60 Day FRN

8038

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Winschell Dugway Motorized Trail
Project; Caribou-Targhee National
Forest, Idaho
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.

AGENCY:
ACTION:

The Forest Service intends to
prepare an environmental impact
statement to analyze and disclose the
environmental effects of constructing a
motorized trail from Morgan Meadows
to Caribou City on the Soda Springs
Ranger District of the Caribou-Targhee
National Forest.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope
of the analysis must be received by
March 18, 2016. The draft
environmental impact statement is
expected June, 2016 and the final
environmental impact statement is
expected October, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to
Garth Smelser, Forest Supervisor,
Caribou-Targhee National Forest, 1405
Hollipark Drive, Idaho Falls, ID 83402.
Comments may also be sent via email to
comments-intermtn-caribou-targhee@
fs.fed.us, or via facsimile to 208–557–
5827.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jessica Taylor, Forest NEPA Coordinator
at 208–557–5837.
Individuals who use
telecommunication devices for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday.
SUMMARY:

asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose for this project is to
respond to outside public interest to
provide a motorized trail opportunity
from Morgan Meadows to Caribou City
allowing forest visitors to experience the
historic mining history of the area.
Proposed Action
The proposed action would establish
a motorized ATV trail from Morgan
Meadows to Caribou City. The proposed
action comes from planning efforts that
have occurred since 2007. This
alternative includes constructing
approximately 2.2 miles of new trail and
managing the new trail as a motorized
ATV trail. Further, the proposed action
calls for reconstructing approximately
4.85 miles of existing trails, exploratory
mining roads and abandoned roads (see
Alternative 2 Map) to implement the
Winschell Dugway Motorized Trail
project.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:05 Feb 16, 2016

Jkt 238001

The proposed action addresses the
trail corridor in the following specific
segments:
1. Use .75 mile of ATV Trail #449,
from Morgan Meadows to Tincup Creek.
2. Reconstruction of 1.5 miles of trail
from Tincup Creek to the saddle west of
Jackknife Basin.
3. Construct 1.5 miles along the
ridgeline west of Jackknife Basin to an
old reclaimed gold exploratory road.
4. Use of old reclaimed gold
exploratory road for approximately .6
mile.
5. Construction of .1 mile down into
the Bilk Creek drainage.
6. Use of abandoned mining road that
crosses Bilk Creek and continues to
ridgeline between Anderson and Bilk
Creeks.
7. Construction of .5 mile on ridgeline
in the Anderson Creek drainage back
into Bilk Creek.
8. Use of old roadbed for .2 mile in
Bilk Creek.
9. Construction of .1 mile of route that
would tie into a well-used road that
takes the trail to Caribou City.
The route would require the
installation of ATV bridges at four
stream crossings; on Bilk Creek (2),
Tincup Creek (1) and on an unnamed
tributary to Tincup Creek (1). A
cooperative agreement with Bonneville
County Parks and Recreation and Idaho
Department of Parks and Recreation
would be created, specifying
management and maintenance
responsibilities of all parties.
Possible Alternatives
Alternatives currently being
considered for the Winschell Dugway
Motorized Trail project include: (a) No
action, and (b) proposed action as
outlined above.
Responsible Official
Forest Supervisor, Garth Smelser, is
the responsible official.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The decision to be made is whether to
implement the proposed action as
described above, or to meet the purpose
and need for action through some other
combination of activities as a result of
the scoping process, or to take no action
at this time.
Scoping Process
This notice of intent initiates the
scoping process, which guides the
development of the environmental
impact statement.
The purpose of this comment period
is to provide an opportunity for the
public to provide early and meaningful
participation on a proposed action prior

PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

to a decision being made by the
Responsible Official. Per 36 CFR 218,
only those who provide specific, written
comments regarding the proposed
project or activity will be eligible to file
an objection.
Comments received in response to
this solicitation, including names and
addresses of those who comment, will
be part of the public record for this
proposed action. Comments submitted
anonymously will be accepted and
considered, however.
Dated: February 10, 2016.
Garth Smelser,
Forest Supervisor, Caribou-Targhee National
Forest.
[FR Doc. 2016–03250 Filed 2–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3411–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration
Request for Extension and Revision of
a Currently Approved Information
Collection
Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration, USDA.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:

In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces Grain Inspection,
Packers and Stockyards
Administration’s (GIPSA) intention to
request that the Office of Management
and Budget approve a 3-year extension
and revision of a currently approved
information collection in support of the
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for the Swine Contract
Library program.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before April 18, 2016.
ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit
comments on this notice. You may
submit comments by any of the
following methods:
• Internet: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail, hand deliver, or courier to R.
Dexter Thomas, GIPSA, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue SW., Room
2530–S, Washington, DC 20250–3604.
• Fax to (202) 690–2173.
Instructions: All comments should
refer to the date and page number of this
issue of the Federal Register. The
information collection package, public
comments, and other documents
relating to this action will be available
for public inspection in the above office
during regular business hours. Please
SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM

17FEN1

asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Notices
call GIPSA’s Management and Budget
Services at (202) 720–7486 to arrange a
viewing of these documents.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Catherine M. Grasso, Program Analyst,
Litigation and Economic Analysis
Division at (202) 720–7201 or
catherine.m.grasso@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Grain
Inspection, Packers and Stockyards
Administration is responsible for
maintaining the Swine Contract Library,
which is authorized by the Livestock
Mandatory Reporting (LMR) Act of
1999, and requires that certain packers
submit hog procurement contracts and
delivery estimates to GIPSA. The LMR
was reauthorized on October 5, 2006,
September 27, 2010, and September 30,
2015, for an additional 5 years each
time.
Title: Swine Contract Library.
OMB Number: 0580–0021.
Expiration Date of Approval: July 31,
2016.
Type of Request: Extension and
revision of a currently approved
information collection.
Abstract: The information collection
and recordkeeping requirements for the
Swine Contract Library are essential to
maintaining the mandatory library of
swine marketing contracts and reporting
the number of swine contracted for
delivery. Currently 32 packers are
required to file contracts and report
certain information on hog deliveries for
a total of 54 plants that they either
operate or at which they have swine
slaughtered. We expect the overall
number of plants and packers to remain
relatively constant, but the specific
packers required to report will vary with
consolidation and construction in the
industry.
Packers are required to report
information for individual plants. The
information collection burden estimate
provided below is based on time and
cost requirements at the plant level.
Consequently, packers that report for
more than one plant would bear a cost
that would be a multiple of the perplant estimates.
We understand from discussions with
packers complying with current
reporting requirements that reporting
packers have adapted pre-existing data
and information systems to provide the
required information.
There are two types of information
collections required for the Swine
Contract Library.
The first information collection
requirement consists of submitting
example contracts. Initially, a packer
submits example contracts currently in
effect or available for each swine

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:05 Feb 16, 2016

Jkt 238001

processing plant that is subject to the
regulations. Subsequently, a packer
submits example contracts for any
offered, new, or amended contracts that
vary from previously submitted
contracts in regard to the base price
determination, the application of a
ledger or accrual account, carcass merit
premium and discount schedules
(including the determination of the lean
percent or other merit of the carcass that
is used to determine the amount of the
premiums and discounts and how those
premiums and discounts are applied), or
the use and amount of noncarcass merit
premiums or discounts. The initial
submission of example contracts
requires more time than subsequent
filings of new contracts or changes, as
packers initially need to review all their
contracts to identify the unique types
that need to be represented by an
example contract submitted to GIPSA.
Thereafter, subsequent filings require
a minimal amount of effort on the part
of packers, as only example contracts
that represent a new or different type
need to be filed with GIPSA. Form
P&SP–342 ‘‘Contract Submission Cover
Sheet,’’ must accompany each contract
submission to identify the contract, the
plan for which the contract is valid, and
the contact person.
Packers are required to submit both
written and verbal contracts. Packers
must document verbal contracts which
adds to their existing recordkeeping
systems in order to comply with this
requirement. Optional form P&SP–343
‘‘Verbal Contract Optional
Documentation Sheet,’’ provides a
format to document the verbal
agreement.
The second information collection
requirement is a monthly filing of
summary information on form P&SP
341, Monthly Report: Estimates of
Swine To Be Delivered Under Contract.
The form for the monthly filing is
simple and brief. For new packers
required to start reporting, this data
should be available in the packers’
existing record system. We encourage
electronic submission and provide the
necessary information on procedures to
submit data to GIPSA electronically.
The estimates of time requirements
used for the burden estimates below
were developed in consultation with
GIPSA personnel knowledgeable in the
industry’s recordkeeping practices. The
estimates also reflect our experience in
assembling large amount of data during
the course of numerous investigations
involving use of data collected from the
industry. Estimates of time requirements
and hourly wage costs for developing
electronic recordkeeping and reporting
systems are based on our experience in

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

8039

developing similar systems in
consultation with our automated
information systems staff.
(1) Contract Submission Cover Sheet
(Form P&SP–342)
Estimate of Burden: Reporting burden
for submission of contracts is estimated
to include 4 hours per plant for an
initial review of all contracts to
categorize them into types and identify
unique examples, plus an additional
0.25 hours per unique contract
identified during the initial review to
submit an example of that contract.
After the initial filing, the reporting
burden is estimated to include 0.25
hours per plant to submit an example of
each new or amended contract.
Respondents: Packers required to
report information for the Swine
Contract Library.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 32
packers (total of 54 plants).
Estimated Number of Responses per
Plant: Number of responses per plant
varies. Some plants could have no
contracts, while others could have up to
80 contracts. We receive an average of
six example contracts per plant per year
for offered contracts and for amended
existing or available contracts.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: Initial filing: 5.5 total
hours for the initial filing of examples
of existing contracts by all plants newly
subject to the regulations combined.
Based on changes in the industry, we
anticipate one new plant to become
subject to the regulations each year.
Calculated as follows: 4 hours per plant
for initial review × 1 new plant = 4
hours for initial review; 0.25 hours per
contract × 6
example contracts per plant × 1 new
plant = 1.5 hours; 4 hours + 1.5 hours
= 5.5 total hours.
Thereafter, 81 total hours annually for
all subsequent filing of example
contracts by all plants combined, based
on an average of 6 newly offered or
amended contracts annually.
Calculated as follows: 0.25 hours per
contract × 6 example contracts per
plant × 54 plants = 81 hours.
Total Cost: Initial filing $138 for one
expected new plant. Calculated as
follows: 5.5 hours × $25 per hour = $138
Thereafter: $2025 annually for all
plants combined for submission of
subsequent filings. Calculated as
follows: 81 hours × $25 per hour =
$2,025
(2) Monthly Report: Estimate of Swine
To Be Delivered Under Contract (Form
P&SP–341)
Estimate of Burden: The reporting
burden for compiling data, completing

E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM

17FEN1

8040

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Notices

asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

and submitting the form is estimated to
average 2 hours per manually prepared
and submitted (by mail or facsimile)
report and 1 hour per electronically
prepared and submitted report. There
would be an estimated additional onetime set up burden of 1 hour at a cost
of $60 per plant for a packer that chose
to create a spreadsheet or database for
recordkeeping and preparation of
monthly estimates. There would be an
estimated additional 2 hour burden at a
cost of $60 per hour or $120 per plant
for a packer to develop procedures to
extract and format the required
information and to develop an interface
between the packer’s electronic
recordkeeping system and GIPSA’s
system. The hourly rate for the
development of electronic tools is
assumed to be high due to the need to
use personnel with specialized
computer skills.
Respondents: Packers required to
report information for the Swine
Contract Library.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 32
packers (total of 54 plants).
Estimated Number of Responses per
Plant: 12 (1 per month for 12 months).
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: 1,296 hours for all plants
combined provided all plants used
manual compiling, preparation, and
submission.
Calculated as follows: 2 hours per
response × 54 plants × 12 responses per
plant = 1,296
648 hours for all plants combined
provided all plants use electronic
compiling, preparation, and submission.
Calculated as follows: 1 hour per
response × 54 plants × 12 responses per
plant = 648 hours.
Total Cost: $32,400 annually for all
plants combined provided all use
manual submission. Calculated as
follows: 1,296 × $25 per hour = $32,400
$16,200 annually for all plants
combined provided all were to
completely utilize electronic
preparation and submission. Calculated
as follows: 648 hours × $25 per hour =
$16,200
Additional $180 one-time set-up cost
provided all plants newly subject to the
Regulations were to completely utilize
electronic systems for preparation and
submission. Calculated as follows: 1
hour build spreadsheet/database + 2
hours develop electronic interface = 3
hours. 3 hours total development × $60
per hour × 1 new plant = $180
The Paperwork Reduction Act also
requires GIPSA to measure the
recordkeeping burden. Under the
Packers and Stockyards Act and its
existing regulations, each packer is

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:05 Feb 16, 2016

Jkt 238001

required to maintain and make available
upon request any records necessary to
verify information on all transactions
between the packer and producers from
whom the packer obtains swine for
slaughter. Records that packers are
required to maintain under existing
regulations would meet the
requirements for verifying the accuracy
of information required to be reported
for the Swine Contract Library. These
records include original contracts,
agreements, receipts, schedules, and
other records associated with any
transaction related to the purchase,
pricing, and delivery of swine for
slaughter under the terms of marketing
contracts. Additional annual costs of
maintaining records would be nominal
since packers are required to store and
maintain such records as a matter of
normal business practice and in
conformity with existing regulations.
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
and its implementing regulations (5 CFR
1320.8(d)(1)), GIPSA specifically
requests comment to:
(a) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(b) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(c) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(d) Minimize the burden on the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
for the Office of Management and
Budget approval. All comments will
also become a matter of public record.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506 and 5 CFR
1320.8.
Larry Mitchell,
Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016–03195 Filed 2–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–EN–P

PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
The Department of Commerce will
submit to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for clearance the
following proposal for collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.
Title: Construction Progress Reporting
Surveys.
OMB Control Number: 0607–0153.
Form Number(s): C–700, C–700(SL),
C–700(R), and C–700 (F).
Type of Request: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Number of Respondents: 24,000.
Average Hours per Response: 30
minutes for initial response; 10 minutes
in succeeding months.
Burden Hours: 56,000.
Needs and Uses: The U.S. Census
Bureau is requesting an extension with
minor revisions of a currently approved
collection for forms C–700, Private
Construction Projects; C–700(R),
Multifamily Residential Projects, C–
700(SL), State and Local Governments
Projects and C–700(F), Federal
Government Projects.
These forms are used to conduct the
Construction Progress Reporting
Surveys (CPRS) to collect information
on the dollar value of construction put
in place on non-residential building
projects under construction by private
companies or individuals, private
multifamily residential buildings, and
building projects under construction by
federal and state and local governments.
The Census Bureau uses the
information collected on these forms to
publish estimates of the monthly dollar
value of construction put in place.
Statistics from the CPRS become part of
the monthly ‘‘Value of Construction Put
in Place’’ or ‘‘Construction Spending’’
series, a Principal Economic Indicator
that is used extensively by the federal
government in making policy decisions
and used to estimate the gross domestic
product (GDP). The private sector uses
the statistics for market analysis and
other research. Construction now
accounts for approximately five percent
of GDP.
There are two changes planned to the
content of these questionnaires. The
first is the elimination of the data item
for square footage of the construction
project. This information was used for
editing but is no longer needed. The
second change is the addition of a data
item to collect the projected completion
date to assist with imputation if a

E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM

17FEN1