware that your entire
comment, including your personally
identifiable information, may be made
publicly available at any time. While
you can ask us in your comment to
withhold your personally identifiable
information from public view, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Julia Fields,
Deputy Director, National Geospatial
Program.
[FR Doc. 2016–10041 Filed 4–28–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4338–11–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[16X/A11220000.224100/AAK4004800/
AX.480ADM100000]

Rate Adjustments for Indian Irrigation
Projects
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of rate adjustments.
AGENCY:

The Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIA) owns, or has an interest in,
irrigation projects located on or
associated with various Indian
reservations throughout the United
States. We are required to establish
irrigation assessment rates to recover the
costs to administer, operate, maintain,
and rehabilitate these projects. We are
notifying you that we have adjusted the
irrigation assessment rates at several of
our irrigation projects and facilities to
reflect current costs of administration,
operation, maintenance, and
rehabilitation.
DATES: The irrigation assessment rates
are current as of January 1, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
details about a particular BIA irrigation
project or facility, please use the tables
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section to contact the regional or local
office where the project or facility is
located.
SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00052

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

25691

A Notice
of Proposed Rate Adjustment was
published in the Federal Register on
June 11, 2015 (80 FR 33279) to propose
adjustments to the irrigation assessment
rates at several BIA irrigation projects.
The public and interested parties were
provided an opportunity to submit
written comments during the 60-day
period that ended August 10, 2015.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Did BIA defer or change any proposed
rate increases?
Yes. Rate increases were deferred on
the Crow Irrigation Project—Two
Leggins Unit and the Wind River
Irrigation Project—Riverton Valley
Irrigation District.
Did BIA receive any comments on the
proposed irrigation assessment rate
adjustments?
Yes. The BIA received sixteen (16)
letters with comments. All comments
received were associated with the
Flathead Indian Irrigation Project’s
(FIIP) proposed rate adjustment for
Calendar Year (CY) 2016.
What issues were of concern to the
commenters?
Comments received relate specifically
to the proposed rate increase for CY
2016 and other activities associated only
with the FIIP.
The BIA’s summary of commenters’
issues and BIA’s response are provided
below.
Comment: Three commenters
requested the rate increase be postponed
until:
—Two court cases (one case in State
court challenging an alleged illegal
vote of the state legislature and one
case in Federal court concerning the
re-assumption of operations and
maintenance of the FIIP by the Bureau
of Indian Affairs) are resolved.
—The Confederated and Salish and
Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) Water
Compact is ratified by Congress.
—Western Montana is no longer in a
federally designated ‘‘Severe
Drought’’ condition.
Response: The final rate for the FIIP
in 2016 will remain the same as 2015.
Comment: How can the request for
increased rates be warranted when those
alleging the need are not fully qualified
to do so?
Response: The final rate for the FIIP
in 2016 will remain the same as 2015.
Comment: The BIA Solicitor’s Office
spent large amounts of Cooperative
Management Entity (CME) O&M funds
traveling back and forth from Portland,
OR and Washington, DC to Montana,
conducting private meetings while the
project manager was spending a large

E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM

29APN1