New AK Survey 30-day FR 7-30-14

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 2014 / Notices
wide survey of archeological sites
would be the goal as well as individual
cultural resource surveys as needed for
specific projects or sites. Partnerships
would be developed with other
agencies, institutions, and cultural
groups (e.g., Choctaw Nation, African
American groups, etc.), to seek ideas
and possible share staff positions. The
refuge would improve management and
interpretation of the refuge’s cultural
resources. Conservation partnerships
would be developed with neighboring
landowners and worked through
partnerships to have the greatest impact
on maintaining or restoring the
biological integrity of the local
community. Fee title acquisition from
willing sellers will focus on lands
within the existing approved acquisition
boundary that will most efficiently
assist the refuge in meeting the purposes
for which it was established and the
mission of the Service. Under this
alternative the two RNAs would no
longer remain under this designation
and would be managed as part of the
larger surrounding units of similar type
and managed for their historic
conditions. A second Wildlife Law
Enforcement Officer would be
established in combination with
possible collateral duty officer positions
to assist in protecting natural and
cultural resources along with public
safety.
The current level of visitor services
programs would be expanded for the
general public and attempts made to
provide more access for users with
disabilities and youth. The Service
would develop a week-long, large game
(turkey and deer) hunt program to
provide increased opportunities for
disabled hunters in exchange for a week
reduction in the general gun deer and
turkey seasons. Deer hunting
opportunities overall would be
increased. The Service would work with
the Mississippi Department of Wildlife,
Fisheries, and Parks to develop family
hunting and fishing opportunities.
Fishing opportunities would be
expanded to include year-round
designated bank fishing areas on Bluff
and Loakfoma Lakes. Other wildlifedependent uses and their supporting
facilities would be maintained and
enhanced through upgrades or
additional facilities. Alternative funding
mechanisms, such as a general user fee
under the Fee Program, and
partnerships would be used to spread
costs of programs across all users
possibly eliminating the need for
separate hunting related fees. The
existing visitor services programs would
be increased. This alternative would

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:48 Jul 29, 2014

Jkt 232001

establish a ‘‘Connecting People with
Nature’’ area to consolidate activities
and users requiring greater support to
enjoy wildlife observation activities.
Existing activities that are not
considered wildlife dependent uses
such as a picnicking area and off-road
mountain biking, would not be allowed
but more opportunities for bicycling,
walking and connecting with nature
would be offered through designed trails
with increased accessibility for disabled
Americans. All existing wildlife
dependent uses and the supporting
facilities would be maintained and, if
resources are available, enhanced
through possible increase and better
maintenance in overlooks, boardwalks,
and trails. An effort would be made to
increase visitor safety and enjoyment
through establishment of parking areas,
improved management of vehicle flow,
creation of paved walking and biking
trails, and roadside bike lanes along
Bluff Lake and Loakfoma Roads. Refuge
regulatory and informational signs
would receive priority. Partnerships to
conduct environmental education and
off-site activities and increase volunteer
involvement in all its programs would
be established. More effort would be
placed toward developing cooperative
programs sponsored through the
Friends.
The current staff of 13 employees
would be reorganized under this goal of
reaching an optimal staff level of 18 as
recommended within the 2008 Final
Report for the Staffing Model for Field
Stations. This alternative would
continue participation in the existing
Fee Program. Changes within the
program would include establishment of
a general access pass for all users to
assist in the maintenance and
development of public use programs
and facilities (e.g., Daily Pass, Weekly
Pass or Annual Pass). Current federal
duck stamps and other congressionally
authorized entrance fee passes would be
accepted as a refuge access pass.
Next Step
After the comment period ends, we
will analyze the comments and address
them.
Public Availability of Comments
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

PO 00000

Frm 00040

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

44191

cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Authority
This notice is published under the
authority of the National Wildlife
Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.).
Dated: June 24, 2014.
Jeffrey M. Fleming,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2014–17788 Filed 7–29–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
[OMB Number 1010—New]

Information Collection: Social
Indicators in Coastal Alaska: Arctic
Communities Survey; Submitted for
OMB Review; Comment Request
MMAA104000
ACTION:

30-Day notice.

To comply with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM) is notifying the
public that we have submitted an
information collection request (ICR) to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. The ICR
pertains to a new survey to be
conducted in northern coastal Alaska
communities. This notice provides the
public a second opportunity to
comment on the paperwork burden of
this collection.
DATES: Submit written comments by
August 29, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments on this
ICR to the Desk Officer for the
Department of the Interior at OMB–
OIRA at (202) 395–5806 (fax) or OIRA_
submission@omb.eop.gov (email). Please
provide a copy of your comments to the
BOEM Information Collection Clearance
Officer, Arlene Bajusz, Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management, 381 Elden Street,
HM–3127, Herndon, Virginia 20170
(mail) or arlene.bajusz@boem.gov
(email). Please reference ICR 1010–New
in your comment and include your
name and return address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Arlene Bajusz, Office of Policy,
Regulations, and Analysis at
arlene.bajusz@boem.gov (email) or (703)
787–1025 (phone). You may review the
ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov.
Follow the instructions to review
Department of the Interior collections
under review by OMB.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM

30JYN1

44192

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 2014 / Notices

OMB Control Number: 1010–New.
Title: Social Indicators in Coastal
Alaska: Arctic Communities Survey.
Abstract: This is a new collection that
involves a survey of the Alaska coastal
area along the Arctic. Section 20 of the
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands
Act (OCSLA) requires the Secretary of
the Department of the Interior (DOI) to
monitor and assess the impacts of
resource development activities in
Federal waters on human, marine, and
coastal environments. The OCSLA
authorizes the Secretary of the Interior
to conduct studies in areas or regions of
lease sales to ascertain the
‘‘environmental impacts on the marine
and coastal environments of the outer
Continental shelf and the coastal areas
which may be affected by oil and gas
development’’ (43 U.S.C. 1346) (Pub. L.
95–372).
The National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–
4347) requires that all Federal agencies
use a systematic, interdisciplinary
approach to ensure the integrated use of
the natural and social sciences in any
planning and decision making that may
have an effect on the human
environment. The Council on
Environmental Quality’s Regulations for
Implementing Procedural Provisions of
NEPA (40 CFR 1500–1508) state that the
‘‘human environment’’ is to be
‘‘interpreted comprehensively’’ to
include ‘‘the natural and physical

environment and the relationship of
people with that environment’’ (40 CFR
1508.14). An action’s ‘‘aesthetic,
historic, cultural, economic, social or
health’’ effects must be assessed,
‘‘whether direct, indirect, or
cumulative’’ (40 CFR 1508.8).
The BOEM is the DOI agency that
conducts OCS lease sales and monitors
and mitigates adverse impacts that
might be associated with offshore
resource development. The BOEM
Environmental Studies Program
implements and manages the
responsibilities of research. This new
survey will facilitate the meeting of
DOI/BOEM information needs by
quantifying measures of well-being and
the living conditions of residents in
coastal Alaska areas, with specific focus
on six In˜upiat coastal Alaska Native
communities in the North Slope
Borough (Barrow, Point Hope,
Wainwright, Nuiqsut, Kaktovik, Point
Lay).
The BOEM will use the information
collected from this survey to learn about
local social systems and well-being in a
way that may shape development
strategies and serve as an interim
baseline for impact mitigation and/or
monitoring to compare against future
research in these areas. With these data,
BOEM will improve information to
make informed oil and gas leasing and
development decisions for these areas.
The studies will help BOEM identify
Number of
responses

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Activity

and mitigate impacts of offshore oil and
gas exploration and development on
Alaska Native communities.
Survey Instrument: The survey
instrument was developed through
collaborative discussions with key
community members tasked to serve on
the North Slope Management Board,
specifically established to deal with this
study.
Interview Methods: The interviews
will be conducted in person in a setting
most comfortable for the respondents.
This personal method is more expensive
and time consuming for the researchers,
but these drawbacks are outweighed by
improvements in the quality of
information obtained and the rapport
established between the surveyor and
the person interviewed. Telephone
interviews have not proven to be
broadly successful in obtaining useful
information on the North Slope. Each
respondent will be paid an honorarium
for taking part in the study. Responses
are voluntary.
Frequency: One-time event.
Description of Respondents:
Respondents are members of the
Alaskan coastal communities in the
North Slope Borough. We plan to
contact 1,001 individuals and estimate
801 will complete the survey.
Estimated Reporting and
Recordkeeping Hour Burden: We
estimate 834 hours for this collection.

Completion time per response

Total annual
burden hours

Initial Contact ................................................................
Survey ...........................................................................

1,001
801

2 minutes ......................................................................
1 hour ...........................................................................

33
801

Total .......................................................................

1,802

.......................................................................................

834

Estimated Reporting and
Recordkeeping Non-Hour Cost Burden:
We have identified no non-hour
paperwork cost burdens for this
collection.
Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Until OMB approves a
collection of information, you are not
obligated to respond.
Comments: We invite comments
concerning this information collection
on:
• Whether or not the collection of
information is necessary, including
whether or not the information will
have practical utility;
• The accuracy of our burden
estimates;

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:48 Jul 29, 2014

Jkt 232001

• Ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and
• Ways to minimize the burden on
respondents.
To comply with the public
consultation process, on March 14,
2014, BOEM published a Federal
Register notice (79 FR 14533)
announcing that we would submit this
ICR to OMB for approval. This notice
provided the required 60-day comment
period. We received one comment in
response to this notice. The Mayor’s
Office of the North Slope Borough posed
several questions and concerns about
aspects of the survey. A summary of
each and the response are outlined
below. The Social Indicators study has
been under construction and planned by
the Environmental Studies Program of
BOEM for more than 5 years and

PO 00000

Frm 00041

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

reported in annual Study Development
Plans provided to the North Slope
Borough (NSB) for review and comment.
It is directly linked to Arctic Social
Indicator domain identification
undertaken by the Arctic Council and is
responsive to the Arctic Research Plan,
issued by the Executive Office of the
President, National Science and
Technology Council in February 2013.
BOEM believes this pioneering effort is
a way to monitor impacts for oil and gas
exploration and development in that the
study meets the information needs to
identify and monitor broad social
changes in the Arctic. We appreciate
this opportunity to respond to specific
questions raised by the Mayor of the
North Slope Borough, Alaska.

E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM

30JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 2014 / Notices
Need for the Survey
1. Is this collection a result of the HIA
in the EIS?
This survey collection is not a result
of the Health Impact Assessment (HIA)
in an EIS. The collection is linked to the
Arctic Social Indicators Project, an
outgrowth of the Arctic Human
Development Report of 2004 conducted
under the auspices of the Arctic
Council’s Sustainable Development
Working Group (Arctic Social Indicators
2010). HIA involves a more specific set
of questions about health status in the
communities, whereas the Social
Indicators study, designed to assess
respondents’ sense of well-being,
explores six domains, one of which is
health.
2. BOEM Should Use the NSB’s Baseline
Community Health Analysis Report in
the Social Indicators and Acknowledge
That the Health Environment is Already
Impacted by Resource Development
The NSB Baseline Community Health
Analysis Report was not completed
until June 2012, after the Social
Indicators contract was awarded. The
designs of both the Baseline Community
Health Analysis Report and the Social
Indicators survey are complementary
because they are derived from the same
parent document, the NSB Census of
2010. The Social Indicators survey
results will be shared with the NSB.
Some of the survey questions will
correspond with the NSB Community
Health Analysis Report and will support
decision making at all levels of
government. The 2010 NSB Census
includes the same overall health
questions that were asked by the Survey
of Living Conditions in the Arctic
(SLiCA) conducted by Dr. Kruse in
collaboration with the NSB in 2003.
These same questions were approved by
the North Slope Management Board
(NSMB) for the BOEM Social Indicators
survey. The project report will be the
venue to address emerging trends,
including if the health environment has
been impacted by resource
development, not the survey
instrument.

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Survey Design
3. Who are the members of the NSMB,
how were they selected, and how was
the survey developed?
The chair and the members of the
NSMB are serving on a voluntary basis.
Representatives are from the
communities of Barrow, Kaktovik,
Nuiqsut, Wainwright, Point Lay, and
Point Hope. Since the members of the
NSMB are volunteers, the BOEM prefers

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:48 Jul 29, 2014

Jkt 232001

not to disclose their names in this
document. As for the survey design, the
contractor, Stephen R. Braund & Assoc.
(SRBA), held a workshop for the NSMB
in Barrow in April 2012 to discuss
survey content and design. The Social
Indicators survey is based upon a pool
of questions derived from previous
research conducted in collaboration
with the NSB (e.g., SLiCA). The
questions correlate directly with
domains identified in the Arctic Social
Indicators Report, 2010, an outgrowth of
the Arctic Human Development Report
of 2004 conducted under the auspices of
the Arctic Council’s Sustainable
Working Group, and the BOEM Social
Indicators contract. Subsequently, SRBA
generated a survey instrument for
review by OMB to obtain a control
number. SRBA consulted again with the
NSMB in September 2012 before the
survey instrument was provided to
BOEM for the OMB submission. This
submission was delayed for a year to
perform a Privacy Act Impact
Assessment, now completed.
4. Why address only the ‘‘head of the
household’’?
BOEM is concerned about the burden
of effort and therefore limits the survey
to heads of households (HH), as the HH
is the individual with the knowledge
and authority to address all of the
questions asked. The HH may be an
adult male or female of any age over 18.
This is the standard best practice among
social scientists conducting surveys,
including Dr. Gary Kofinas’s ‘‘The Study
of Sharing Networks to Assess the
Vulnerabilities of Local Communities to
Oil & Gas Development in Arctic
Alaska,’’ also funded by BOEM.
5. It is Important To Have a Variety of
People From the North Slope Involved
in Helping To Pick the Contractor/
Review the Survey Questions
A variety of individuals from each
North Slope coastal community and the
Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission
were involved in selecting the survey
questions. BOEM selected the contractor
through a competitive bidding process
based on the merits of the technical
proposal and expertise of the contractor.
6. Survey Fatigue: Suggest BOEM
Coordinate With the Other Agencies/
Industry.
BOEM and its project contractors are
highly concerned about survey fatigue
and the importance of coordinating with
others who conduct research among the
In˜upiat of the North Slope. BOEM has
coordinated with other entities doing
research. However, BOEM has found
that even though there are surveys that

PO 00000

Frm 00042

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

44193

may ask a similar question, none fully
address the sense of well-being as this
Social Indicators survey is designed to
assess. BOEM and SRBA are leaders in
the field of social research and well
understand and are sensitive to the
problems of public burden and survey
fatigue. Once BOEM receives OMB
approval, BOEM and SRBA will
coordinate with local and regional
authorities to schedule the Social
Indicators survey implementation.
In this notice, BOEM is also
responding to a comment received on a
Federal Register notice (78 FR 25473)
published May 1, 2013, requesting
public comment on a survey renewal
collection (1010–0184) that we have
since discontinued. In that notice, we
introduced this new Social Indicators
survey and received a comment;
therefore, we are addressing that
comment in this new collection now.
The commenter suggested the use of
Dillman’s Tailored Design Method as
being a superior alternative to random
sampling. BOEM agrees with the
Dillman strategy and has used similar
elements in designing our face-to-face
surveys. Dillman’s strategies target
improving response rates for mail,
telephone, and internet surveys, which
can have response rates lower than 50
percent. In contrast, prior experience in
applying the proposed sample design
and face-to-face interviews in northern
Alaska has shown response rates above
80 percent. Several opportunities of
advance survey notice have been
achieved through the NSMB
participation in the survey design
process. Upon OMB approval, the
design team will work with the NSMB
to extend community involvement to
the city councils, tribal governments,
and village corporations. In addition,
Dillman’s approach concerns how the
interview process is designed, not how
people are sampled from the population
to be described. The sampling approach
used in our surveys is termed ‘‘area
probability sampling,’’ developed by the
Institute for Social Research, University
of Michigan, to meet the statistical goals
of producing valid estimates and
confidence intervals. A probability
sample means that each person/
household in the population to be
sampled has a known probability of
being selected. A probability sample is
commonly referred to as a ‘‘random
sample.’’ In accordance with Dillman’s
approach, BOEM incorporates specific
procedures to maintain the validity of
the probability sample by making
repeated contacts to interview the
selected respondent. We also train
interviewers to build trust and
engagement in the study and engage

E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM

30JYN1

44194

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 2014 / Notices

community leaders and secure their
approval. The addition of a
remuneration provides additional
incentive for participation.
Public Availability of Comments:
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.
Dated: July 3, 2014.
Deanna Meyer-Pietruszka,
Chief, Office of Policy, Regulations, and
Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2014–17929 Filed 7–29–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
[14XR0687NA, RX.18527901.3000000,
RR02054000]

Central Valley Project Improvement
Act, Water Management Plans
AGENCY:

Bureau of Reclamation,

Interior.
Notice of availability.

ACTION:

The following Water
Management Plans are available for
review:
• Patterson Irrigation District
• Central San Joaquin Water
Conservation District
• Madera Irrigation District
• Panoche Water District
• Sacramento County Water Agency
• City of Redding
• Sacramento Municipal Utility District
• Stockton East Water District
To meet the requirements of the
Central Valley Project Improvement Act
of 1992 and the Reclamation Reform Act
of 1982, the Bureau of Reclamation
developed and published the Criteria for
Evaluating Water Management Plans
(Criteria). For the purpose of this
announcement, Water Management
Plans (Plans) are considered the same as
Water Conservation Plans. The above
entities have each developed a Plan,
which Reclamation has evaluated and
preliminarily determined to meet the
requirements of these Criteria.
Reclamation is publishing this notice in
order to allow the public to review the
Plans and comment on the preliminary
determinations. Public comment on

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:48 Jul 29, 2014

Jkt 232001

Reclamation’s preliminary (i.e., draft)
determination of Plan adequacy is
invited at this time.
DATES: All public comments must be
received by August 29, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Please mail comments to
Ms. Melissa Crandell, Bureau of
Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, MP–
410, Sacramento, California 95825, or
email at mcrandell@usbr.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
be placed on a mailing list for any
subsequent information, please contact
Ms. Crandell at the email address above
or 916–978–5208 (TDD 978–5608).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are
inviting the public to comment on our
preliminary (i.e., draft) determination of
Plan adequacy. Section 3405(e) of the
Central Valley Project Improvement Act
(Title 34 Pub. L. 102–575), requires the
Secretary of the Interior to establish and
administer an office on Central Valley
Project water conservation best
management practices that shall
‘‘develop criteria for evaluating the
adequacy of all water conservation
plans developed by project contractors,
including those plans required by
section 210 of the Reclamation Reform
Act of 1982.’’ Also, according to Section
3405(e)(1), these criteria must be
developed ‘‘with the purpose of
promoting the highest level of water use
efficiency reasonably achievable by
project contractors using best available
cost-effective technology and best
management practices.’’ These criteria
state that all parties (Contractors) that
contract with Reclamation for water
supplies (municipal and industrial
contracts over 2,000 acre-feet and
agricultural contracts over 2,000
irrigable acres) must prepare a Plan that
contains the following information:
1. Description of the District;
2. Inventory of Water Resources;
3. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
for Agricultural Contractors;
4. BMPs for Urban Contractors;
5. Plan Implementation;
6. Exemption Process;
7. Regional Criteria; and
8. Five-Year Revisions.
Reclamation evaluates Plans based on
these criteria. A copy of these Plans will
be available for review at Reclamation’s
Mid-Pacific Regional Office, 2800
Cottage Way, MP–410, Sacramento,
California 95825. Our practice is to
make comments, including names and
home addresses of respondents,
available for public review. If you wish
to review a copy of these Plans, please
contact Ms. Crandell.
Public Disclosure
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other

PO 00000

Frm 00043

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

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.
Dated: July 22, 2014.
Richard J. Woodley,
Regional Resources Manager, Mid-Pacific
Region, Bureau of Reclamation.
[FR Doc. 2014–17948 Filed 7–29–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P

INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–894]

Certain Tires and Products Containing
Same: Commission Determination To
Issue a Limited Exclusion Order and
Cease and Desist Orders Against
Respondents Found in Default;
Termination of Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has issued (1) a limited
exclusion order against infringing
products of respondents previously
found in default, i.e., WestKY Customs,
LLC of Benton, Kentucky (‘‘WestKY’’);
Tire & Wheel Master, Inc. of Stockton,
California (‘‘Tire & Wheel Master’’);
Vittore Wheel & Tire of Asheboro, North
Carolina (‘‘Vittore’’); RTM Wheel & Tire
of Asheboro, North Carolina (‘‘RTM’’);
Turbo Wholesale Tires, Inc. of
Irwindale, California (‘‘Turbo’’); Lexani
Tires Worldwide, Inc. of Irwindale,
California (‘‘Lexani’’); WTD Inc. of
Cerritos, California (‘‘WTD’’); and
Simple Tire of Cookeville, Tennessee
(‘‘Simple Tire’’) (collectively,
‘‘Defaulting Respondents’’); and (2)
cease and desist orders directed against
each of the Defaulting Respondents. The
investigation is terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–3115. Copies of non-confidential
documents filed in connection with this
investigation are or will be available for
inspection during official business
hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the
Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E
SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM

30JYN1