Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 102 / Thursday, May 26, 2011 / Notices 30639 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Credit Corporation 

Farm Service Agency 

Final Environmental Assessment and 

Mitigated Finding of No Significant 

Impact; Giant Miscanthus in Arkansas, 

Missouri, Ohio, and Pennsylvania 

AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation 

and Farm Service Agency, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice; Mitigated Finding of No 

Significant Impact. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

final environmental assessment (EA) 

that includes a mitigated finding of no 

significant impact (FONSI) for the 

proposed establishment and production 

of giant miscanthus (Miscanthus X 

giganteus) as a dedicated energy crop to 

be grown in the Aloterra Energy and 

MFA Oil Biomass Company (project 

sponsors) proposed project areas in 

Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and 

Pennsylvania as part of the Biomass 

Crop Assistance Program (BCAP). Based 

on comments received on the draft and 

in consultation with NRCS and ARS, 

FSA developed and included a finalized 

mitigation and monitoring plan as a part 

of the final EA. 

ADDRESSES: For a copy of mitigated 

FONSI, which is in the final EA, by any 

following methods: 

• Through the FSA home page at 

http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/ 

webapp?area=home&subject=

ecrc&topic=nep-cd; 

• E-mail: rschneider@intenvsol.com, 

with the following subject line: ‘‘Request 

for copy FONSI and final Giant 

Miscanthus EA’’; 

• Write to: Giant Miscanthus EA 

Copies, Integrated Environmental 

Solutions, LLC, 2150 S Central Expy, 

Ste 110, McKinney, TX 75070. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew Ponish, (202) 720–6853. 

Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication 

(braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) 

should contact the USDA Target Center 

at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Aloterra Energy and MFA Oil 

Biomass Company submitted a proposal 

to the Farm Service Agency (FSA) to 

establish BCAP project areas in 

Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and 

Pennsylvania. The proposal is to 

establish and produce giant miscanthus 

as a dedicated energy crop. FSA 

analyzed the potential environmental 

impacts of growing giant miscanthus in 

those areas in the final EA. FSA 

reviewed and considered all comments 

submitted on the draft EA in response 

to the notice published in the Federal 

Register on April 8, 2011 (76 FR 19741) 

and used additional inputs from the 

Natural Resources Conservation Service 

(NRCS) and the Agricultural Research 

Service (ARS) in developing the final 

EA and the mitigation and monitoring 

plan as described in this notice. In the 

final EA, FSA has issued a mitigated 

FONSI on the proposal. 

The final EA and mitigation and 

monitoring plan for the proposed BCAP 

project areas supporting the 

establishment and production of Giant 

Miscanthus (Miscanthus X giganteus) in 

Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and 

Pennsylvania sponsored by Aloterra 

Energy LLC and MFA Oil Biomass LLC 

is now available. 

Comments Received 

FSA received 54 comments on the 

draft EA from Federal agencies, State 

agencies, non-governmental 

organizations, and individuals. Of those 

comments, 37 commenters supported 

the proposal and 10 were against the 

proposal. In the comments, 280 issues 

were raised concerning many resource 

topics, National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) requirements, and BCAP 

issues. Multiple commenters included 

air quality; biodiversity; invasiveness; 

land use changes; long-term monitoring 

and mitigation; mitigation measures; 

pests and diseases; seed sterility; 

species of concern and State-listed 

protected species; water quality; and 

water use. The comments were 

addressed and are included as an 

appendix to the Final EA. 

The comments, as well as 

consultation with NRCS and ARS, 

provided the basis for the mitigation 

measures and monitoring activities that 

will occur within each project area. 

More site-specific measures, which may 

be more stringent than the overall 

project area measures, depending upon 

the individual contract acreage and the 

project area, will be identified during 

the development of the individual 

producer’s conservation plan, 

developed with the assistance of a 

qualified technical service provider. 

The Record of Decision for the Final 

BCAP Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement published in the 

Federal Register on October 27, 2010 

(75 FR 65995–66007) is incorporated by 

reference in the EA. FSA considered the 

conditions specified in the record of 

decision and comments to the draft EA, 

as a result, FSA determined that it 

should do an EA to make a 

determination about whether there 

could be significant environmental 

impacts. The findings of the Final EA 

and mitigation and monitoring plan are 

summarized below. 

Decision 

FSA, on behalf of the Commodity 

Credit Corporation (CCC), has prepared 

an EA to evaluate the environmental 

consequences associated with 

establishing BCAP project areas that 

support the establishment and 

production of giant miscanthus 

(Miscanthus X giganteus) on 50,000 

acres per proposed project area (200,000 

acres total) by 2014. BCAP is a program 

authorized by the Food, Conservation, 

and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110– 

246, commonly referred to as the 2008 

Farm Bill) that provides financial 

assistance to contract producers in 

approved project areas for the 

establishment and production of 

perennial bioenergy crops and annual 

bioenergy crops that show exceptional 

promise for producing bioenergy or 

biofuels that preserve natural resources 

and that are not primarily grown for 

food or animal feed. 

The purpose of the Proposed Action 

is to support the establishment and 

production of giant miscanthus as a 

crop for energy production to be grown 

by BCAP participants in the project 

areas proposed in Arkansas, Missouri, 

Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The need for 

the Proposed Action is to provide 

renewable biomass feedstock to a 

Biomass Conversion Facility (BCF) for 

use in energy production with and 

potentially outside the immediate 

region(s). 

Proposed Action 

Aloterra Energy LLC and MFA Oil 

Biomass LLC (project sponsors) are 

proposing that FSA establishes BCAP 

project areas that support the 

establishment and production of giant 

miscanthus on 50,000 acres per 

proposed project area (200,000 total 

acres) by 2014, with crop longevity of 20 

to 30 years. The acreage projected to be 

enrolled within the proposed project 

areas are marginal croplands and 

pastureland. 

The proposed project areas are located 

in four States in four distinct proposed 

project areas. Missouri contains two 

proposed project areas: Columbia and 

Aurora. Arkansas contains one proposed 

project area: Paragould. Ohio and 

Pennsylvania contain the final proposed 

project area: Ashtabula. Each proposed 

project area is named for the 

approximate location of the BCF that 

will be used to process the giant 

miscanthus biomass into pellets to be 

shipped to other location. Each 

proposed project area was developed at 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

30640 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 102 / Thursday, May 26, 2011 / Notices 

an approximate 50-mile radius from the 

approximate BCAP location in that area. 

The establishment and production of 

giant miscanthus would begin with 

centralized propagation acres on each 

farm, which would be distributed to 

plantation acres during the next growing 

season. During the 2011 planting 

season, the initial establishment would 

require a centralized location within 

each proposed project area with centerpivot irrigation due to the timing of 

planting and current climatic conditions 

occurring during the growing season. 

The centralized propagation area for the 

entire proposed project area would only 

occur for the 2011 planting season; all 

other planting seasons would follow the 

on-farm model with the initial 

establishment of propagation acres, 

followed by plantation acres the 

following growing season. 

Equipment to be used to establish 

giant miscanthus would be modified 

equipment from existing perennial grass 

industries. Equipment used to harvest 

and bale giant miscanthus would be 

similar to existing types of agricultural 

machinery used for hay crops; however, 

they would need to be more heavy-duty 

due to the increased biomass amounts 

being harvested and baled. 

Reasons for Mitigated Finding of No 

Significant Impact 

In consideration of the analysis 

documented in the EA and the reasons 

outlined in the FONSI, the Proposed 

Action would not constitute a major 

Federal action that would significantly 

affect the human environment. 

Therefore, an environmental impact 

statement (EIS) will not be prepared. 

The determination is based on the 

following: 

1. The Proposed Action as outlined in 

the EA would provide minor beneficial 

effects to socioeconomics, soil 

resources, and water quality and 

quantity of the local areas due to 

diversified agricultural production, 

establishment of perennial vegetation on 

highly erodible soils, and estimated 

higher water use efficiency of the 

species to be established. 

2. The Proposed Action could result 

in minor negative effects from land use 

changes associated with marginal and 

idle croplands and pasturelands 

returning to agricultural production; 

vegetation composition on pasturelands, 

which in turn could alter wildlife 

habitat, and water quantity due to 

increased water use of the species when 

compared to annual species, such as 

traditional row crops. The potential 

negative effects would be minimized 

through the use of the mitigation and 

monitoring plan, described below and 

in the EA. 

3. The Proposed Action would require 

site specific environmental screening for 

each producer contract initiated with 

FSA for inclusion as a producer within 

the proposed project areas. The 

environmental screening would identify 

either the field level resources that 

would be needed to be avoided or the 

effects could be minimized through 

mitigation efforts as described in the 

EA. 

4. The potential beneficial and 

adverse impacts of implementing the 

Proposed Action have been fully 

considered within the EA. No 

significant adverse direct or indirect 

effects were identified, based on the 

resource analyses provided. 

5. The Proposed Action would not 

involve effects to the quality of the 

human environment that are likely to be 

highly controversial. 

6. The Proposed Action would not 

establish a precedent for future actions 

with significant effects and does not 

represent a decision in principle about 

a future consideration. 

7. The Proposed Action does not 

result in cumulative significant impacts 

when considered with other actions that 

also individually have insignificant 

impacts. Cumulative impacts of 

implementing the Proposed Action were 

determined to be not significant. 

8. The Proposed Action would not 

have adverse effects on threatened or 

endangered species or designated 

critical habitat since site specific 

analyses would be undertaken for each 

producer contract within each proposed 

BCAP project area to avoid adverse 

effects to the protected species. 

9. The Proposed Action does not 

threaten a violation of Federal, State, or 

local law or requirements imposed for 

the protection of the environment. 

Overview of the Mitigation and 

Monitoring Plan 

To avoid more than minor adverse 

effects to the human and natural 

environment, a mitigation and 

monitoring plan was developed to 

address each of the resource areas 

analyzed in detail within the EA. One 

of the primary components of the 

mitigation and monitoring plan is 

producer education. The education 

component, to be held twice annually 

for active producers with an orientation 

program for new producers, outlines 

best practice standards across an array 

of resource areas and topics to ensure 

effective establishment and management 

of the giant miscanthus fields. In 

addition to the educational component, 

producers will be required to submit 

annual reports to the Project Sponsors 

detailing many aspects of production 

and allows for a greater understanding 

of how this species will grow in a 

production setting. More specifically, 

FSA, with cooperation from NRCS, ARS 

and the project sponsors, is proposing 

the following mitigation and monitoring 

measures. The following mitigation and 

monitoring measures have been 

developed based on the current 

literature and in some cases, 

conservative estimates relating to 

existing standards for other 

conservation programs and practices, 

but not specified to giant miscanthus. 

• Biannual producer meetings to 

discuss new developments in 

production, management, pest and 

disease treatment, and eradication. 

• New producer orientation to 

discuss production methods; 

management activities; potential for 

spread of giant miscanthus, treatment 

methods, and responsibilities; pest and 

disease identification, treatment 

methods, and responsibilities; 

eradication methods, if necessary; and 

reporting requirements. 

• Producer Conservation Plans to 

include site specific best management 

practices (BMPs), which could include, 

but not be limited to, NRCS 

Conservation Practice Standards (CPS) 

for soil erosion, pesticide use and 

application, fertilizer use and 

application, and other relevant areas for 

each specific site. 

• Setbacks and buffers to manage the 

giant miscanthus stand and to prevent 

unintentional spread of the giant 

miscanthus follow all local, state, or 

Federal regulations for containment of 

biomass plantings in the existence at the 

time of development of the producer’s 

conservation plan or through an 

amendment of the conservation plan 

initiated by the producer and approved 

by FSA and NRCS, if determined 

appropriate for the site-specific 

conditions. If no such guidance exists, 

minimum procedures to prevent 

unintentional spread of giant 

miscanthus include the following: 

Æ Establish or maintain a minimum 

25 feet of setback or border around a 

giant miscanthus stand, unless the field 

is adjacent to existing cropland or 

actively managed pasture with the same 

operator. 

Æ Setback or border areas may be 

planted to an annual row crop such as 

corn or soybeans; may be planted to a 

site-adapted, perennial cool-season or 

warm-season forage or turf grass; may be 

kept in existing vegetation; or kept clear 

by disking, rotovating, or treating with 

a non-selective burn down herbicide at 

least once a year. The method used may 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 102 / Thursday, May 26, 2011 / Notices 30641 

be dependent on slope and the potential 

for erosion. 

• Use only the sterile variety of giant 

miscanthus cultivar known as the 

‘‘Illinois Clone’’ within the proposed 

project areas; all Illinois Clone cultivars 

must be approved for planting under 

Aloterra’s membership through the Ohio 

Seed Improvement Association’s 

Quality Assurance program. 

• Initiate a seed sampling program to 

determine the on-going sterility of seeds 

produced from the acres within the 

project areas. The seed sampling 

program includes recommended actions 

specified in the mitigation and 

monitoring plan, including eradication, 

if a seed sample returns viable seed. 

• Exclusion of planting giant 

miscanthus on certain acreage within 

the project areas, depending upon 

certain site-specific conditions specified 

in the mitigation and monitoring plan, 

like those lands subject to frequest 

flooding events. 

• Develop monitoring program to 

identify: 

(1) Notify both United States 

Department of Agriculture (USDA) and 

the project sponsors of any spread of 

giant miscanthus outside of planted 

fields as soon as possible after 

identification of the spread, 

(2) Notify the project sponsors of the 

identification of diseases and pests as 

soon as possible after identification and; 

(3) Include wildlife use or changes in 

use in the annual producer report 

specify all; a USDA representative will 

conduct an annual field visit to monitor 

the site and to look for potential spread 

of Miscanthus beyond the site and; 

(4) USDA will work with local weed 

control districts to provide additional 

monitoring and evaluation of the sites as 

appropriate. 

• Annual producer reporting, to 

include land use tracking with the 

average and total size of enrolled fields; 

prior land use; rationale for land use 

change; spread of giant miscanthus 

outside of planted fields; any pests or 

diseases identification; the use of 

pesticides or herbicides to control 

unwanted spread of giant miscanthus or 

pests or diseases; BMP and CPS 

incorporated into field management, 

such as erosion control structures or 

materials, vegetative barriers, etc.; 

fertilizer usage and application 

methods; and cost data. 

Determination 

In accordance with NEPA and FSA 

environmental regulations at 7 CFR part 

799 that implemented the regulation of 

the Council on Environmental Quality 

(40 CFR parts 1500–1508), I find that the 

Proposed Action and associated 

mitigation measures do not constitute a 

major Federal action significantly 

affecting the quality of the human 

environment. Therefore, no 

environmental impact statement will be 

prepared. 

I make these findings and 

determination today, May 23, 2011, in 

Washington, DC, effective immediately. 

This notice will be published on our 

Web site and in the Federal Register. 

Signed: May 20, 2011. 

Bruce Nelson, 

Acting Executive Vice President, Commodity 

Credit Corporation, and Acting 

Administrator, Farm Service Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2011–13094 Filed 5–25–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Pennington County Resource Advisory 

Committee 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Pennington County 

Resource Advisory Committee will meet 

in Rapid City, SD. The committee is 

meeting as authorized under the Secure 

Rural Schools and Community SelfDetermination Act (Pub. L. 110–343) 

and in compliance with the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act. The purpose 

of the meetings is to accept, review and 

approve project proposals for 

Pennington County. 

DATES: The meetings will be held June 

21 and June 28, 2011, at 5 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at 

the Mystic Ranger District Office at 8221 

South Highway 16. Written comments 

should be sent to Robert J. Thompson, 

8221 South Highway 16, Rapid City, SD 

57702. Comments may also be sent via 

e-mail to rjthompson@fs.fed.us, or via 

facsimile to 605–343–7134. 

All comments, including names and 

addresses when provided, are placed in 

the record and are available for public 

inspection and copying. The public may 

inspect comments received at the 

Mystic Ranger District office. Visitors 

are encouraged to call ahead at 605– 

343–1567 to facilitate entry into the 

building. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert J. Thompson, District Ranger, 

Mystic Ranger District, 605–343–1567. 

Individuals who use telecommunication 

devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 

a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, 

Monday through Friday. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Meetings 

are open to the public. The following 

business will be conducted: Accept, 

review, discussion and approval of 

project proposals. Persons who wish to 

bring matters to the attention of the 

Committee may file written statements 

with the Committee staff before or after 

the meeting. 

Dated: May 18, 2011. 

Craig Bobzien, 

Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. 2011–13045 Filed 5–25–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Rural Housing Service 

Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) 

for Loan Guarantees Under Section 

538 Guaranteed Rural Rental Housing 

Program (GRRHP) for Fiscal Year 2011 

AGENCY: Rural Housing Service, USDA. 

ACTION: NOFA. 

SUMMARY: This is a request for proposals 

for guaranteed loans under the section 

538 Guaranteed Rural Rental Housing 

Program (GRRHP) pursuant to 7 CFR 

3565.4 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011. The 

Department of Defense and Full Year 

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 

(Pub. L. 112–20) (April 15, 2011) 

appropriated approximately 

$31,000,000 to the Agency for FY 2011 

funding for the section 538 program. 

The commitment of program dollars 

will be made first to approved and 

complete applications from prior years 

NOFA, then to applicants of selected 

responses in the order they are ranked 

under this NOFA that have fulfilled the 

necessary requirements for obligation. 

Expenses incurred in developing 

applications will be at the applicant’s 

risk. The following paragraphs outline 

the timeframes, eligibility requirements, 

lender responsibilities, and the overall 

response and application processes. 

Eligible lenders are invited to submit 

responses for new construction and 

acquisition with rehabilitation of 

affordable rural rental housing. The 

Agency will review responses submitted 

by eligible lenders, on the lender’s 

letterhead, and signed by both the 

prospective borrower and lender. 

Although a complete application is not 

required in response to this NOFA, 

eligible lenders may submit a complete 

application concurrently with the 

response. Submitting a complete 

application will not have any effect on 

the respondent’s NOFA response score. 

DATES: Eligible responses to this NOFA 

will be accepted per this guidance until 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES