Published 30-day FRN

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2023 / Notices
funding opportunities and guidance to
states and territories, as well as tribal
and local communities; technical
assistance to grantees and practitioners;
publishing and sharing resources for
individuals and family members seeking
information on prevention, harm
reduction, treatment and recovery;
collecting, analyzing, and sharing
behavioral health data; collaborating
with other Federal agencies to evaluate
programs and improve policies; and
raising awareness of available resources
through educational messaging
campaigns and events. Integral to this
role, SAMHSA conducts qualitative
research and evaluation studies,
develops policy analyses, and estimates
the cost and benefits of policy
alternatives for SAMHSA related
programs.
The goal of establishing the SAMHSA
Generic Clearance for the Collection of
Qualitative Research and Assessmentis
to help public health officials,
policymakers, community practitioners,
and the public to understand mental
health and substance use trends and
how they are evolving; inform the
development and implementation of
targeted evidence-based interventions;
focus resources where they are needed
most; and evaluate the success of

71879

experts; national, state, and local public
health representatives; human service,
and healthcare providers; and
representatives of other health
organizations. A variety of instruments
and platforms will be used to collect
information from respondents. The
annual burden hours requested (15,000)
are based on the number of collections
we expect to conduct over the requested
period for this clearance. The burden
estimates were calculated based on the
amount of IC submissions to the 0930–
0393 Fast Track Generic Clearance for
the Collection of Qualitative Feedback
on the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA) Service Delivery that are
ineligible for OMB approval under it.
This Generic information collection will
provide a viable replacement option.
Internal assessments of projected IC
submission over the next three years
estimate the burden hours for this
information collection to be
approximately half that of the 0930–
0393 Fast Track Generic Clearance for
the Collection of Qualitative Feedback
on the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA) Service Delivery.

programs and policies. A key objective
is to decrease the burden on
stakeholders while expanding and
improving data collection, analysis,
evaluation, and dissemination. To
achieve this objective, SAMHSA is
streamlining and modernizing data
collection efforts, while also
coordinating evaluation across the
agency to ensure funding and policies
are data driven. Additionally, the
agency is utilizing rigorous evaluation
and analytical processes that are in
alignment with the Foundations for
Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of
2018. SAMHSA, using robust methods
to collect, analyze, and report valid,
reliable, trustworthy, and protected
data, is key to improving and impacting
behavioral health treatment, prevention,
and recovery for communities most in
need. By using rigorous methods, and
improving the quality and completeness
of program data, data can be
disaggregated across different
population groups to assess disparities
within the behavioral health care
system. SAMHSA’s vision will be
accomplished by better leveraging
optimal data to inform the agency’s
policies and programs.
The qualitative research participants
will include grant recipients; policy

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN TABLE
Form

Number of
respondents

Number of
responses per
respondent

Average
burden hours
per response

Total burden
hours

Qualitative Research ........................

15,000

1

1

15,000

Type of respondent
SAMHSA internal
stakeholders.

and

external

Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting
‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open
for Public Comments’’ or by using the
search function.

[FR Doc. 2023–22972 Filed 10–17–23; 8:45 am]

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

BILLING CODE 4162–20–P

18:01 Oct 17, 2023

Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R7–NWRS–2023–N071;
FXRS12630700000–234–FF07R08000; OMB
Control Number 1018–0141]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Alaska Guide Service
Evaluation
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of information collection;
request for comment.
AGENCY:

Alicia Broadus,
Public Health Advisor.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we,
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service), are proposing to renew an
information collection with revisions.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before
November 17, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
SUMMARY:

Jkt 262001

PO 00000

Frm 00063

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to https://www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain. Find this
particular information collection by
selecting ‘‘Currently under Review—
Open for Public Comments’’ or by using
the search function. Please provide a
copy of your comments to the Service
Information Collection Clearance
Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
MS: PRB (JAO/3W), 5275 Leesburg Pike,
Falls Church, VA 22041–3803 (mail); or
by email to Info_Coll@fws.gov. Please
reference ‘‘1018–0141’’ in the subject
line of your comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Madonna L. Baucum, Service
Information Collection Clearance
Officer, by email at Info_Coll@fws.gov,
or by telephone at (703) 358–2503.
Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access

E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM

18OCN1

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

71880

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2023 / Notices

telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.) and its implementing regulations
at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), all information
collections require approval under the
PRA. 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.
On April 19, 2023, we published in
the Federal Register (88 FR 24207) a
notice of our intent to request that OMB
approve this information collection. In
that notice, we solicited comments for
60 days, ending on June 20, 2023. The
Service also published the Federal
Register notice (and both forms) on
Regulations.gov (Docket No. FWS–R7–
NWRS–2023–0005) to provide the
public with an additional method to
submit comments (in addition to the
typical Info_Coll@fws.gov email and
U.S. mail submission methods). We
received the following comments in
response to that notice:
Comment 1: Anonymous electronic
comment received May 6, 2023, via
Regulations.gov (FWS–R7–NWRS–
2023–0005–0004): ‘‘I recommend
prohibiting commercial guiding on
public lands. It is not necessary or
appropriate. Many of them do
something illegal [because] they have a
client paying money and that alone
pressures them to same day airborne,
herd animals, bait, and the list goes on
and on.
There are plenty of hunters in Alaska
if some rich fancy pants from Germany
wants a trophy well he can afford to
spend the time and money to learn the
skill.’’
Agency Response to Comment 1: This
comment does not address the
information collection requirements. No
response required.
Comment 2: Electronic comment
received May 16, 2023, via
Regulations.gov (FWS–R7–NWRS–
2023–0005–0005) from Josh Hayes:
‘‘Data collection is necessary in order to
properly understand guide/client/public
interaction within the Refuges. In the
high use areas, and in competitive
permitted areas of Refuges in Alaska I
feel it is paramount that commercial
operators are regularly evaluated.
Modern data collection is often

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:01 Oct 17, 2023

Jkt 262001

electronic via phones, apps, internet
based reporting etc. Due to limited
internet/cell phone access and
connectivity in many areas of Alaska—
these collection methods are convenient
only when allowing the Client to
respond/reply within a fairly broad
timeframe.
As a commercial operator collecting
in depth personal information from
every client/guest is not necessarily
convenient. Often due to inclement
weather, written documentation is
nearly impossible, and phones/devices
often prove difficult to operate in rain,
snow, or colder climates. Many clients/
guests are invitees of an individual or
entity that has booked the trip on the
client/guests behalf. For the commercial
operators it would streamline data
collection processes if only the
individuals booking the trip provided
their personal data—FWS could then
solicit those individuals directly. Often
times commercial operators only have
the information of the point of contact
for trip bookings and are not in contact
with the other invitees until the day of
the trip. Data Collection/Evaluation
Comments;
I believe that the following questions
should be asked to individual clients
being hosted by the guides and outfitters
within all refuges:
1. Did the guide/outfitter create and
express accurate expectations prior to
booking?
2. Was the guide/outfitter honest
regarding trip opportunities prior to
booking? On the web, social media
platforms, advertisements etc...?
3. What was the level of public access
and participation within the Refuge?’’
Agency Response to Comment 2 (by
numbered recommendation):
1. Did the guide/outfitter create and
express accurate expectations prior to
booking? Section 2 Question 4 asks the
respondent to rate their level of
agreement with the following statement
‘‘My guided experience was what I
expected based on the guide’s
advertisement’’. We believe this
question captures what is being
expressed by the commenter. We
recommend no change.
2. Was the guide/outfitter honest
regarding trip opportunities prior to
booking? On the web, social media
platforms, advertisements etc...? Section
2 Question 4 asks the respondent to rate
their level of agreement with the
following statement ‘‘My guided
experience was what I expected based
on the guide’s advertisement’’. We
believe this question captures what is

PO 00000

Frm 00064

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

being expressed by the commenter. We
recommend no change.
3. What was the level of public access
and participation within the Refuge? It
is unclear what the commenter is
requesting clients be asked about ‘‘level
of public access’’ and ‘‘participation’’.
We recommend no change.
Comment 3: Electronic comment
received May 18, 2023, via
Regulations.gov (FWS–R7–NWRS–
2023–0005–0006) from Michael Zweng:
‘‘Section #1—New form question #1.
Although I explain to my clients in
detail where we hunt, I think the
question should have some specifics to
guide the clients such as: name the bay
where you hunted, the river you hunted,
the mountain range where you hunted.
I would eliminate question #5. This is
going to guided hunting clients so we
already know the answer.
Section #2—New for question #1. I
provide detailed client handbook to all
my clients that explain everything on
question #1. However, some clients are
not necessarily interested in this aspect
of the refuge and it goes in one ear and
out the other. They may not absorb it
and a guide may get a poor score just
because the client did not absorb the
information. This may reflect poorly on
the guide and I think this question
should be removed.
Section #3—New form question #2.
This question should be removed.
Section #4—New form Question #1.
This question implies the guide did
some things poorly. The client may feel
obligated to fill in this section even if it
was the best outdoor experience they
ever had. Maybe ask the question
‘‘Please list anything your guide could
have done to make your experience
better’’. You will probably get feedback
about better food and better
accommodations but my hunts are sold
as adventurous backpack style hunting
so it was explained what we eat and
how we hunt.
Section #5—This entire section
should be eliminated. It has no bearing
on the quality of guide services
provided and adds no value to the
intended purpose of this questionnaire.
I feel a lot of my clients would fail to
complete this entire questionnaire if
they were asked these questions.’’
Agency Response to Comment 3 (by
section):
Section #1: We believe this openended style question allows for the
respondent to have maximum flexibility
in describing where on the refuge their
guided trip occurred. We recommend no

E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM

18OCN1

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2023 / Notices
change. This Form is not specific to
competitively awarded guide service
evaluations, but rather to all guided
services on refuges (including
noncompetitive guided activities as well
as nonconsumptive uses). We
recommend no change.
Section #2: The question asks the
respondent to rate their level of
agreement with the statement ‘‘Your
guide(s) provided information about
. . .’’ not how well the client
understood the information. The
information gathered from this question
is of interest to the National Wildlife
Refuge System as it pertains to
education and interpretation
opportunities for guided clients. We
recommend no change.
Section #3: Understanding
accessibility accommodations on
National Wildlife Refuges is important
to ensuring visitors of different physical
abilities can experience Refuges. We
recommend no change.
Section #4: We do not believe this
question make any implications about
the guides’ services. By asking how a
guide might ‘‘have made your
experience better’’ (as asked in the
Form), the Service may learn valuable
feedback about visitor preferences. This
initial effort (i.e., revision of the Form)
is necessary to conduct a 2-year pilot of
the revised Guide Service Evaluation
Form. What we learn will help the
Service determine whether further Form
revision is needed. We recommend no
change.
Section #5: The National Wildlife
Refuge System is interested in who
visits Refuges to inform Visitor Services
outreach activities. We recommend no
change.
Comment 4: Anonymous electronic
comment received June 4, 2023, via
Regulations.gov (FWS–R7–NWRS–
2023–0005–0007): ‘‘Please don’t allow
hunting, fishing, and trapping on any of
these wildlife refuge locations anymore.
Please protect the animals. These
killings don’t benefit these animals in
any way and this killing business is
unnecessary.’’
Agency Response to Comment 4: This
comment does not address the
information collection; no response
required.
Comment 5: Electronic comment
received June 19, 2023, via
Regulations.gov (FWS–R7–NWRS–
2023–0005–0008) from Jon M. DeVore,
Attorney, on behalf of the Alaska
Professional Hunters Association
(APHA). Excerpts from the letter that
express perspectives about the AK
Guide Evaluation Form are below:
‘‘1. So, the proposed Alaska Guide
Service Evaluation form should set a

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:01 Oct 17, 2023

Jkt 262001

specific goal of how best to gather the
information it seeks in a manner that is
most likely to obtain the greatest
number of respondents.
2. APHA recommends that the FWS
should be more transparent about how
the Alaska Guide Service Evaluations
may be used by the FWS.
3. This is not a suggestion that client
evaluations be the only tool used to
evaluate guides, but we do recommend
that evaluations be available as a
reference for the ranking panel and then
used as a decision factor by the refuge
manager.
4. However, if it is the intent that the
name and operations of individual
guides are to be made public, the FWS
should notify in advance the guide and
operations.
5. For example, bad weather may have
caused a less than optimal experience,
so we recommend that the FWS take
any such factors into consideration
when utilizing client feedback that
might be pre-disposed to be negative for
reasons unrelated to the guide
personally.
6. It is critical to ask, up front, if the
hunter was successful in harvesting
their target species then bifurcate the
evaluations into two broad categories:
successful harvest and unsuccessful
harvest.
7. Once harvest and weather are
controlled for, clients should evaluate
their trip first and foremost on safety.
8. However, the Federal Register is
not transparent on how the information
will be ultimately used.’’
Agency Response to Comment 5:
Comment responses by response
number:
1. This comment addresses post-data
collection decision making but does not
address the content of the Guide Service
Evaluation Form; no response required.
2. This comment addresses post-data
collection decision making but does not
address the content of the Guide Service
Evaluation Form; no response required.
This initial effort (i.e., revision of the
Form) is necessary to conduct a 2-year
pilot of the revised Guide Service
Evaluation Form. What we learn will
help the Service determine whether
further Form revision is needed and
how we will use this information.
3. This comment addresses post-data
collection decision making but does not
address the content of the Guide Service
Evaluation Form; no response required.
This initial effort (i.e., revision of the
Form) is not specific to competitively
awarded guide service evaluations, but
rather to all guided services on refuges
(including noncompetitive guided
activities as well as nonconsumptive
uses).

PO 00000

Frm 00065

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

71881

4. This comment addresses data
management but does not address the
content of the Guide Service Evaluation
Form; no response required. All survey
respondent names and responses will
remain anonymous to the public.
5. There are many factors that may
impact the guided client experience on
refuges. It is not possible for the Guide
Service Evaluation Form to analyze all
factors that are outside of the control of
the guide service provider or the
Service. This initial effort (i.e., revision
of the Form) is necessary to conduct a
2-year pilot of the revised Guide Service
Evaluation Form. What we learn will
help the Service determine whether
further Form revision is needed.
6. This Form is not specific to
competitively awarded guide service
evaluations, but rather to all guided
services on refuges (including
noncompetitive guided activities as well
as nonconsumptive uses). This initial
effort (i.e., revision of the Form) is
necessary to conduct a 2-year pilot of
the revised Guide Service Evaluation
Form. What we learn will help the
Service determine whether further Form
revision is needed.
7. Safety concerns are captured in
Section 2 Question 2 of the Guide
Survey Evaluation Form, ‘‘Please rate
your level of agreement with the
following statement: your guide used
skills that kept you safe’’.
8. This comment addresses post-data
collection decision-making but does not
address the content of the Guide Service
Evaluation Form; no response required.
This initial effort (i.e., revision of the
Form) is necessary to conduct a 2-year
pilot of the revised Guide Service
Evaluation Form. What we learn will
help the Service determine whether
further Form revision is needed and
how we will use this information.
As part of our continuing effort to
reduce paperwork and respondent
burdens, we invite the public and other
Federal agencies to comment on new,
proposed, revised, and continuing
collections of information. This helps us
assess the impact of our information
collection requirements and minimize
the public’s reporting burden. It also
helps the public understand our
information collection requirements and
provide the requested data in the
desired format.
We are especially interested in public
comment addressing the following:
(1) Whether or not the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether or not the
information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the
burden for this collection of

E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM

18OCN1

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

71882

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2023 / Notices

information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) How might the agency minimize
the burden of 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, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of response.
Comments that you submit in
response to this notice are a matter of
public record. We will include or
summarize each comment in our request
to OMB to approve this information
collection request (ICR). 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.
Abstract: We collect information via
Form 3–2349 (Alaska Guide Service
Evaluation) to help us evaluate
commercial guide services on our
national wildlife refuges in the State of
Alaska (State). The National Wildlife
Refuge Administration Act of 1966, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 668dd–ee),
authorizes us to permit uses, including
commercial visitor services, on national
wildlife refuges when we find the
activity to be compatible with the
purposes for which the refuge was
established. With the objective of
making available a variety of quality
visitor services for wildlife-dependent
recreation on National Wildlife Refuge
System lands, we issue permits for
commercial guide services, including
big game hunting, sport fishing, wildlife
viewing, river trips, and other guided
activities. We use FWS Form 3–2349 as
a method to:
• Monitor the quality of services
provided by commercial guides.
• Gauge client satisfaction with the
services.
• Assess the impacts of the activity
on refuge resources.
The client is the best source of
information on the quality of
commercial guiding services. We
collect:
• Client name.
• Guide name(s).
• Type of guided activity.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:01 Oct 17, 2023

Jkt 262001

• Dates and location of guided
activity.
• Information on the services
received, such as the client’s
expectations, safety, environmental
impacts, and client’s overall
satisfaction.
We encourage respondents to provide
any additional comments that they wish
regarding the guide service or refuge
experience, and ask whether or not they
wish to be contacted for additional
information.
The above information, in
combination with State-required guide
activity reports and contacts with guides
and clients in the field, provides a
comprehensive method for monitoring
permitted commercial guide activities.
A regular program of client evaluation
helps refuge managers detect potential
problems with guide services so that we
can take corrective actions promptly. In
addition, we use this information during
the competitive selection process for big
game and sport fishing guide permits to
evaluate a renewing applicant’s ability
to provide a quality guiding service.
The Service is actively reviewing the
current evaluation form to identify ways
to improve the information collected to:
• Provide more quantifiable and
defensible data;
• Provide statistical data for each
completed and submitted form; and
• Translate the client responses into
useful information, so refuge
management can make better informed
decisions.
Proposed Revisions
Alaska Guide Service Evaluation
(Form 3–2538) (NEW)—With this
submission, the Service will propose a
new form (Form 3–2538, ‘‘Alaska Guide
Service Evaluation’’) to OMB for
approval. The Service initially proposed
this form for viability testing under
OMB Control No. 1090–0011, ‘‘DOI
Generic Clearance for the Collection of
Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service
Delivery,’’ in our December 22, 2020,
Federal Register notice (85 FR 83604).
However, the pandemic significantly
limited the number of guide trips during
the 2020 through 2022 seasons. In
addition, changes to Control No. 1090–
0011 now prohibit testing of new forms.
We are now proposing the form to be
approved under this collection (Control
No. 1018–0141) rather than for usability
testing under Control No. 1090–0011.
In order to effectively adapt visitor
services programming in the Alaska
Region, we need to understand visitor
satisfaction. To that end, the Alaska
Guide Service Evaluation team,
comprised of representatives from
across the Region, with the assistance of

PO 00000

Frm 00066

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

the Human Dimensions Branch and the
Service Information Collection
Clearance Officer, has revised the
current guide evaluation form. The
revised form provides the region’s
refuges with a useful and quantitative
tool that reflects social science survey
design best practices, and that is
standardized for use across refuges in
the region. Form 3–2538 would collect
the following information from
participants in the Alaska guide
program:
• Details regarding the guided trip—
name of the person(s) or outfitters
guiding the trip and top three purposes
for visiting the refuge.
• Experiences with guided trip.
• Level of satisfaction with guided
trip and details regarding purpose of
visit to refuge.
• Suggestions for improvements.
• Details about visitor—gender; State
and/or country of residence; year of
birth; race or ethnicity; details regarding
formal schooling; and approximate
household income.
• Contact information for followup
questions (optional).
Upon approval of the new Form 3–
2538, the Service will review the form
after two seasons to determine what, if
any, changes need to be made prior to
the next renewal of this collection.
Individual refuge programs within
Alaska will use the information
collected to determine baseline guidesupported visitor experience conditions
and be able to adapt management over
time to continue to achieve desired
guide-supported visitor experience
opportunities on Alaska’s refuges.
Alaska Guide Service Evaluation
(Form 3–2349) (DISCONTINUE)—With
this submission, and upon approval of
Form 3–2538, the Service requests to
discontinue the original Alaska Guide
Service Evaluation (Form 3–2349).
The public may request copies of any
form contained in this information
collection by sending a request to the
Service Information Collection
Clearance Officer (see ADDRESSES).
Title of Collection: Alaska Guide
Service Evaluation.
OMB Control Number: 1018–0141.
Form Number: Forms 3–2349 and 3–
2538.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Public: Clients
of permitted commercial guide service
providers.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: 300.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 300.
Estimated Completion Time per
Response: 20 minutes.

E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM

18OCN1

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2023 / Notices
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 100.
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
Frequency of Collection: One time,
following use of commercial guide
services.
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.
The authority for this action is the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Madonna Baucum,
Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2023–22963 Filed 10–17–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
[S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000
245S180110; S2D2S SS08011000
SX064A000 24XS501520; OMB Control
Number 1029–0118]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Federal Inspections and
Monitoring
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of information collection;
request for comment.
AGENCY:

In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we,
the Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE),
are proposing to renew an information
collection.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before
November 17, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting
‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open
for Public Comments’’ or by using the
search function. Please provide a copy
of your comments to Mark Gehlhar,
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement, 1849 C Street NW,
Room 4556–MIB, Washington, DC
20240, or by email to mgehlhar@
osmre.gov. Please reference OMB
Control Number 1029–0118 in the
subject line of your comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request additional information about

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:01 Oct 17, 2023

Jkt 262001

this ICR, contact Mark Gehlhar by email
at mgehlhar@osmre.gov, or by telephone
at (202) 208–2716. Individuals in the
United States who are deaf, deafblind,
hard of hearing, or have a speech
disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. You may
also view the ICR at http://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA; 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), we
provide the general public and other
Federal agencies with an opportunity to
comment on new, proposed, revised,
and continuing collections of
information. This helps us assess the
impact of our information collection
requirements and minimize the public’s
reporting burden. It also helps the
public understand our information
collection requirements and provide the
requested data in the desired format.
A Federal Register notice with a 60day public comment period soliciting
comments on this collection of
information was published on June 12,
2023 (88 FR 38094). No comments were
received.
As part of our continuing effort to
reduce paperwork and respondent
burdens, we are again soliciting
comments from the public and other
Federal agencies on the proposed ICR
that is described below. We are
especially interested in public comment
addressing the following:
(1) Whether or not the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether or not the
information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the
burden for this collection of
information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) How might the agency minimize
the burden of 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, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of response.
Comments that you submit in
response to this notice are a matter of
public record. Before including your

PO 00000

Frm 00067

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

71883

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.
Abstract: This part establishes the
procedures for any person to notify the
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement in writing of any
violation that may exist at a surface coal
mining operation and to request a
Federal inspection. The information
will be used to investigate potential
violations of the Act or applicable State
regulations.
Title of Collection: Federal
Inspections and Monitoring.
OMB Control Number: 1029–0118.
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Public:
Individuals.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: 11.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 11.
Estimated Completion Time per
Response: 1 hour.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 11.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: Once.
Total Estimated Annual Nonhour
Burden Cost: None.
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.
The authority for this action is the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Mark J. Gehlhar,
Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Division of Regulatory Support.
[FR Doc. 2023–22998 Filed 10–17–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P

INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
Notice of Receipt of Complaint;
Solicitation of Comments Relating to
the Public Interest
International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM

18OCN1