Notice of the Withdrawal of a 1994 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and a 2001 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Regarding Certain Activities Along the U.S. Southwest Border, 25067-25068 [2019-11251]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
25067
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2019 / Notices
Number of respondents
Responses/
respondent
Burden/
responses
(hours)
Total burden
hours
500 ...............................................................................................................................................
1
1.5
750
Send comments to Janet Heekin,
SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer,
5600 Fishers Lane, Room 15E21–B,
Rockville, Maryland 20857, OR email a
copy to janet.heekin@samhsa.hhs.gov.
Written comments should be received
by July 29, 2019.
Dated: May 24, 2019.
Carlos Castillo,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2019–11303 Filed 5–29–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162–20–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Notice of the Withdrawal of a 1994
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement and a 2001 Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
Regarding Certain Activities Along the
U.S. Southwest Border
U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of a
programmatic environmental impact
statement and a supplemental
programmatic environmental impact
statement.
AGENCY:
This Notice is published to
provide public awareness of the
decision of both U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP), a component of
the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), and Joint Task Force—North
(JTF–N), a joint command of the
Department of Defense (DoD), to
withdraw the Records of Decision for
the joint Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement (PEIS) of 1994 and the
Supplemental PEIS (SPEIS) of 2001. The
documents were titled ‘‘Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement for
JTF–6 Activities Along the U.S./Mexico
Border’’ and ‘‘Supplemental
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement for INS and JTF–6
Activities.’’ These documents were
created by entities which no longer
exist. These documents are no longer
used to provide compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) for any actions of entities within
either Department. Actions currently
taken by either CBP or JTF–N comply
with NEPA through analysis of
individual projects. The successor to the
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 May 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS) is CBP, and the successor to JTF–
6 is JTF–N.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Christopher Oh, Director, Energy and
Environmental Management Division,
Facilities Management and Engineering
Division, Office of Facilities and Asset
Management at 202–344–2448.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Homeland Security Act of 2002
created DHS. One of the principal
mission responsibilities of DHS is
border security. CBP is the DHS
component with primary responsibility
for border security. In 2003, Congress
created CBP by combining elements of
the former INS, including the United
States Border Patrol (USBP), and the
former U.S. Customs Service, and made
it a component agency of DHS. CBP has
a priority mission of keeping terrorists
and their weapons out of the United
States. It is also charged with enforcing
customs, immigration, agriculture and
other laws at the nation’s borders while
facilitating legitimate trade and travel
through the Ports of Entry (POEs). As
part of its border security mission, CBP
is charged with deterring and
preventing cross-border violations both
at and between the POEs, including
illegal immigration and illegal
trafficking of human beings, narcotics,
weapons, and other contraband.
Based in Fort Bliss, Texas, Joint Task
Force North (JTF–N) is a joint service
command comprised of active-duty and
reserve component soldiers, sailors,
airmen, Marines, coast guardsmen, DoD
civilian employees, and contracted
support personnel. JTF–N is the DoD
organization tasked to support our
nation’s federal law enforcement
agencies in the identification and
interdiction of suspected transnational
criminal organizations’ activities
conducted within and along the
approaches to the continental United
States.
In 1994, the INS, then a part of the
Department of Justice, and JTF–6, a joint
command within DoD, jointly prepared
a Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement (the 1994 PEIS). The 1994
PEIS was intended to address the
cumulative effects of past and
reasonably foreseeable projects
undertaken by JTF–6 for numerous law
enforcement agencies within the four
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
southwestern states. JTF–6 was, at the
time, a recently formed military
command that provided assistance and
support to various counter drug law
enforcement agencies along the
southwest border.
In 2001, the INS and JTF–6 prepared
a Supplemental PEIS (SPEIS). Instead of
addressing the support activities JTF–6
would provide to numerous law
enforcement agencies across the
southwest border, the 2001 SPEIS
focused on the support activities JTF–6
would specifically provide to USBP.
The intent and purpose of the 2001
SPEIS was to assess and analyze the
potential impacts of the JTF–6 activities
‘‘in support of INS/USBP.’’ The Record
of Decision for this SPEIS was signed in
2002 by the INS and JTF–6. For both
EISs in question, the INS was the lead
agency and JTF–6 was a cooperating
agency.
The 1994 PEIS and the 2001 SPEIS
were created by entities that no longer
exist. For this and other reasons, CBP
and JTF–N no longer rely on the 1994
PEIS or the 2001 SPEIS to achieve NEPA
compliance for their actions and
activities on the southwest border.1
Rather, both CBP and JTF–N achieve
NEPA compliance for their actions and
activities on the southwest border
through site-specific or project-specific
NEPA analyses. CBP and JTF–N believe
their decision-makers are well-served by
site-specific or project-specific NEPA
analyses. Unlike a sprawling
programmatic NEPA analysis, a sitespecific or project-specific NEPA
analysis gives decision-makers concrete
and tangible information regarding the
potential impacts of a proposed action.
In addition, because every site-specific
or project-specific analysis includes an
analysis of cumulative impacts, they
also present decision-makers with a
larger frame of reference in which to
understand those impacts.
Withdrawal of PEIS and Supplemental
PEIS
Based on the experience of CBP and
JTF–N, and the nature of the 1994 PEIS
and 2001 SPEIS, CBP and JTF–N have
withdrawn both the 1994 PEIS and the
2001 SPEIS and their respective Records
of Decision. Both of these documents
1 See National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
as amended, Public Law 91–190, 83 Stat. 852 (Jan.
1, 1970).
E:\FR\FM\30MYN1.SGM
30MYN1
25068
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2019 / Notices
contain potentially valuable
information. The withdrawal of the
1994 PEIS and the 2001 SPEIS and their
respective Records of Decision does not
in any way impinge on the ability of
those preparing NEPA analyses in the
future to use that information by citing
the independent source(s) of the
information, provided the continued
accuracy of the information is validated.
Dated: May 23, 2019.
Karl H. Calvo,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Facilities
and Asset Management, Office of Enterprise
Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
[FR Doc. 2019–11251 Filed 5–29–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–HQ–MB–2019–N022; FF09M21200–
189–FXMB1231099BPP0L2; OMB Control
Number 1018–0067]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Approval Procedures for
Nontoxic Shot and Shot Coatings
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of information collection;
request for comment.
AGENCY:
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.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before July 29,
2019.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments on the
information collection request by mail
to the Service Information Collection
Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803 (mail); or by email to Info_Coll@
fws.gov. Please reference OMB Control
Number 1018–0067 in the subject line of
your comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request additional information about
this ICR, contact Madonna L. Baucum,
Service Information Collection
Clearance Officer, by email at Info_
Coll@fws.gov, or by telephone at (703)
358–2503.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 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
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 May 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
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 soliciting comments on the
proposed information collection request
(ICR) that is described below. We are
especially interested in public comment
addressing the following issues: (1) Is
the collection necessary to the proper
functions of the Service; (2) will this
information be processed and used in a
timely manner; (3) is the estimate of
burden accurate; (4) how might the
Service enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (5) how might the Service
minimize the burden of this collection
on the respondents, including through
the use of information technology.
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 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: The Migratory Bird Treaty
Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.)
prohibits the unauthorized take of
migratory birds and authorizes the
Secretary of the Interior to regulate take
of migratory birds in the United States.
Under this authority, we control the
hunting of migratory game birds through
regulations in 50 CFR part 20. On
January 1, 1991, we banned lead shot for
hunting waterfowl and coots in the
United States.
Regulations at 50 CFR 20.134 outline
the application and approval process for
new types of nontoxic shot. When
considering approval of a candidate
material as nontoxic, we must ensure
that it is not hazardous in the
environment and that secondary
exposure (ingestion of spent shot or its
components) is not a hazard to
migratory birds. To make that decision,
we require each applicant to provide
information about the solubility and
toxicity of the candidate material.
Additionally, for law enforcement
purposes, a noninvasive field detection
device must be available to distinguish
candidate shot from lead shot. This
information constitutes the bulk of an
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
application for approval of nontoxic
shot. The Director uses the data in the
application to decide whether to
approve a material as nontoxic.
Title of Collection: Approval
Procedures for Nontoxic Shot and Shot
Coatings (50 CFR 20.134).
OMB Control Number: 1018–0067.
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Public:
Businesses that produce and/or market
approved nontoxic shot types or
nontoxic shot coatings.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: 1.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 1.
Estimated Completion Time per
Response: 3,200 hours.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 3,200 hours.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: On occasion.
Total Estimated Annual Nonhour
Burden Cost: $26,630 ($1,630
application processing fee and $25,000
for solubility testing).
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.).
Dated: May 24, 2019.
Madonna Baucum,
Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–11288 Filed 5–29–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R1–ES–2019–N060;
FXES11130100000–190–FF01E00000]
Endangered Species; Receipt of
Recovery and Interstate Commerce
Permit Applications
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of permit
applications; request for comments.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, have received
applications for permits to conduct
activities intended to enhance the
propagation and survival of endangered
species under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended. We invite the
public and local, State, Tribal, and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\30MYN1.SGM
30MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 104 (Thursday, May 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25067-25068]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11251]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Notice of the Withdrawal of a 1994 Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement and a 2001 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Regarding Certain Activities Along the U.S. Southwest Border
AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of a programmatic environmental impact
statement and a supplemental programmatic environmental impact
statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Notice is published to provide public awareness of the
decision of both U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a component
of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Joint Task Force--
North (JTF-N), a joint command of the Department of Defense (DoD), to
withdraw the Records of Decision for the joint Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) of 1994 and the Supplemental PEIS
(SPEIS) of 2001. The documents were titled ``Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement for JTF-6 Activities Along the U.S./Mexico Border''
and ``Supplemental Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for INS
and JTF-6 Activities.'' These documents were created by entities which
no longer exist. These documents are no longer used to provide
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for any
actions of entities within either Department. Actions currently taken
by either CBP or JTF-N comply with NEPA through analysis of individual
projects. The successor to the Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS) is CBP, and the successor to JTF-6 is JTF-N.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Christopher Oh, Director, Energy
and Environmental Management Division, Facilities Management and
Engineering Division, Office of Facilities and Asset Management at 202-
344-2448.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 created DHS. One of the principal
mission responsibilities of DHS is border security. CBP is the DHS
component with primary responsibility for border security. In 2003,
Congress created CBP by combining elements of the former INS, including
the United States Border Patrol (USBP), and the former U.S. Customs
Service, and made it a component agency of DHS. CBP has a priority
mission of keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the United
States. It is also charged with enforcing customs, immigration,
agriculture and other laws at the nation's borders while facilitating
legitimate trade and travel through the Ports of Entry (POEs). As part
of its border security mission, CBP is charged with deterring and
preventing cross-border violations both at and between the POEs,
including illegal immigration and illegal trafficking of human beings,
narcotics, weapons, and other contraband.
Based in Fort Bliss, Texas, Joint Task Force North (JTF-N) is a
joint service command comprised of active-duty and reserve component
soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, coast guardsmen, DoD civilian
employees, and contracted support personnel. JTF-N is the DoD
organization tasked to support our nation's federal law enforcement
agencies in the identification and interdiction of suspected
transnational criminal organizations' activities conducted within and
along the approaches to the continental United States.
In 1994, the INS, then a part of the Department of Justice, and
JTF-6, a joint command within DoD, jointly prepared a Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement (the 1994 PEIS). The 1994 PEIS was
intended to address the cumulative effects of past and reasonably
foreseeable projects undertaken by JTF-6 for numerous law enforcement
agencies within the four southwestern states. JTF-6 was, at the time, a
recently formed military command that provided assistance and support
to various counter drug law enforcement agencies along the southwest
border.
In 2001, the INS and JTF-6 prepared a Supplemental PEIS (SPEIS).
Instead of addressing the support activities JTF-6 would provide to
numerous law enforcement agencies across the southwest border, the 2001
SPEIS focused on the support activities JTF-6 would specifically
provide to USBP. The intent and purpose of the 2001 SPEIS was to assess
and analyze the potential impacts of the JTF-6 activities ``in support
of INS/USBP.'' The Record of Decision for this SPEIS was signed in 2002
by the INS and JTF-6. For both EISs in question, the INS was the lead
agency and JTF-6 was a cooperating agency.
The 1994 PEIS and the 2001 SPEIS were created by entities that no
longer exist. For this and other reasons, CBP and JTF-N no longer rely
on the 1994 PEIS or the 2001 SPEIS to achieve NEPA compliance for their
actions and activities on the southwest border.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended,
Public Law 91-190, 83 Stat. 852 (Jan. 1, 1970).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rather, both CBP and JTF-N achieve NEPA compliance for their
actions and activities on the southwest border through site-specific or
project-specific NEPA analyses. CBP and JTF-N believe their decision-
makers are well-served by site-specific or project-specific NEPA
analyses. Unlike a sprawling programmatic NEPA analysis, a site-
specific or project-specific NEPA analysis gives decision-makers
concrete and tangible information regarding the potential impacts of a
proposed action. In addition, because every site-specific or project-
specific analysis includes an analysis of cumulative impacts, they also
present decision-makers with a larger frame of reference in which to
understand those impacts.
Withdrawal of PEIS and Supplemental PEIS
Based on the experience of CBP and JTF-N, and the nature of the
1994 PEIS and 2001 SPEIS, CBP and JTF-N have withdrawn both the 1994
PEIS and the 2001 SPEIS and their respective Records of Decision. Both
of these documents
[[Page 25068]]
contain potentially valuable information. The withdrawal of the 1994
PEIS and the 2001 SPEIS and their respective Records of Decision does
not in any way impinge on the ability of those preparing NEPA analyses
in the future to use that information by citing the independent
source(s) of the information, provided the continued accuracy of the
information is validated.
Dated: May 23, 2019.
Karl H. Calvo,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Facilities and Asset Management,
Office of Enterprise Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
[FR Doc. 2019-11251 Filed 5-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
