Retraction of Salt River Allotments Vegetative Management EIS, 10662-10663 [2015-04073]
Download as PDF
10662
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Quarantine (PPQ) Treatment Manual.1
Section 305.3 sets out a process for
adding, revising, or removing treatment
schedules in the PPQ Treatment
Manual. In that section, paragraph (b)
sets out the process for adding, revising,
or removing treatment schedules when
there is an immediate need to make a
change. The circumstances in which an
immediate need exists are described in
§ 305.3(b)(1). They are:
• PPQ has determined that an
approved treatment schedule is
ineffective at neutralizing the targeted
plant pest(s).
• PPQ has determined that, in order
to neutralize the targeted plant pest(s),
the treatment schedule must be
administered using a different process
than was previously used.
• PPQ has determined that a new
treatment schedule is effective, based on
efficacy data, and that ongoing trade in
a commodity or commodities may be
adversely impacted unless the new
treatment schedule is approved for use.
• The use of a treatment schedule is
no longer authorized by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency or by
any other Federal entity.
A treatment schedule currently listed
in the PPQ Treatment Manual (T101–i–
2–1) requires baby kiwi (Actinidia
arguta), fig (Ficus carica), grape (Vitis
spp.), and pomegranate (Punica
granatum) to be treated with methyl
bromide (MB) to prevent the
introduction into the United States of
external pests, including Chilean false
red mite (Brevipalpus chilensis). The
treatment as originally approved
required the use of 1.5 lb b 4.0 lb of MB
gas per 1,000 ft3 for 2 hours at
temperatures of 40 °F or above.
However, in 2006, APHIS determined
that this treatment was insufficient to
mitigate the risk from the mite on
grapes. Therefore, as an emergency
measure, the treatment was amended to
require a longer exposure time of up to
3 hours under tarpaulin or 2.5 hours in
chamber. As an emergency measure,
this action was done administratively
and was not meant to be permanent.
On April 4, 2011, APHIS published a
notice 2 in the Federal Register (76 FR
18511–18512, Docket No. APHIS–2009–
0097) that approved the use of this
revised treatment to treat figs from Chile
1 The Treatment Manual is available on the
Internet at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_
export/plants/manuals/ports/downloads/
treatment.pdf or by contacting the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection
and Quarantine, Manuals Unit, 92 Thomas Johnson
Drive, Suite 200, Frederick, MD 21702.
2 To view the notice and the comments we
received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2009-0097.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:05 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
in order to meet U.S. entry
requirements. Since publication of that
notice, we have determined that figs
have a higher sorption rate of the MB
gas than other commodities. Therefore,
in order to achieve 100 percent
mortality of Chilean false red mite on
figs, the figs must be exposed to a higher
dose of MB.
In accordance with § 305.3(b)(2), we
are providing notice that we have
determined that it is necessary to add
new treatment schedule T101–i–2–22,
which provides for a MB treatment
schedule for figs during an exposure
period of 3 hours in a chamber at a
dosage rate of 3.5 lbs gas/1,000 ft3 at a
temperature between 50 °F and 59 °F, 3
lbs gas/1,000 ft3 at a temperature
between 60 °F and 69 °F, and 2.5 lbs
gas/1,000 ft3 at a temperature of 70 °F or
above. Since the efficacy of new
schedule T101–i–2–2 was not verified
under tarpaulin, the new treatment
schedule is applicable only in
chambers. This action also amends
treatment schedule T101–i–2–1 by
removing figs from the schedule and
making the revised treatment schedule
permanent. Revised treatment schedule
T101–i–2–1 will continue to be
applicable both in chambers and under
tarpaulin for grapes, baby kiwis, and
pomegranates. APHIS’ experience with
successful importation of these
commodities using the existing
treatment schedule has provided
sufficient evidence to prove the
effectiveness of the treatment. In order
to have minimum adverse impact on the
ongoing trade of figs and using the
immediate process as provided in
§ 305.3(b), these changes are effective
immediately upon publication of this
notice. The new treatment schedule will
be listed in a separate section of the PPQ
Treatment Manual, which will indicate
that T101–i–2–22 was added through
the immediate process described in
paragraph (b) of § 305.3 and that it is
subject to change or removal based on
public comment.
The reasons for the addition of this
treatment schedule are described in
detail in a treatment evaluation
document we have prepared to support
this action. The treatment evaluation
document may be viewed on the
Regulations.gov Web site or in our
reading room (see ADDRESSES above for
instructions for accessing
Regulations.gov and information on the
location and hours of the reading room).
You may request paper copies of the
treatment evaluation document by
calling or writing to the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. Please refer to the subject of
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the treatment evaluation document
when requesting copies.
After reviewing the comments we
receive, we will announce our decision
regarding the new treatment schedule
that is described in the treatment
evaluation document in a subsequent
notice, in accordance with paragraph
(b)(3) of § 305.3. If we do not receive any
comments, or the comments we receive
do not change our determination that
the treatment is effective, we will affirm
the treatment schedule’s addition to the
PPQ Treatment Manual and make
available a new version of the PPQ
Treatment Manual in which T101–i–2–
2 is listed in the main body of the PPQ
Treatment Manual. If we receive
comments that cause us to determine
that T101–i–2–2 needs to be changed or
removed, we will make available a new
version of the PPQ Treatment Manual
that reflects changes to or the removal
of T101–i–2–2.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781–
7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.3.
Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of
February 2015.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–04172 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
[EIS No. 2011–13640]
Retraction of Salt River Allotments
Vegetative Management EIS
Forest Service, USDA.
Retraction of NOI.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Forest Service has
published a Notice of Intent (NOI) on
May 25, 2011 for Salt River Allotments
Vegetative Management EIS. This
Environmental Impact Statement was
first designed due to complexities
encountered with a variety of current
activities and environmental conditions
that interconnect along Salt River. These
activities include: White water rafting,
wilderness values, critical habitat of
aquatic and terrestrial species. Planned
livestock grazing project included a
desire by term-grazing permittees to
graze livestock (i.e., cattle) along river.
DATES: Not Applicable.
ADDRESSES: No further comments will
be received on this project.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.
Jamie Wages 7680 South Sixshooter
Canyon Road Globe, Arizona 85501,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Notices
ajwages@fs.fed.us or 928–402–6222.
Individuals who use telecommunication
devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the
Federal Information Relay Service at
(800) 877–8339 between 8:00 a.m. and
8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,
Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Selecting
to do an EIS upfront was a shortcut for
doing an EA and then not being able to
certify proposed action did not have a
significant impact in a FONSI. However,
through discussions with term-grazing
permittees, it was determined that if
livestock were allowed to graze along
river that neither Forest Service nor
term-grazing permittees had time or
money to conduct monitoring necessary
to determine appropriateness of this
proposed action along river corridor. By
withdrawing complexity inherent in
proposed action to graze along river,
need for an EIS evaporated. Therefore,
project planning will continue through
an EA process. Environmental Impact
Statement will be retracted on February
18, 2015.
Dated: February 17, 2015.
Richard Reitz,
Globe Ranger District, Tonto National Forest.
Dated: February 18, 2015.
Kelly Jardine,
Tonto Basin Ranger District, Tonto National
Forest.
[FR Doc. 2015–04073 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
by the Final EIS and Draft Record of
Decision (ROD) in May 2016. A final
decision is expected in August 2016.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be: mailed
to the Stanislaus National Forest; Attn:
Rim Reforestation; 19777 Greenley
Road; Sonora, CA 95370; delivered to
the address shown during business
hours (M–F 8:00 am to 4:30 pm); or,
submitted by FAX (209) 533–1890.
Submit electronic comments, in
common (.doc, .pdf, .rtf, .txt) formats, to:
comments-pacificsouthwest-stanislaus@
fs.fed.us with Subject: Rim
Reforestation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maria Benech, Stanislaus National
Forest; 19777 Greenley Road; Sonora,
CA 95370; phone (209) 532–3671; or
email: mbenech@fs.fed.us. A scoping
package, maps and other information
are online at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/
project/?project=45612.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
General Background
The Rim Fire started on August 17,
2013 in a remote area of the Stanislaus
National Forest near the confluence of
the Clavey and Tuolumne Rivers about
20 miles east of Sonora, California. Over
the next several weeks it burned
257,314 acres, including 154,430 acres
of NFS lands, becoming the third largest
wildfire in California history. The Rim
Fire Reforestation project is located
within the Rim Fire perimeter in the
Stanislaus National Forest on portions
of the Mi-Wok and Groveland Ranger
Districts.
Forest Service
Purpose and Need for Action
Stanislaus National Forest, CA; Notice
of Intent To Prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement for Rim Fire
Reforestation
The primary purposes of the project
are to: (1) Return Mixed Conifer Forest
to the Landscape; (2) Restore Old Forest
for Wildlife Habitat and Connectivity;
(3) Reduce Fuels for Future Fire
Resiliency; (4) Enhance Deer Habitat;
and, (5) Eradicate Noxious Weeds.
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Action
The Stanislaus National
Forest proposes about 42,000 acres of
reforestation, plantation thinning,
additional deer habitat and noxious
weed treatments on National Forest
System (NFS) lands within the 2013
Rim Fire in order to: Return mixed
conifer forest to the landscape; restore
old forest for wildlife; reduce fuels;
enhance deer habitat; and, eradicate
noxious weeds.
DATES: Comments on the proposed
action should be submitted within 45
days of the date of publication of this
Notice of Intent. Completion of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
is expected in November 2015 followed
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:05 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
The Forest Service proposed action
includes about 42,000 acres of
reforestation, plantation thinning,
additional deer habitat and noxious
weed eradication treatments on NFS
lands within the 2013 Rim Fire.
Reforestation treatments (30,065
acres) include: Hand, mechanical and
manual herbicide site preparation
(Glyphosate); prescribed burning;
planting a diversity of conifer tree
species using various patterns and
densities (trees per acre) across the
landscape (up and down slopes with
fewer on ridges and more in drainage
bottoms) to develop resilient mixed
conifer forest and enhance wildlife
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10663
(including deer) habitat; manual
herbicide release (Glyphosate) when
vegetation competition begins to inhibit
survival and growth; and, noxious weed
eradication as described below. The
reforestation treatment (30,065 acres)
includes thinning and planting on 7,307
acres of existing plantations currently
under-stocked due to high burn severity
from the 2013 Rim Fire.
Plantation Thinning treatments
(11,359 acres) include: Hand and
mechanical site preparation; prescribed
burning and thinning to achieve an
Individual, Clumpy, Open (ICO) pattern
to maximize heterogeneity and wildlife
(including deer) habitat while creating
more fire resilient stands; and, noxious
weed eradication as described below.
Additional Deer Habitat treatments
(407 acres) include: Prescribed burning;
and, noxious weed eradication as
described below.
Noxious Weed Eradication treatments
(4,160 acres) include: Weed treatments
with a variety of EPA approved
herbicides (such as Glyphosate,
Clopyralid, Aminopyralid, Clethodim
and Fluazifop-P-butyl). These noxious
weed treatments overlap (within and up
to 100 feet adjacent to) the reforestation,
plantation thinning and additional deer
habitat treaments described above.
No treatments are proposed within
Wilderness, Inventoried Roadless Areas,
or the wild classification segments of
Wild and Scenic Rivers or Proposed
Wild and Scenic Rivers. Project design
will incorporate Best Management
Practices (BMPs) according to regional
and national guidance. Implementation
is expected to begin in fall 2016 and
continue for up to 10 years.
Possible Alternatives
In addition to the Proposed Action,
the EIS will evaluate the required No
Action alternative and likely consider
other alternatives identified through the
inderdisciplinary process and public
participation.
Responsible Official
Jeanne M. Higgins, Forest Supervisor;
Stanislaus National Forest; 19777
Greenley Road; Sonora, CA 95370.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The responsible official will decide
whether to adopt and implement the
proposed action, an alternative to the
proposed action, or take no action with
respect to the Rim Fire Reforestation
project.
Scoping Process
Public participation is important at
numerous points during the analysis.
The Forest Service seeks information,
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 39 (Friday, February 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10662-10663]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04073]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
[EIS No. 2011-13640]
Retraction of Salt River Allotments Vegetative Management EIS
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Retraction of NOI.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service has published a Notice of Intent (NOI) on
May 25, 2011 for Salt River Allotments Vegetative Management EIS. This
Environmental Impact Statement was first designed due to complexities
encountered with a variety of current activities and environmental
conditions that interconnect along Salt River. These activities
include: White water rafting, wilderness values, critical habitat of
aquatic and terrestrial species. Planned livestock grazing project
included a desire by term-grazing permittees to graze livestock (i.e.,
cattle) along river.
DATES: Not Applicable.
ADDRESSES: No further comments will be received on this project.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Jamie Wages 7680 South Sixshooter
Canyon Road Globe, Arizona 85501,
[[Page 10663]]
ajwages@fs.fed.us or 928-402-6222. Individuals who use
telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00
p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Selecting to do an EIS upfront was a
shortcut for doing an EA and then not being able to certify proposed
action did not have a significant impact in a FONSI. However, through
discussions with term-grazing permittees, it was determined that if
livestock were allowed to graze along river that neither Forest Service
nor term-grazing permittees had time or money to conduct monitoring
necessary to determine appropriateness of this proposed action along
river corridor. By withdrawing complexity inherent in proposed action
to graze along river, need for an EIS evaporated. Therefore, project
planning will continue through an EA process. Environmental Impact
Statement will be retracted on February 18, 2015.
Dated: February 17, 2015.
Richard Reitz,
Globe Ranger District, Tonto National Forest.
Dated: February 18, 2015.
Kelly Jardine,
Tonto Basin Ranger District, Tonto National Forest.
[FR Doc. 2015-04073 Filed 2-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P