81 FR 53398 - Environmental Impact Statement; Fruit Fly Eradication Program
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 156 (August 12, 2016)
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 156 (August 12, 2016)
| Page Range | 53398-53399 | |
| FR Document | 2016-19223 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 156 (Friday, August 12, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 53398-53399] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-19223] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2016-0031] Environmental Impact Statement; Fruit Fly Eradication Program AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: We are advising the public that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service plans to prepare an updated environmental impact statement to analyze the effects of a program to eradicate exotic fruit fly species from wherever they might occur in the United States, including Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. This notice identifies potential issues and alternatives that will be studied in the environmental impact statement, and requests public comments to further delineate the scope of the alternatives and environmental impacts and issues. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before September 26, 2016. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0031. Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2016-0031, 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-2016- 0031 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. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions related to the Fruit Fly Eradication Program, contact Mr. John C. Stewart, APHIS National Fruit Fly Eradication Program Manager, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, PPQ, APHIS, 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 400, Raleigh NC 27606, John.C.Stewart@aphis.usda.gov; (919) 855-7426. For questions related to the environmental impact statement, contact Dr. Jim Warren, Environmental Protection Specialist, Environmental and Risk Analysis Services, PPD, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 149, Riverdale, MD 20737; Jim.E.Warren@aphis.usda.gov; (202) 316-3216. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Non-native (exotic) fruit flies in the family Tephritidae have a wide host range, including more than 400 species of fruit and vegetables. Introduction of these pest species into the United States causes economic losses from destruction and spoiling of host commodities by larvae, costs associated with implementing control measures, environmental impacts due to increased pesticide usage if fruit flies become established, and loss of market share due to restrictions on shipment of host commodities. Three species pose the greatest risk to United States agriculture: the Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly), Ceratitis capitata; the Oriental fruit fly (OFF), Bactrocera dorsalis; and the Mexican fruit fly (Mexfly), Anastrepha ludens. Currently, Medfly is established in Hawaii where it was first detected in 1910. Although Medfly has been periodically introduced to the United States mainland since 1929, successful eradication programs have prevented it from becoming an established pest in the continental United States. OFF was introduced into Hawaii in the 1940s and has since became established there. Although OFF is not established in the continental United States, new infestations have been detected on an almost annual basis since it was first detected in California in 1960. The Mexfly has been introduced repeatedly to Texas and eradicated since its first introduction in 1927. The risk of introduction along the Mexican and U.S. border continues to increase as the rate of infestations in Mexico increases annually. The regulations in ``Subpart--Fruit Flies'' (7 CFR 301.32 through 301.32-10, referred to below as the regulations), restrict the movement of certain regulated articles from quarantined areas in order to prevent the spread of fruit flies to noninfested areas of the United States. Within the quarantined areas, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) works with State and local officials to eradicate fruit flies, after which the quarantine can be removed. Current efforts to eradicate infestations include chemical and nonchemical control measures. Chemical options may include applications of insecticides and/or the use of detection and control attractants that can be applied using various methods. Nonchemical control methods include sterile insect technique (SIT) and host removal from areas in and around the detection sites. Under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C 4321 et seq.), Federal agencies must examine the potential environmental effects of the proposed Federal actions and alternatives. A final environmental impact statement (EIS) was prepared in 2001 to examine the environmental effects of the fruit fly cooperative control program. Since the publication of the 2001 EIS, there have been scientific and technological advances in the field. As a result, we are planning to prepare a new EIS to analyze and examine the environmental effects of control alternatives available to the agency, including a no action alternative. It will be used for planning and decisionmaking and to inform the public about the environmental effects of APHIS' fruit fly eradication activities. It will also provide an overview of APHIS activities to which we can tier site- specific analyses and environmental assessments if new fruit fly infestations are discovered in the United States. We are requesting public comment to help us identify or confirm potential alternatives and environmental issues that should be examined in the EIS, as well as comments that identify other [[Page 53399]] issues that should be examined in the EIS. The EIS will be prepared in accordance with: (1) NEPA, (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). We have identified four alternatives for further examination in the EIS: No action. Under this alternative, APHIS would maintain the program that was described in the 2001 EIS and Record of Decision. This alternative includes methods to exclude, detect, prevent, and control (both nonchemical and chemical) fruit fly infestations. This alternative represents the baseline against which a proposed action may be compared. No eradication alternative. Under this alternative, APHIS would not control or cooperate with other governmental entities to eradicate exotic fruit flies. Any control efforts would be the responsibility of State and local governments, growers or grower groups, and individual citizens. Quarantine and commodity treatment and certification. This alternative combines a Federal quarantine with commodity treatment and certification, as stipulated under the regulations. Regulated commodities harvested within the quarantined area would not be allowed to move unless treated with prescribed applications and certified for movement outside the area. Nonchemical treatment and host certification methods that may be used in this alternative include cold treatment, vapor heat treatment, and irradiation treatment. Regulatory certification chemical treatments may include fumigation with methyl bromide. Integrated pest management approach. Under this alternative, APHIS would use methods to exclude, detect, prevent, and control fruit fly infestations. This alternative would update the information and technologies that were analyzed in the 2001 EIS. These methods could be used individually or in combination with other methods. In an integrated approach, program managers would make management decisions in such a way as to protect human health, nontarget species (endangered and threatened species), sensitive areas, and other components of the environment within the potential program area. Program eradication efforts may employ any or a combination of the following: No action, regulatory quarantine treatment and control of host materials and regulated articles, host survey for evidence of breeding fruit flies, host removal, eradication chemical applications, mass trapping to delimit the infestation and monitor posttreatment populations, and use of SIT. We have identified the following potential environmental impacts or issues for further examination in the EIS: Effects on wildlife, including consideration of migratory bird species and changes in native wildlife habitat and populations, and federally listed endangered and threatened species; Effects on soil, air, and water quality; Effects on human health and safety; Effects on cultural and historic resources; and Effects on economic resources. We welcome comments on the proposed action, and on other alternatives and environmental impacts, or issues that should be considered for further examination in the EIS. All comments on this notice 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 invitation to comment on it will be published in the Federal Register. Done in Washington, DC, this 8th day of August 2016. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. 2016-19223 Filed 8-11-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
![53398 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Notices
the comments, if APHIS determines that APHIS–2016–0031, Regulatory Analysis Although OFF is not established in the
no substantive information has been and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station continental United States, new
received that would warrant APHIS 3A–03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, infestations have been detected on an
altering its preliminary regulatory Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. almost annual basis since it was first
determination or FONSI, our Supporting documents and any detected in California in 1960. The
preliminary regulatory determination comments we receive on this docket Mexfly has been introduced repeatedly
will become final and effective upon may be viewed at http:// to Texas and eradicated since its first
notification of the public through an www.regulations.gov/ introduction in 1927. The risk of
announcement on our Web site at http:// #!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0031 or introduction along the Mexican and
www.aphis.usda.gov/biotechnology/ in our reading room, which is located in U.S. border continues to increase as the
petitions_table_pending.shtml. APHIS Room 1141 of the USDA South rate of infestations in Mexico increases
will also furnish a response to the Building, 14th Street and Independence annually.
petitioner regarding our final regulatory Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal The regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Fruit
determination. No further Federal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 Flies’’ (7 CFR 301.32 through 301.32–10,
Register notice will be published p.m., Monday through Friday, except referred to below as the regulations),
announcing the final regulatory holidays. To be sure someone is there to restrict the movement of certain
determination regarding NF872 apple. help you, please call (202) 799–7039 regulated articles from quarantined
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781– before coming. areas in order to prevent the spread of
7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For fruit flies to noninfested areas of the
371.3. questions related to the Fruit Fly United States. Within the quarantined
Done in Washington, DC, this 8th day of Eradication Program, contact Mr. John areas, Animal and Plant Health
August 2016. C. Stewart, APHIS National Fruit Fly Inspection Service (APHIS) works with
Kevin Shea, Eradication Program Manager, Center State and local officials to eradicate fruit
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health for Plant Health Science and flies, after which the quarantine can be
Inspection Service. Technology, PPQ, APHIS, 1730 Varsity removed.
[FR Doc. 2016–19222 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] Drive, Suite 400, Raleigh NC 27606, Current efforts to eradicate
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P John.C.Stewart@aphis.usda.gov; (919) infestations include chemical and
855–7426. For questions related to the nonchemical control measures.
environmental impact statement, Chemical options may include
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE contact Dr. Jim Warren, Environmental applications of insecticides and/or the
Protection Specialist, Environmental use of detection and control attractants
Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Risk Analysis Services, PPD, that can be applied using various
Service APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 149, methods. Nonchemical control methods
[Docket No. APHIS–2016–0031] Riverdale, MD 20737; Jim.E.Warren@ include sterile insect technique (SIT)
aphis.usda.gov; (202) 316–3216. and host removal from areas in and
Environmental Impact Statement; Fruit SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: around the detection sites.
Fly Eradication Program Under the provisions of the National
Background Environmental Policy Act of 1969
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA. Non-native (exotic) fruit flies in the (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C 4321 et
family Tephritidae have a wide host seq.), Federal agencies must examine
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an
range, including more than 400 species the potential environmental effects of
environmental impact statement.
of fruit and vegetables. Introduction of the proposed Federal actions and
SUMMARY: We are advising the public these pest species into the United States alternatives. A final environmental
that the Animal and Plant Health causes economic losses from destruction impact statement (EIS) was prepared in
Inspection Service plans to prepare an and spoiling of host commodities by 2001 to examine the environmental
updated environmental impact larvae, costs associated with effects of the fruit fly cooperative
statement to analyze the effects of a implementing control measures, control program. Since the publication
program to eradicate exotic fruit fly environmental impacts due to increased of the 2001 EIS, there have been
species from wherever they might occur pesticide usage if fruit flies become scientific and technological advances in
in the United States, including Hawaii, established, and loss of market share the field. As a result, we are planning
Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, due to restrictions on shipment of host to prepare a new EIS to analyze and
and the U.S. Virgin Islands. This notice commodities. Three species pose the examine the environmental effects of
identifies potential issues and greatest risk to United States agriculture: control alternatives available to the
alternatives that will be studied in the the Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly), agency, including a no action
environmental impact statement, and Ceratitis capitata; the Oriental fruit fly alternative. It will be used for planning
requests public comments to further (OFF), Bactrocera dorsalis; and the and decisionmaking and to inform the
delineate the scope of the alternatives Mexican fruit fly (Mexfly), Anastrepha public about the environmental effects
and environmental impacts and issues. ludens. of APHIS’ fruit fly eradication activities.
DATES: We will consider all comments Currently, Medfly is established in It will also provide an overview of
that we receive on or before September Hawaii where it was first detected in APHIS activities to which we can tier
26, 2016. 1910. Although Medfly has been site-specific analyses and environmental
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments periodically introduced to the United assessments if new fruit fly infestations
by either of the following methods: States mainland since 1929, successful are discovered in the United States.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to eradication programs have prevented it We are requesting public comment to
http://www.regulations.gov/ from becoming an established pest in help us identify or confirm potential
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0031. the continental United States. OFF was alternatives and environmental issues
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: introduced into Hawaii in the 1940s and that should be examined in the EIS, as
Send your comment to Docket No. has since became established there. well as comments that identify other
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\12AUN1.SGM 12AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_53554/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Notices 53399
issues that should be examined in the following: No action, regulatory at the following Web site: http://
EIS. quarantine treatment and control of host www.fs.usda.gov/main/flathead/
The EIS will be prepared in materials and regulated articles, host workingtogether/advisorycommittees.
accordance with: (1) NEPA, (2) survey for evidence of breeding fruit DATES: The meeting will be held on
regulations of the Council on flies, host removal, eradication chemical September 12, 2016, at 6:00 p.m.
Environmental Quality for applications, mass trapping to delimit All RAC meetings are subject to
implementing the procedural provisions the infestation and monitor cancellation. For status of meeting prior
of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3) posttreatment populations, and use of to attendance, please contact the person
USDA regulations implementing NEPA SIT. listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA We have identified the following CONTACT.
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part potential environmental impacts or ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
372). issues for further examination in the Flathead National Forest Supervisor’s
We have identified four alternatives EIS: Office, 650 Wolfpack Way, Kalispell,
for further examination in the EIS: • Effects on wildlife, including Montana.
No action. Under this alternative, consideration of migratory bird species
APHIS would maintain the program that Written comments may be submitted
and changes in native wildlife habitat as described under SUPPLEMENTARY
was described in the 2001 EIS and and populations, and federally listed INFORMATION. All comments, including
Record of Decision. This alternative endangered and threatened species;
includes methods to exclude, detect, names and addresses when provided,
• Effects on soil, air, and water are placed in the record and are
prevent, and control (both nonchemical quality;
and chemical) fruit fly infestations. This available for public inspection and
• Effects on human health and safety; copying. The public may inspect
alternative represents the baseline • Effects on cultural and historic
against which a proposed action may be comments received at the Flathead
resources; and National Forest Supervisor’s Office, 650
compared. • Effects on economic resources.
No eradication alternative. Under this Wolfpack Way, Kalispell, Montana.
We welcome comments on the Please call ahead at 406–758–5252 to
alternative, APHIS would not control or proposed action, and on other
cooperate with other governmental facilitate entry into the building.
alternatives and environmental impacts,
entities to eradicate exotic fruit flies. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
or issues that should be considered for
Any control efforts would be the Janette Turk, Designated Federal Official
further examination in the EIS.
responsibility of State and local by phone at 406–758–5252, or by email
All comments on this notice will be
governments, growers or grower groups, at jturk@fs.fed.us.
carefully considered in developing the Individuals who use
and individual citizens. final scope of the EIS. Upon completion
Quarantine and commodity treatment telecommunication devices for the deaf
of the draft EIS, a notice announcing its (TDD) may call the Federal Information
and certification. This alternative availability and an invitation to
combines a Federal quarantine with Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339
comment on it will be published in the between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.,
commodity treatment and certification, Federal Register.
as stipulated under the regulations. Eastern Standard Time, Monday
Regulated commodities harvested Done in Washington, DC, this 8th day of through Friday.
within the quarantined area would not August 2016. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
be allowed to move unless treated with Kevin Shea, purpose of the meeting is to hear a
prescribed applications and certified for Administrator, Animal and Plant Health presentation of project proposals for
movement outside the area. Inspection Service. RAC consideration.
Nonchemical treatment and host [FR Doc. 2016–19223 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] The meeting is open to the public.
certification methods that may be used BILLING CODE 3410–34–P The agenda will include time for people
in this alternative include cold to make oral statements of three minutes
treatment, vapor heat treatment, and or less. Individuals wishing to make an
irradiation treatment. Regulatory DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE oral statement should request in writing
certification chemical treatments may by September 7, 2016, to be scheduled
include fumigation with methyl Forest Service on the agenda. Anyone who would like
bromide. to bring related matters to the attention
Flathead Resource Advisory
Integrated pest management of the committee may file written
Committee
approach. Under this alternative, APHIS statements with the committee staff
would use methods to exclude, detect, AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. before or after the meeting. Written
prevent, and control fruit fly ACTION: Notice of meeting. comments and requests for time to make
infestations. This alternative would oral comments must be sent to Janette
update the information and technologies SUMMARY: The Flathead Resource Turk, Designated Federal Official,
that were analyzed in the 2001 EIS. Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Flathead National Forest Supervisor’s
These methods could be used Kalispell, Montana. The committee is Office, 650 Wolfpack Way, Kalispell,
individually or in combination with authorized under the Secure Rural Montana; or by email to jturk@fs.fed.us,
other methods. In an integrated Schools and Community Self- or via facsimile to 406–758–5379.
approach, program managers would Determination Act (the Act) and Meeting Accommodations: If you are
make management decisions in such a operates in compliance with the Federal a person requiring reasonable
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
way as to protect human health, Advisory Committee Act. The purpose accommodation, please make requests
nontarget species (endangered and of the committee is to improve in advance for sign language
threatened species), sensitive areas, and collaborative relationships and to interpreting, assistive listening devices,
other components of the environment provide advice and recommendations to or other reasonable accommodation. For
within the potential program area. the Forest Service concerning projects access to the facility or proceedings,
Program eradication efforts may and funding consistent with Title II of please contact the person listed in the
employ any or a combination of the the Act. RAC information can be found section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\12AUN1.SGM 12AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_53554/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-09 11:33:16
Document Modified: 2018-02-09 11:33:16
| 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 of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. | |
| Dates | We will consider all comments that we receive on or before September 26, 2016. | |
| Contact | For questions related to the Fruit Fly Eradication Program, contact Mr. John C. Stewart, APHIS National Fruit Fly Eradication Program Manager, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, PPQ, APHIS, 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 400, Raleigh NC 27606, [email protected]; (919) 855-7426. For questions related to the environmental impact statement, contact Dr. Jim Warren, Environmental Protection Specialist, Environmental and Risk Analysis Services, PPD, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 149, Riverdale, MD 20737; [email protected]; (202) 316-3216. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 53398 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR