9028 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

[Docket No. APHIS–2010–0086] 

Notice of Availability of a Swine 

Brucellosis and Pseudorabies 

Proposed Action Plan 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of availability and 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We are making a proposed 

action plan describing a potential new 

approach to managing swine brucellosis 

and pseudorabies available for public 

review and comment. Swine brucellosis 

and pseudorabies have been eliminated 

from commercial swine herds within 

the United States, but potential sources 

of introduction of these diseases exist 

and we believe program modifications 

are necessary to address these risks. The 

proposed action plan presents our 

current thinking about the program 

modifications that we are considering. 

DATES: We will consider all comments 

that we receive on or before April 8, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by either of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!documentDetail;D=APHIS–2010– 

0086–0001. 

• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: 

Send your comment to Docket No. 

APHIS–2010–0086, 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–2010–0086 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: Dr. 

Troy Bigelow, National Center for 

Animal Health Programs, VS, APHIS, 

Federal Building Room 891, 210 Walnut 

Street, Des Moines, IA 50309; (515) 284– 

4121. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Brucellosis is a contagious disease, 

caused by bacteria of the genus Brucella, 

that affects both animals and humans. 

The disease mainly affects cattle, bison, 

and swine. Swine brucellosis, caused by 

Brucella suis, causes loss of young 

through spontaneous abortion or birth of 

weak offspring, reduced lactation, and 

infertility. There is no economically 

feasible treatment for brucellosis in 

swine and other livestock. In humans, 

brucellosis initially causes flu-like 

symptoms, but the disease may develop 

into a variety of chronic conditions, 

including arthritis. Humans can be 

treated for brucellosis with antibiotics. 

Pseudorabies is a contagious, 

communicable disease of livestock, 

primarily swine, and other animals. The 

disease, also known as Aujeszky’s 

disease, is caused by a herpes virus. The 

disease does not affect humans, and, for 

livestock, several pseudorabies vaccines 

exist. 

The regulations contained in 9 CFR 

part 78 (referred to below as the swine 

brucellosis regulations) provide, among 

other things, conditions under which 

swine may be considered reactors for or 

exposed to swine brucellosis, and 

conditions under which the Animal and 

Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) 

would validate a herd or State as free of 

the disease. The swine brucellosis 

regulations also specify requirements for 

the interstate movement of breeding 

swine. These requirements are 

predicated on whether the swine 

originate from a herd or a State 

validated by APHIS as free of swine 

brucellosis, and, if not, whether the 

swine are brucellosis reactors or 

brucellosis exposed. 

The regulations in 9 CFR part 85 

(referred to below as the pseudorabies 

regulations) provide, among other 

things, conditions under which swine 

may be considered infected with or 

exposed to pseudorabies. The 

pseudorabies regulations also contain 

requirements for the interstate 

movement of swine that are known to be 

infected with or exposed to 

pseudorabies, requirements for the 

interstate movement of swine 

vaccinated for pseudorabies but not 

known to be infected with or exposed to 

the disease, and requirements for the 

interstate movement of all other swine. 

The regulations presuppose widespread 

testing of commercial swine for 

pseudorabies. 

The swine brucellosis and 

pseudorabies regulations are intended to 

prevent the spread of swine brucellosis 

and pseudorabies through the interstate 

movement of diseased or exposed swine 

or through their contact with unaffected 

swine during or following movement 

from their premises of origin. APHIS 

established the swine brucellosis and 

pseudorabies regulations when the 

diseases were prevalent in the 

commercial swine herd within the 

United States. 

This is no longer the case; both swine 

brucellosis and pseudorabies have been 

eliminated from commercial herds 

within the United States. As a result, in 

recent years, our swine brucellosis and 

pseudorabies program activities have 

placed an increased emphasis on 

monitoring the risk that these diseases 

will be introduced into swine herds. 

These monitoring activities have 

identified feral swine as reservoirs of 

the two diseases. In recent years, APHIS 

has identified several swine herds 

throughout the United States that were 

infected with swine brucellosis or 

pseudorabies. In each case, it was 

determined that the swine became 

infected through contact with feral 

swine at their premises. 

Feral swine populations are known to 

exist in at least 38 States. While the 

exact distribution and density of each 

population is unknown, the populations 

are believed to be growing. In each State 

in which feral swine are known to exist, 

APHIS considers the commercial swine 

within the State at risk of becoming 

exposed to or infected with swine 

brucellosis or pseudorabies. APHIS 

considers States or Tribes that border or 

obtain swine from States with feral 

swine populations to face similar, but 

lower, risks. The current swine 

brucellosis and pseudorabies 

regulations do not account for these 

risks. 

Accordingly, in this document, 

APHIS announces the availability of a 

proposed action plan for a new 

approach for the swine brucellosis and 

pseudorabies programs. The proposal, 

titled ‘‘A New Approach for Managing 

Swine Brucellosis and Swine 

Pseudorabies Virus: Veterinary Services’ 

Proposed Action Plan,’’ may be viewed 

on the Regulations.gov Web site or in 

our reading room. (A link to 

Regulations.gov and information on the 

location and hours of the reading room 

are provided under the heading 

ADDRESSES at the beginning of this 

notice.) In addition, copies may be 

obtained by calling or writing to the 

individual listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. The proposed 

action plan is also available on APHIS’ 

Web site, at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ 

animal_health/animal_dis_spec/swine/. 

While commenters are invited to 

address any aspects of the plan in their 

comments, we specifically request 

comment regarding the following topics: 

• Risk. The new approach outlined in 

the plan considers feral swine to be 

reservoirs of swine brucellosis and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices 9029 

pseudorabies and to present a 

significant risk of introducing the 

diseases into commercial swine 

populations. Does the plan accurately 

present the risk that feral swine pose of 

transmitting these diseases? Are there 

other significant potential sources of 

introduction that APHIS should 

consider? 

• Responsibility. The plan outlines an 

approach in which States and Tribes 

would play a significant role in 

identifying and monitoring possible 

sources of introduction of pseudorabies 

or swine brucellosis into the 

commercial swine herd in their State or 

Tribe, with the ultimate goals of quickly 

identifying and responding to outbreaks 

and thereby preventing the spread of 

swine brucellosis or pseudorabies 

through the interstate movement of 

commercial swine. What role should a 

State or Tribe have for ensuring that 

swine moved from the State or Tribe do 

not spread these diseases? What role lies 

with APHIS, or with the commercial 

swine industry? 

• Swine Health Plan. Would the 

Swine Health Plan concept described in 

the action plan be sufficient to prevent 

the spread of swine brucellosis and 

pseudorabies through the interstate 

movement of diseased swine? If the plan 

concept would be sufficient, do States 

and Tribes currently have sufficient 

personnel and resources to draft and 

implement such a plan? How long is it 

likely to take a State or Tribe to draft 

such a plan and arrange resources as 

specified in their plan? 

• Program consolidation. The action 

plan considers consolidating the swine 

brucellosis and pseudorabies programs, 

and the regulations pertaining to these 

programs, into one domestic swine 

health program. Does such a 

consolidation make sense? If not, how 

would the two regulatory programs need 

to differ? 

• Indemnity. The plan considers 

consolidating the existing regulations 

governing indemnity paid for swine 

destroyed because they are known to be 

infected with swine brucellosis with 

those governing indemnity paid for 

swine destroyed because they are 

known to be infected with pseudorabies, 

as well as streamlining certain 

provisions of the regulations. Does such 

a consolidation make sense? 

We will consider all comments that 

we receive as we continue to explore 

potential new approaches to managing 

swine brucellosis and pseudorabies. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 4th day of 

February 2013. 

Kevin Shea, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–02772 Filed 2–6–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests; 

ID; Clear Creek Integrated Restoration 

Project 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: This is a corrected notice. 

This notice updates information about 

proposed actions in the Clear Creek 

Integrated Restoration Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). 

The DEIS will include two site-specific, 

nonsignificant amendments of the Nez 

Perce Forest Plan (1987). The proposed 

amendments would clarify the Forest’s 

interpretation of old growth standards 

found in the Nez Perce Forest Plan, and 

would adopt the Regional soils standard 

for the Clear Creek Integrated 

Restoration project area. The original 

notice was published in the Federal 

Register on January 6, 2012, pages 775 

and 776. The Forest Service gives notice 

of its intent to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement for the 

Clear Creek Integrated Restoration 

Project. The Proposed action would use 

a combination of timber harvest, precommercial thinning, prescribed fire 

and reforestation to achieve the desired 

range of age classes, size classes, 

vegetative species distributions, habitat 

complexity (diversity) and landscape 

patterns across the forested portions of 

the project area. Road decommissioning, 

culvert replacements and road 

improvements are also proposed to 

improve watershed health. The EIS will 

analyze the effects of the proposed 

action and alternatives. The Nez PerceClearwater Forest invites comments and 

suggestions on the issues to be 

addressed. The agency gives notice of 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) analysis and decision making 

process on the proposal so interested 

and affected members of the public may 

participate and contribute to the final 

decision. 

DATES: The Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement is expected in March 2013, 

and will be followed by a 45-day public 

comment period. The Final 

Environmental Impact Statement is 

expected in November 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Send written or electronic 

comments to Lois Hill, Interdisciplinary 

Team Leader; Kamiah Ranger Station; 

903 3rd Street; Kamiah, ID 83536; FAX 

208–935–4257; Email commentsnorthern-nezperce-moosecreek@fs.fed.us. Include your name, 

address, organization represented (if 

any), and the name of the project for 

which you are submitting comments. 

Electronic comments will be accepted in 

MS Word, Word Perfect, or Rich Text 

formats. Comments received in response 

to this solicitation, including names and 

addresses of those who comment, will 

be part of the public record for this 

proposed action. Comments submitted 

anonymously will be accepted and 

considered; however, anonymous 

comments will not provide the Agency 

with the ability to provide the 

respondent with subsequent 

environmental documents. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois 

Hill, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, 

(208) 935–4258. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

objective of the Clear Creek Integrated 

Restoration Project is to manage forest 

vegetation to restore natural disturbance 

patterns; improve long term resistance 

and resilience at the landscape level; 

reduce fuels; improve watershed 

conditions; improve elk habitat 

effectiveness; improve habitat for early 

seral species; and maintain habitat 

structure, function, and diversity. 

Timber outputs from the proposed 

action would be used to offset treatment 

costs and support the economic 

structure of local communities and 

provide for regional and national needs. 

Purpose and Need for the Proposal 

Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat 

Improvement 

Purpose: Trend vegetation species 

composition, structure, and 

distributions toward desired conditions 

described in the Forest Plan. 

Need: There is a need to change tree 

species composition by retaining and 

planting early seral species, such as 

ponderosa pine, western larch and 

western white pine. The project area has 

a high proportion of grand fir/Douglas 

fir habitat. These habitats tend to be 

more susceptible to insects and 

diseases. Grand fir is unlikely to survive 

a wildfire. There is a need to trend the 

area toward a more diverse and resilient 

forest structure by creating a range of 

age classes, size classes, habitat 

complexity (diversity) and disturbance 

patterns that more closely emulate 

natural mixed severity disturbance. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES