Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Revisions to a Currently Approved Information Collection; Request for Comments, 5684-5687 [E6-1398]

Download as PDF hsrobinson on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 5684 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2006 / Notices became Oregon State University in 1962. In 1975, Keith Chamberlain gifted the cranium to the John B. Horner Museum of the Oregon Country. The Horner Museum closed in 1995. Currently, cultural items from the Horner Museum are referred to as the Horner Collection, which is owned by, and in the possession of, Oregon State University. It is unknown whether the human remains were removed by Mr. Chamberlain. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains have been identified as Native American based on the presence of cranial deformation and museum records that identify the human remains as a ‘‘flathead skull’’, cranial deformation is consistent with practices of the Chinook-speaking groups and, to a lesser degree, by the Sahaptin-speaking groups. The Memaloose Islands were used during the post-contact period by local Native American peoples for the burial of their dead. The Memaloose Islands are within the traditional territory of Chinook- and Sahaptin-speaking Indian groups represented today by the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Indian Nation, Washington, and the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon has submitted a claim for the human remains. Officials of the Horner Collection, Oregon State University have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), the human remains described above represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry. Officials of the Horner Collection, Oregon State University have also determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Indian Nation, Washington, and Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the human remains should contact Sabah Randhawa, Executive Vice President and Provost, President’s Office, Oregon State University, 600 Kerr Administration Building, Corvallis, OR 97331, telephone (541) 737–8260, before March 6, 2006. Repatriation of the human remains to the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:26 Feb 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 Oregon may proceed after that date if no additional claimants come forward. The Horner Collection, Oregon State University is responsible for notifying the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington, and Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon that this notice has been published. Dated: January 20, 2006. C. Timothy McKeown, Acting Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E6–1380 Filed 2–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–50–S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Notice of Inventory Completion: Renton Historical Society and Museum, Renton, WA National Park Service, Interior. Notice. AGENCY: ACTION: Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains in the control of the Renton Historical Society and Museum, Renton, WA. The human remains were removed from King County, WA. This notice is published as part of the National Park Service’s administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003 (d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by Renton Historical Society and Museum professional staff in consultations with representatives of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington. In the early 1900s, human remains representing a minimum of one individual were removed from an unknown site on the beach of southern Lake Washington, Renton, King County, WA, by Carl Mattison, a local resident. In 1978, the human remains were donated to the Renton Historical Society and Museum by Marilyn Calcaterra and Judith Matson. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present. Based on a cursory physical examination of the human remains and general knowledge of indigenous habitation of the Lake Washington area prior to colonization by Europeans, the PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 human remains are presumed to comprise the partial skeleton of an individual of Native American ancestry. According to museum records, the donor speculated that a mass burial site, similar to those used by Native Americans, was within the general area where the human remains were unearthed. Moreover, Native Americans have been known to populate the area surrounding Lake Washington since before contact. Descendants of the original inhabitants are members of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington, and the Lake Washington area is within their aboriginal territory. Officials of the Renton Historical Society and Museum have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), the human remains described above represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry. Officials of the Renton Historical Society and Museum also have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington. Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the human remains should contact Laura Crawford, Acting Collections Manager, Renton Historical Museum, 235 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055, telephone (425) 255–2330, before March 6, 2006. Repatriation of the human remains to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington may proceed after that date if no additional claimants come forward. The Renton Historical Society and Museum is responsible for notifying the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington that this notice has been published. Dated: January 20, 2006. C. Timothy McKeown, Acting Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E6–1378 Filed 2–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–50–S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Revisions to a Currently Approved Information Collection; Request for Comments AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior. E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM 02FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2006 / Notices Notice of revisions to a currently approved information collection form (OMB No. 1006–0003). hsrobinson on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES ACTION: SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the following Information Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment: The previouslyapproved Right-of-Use (ROU) Application (Form 7–2540), 43 CFR part 429, OMB Control Number 1006–0003, has been significantly modified, shortened and made clearer for shortterm public uses of Reclamation land, facilities, and water surfaces. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden. DATES: All written comments must be received on or before March 6, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may send comments regarding the burden estimate, or any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior at the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, via facsimile to (202) 395–6566, or e-mail to OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov. A copy of your comments should also be directed to the Bureau of Reclamation, Attention: D–5300, P.O. Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225–0007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information or a copy of the proposed ROU Application Form 7– 7540 contact Marian Mather, D–5300, P.O. Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225– 0007; or by telephone: (303) 445–2895. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In response to public comments to the Federal Register (FR) notice 70 FR 43181 (July 26, 2005) relating to the complexity of the currently-approved ROU application form, Reclamation has significantly modified, shortened, and made clearer the ROU Application Form 7–2540 to address short-term public requests to use Reclamation land, facilities, and water surfaces. The public comments were instructive to Reclamation by pointing out that, for example, the types of information needed from a boating regatta organizer would differ significantly from that needed from a construction company requesting a right-of-way for placement of a fiber optics cable. In the latter case, Reclamation will begin using the Standard Form 299 (SF 299), Application for Transportation and Utility Systems and Facilities on VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:26 Feb 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 Federal Lands. The SF 299 requires more in-depth information from those individuals requesting approval to place and construct such infrastructure as transmission lines, telecommunications towers, or natural gas pipelines, or for other long-term uses such as grazing and farming. The use of this form is in compliance with the Presidential Memorandum, subject: Improving Rights of-Way Management Across Federal Lands to Spur Broadband Deployment, dated March 26, 2004. Requesting the more detailed information from an organizer of a short-term event would be inappropriate and not be useful to Reclamation in determining whether to grant the request. Thus the decision was made, after publishing of the July 2005 FR notice relating to the renewal of a single ROU form, to significantly modify the Form 7–2540 so that appropriate information was requested from shortterm ROU applicants. Title: Bureau of Reclamation Right-ofUse Application, 43 CFR 429. Abstract: Reclamation is responsible for approximately 8 million acres of land which directly support Reclamation’s Federal water projects in the 17 western states. Individuals or entities wanting to use Reclamation’s lands, facilities, and water surfaces must submit an application to gain permission for such uses based on the type of use for either long-term or shortterm activities. Examples of short-term activities are recreation and sporting events, and commercial filming and photography. Reclamation will review and evaluate these ROU applications and determine whether the granting of the requested use is compatible with Reclamation’s present or future uses of the water and related project lands, facilities, or water surfaces. Frequency: Each time a short-term right-of-use is requested. Respondents: Individuals, corporations, companies, and State and local entities that want to use Reclamation lands, facilities, or water surfaces. Estimated Annual Total Number of Respondents: 175. Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.0. Estimated Total Number of Annual Responses: 175. Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 350 hours. Estimated Completion Time Per Respondent: 2 hours. Non-hour Cost Burden: Processing fee of $200 per ROU Application. Public Comments: Notice was given in the Federal Register on July 26, 2005 (70 FR 43181, July 26, 2005) to solicit PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 5685 public comments on Form 7–2540, which was reworked in preparation for public comment. Four individuals commented on this form and all comments were from an organized recreation activity perspective from the area of the New Melones Reservoir in Reclamation’s Central Valley Project. The following are the paraphrased public comments and Reclamation’s responses: Comment 1: All individuals who commented were specifically critical of charging a $200 application fee claiming that the application fee is ‘‘outrageous and not economically feasible’’ and will force special events to take their activities elsewhere. Also, there were three comments which stated, in effect, that there is no ‘‘set rate’’ for the charging of (rental) fees and it appears as if Reclamation can [arbitrarily] determine such charges. Response: It is important to understand that the application fee and the value of the right of use (i.e., rental fee) are not established by this form. This form only states what fees are required according to the existing 1983 regulation, 43 CFR part 429, specifically § 429.6(b) for the application fee (referred to as initial deposit fee) and section 429.6(f) for rental charges. The application fee must equal Reclamation’s costs of administering the resultant ROU authorizations, as required by 31 U.S.C. 9701 and OMB Circular A–25. As with any applicable regulation, Reclamation does not have the latitude to arbitrarily waive the application fee as it is required by this regulation. Comment 2: The form is complicated, lengthy, and difficult to fill out and understand. Response: Reclamation agrees that the form was too difficult, lengthy, and complicated for short-term recreational uses envisioned by the commenters. This comment became the impetus behind Reclamation’s decision to completely revise the ROU form referenced in the FR Notice. The reason for the complete revision was that the Form 7–2540 cited in the FR Notice was really geared more for longer term uses, such as broadband deployment activities, pipeline placement and construction, and grazing or farming leases. In addition, Reclamation became aware of the recent requirement for all bureaus to use the SF 299 instead of other forms for such activities. Thus, the issue of what form should be used to collect information for long term uses was resolved with the decision to use the SF 299. E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM 02FEN1 hsrobinson on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES 5686 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2006 / Notices As a result of the public comments, Reclamation’s Form 7–2540 was revised to target shorter term uses such as special recreation events, organized gatherings for special events, sporting events, and commercial filming. The resulting proposed short-term ROU Application Form 7–2540 is a significantly simpler, one-page form with an additional page of instructions, which should provide ease of understanding and facilitate completion for individuals requesting such uses of Reclamation’s lands, facilities, and water surfaces. Comment 3: Two hours to complete the form is unacceptable. Response: Trying to keep both shortand long-term uses under Reclamation’s previously approved Form 7–2540 caused confusion and Reclamation agrees with the commenters that it did make the form appear more onerous and lengthy to fill out. To facilitate completion of the revised ROU Application Form 7–2540 for short-term uses, it will be made available on the Internet where it can be downloaded and filled out on a personal computer or printed out for manual completion. The hours spent by the applicants to complete the application should not exceed 2 hours on average, depending upon the type of backup materials needed. Comment 4: Fishing tournaments and boat regattas are not in the same category as construction of transmission lines. Response: Reclamation agrees with this comment. In response, Reclamation has completely revised the previous Form 7–2540 to meet the needs of shortterm users, such as those requesting permission to hold special events, like fishing tournaments and boating regattas. Comment 5: There is no set size of event which triggers the use of the application. Response: The size of the event does not matter as to whether a ROU Application Form 7–2540 is required. Section 43 CFR 429.6 requires that ‘‘The applicant for a right-of-use over land or estate in land, in the custody and control of Reclamation, must make application to the * * * affected [Reclamation] field office. * * *’’ In contrast, the ROU Application Form 7– 2540 does not need to be completed for day-to-day individual use of Reclamation’s land, facilities, or water surfaces as long as those uses do not exclusively limit other users from enjoying the same area and do not interfere with or threaten project operations. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:26 Feb 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 Comment 6: There is no time limit for returning any remaining deposit of application fee. Response: The comment is a reasonable concern. The new, proposed ROU Application Form 7–2540 has now been modified to include a statement that a refund of any unused initial deposit fee will be completed within 30 days, provided that proper banking information for electronic funds transfer has been provided in a timely manner so as to facilitate such refund. Should their ROU request be denied, contact will be made with the applicant to gather banking information necessary to process their refund. Upon receipt of this information, the refund of any unused initial deposit fee will then be completed within 30 days. Comment 7: One individual commented that Reclamation may ask for a ‘‘deposit fee of $200, and then says it may refund a part of that, or ask for more, after they decide how much the value of the right-of-use is, based on an appraisal.’’ (emphasis added) Response: As discussed in detail in Reclamation’s responses to comment 1 above, there are two fees or charges associated with an approved ROU Application Form 7–2540. Both the fee and rental charges are authorized and required by 43 CFR part 429. The first fee is referred to as an initial application fee (please refer to Reclamation’s response to comment 6 above with regard to the conditions associated with a refund of an application fee). Reclamation may ask for additional monies for the initial application fee ONLY if the administrative costs of actually getting to the point of approving the application exceeds the initial $200 application fee. The commenter is incorrect to assume that asking the applicant for more money to cover Reclamation’s administrative costs is ‘‘based on an appraisal’’ of the ROU; rather, it is based only on Reclamation’s estimated costs of approving the applicant’s request. The second required charge is the cost to the applicant for the rental charge or value of the authorized ROU. This rental charge is based on an appraisal or other acceptable means of establishing the value of permitting the applicant to use Federal lands or water surfaces (see 43 CFR 429.3). Comment 8: House Rule (H.R.) 4818 states that 80 percent of the use fees must be spent on much-needed improvements at a local level. We are concerned with how Reclamation will decide the fees, and who will make the decision. PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Response: The renewal of the ROU application at issue here has nothing to do with H.R. 4818. The initial application fees cover Reclamation’s costs of reviewing and granting the ROU. The monies collected from the rental charges are credited in accordance with existing Federal reclamation law and are statutorily not available for direct improvements at the local level. Again, these application fees and rental charges are authorized by an existing regulation 43 CFR part 429 and are independent of and not affected by H.R. 4818. Comment 9: One comment requested a 90-day extension to solicit additional comments. Response: This suggestion cannot be accommodated. However, the public is given an additional 30 days to respond to this second FR Notice. Individuals wishing to comment will direct their comments directly to the OMB at the address provided in this notice. Individuals should request a copy of the ROU Application Form 7–2540 from the Reclamation staff listed in this notice. Public comments are invited on the modified ROU Application Form 7– 2540 as to: (a) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of Reclamation’s functions to manage and operate Federal water projects and their associated lands, facilities, and water surfaces, including whether the information will have practical use; (b) The accuracy of the burden estimate for the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other forms of information technology. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Reclamation will display a valid OMB control number on the ROU Application Form 7–2540. OMB has up to 60 days to approve or disapprove this information collection, but may respond after 30 days; therefore, public comment should be submitted to OMB within 30 days in order to assure maximum consideration. Department of the Interior’s practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM 02FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2006 / Notices available for public review. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address from public disclosure, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which we would withhold a respondent’s identity from public disclosure, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public disclosure in their entirety. Dated: January 25, 2006. Roseann Gonzales, Director, Office of Program and Policy Services, Denver Office. [FR Doc. E6–1398 Filed 2–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. NAFTA–103–13] Woven Cotton Boxer Shorts: Probable Effect of Modification of NAFTA Rules of Origin for Goods of Canada and Mexico United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Institution of investigation and request for written submissions. AGENCY: hsrobinson on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES DATES: Effective Date: January 27, 2006. SUMMARY: Following receipt of a request on January 4, 2006 from the United States Trade Representative (USTR) under authority delegated by the President and pursuant to section 103 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3313), the Commission instituted investigation No. NAFTA– 103–13, Woven Cotton Boxer Shorts: Probable Effect of Modification of NAFTA Rules of Origin for Goods of Canada and Mexico. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information may be obtained from Laura V. Rodriguez, Office of Industries (202– 205–3499, laura.rodriguez@usitc.gov); for information on legal aspects, contact William Gearhart of the Office of the General Counsel (202–205–3091, william.gearhart@usitc.gov). The media should contact Margaret O’Laughlin, Office of Public Affairs (202–205–1819, margaret.olaughlin@usitc.gov). Background: Annex 300–B, Chapter 4, and Annex 401 of the NAFTA contain the rules of origin for textiles and VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:26 Feb 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 apparel for application of the tariff provisions of the NAFTA. These rules are set forth for the United States in general note 12 to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS). According to the USTR request letter, U.S. negotiators have recently reached agreement in principle with representatives of the Governments of Canada and Mexico to modify the NAFTA rule of origin for woven cotton boxer shorts classified in HTS subheading 6207.1000 and made from cotton woven fabrics of HTS subheadings 5210.1160, 5210.5160, 5210.4180, 5210.4160, 5210.5140, 5208.4240, 5208.4140, 5208.5230, and 5208.5140. These changes are the result of determinations that North American producers are not able to produce certain fabrics in commercial quantities in a timely manner. If implemented, the proposed rule of origin would apply to U.S. imports from and exports to the NAFTA parties. Section 202(q) of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (the Act) authorizes the President, subject to the consultation and layover requirements of section 103 of the Act, to proclaim such modifications to the rules of origin as are necessary to implement an agreement with one or more of the NAFTA countries pursuant to paragraph 2 of section 7 of Annex 300–B of the Agreement. One of the requirements set out in section 103 of the Act is that the President obtain advice from the United States International Trade Commission. In his letter, the USTR requested that the Commission provide advice on the probable effect of the proposed modification of the NAFTA rule of origin for woven cotton boxer shorts (as described above) on U.S. trade under the NAFTA, on total U.S. trade, and on domestic producers of the affected articles. As requested, the Commission will submit its advice to the USTR by April 3, 2006 and soon thereafter, issue a public version of the report with any confidential business information deleted. Additional information concerning the articles and the proposed modifications can be obtained by accessing the electronic version of this notice at the Commission Internet site (http://www.usitc.gov). The current NAFTA rules of origin applicable to U.S. imports can be found in general note 12 of the 2006 HTS (see ‘‘General Notes’’ link at http://www.usitc.gov/ tata/hts/bychapter/index.htm). Written Submissions: No public hearing is planned. However, interested parties are invited to submit written statements concerning the matters to be addressed by the Commission in this investigation. Submissions should be addressed to the Secretary, United PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 5687 States International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. To be assured of consideration by the Commission, written statements related to the Commission’s reports should be submitted to the Commission at the earliest practical date and should be received no later than the close of business on February 20, 2006. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.8). Section 201.8 of the rules requires that a signed original (or copy designated as an original) and fourteen (14) copies of each document be filed. In the event that confidential treatment of the document is requested, at least four (4) additional copies must be filed, in which the confidential business information must be deleted (see the following paragraph for further information regarding confidential business information). The Commission’s rules do not authorize filing submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means, except to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the rules (see Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, http:// hotdocs.usitc.gov/pubs/ handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf. Any submissions that contain confidential business information (CBI) must also conform with the requirements of section 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.6). Section 201.6 of the rules requires that the cover of the document and the individual pages be clearly marked as to whether they are the ‘‘confidential’’ or ‘‘nonconfidential’’ version, and that the CBI be clearly identified by means of brackets. All written submissions, except for CBI, will be made available in the Office of the Secretary to the Commission for inspection by interested parties. The Commission may include some or all of the CBI it receives in the report it sends to the President. However, the Commission will not publish CBI in the public version of the report in a manner that would reveal the operations of the firm supplying the information. The public version will be made available to the public on the Commission’s Internet site (http://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) http://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing impaired individuals may obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM 02FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5684-5687]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-1398]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation


Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Revisions to a 
Currently Approved Information Collection; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

[[Page 5685]]


ACTION: Notice of revisions to a currently approved information 
collection form (OMB No. 1006-0003).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the following 
Information Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment: The previously-
approved Right-of-Use (ROU) Application (Form 7-2540), 43 CFR part 429, 
OMB Control Number 1006-0003, has been significantly modified, 
shortened and made clearer for short-term public uses of Reclamation 
land, facilities, and water surfaces. The ICR describes the nature of 
the information collection and its expected cost and burden.

DATES: All written comments must be received on or before March 6, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments regarding the burden estimate, or any 
other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions for 
reducing the burden, to the Desk Officer for the Department of the 
Interior at the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information 
and Regulatory Affairs, via facsimile to (202) 395-6566, or e-mail to 
OIRA--DOCKET@omb.eop.gov. A copy of your comments should also be 
directed to the Bureau of Reclamation, Attention: D-5300, P.O. Box 
25007, Denver, CO 80225-0007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information or a copy of 
the proposed ROU Application Form 7-7540 contact Marian Mather, D-5300, 
P.O. Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225-0007; or by telephone: (303) 445-2895.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In response to public comments to the 
Federal Register (FR) notice 70 FR 43181 (July 26, 2005) relating to 
the complexity of the currently-approved ROU application form, 
Reclamation has significantly modified, shortened, and made clearer the 
ROU Application Form 7-2540 to address short-term public requests to 
use Reclamation land, facilities, and water surfaces. The public 
comments were instructive to Reclamation by pointing out that, for 
example, the types of information needed from a boating regatta 
organizer would differ significantly from that needed from a 
construction company requesting a right-of-way for placement of a fiber 
optics cable. In the latter case, Reclamation will begin using the 
Standard Form 299 (SF 299), Application for Transportation and Utility 
Systems and Facilities on Federal Lands. The SF 299 requires more in-
depth information from those individuals requesting approval to place 
and construct such infrastructure as transmission lines, 
telecommunications towers, or natural gas pipelines, or for other long-
term uses such as grazing and farming. The use of this form is in 
compliance with the Presidential Memorandum, subject: Improving Rights 
of-Way Management Across Federal Lands to Spur Broadband Deployment, 
dated March 26, 2004. Requesting the more detailed information from an 
organizer of a short-term event would be inappropriate and not be 
useful to Reclamation in determining whether to grant the request. Thus 
the decision was made, after publishing of the July 2005 FR notice 
relating to the renewal of a single ROU form, to significantly modify 
the Form 7-2540 so that appropriate information was requested from 
short-term ROU applicants.
    Title: Bureau of Reclamation Right-of-Use Application, 43 CFR 429.
    Abstract: Reclamation is responsible for approximately 8 million 
acres of land which directly support Reclamation's Federal water 
projects in the 17 western states. Individuals or entities wanting to 
use Reclamation's lands, facilities, and water surfaces must submit an 
application to gain permission for such uses based on the type of use 
for either long-term or short-term activities. Examples of short-term 
activities are recreation and sporting events, and commercial filming 
and photography. Reclamation will review and evaluate these ROU 
applications and determine whether the granting of the requested use is 
compatible with Reclamation's present or future uses of the water and 
related project lands, facilities, or water surfaces.
    Frequency: Each time a short-term right-of-use is requested.
    Respondents: Individuals, corporations, companies, and State and 
local entities that want to use Reclamation lands, facilities, or water 
surfaces.
    Estimated Annual Total Number of Respondents: 175.
    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.0.
    Estimated Total Number of Annual Responses: 175.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 350 hours.
    Estimated Completion Time Per Respondent: 2 hours.
    Non-hour Cost Burden: Processing fee of $200 per ROU Application.
    Public Comments: Notice was given in the Federal Register on July 
26, 2005 (70 FR 43181, July 26, 2005) to solicit public comments on 
Form 7-2540, which was reworked in preparation for public comment. Four 
individuals commented on this form and all comments were from an 
organized recreation activity perspective from the area of the New 
Melones Reservoir in Reclamation's Central Valley Project. The 
following are the paraphrased public comments and Reclamation's 
responses:

    Comment 1: All individuals who commented were specifically critical 
of charging a $200 application fee claiming that the application fee is 
``outrageous and not economically feasible'' and will force special 
events to take their activities elsewhere. Also, there were three 
comments which stated, in effect, that there is no ``set rate'' for the 
charging of (rental) fees and it appears as if Reclamation can 
[arbitrarily] determine such charges.
    Response: It is important to understand that the application fee 
and the value of the right of use (i.e., rental fee) are not 
established by this form. This form only states what fees are required 
according to the existing 1983 regulation, 43 CFR part 429, 
specifically Sec.  429.6(b) for the application fee (referred to as 
initial deposit fee) and section 429.6(f) for rental charges. The 
application fee must equal Reclamation's costs of administering the 
resultant ROU authorizations, as required by 31 U.S.C. 9701 and OMB 
Circular A-25. As with any applicable regulation, Reclamation does not 
have the latitude to arbitrarily waive the application fee as it is 
required by this regulation.

    Comment 2: The form is complicated, lengthy, and difficult to fill 
out and understand.
    Response: Reclamation agrees that the form was too difficult, 
lengthy, and complicated for short-term recreational uses envisioned by 
the commenters. This comment became the impetus behind Reclamation's 
decision to completely revise the ROU form referenced in the FR Notice. 
The reason for the complete revision was that the Form 7-2540 cited in 
the FR Notice was really geared more for longer term uses, such as 
broadband deployment activities, pipeline placement and construction, 
and grazing or farming leases. In addition, Reclamation became aware of 
the recent requirement for all bureaus to use the SF 299 instead of 
other forms for such activities. Thus, the issue of what form should be 
used to collect information for long term uses was resolved with the 
decision to use the SF 299.

[[Page 5686]]

    As a result of the public comments, Reclamation's Form 7-2540 was 
revised to target shorter term uses such as special recreation events, 
organized gatherings for special events, sporting events, and 
commercial filming. The resulting proposed short-term ROU Application 
Form 7-2540 is a significantly simpler, one-page form with an 
additional page of instructions, which should provide ease of 
understanding and facilitate completion for individuals requesting such 
uses of Reclamation's lands, facilities, and water surfaces.

    Comment 3: Two hours to complete the form is unacceptable.
    Response: Trying to keep both short- and long-term uses under 
Reclamation's previously approved Form 7-2540 caused confusion and 
Reclamation agrees with the commenters that it did make the form appear 
more onerous and lengthy to fill out. To facilitate completion of the 
revised ROU Application Form 7-2540 for short-term uses, it will be 
made available on the Internet where it can be downloaded and filled 
out on a personal computer or printed out for manual completion. The 
hours spent by the applicants to complete the application should not 
exceed 2 hours on average, depending upon the type of backup materials 
needed.

    Comment 4: Fishing tournaments and boat regattas are not in the 
same category as construction of transmission lines.
    Response: Reclamation agrees with this comment. In response, 
Reclamation has completely revised the previous Form 7-2540 to meet the 
needs of short-term users, such as those requesting permission to hold 
special events, like fishing tournaments and boating regattas.

    Comment 5: There is no set size of event which triggers the use of 
the application.
    Response: The size of the event does not matter as to whether a ROU 
Application Form 7-2540 is required. Section 43 CFR 429.6 requires that 
``The applicant for a right-of-use over land or estate in land, in the 
custody and control of Reclamation, must make application to the * * * 
affected [Reclamation] field office. * * *'' In contrast, the ROU 
Application Form 7-2540 does not need to be completed for day-to-day 
individual use of Reclamation's land, facilities, or water surfaces as 
long as those uses do not exclusively limit other users from enjoying 
the same area and do not interfere with or threaten project operations.

    Comment 6: There is no time limit for returning any remaining 
deposit of application fee.
    Response: The comment is a reasonable concern. The new, proposed 
ROU Application Form 7-2540 has now been modified to include a 
statement that a refund of any unused initial deposit fee will be 
completed within 30 days, provided that proper banking information for 
electronic funds transfer has been provided in a timely manner so as to 
facilitate such refund. Should their ROU request be denied, contact 
will be made with the applicant to gather banking information necessary 
to process their refund. Upon receipt of this information, the refund 
of any unused initial deposit fee will then be completed within 30 
days.

    Comment 7: One individual commented that Reclamation may ask for a 
``deposit fee of $200, and then says it may refund a part of that, or 
ask for more, after they decide how much the value of the right-of-use 
is, based on an appraisal.'' (emphasis added)
    Response: As discussed in detail in Reclamation's responses to 
comment 1 above, there are two fees or charges associated with an 
approved ROU Application Form 7-2540. Both the fee and rental charges 
are authorized and required by 43 CFR part 429. The first fee is 
referred to as an initial application fee (please refer to 
Reclamation's response to comment 6 above with regard to the conditions 
associated with a refund of an application fee). Reclamation may ask 
for additional monies for the initial application fee ONLY if the 
administrative costs of actually getting to the point of approving the 
application exceeds the initial $200 application fee. The commenter is 
incorrect to assume that asking the applicant for more money to cover 
Reclamation's administrative costs is ``based on an appraisal'' of the 
ROU; rather, it is based only on Reclamation's estimated costs of 
approving the applicant's request.
    The second required charge is the cost to the applicant for the 
rental charge or value of the authorized ROU. This rental charge is 
based on an appraisal or other acceptable means of establishing the 
value of permitting the applicant to use Federal lands or water 
surfaces (see 43 CFR 429.3).

    Comment 8: House Rule (H.R.) 4818 states that 80 percent of the use 
fees must be spent on much-needed improvements at a local level. We are 
concerned with how Reclamation will decide the fees, and who will make 
the decision.
    Response: The renewal of the ROU application at issue here has 
nothing to do with H.R. 4818. The initial application fees cover 
Reclamation's costs of reviewing and granting the ROU. The monies 
collected from the rental charges are credited in accordance with 
existing Federal reclamation law and are statutorily not available for 
direct improvements at the local level. Again, these application fees 
and rental charges are authorized by an existing regulation 43 CFR part 
429 and are independent of and not affected by H.R. 4818.

    Comment 9: One comment requested a 90-day extension to solicit 
additional comments.
    Response: This suggestion cannot be accommodated. However, the 
public is given an additional 30 days to respond to this second FR 
Notice. Individuals wishing to comment will direct their comments 
directly to the OMB at the address provided in this notice. Individuals 
should request a copy of the ROU Application Form 7-2540 from the 
Reclamation staff listed in this notice.

    Public comments are invited on the modified ROU Application Form 7-
2540 as to:
    (a) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for 
the proper performance of Reclamation's functions to manage and operate 
Federal water projects and their associated lands, facilities, and 
water surfaces, including whether the information will have practical 
use;
    (b) The accuracy of the burden estimate for the proposed collection 
of information, including the validity of the methodology and 
assumptions used;
    (c) Ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and
    (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on 
respondents, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, 
mechanical, or other forms of information technology.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. Reclamation will display a valid 
OMB control number on the ROU Application Form 7-2540.
    OMB has up to 60 days to approve or disapprove this information 
collection, but may respond after 30 days; therefore, public comment 
should be submitted to OMB within 30 days in order to assure maximum 
consideration.
    Department of the Interior's practice is to make comments, 
including names and home addresses of respondents,

[[Page 5687]]

available for public review. Individual respondents may request that we 
withhold their home address from public disclosure, which we will honor 
to the extent allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in 
which we would withhold a respondent's identity from public disclosure, 
as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or 
address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your 
comment. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, 
and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or 
officials of organizations or businesses, available for public 
disclosure in their entirety.

    Dated: January 25, 2006.
Roseann Gonzales,
Director, Office of Program and Policy Services, Denver Office.
[FR Doc. E6-1398 Filed 2-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MN-P