Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 221 / Monday, November 17, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61213

Subpart—Imported Plants and Plant

Parts

§ 301.10 Definitions.

Move (moved, movement). Shipped,

offered to a common carrier for

shipment, received for transportation or

transported by a common carrier, or

carried, transported, moved, or allowed

to be moved.

State. Any State, territory, district, or

possession of the United States.

§ 301.11 Notice of quarantine; prohibition

on the interstate movement of certain

imported plants and plant parts.

(a) In accordance with part 319 of this

chapter, some plants and plant parts

may only be imported into the United

States subject to certain destination

restrictions. That is, under part 319,

some plants and plant parts may be

imported into some States or areas of

the United States but are prohibited

from being imported into, entered into,

or distributed within other States or

areas, as an additional safeguard against

the introduction and establishment of

foreign plant pests and diseases.

(b) Under this quarantine notice,

whenever any imported plant or plant

part is subject to destination restrictions

under part 319:

(1) The State(s) or area(s) into which

the plant or plant part is allowed to be

imported is quarantined with respect to

that plant or plant part; and

(2) No person shall move any plant or

plant part from any such quarantined

State or area into or through any State

or area not quarantined with respect to

that plant or plant part.

Subpart—Unshu Oranges—[Removed

and Reserved]

3. Subpart-Unshu Oranges, consisting

of § 301.83, is removed and reserved.

Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of

November 1997.

Terry L. Medley,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97–30107 Filed 11–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

7 CFR Part 301

[Docket No. 97–113–1]

Mexican Fruit Fly Regulations;

Addition of Regulated Area

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Interim rule and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: We are amending the Mexican

fruit fly regulations by adding California

to the list of quarantined States and by

designating a portion of Los Angeles

County, CA, as a regulated area. This

action is necessary on an emergency

basis to prevent the spread of the

Mexican fruit fly to noninfested areas of

the United States. This action restricts

the interstate movement of regulated

articles from the regulated area in

California.

DATES: Interim rule effective November

10, 1997. Consideration will be given

only to comments received on or before

January 16, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and

three copies of your comments to

Docket No. 97–113–1, Regulatory

Analysis and Development, PPD,

APHIS, suite 3C03, 4700 River Road

Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.

Please state that your comments refer to

Docket No. 97–113–1. Comments

received may be inspected 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 comments are requested to call

ahead on (202) 690–2817 to facilitate

entry into the comment reading room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Michael B. Stefan, Operations Officer,

Domestic and Emergency Operations,

PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 134,

Riverdale, MD 20737–1236, (301) 734–

8247; or e-mail:

mstefan@aphis.usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Mexican fruit fly, Anastrepha

ludens (Loew), is a destructive pest of

citrus and many other types of fruit. The

short life cycle of the Mexican fruit fly

allows rapid development of serious

outbreaks that can cause severe

economic losses in commercial citrusproducing areas.

The Mexican fruit fly regulations

(contained in 7 CFR 301.64 through

301.64–10 and referred to below as the

regulations) were established to prevent

the spread of the Mexican fruit fly to

noninfested areas of the United States.

The regulations impose restrictions on

the interstate movement of regulated

articles from the regulated areas. Prior to

the effective date of this rule, Texas was

the only State quarantined for the

Mexican fruit fly.

Section 301.64–3 provides that the

Deputy Administrator of the Animal

and Plant Health Inspection Service

(APHIS) for Plant Protection and

Quarantine (PPQ) shall list as a

regulated area each quarantined State,

or each portion of a quarantined State,

in which the Mexican fruit fly has been

found by an inspector, in which the

Deputy Administrator has reason to

believe the Mexican fruit fly is present,

or that the Deputy Administrator

considers necessary to regulate because

of its proximity to the Mexican fruit fly

or its inseparability for quarantine

enforcement purposes from localities in

which the Mexican fruit fly occurs. Less

than an entire quarantined State is

designated as a regulated area only if the

Deputy Administrator determines that:

(1) The State has adopted and is

enforcing a quarantine or regulation that

imposes restrictions on the intrastate

movement of the regulated articles that

are substantially the same as those that

are imposed with respect to the

interstate movement of the articles; and

(2) The designation of less than the

entire State as a regulated area will

otherwise be adequate to prevent the

artificial interstate spread of the

Mexican fruit fly.

Recent trapping surveys by inspectors

of California State and county agencies

and by inspectors of PPQ reveal that

portions of Los Angeles County, CA, are

infested with the Mexican fruit fly.

Specifically, on October 10, 1997,

inspectors found one female Mexican

fruit fly in a trap in a residential area of

Los Angeles County; on October 20,

1997, inspectors found one male

Mexican fruit fly in the same area; and,

on October 22, 1997, inspectors detected

larvae in the same area as the adult

finds, indicating that an infestation

exists. The Mexican fruit fly is not

known to occur anywhere else in the

continental United States except parts of

Texas.

Accordingly, to prevent the spread of

the Mexican fruit fly to other States, we

are amending the regulations in

§ 301.64(a) by designating California as

a quarantined State and in § 301.64–3(c)

by designating as a regulated area a

portion of Los Angeles County, CA. The

regulated area is described in the rule

portion of this document.

There does not appear to be any

reason to designate any other portions of

the quarantined State of California as a

regulated area. Officials of State

agencies of California have begun an

intensive Mexican fruit fly eradication

program in the regulated area in

California. Also, California has adopted

and is enforcing regulations imposing

restrictions on the intrastate movement

of certain articles from the regulated

area that are substantially the same as
61214 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 221 / Monday, November 17, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

those imposed with respect to the

interstate movement of regulated

articles.

Emergency Action

The Administrator of the Animal and

Plant Health Inspection Service has

determined that an emergency exists

that warrants publication of this interim

rule without prior opportunity for

public comment. Immediate action is

necessary to prevent the Mexican fruit

fly from spreading to noninfested areas

of the United States.

Because prior notice and other public

procedures with respect to this action

are impracticable and contrary to the

public interest under these conditions,

we find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553

to make the rule effective upon

signature. We will consider comments

that are received within 60 days of

publication of this rule in the Federal

Register. After the comment period

closes, we will publish another

document in the Federal Register. It

will include a discussion of any

comments we receive and any

amendments we are making to the rule

as a result of the comments.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12866. For this action,

the Office of Management and Budget

has waived its review process required

by Executive Order 12866.

This rule restricts the interstate

movement of regulated articles from a

portion of Los Angeles County, CA.

Within the regulated area there are

approximately 804 small entities that

may be affected by this rule. These

include 1 farmers’ market, 2 community

gardens, 298 distributors, 1 food bank,

440 fruit sellers, 5 growers, 4 haulers, 27

nurseries, 11 packers, 7 processors, 1

swap meet, and 7 transient load carriers.

These 804 entities comprise less than 1

percent of the total number of similar

entities operating in the State of

California. Additionally, these small

entities sell regulated articles primarily

for local intrastate, not interstate

movement, so the effect, if any, of this

regulation on these entities appears to

be minimal.

The effect on those few entities that

do move regulated articles interstate

will be minimized by the availability of

various treatments, that, in most cases,

will allow these small entities to move

regulated articles interstate with very

little additional cost.

Under these circumstances, the

Administrator of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12372

This program/activity is listed in the

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

under No. 10.025 and is subject to

Executive Order 12372, which requires

intergovernmental consultation with

State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part

3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12988

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State

and local laws and regulations that are

inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no

retroactive effect; and (3) does not

require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court

challenging this rule.

National Environmental Policy Act

An environmental assessment and

finding of no significant impact have

been prepared for the Mexican fruit fly

program. The assessment provides a

basis for the conclusion that the

methods employed to eradicate the

Mexican fruit fly will not present a risk

of introducing or disseminating plant

pests and will not have a significant

impact on the quality of the human

environment. Based on the finding of no

significant impact, the Administrator of

the Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service has determined that an

environmental impact statement need

not be prepared.

The environmental assessment and

finding of no significant impact were

prepared in accordance with: (1) The

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (NEPA) (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).

Copies of the environmental

assessment and finding of no significant

impact are 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) 690–2817 to

facilitate entry into the reading room. In

addition, copies may be obtained by

writing to the individual listed under

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule contains no information

collection or recordkeeping

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301

Agricultural commodities,

Incorporation by reference, Plant

diseases and pests, Quarantine,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Transportation.

Accordingly, 7 CFR part 301 is

amended as follows:

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE

NOTICES

1. The authority citation for part 301

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150bb, 150dd, 150ee,

150ff, 161, 162, and 164–167; 7 CFR 2.22,

2.80, and 371.2(c).

§ 301.64 [Amended]

2. In § 301.64, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the phrase ‘‘the

State of Texas’’ and adding ‘‘the States

of California and Texas’’ in its place.

3. In § 301.64–3, paragraph (c) is

amended by adding in alphabetical

order an entry for ‘‘California’’ to read

as follows:

§ 301.64–3 Regulated areas.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

California

Los Angeles County. That portion of Los

Angeles County in the Boyle Heights area

bounded by a line drawn as follows:

Beginning at the intersection of Interstate

Highway 101 and Alvarado Street; then

northeast along Alvarado Street to Sunset

Boulevard; then southeast along Sunset

Boulevard to Echo Park Avenue; then

northeast along Echo Park Avenue to Morton

Avenue; then northeast along Morton Avenue

to Morton Place; then southeast along Morton

Place to Academy Road; then east along

Academy Road to State Highway 110; then

northeast along State Highway 110 to Via

Marisol Avenue; then east along Via Marisol

Avenue to Monterey Road; then south along

Monterey Road to Huntington Drive; then

northeast along Huntington Drive to Poplar

Boulevard; then east along Poplar Boulevard

to Fremont Avenue; then south along

Fremont Avenue to Interstate Highway 10;

then east along Interstate Highway 10 to

Atlantic Boulevard; then south along Atlantic

Boulevard to Newmark Avenue; then east

along Newmark Avenue to Garfield Avenue;

then south along Garfield Avenue to Slauson

Avenue; then west along Slauson Avenue to

Eastern Avenue; then south along Eastern

Avenue to Gage Avenue; then west along

Gage Avenue to Interstate Highway 710; then

south along Interstate Highway 710 to

Florence Avenue; then west along Florence

Avenue to Central Avenue; then north along
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 221 / Monday, November 17, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61215

Central Avenue to Slauson Avenue; then

west along Slauson Avenue to Interstate

Highway 110; then north along Interstate

Highway 110 to Jefferson Boulevard; then

northwest along Jefferson Boulevard to

Hoover Street; then north along Hoover Street

to Alvarado Street; then northeast along

Alvarado Street to the point of beginning.

* * * * *

Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of

November 1997.

Terry L. Medley,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97–30106 Filed 11–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation

Service

7 CFR Part 650

Protection of Wetlands

AGENCY: Natural Resources

Conservation Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Government

Performance Results Act, the Natural

Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)

is removing obsolete, unnecessary, or

redundant regulations from the Code of

Federal Regulations. This action

removes the regulations found at 7 CFR

650.26 concerning the NRCS wetland

technical assistance policy.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 17, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Warren M. Lee (202) 720–3534.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866

This document does not meet the

criteria for a significant regulatory

action as specified in E.O. 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

It has been determined that the

Regulatory Flexibility Act is not

applicable to this rule because NRCS is

not required by 5 U.S.C. 553 or any

other provision of law to publish a

notice of proposed rule making with

respect to the subject matter of this rule.

Environmental Evaluation

This final rule will have no significant

effect on the human environment and is

categorically exempt under 7 CFR

1b.3(a)(6), therefore neither an

environmental assessment nor an

environmental impact statement is

required.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain reporting

or record keeping requirements subject

to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Background

Pursuant to the Administration effort

to review existing agency regulations

and remove unnecessary regulations

from the Code of Federal Regulations,

the NRCS has determined that the

regulation found at 7 CFR part 650.26,

‘‘Protection of Wetlands,’’ is

unnecessary because the regulation

addresses a matter of internal agency

policy, does not regulate any member of

the public, conflicts with agency

implementation of the wetland

conservation provisions of the Food

Security Act of 1985, as amended, 16

U.S.C. 3801 et seq., and utilizes a

superseded classification of wetlands.

Executive Order 11990

Wetlands provide fish and wildlife

habitats, maintain ground water

supplies and water quality, protect

shorelines from erosion, store

floodwaters and trap sediments, and

provide recreational and educational

opportunities. Historically, wetlands

have been converted at a rapid rate with

the concomitant loss of the functions

and values that they provide to the

Nation. In some cases, activities of the

Federal government contributed to the

loss of the Nation’s wetlands. To

minimize adverse impacts on wetlands

resulting from Federally-sponsored

activities, President Carter in 1977

issued an Executive Order to protect

wetlands. Executive Order 11990

established the policy that, to the extent

authorized by law, the Executive Branch

would avoid direct or indirect support

of new construction in wetlands

wherever there exists a practicable

alternative.

Pursuant to the Soil Conservation and

Domestic Allotment Act of 1935, 16

U.S.C. 590a et seq., the Soil

Conservation Service (SCS) of the

United States Department of Agriculture

provided technical assistance to

landowners for the protection of natural

resources on private lands. Technical

assistance included the personnel and

support resources needed to conduct

planning and conservation practice

survey, layout, design, installation and

certification. Among activities

conducted prior to 1977, SCS provided

technical assistance related to the

construction of drainage ditches and

other structures that resulted in the

conversion of wetlands.

Section 6 of Executive Order 11990

requires agencies to issue or amend

their existing procedures to comply

with the policies of the order, and

accordingly, SCS revised its policy

regarding technical assistance in 1977.

These changes restricted the situations

in which SCS employees could provide

technical assistance to clients related to

new construction in wetlands. In 1979,

SCS codified the wetland technical

assistance policy at 7 CFR 650.26. SCS

modified this regulation in 1982 to

enable SCS employees to provide

assistance for new construction in

wetlands when denial of such assistance

would lead to ‘‘detrimental

consequences on soil and water

resources or on human welfare and

safety.’’ 47 FR 34111 (August 6, 1982).

Since 1982, SCS updated its technical

assistance policy several times, but such

updates did not require amendments to

the regulation at 7 CFR 650.26. Pursuant

to Departmental reorganization in 1994,

SCS was abolished and the Natural

Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)

assumed most of the statutory and

regulatory responsibilities of the SCS,

including the provision of technical

assistance on private lands.

The Conflict With the Wetland

Conservation Provisions

The wetland conservation provisions

of the Food Security Act of 1985 (the

1985 Act), as amended, 16 U.S.C. 3801

et seq., encourage participants in United

States Department of Agriculture

(USDA) programs to adopt land

management measures that protect

wetland functions and values by linking

eligibility for USDA program benefits to

farming practices on converted

wetlands. In particular, the wetland

conservation (WC) provisions of the

1985 Act provide that after December

23, 1985, a program participant is

ineligible for certain USDA program

benefits for the production of an

agricultural commodity on a converted

wetland, or after November 28, 1990, for

the conversion of a wetland that makes

the production of an agricultural

commodity possible. The 1985 Act,

however, affords relief to program

participants who meet certain

conditions identified under the 1985

Act by exempting such actions from the

ineligibility provisions.

The current version of the wetland

technical assistance rule, 7 CFR 650.26,

allows NRCS to provide technical

assistance to a producer that could place

the producer in violation of the WC

provisions. In particular, the rule allows

NRCS personnel to provide technical

assistance for certain construction in

types 1 and 2 wetlands under the

Circular 39 classification of wetlands.

The wetland classification system in