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 http:// 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, http:// 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, http:// 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 http://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