This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency statements of organization and functions are examples of documents appearing in this section. 

# Notices Federal Register 

### 56730

Vol. 76, No. 178

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

1 A list of pest-free-areas currently recognized by APHIS can be found at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ import

_ export/plants/manuals/ports/downloads/ DesignatedPestFreeAreas.pdf. **DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service** 

**[Docket No. APHIS–2011–0088]**

**Determination of Pest-Free Areas in Australia; Request for Comments** 

**AGENCY :**  Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  We are advising the public that we have received a request from the Government of Australia to recognize additional areas as pest-free areas for Mediterranean fruit fly ( Ceratitis capitata ) or Queensland fruit fly (Bactrocera tryoni). After reviewing the documentation submitted in support of this request, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that these areas meet the criteria in our regulations for recognition as pest-free areas. We are making that determination, as well as an evaluation document we have prepared in connection with this action, available for review and comment.

**DATES :**  We will consider all comments that we receive on or before November 14, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ #!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0088-
0001.

• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS–2011–0088, 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-2011-0088 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) 690–2817 before coming.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ms. Meredith C. Jones, Regulatory Coordination Specialist, Regulatory Coordination and Compliance, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 156, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 734–7467.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Under the regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables’’ (7 CFR 319.56–1 through 319.56–51, referred to below as the regulations), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture prohibits or restricts the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world to prevent plant pests from being introduced into and spread within the United States.

Section 319.56–4 of the regulations contains a performance-based process for approving the importation of commodities that, based on the findings of a pest risk analysis, can be safely imported subject to one or more of the designated phytosanitary measures listed in paragraph (b) of that section. One of the designated phytosanitary measures is that the fruits or vegetables are imported from a pest-free area 1 in the country of origin that meets the requirements of § 319.56–5 for freedom from that pest and are accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate stating that the fruits or vegetables originated in a pest-free area in the country of origin.

Under the regulations in § 319.56–5, APHIS requires that determinations of pest-free areas be made in accordance with the criteria for establishing freedom from pests found in International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No. 4, ‘‘Requirements For the Establishment of Pest Free Areas.’’ The international standard was established by the International Plant Protection Convention of the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization and is incorporated by reference in our regulations in 7 CFR 300.5. In addition, APHIS must also approve the survey protocol used to determine and maintain pest-free status, as well as protocols for actions to be performed upon detection of a pest. Pest-free areas are subject to audit by APHIS to verify their status.

APHIS has received a request from the Government of Australia to recognize new areas of that country as being free of Ceratitis capitata, the Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly), and to recognize other areas of the country as being free of Bactrocera tryoni, the Queensland fruit fly. Specifically, the Government of Australia asked that we recognize the States of New South Wales, Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, and Victoria as free of Medfly and the State of Western Australia as free of Queensland fruit fly.

Each proposed pest-free area is free of one of the fruit flies, but may have the other fruit fly, so fruit from these areas of Australia would still require a quarantine treatment. However the treatments required are different for each fly, are less stringent than the treatments for both flies, and therefore are less damaging to the commodity.

In accordance with our regulations and the criteria set out in ISPM No. 4, we have reviewed and approved the survey protocols and other information provided by Australia relative to its system to establish freedom, phytosanitary measures to maintain freedom, and system for the verification of the maintenance of freedom. Because this action concerns the expansion of a currently recognized pest-free area in Australia from which fruits and vegetables are authorized for importation into the United States, our review of the information presented by Australia in support of its request is examined in a commodity import evaluation document (CIED) titled ‘‘Recognition of Additional States asMedfly and Queensland fruit fly PestFree Areas (PFA) for Australia.’’

The CIED may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site or in our reading room (see **ADDRESSES** above for instructions for accessing Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the reading room). You may request paper copies of the CIED by calling or writing to the person listed under **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION**
**CONTACT**

.


### 56731 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2011 / Notices

1 To view the notice, EA, risk assessments, the comments we received, and the FONSI, go to http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS–
2011–0089. Therefore, in accordance with § 319.56–5(c), we are announcing the Administrator’s determination that the States of New South Wales, Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, and Victoria meet the criteria of § 319.56–5(a) and (b) with respect to freedom from Medfly and the State of Western Australia meets the criteria of § 319.56–5(a) and (b) with respect to freedom from Queensland fruit fly. After reviewing the comments we receive on this notice, we will announce our decision regarding the status of these areas with respect to their freedom from Medfly and Queensland fruit fly. If the Administrator’s determination remains unchanged, we will amend the list of pest-free areas to list the States of New South Wales, Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, and Victoria as free of Medfly and the State of Western Australia as free of Queensland fruit fly.

Done in Washington, DC, this 7th day of September 2011. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–23431 Filed 9–13–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–34–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service** 

**[Docket No. APHIS–2011–0089]**

**Oral Rabies Vaccine Trial; Availability of an Environmental Assessment and**  **Finding of No Significant Impact**

**AGENCY :**  Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  We are advising the public that an environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact have been prepared by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service relative to an oral rabies vaccination field trial in West Virginia. Based on its finding of no significant impact, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that an environmental impact statement need not be prepared.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Dr. Dennis Slate, Rabies Program Coordinator, Wildlife Services, APHIS, 59 Chennell Drive, Suite 7, Concord, NH 03301; (603) 223–9623. To obtain copies of the environmental assessment or finding of no significant impact, contact Ms. Beth Kabert, Environmental Coordinator, Wildlife Services, 140–C Locust Grove Road, Pittstown, NJ 08867; (908) 735–5654, fax (908) 735–0821, or e-mail beth.e.kabert@aphis.usda.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Background

The Wildlife Services (WS) program in the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) cooperates with Federal agencies, State and local governments, and private individuals to research and implement the best methods of managing conflicts between wildlife and human health and safety, agriculture, property, and natural resources. Wildlife-borne diseases that can affect domestic animals and humans are among the types of conflicts that APHIS–WS addresses. Wildlife is the dominant reservoir of rabies in the United States.

On August 8, 2011, we published in the Federal Register (76 FR 48119– 48120, Docket No. APHIS–2011–0089) a notice 1 in which we announced the availability, for public review and comment, of an environmental assessment (EA) that examined the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed field trial to test the safety and efficacy of an experimental oral rabies vaccine for wildlife in West Virginia.

We solicited comments on the EA for 30 days ending September 7, 2011. We received 13 comments by that date. They were from private citizens and representatives of public health, agriculture, and natural resources agencies in the United States and Canada. Nine of the commenters fully supported the proposed field trial. The remaining commenters presented specific questions or suggestions regarding the field trial or the experimental vaccine. All the comments, and APHIS’ responses to those comments, are presented in an appendix to the EA (see footnote 1).

In this document, we are advising the public of our finding of no significant impact (FONSI) regarding the implementation of a field trial to test the safety and efficacy of the AdRG1.3 wildlife rabies vaccine in Greenbrier, Summers, and Monroe Counties, WV, including portions of U.S. Forest Service National Forest System lands, but excluding Wilderness Areas. The finding, which is based on the EA, reflects our determination that the distribution of this experimental wildlife rabies vaccine will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. The EA and FONSI may be viewed on the APHIS Web site at http://www. aphis.usda.gov/regulations/ws/ws

_ nepa

_ environmental

_ documents.shtml and on the Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 1). Copies of the EA and FONSI are also 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 as described under **FOR FURTHER**
**INFORMATION CONTACT**

**.**

The EA and FONSI have been prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq. ), (2) regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3) USDA regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).

Done in Washington, DC, this 8th day of September 2011. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–23587 Filed 9–13–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–34–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Forest Service**

**Fremont and Winema Resource Advisory Committee** 

**AGENCY :**  Forest Service, USDA.

**ACTION :**  Notice of meeting/field tour.

**SUMMARY :**  The Fremont and Winema Resource Advisory Committee will meet in Bly, Oregon and travel to various project sites along the North Fork of the Sprague River, for the purpose of monitoring and viewing active and completed Title II watershed restoration projects. The committee operates in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, under the provisions of Title II of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (Pub. L. 110–343) of 2000 (reauthorized in 2008).

**DATES :**  The tour will be held on Oct 6, 2011 9 a.m.–14 p.m.

**ADDRESS :**  The tour will commence from Bly, OR onto the Fremont-Winema Forest and along the North Fork of the Sprague River including a private ranch.