81 FR 51174 - The Scotts Co. and Monsanto Co.; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Determination of Nonregulated Status of Glyphosate-Resistant Creeping Bentgrass
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 149 (August 3, 2016)
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 149 (August 3, 2016)
| Page Range | 51174-51176 | |
| FR Document | 2016-18421 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 3, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 51174-51176] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-18421] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2015-0096] The Scotts Co. and Monsanto Co.; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Determination of Nonregulated Status of Glyphosate-Resistant Creeping Bentgrass AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: We are announcing that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate the environmental impacts that may result from the approval of a new petition for nonregulated status of glyphosate-resistant creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L.) (event ASR368) from The Scotts Company and Monsanto Company following withdrawal of their 2003 petition. Issues to be addressed in the EIS include the potential environmental impacts to managed natural and non-agricultural lands, agricultural production systems, the physical environment, biological resources, human health, socioeconomics, federally listed threatened or endangered species, and cultural or historic resources. This notice of intent (NOI) replaces a previous NOI published in September 2004 and initiates a fresh public scoping process and stakeholder engagement for the purpose of preparing an EIS. We are requesting public comments to further frame the scope of the issues to be included in the EIS, including alternatives and environmental impacts. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before September 2, 2016. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0096. Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2015-0096, 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 http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015- 0096 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 help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming. Other Information: We have retained the public comments submitted in response to previous notices on this subject. Due to the amount of time that has passed since these comments were originally submitted, some of the comments may need to be updated with newer information. These earlier comments will be assessed as long as they reflect conditions in the current agricultural and natural environment and are relevant to issues studied in the environmental impact statement (EIS). We welcome new submissions offering scientific facts, professional observations, and perspectives about how to evaluate any new material available for analysis in the EIS. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Sidney Abel, Assistant Deputy Administrator, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238; (301) 851-3896, email: [email protected]. To obtain copies of the petition, contact [[Page 51175]] Ms. Cindy Eck at (301) 851-3882, email: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Under the authority of the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act (PPA), as amended (7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the regulations in 7 CFR part 340, ``Introduction of Organisms and Products Altered or Produced Through Genetic Engineering Which Are Plant Pests or Which There Is Reason to Believe Are Plant Pests,'' regulate, among other things, the introduction (importation, interstate movement, or release into the environment) of organisms and products altered or produced through genetic engineering that are plant pests or that there is reason to believe are plant pests. Such genetically engineered organisms and products are considered ``regulated articles.'' The regulations in 7 CFR 340.6(a) provide that any person may submit a petition to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) seeking a determination that an article should not be regulated under 7 CFR part 340. Paragraphs (b) and (c) of Sec. 340.6 describe the form that a petition for a determination of nonregulated status must take and the information that must be included in the petition. APHIS received a new petition from The Scotts Company (Scotts) and Monsanto Company (Monsanto), APHIS Petition Number 15-300-01p, seeking a determination of nonregulated status for creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L.) that is resistant to glyphosate, identified as event ASR368 or Roundup Ready[supreg] creeping bentgrass. The petition states that this regulated article is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk and, therefore, should not be a regulated article under APHIS' regulations in 7 CFR part 340. These part 340 regulations are authorized by the PPA to prevent the introduction or dissemination of plant pests, and the decision on whether or not to approve the petition request will be based on this standard. A total of six notices have been published in the Federal Register related to the current and previous petition. The first notice,\1\ published on January 5, 2004, advised the public of receipt of petition 03-104-01p and solicited comments from the public on the petition. The second notice,\2\ published on September 24, 2004, announced APHIS' intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) to provide the Agency with a review and analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the petition request. The third notice,\3\ published on November 18, 2004, reopened the comment period on the second notice and announced APHIS' intent to hold a public meeting to promote further public involvement in the development of the EIS. On April 11, 2005, a fourth notice \4\ invited the public to attend public EIS scoping sessions in May 2005 in Maryland and Oregon. The fifth notice,\5\ published on October 12, 2005, requested information from the public on glyphosate use and weed management in nonagricultural lands. The sixth notice \6\ published on January 8, 2016, advised the public of receipt of the current petition (15-300-01p) and solicited comment from the public, including comments related to the environmental impacts associated with the potential deregulation. APHIS received 168 comments during the 60-day comment period from a variety of stakeholders. These comments can be viewed on Regulations.gov (see ADDRESSES above). In total, more than 1,000 comments were submitted to APHIS during the public comment periods and at the public meetings. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Docket No. 03-101-1 published on January 5, 2004, Vol. 69 No. 2; http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/fedregister/BRS_20040105a.pdf. \2\ Docket No. 03-101-2 published on September 24, 2004, Vol. 69 No. 185; http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/fedregister/BRS_20040924a.pdf. \3\ Docket No. 03-101-3 published on November 18, 2004, Vol. 69 No. 222; http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/fedregister/BRS_20041118a.pdf. \4\ Docket No. 03-101-4 published on April 11, 2005, Vol. 70 No. 68; http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/fedregister/BRS_20050411a.pdf. \5\ Docket No. 03-101-5 published on October 12, 2005, Vol. 70 No. 196 http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/fedregister/BRS_20051012a.pdf. \6\ Docket No. APHIS-2015-0096 published on January 8, 2016, Vol. 81, No. 5 https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=APHIS-2015-0096. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Creeping bentgrass is a perennial outcrossing species, thus major issues raised by commenters focused on plant biology and agronomic consequences of it outcrossing to weedy species that may impact agriculture and/or natural ecosystems. Issues raised specifically included the distribution of seed and pollen from creeping bentgrass, hybridization with native or naturalized species, the need for additional chemicals to control glyphosate-resistant grass species that may develop due to hybridization with creeping bentgrass, increased weediness, the ability of creeping bentgrass to establish without cultivation, potential impacts on agricultural irrigation canals, and the development of herbicide-resistant weeds. APHIS published a preliminary risk assessment \7\ as part of its evaluation of the petition request under 7 CFR part 340 and also a white paper \8\ to support the preliminary risk assessment, providing a summary of the biology and ecology of creeping bentgrass. These documents were published in 2005 and 2006, respectively. The preliminary risk assessment concluded that there is a possibility that ASR368 or hybrids of ASR368 could become established in various urban or rural and natural areas. At the time the preliminary risk assessment was written, there were at least 13 naturalized or native species with which creeping bentgrass could hybridize in the United States. The white paper presented biological and ecological information on creeping bentgrass, including its distribution in the United States and Canada, and the ability for it to form hybrids by natural interspecific crosses or potentially do so. APHIS will further investigate in the EIS whether or not there are any additional species that hybridize with A. stolonifera and associated environmental impacts. APHIS will review the 2005 preliminary risk assessment, updating it to reflect changes in turfgrass science and the current document standards of APHIS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/03_10401p_ra.pdf. \8\ http://www.aphis.usda.gov/peer_review/downloads/cbg-wpFinal.pdf. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To fulfill its section 7 requirements under the Endangered Species Act, APHIS entered into consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) on the first petition (03-104-01p). Subsequent to the withdrawal of the petition in September 2015, APHIS notified the USFWS that it was terminating the consultation on the petition. Information provided during the comment period on this notice of intent (NOI) will be used to update APHIS' assessment of the effects on threatened and endangered species and critical habitat (collectively referred to as listed resources) and, as appropriate and required by statute, will be shared with the USFWS as part of APHIS' commitment to protect listed resources. If APHIS enters into formal consultation, the USFWS will make a determination about whether nonregulated status of ASR368 will jeopardize the continued existence of federally listed plant and animal species. Under NEPA, Federal agencies must examine the potential environmental [[Page 51176]] impacts of proposed major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment before taking that action. In accordance with NEPA, the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), USDA regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372) require that for each submitted petition, APHIS consider the potential environmental impacts of a request for nonregulated status either by preparing an environmental assessment (EA) or an EIS. APHIS has decided to prepare an EIS to better understand the degree of uncertainty for environmental impacts associated with the deregulation of ASR368. This uncertainty is primarily related to four issues that will be studied in the EIS: (1) Potential for hybridization and introgression, (2) management of volunteer ASR368, (3) potential effects on weed management practices, and (4) potential inter-related trade and economic impacts. The EIS will examine the broad and cumulative environmental impacts of the requested deregulation of ASR368, including potential impacts of the proposed action on the human environment and alternative courses of action. Alternatives The Federal action being considered is whether to approve the petition for nonregulated status of ASR368. This notice identifies reasonable alternatives and potential issues that may be studied in the EIS. We are requesting public input and comment on the range of alternatives, and on the environmental impacts and issues stated in this NOI as well as suggestions for additional alternatives for consideration and new impacts or issues to be evaluated in the EIS for the petition. The EIS will consider a range of reasonable alternatives. APHIS is currently considering two alternatives: (1) Take no action, i.e., APHIS would not change the regulatory status of the glyphosate-resistant creeping bentgrass event ASR368 and such plants would continue to be regulated articles, or (2) approve the petition for determination of nonregulated status of ASR368. Environmental Issues for Consideration We have identified the following potential environmental issues for consideration in the EIS: Impacts on managed natural and non- agricultural lands; on agricultural production systems; on the physical environment; on biological resources; on human health; on socioeconomic issues; on federally listed threatened or endangered species; and on cultural or historic resources. In addition to providing input and comment on these issues, we are also requesting that the public provide information on the following questions during the comment period: Potential for Hybridization and Introgression What are the weed species in potential affected environments with which ASR368 may hybridize and introgress? What evidence is there that this would or could occur? If introgression was to occur, would the inability to identify introgression of ASR368 lead to stand failures or increasing costs for production of grass seed crops when compared to non- genetically engineered (non-GE) creeping bentgrass? What evidence is there that would support stand failure or increased costs. Management of Volunteer ASR368 Compared to non-GE creeping bentgrass and other grasses, would deregulation of ASR368 result in its establishment and persistence in situations where it is unwanted, unintended, or unexpected (e.g., agricultural irrigation canals, habitat restoration, riparian areas, wetlands, or grasslands)? When compared to non-GE creeping bentgrass, could the spread of ASR368 or its relatives to areas where it is unwanted, unintended, or unexpected potentially result in adverse effects on native species or habitats, including threatened and endangered species and their habitats? What supporting information is available to conclude an adverse effect? Potential Effects on Weed Management Practices Would the presence of volunteer ASR368 increase the costs and complexity of weed control for growers of non-GE creeping bentgrass and other crops? What evidence is there to support this conclusion? What potential changes of agronomic practices may occur as a result of the presence of ASR368 agricultural crops, including crop rotation practices, herbicide use, and tillage? Potential Trade and Economic Impacts What potential impacts on GE-free grass seed exports could result from the presence of ASR368? What potential impacts on conventional and organic crops could result from the presence of ARS368? Comments that identify other issues or alternatives that should be considered for examination in the EIS would be especially helpful. All comments received during the scoping period will be carefully considered in developing the final scope of the EIS. Upon completion of the draft EIS, a notice announcing its availability and an opportunity to comment on it will be published in the Federal Register. 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 27th day of July 2016. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. 2016-18421 Filed 8-2-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
![51174
Notices Federal Register
Vol. 81, No. 149
Wednesday, August 3, 2016
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Purpose: United States Agency for previous NOI published in September
contains documents other than rules or International Development must collect 2004 and initiates a fresh public scoping
proposed rules that are applicable to the information for reporting purposes to process and stakeholder engagement for
public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Congress and Office of Acquisition and the purpose of preparing an EIS. We are
committee meetings, agency decisions and Assistance Contract Administration. requesting public comments to further
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
This collection is to collect personal frame the scope of the issues to be
statements of organization and functions are information on applicants for USAID included in the EIS, including
examples of documents appearing in this personal services contracts and is used alternatives and environmental impacts.
section. to award a personal services contract DATES: We will consider all comments
with required signatures. that we receive on or before September
Annual Reporting Burden: 2, 2016.
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL U.S. Respondents: 550. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
DEVELOPMENT Total Annual U.S. Responses: 550. by either of the following methods:
Total Annual Hours Requested: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
Notice of Public Information 137.50 hours. http://www.regulations.gov/
Collections Being Reviewed by the Dated: July 18, 2016. #!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0096.
U.S. Agency for International • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:
Lynn Winston,
Development; Comments Requested Send your comment to Docket No.
Chief, Information and Records Division, US
SUMMARY: U.S. Agency for International Agency for International Development. APHIS–2015–0096, Regulatory Analysis
Development (USAID) is making efforts [FR Doc. 2016–17375 Filed 8–2–16; 8:45 am] and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station
to reduce the paperwork burden. USAID BILLING CODE M
3A–03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118,
invites the general public and other Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.
Federal agencies to take this Supporting documents and any
opportunity to comment on the comments we receive on this docket
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE may be viewed at http://
following proposed and/or continuing
information collections, as required by Animal and Plant Health Inspection www.regulations.gov/
the Paperwork Reduction Act for 1995. Service #!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0096 or
Comments are requested concerning: in our reading room, which is located in
(a) The accuracy of the burden [Docket No. APHIS–2015–0096] Room 1141 of the USDA South
estimates; (b) ways to enhance the Building, 14th Street and Independence
The Scotts Co. and Monsanto Co.; Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal
quality, utility, and clarity of the
Notice of Intent To Prepare an reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30
information collected; and (c) ways to
Environmental Impact Statement for p.m., Monday through Friday, except
minimize the burden of the collection of
Determination of Nonregulated Status holidays. To be sure someone is there to
information on the respondents,
of Glyphosate-Resistant Creeping help you, please call (202) 799–7039
including the use of automated
Bentgrass before coming.
collection techniques, or other forms of
information technology. AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Other Information: We have retained
DATES: Submit comments on or before Inspection Service, USDA. the public comments submitted in
October 3, 2016. ACTION: Notice.
response to previous notices on this
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
subject. Due to the amount of time that
Sylvia Joyner, Bureau for Management, SUMMARY: We are announcing that the has passed since these comments were
Office of Management Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection originally submitted, some of the
Information and Records Division, U.S. Service intends to prepare an comments may need to be updated with
Agency for International Development, environmental impact statement (EIS) to newer information. These earlier
Room 2.07C, RRB, Washington, DC evaluate the environmental impacts that comments will be assessed as long as
20523, (202) 712–5007 or via email may result from the approval of a new they reflect conditions in the current
sjoyner@usaid.gov. petition for nonregulated status of agricultural and natural environment
Comments: Send comments via email glyphosate-resistant creeping bentgrass and are relevant to issues studied in the
to jltaylor@usaid.gov, U.S. Agency for (Agrostis stolonifera L.) (event ASR368) environmental impact statement (EIS).
International Development, Office of from The Scotts Company and We welcome new submissions offering
Acquisition and Assistance, 1300 Monsanto Company following scientific facts, professional
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., SA–44 withdrawal of their 2003 petition. Issues observations, and perspectives about
Room 867–C, Washington, DC 20523, to be addressed in the EIS include the how to evaluate any new material
potential environmental impacts to available for analysis in the EIS.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
202–567–4673.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: managed natural and non-agricultural FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
OMB No: lands, agricultural production systems, Sidney Abel, Assistant Deputy
Form No.: AID 309–1. the physical environment, biological Administrator, Biotechnology
Title: CONTRACT WITH AN resources, human health, Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River
INDIVIDUAL FOR PERSONAL socioeconomics, federally listed Road, Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737–
SERVICES. threatened or endangered species, and 1238; (301) 851–3896, email:
Type of Review: A Revised cultural or historic resources. This Sidney.w.abel@aphis.usda.gov. To
Information Collection. notice of intent (NOI) replaces a obtain copies of the petition, contact
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:21 Aug 02, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM 03AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_51323/page/1.svg)
![51176 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 3, 2016 / Notices
impacts of proposed major Federal federally listed threatened or Comments that identify other issues
actions significantly affecting the endangered species; and on cultural or or alternatives that should be
quality of the human environment historic resources. In addition to considered for examination in the EIS
before taking that action. In accordance providing input and comment on these would be especially helpful. All
with NEPA, the regulations of the issues, we are also requesting that the comments received during the scoping
Council on Environmental Quality for public provide information on the period will be carefully considered in
implementing the procedural provisions following questions during the comment developing the final scope of the EIS.
of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), period: Upon completion of the draft EIS, a
USDA regulations implementing NEPA notice announcing its availability and
(7 CFR part 1b), and APHIS’ NEPA Potential for Hybridization and
an opportunity to comment on it will be
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part Introgression
published in the Federal Register.
372) require that for each submitted • What are the weed species in
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781–
petition, APHIS consider the potential potential affected environments with 7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and
environmental impacts of a request for which ASR368 may hybridize and 371.3.
nonregulated status either by preparing introgress? What evidence is there that
Done in Washington, DC, this 27th day of
an environmental assessment (EA) or an this would or could occur?
July 2016.
EIS. APHIS has decided to prepare an • If introgression was to occur, would
the inability to identify introgression of Kevin Shea,
EIS to better understand the degree of
uncertainty for environmental impacts ASR368 lead to stand failures or Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
increasing costs for production of grass Inspection Service.
associated with the deregulation of
ASR368. This uncertainty is primarily seed crops when compared to non- [FR Doc. 2016–18421 Filed 8–2–16; 8:45 am]
related to four issues that will be genetically engineered (non-GE) BILLING CODE P
studied in the EIS: (1) Potential for creeping bentgrass? What evidence is
hybridization and introgression, (2) there that would support stand failure
management of volunteer ASR368, (3) or increased costs. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
potential effects on weed management
Management of Volunteer ASR368 Animal and Plant Health Inspection
practices, and (4) potential inter-related
• Compared to non-GE creeping Service
trade and economic impacts. The EIS
will examine the broad and cumulative bentgrass and other grasses, would [Docket No. APHIS–2016–0046]
environmental impacts of the requested deregulation of ASR368 result in its
deregulation of ASR368, including establishment and persistence in Secretary’s Advisory Committee on
potential impacts of the proposed action situations where it is unwanted, Animal Health; Intent To Renew
on the human environment and unintended, or unexpected (e.g., AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health
alternative courses of action. agricultural irrigation canals, habitat Inspection Service, USDA.
restoration, riparian areas, wetlands, or
Alternatives ACTION: Notice of intent.
grasslands)?
The Federal action being considered • When compared to non-GE creeping SUMMARY: We are giving notice that the
is whether to approve the petition for bentgrass, could the spread of ASR368 Secretary of Agriculture intends to
nonregulated status of ASR368. This or its relatives to areas where it is renew the charter for the Secretary’s
notice identifies reasonable alternatives unwanted, unintended, or unexpected Advisory Committee on Animal Health
and potential issues that may be studied potentially result in adverse effects on for a 2-year period. The Secretary has
in the EIS. We are requesting public native species or habitats, including determined that the Committee is
input and comment on the range of threatened and endangered species and necessary and in the public interest.
alternatives, and on the environmental their habitats? What supporting
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
impacts and issues stated in this NOI as information is available to conclude an
well as suggestions for additional Diane L. Sutton, Designated Federal
adverse effect?
alternatives for consideration and new Officer, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road
impacts or issues to be evaluated in the Potential Effects on Weed Management Unit 43, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301)
EIS for the petition. Practices 851–3509.
The EIS will consider a range of • Would the presence of volunteer SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
reasonable alternatives. APHIS is ASR368 increase the costs and to the Federal Advisory Committee Act
currently considering two alternatives: complexity of weed control for growers (FACA, 5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby
(1) Take no action, i.e., APHIS would of non-GE creeping bentgrass and other given that the Secretary of Agriculture
not change the regulatory status of the crops? What evidence is there to intends to renew the Secretary’s
glyphosate-resistant creeping bentgrass support this conclusion? Advisory Committee on Animal Health
event ASR368 and such plants would • What potential changes of (the Committee) for 2 years. The term
continue to be regulated articles, or (2) agronomic practices may occur as a for the renewed charter will extend from
approve the petition for determination result of the presence of ASR368 August 8, 2016, to August 7, 2018.
of nonregulated status of ASR368. agricultural crops, including crop The Committee advises the Secretary
rotation practices, herbicide use, and on strategies, policies, and programs to
Environmental Issues for Consideration prevent, control, or eradicate animal
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
tillage?
We have identified the following diseases. The Committee considers
potential environmental issues for Potential Trade and Economic Impacts agricultural initiatives of national scope
consideration in the EIS: Impacts on • What potential impacts on GE-free and significance and advises on matters
managed natural and non-agricultural grass seed exports could result from the of public health, conservation of
lands; on agricultural production presence of ASR368? national resources, stability of livestock
systems; on the physical environment; • What potential impacts on economies, livestock disease
on biological resources; on human conventional and organic crops could management and traceability strategies,
health; on socioeconomic issues; on result from the presence of ARS368? prioritizing animal health imperatives,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:21 Aug 02, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM 03AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_51323/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-08-02 23:43:50
Document Modified: 2016-08-02 23:43:50
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice. | |
| Dates | We will consider all comments that we receive on or before September 2, 2016. | |
| Contact | Dr. Sidney Abel, Assistant Deputy Administrator, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238; (301) 851-3896, email: [email protected] To obtain copies of the petition, contact Ms. Cindy Eck at (301) 851-3882, email: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 51174 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR