Spotted Lanternfly Cooperative Control Program; Programmatic Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 43372-43373 [2024-10648]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
43372
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 2024 / Notices
The methodology, publication dates,
burden and data collection plan do not
change as result of these program
changes. The changes to these surveys
will not affect burden hours.
Included with this change request are
(1) Addition of the Arizona Enterprise
Version of the Vegetable Chemical Use
Survey that should have been added
earlier, and
(2) One version of the ARMS 2 Wheat
Production Practices Report. The one
version will be used in lieu of three
versions (winter, Durum, and other
spring wheat) submitted earlier.
Need and Use of the Information:
ARMS is the only annual source of
whole farm information available for
objective evaluation of many critical
issues related to agriculture and the
rural economy. This issues that will be
addressed in this request are: input
usage, production practices, and
chemical use. Without these data,
decision makers cannot analyze and
report on critical issues that affect farms
and farm households when pesticide
regulatory actions are being considered.
Description of Respondents: Farms;
Business or other for-profit.
Number of Respondents: 416,150.
Frequency of Responses: Reporting:
Quarterly; Semi-annually; Monthly;
Annually.
Total Burden Hours: 52,147.
Levi S. Harrell,
Departmental Information Collection
Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024–10790 Filed 5–16–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–20–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
The Department of Agriculture has
submitted the following information
collection requirement(s) to OMB for
review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. Comments are
required regarding; 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; the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of burden including
the validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; ways to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the
information to be collected; and ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on those who are to
respond, including through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 May 16, 2024
Jkt 262001
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Comments regarding this information
collection received by June 17, 2024
will be considered. Written comments
and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be
submitted within 30 days of the
publication of this notice on the
following website www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain. Find this
particular information collection by
selecting ‘‘Currently under 30-day
Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or
by using the search function.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor a collection of information
unless the collection of information
displays a currently valid OMB control
number and the agency informs
potential persons who are to respond to
the collection of information that such
persons are not required to respond to
the collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Farm Service Agency
Title: Volunteer Programs.
OMB Control Number: 0560–0232.
Summary of Collection: Section 1526
of the Food and Agriculture Act of 1981
(7 U.S.C. 2272) permits the Secretary of
Agriculture to establish a program to use
volunteers to perform a wide range of
activities to carry out the programs of or
supported by the Department of
Agriculture (USDA). Each USDA agency
is granted the authority to establish
programs designed to provide
educationally related work assignments
for students in non-pay status. USDA,
Departmental Regulation 4230–1
requires documentation of service
performed without compensation by
persons who do not receive Federal
appointment. For this requirement, the
information collection request is
necessary to continue implementation
of the programs, which allows the Farm
Service Agency (FSA) and Risk
Management Agency (RMA) to use
volunteers to perform a wide range of
activities to carry out the programs of or
supported by the Agency.
Need and Use of the Information:
Applicants who are accepted in the
program will complete the ‘‘Service
Agreement and Attendance Record.’’
FSA and RMA will use the reported
information to respond to request for
information on volunteers from the
USDA Office of Human Resources
Management. FSA Human Resource is
responsible for determining how to
document volunteer appointments. If
the information were not collected for
each volunteer, FSA and RMA would be
unable to document service performed
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
without compensation by persons in the
program if this information were not
collected for each volunteer.
Description of Respondents:
Individuals or households.
Number of Respondents: 20.
Frequency of Responses: Reporting:
Annually.
Total Burden Hours: 20.
Rachelle Ragland-Greene,
Acting Departmental Information Collection
Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024–10865 Filed 5–16–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2023–0079]
Spotted Lanternfly Cooperative
Control Program; Programmatic
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
We are advising the public
that the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service has prepared a
programmatic environmental
assessment and finding of no significant
impact relative to the Spotted Lanternfly
Cooperative Control Program in the
conterminous United States. The
environmental assessment documents
our review and analysis of
environmental impacts associated with
the Spotted Lanternfly Cooperative
Control Program. 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: Mr.
Matthew Travis, Spotted Lanternfly
National Policy Manager, PPQ, APHIS,
Emergency and Domestic Programs,
4700 River Road, Unit 133, Riverdale,
MD 20737–1238; telephone: (580) 240–
5394; email: Matthew.A.Travis@
usda.gov.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The spotted lanternfly (SLF), Lycorma
delicatula, an invasive species native to
Asia, is a destructive pest that in large
numbers can cause significant damage
to critical habitat and economically
important plants. The U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) proposed to
control SLF to slow the spread of this
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 2024 / Notices
invasive insect in the conterminous
United States wherever outbreaks are
detected.
SLF infestation has led to crop loss,
agriculture exportation problems, and
increased management costs. APHIS has
concerns with the potential for longdistance movement of SLF within the
United States, and the continued risk of
SLF introduction from other countries.
Additionally, APHIS acknowledges that
the environmental and socioeconomic
damage to SLF-affected regions can be
substantial.
On November 9, 2023, we published
in the Federal Register (88 FR 77259–
77260, Docket No. APHIS–2023–0079) a
notice 1 in which we announced the
availability, for public review and
comment, of a programmatic
environmental assessment (ProEA) that
examined the potential environmental
impacts associated with the SLF
cooperative control program. In our
analysis, APHIS found that an adaptive
pest management approach that
combines quarantine, chemical
treatments, and pest survey is the
preferred alternative to address the
potential environmental impact of a SLF
outbreak.
We solicited comments on the ProEA
for 30 days ending December 11, 2023.
We received two comment submissions
by that date. A commenter questioned
why Alaska and Hawaii were excluded
from the ProEA, citing a map for the
possible host range of SLF that
indicated it could become established in
Alaska. The ProEA was limited to the
conterminous United States based on
information that possible introduction
of SLF into Alaska was not imminent.
However, should SLF become
established in Alaska, a supplemental
EA will be prepared. The same
commenter also raised a concern with a
perceived lack of information and
analyses on the economic impact of an
SLF outbreak in the draft ProEA.
Finally, another commenter agreed with
APHIS that SLF is a destructive pest.
The comments that we received, and
APHIS’ responses to the comments, are
presented in our finding of no
significant impact (FONSI) (see
supporting documents).
In this document, we are advising the
public of our FONSI on the
implementation of the adaptive
management alternative for the SLF
program. The finding, which is based on
the results of the analysis in the final
ProEA, reflects our determination that
1 To view the notice, the supporting documents,
and the comments we received, go to
www.regulations.gov, and enter APHIS–2023–0079
in the Search field.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 May 16, 2024
Jkt 262001
under this alternative, the methods used
to exclude, detect, prevent, and control
SLF infestations will not have a
significant impact on the quality of the
human environment.
The ProEA and FONSI may be viewed
on the regulations.gov website or in our
reading room (see ADDRESSES above for
a link to regulations.gov and
information on the location and hours of
the reading room). You may also request
paper copies of the ProEA and FONSI
by calling or writing to the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. Please refer to the title of the
ProEA when requesting copies.
The ProEA and FONSI 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 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part
372).
Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of
May 2024.
Michelle Wenberg,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–10648 Filed 5–16–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. FSIS–2024–0008]
Retail Exemptions Adjusted Dollar
Limitations
Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS), U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
FSIS is announcing the dollar
limitations on the amount of meat and
meat products and poultry and poultry
products that a retail store can sell to
hotels, restaurants, and similar
institutions without disqualifying itself
for exemption from Federal inspection
requirements.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Applicable June 17, 2024.
Gina
Kouba, Office of Policy and Program
Development, Food Safety and
Inspection Service, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue SW, Mailstop
3758, South Building, Washington, DC
20250–3700; 202–720–5046.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43373
Background
The Federal Meat Inspection Act (21
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and the Poultry
Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451
et seq.) provide a comprehensive
statutory framework to ensure that meat
and meat products and poultry and
poultry products prepared for commerce
are wholesome, not adulterated, and
properly labeled and packaged.
Statutory provisions requiring
inspection of the processing of meat and
meat products and poultry and poultry
products do not apply to operations of
types traditionally and usually
conducted at retail stores and
restaurants in regard to products offered
for sale to consumers in normal retail
quantities (21 U.S.C. 661(c)(2) and
454(c)(2)). FSIS’ regulations (9 CFR
303.1(d) and 381.10(d)) elaborate on the
conditions under which requirements
for inspection do not apply to retail
operations involving the preparation of
meat and meat products and the
processing of poultry and poultry
products.
Sales to Hotels, Restaurants, and
Similar Institutions
Under the aforementioned
regulations, sales to hotels, restaurants,
and similar institutions (other than
household consumers) disqualify a
retail store from exemption if the retail
product sales of amenable products
exceed either of two maximum limits:
25 percent of the dollar value of the
total retail product sales or the calendar
year retail dollar limitation set by the
FSIS Administrator. The retail dollar
limitation is adjusted automatically
during the first quarter of the year if the
Consumer Price Index (CPI), published
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, shows
an increase or decrease of more than
$500 in the price of the same volume of
product for the previous year. FSIS
publishes a notice of the adjusted retail
dollar limitations in the Federal
Register. (See 9 CFR 303.1(d)(2)(iii)(b)
and 381.10(d)(2)(iii)(b).)
The CPI for 2023 reveals an annual
average price increase for meat and meat
products of 2.07 percent, an average
annual price increase for Siluriformes
fish and fish products of 0.31 percent,
and an annual average price increase for
poultry and poultry products of 3.10
percent.1 2 3 When rounded to the
1 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI–U):
Meats in U.S. city average, all urban consumers, not
seasonally adjusted [Series ID
CUUR0000SAF11211], accessed on February 8,
2024.
2 BLS, CPI–U: Fish and seafood in U.S. city
average, all urban consumers, not seasonally
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
Continued
17MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 97 (Friday, May 17, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43372-43373]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-10648]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
[Docket No. APHIS-2023-0079]
Spotted Lanternfly Cooperative Control Program; Programmatic
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 programmatic environmental assessment
and finding of no significant impact relative to the Spotted Lanternfly
Cooperative Control Program in the conterminous United States. The
environmental assessment documents our review and analysis of
environmental impacts associated with the Spotted Lanternfly
Cooperative Control Program. 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: Mr. Matthew Travis, Spotted Lanternfly
National Policy Manager, PPQ, APHIS, Emergency and Domestic Programs,
4700 River Road, Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238; telephone: (580)
240-5394; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The spotted lanternfly (SLF), Lycorma delicatula, an invasive
species native to Asia, is a destructive pest that in large numbers can
cause significant damage to critical habitat and economically important
plants. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) proposed to control SLF to slow the spread
of this
[[Page 43373]]
invasive insect in the conterminous United States wherever outbreaks
are detected.
SLF infestation has led to crop loss, agriculture exportation
problems, and increased management costs. APHIS has concerns with the
potential for long-distance movement of SLF within the United States,
and the continued risk of SLF introduction from other countries.
Additionally, APHIS acknowledges that the environmental and
socioeconomic damage to SLF-affected regions can be substantial.
On November 9, 2023, we published in the Federal Register (88 FR
77259-77260, Docket No. APHIS-2023-0079) a notice \1\ in which we
announced the availability, for public review and comment, of a
programmatic environmental assessment (ProEA) that examined the
potential environmental impacts associated with the SLF cooperative
control program. In our analysis, APHIS found that an adaptive pest
management approach that combines quarantine, chemical treatments, and
pest survey is the preferred alternative to address the potential
environmental impact of a SLF outbreak.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the notice, the supporting documents, and the
comments we received, go to www.regulations.gov, and enter APHIS-
2023-0079 in the Search field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We solicited comments on the ProEA for 30 days ending December 11,
2023. We received two comment submissions by that date. A commenter
questioned why Alaska and Hawaii were excluded from the ProEA, citing a
map for the possible host range of SLF that indicated it could become
established in Alaska. The ProEA was limited to the conterminous United
States based on information that possible introduction of SLF into
Alaska was not imminent. However, should SLF become established in
Alaska, a supplemental EA will be prepared. The same commenter also
raised a concern with a perceived lack of information and analyses on
the economic impact of an SLF outbreak in the draft ProEA. Finally,
another commenter agreed with APHIS that SLF is a destructive pest. The
comments that we received, and APHIS' responses to the comments, are
presented in our finding of no significant impact (FONSI) (see
supporting documents).
In this document, we are advising the public of our FONSI on the
implementation of the adaptive management alternative for the SLF
program. The finding, which is based on the results of the analysis in
the final ProEA, reflects our determination that under this
alternative, the methods used to exclude, detect, prevent, and control
SLF infestations will not have a significant impact on the quality of
the human environment.
The ProEA and FONSI may be viewed on the regulations.gov website or
in our reading room (see ADDRESSES above for a link to regulations.gov
and information on the location and hours of the reading room). You may
also request paper copies of the ProEA and FONSI by calling or writing
to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please
refer to the title of the ProEA when requesting copies.
The ProEA and FONSI 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 1b), and (4)
APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of May 2024.
Michelle Wenberg,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-10648 Filed 5-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
