58664 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Notices 

corn, these plants are not infected by 

this organism, nor do they contain 

genetic material from this pathogen that 

can cause plant disease; (2) it exhibits 

no characteristics that would cause it to 

be more weedy than the non-transgenic 

parent corn line or other cultivated 

corn; (3) gene introgression from DAS–

59122–7 corn into wild relatives in the 

United States and its territories is 

extremely unlikely and is not likely to 

increase the weediness potential of any 

resulting progeny nor adversely affect 

genetic diversity of related plants any 

more than would introgression from 

traditional corn hybrids; (4) disease and 

insect susceptibility and compositional 

profiles of the kernel is similar to nontransgenic corn and should have no 

adverse impact on raw or processed 

agricultural commodities; (5) it exhibits 

no potential to have significant adverse 

impact on organisms beneficial to 

agriculture; (6) compared to current 

agricultural practices, cultivation of 

DAS–59122–7 should not reduce the 

ability to control pests and weeds in 

corn or other crops. In addition to our 

finding of no plant pest risk, there will 

be no effect on threatened or 

endangered species resulting from a 

determination of non-regulated status 

for DAS–59122–7 and its progeny. 

Therefore, APHIS has concluded that 

the subject corn and any progeny 

derived from hybrid crosses with other 

non-transformed corn varieties will be 

as safe to grow as corn varieties in 

traditional breeding programs that are 

not subject to regulation under 7 CFR 

part 340. The effect of this 

determination is that Dow 

AgroSciences/Pioneer corn line DAS–

59122–7 is no longer considered a 

regulated article under APHIS’

regulations in 7 CFR part 340. 

Therefore, the requirements 

pertaining to regulated articles under 

those regulations no longer apply to the 

subject corn or its progeny. However, 

importation of corn line DAS–59122–7 

and seeds capable of propagation are 

still subject to the restrictions found in 

APHIS’ foreign quarantine notices in 7 

CFR part 319 and imported seed 

regulations in 7 CFR part 361. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

An EA was prepared to examine any 

potential environmental impacts and 

plant pest risk associated with the 

determination of nonregulated status for 

the Dow AgroSciences/Pioneer corn line 

DAS–59122–7. The EA was 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). 

Based on that EA, APHIS has reached 

a FONSI with regard to the 

determination that Dow AgroSciences/ 

Pioneer corn line DAS–59122–7 and 

lines developed from it are no longer 

regulated articles under its regulations 

in 7 CFR part 340. Copies of the EA and 

FONSI are available from the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this notice. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622n and 7701–7772; 

31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of 

October 2005. 

Elizabeth E. Gaston, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–20194 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

[Docket No. 05–062–2] 

University of Kentucky; Availability of 

an Environmental Assessment and a 

Finding of No Significant Impact for 

Field Tests of Genetically Engineered 

Neotyphodium 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: We are advising the public 

that the Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service has prepared an 

environmental assessment for a field 

trial of genetically engineered strains of 

an endophytic fungus of perennial 

ryegrass, Neotyphodium sp. isolate Lp1. 

The fungi have been genetically 

engineered to disrupt the ergovaline 

synthesis pathway. The environmental 

assessment provides a basis for our 

conclusion that these field tests will not 

present a risk of introducing or 

disseminating a plant pest and will not 

have a significant impact on the quality 

of the human environment. 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 these field tests. 

DATES: A permit may be issued on or 

after October 7, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Michael Blanchette, Biotechnology 

Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River 

Road, Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737–

1236; (301) 734–5141; e-mail: 

michael.p.blanchette@aphis.usda.gov. 

To obtain copies of the petition, the 

environmental assessment (EA), or the 

finding of no significant impact 

(FONSI), contact Ms. Ingrid Berlanger at 

(301) 734–4885; e-mail: 

ingrid.e.berlanger@aphis.usda.gov. The 

EA and FONSI are also available on the 

Internet at: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ 

brs/aphisdocs/05_15201r_ea.pdf. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

regulations in 7 CFR part 340, 

‘‘Introduction of Organisms and 

Products Altered or Produced Through 

Genetic Engineering Which Are Plant 

Pests or Which There Is Reason to 

Believe Are Plant Pests,’’ regulate, 

among other things, the introduction 

(importation, interstate movement, or 

release into the environment) of 

organisms and products altered or 

produced through genetic engineering 

that are plant pests or that there is 

reason to believe are plant pests. Such 

genetically engineered organisms and 

products are considered ‘‘regulated 

articles.’’ A permit must be obtained or 

a notification acknowledged before a 

regulated article may be introduced. The 

regulations set forth the permit 

application requirements and the 

notification procedures for the 

importation, interstate movement, or 

release into the environment of a 

regulated article. 

On June 1, 2005, the Animal and 

Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) 

received a permit application (APHIS 

No. 05–152–01r) from the University of 

Kentucky, Department of Plant 

Pathology, for a confined field release of 

two mutant strains of Neotyphodium sp 

isolate Lp1, which is an endophytic 

fungus of Lolium perenne (perennial 

ryegrass). These two mutants were 

generated by inserting a gene construct 

containing a hygromycin 

phosphotransferase gene (hph) into 

specific genes in the ergovaline 

synthesis pathway. The literature is 

obscure regarding the specific donor of 

the hph gene to the plasmid that was 

used to create this construct. The 

identical hph gene has been identified 

in three bacterial species, Klebsiella sp., 

Streptomyces hygroscopicus, and 

Escherichia coli. Expression of the hph 

gene is regulated by the Neurospora 

crassa cross-pathway control gene (cpc1) promoter and a transcription 

termination sequence from the trpC 

gene of Aspergillus nidulans. 

Strain Lp1–4175 results from an 

insertion of the hph construct in the 

dimethylallyltryptophan synthase 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Notices 58665 

(dmaW) gene. This strain does not 

produce ergot alkaloids or clavine 

mycotoxins that are believed to cause 

toxicoses to grazing livestock and 

wildlife. Strain Lp1–981 was generated 

by an insertion of the hph construct in 

lysergyl peptide synthetase subunit 1 

(lpsA). This line lacks the ability to 

produce ergovaline and other amides of 

lysergic acid, but retains the ability to 

produce clavines and lysergic acid. 

Perennial ryegrass plants that have 

been inoculated with either mutant 

strain will be planted in the trial for the 

purpose of increasing seed. The 

endophyte is only transmitted vertically 

through seed. Therefore this trial will 

result in an increase in inoculated seed 

for future experiments. 

On August 12, 2005, we published in 

the Federal Register (70 FR 47169–

47170, Docket No. 05–062–1) a notice 

announcing the availability, for review 

and comment, of an environmental 

assessment (EA) for a field trial of the 

genetically engineered strains of 

Neotyphodium sp. isolate Lp1. We 

solicited comments on the EA for 30 

days ending on September 12, 2005. We 

received eight comments by that date, 

from an academic professional, a public 

interest group, and private individuals. 

All eight commenters expressed 

concerns about the field trial. Some of 

the comments criticized the treatment of 

horizontal gene transfer and acute 

toxicity in the EA. Others suggested that 

these types of experiments should only 

be conducted in a contained facility. 

APHIS has responded to these 

comments in an attachment to the 

finding of no significant impact 

(FONSI). 

Pursuant to its regulations (7 CFR part 

340) promulgated under the Plant 

Protection Act, APHIS has determined 

that this field trial will not pose a risk 

of the introduction or dissemination of 

a plant pest for the following reasons: 

1. The test fungi Neotyphodium sp. 

Lp1 strains Lp1-981 and Lp1-4175 are 

identical to the untransformed 

endophyte except for their inability to 

produce toxic ergot alkaloids. 

2. Neotyphodium species are not 

known as animal or human pathogens, 

and both it and its sexually transmitted 

form of the species (Epichloee ̈ sp.) are 

only found in grasses. 

3. Dissemination of Neotyphodium sp. 

Lp1 strains Lp1-981 and Lp1-4175 will 

be prevented through physical methods, 

normal site security, small size of the 

trials, and cleaning of equipment. 

4. The host range of Neotyphodium 

sp. Lp1 strains Lp1-981 and Lp1-4175 

and mode of transmission has not 

changed. 

5. The Neotyphodium sp. Lp1 strains 

Lp1-981 and Lp1-4175 are expected to 

be less toxic to herbivores than the 

untransformed endophyte and therefore 

should not pose any new dietary threat. 

6. The Neotyphodium species has 

never been associated with animal or 

human disease and therefore will not 

pose a risk to human health. 

7. Hygromycin B phosphotransferase 

(from the marker gene) does not confer 

any plant pest characteristics to 

Neotyphodium species. 

8. Threatened and endangered species 

in the area are not hosts of 

Neotyphodium sp. nor do they feed on 

hosts of these fungi, and therefore will 

not be affected by the trials. 

The EA and the FONSI were 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). Copies of the EA and FONSI are 

available from the individual listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of 

October 2005. 

Elizabeth E. Gaston, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–20195 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Food and Nutrition Service 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request—School Lunch and 

Breakfast Cost Study-II 

AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 

notice invites the general public and 

other public agencies to comment on the 

proposed collection of data for the 

School Lunch and Breakfast Cost StudyII in order to assess the adequacy of the 

Federal meal reimbursement rates. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 6, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on: 

(a) Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Comments may be sent to Alberta 

Frost, Director, Office of Analysis, 

Nutrition and Evaluation, Food and 

Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, 3101 Park Center Drive, 

Room 1014, Alexandria, VA 22302. 

Comments may also be submitted via 

fax to the attention of Alberta Frost at 

703–305–2576 or via e-mail to 

Alberta.Frost@fns.usda.gov. 

All written comments will be open for 

public inspection at the office of the 

Food and Nutrition Service during 

regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday) at Room 

1014, 3101 Park Center Drive, 

Alexandria, Virginia 22302. 

All responses to this notice will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for OMB approval. All comments will 

be a matter of public record. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of this information collection 

should be directed to Alberta Frost at 

703–305–2017. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: School Lunch and Breakfast 

Cost Study-II. 

OMB Number: Not yet assigned. 

Form Number: N/A. 

Expiration Date: Not yet determined. 

Type of Request: New Collection of 

Information. 

Abstract: The School Lunch and 

Breakfast Cost Study-II will collect and 

analyze data from a nationally 

representative sample of public schools 

participating in the National School 

Lunch Program (NSLP). Data will be 

collected so as to provide sufficient 

information on school meal production 

costs to assess the adequacy of Federal 

meal reimbursement rates. The 

information will be used to determine 

the national average reported and full 

costs to produce NSLP and School 

Breakfast Program (SBP) reimbursable 

meals, the extent to which indirect costs 

are charged to School Food Authority 

(SFA) accounts for food service 

operations, the value of administrative 

costs used to produce reimbursable