Interstate Movement of Municipal Solid Waste From Hawaii; Availability of an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 34700-34701 [E8-13735]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
34700
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 18, 2008 / Notices
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
are considered to be unsafe unless a
tolerance or exemption from tolerance
has been established. Residue tolerances
for pesticides are established by EPA
under the FFDCA, and the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA)
enforces the tolerances set by EPA. BCS
submitted the appropriate regulatory
package to EPA for registering the use of
glyphosate herbicide on GBH614 cotton.
Safe use of glyphosate has been
established by the EPA through the
registration of glyphosate for use on
cotton and the setting of tolerances for
the herbicide.
FDA’s policy statement concerning
regulation of products derived from new
plant varieties, including those
genetically engineered, was published
in the Federal Register on May 29, 1992
(57 FR 22984–23005). Under this policy,
FDA uses what is termed a consultation
process to ensure that human and
animal feed safety issues or other
regulatory issues (e.g., labeling) are
resolved prior to commercial
distribution of a bioengineered food. In
compliance with the FDA policy, BCS
has submitted a food and feed safety
and nutritional assessment summary for
GHB614 cotton to the FDA. This
assessment is pending. As of May 29,
2008, FDA has not announced the
completion of BCS’ consultation for
cotton event GHB614 (see https://
www.cfsan.fda.gov/lrd/∼biocon.html).
The petition and the draft EA are
available for public review, and copies
of the petition and the draft EA are
available as indicated under ADDRESSES
and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
above.
After the comment period closes,
APHIS will review all written comments
received during the comment period
and any other relevant information. All
public comments received regarding the
petition and draft EA will be available
for public review. After reviewing and
evaluating the comments on the petition
and the draft EA and other data, APHIS
will furnish a response to the petitioner,
either approving (in whole or part) or
denying the petition. APHIS will then
publish a notice in the Federal Register
announcing the regulatory status of
BCS’ herbicide-tolerant cotton event
GHB614 and the availability of APHIS’
written regulatory and environmental
decision.
National Environmental Policy Act
A draft EA has been prepared to
provide the APHIS decisionmaker with
a review and analysis of any potential
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed determination of
nonregulated status for GHB614. The
draft EA was prepared in accordance
with (1) The National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) regulations
of the Council on Environmental
Quality for implementing the
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
parts 1500–1508), (3) USDA regulations
implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b),
and (4) APHIS’ NEPA Implementing
Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
In accordance with § 340.6(d) of the
regulations, we are publishing this
notice to inform the public that APHIS
will accept written comments regarding
the petition for a determination of
nonregulated status from interested or
affected persons for a period of 60 days
from the date of this notice. We are also
soliciting written comments from
interested or affected persons on the
draft EA prepared to examine any
potential environmental impacts of the
proposed determination for the
deregulation of the subject cotton event.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 Jun 17, 2008
Jkt 214001
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781–
7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and
371.3.
Done in Washington, DC, this 12th day of
June 2008.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E8–13736 Filed 6–17–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2007–0070]
Interstate Movement of Municipal Solid
Waste From Hawaii; Availability of an
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We are advising the public
that the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service has prepared a
regional programmatic environmental
assessment and finding of no significant
impact relative to the interstate
movement of municipal solid waste
from Hawaii to landfills in the States of
Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. The
environmental assessment contains a
general assessment of the potential
environmental effects associated with
moving garbage interstate from Hawaii
to Idaho, Oregon, and Washington
subject to certain pest risk mitigation
measures and documents our review
and analysis of the environmental
impacts associated with, and
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
alternatives to, such movements. Based
on its finding of no significant impact,
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service has determined that an
environmental impact statement need
not be prepared.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Shannon Hamm, Acting Deputy
Administrator, Policy and Program
Development, APHIS, 4700 River Road
Unit 20, Riverdale, MD 20737–1231;
(301) 734–4957.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The importation and interstate
movement of garbage is regulated by the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS) under 7 CFR 330.400
and 9 CFR 94.5 in order to protect
against the introduction into and
dissemination within the United States
of plant and animal pests and diseases.
On March 13, 2008, we published in
the Federal Register (73 FR 13525,
Docket No. APHIS–2007–0070) a
notice 1 in which we announced the
availability, for public review and
comment, of a regional programmatic
environmental assessment relative to
the interstate movement of municipal
solid waste from Hawaii to landfills in
the States of Idaho, Oregon, and
Washington.
The environmental assessment, titled
‘‘Regional Movement of Plastic-baled
Municipal Solid Waste from Hawaii to
Washington, Oregon, and Idaho’’
(February 2008), considers the
movement of a cumulative maximum
amount of baled municipal solid waste
from the State of Hawaii to any qualified
landfill in Washington, Oregon, or Idaho
under compliance agreements with
APHIS and in accordance with the
standards previously established by
APHIS regarding baling, handling, spill
response, and disposal.
We solicited comments on the
regional programmatic environmental
assessment for 30 days ending on April
14, 2008. We received three comments
by that date, from the State of Idaho, a
private citizen, and a law office. All of
the commenters raised specific issues
regarding the environmental
assessment. In an attachment to the
finding of no significant impact
determination, we respond to each of
the issues raised by the commenters.
Based on the information contained in
the regional programmatic
environmental assessment and
following our consideration of the
1 To view the notice and the comments we
received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/
fdmspublic/component/
main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS–2007–0070.
E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM
18JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 18, 2008 / Notices
information submitted during the
comment period, we have determined
that implementation of either alternative
examined in the environmental
assessment—i.e., the barging of
municipal solid waste from Hawaii to
landfills within the States of Oregon,
Washington, and Idaho under
compliance agreements with APHIS or
taking no action (no interstate
movement of municipal solid waste
from Hawaii)—is not expected to result
in a significant impact to the human
environment, and an environmental
impact statement does not need to be
prepared.
The environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact have
been prepared in accordance with: (1)
The National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the
Council on Environmental Quality for
implementing the procedural provisions
of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3)
USDA regulations implementing NEPA
(7 CFR part 1), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part
372).
Done in Washington, DC, this 12th day of
June 2008.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E8–13735 Filed 6–17–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Waivers Under
Section 6(o) of the Food Stamp Act
Food and Nutrition Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice invites the general public and
other public agencies to comment on
proposed information collections. The
proposed collection is a revision of a
currently approved collection.
The purpose of Section 6(o) of the
Food Stamp Act of 1977, as amended by
Section 824 of the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996, is to
establish a time limit for the receipt of
food stamp benefits for certain ablebodied adults who are not working. The
provision authorizes the Secretary of
Agriculture, upon a State agency’s
request, to waive the provision for any
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 Jun 17, 2008
Jkt 214001
group of individuals if the Secretary
determines ‘‘that the area in which the
individuals reside has an
unemployment rate of over 10 percent,
or does not have a sufficient number of
jobs to provide employment for the
individuals.’’ As required in the statute,
in order to receive a waiver the State
agency must submit sufficient
supporting information so that the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) can make the required
determination as to the area’s
unemployment rate or sufficiency of
available jobs. This collection of
information is therefore necessary in
order to obtain waivers of the food
stamp time limit.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 18, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) 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) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who respond, including
through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology. Comments may be sent to
Patrick Waldron, Chief, Certification
Policy Branch, Program Development
Division, Food and Nutrition Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101
Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA
22302. Comments may also be faxed to
the attention of Mr. Waldron at (703)
305–2486. The e-mail address is:
Patrick.Waldron@FNS.USDA.GOV. All
written comments will be open for
public inspection at the office of the
Food and Nutrition Service during
regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5
p.m., Monday through Friday) at 3101
Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia,
22302, Room 812.
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
for OMB approval. All comments will
be a matter of public record.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information
should be directed to Mr. Waldron at
(703) 305–2495.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Waiver Guidance for Food
Stamp Time Limits.
OMB Number: 0584–0479.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34701
Expiration Date: August 31, 2008.
Type of Request: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Abstract: Section 824 of the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA),
Public Law 104–193, 110 Stat. 2323
amended Section 6(o) of the Food
Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2015(o)) to
establish a time limit for the receipt of
food stamp benefits for certain ablebodied adults who are not working. The
provision authorizes the Secretary of
Agriculture, upon a State agency’s
request, to waive the provision for any
group of individuals if the Secretary
determines ‘‘that the area in which the
individuals reside has an
unemployment rate of over 10 percent,
or does not have a sufficient number of
jobs to provide employment for the
individuals.’’ As required in the statute,
in order to receive a waiver the State
agency must submit sufficient
supporting information so that USDA
can make the required determination as
to the area’s unemployment rate or
sufficiency of available jobs. This
collection of information is therefore
necessary in order to obtain waivers of
the food stamp time limit. During the
last three years, the Food and Nutrition
Service (FNS) has received on average
48 requests for waivers from an average
of 48 State agencies. We wish to note
that FNS has granted a limited number
of 2-year waivers and that the estimated
average of 48 submissions a year is
based on multiple annual submissions
from some State agencies and less
biannual submissions from other State
agencies. Each request submitted by a
State agency to exempt individuals
residing in specified areas is considered
by FNS to be a separate request, since
the requested exemptions may be based
on different criteria, are submitted at
different times, and require separate
analysis. Although State agencies have
submitted significantly fewer multiple
requests since the last time that this
reporting burden was extended, in order
to ensure that all areas that potentially
qualify for exemptions are included in
their waiver requests, State agencies are
employing a more sophisticated analysis
covering multiple timeframes and multicounty geographical and labor market
areas, requiring more time for the
preparation and evaluation of each
request.
Affected Public: State and Local
governments.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
48.
Estimated Number of Responses: 48.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Respondent: 1.
E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM
18JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 18, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34700-34701]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-13735]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
[Docket No. APHIS-2007-0070]
Interstate Movement of Municipal Solid Waste From Hawaii;
Availability of an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are advising the public that the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service has prepared a regional programmatic environmental
assessment and finding of no significant impact relative to the
interstate movement of municipal solid waste from Hawaii to landfills
in the States of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. The environmental
assessment contains a general assessment of the potential environmental
effects associated with moving garbage interstate from Hawaii to Idaho,
Oregon, and Washington subject to certain pest risk mitigation measures
and documents our review and analysis of the environmental impacts
associated with, and alternatives to, such movements. Based on its
finding of no significant impact, the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service has determined that an environmental impact
statement need not be prepared.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Shannon Hamm, Acting Deputy
Administrator, Policy and Program Development, APHIS, 4700 River Road
Unit 20, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-4957.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The importation and interstate movement of garbage is regulated by
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) under 7 CFR
330.400 and 9 CFR 94.5 in order to protect against the introduction
into and dissemination within the United States of plant and animal
pests and diseases.
On March 13, 2008, we published in the Federal Register (73 FR
13525, Docket No. APHIS-2007-0070) a notice \1\ in which we announced
the availability, for public review and comment, of a regional
programmatic environmental assessment relative to the interstate
movement of municipal solid waste from Hawaii to landfills in the
States of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the notice and the comments we received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/
main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0070.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The environmental assessment, titled ``Regional Movement of
Plastic-baled Municipal Solid Waste from Hawaii to Washington, Oregon,
and Idaho'' (February 2008), considers the movement of a cumulative
maximum amount of baled municipal solid waste from the State of Hawaii
to any qualified landfill in Washington, Oregon, or Idaho under
compliance agreements with APHIS and in accordance with the standards
previously established by APHIS regarding baling, handling, spill
response, and disposal.
We solicited comments on the regional programmatic environmental
assessment for 30 days ending on April 14, 2008. We received three
comments by that date, from the State of Idaho, a private citizen, and
a law office. All of the commenters raised specific issues regarding
the environmental assessment. In an attachment to the finding of no
significant impact determination, we respond to each of the issues
raised by the commenters.
Based on the information contained in the regional programmatic
environmental assessment and following our consideration of the
[[Page 34701]]
information submitted during the comment period, we have determined
that implementation of either alternative examined in the environmental
assessment--i.e., the barging of municipal solid waste from Hawaii to
landfills within the States of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho under
compliance agreements with APHIS or taking no action (no interstate
movement of municipal solid waste from Hawaii)--is not expected to
result in a significant impact to the human environment, and an
environmental impact statement does not need to be prepared.
The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact
have been prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2)
regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing
the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA
regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1), and (4) APHIS' NEPA
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
Done in Washington, DC, this 12th day of June 2008.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E8-13735 Filed 6-17-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
