81 FR 2229 - Draft Methodology for Prioritizing Status Reviews and Accompanying 12-Month Findings on Petitions for Listing Under the Endangered Species Act
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 10 (January 15, 2016)
Fish and Wildlife Service
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 10 (January 15, 2016)
| Page Range | 2229-2232 | |
| FR Document | 2016-00616 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 10 (Friday, January 15, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 2229-2232] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-00616] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0169; 4500030113] Draft Methodology for Prioritizing Status Reviews and Accompanying 12-Month Findings on Petitions for Listing Under the Endangered Species Act AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a draft methodology for prioritizing status reviews and accompanying 12- month findings on petitions for listing species under the Endangered Species Act. This draft methodology is intended to allow us to address outstanding workload strategically as our resources allow and to provide transparency to our partners and other stakeholders as to how we establish priorities within our upcoming workload. DATES: We will accept comments from all interested parties until February 16, 2016. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below), the deadline for submitting an electronic comment is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter the FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0169, which is the docket number for this draft policy. Then click on the Search button. You may enter a comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!'' Please ensure that you have found the correct document before submitting your comment. U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0169, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Request for Information section, below, for more information). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Krofta, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Conservation and Classification, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone 703/358-2171; facsimile 703/358-1735. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800- 877-8339. [[Page 2230]] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Under the Endangered Species Act, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the public can petition the Service to list, delist, or reclassify a species as an endangered species or a threatened species. The Act sets forth specific timeframes in which to complete initial findings on petitions: The Service has, to the maximum extent practicable, 90 days from receiving a petition to make a finding on whether the petition presents substantial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted; and subsequently 12 months from receiving a petition for which the Service has made a positive initial finding to make a finding on whether the petitioned action is warranted. However, these statutory deadlines have often proven not to be achievable given the workload in the listing program and the available resources. Recently, as a result of petitions to list a large number of species under the Act, our workload includes more than 500 unresolved status reviews and accompanying 12-month findings on those petitions to complete. At the same time, our resources to complete these findings are limited. Over the last several years, we have streamlined, and continue to find efficiencies in, our procedures for evaluating petitions and conducting listing actions, but these efforts are not sufficient to keep up with the demands of our workload. This draft methodology is intended to allow us to address the outstanding workload of status reviews and accompanying 12-month findings strategically as our resources allow and to provide transparency to our partners and other stakeholders as to how we establish priorities within our upcoming workload. To balance and manage this existing and anticipated future status review and accompanying 12-month finding workload in the most efficient manner, we have developed a draft methodology to help us use our resources wisely by working on the highest-priority status reviews and accompanying 12-month petition findings first. The draft methodology consists of identifying five prioritization categories for these actions, determining where (into which category) each action belongs, and using that information to establish the order in which we plan to complete status reviews and accompanying 12-month findings on petitions to list species under the Act. This prioritization of petition findings will inform a multi-year National Listing Workplan for completing all types of actions in the listing program workload--including not only status reviews and accompanying 12-month findings, but also status reviews initiated by the Service, proposed and final listing determinations, and proposed and final critical habitat designations. We intend to make the National Listing Workplan publically available on our Web site (www.fws.gov/endangered/) and periodically update it as circumstances warrant. This draft methodology for prioritizing petitions to list species does not apply to actions to downlist a species from an endangered species to a threatened species or to delist a species. Further, this methodology does not replace our 1983 Endangered and Threatened Species Listing and Recovery Priority Guidelines (September 21, 1983; 48 FR 43098), which applies to species that have already been determined to warrant a listing proposal; rather, it complements it and can be used in conjunction with it. As with the 1983 guidelines, this draft methodology must be viewed as a guide and should not be looked upon as an inflexible framework for determining resource allocations (See 48 FR 43098). It is not intended to be binding. The draft methodology to be used in prioritizing actions and identified herein incorporates numerous objectives--including acting on the species that are most in need of, and that would most benefit from, listing under the Act first, and maximizing the efficiency of the listing program. We plan to evaluate unresolved status reviews and accompanying 12- month findings for upcoming listing actions and prioritize them using the prioritization categories and additional considerations identified in this draft methodology to assign each action to one of five priority categories, or ``bins,'' as described below. In prioritizing status reviews and accompanying 12-month findings, we will consider information from the 90-day finding, any petitions, and any other information in our files. We recognize that we may not always have in our files the information necessary to assign an action to the correct bin, so we plan to also work with State fish and wildlife agencies, Native American Tribes, and other appropriate conservation partners who have management responsibility for these species or relevant scientific data to obtain the information necessary to allow us to accurately prioritize specific actions. This priority system will assist us in compiling outstanding workload into a multi-year National Listing Workplan designed to address the species with the highest need first. It is our intention that the National Listing Workplan balance addressing the large backlog of status reviews and accompanying 12-month findings with making progress on other listing actions, such as making final listing determinations for candidate species and designating critical habitat. While this draft methodology was developed primarily to prioritize the outstanding status reviews and accompanying 12-month petition findings, the considerations raised in our prioritization categories may also be useful in prioritizing other actions in the listing program as we develop the National Listing Workplan each year. Prior to the start of each fiscal year, we will update the National Listing Workplan as new information is obtained. We will share the National Listing Workplan with other Federal agencies, State fish and wildlife agencies, Native American Tribes, and other stakeholders and the public at large through posting on our Web site (www.fws.gov/endangered/). Priority Bins Below we describe the categories we have identified for prioritizing listing actions and the information that factors into placing specific actions into the appropriate priority bin. Note that an action need not meet every facet of a particular bin in order to be placed in that bin. If an action meets the conditions for more than one bin, the Service will seek to prioritize that action by taking into consideration any case-specific information relevant to determining what prioritization would, overall, best advance the objectives of this draft methodology--including protecting the species that are most in need of, and that would benefit most from, listing under the Act first, and maximizing the efficiency of the listing program. (1) Highest Priority--Critically Imperiled: Highest priority will be given to a species experiencing severe threat levels across a majority of its range, resulting in severe population-level impacts. Species that are critically imperiled and need immediate listing action in order to prevent extinction will be given highest priority. (2) Strong Data Already Available on Status: Species for which we currently have strong information concerning the species' status will receive next highest priority. We acknowledge that the Act requires that we base our decisions on the best available information at the time we make a determination, and we will continue to adhere to that requirement. Our experience implementing the Act has shown us that [[Page 2231]] high-quality scientific information leads to stronger, more defensible decisions that have increased longevity. Therefore, we will generally place species for which we have particularly strong scientific data supporting a clear decision on status--either a decision that the species warrants listing or does not warrant listing--at a higher priority than species in Bins 3, 4, and 5, discussed below. (3) New Science Underway to Inform Key Uncertainties: As stated previously, a higher quality of scientific information leads to better decision-making, which focuses our resources on providing protections associated with endangered and threatened species listing on species most in need. Scientific uncertainty regarding a species' status is often encountered in listing decisions. For circumstances when that uncertainty can be resolved within a reasonable timeframe because emerging science (e.g., taxonomy, genetics, threats) is underway to answer key questions that may influence the listing determination, those species will be prioritized for action next after those with existing strong information bases. This bin is appropriate when the emerging science or study is already underway, or a report is expected soon, or the data exist, but they need to be compiled and analyzed. Placing a species in this bin does not put off working on the listing action; it just prioritizes work on species in Bins 1 and 2 for completion first. Moreover, species do not remain in this bin indefinitely; a species for which ongoing research is not expected to produce results in the near future would not be placed in this bin, and any species that is placed in this bin will be moved to another bin after the research results become available. With the new, emerging information, a more informed decision could be made (e.g., a species' status could be determined fairly readily through surveys or other research). (4) Conservation Opportunities in Development or Underway: Where efforts to conserve species are organized, underway, and likely to address the threats to the species, we will consider these species as our fourth highest priority. In order for a species to be appropriately placed in this bin, conservation agreements and commitments should be completed in time for consideration in the status review and accompanying 12-month finding and in an amount of time that provides landowners or other entities adequate opportunity to enroll prior to any listing decision. Placing a species in this bin does not put off working on the listing action; it just prioritizes work on species in Bins 1, 2, and 3 for completion first. (5) Limited Data Currently Available: Species for which we know almost nothing about its threats or status will be given fifth highest priority. If we do not have much information about a species without conducting research or further analysis, the species would be suitably placed in this bin. Placing a species in this bin does not put off working on the listing action; it just prioritizes work on species in Bins 1, 2, 3, and 4 for completion first. According to the standard under the Act, we need to make listing decisions based on the best available scientific and commercial data. Because the best available data for species in this bin may be very limited, even if the Service conducts further research, we will place a higher priority on work for those species for which we have more and better data already available. Additional Considerations The following considerations will also be used to inform implementation of the prioritization process, development of the National Listing Workplan, and any necessary internal ranking within each bin (i.e., as tie-breakers within a bin): The level of complexity surrounding the status review and accompanying 12-month finding, such as the degree of controversy, biological complexity, or whether the status review and accompanying 12-month finding covers multiple species or spans multiple regions of the Service. The extent to which the protections of the Act would be able to improve conditions for that species and its habitat or also provide benefits to many other species. For example, a species primarily under threat due to sea level rise from the effects of climate change is unlikely to have its condition much improved by the protections of the Act. By contrast, a species primarily under threat due to habitat destruction from grazing practices on public lands would more directly benefit from the protections of the Act. Whether there are opportunities to maximize efficiency by batching multiple species for the purpose of status reviews, petition findings, or listing determinations. For example, actions could be batched by taxon, by species with like threats, by similar geographic location, or other similar circumstances. Batching may result in lower- priority actions that are tied to higher-priority actions being completed earlier than they would otherwise. Whether there are any special circumstances whereby an action should be bumped up (or down) in priority when internally ranking actions within a bin or developing the National Listing Workplan. One limitation that might result in divergence from priority order is when the current highest priorities are clustered in a geographic area, such that our scientific expertise at the field office level is fully occupied with their existing workload. We recognize that the geographic distribution of our scientific expertise will in some cases require us to balance workload across geographic areas. Request for Information Section 4(h) of the ESA requires that, when the Secretary establishes guidelines to insure that the purposes of Section 4 are achieved efficiently and effectively, the Secretary provide to the public notice of, and opportunity to submit written comments on, those guidelines. In addition, we intend that a final methodology for prioritizing status reviews and accompanying 12-month findings for listing will consider information and recommendations from all interested parties. We therefore solicit comments, information, and recommendations from governmental agencies, Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry groups, environmental interest groups, and any other interested parties. All comments and materials we receive by the date listed above in DATES will be considered prior to the adoption of a final methodology. If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov. We seek comments and recommendations in particular on: (1) Whether this draft methodology sets out clearly defined conditions for the prioritization bins. If not, please provide detailed comments so that we can clarify our methodology. (2) Whether there may be other factors or considerations that should be incorporated into our methodology. (3) Whether our draft methodology makes logical sense and will result in an appropriate use of our limited resources. Determinations Under Other Authorities As mentioned above, we intend to use this methodology to prioritize work on [[Page 2232]] status reviews and accompanying 12-month findings and to assist with prioritizing actions in order to develop the National Listing Workplan for each fiscal year. Below we make determinations provided for under several Executive Orders and statutes that may apply where a Federal action is not a binding rule or regulation. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) We are analyzing this draft methodology in accordance with the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Department of the Interior regulations on Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (43 CFR 46.10-46.450), and the Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 1-6 and 8). We invite the public to comment on the extent to which this draft methodology may have a significant impact on the human environment, or fall within one of the categorical exclusions for actions that have no individual or cumulative effect on the quality of the human environment. We will complete our analysis, in compliance with NEPA, before finalizing this methodology. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This draft methodology does not contain any collections of information that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This draft methodology will not impose recordkeeping or reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals, businesses, or organizations. We 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. Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, ``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,'' and the Department of the Interior Manual at 512 DM 2, and the Department of Commerce American Indian and Alaska Native Policy (March 30, 1995), we have considered possible effects on federally recognized Indian tribes and have preliminarily determined that there are no potential adverse effects of issuing this draft methodology. Our intent with this draft methodology is to provide transparency to Tribes and other stakeholders in the prioritization of our upcoming workload. We will continue to work with Tribes as we finalize this draft methodology and obtain the information necessary to accurately bin specific actions and develop our National Listing Workplan. Authors The primary authors of this draft policy are the staff members of the Division of Conservation and Classification, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041. Authority The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Dated: January 6, 2016. Stephen Guertin, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2016-00616 Filed 1-14-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2016 / Notices 2229
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. law, subject to screening for other DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
11411), as amended, HUD is publishing Federal use. At the appropriate time,
this Notice to identify Federal buildings HUD will publish the property in a Fish and Wildlife Service
and other real property that HUD has Notice showing it as either suitable/ [Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0169;
reviewed for suitability for use to assist available or suitable/unavailable. 4500030113]
the homeless. The properties were
For properties listed as suitable/
reviewed using information provided to Draft Methodology for Prioritizing
HUD by Federal landholding agencies unavailable, the landholding agency has Status Reviews and Accompanying 12-
regarding unutilized and underutilized decided that the property cannot be Month Findings on Petitions for Listing
buildings and real property controlled declared excess or made available for Under the Endangered Species Act
by such agencies or by GSA regarding use to assist the homeless, and the
its inventory of excess or surplus property will not be available. AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Federal property. This Notice is also Interior.
Properties listed as unsuitable will
published in order to comply with the ACTION: Notice.
not be made available for any other
December 12, 1988 Court Order in purpose for 20 days from the date of this SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
National Coalition for the Homeless v. Notice. Homeless assistance providers Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
Veterans Administration, No. 88–2503– interested in a review by HUD of the draft methodology for prioritizing status
OG (D.D.C.). determination of unsuitability should reviews and accompanying 12-month
Properties reviewed are listed in this findings on petitions for listing species
call the toll free information line at 1–
Notice according to the following under the Endangered Species Act. This
categories: Suitable/available, suitable/ 800–927–7588 for detailed instructions
or write a letter to Ann Marie Oliva at draft methodology is intended to allow
unavailable, and suitable/to be excess, us to address outstanding workload
and unsuitable. The properties listed in the address listed at the beginning of
this Notice. Included in the request for strategically as our resources allow and
the three suitable categories have been to provide transparency to our partners
reviewed by the landholding agencies, review should be the property address
(including zip code), the date of and other stakeholders as to how we
and each agency has transmitted to establish priorities within our upcoming
HUD: (1) Its intention to make the publication in the Federal Register, the
workload.
property available for use to assist the landholding agency, and the property
DATES: We will accept comments from
homeless, (2) its intention to declare the number.
property excess to the agency’s needs, or all interested parties until February 16,
For more information regarding 2016. Please note that if you are using
(3) a statement of the reasons that the particular properties identified in this
property cannot be declared excess or the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see
Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing ADDRESSES section, below), the deadline
made available for use as facilities to sanitary facilities, exact street address),
assist the homeless. for submitting an electronic comment is
Properties listed as suitable/available providers should contact the 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date.
will be available exclusively for appropriate landholding agencies at the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
homeless use for a period of 60 days following addresses: NAVY: Mr. Steve by one of the following methods:
from the date of this Notice. Where Matteo, Department of the Navy, Asset • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
property is described as for ‘‘off-site use Management; Division, Naval Facilities www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
only’’ recipients of the property will be Engineering Command, Washington enter the FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0169,
required to relocate the building to their Navy Yard, 1330 Patterson Ave. SW., which is the docket number for this
own site at their own expense. Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20374; draft policy. Then click on the Search
Homeless assistance providers (202)685–9426. (This is not a toll-free button. You may enter a comment by
interested in any such property should number) clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ Please
send a written expression of interest to ensure that you have found the correct
Dated: January 7, 2016.
HHS, addressed to: Ms. Theresa M. document before submitting your
Ritta, Chief Real Property Branch, the Brian P. Fitzmaurice, comment.
Department of Health and Human Director, Division of Community Assistance, • U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public
Services, Room 5B–17, Parklawn Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs. Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No.
Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Unsuitable Properties
FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0169, U.S. Fish and
MD 20857, (301) 443–2265 (This is not Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275
a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the Building Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
interested provider an application Louisiana 3803.
packet, which will include instructions We will post all comments on http://
6 Buildings
for completing the application. In order www.regulations.gov. This generally
NAS JRB, New Orleans
to maximize the opportunity to utilize a means that we will post any personal
New Orleans LA 70143
suitable property, providers should information you provide us (see the
Landholding Agency: Navy
submit their written expressions of Request for Information section, below,
Property Number: 77201610001
interest as soon as possible. For for more information).
Status: Excess
complete details concerning the Directions: 300, 301, 301A, 301B, 305, 305A FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
processing of applications, the reader is Comments: public access denied and no Douglas Krofta, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
encouraged to refer to the interim rule alternative method to gain access without Service, Division of Conservation and
governing this program, 24 CFR part compromising national security. Classification, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg
581. Reasons: Secured Area. Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803;
For properties listed as suitable/to be [FR Doc. 2016–00486 Filed 1–14–16; 8:45 am]
telephone 703/358–2171; facsimile 703/
excess, that property may, if 358–1735. If you use a
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
subsequently accepted as excess by telecommunications device for the deaf
GSA, be made available for use by the (TDD), call the Federal Information
homeless in accordance with applicable Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:01 Jan 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM 15JAN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_2239/page/1.svg)
![2232 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2016 / Notices
status reviews and accompanying 12- to Tribes and other stakeholders in the madonna_baucum@nps.gov (email).
month findings and to assist with prioritization of our upcoming Please reference OMB Control Number
prioritizing actions in order to develop workload. We will continue to work ‘‘1024–0232, NPS National
the National Listing Workplan for each with Tribes as we finalize this draft Underground Railroad Network to
fiscal year. Below we make methodology and obtain the information Freedom’’ in the subject line of your
determinations provided for under necessary to accurately bin specific comments.
several Executive Orders and statutes actions and develop our National FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
that may apply where a Federal action Listing Workplan. Diane Miller, National Manager,
is not a binding rule or regulation. National Underground Railroad
Authors
National Environmental Policy Act Network to Freedom Program, National
The primary authors of this draft
(NEPA) Park Service, c/o Blackwater National
policy are the staff members of the
We are analyzing this draft Wildlife Refuge, 2145 Key Wallace
Division of Conservation and
methodology in accordance with the Drive, Cambridge, Maryland 21613; or
Classification, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
criteria of the National Environmental via email at diane_miller@nps.gov.
Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls
Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Church, VA 22041.
seq.), the Department of the Interior I. Abstract
regulations on Implementation of the Authority
National Environmental Policy Act (43 The authority for this action is the Public Law 105–203 (National
CFR 46.10–46.450), and the Department Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Underground Railroad Network to
of the Interior Manual (516 DM 1–6 and amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Freedom Act of 1998) authorizes the
8). We invite the public to comment on Secretary of the Interior to establish the
Dated: January 6, 2016. Network to Freedom (Network). The
the extent to which this draft
Stephen Guertin, Network is a collection of sites,
methodology may have a significant
impact on the human environment, or Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife facilities, and programs, both
Service. governmental and nongovernmental,
fall within one of the categorical
exclusions for actions that have no [FR Doc. 2016–00616 Filed 1–14–16; 8:45 am] around the United States. All entities
individual or cumulative effect on the BILLING CODE 4333–15–P must have a verifiable association with
quality of the human environment. We the historic Underground Railroad
will complete our analysis, in movement. The National Park Service
compliance with NEPA, before DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR administers the National Underground
finalizing this methodology. Railroad Network to Freedom Program.
National Park Service The program coordinates preservation
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [NPS–NER–19995, PPNEHATUC0, and education efforts Nationwide and
This draft methodology does not PPMRSCR1Y.CU0000 (166)] integrates local historical places,
contain any collections of information museums, and interpretive programs
that require approval by the Office of Proposed Information Collection; associated with the Underground
Management and Budget (OMB) under National Underground Railroad Railroad into a mosaic of community,
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Network to Freedom Program regional, and national stories.
3501 et seq.). This draft methodology Individuals; businesses;
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
will not impose recordkeeping or organizations; State, tribal and local
ACTION: Notice; request for comments. governments; and Federal agencies that
reporting requirements on State or local
governments, individuals, businesses, or SUMMARY: We (National Park Service) want to join the Network must complete
organizations. We may not conduct or will ask the Office of Management and an application form. The application
sponsor and you are not required to Budget (OMB) to approve the and instructions are available on our
respond to a collection of information information collection described below. Web site at http://www.nps.gov/
unless it displays a currently valid OMB As required by the Paperwork subjects/ugrr/index.htm. Respondents
control number. Reduction Act of 1995 and as part of our must (1) verify associations and
continuing efforts to reduce paperwork characteristics through descriptive texts
Government-to-Government that are the result of historical research
Relationship With Tribes and respondent burden, we invite the
general public and other Federal and (2) submit supporting
In accordance with the President’s agencies to take this opportunity to documentation; e.g., copies of rare
memorandum of April 29, 1994, comment on this IC. This IC is documents, photographs, and maps.
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations scheduled to expire on July 31, 2016. Much of the information is submitted in
with Native American Tribal We may not conduct or sponsor and a electronic format and used to determine
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive person is not required to respond to a eligibility to become part of the
Order 13175 ‘‘Consultation and collection of information unless it Network.
Coordination with Indian Tribal displays a valid OMB control number. Upon approval by OMB of this
Governments,’’ and the Department of extension request, the NPS will begin
DATES: To ensure we are able to
the Interior Manual at 512 DM 2, and developing a HTML version of the 10–
the Department of Commerce American consider your comments, we must 946, ‘‘National Park Service National
receive them on or before March 15,
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Indian and Alaska Native Policy (March Underground Railroad Network to
30, 1995), we have considered possible 2016. Freedom Application Form’’ on the
effects on federally recognized Indian ADDRESSES: Please send your comments Department of the Interior’s Enterprise
tribes and have preliminarily on the ICR to Madonna L. Baucum, Forms System (EFS) Web site. The EFS
determined that there are no potential Information Collection Clearance will consolidate all internal forms used
adverse effects of issuing this draft Officer, National Park Service, 12201 by the Department and external forms
methodology. Our intent with this draft Sunrise Valley Drive, Room 2C114, Mail used by the public into a centralized
methodology is to provide transparency Stop 242, Reston, VA 20192 (mail); or automated forms program. This will
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:01 Jan 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM 15JAN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_2239/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-02 12:31:54
Document Modified: 2018-02-02 12:31:54
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice. | |
| Dates | We will accept comments from all interested parties until February 16, 2016. Please note that if you are using the Federal | |
| Contact | Douglas Krofta, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Conservation and Classification, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone 703/358-2171; facsimile 703/358-1735. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800- 877-8339. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 2229 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR