Finding of No Significant Impact, 56468-56469 [E6-15855]
Download as PDF
56468
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 71, No. 187
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Commodity Credit Corporation
Finding of No Significant Impact
AGENCY:
Commodity Credit Corporation,
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
USDA.
SUMMARY: The Commodity Credit
Corporation (CCC) is issuing a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with
respect to the implementation of the
Emergency Forestry Conservation
Reserve Program (EFCRP). EFCRP
provides cost-share assistance for
cleanup and replanting for those owners
or operators of non-industrial forest
land and school trust land that
experienced a loss of 35 percent or more
of merchantable timber directly related
to hurricanes that occurred during the
2005 calendar year.
DATES: This action is effective 30 days
after publication of this Notice.
ADDRESSES: The Final Programmatic
Environmental Assessment and FONSI
may be reviewed at https://
www.fsa.usda.gov/dafp/cepd/epb/
assessments.htm. Written comments
should be directed to Mike Linsenbigler,
USDA/FSA/CEPD/Stop 0513, 1400
Independence Ave., SW., Washington,
DC 20250–0513. Electronic comments
may be submitted to
EFCRP@wdc.usda.gov. Persons with
disabilities who require alternative
means for communication (Braille, large
print, audio tape, etc.) should contact
the USDA Target Center at (202) 720–
2600 (voice and TDD).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Consistent
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, as amended, (42 U.S.C.
4321, et seq.) (NEPA), the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ)
Regulations for Implementing the
Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
parts 1500–1508), and FSA’s policy and
procedures (7 CFR part 799), the United
States Department of Agriculture, Farm
Service Agency (FSA), on behalf of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Sep 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
CCC, prepared a Programmatic
Environmental Assessment for the
Emergency Forestry Conservation
Reserve Program (EFCRP) to evaluate
the environmental consequences
associated with the 2005 hurricane
season. During the course of the 2005
hurricane season, one of the worst on
record, five hurricanes made landfall on
the United States (U.S.) between July
and October 2006: Dennis, Katrina,
Ophelia, Rita, and Wilma. Each of these
caused damage to infrastructure, homes,
personal property, and agricultural
resources, including privately owned
forests. The purpose of EFCRP is to
provide cost-share assistance for
cleanup and replanting for those owners
or operators of non-industrial forest
land and school trust land that
experienced a loss of 35 percent or more
of merchantable timber directly related
to hurricanes that occurred during the
2005 calendar year.
The EFCRP was authorized by Section
107 of Division B, Title I, of the
Department of Defense Appropriations
Act of 2006, H.R. 2863, signed by the
President on December 30, 2005. The
program applies to the States of
Alabama, Florida, Louisiana,
Mississippi, North Carolina, and Texas.
Preferred Alternative
Implementation of the Preferred
Alternative will provide cost-share
assistance for cleanup and replanting for
owners or operators of non-industrial
private forest land (including school
trust lands) who experienced a loss of
35 percent or more of merchantable
timber directly related to hurricanes
Katrina, Ophelia, Rita, Dennis, and
Wilma during the 2005 calendar year.
Producers will be provided financial
assistance for the following nine eligible
conservation practices: CP 35A and CP
35B: New and Existing Longleaf Pine;
CP 35C and CP 35D: New and Existing
Bottomland Hardwood; CP 35E and CP
35F: New and Existing Softwood; CP
35G and CP 35H: New and Existing
Upland Hardwood; and Mixed Existing,
CP35I. Each EFCRP contract would have
a conservation plan developed by a
professional forester. There would be a
status review by FSA on each contract
until the Practice is established.
Reasons for Finding of No Significant
Impact
In consideration of the analysis
documented in the Programmatic
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Environmental Assessment for the
Emergency Forestry Conservation
Reserve Program and the reasons
outlined in this FONSI, the preferred
alternative would not constitute a major
State or Federal action that would
significantly affect the human
environment. Therefore, an
Environmental Impact Statement need
not be prepared. This determination is
based on the following:
1. Both beneficial and adverse
impacts of implementing the preferred
alternative have been fully considered
within the Programmatic Environmental
Assessment for the Emergency Forestry
Conservation Reserve Program. The
beneficial impacts outweigh any adverse
impacts. Adverse cumulative impacts
are expected to be minor as
implementation of the preferred
alternative will cause very little if any
adverse impacts on the area of potential
effects and the human environment.
2. The preferred alternative would not
significantly affect public health or
safety. Further, the removal of downed
timber as a result of the preferred
alternative would reduce fire fuel,
minimizing the potential for wildfires to
threaten public safety.
3. The preferred alternative would not
significantly affect any unique
characteristics which includes historic
and cultural resources, parklands, prime
farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic
rivers, or ecologically critical areas.
4. The preferred alternative does not
involve effects to the quality of the
human environment that are likely to be
highly controversial. Implementing the
preferred alternative will reduce
contamination of drinking water,
improve air quality, and further
recreational and socioeconomic
benefits.
5. The preferred alternative would not
impose highly uncertain, or involve
unique or unknown risks.
6. The preferred alternative would not
establish a precedent for future actions
with significant effects and does not
represent a decision in principle about
a future consideration. The preferred
alternative is intended to assist owners
or operators of non-industrial private
forest land in recovering from the 2005
hurricane damage. Any future projects
that are similar in nature will need to be
reviewed on a case-by-case basis to
determine their individual potential for
impact on the human environment.
E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM
27SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 27, 2006 / Notices
7. The preferred alternative is not
related to other actions with
individually insignificant but
cumulative significant impacts. The
Environmental Consequences section of
the Programmatic Environmental
Assessment for the Emergency Forestry
Conservation Reserve Program discusses
potential cumulative impacts of
implementing the preferred alternative.
Cumulative impacts of implementing
the preferred alternative were
determined to not be significant.
8. The preferred alternative would not
adversely affect districts, sites,
highways, structures, or objects listed in
or eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places or cause loss
or destruction of significant scientific,
cultural, or historical resources.
Consultation with the State Historic
Preservation Offices was completed.
Site-specific cultural resource
considerations will be addressed during
the environmental review process for
individual contracts.
9. The preferred alternative would not
have adverse effects on threatened or
endangered species or designated
critical habitat. In accordance with
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act,
16 U.S.C. 1536, the effects of
implementing the preferred alternative
on threatened and endangered species
and designated critical habitat were
addressed in the Programmatic
Environmental Assessment for the
Emergency Forestry Conservation
Reserve Program. Informal consultation
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
was completed.
10. The preferred alternative does not
threaten a violation of Federal, State, or
local law or requirements imposed for
the protection of the environment.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Determination
Consistent with the National
Environmental Policy Act, 40 CFR part
1502.4, ‘‘Major Federal actions requiring
the preparation of Environmental
Impact Statements,’’ 7 CFR part 799,
‘‘Environmental Quality and Related
Environmental Concerns—Compliance
with NEPA implementing the
regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality,’’ and 40 CFR
Parts 1500–1508, I find that neither the
proposed action nor any of the
alternatives analyzed constitute a major
Federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment.
Therefore, no environmental impact
statement will be prepared.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Sep 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
Signed in Washington, DC on September
21, 2006.
Thomas B. Hofeller,
Acting Executive Vice President, Commodity
Credit Corporation.
[FR Doc. E6–15855 Filed 9–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. FSIS–2006–0029]
National Advisory Committee on Meat
and Poultry Inspection
Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS), USDA.
ACTION: Notice of public meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Advisory
Committee on Meat and Poultry
Inspection (NACMPI) will hold a public
meeting on October 12–13, 2006, to
review and discuss the following issues:
(1) Using Risk to Direct In-Plant
Inspection Activities in Processing
Assignments, and (2) Using Risk in
Slaughter Operations. Two
subcommittees will also meet on
October 12, 2006, to work on these
issues after discussion during the full
committee session.
DATES: The full Committee will hold a
public meeting on Thursday, October
12, and Friday, October 13, 2006, from
8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. Subcommittees will
hold open meetings on Thursday,
October 12, 2006, from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m.
ADDRESSES: All Committee meetings
will take place in the conference room
at the south end of the U. S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA) cafeteria located
in the South Building, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250. A meeting
agenda is available on the Internet at the
NACMPI Web site, https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/about_fsis/nacmpi/
index.asp. The NACMPI meeting
agenda, together with information and
resource materials on risk-based
inspection, is also available on the
Internet at the Risk-based Inspection
System Web site, https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/
Regulations_&_Policies/
Risk_Based_Inspection/index.asp. FSIS
welcomes comments on the topics to be
discussed at the NACMPI public
meeting. Comments may be submitted
by any of the following methods:
Electronic mail:
NACMPI@fsis.usda.gov.
Mail, including floppy disks or CD–
ROM’s: Send to Advisory Committee
Specialist, United States Department of
Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56469
Service, 14th & Independence Avenue,
SW., Mail Drop 405 Aerospace,
Washington, DC 20250.
Hand-or courier-delivered items:
Deliver to Loraine Cannon at 901 D
Street, SW., Washington, DC. To deliver
these items, the building security guard
must first call (202) 690–6520.
Facsimile: Send to Loraine Cannon,
(202) 690–6519.
All submissions received must
include the Agency name and docket
number FSIS–2006–0029.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Tynan for technical information
at (202) 720–3884, or e-mail
robert.tynan@fsis.usda.gov and Loraine
Cannon for meeting information at (202)
690–6647, FAX (202) 690–6519, or email NACMPI@fsis.usda.gov. Persons
requiring a sign language interpreter or
other special accommodations should
notify Loraine Cannon no later than
September 26, 2006, at the numbers
above or by e-mail.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 15, 2005, the Secretary of
Agriculture renewed the charter for the
NACMPI. The Committee provides
advice and recommendations to the
Secretary of Agriculture pertaining to
the Federal and State meat and poultry
inspection programs, pursuant to
sections 7(c), 24, 205, 301(a)(3), 301(a)
(4), and 301(c) of the Federal Meat
Inspection Act [21 U.S.C. 607(c), 624,
645, 661(a)(3), 661(a)(4), and 661(c)] and
sections 5(a)(3), 5(a)(4), 5(c), 8(b), and
11(e) of the Poultry Products Inspection
Act [21 U.S.C. 454(a)(3), 454(a)(4),
454(c), 457(b), and 460(e)].
The Administrator of FSIS is the
chairperson of the Committee.
Membership of the Committee is drawn
from representatives of consumer
groups; producers, processors and
marketers from the meat, poultry and
egg product industries; State and local
government officials; and academia. The
current members of the NACMPI are: Dr.
Gladys Bayse, Spelman College; Dr.
David Carpenter, Southern Illinois
University; Dr. James Denton,
University of Arkansas; Mr. Darin
Detwiler, Lake Washington School
District; Mr. Kevin Elfering, Minnesota
Department of Agriculture; Ms. Sandra
Eskin, Public Policy Consultant; Mr.
Mike Finnegan, Montana Department of
Agriculture; Mr. Michael Govro, Oregon
Department of Agriculture; Dr. Andrea
Grondahl, North Dakota Department of
Agriculture; Dr. Joseph Harris,
Southwest Meat Association; Dr. Jill
Hollingsworth, Food Marketing
Institute; Mr. Michael Kowalcyk, Safe
E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM
27SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 27, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56468-56469]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-1585]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 27, 2006 /
Notices
[[Page 56468]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Commodity Credit Corporation
Finding of No Significant Impact
AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, USDA.
SUMMARY: The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) is issuing a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the implementation of the
Emergency Forestry Conservation Reserve Program (EFCRP). EFCRP provides
cost-share assistance for cleanup and replanting for those owners or
operators of non-industrial forest land and school trust land that
experienced a loss of 35 percent or more of merchantable timber
directly related to hurricanes that occurred during the 2005 calendar
year.
DATES: This action is effective 30 days after publication of this
Notice.
ADDRESSES: The Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment and FONSI
may be reviewed at https://www.fsa.usda.gov/dafp/cepd/epb/
assessments.htm. Written comments should be directed to Mike
Linsenbigler, USDA/FSA/CEPD/Stop 0513, 1400 Independence Ave., SW.,
Washington, DC 20250-0513. Electronic comments may be submitted to
EFCRP@wdc.usda.gov. Persons with disabilities who require alternative
means for communication (Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) should
contact the USDA Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Consistent with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) (NEPA), the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the
Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and FSA's
policy and procedures (7 CFR part 799), the United States Department of
Agriculture, Farm Service Agency (FSA), on behalf of the CCC, prepared
a Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the Emergency Forestry
Conservation Reserve Program (EFCRP) to evaluate the environmental
consequences associated with the 2005 hurricane season. During the
course of the 2005 hurricane season, one of the worst on record, five
hurricanes made landfall on the United States (U.S.) between July and
October 2006: Dennis, Katrina, Ophelia, Rita, and Wilma. Each of these
caused damage to infrastructure, homes, personal property, and
agricultural resources, including privately owned forests. The purpose
of EFCRP is to provide cost-share assistance for cleanup and replanting
for those owners or operators of non-industrial forest land and school
trust land that experienced a loss of 35 percent or more of
merchantable timber directly related to hurricanes that occurred during
the 2005 calendar year.
The EFCRP was authorized by Section 107 of Division B, Title I, of
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2006, H.R. 2863, signed
by the President on December 30, 2005. The program applies to the
States of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and
Texas.
Preferred Alternative
Implementation of the Preferred Alternative will provide cost-share
assistance for cleanup and replanting for owners or operators of non-
industrial private forest land (including school trust lands) who
experienced a loss of 35 percent or more of merchantable timber
directly related to hurricanes Katrina, Ophelia, Rita, Dennis, and
Wilma during the 2005 calendar year.
Producers will be provided financial assistance for the following
nine eligible conservation practices: CP 35A and CP 35B: New and
Existing Longleaf Pine; CP 35C and CP 35D: New and Existing Bottomland
Hardwood; CP 35E and CP 35F: New and Existing Softwood; CP 35G and CP
35H: New and Existing Upland Hardwood; and Mixed Existing, CP35I. Each
EFCRP contract would have a conservation plan developed by a
professional forester. There would be a status review by FSA on each
contract until the Practice is established.
Reasons for Finding of No Significant Impact
In consideration of the analysis documented in the Programmatic
Environmental Assessment for the Emergency Forestry Conservation
Reserve Program and the reasons outlined in this FONSI, the preferred
alternative would not constitute a major State or Federal action that
would significantly affect the human environment. Therefore, an
Environmental Impact Statement need not be prepared. This determination
is based on the following:
1. Both beneficial and adverse impacts of implementing the
preferred alternative have been fully considered within the
Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the Emergency Forestry
Conservation Reserve Program. The beneficial impacts outweigh any
adverse impacts. Adverse cumulative impacts are expected to be minor as
implementation of the preferred alternative will cause very little if
any adverse impacts on the area of potential effects and the human
environment.
2. The preferred alternative would not significantly affect public
health or safety. Further, the removal of downed timber as a result of
the preferred alternative would reduce fire fuel, minimizing the
potential for wildfires to threaten public safety.
3. The preferred alternative would not significantly affect any
unique characteristics which includes historic and cultural resources,
parklands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or
ecologically critical areas.
4. The preferred alternative does not involve effects to the
quality of the human environment that are likely to be highly
controversial. Implementing the preferred alternative will reduce
contamination of drinking water, improve air quality, and further
recreational and socioeconomic benefits.
5. The preferred alternative would not impose highly uncertain, or
involve unique or unknown risks.
6. The preferred alternative would not establish a precedent for
future actions with significant effects and does not represent a
decision in principle about a future consideration. The preferred
alternative is intended to assist owners or operators of non-industrial
private forest land in recovering from the 2005 hurricane damage. Any
future projects that are similar in nature will need to be reviewed on
a case-by-case basis to determine their individual potential for impact
on the human environment.
[[Page 56469]]
7. The preferred alternative is not related to other actions with
individually insignificant but cumulative significant impacts. The
Environmental Consequences section of the Programmatic Environmental
Assessment for the Emergency Forestry Conservation Reserve Program
discusses potential cumulative impacts of implementing the preferred
alternative. Cumulative impacts of implementing the preferred
alternative were determined to not be significant.
8. The preferred alternative would not adversely affect districts,
sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for
listing in the National Register of Historic Places or cause loss or
destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical
resources. Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Offices
was completed. Site-specific cultural resource considerations will be
addressed during the environmental review process for individual
contracts.
9. The preferred alternative would not have adverse effects on
threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat. In
accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C.
1536, the effects of implementing the preferred alternative on
threatened and endangered species and designated critical habitat were
addressed in the Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the
Emergency Forestry Conservation Reserve Program. Informal consultation
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was completed.
10. The preferred alternative does not threaten a violation of
Federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection
of the environment.
Determination
Consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act, 40 CFR part
1502.4, ``Major Federal actions requiring the preparation of
Environmental Impact Statements,'' 7 CFR part 799, ``Environmental
Quality and Related Environmental Concerns--Compliance with NEPA
implementing the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality,''
and 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, I find that neither the proposed action nor
any of the alternatives analyzed constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
Therefore, no environmental impact statement will be prepared.
Signed in Washington, DC on September 21, 2006.
Thomas B. Hofeller,
Acting Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation.
[FR Doc. E6-15855 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-05-P