Medfly Cooperative Eradication Program; Record of Decision Based on the Final Environmental Impact Statement

SUMMARY: This notice advises the public of the Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service's record of decision for the Medfly Cooperative

Eradication Program final environmental impact statement.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the record of decision and the final environmental

impact statement on which the record of decision is based are available

for review between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except

holidays, at the following locations:

APHIS Reading Room, room 1141, South Building, 14th Street and

Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250;

USDA-APHIS Library, room G180, Federal Building, 6505 Belcrest

Road, Hyattsville, MD 20782;

USDA-APHIS-PPQ, 9580 Micron Avenue, Suite I, Sacramento,

CA 95827;

USDA-APHIS-PPQ, 3505 Boca Chica Boulevard, Suite 360,

Brownsville, TX 78521-4065;

USDA-APHIS-PPQ, 3505 25th Avenue, Building 1, North,

Gulfport, MS 39501;

USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Blason II, 1st floor, 505 South Lenola

Road, Moorestown, NJ 08057.

Interested persons may obtain copies of the record of decision and

the final environmental impact statement by writing to any of the

addresses listed above with an asterisk or to the address listed below

under ``FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Harold T. Smith, Branch Chief,

Environmental Analysis and Documentation, BBEP, APHIS, USDA, room 543,

Federal Building, 6505 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, MD 20782, (301) 436-

8963.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 9, 1993, the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) published in the Federal Register (58

FR 18366, Docket No. 90-108-3) a notice advising the public that APHIS

had prepared a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for the

Medfly Cooperative Eradication Program. The notice also requested

comments on the draft EIS to be received on or before May 24, 1993. On

May 28, 1993, we published a notice reopening the comment period and

extending it until June 18, 1993 (58 FR 31007, Docket No. 90-108-4). By

close of business June 18, 1993, we had received 255 comments on the

draft EIS. We carefully reviewed and considered all of the comments,

and revised the draft EIS based on suggestions and information offered

in the comments.

On November 26, 1993, we published in the Federal Register (58 FR

62322, Docket No. 90-108-5) a notice advising the public that APHIS, in

cooperation with 12 other Federal and State organizations, had prepared

a final EIS for the Medfly Cooperative Eradication Program. The final

EIS includes a comprehensive analysis of all feasible methods for

controlling the Mediterranean fruit fly. The final EIS was made

available, and locations were provided where interested persons could

review copies.

This notice advises the public that APHIS has prepared a record of

decision based on the final EIS. This record of decision has been

prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental Policy Act

(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 Guidelines Implementing NEPA (44 FR

50381-50384, August 28, 1979, and 44 FR 51272-51274, August 31, 1979).

The Agency record of decision is set forth below.

Record of Decision; Final Environmental Impact Statement; Medfly

Cooperative Eradication Program

Decision

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service (APHIS) has prepared a final environmental impact

statement (EIS) for the Medfly Cooperative Eradication Program. The EIS

analyzed alternatives for eradication of the Mediterranean fruit fly

(Medfly), a serious pest of agriculture that may in the future infest

areas of the conterminous United States. After considering fully the

analysis presented in the EIS (including supportive documents cited or

incorporated by reference), I have accepted the findings of the EIS.

As described in the EIS, selection of an alternative (and

associated control methods) for future Medfly programs will be on an

individual basis, made only after site-specific assessment of the

individual program areas. The selection of an alternative (and control

methods) will consider the findings of the EIS, the site-specific

assessment, the public response, and any other relevant information

available to APHIS at the time. APHIS will conduct environmental

monitoring, as described in ``Environmental Monitoring Plan, Medfly

Cooperative Eradication Program'' (incorporated by reference in this

record of decision). I have determined that this course of action

includes all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm

from Medfly control measures that may be employed by APHIS in future

cooperative Medfly programs.

Alternatives Considered

The alternatives considered within the EIS include: No action,

Medfly suppression (including chemicals), Medfly suppression (no

chemicals), Medfly eradication (including chemicals), and Medfly

eradication (no chemicals). They were broad in scope and reflect the

major choices that must be made for a future program. The action

alternatives combined variously the use of control methods, also

analyzed within the EIS. The control methods included chemical control,

nonchemical control, and combined control (including integrated pest

management or IPM). They are limited in scope and reflect the specific

means by which the program objectives may be met. The EIS considered

and compared the potential impacts of the alternatives as well as their

component control methods.

Decisional Background

In arriving at this decision, I have considered pertinent risk

analyses, chemical background statements, a biological assessment for

endangered and threatened species, and other technical documents whose

analyses and conclusions were integrated into and summarized within the

EIS. I have also considered APHIS' responsibilities under various

statutes or regulations, the technological feasibilities of the

alternatives and control methods, and public perspectives relative to

environmental issues. Although scientific controversy may exist

relative to the severity of potential impacts, especially with regard

to pesticide impacts, I am satisfied that APHIS has estimated correctly

the impacts of alternatives for Medfly eradication.

APHIS understands the potential consequences of control methods

(especially chemical methods) used for Medfly eradication. Chemical

control methods have greater potential for adverse environmental

consequences than nonchemical control methods. Chemical pesticides have

the potential to adversely affect human health, nontarget species, and

physical components of the environment. APHIS fully appreciates the

dangers pesticides may pose, especially to sensitive members of

communities.

APHIS is committed to the rational use of chemical pesticides and

strives to reduce their use wherever possible. However, APHIS has

statutory obligations that require it to act decisively to eliminate

foreign pest species such as the Medfly. Given the current state of

control technology, we believe that nonchemical control methods (used

exclusively) are not capable of eradicating the Medfly. We know too

that the net result of a decision not to use chemicals would be that

other government entities or commercial growers are likely to use even

more chemicals over a wider area, with correspondingly greater

environmental impact. APHIS is convinced that, if eradication remains

the objective, a coordinated and well-run government program that

limits the use of pesticides to the minimum necessary to do the job is

therefore in the best interests of the public and the environment.

APHIS continues to support and favor the use of IPM strategies in

achieving Medfly eradication.

Final Implementation

In all cases, a site-specific assessment will be made prior to the

time a decision is made on the control methods that will be used on a

particular program. The site-specific assessment will consider

characteristics such as unique and sensitive aspects of the program

area, applicable environmental and program documentation, and

applicable new developments in environmental science or control

technologies. The site-specific assessment will also confirm the

adequacy of or need for additional program mitigative measures. The

site-specific analysis process is described more fully in the EIS.

Site-specific assessments will be made available to the public and

APHIS will consider the public's perspective relative to individual

programs.

To avoid or minimize environmental harm, APHIS will follow all

standard operational procedures and program mitigative measures

developed for the Medfly Cooperative Eradication Program. These

procedures (incorporated by reference in this record of decision) are

fully described in the EIS, and include but are not limited to the

following: Pesticide applicator certification, training and applicator

orientation, special pesticide precautions for pesticide application,

identification of sensitive sites, public notification procedures, and

interagency coordination and consultation.

December 29, 1993.

Lonnie J. King,

Acting Administrator.

Done in Washington, DC, this 1st day of February, 1994.

Lonnie J. King,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 94-2601 Filed 2-3-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-34-P