Availability of an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact; Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Conservation Program, 66147-66148 [2019-26110]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 3, 2019 / Notices
Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department
of Agriculture is authorized, among
other things, to prohibit or restrict the
interstate movement of animals and
animal products to prevent the
dissemination within the United States
of animal diseases and pests of livestock
and to conduct programs to detect,
control, and eradicate pests and diseases
of livestock.
Scrapie is a progressive, degenerative,
and eventually fatal disease affecting the
nervous system of sheep and goats. Its
control is complicated because the
disease has an extremely long
incubation period without clinical signs
of disease and no known treatment.
APHIS regulations in 9 CFR part 79
restrict the interstate movement of
certain sheep and goats to control the
spread of scrapie, and 9 CFR part 54
contains regulations for an indemnity
program, flock cleanup, testing, and a
Scrapie Free Flock Certification Program
(SFCP).
The scrapie disease control program
information collection activities include
cooperative agreements; grants;
memoranda of understanding; APHIS
forms for inspection and epidemiology
data; applications to participate in the
SFCP; flock plans; post-exposure
management and monitoring plans;
record suspect/dead animals; scrapie
test records; applications for indemnity
payments; certificates, permits, and
owner statements for the interstate
movement of certain sheep and goats;
applications for premises identification
numbers; applications for official APHIS
identification; designated scrapie
epidemiologist training; and other
program-related activities.
In addition, APHIS is adding new
information collection activities to the
current domestic scrapie program that
include State burden from interstate
certificates of veterinary inspection,
private laboratory approval requests,
contributions of breed registry
associations, epidemiology and
identification compliance reporting,
declination to respond, epidemiology
training, and disposal cost information.
As a consequence, we have adjusted the
estimates of burden accordingly. In
addition, the adjusted estimates also
reflect increases in identification tag
orders and the number of specimen
submissions per laboratory to better
represent our current activities.
The information collection activities
above are currently approved by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under OMB control numbers
0579–0101 (Scrapie in Sheep and Goats;
Interstate Movement Restrictions and
Indemnity Program), and 0579–0469
(Scrapie in Sheep and Goats; Flock
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Dec 02, 2019
Jkt 250001
Certification, Interstate Movement and
Indemnity Revisions). After OMB
approves this combined information
collection package (0579–0101), APHIS
will retire OMB control number 0579–
0469.
We are asking the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to
approve our use of these information
collection activities, as described, for an
additional 3 years.
The purpose of this notice is to solicit
comments from the public (as well as
affected agencies) concerning our
information collection. These comments
will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our
estimate of the burden of the collection
of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, through use, as
appropriate, of automated, electronic,
mechanical, and other collection
technologies; e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses.
Estimate of burden: The public
burden for this collection of information
is estimated to average 0.66 hours per
response.
Respondents: Flock owners; market
owners, operators, or managers; dealers;
slaughter plant owners, operators, or
managers; feedlot owners, operators, or
managers; tag manufacturers; managers
of producer organizations; accredited
veterinarians; and State animal health
authorities.
Estimated annual number of
respondents: 100,050.
Estimated annual number of
responses per respondent: 13.55.
Estimated annual number of
responses: 1,355,937.
Estimated total annual burden on
respondents: 898,574 hours. (Due to
averaging, the total annual burden hours
may not equal the product of the annual
number of responses multiplied by the
reporting burden per response.)
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
for OMB approval. All comments will
also become a matter of public record.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
66147
Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of
November 2019.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–26115 Filed 12–2–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2018–0064]
Availability of an Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact; Southwestern
Willow Flycatcher Conservation
Program
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
We are advising the public
that the United States Department of
Agriculture and its sub-agency, the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service, have prepared an
environmental assessment and finding
of no significant impact for a
conservation program pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act to benefit the
southwestern willow flycatcher, a small,
neotropical migrant bird found in
Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada,
New Mexico, Texas, and Utah. Based on
our finding of no significant impact, we
have determined that an environmental
impact statement need not be prepared.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Kai Caraher, Biological Scientist, PHP,
PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 150,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 851–
2345; Kai.Caraher@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Saltcedar, also known as tamarisk
(Tamarix species), is an invasive plant
widely established in riparian areas in
the western United States. This nonnative weed, which can take the form of
a shrub or small tree, was introduced
into the United States in the latter part
of the 19th century. Although saltcedar
is an invasive plant, native animals have
adapted to its presence.
In 1986, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Agricultural
Research Service (ARS) began research
into the potential for biological control
of saltcedar. From 1998 to 2000, ARS
conducted open field release trials of
tamarisk leaf beetles (Diorhabda
species) to determine the conditions
under which releases could succeed.
These field trials took place after ARS
consulted with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to ensure
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03DEN1.SGM
03DEN1
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
66148
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 3, 2019 / Notices
compliance with the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). USDA’s Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
permitted the releases after it completed
additional environmental risk analyses
and provided the public an opportunity
to comment on the documents.
In 2005, APHIS initiated a biological
control program for saltcedar defoliation
in the northern United States using the
tamarisk leaf beetle as the biological
control agent in limited locations
outside of the habitat of the
southwestern willow flycatcher (SWFL,
Empidonax traillii extimus). Greater
than anticipated natural dispersion and
intentional human-assisted movement
of the beetle into SWFL habitat caused
defoliation of saltcedar trees, hampering
the flycatcher’s nesting success.
After tamarisk leaf beetles were
discovered in SWFL habitat, APHIS
terminated its saltcedar biological
control program in 2010 and canceled
release permits because of concern
about the potential adverse effects on
SWFL. APHIS reinitiated consultation
with USFWS on these actions, in
compliance with section 7(a)(2) of the
ESA and 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2), and
USFWS concurred with APHIS’
determination that these actions were
not likely to adversely affect the SWFL.
On September 30, 2013, the Center for
Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit
against USDA, APHIS, ARS, the
Department of the Interior (DOI), and
USFWS alleging that the APHIS
saltcedar biological control program
violated the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the ESA. On
May 3, 2016, the Court granted the
plaintiff’s second of five claims, finding
that APHIS did not comply with the
ESA section 7(a)(1), which requires
Federal agencies to consult with DOI
and ‘‘utilize their authorities in
furtherance of the purposes of [the ESA]
by carrying out programs for the
conservation of endangered species and
threatened species listed pursuant to [16
U.S.C. 1533]’’ 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(1). On
June 19, 2018, the Court ordered USDA
and APHIS to publish proposed
conservation program alternatives in
compliance with ESA section 7(a)(1),
solicit public comments on the
proposed alternatives, then publish a
draft environmental assessment (EA) for
public comment, and complete review
of all public comments, and issue final
decision and final EA, or an
environmental impact statement (EIS)
should it be appropriate.
On October 26, 2018, APHIS
published in the Federal Register (83
FR 54080–54082, Docket No. APHIS–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Dec 02, 2019
Jkt 250001
2018–0064) a notice 1 informing the
public of APHIS’ intent to conduct a
scoping process and prepare an EA. We
solicited comments for 30 days ending
on November 26, 2018. We received 23
comments by that date.
After taking into consideration the
comments that we received, on July 9,
2019, we published in the Federal
Register (84 FR 32701–32702, Docket
No. APHIS–2018–0064) a notice in
which we announced the availability,
for public review and comment, of an
EA that examined the environmental
effects of possible SWFL conservation
measures available to USDA and APHIS,
as well as a ‘‘no action’’ alternative.
We solicited comments on the EA for
30 days ending August 8, 2019. We
received 22 comments by that date. Four
commenters were supportive of the
preferred alternative in the EA without
further comment, and one expressed
general opposition to all APHIS
biocontrol efforts. Additionally, several
commenters asked for changes in
nomenclature or phrasing within the
draft EA in order to clarify its provisions
without changing its meaning; we have
incorporated the requested changes to
the extent possible within the final EA.
The remaining comments are addressed
in the final EA itself.
In this document, we are advising the
public of our finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) regarding our preferred
alternative for SWFL conservation
measures. The finding, which is based
on the EA, reflects our determination
that the preferred alternative will not
have significant impact on the quality of
the human environment.
The EA and FONSI may be viewed on
the Regulations.gov website (see
footnote 1). Copies of the EA and FONSI
are also available for public inspection
at USDA, Room 1141, South Building,
14th Street and Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC, between 8 a.m.
and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except holidays. Persons wishing to
inspect copies are requested to call
ahead on (202) 799–7039 to facilitate
entry into the reading room. In addition,
copies may be obtained by calling or
writing to the individual listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
The EA and FONSI have been
prepared in accordance with: (1) NEPA,
as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); (2)
regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality for
1 To view the notice of intent and the comments
that we received on that document, or the
subsequent notice of availability of the
environmental assessment, its supporting
documents, and the comments that we received on
that document, go to https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2018-0064.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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).
Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of
November 2019.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–26110 Filed 12–2–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2019–0075]
Notice of Request for Revision to and
Extension of Approval of an
Information Collection; Phytosanitary
Export Certification
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Revision to and extension of
approval of an information collection;
comment request.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service’s intention to
request a revision to and extension of
approval of an information collection
associated with the regulations for the
issuance of phytosanitary certificates for
plants or plant products being exported
to foreign countries.
DATES: We will consider all comments
that we receive on or before February 3,
2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2019-0075.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:
Send your comment to Docket No.
APHIS–2019–0075, Regulatory Analysis
and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station
3A–03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.
Supporting documents and any
comments we receive on this docket
may be viewed at https://
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2019-0075 or
in our reading room, which is located in
Room 1141 of the USDA South
Building, 14th Street and Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC. Normal
reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
holidays. To be sure someone is there to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03DEN1.SGM
03DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 3, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66147-66148]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26110]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
[Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064]
Availability of an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact; Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Conservation Program
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are advising the public that the United States Department
of Agriculture and its sub-agency, the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, have prepared an environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact for a conservation program pursuant to
the Endangered Species Act to benefit the southwestern willow
flycatcher, a small, neotropical migrant bird found in Arizona,
California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah. Based on our
finding of no significant impact, we have determined that an
environmental impact statement need not be prepared.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kai Caraher, Biological Scientist,
PHP, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 150, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;
(301) 851-2345; [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Saltcedar, also known as tamarisk (Tamarix species), is an invasive
plant widely established in riparian areas in the western United
States. This non-native weed, which can take the form of a shrub or
small tree, was introduced into the United States in the latter part of
the 19th century. Although saltcedar is an invasive plant, native
animals have adapted to its presence.
In 1986, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) Agricultural
Research Service (ARS) began research into the potential for biological
control of saltcedar. From 1998 to 2000, ARS conducted open field
release trials of tamarisk leaf beetles (Diorhabda species) to
determine the conditions under which releases could succeed. These
field trials took place after ARS consulted with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to ensure
[[Page 66148]]
compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA). USDA's Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) permitted the releases after it
completed additional environmental risk analyses and provided the
public an opportunity to comment on the documents.
In 2005, APHIS initiated a biological control program for saltcedar
defoliation in the northern United States using the tamarisk leaf
beetle as the biological control agent in limited locations outside of
the habitat of the southwestern willow flycatcher (SWFL, Empidonax
traillii extimus). Greater than anticipated natural dispersion and
intentional human-assisted movement of the beetle into SWFL habitat
caused defoliation of saltcedar trees, hampering the flycatcher's
nesting success.
After tamarisk leaf beetles were discovered in SWFL habitat, APHIS
terminated its saltcedar biological control program in 2010 and
canceled release permits because of concern about the potential adverse
effects on SWFL. APHIS reinitiated consultation with USFWS on these
actions, in compliance with section 7(a)(2) of the ESA and 16 U.S.C.
1536(a)(2), and USFWS concurred with APHIS' determination that these
actions were not likely to adversely affect the SWFL.
On September 30, 2013, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a
lawsuit against USDA, APHIS, ARS, the Department of the Interior (DOI),
and USFWS alleging that the APHIS saltcedar biological control program
violated the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the ESA. On May 3, 2016, the Court
granted the plaintiff's second of five claims, finding that APHIS did
not comply with the ESA section 7(a)(1), which requires Federal
agencies to consult with DOI and ``utilize their authorities in
furtherance of the purposes of [the ESA] by carrying out programs for
the conservation of endangered species and threatened species listed
pursuant to [16 U.S.C. 1533]'' 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(1). On June 19, 2018,
the Court ordered USDA and APHIS to publish proposed conservation
program alternatives in compliance with ESA section 7(a)(1), solicit
public comments on the proposed alternatives, then publish a draft
environmental assessment (EA) for public comment, and complete review
of all public comments, and issue final decision and final EA, or an
environmental impact statement (EIS) should it be appropriate.
On October 26, 2018, APHIS published in the Federal Register (83 FR
54080-54082, Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064) a notice \1\ informing the
public of APHIS' intent to conduct a scoping process and prepare an EA.
We solicited comments for 30 days ending on November 26, 2018. We
received 23 comments by that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the notice of intent and the comments that we
received on that document, or the subsequent notice of availability
of the environmental assessment, its supporting documents, and the
comments that we received on that document, go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2018-0064.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After taking into consideration the comments that we received, on
July 9, 2019, we published in the Federal Register (84 FR 32701-32702,
Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064) a notice in which we announced the
availability, for public review and comment, of an EA that examined the
environmental effects of possible SWFL conservation measures available
to USDA and APHIS, as well as a ``no action'' alternative.
We solicited comments on the EA for 30 days ending August 8, 2019.
We received 22 comments by that date. Four commenters were supportive
of the preferred alternative in the EA without further comment, and one
expressed general opposition to all APHIS biocontrol efforts.
Additionally, several commenters asked for changes in nomenclature or
phrasing within the draft EA in order to clarify its provisions without
changing its meaning; we have incorporated the requested changes to the
extent possible within the final EA. The remaining comments are
addressed in the final EA itself.
In this document, we are advising the public of our finding of no
significant impact (FONSI) regarding our preferred alternative for SWFL
conservation measures. The finding, which is based on the EA, reflects
our determination that the preferred alternative will not have
significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
The EA and FONSI may be viewed on the Regulations.gov website (see
footnote 1). Copies of the EA and FONSI are also available for public
inspection at USDA, Room 1141, South Building, 14th Street and
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing to inspect
copies are requested to call ahead on (202) 799-7039 to facilitate
entry into the reading room. In addition, copies may be obtained by
calling or writing to the individual listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
The EA and FONSI have been prepared in accordance with: (1) 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).
Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of November 2019.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-26110 Filed 12-2-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
