Proposed Rules. Proposed rule; petition finding; request for information

8,315 words·~38 min read·/register/2007/04/13/07-1834

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 [Docket No. 070402074-7074-01; I.D. No. 032207B] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: 90-Day Finding for a Petition to List Black Abalone as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Proposed rule; petition finding; request for information.

SUMMARY: We, the NMFS, have received a petition to list the black abalone ( *Haliotis cracherodii* ) as a threatened or endangered species and to designate critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We find that the petition presents substantial scientific information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. This finding normally initiates a formal status review, but as described below in the Background section (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ), in this case, we had already initiated a formal status review on October 17, 2006.

To ensure that the review is comprehensive, we are soliciting information pertaining to this species, any potential critical habitat, and recommendations of qualified individuals to peer review the agency's black abalone status review report. DATES: Information and comments on this action must be received by June 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit information and/or comments by any of the following methods: • E-Mail: *BlackAbalone.Comments@noaa.gov* • Mail: Submit written comments to Chief, Protected Resources Division, Southwest Region, National Marine Fisheries Service, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA, 90802-4213. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* .

Follow the instructions for submitting comments. An electronic version of the petition can be obtained via the Internet at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov* or by submitting a request to the Assistant Regional Administrator, Protected Resources Division, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Neuman, NMFS, Southwest Region

(562)980-4115 or Lisa Manning, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources

(301)713-1401. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Black abalone was added to NMFS' Candidate Species list on June 23, 1999 (64 FR 33466), transferred to NMFS' Species of Concern list on April 15, 2004 (69 FR 19975), and has since been considered for listing on the List of Endangered and Threatened Species under the ESA. The species is currently listed on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

(IUCN)Red List of Threatened Species (Smith *et al.* 2003). We initiated an informal ESA status review of black abalone on July 15, 2003, and conducted biological scoping workshops on January 29-30, 2004 and July 31-August 1, 2006. We formally announced initiation of a black abalone status review on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61021), and at that time solicited information from the public on the following topics:

(1)long-term trends in abundance throughout the species' range;

(2)potential factors for the species' decline throughout its range (e.g., overharvesting, natural predation, disease, habitat loss etc.);

(3)status of the black abalone fishery in Mexico;

(4)implication of low population size for black abalone conservation;

(5)factors important for black abalone management;

(6)current estimate of population size and available habitat;

(7)knowledge of various life history parameters (size/age at maturity, fecundity, length of larval stage, larval dispersal dynamics, etc.); and

(8)projections on population growth or decline and risk of extinction. On December 27, 2006, we received a petition from the Center for Biological Diversity

(CBD)requesting that we list black abalone as either an endangered or threatened species under the ESA and designate critical habitat for the species concurrently with any listing determination. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ) requires that we make a finding as to whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the petitioned action may be warranted. Our joint NMFS/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ESA implementing regulations (50 CFR 424.14) define “substantial information” as the amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted. In determining whether substantial information exists for a petition to list a species, we consider several factors, including information submitted with and referenced in the petition and all other information readily available in our files. To the maximum extent practicable, this finding is to be made within 90 days of the receipt of the petition, and the finding is to be published promptly in the **Federal Register** . If we find that a petition presents substantial information indicating that the requested action may be warranted, section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA requires the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to conduct a status review of the species and make a finding as to whether the petitioned action is warranted within 1 year of the receipt of the petition. Analysis of Petition Natural History Black abalone is a marine mollusc and a member of the family *Haliotidae* and the genus *Haliotis.* There is some debate regarding the historic range of black abalone. Based on museum specimen records examined by Geiger (1999), black abalone ranged historically from Crescent City (Del Norte County, California) to Cabo San Lucas (Southern Baja California). Most experts agree that the current range of black abalone extends from Point Arena (Mendocino County, California) to Northern Baja California, but are rare north of San Francisco (Morris *et al.* , 1980) and south of Punta Eugenia (P. Raimondi, pers. comm.). Of the seven species of abalone found in California (Geiger, 1999), black abalone is a relatively shallow water species and is most abundant in rocky intertidal habitat (Morris *et al.* , 1980), although they do occur from the high intertidal zone to 6 m depth. Average black abalone shell length is approximately 115 mm (Ault, 1985), however, maximum shell length may exceed 200 mm (Morris *et al.* , 1980). The epipodium (the circular fringe of skin around the foot) and tentacles are black and the underside of the foot is pearly white. The outer surface of the shell is dark blue to black, smooth and has 5-9 open respiratory pores with edges that are flush with the shell surface (Haaker *et al.* , 1986). The vacillatory nature of rocky intertidal habitat dictates that black abalone tolerate a wide range of environmental conditions (e.g. temperature, salinity, dessication, and wave action). For example, water temperatures may range between 7-24 °C (45-75 °F) (Howorth, 1978) in rocky intertidal areas throughout their range. In the absence of anthropogenic influences (e.g., harvest and spread of disease (Friedman and Finley, 2003)), a combination of black abalone life history, ecology, and behavior and these widely ranging environmental variables is what controls the species' spatial distribution. Black abalone are often found in a clumped distribution, with smaller abalone (<90 mm) exhibiting cryptic behavior and tending to stay within the protective confines of crevices, under rocks, and in boulder fields (Blecha *et al.* , 1992; Tissot, 1995; Ault, 1985). Individuals larger than 90 mm often occupy more exposed rocks and surge channels in areas where sea otters are absent, but tend to reside in cracks and crevices in areas where sea otters are present (Morris *et al.* , 1980; Lowry and Pearse, 1973; Hines and Pearse, 1982; Blecha *et al.* , 1992). Black abalone exhibit separate sexes and are thought to reach sexual maturity between 40-50 mm shell length in California. Sperm or eggs are broadcast into the water sometime between late spring and late summer (Webber and Giese, 1969; CDFG, 2005). This type of spawning strategy depends on densely aggregated adults to achieve the high gamete densities needed for successful fertilization (Davis, 1996). The free-swimming larval phase for this species may range from 5 to 14 days depending on water temperature (Ault, 1985). This relatively short dispersive phase combined with hydrodynamic conditions during the time of spawning may limit dispersal distances. Analysis of the genetic structure of black abalone populations on the central California coast indicates that these black abalone populations are composed predominantly of individuals that were spawned locally (Hamm and Burton, 2000). Patterns in recruitment of juveniles to central coastal populations provide additional evidence that black abalone larvae do not tend to travel very far along the coast and, therefore, populations are relatively closed (Raimondi *et al.* , 2002). In Southern California, results of a drift card study at San Nicolas Island suggest that black abalone larvae are locally retained with occasional migrants dispersing over long distances (> 10 km; Chambers *et al.* , 2006). Larval black abalone tend to settle into areas characterized by bare rock and coralline red algae (Douros, 1985; Miner *et al.* , 2006). Once settled onto rocky substrata, black abalone juveniles consume rock-encrusting coralline algae and diatom and bacterial films (Haaker *et al.* , 1986). Adult black abalone feed primarily on pieces of algae drifting with the surge or current, such as giant kelp, bull kelp, and feather boa kelp (Haaker *et al.* , 1986). Growth rates can vary depending on food availability, water temperature, and other environmental factors (CDFG, 2005). Abalone are long-lived (30+ years) and it takes approximately 20 years for black abalone to reach their maximum length (Blecha *et al.* , 1992). Black abalone are preyed upon by a wide variety of marine predators including sea stars, fishes, octopus, the southern sea otter, and striped shore crab. Abundance Historically, sea otter predation and hunting by Native Americans were two primary sources of mortality for large black abalone. The elimination or relocation of Native American coastal settlements during the 1700s and 1800s and sea otter (a primary predator on black abalone) hunting by Russian fur traders resulted in high densities (< 40 individuals per m 2 ) of black abalone in many places throughout their range (Howorth, 1978; Douros, 1993; Richards and Davis, 1993). Chinese immigrants began harvesting abalone from dense intertidal beds in central and southern California and Baja California in the mid-1800s and annual harvest reached a peak of 1,814 metric tons

(mt)in 1879 (Howorth, 1978; Rogers-Bennett *et al.* , 2002). Commercial harvest was banned in the early 1900s, during which time black abalone populations expanded slightly. However, in 1968 commercial harvest of black abalone resumed. The commercial harvest was greatest around the islands off southern California, particularly San Miguel, San Clemente and San Nicolas Islands (California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), unpublished data). The average annual harvest declined from 290 mt in the 1970s, with a peak occurring in 1973 (868 mt; Rogers-Bennett *et al.* , 2002), to 175 mt in the 1980s, to 14 mt in the 1990s. By the mid-1980s overharvesting, as evidenced by declining trends in fishery-dependent data and eventual closure of the commercial fishery (B. Tissot, unpublished data), and possibly other factors such as pollution (Miller and Lawrenze-Miller, 1993), reduced southern California coastal populations of black abalone considerably. Remnant populations persisted primarily on offshore islands and inaccessible sections of the coast north of Santa Barbara. Commercial harvesting was prohibited again in 1993. In the mid- and late-1980s, black abalone on the Channel Islands suffered massive local die-offs (generally >90 percent losses) from a disease known as Withering Syndrome

(WS)(Haaker *et al.* , 1992; Richards and Davis, 1993; Lafferty and Kuris, 1993). The cause of WS is unknown, but has been attributed to a Rickettsiales-like pathogen (Friedman *et al.* , 2000). The disease is manifested by severe weight loss, loss of appetite, followed by detachment from the substrate and eventual mortality (Tissot, 1991; Haaker *et al.* , 1992; Steinbeck *et al.* , 1992). There is also strong evidence that the intensity of mortality from this disease increases with increasing water temperature (Tissot, 1995; Steinbeck *et al.* , 1992; Alstatt *et al.* , 1996; Raimondi *et al.* , 2002). Prior to 1992, the only mainland site where a WS-related die-off had been observed was in Diablo Cove, the site of the discharge for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (Steinbeck *et al.* , 1992). However, in 1992 a massive die-off began at a mainland site, Government Point, near Point Conception (Alstatt *et al.* , 1996). Subsequent monitoring of sites along the central California coast has detected a pattern of mortality suggesting that WS is progressing northward up the coast, but at a variable rate (Altstatt *et al.* , 1996; Raimondi *et al.* , 2002; Miner *et al.* , 2006). Fishery-independent data obtained from long-term monitoring studies (1975-present) were examined to detect trends in abundance from 32 sampling locations throughout California (B. Tissot, unpublished data). Percent changes in abundance were calculated by comparing mean densities prior to the onset of WS and after the onset of WS at each sampling location. Preliminary results suggest that black abalone have gone locally extinct or declined between 90-99 percent at 50 percent of the sampling locations and have declined between 80-89 percent at another 16 percent of the sampling locations. Thus, significant declines (>80 percent) have occurred at over 50 percent of the locations sampled in California (Brian Tissot, unpublished data). Although abundance data for black abalone populations in Mexico are scant, existing fishery-dependent data suggest declines similar to those exhibited in California. Based on the data published in Hobday and Tegner (2000), the catch of black abalone declined from a high of 28 mt in 1990, to <1 mt in 1998, an overall decline of >95 percent. Summation The principal cause of black abalone population decline in southern and central California has been attributed to over-harvesting (Karpov *et al.* , 2000) and/or the onset of WS in southern California in the 1980s (Lafferty and Kuris, 1993) and the disease's northward progression. Black abalone populations have declined by over 99 percent (Brian Tissot, unpublished data) in southern California (except for San Nicolas and San Miguel Islands). In many locations recruitment rates are low, and in areas where remnant healthy populations are producing recruits, these recruits are retained locally and are not recolonizing historically populated areas only tens of kilometers away (Miller and Lawrenze-Miller, 1993; Raimondi *et al.* , 2002; Miner *et al.* , 2006). Miner *et al.*

(2006)hypothesize that the causes of low (or no) recruitment at sites with low adult density include:

(1)local adult densities too low for successful fertilization;

(2)limited dispersal ability of larval abalone limiting the supply of larvae from healthy adjacent populations;

(3)suitable larval settlement habitat overgrown in the absence of adult abalone; and

(4)newly recruited juvenile abalone killed by WS before they can be observed and counted by researchers. Petition Finding Given documented declines in abundance within the range of the species and the potential negative effects of ongoing and future threats posed primarily by the northward spread of WS, as described in the petition and in the information in our files, we have determined that the petition presents substantial information and that listing black abalone under the ESA may be warranted. We have supported efforts to learn more about the factors that have contributed to the decline of this species and encouraged Federal agencies and other appropriate parties to conserve and protect surviving black abalone throughout its range from Fort Bragg, California to southern Baja California. Despite these efforts, including closure of the fishery in southern California in 1993, the species continues to decline along the mainland coast of southern California and the northern Channel Islands. In compliance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA, the Secretary will make his determination whether the petitioned action is warranted within 12 months from the date the petition was received (December 27, 2006) following completion of an ESA status review. Listing Factors and Basis for Determination Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA requires the Secretary to determine whether any species is a threatened or an endangered species because of any of the following factors:

(1)The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range;

(2)overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes;

(3)disease or predation;

(4)inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or

(5)other natural or manmade factors affecting its continuing existence. Listing determinations are based solely on the best available scientific and commercial data after taking into account any efforts being made by any state or foreign nation to protect the species. Information Solicited To ensure that the black abalone status review is complete and is based on the best available scientific and commercial data, we reiterate our previous solicitation for information on this species. We specifically request the following information:

(1)long-term trends in abundance throughout the species' range;

(2)potential factors for the species' decline throughout its range (e.g., overharvesting, natural predation, disease, habitat loss etc.);

(3)historic and current range, distribution and habitat use of this species;

(4)status of the black abalone populations in Baja California, Mexico;

(5)historic and current estimates of population size and available habitat;

(6)knowledge of various life history parameters (size/age at maturity, fecundity, length of larval stage, larval dispersal dynamics, etc.);

(7)projections on population growth or decline and risk of extinction; and

(8)efforts being made to protect black abalone throughout their range. Critical Habitat We are also requesting information on areas that may qualify as critical habitat for black abalone, such as identification of areas that include the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the species. Essential features include, but are not limited to:

(1)space for individual and population growth and for normal behavior;

(2)food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements;

(3)cover or shelter;

(4)sites for reproduction and development of offspring; and

(5)habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the historical, geographical and ecological distributions of the species (50 CFR 424.12). For areas potentially qualifying as critical habitat, we request information describing:

(1)the activities that affect the areas or could be affected by the designation, and

(2)the economic or other costs and benefits of additional management measures likely to result from a designation. Peer Review The joint NMFS/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service peer review policy for review of scientific data was published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and on January 14, 2005, the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)published its Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (70 FR 2664). The purpose of the peer review policy and the OMB Information Quality Bulletin is to ensure that listings are based on the best scientific and commercial data available. We are soliciting the names of recognized experts in the field that could take part in the peer review process for this status review. Independent peer reviewers will be selected from the academic and scientific community, Federal and state agencies, the private sector, and public interest groups. References A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon request (see ADDRESSES section). Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* Dated: April 6, 2007. William T. Hogarth, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E7-6966 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S 72 71 Friday, April 13, 2007 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [Doc. No. TB-07-01] Request for an Extension of and Revision to a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's

(AMS)intention to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget, for an extension of and revision to the currently approved information collection in support of the Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act of 2004 (U.S.C. Chapter 518), the Rural Development, Food and Drug Administrative, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for 2002 (Appropriations Act), and the Tobacco Inspection Act and Regulations Governing the Tobacco Standards. DATES: Comments received by June 12, 2007 will be considered. *Additional Information Or Comments:* Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposal to Kenneth E. Wall, Chief, Standardization and Review Branch, Tobacco Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1306 Annapolis Drive, Raleigh, North Carolina 27608. Comments should be submitted in triplicate. Comments may also be submitted electronically through *www.regulations.gov* . All comments should reference the docket number and page number of this issue of the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth E. Wall, Chief, Standardization and Review Branch, Tobacco Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA, 1306 Annapolis Drive, Raleigh, North Carolina 27608, telephone

(919)856-4552 ext. 30 and facsimile

(919)856-4208, or e-mail at *Kenneth.Wall@usda.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Reporting and Recording Requirements for 7 CFR Part 29. *OMB Number:* 0581-0056. *Expiration Date of Approval:* September 30, 2007. *Type of Request:* Extension and revision of a currently approved information collection. *Abstract:* The Tobacco Inspection Act (7 U.S.C. 511 *et seq.* ) requires that all tobacco sold at designated auction markets in the U.S. be inspected and graded. The Appropriations Act (7 U.S.C. 511s note) requires that all tobacco eligible for price support in the U.S. be inspected and graded. The Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act of 2004 (7 U.S.C. 518) eliminated price supports and marketing quotas for all tobacco beginning with the 2005 crop year. Mandatory inspection and grading of domestic and imported tobacco was eliminated as well as the mandatory pesticide testing of imported tobacco and the tobacco market news program. The Tobacco Inspection Act also provides for interested parties to request inspection, pesticide testing and grading services on a permissive basis. The information collection requirements authorized for the programs under the Tobacco Inspection Act and the Appropriations Act include: application for inspection of tobacco, application and other information used in the approval of new auction markets or the extension of services to designated tobacco markets, and the information required to be provided in connection with auction and non-auction sales. *Estimate of Burden:* Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.60 hours per response. *Respondents:* Primarily tobacco companies, tobacco manufacturers, import inspectors, and small businesses or organizations. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 50 *Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent:* 48 *Estimated Number of Responses:* 2415 *Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents:* 3851 *Comments are invited on:*

(1)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)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;

(3)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Kenneth E. Wall, Chief, Standardization and Review Branch, Tobacco Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1306 Annapolis Drive, Raleigh, North Carolina 27608. All comments received will be available for public inspection during regular business hours at the same address. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Dated: April 9, 2007. Lloyd C. Day, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. E7-7039 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2007-0036] Notice of Request for Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Communicable Diseases in Horses AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Extension of approval of an information collection; comment request. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request an extension of approval of an information collection associated with regulations for the interstate movement of horses that have tested positive for equine infectious anemia. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before June 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* , select “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select APHIS-2007-0036 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2007-0036, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2007-0036. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room 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. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on an information collection associated with regulations for the interstate movement of equine that have tested positive for equine infectious anemia, contact Dr. Tim Cordes, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Aquaculture, Swine, Equine, and Poultry Programs, NCAHP, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737;

(301)734-3279. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at

(301)734-7477. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Communicable Diseases in Horses. *OMB Number:* 0579-0127. *Type of Request:* Extension of approval of an information collection. *Abstract:* Under the authority of the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 *et seq.* ), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture regulates the importation and interstate movement of animals and animal products, and conducts various other activities to protect the health of our Nation's livestock and poultry. Equine infectious anemia

(EIA)is an infectious and potentially fatal viral disease of equines. There is no vaccine or treatment for the disease. It is often difficult to differentiate from other fever-producing diseases, including anthrax, influenza, and equine encephalitis. The regulations in 9 CFR 75.4 govern the interstate movement of equines that have tested positive to an official test for EIA (EIA reactors) and provide for the approval of laboratories, diagnostic facilities, and research facilities. The regulations require the use of an official EIA test, a certificate for the interstate movement of an EIA reactor, and proper identification of the reactor, as well as recordkeeping by accredited and State veterinarians; laboratory, diagnostic, and research facility personnel; and stockyard personnel. We are asking the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)to approve our use of these information collection activities for an additional 3 years. The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning this information collection activity. These comments will help us:

(1)Evaluate whether the information collection is necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies, *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses. *Estimate of burden:* The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.0882261 hours per response. *Respondents:* Accredited and State veterinarians; laboratory, diagnostic, and research facility personnel; stockyard personnel; and owners and shippers of horses. *Estimated annual number of respondents:* 10,302. *Estimated annual number of responses per respondent:* 191.8076. *Estimated annual number of responses:* 1,976,002. *Estimated total annual burden on respondents:* 174,335 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.) All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of April 2007. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E7-7042 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0181] Notice of Request for Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Commercial Transportation of Equines for Slaughter AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Extension of approval of an information collection; comment request. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request an extension of approval of an information collection associated with regulations for the commercial transportation of equines to slaughtering facilities. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before June 12, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* , select “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select APHIS-2006-0181 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0181, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0181. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room 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. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at h *ttp://www.aphis.usda.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding an information collection associated with regulations for the commercial transportation of equines to slaughtering facilities, contact Dr. Tim Cordes, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Aquaculture, Swine, Equine, and Poultry Programs, NCAHP, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737;

(301)734-3279. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at

(301)734-7477. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Commercial Transportation of Equines for Slaughter. *OMB Number:* 0579-0160. *Type of Request:* Extension of approval of an information collection. *Abstract:* Under the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (“the Farm Bill”), Congress gave responsibility to the Secretary of Agriculture to regulate the commercial transportation within the United States of equines for slaughter. Sections 901-905 of the Farm Bill (7 U.S.C. 1901 note) authorized the Secretary to issue guidelines for the regulation of commercial transportation of equines for slaughter by persons regularly engaged in that activity within the United States. As a result of that authority, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, established regulations in 9 CFR part 88, “Commercial Transportation of Equines for Slaughter.” The minimum standards cover, among other things, the food, water, and rest provided to such equines. The regulations require the owner/shipper of the equines to take certain actions in loading and transporting the equines and to certify that the commercial transportation meets certain requirements. Our regulations prohibit the commercial transportation to slaughter facilities of equines considered to be unfit for travel, the use of electric prods on such animals in commercial transportation to slaughter, and the use of double-deck trailers for commercial transportation of equines to slaughtering facilities. These regulations require the use of two information collection activities:

(1)The preparation of an owner-shipper certificate for each equine transported to slaughter and

(2)the collection of business information from any individual or other entity found to be transporting horses to a slaughtering facility. We are asking the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)to approve our use of these information collection activities for an additional 3 years. The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

(1)Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Estimate of burden:* The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.0523661 hours per response. *Respondents:* Owners and shippers of slaughter horses. *Estimated annual number of respondents :* 200. *Estimated annual number of responses per respondent:* 401.5. *Estimated annual number of responses:* 80,300. *Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 4,205 hours.* (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.) All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of April 2007. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E7-7044 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Farm Service Agency Notice of Availability of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the 2005 Hurricane Tree Assistance Program AGENCY: Farm Service Agency, USDA. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment

(PEA)for the implementation of the 2005 Hurricane Tree Assistance Program (TAP), authorized by the Emergency Agricultural Disaster Assistance Act. The draft PEA assesses the potential environmental impacts of alternatives to be considered in the administration of this hurricane program. The draft PEA also provides a means for the public to voice any concerns they may have about the program, and any ideas for improving it. This Notice of Availability informs the public of the availability of the applicable draft PEA and solicits public comment. DATES: FSA invites comments on the draft PEA. Comments should be submitted by close of business on April 30, 2007, to ensure consideration. Comments submitted after this date will be considered to the extent possible. ADDRESSES: Comments on and requests for copies of the draft PEA should be submitted to Matthew T. Ponish, National Environmental Compliance Manager, United States Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Mail Stop 0513, Washington DC 20250-0513, or by e-mail at *Matthew.Ponish@wdc.usda.gov* . The Draft PEA can be reviewed online at *http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&subject=ecrc&topic=nep-cd* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Ponish, USDA/FSA/CEPD/Stop 0513, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250-0513,

(202)720-6853, or e-mail at: *Matthew.Ponish@wdc.usda.gov* . 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 Farm Service Agency announces the availability of the draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment

(PEA)for the 2005 Hurricane TAP, authorized by the Emergency Agricultural Disaster Assistance Act (Pub. L. 109-234, section 3021), the goal of which is to reimburse eligible producers of eligible tree crops for certain costs associated with reestablishing crops lost because of the hurricanes of 2005. TAP will be implemented in counties declared disasters as a result of the 2005 hurricanes in the following states: Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. In consideration of the analysis documented in the PEA, the program would not constitute a major State or Federal action that would significantly affect the human environment. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. The regulations promulgating the 2005 Hurricane TAP were published in the **Federal Register** on February 12, 2007 (72 FR 6435), along with the provision that no benefit shall be paid under the program until FSA has completed the PEA and issued a decision document. The draft PEA assesses the potential environmental impacts of alternatives to be considered in the administration of the 2005 TAP. The draft PEA also provides a means for the public to voice any concerns they may have about the program and any ideas for improving it. This Notice of Availability informs the public of the availability of the draft PEA and solicits public comment. Signed in Washington DC on April 4, 2007. Thomas B. Hofeller, Acting Administrator, Farm Service Agency. [FR Doc. E7-6993 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Newspapers To Be Used for Publication of Legal Notice of Appealable Decisions and Publication of Notice of Proposed Actions for Southern Region; Alabama, Kentucky, Georgia, Tennessee, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Virginia, West Virginia, Arkansas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Puerto Rico AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Deciding Officers in the Southern Region will publish notice of decisions subject to administrative appeal under 36 CFR parts 215 and 217 in the legal notice section of the newspapers listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. As provided in 36 CFR part 215.5 and 36 CFR part 217.5(d), the public shall be advised through **Federal Register** notice, of the newspaper of record to be utilized for publishing legal notice of decisions. Newspaper publication of notice of decisions is in addition to direct notice of decisions to those who have requested it and to those who have participated in project planning. Responsible Officials in the Southern Region will also publish notice of proposed actions under 36 CFR part 215 in the newspapers that are listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. As provided in 36 CFR part 215.5, the public shall be advised, through **Federal Register** notice, of the newspaper of record to be utilized for publishing notices on proposed actions. Additionally, the Deciding Officers in the Southern Region will publish notice of the opportunity to object to a proposed authorized hazardous fuel reduction project under 36 CFR part 218.4 in the legal notice section of the newspapers listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. DATES: Use of these newspapers for purposes of publishing legal notice of decisions subject to appeal under 36 CFR parts 215 and 217, notices of proposed actions under 36 CFR part 215, and notices of the opportunity to object under 36 CFR part 218 shall begin on or after the date of this publication. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James W. Bennett, Regional Appeal Review Team Manager, Southern Region, Planning, 1720 Peachtree Road, NW., Atlanta, Georgia 30309, Phone: 404/347-2788. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Deciding Officers in the Southern Region will give legal notice of decisions subject to appel under 36 CFR part 217, the Responsible Officials in the Southern Region will give notice of decisions subject to appeal under 36 CFR part 215 and opportunity to object to a proposed authorized hazardous fuel reduction project under 36 CFR part 218 in the following newspapers which are listed by Forest Service administrative unit. Responsible Officials in the Southern Region will also give notice of proposed actions under 36 CFR part 215 in the following newspapers of record which are listed by Forest Service administrative unit. The timeframe for comment on a proposed action shall be based on the date of publication of the notice of the proposed action in the newspaper of record. The timeframe for appeal shall be based on the date of publication of the legal notice of the decision in the newspaper of record for 36 CFR parts 215 and 217. The timeframe for an objection shall be based on the date of publication of the legal notice of the opportunity to object for projects subject to 36 CFR part 218. Where more than one newspaper is listed for any unit, the first newspaper listed is the newspaper of record that will be utilized for publishing the legal notice of decisions and calculating timeframes. Secondary newspapers listed for a particular unit are those newspapers the Deciding Officer/Responsible Official expects to use for purposes of providing additional notice. The following newspapers will be used to provide notice. Southern Region Regional Forester Decisions Affecting National Forest System lands in more than one Administrative unit of the 15 in the Southern Region, *Atlanta Journal-Constitution* , publishing daily in Atlanta, GA. Affecting National Forest System lands in only one Administrative unit or only one Ranger District will appear in the newspaper of record elected by the National Forest, National Grassland, National Recreation Area, or Ranger District as listed below. National Forests in Alabama Forest Supervisor Decisions Affecting National Forest System lands in more than one Ranger District of the 6 in the National Forests in Alabama, *Montgomery Advertiser* , published daily in Montgomery, AL. Affecting National Forest System lands in only one Ranger District will appear in the newspaper of record elected by the Ranger District as listed below. District Ranger Decisions Bankhead Ranger District: *Northwest Alabamian* , published bi-weekly (Wednesday & Saturday) in Haleyville, AL. Conecuh Ranger District: *The Andalusia Star News* , published daily (Tuesday through Saturday) in Andalusia, AL. Oakmulgee Ranger District, *The Tuscaloosa News* , published daily in Tuscaloosa, AL. Shoal Creek Ranger District: *The Anniston Star* , published daily in Anniston, AL. Talladega Ranger District: *The Daily Home* , published daily in Talladega, AL. Tuskegee Ranger District: *Tuskegee News* , published weekly (Thursday) in Tuskegee, AL. Carribean National Forest, Puerto Rico Forest Supervisor Decisions *El Nuevo Dia* , published daily in Spanish in San Juan, PR. *San Juan Star* , published daily in English in San Juan, PR. Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forest, Georgia Forest Supervisor Decisions *The Times* , published daily in Gainesville, GA. District Ranger Decisions Armuchee-Cohutta Ranger District: *Daily Citizen* , published daily in Dalton, GA. Brasstown Ranger District: *North Georgia News,* (newspaper of record) published weekly (Wednesday) in Blairsville, GA. *Towns County Herald,* (secondary) published weekly (Thursday) in Hiawassee, GA. *The Dahlonega Nuggett,* (secondary) published weekly (Wednesday) in Dahlonega, GA. Chattooga Ranger District: *Northeast Georgian,* (newspaper of record) published bi-weekly (Tuesday & Friday) in Cornelia, GA. *Chieftain & Toccoa Record,* (secondary) published bi-weekly (Tuesday & Friday) in Toccoa, GA. *White County News Telegraph,* (secondary) published weekly (Thursday) in Cleveland, GA. *The Dahlonega Nuggett,* (secondary) published weekly (Thursday) in Dahlonega, GA. Oconee Ranger District: *Eatonton Messenger,* published weekly (Thursday) in Eatonton, GA. Tallulah Ranger District: *Clayton Tribune,* published weekly (Thursday) in Clayton, GA. Toccoa Ranger District: *The News Observer* (newspaper of record) published bi-weekly (Tuesday & Friday) in Blue Ridge, GA. *The Dahlonega Nuggett,* (secondary) published weekly (Wednesday) in Dahlonega, GA. Cherokee National Forest, Tennessee Forest Supervisor Decisions *Knoxville News Sentinel,* published daily in Knoxville, TN. District Ranger Decisions Nolichuchy-Unaka Ranger District: *Greeneville Sun,* published daily (except Sunday) in Greeneville, TN. Ocoee-Hiwassee Ranger District: *Polk County News,* published weekly (Wednesday) in Benton, TN. Tellico Ranger District: *Monroe County Advocate & Democrat,* published tri-weekly (Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday) in Sweetwater, TN. Watauga Ranger District: *Johnson City Press,* published daily in Johnson City, TN. Daniel Boone National Forest, Kentucky Forest Supervisor Decisions *Lexington Herald-Leader,* published daily in Lexington, KY. District Ranger Decisions Cumberland Ranger District: *Lexington Herald-Leader,* published daily in Lexington, KY. London Ranger District: *The Sentinel-Echo,* published tri-weekly (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) in London, KY. Redbird Ranger District: *Manchester Enterprise,* published weekly (Thursday) in Manchester, KY. Stearns Ranger District: *McCreary County Record,* published weekly (Tuesday) in Whitley City, KY. National Forests in Florida, Florida Forest Supervisor Decisions *The Tallahassee Democrat,* published daily in Tallahassee, FL. District Ranger Decisions Apalachicola Ranger District: *Calhoun-Liberty Journal,* published weekly (Wednesday) in Bristol, FL. Lake George Ranger District: *The Ocala Star Banner,* published daily in Ocala, FL. Osceola Ranger District: *The Lake City Reporter* , published daily (Monday-Saturday) in Lake City, FL. Seminole Ranger District: *The Daily Commercial,* published in Leesburg, FL. Wakulla Ranger District: *The Tallahassee Democrat,* published daily in Tallahassee, FL. Francis Marion & Sumter National Forests, South Carolina Forest Supervisor Decisions *The State,* published daily in Columbia, SC. District Ranger Decisions Andrew Pickens Ranger District: *The Daily Journal,* published daily (Tuesday through Saturday) in Seneca, SC. Enoree Ranger District: *Newberry Observer,* published tri-weekly (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) in Newberry, SC. Long Cane Ranger District: *The State* , published daily in Columbia, SC. Wambaw Ranger District: *Post and Courier,* published daily in Charleston, SC. Witherbee Ranger District: *Post and Courier,* published daily in Charleston, SC. George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, Virginia and West Virginia Forest Supervisor Decisions *Roanoke Times,* published daily in Roanoke, VA. District Ranger Decisions Clinch Ranger District: *Coalfield Progress,* published bi-weekly (Tuesday and Thursday) in Norton, VA. North River Ranger District: *Daily News Record,* published daily (except Sunday) in Harrisonburg, VA. Glenwood-Pedlar Ranger District: *Roanoke Times,* published daily in Roanoke, VA. James River Ranger District: *Virginian Review,* published daily (except Sunday) in Covington, VA. Lee Ranger District: *Shenandoah Valley Herald,* published weekly (Wednesday) in Woodstock, VA. Mount Rogers National Recreation Area: *Bristol Herald Courier,* published daily in Bristol, VA. Eastern Divide Ranger District: *Roanoke Times,* published daily in Roanoke, VA. Warm Springs Ranger District: *The Recorder,* published weekly (Thursday) in Monterey, VA. Kisatchie National Forest, Louisiana Forest Supervisor Decisions *The Town Talk,* published daily in Alexandria, LA. District Ranger Decisions Calcasieu Ranger District: *The Town Talk,* (newspaper of record) published daily in Alexandria, LA. *The Leesville Ledger,* (secondary) published tri-weekly (Tuesday, Friday, and Sunday) in Leesville, LA. Caney Ranger District: *Minden Press Hearld,* (newspaper of record) published daily in Minden, LA. *Homer Guardian Journal,* (secondary) published weekly (Wednesday) in Homer, LA. Catahoula Ranger District: *The Town Talk,* published daily in Alexandria, LA. Kisatchie Ranger District; *Natchitoches Times,* published daily (Tuesday thru Friday and on Sunday) in Natchitoches, LA. Winn Ranger District: *Winn Parish Enterprise,* published weekly (Wednesday) in Winnfield, LA. Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area, Kentucky and Tennessee Area Supervisor Decisions *The Paducah Sun,* published daily in Paducah, KY. National Forests in Mississippi, Mississippi Forest Supervisor Decisions *Clarion-Ledger,* published daily in Jackson, MS. District Ranger Decisions Bienville Ranger District: *Clarion-Ledger,* published daily in Jackson, MS. Chickasawhay Ranger District: *Clarion-Ledger* , published daily in Jackson, MS. Delta Ranger District: *Clarion-Ledger* , published daily in Jackson, MS. De Sota Ranger District: *Clarion-Ledger* , published daily in Jackson, MS. Holly Springs Ranger District: *Clarion-Ledger* , published daily in Jackson, MS. Homochitto Ranger District: *Clarion-Ledger* , published daily in Jackson, MS. Tombigbee Ranger District: *Clarion-Ledger* , published daily in Jackson, MS. National Forests in North Carolina, North Carolina Forest Supervisor Decisions *The Asheville Citizen-Times* , published daily in Asheville, NC. District Ranger Decisions Appalachian Ranger District: *The Asheville Citizen-Times* , published daily in Asheville, NC. Cheoah Ranger District: *Graham Star* , published weekly (Thursday) in Robbinsville, NC. Croatan Ranger District: *The Sun Journal* , published daily in New Bern, NC. Grandfather Ranger District: *McDowell News* , published daily in Marion, NC. Highlands Ranger District: *The Highlander* , published weekly (mid May-mid Nov. Tues. & Fri.; mid Nov.-mid May Tues. only) in Highlands, NC. PisgahRanger District: *The Asheville Citizen-Times* , published daily in Asheville, NC. Tusquitee Ranger District: *Cherokee Scout* , published weekly (Wednesday) in Murphy, NC. Uwharrie Ranger District: *Montgomery Herald* , published weekly (Wednesday) in Troy, NC. Wayah Ranger District: *The Franklin Press* , published bi-weekly (Tuesday and Friday) in Franklin, NC. Ouachita National Forest, Arkansas and Oklahoma Forest Supervisor Decisions *Arkansas Democrat-Gazette* , published in Little Rock, AR. District Ranger Decisions Caddo-Womble Ranger District: *Arkansas Democrat-Gazette* , published daily in Little Rock, AR. Jessieville-Winona-Fourche Ranger District: *Arkansas Democrat-Gazette* , published daily in Little Rock, AR. Mena-Oden Ranger District: *Arkansas Democrat-Gazette* , published daily in Little Rock, AR. Oklahoma Ranger District (Choctaw; Kiamichi; and Tiak) *Tulsa World* , published in daily in Tulsa, OK. Poteau-Cold Springs Ranger District: *Arkansas Democrat-Gazette* , published daily in Little Rock, AR. Ozark-St. Francis National Forests, Arkansas Forest Supervisor Decisions *The Courier* , published daily (Tuesday through Sunday) in Russellville, AR. District Ranger Decisions Bayou Ranger District: *The Courier* , published daily (Tuesday through Sunday) in Russellville, AR. Boston Mountain Ranger District: *Southwest Times Record* , published daily in Fort Smith, AR. Buffalo Ranger District: *Newton County Times* , published weekly in Jasper, AR. Magazine Ranger District: *Southwest Times Record,* , published daily in Fort Smith, AR. Pleasant Hill Ranger District: *Johnson County Graphic* , published weekly (Wednesday) in Clarksville, AR. St. Francis National Forest: *The Daily World* , published daily (Sunday through Friday) in Helena, AR. Sylamore Ranger District: *Stone County Leader* , published weekly (Wednesday) in Mountain View, AR. National Forests and Grasslands in Texas, Texas Forest Supervisor Decisions *The Lufkin Daily News* , published daily in Lufkin, TX. District Ranger Decisions Angelina National Forest: *The Lufkin Daily News* , published daily in Lufkin, TX. Caddo & LBJ National Grasslands: *Denton Record-Chronicle* , published daily in Denton, TX. Davy Crockett National Forest: *The Lufkin Daily News* , published daily in Lufkin, TX. Sabine National Forest: *The Lufkin Daily News* , published daily in Lufkin, TX. Sam Houston, National Forest: *The Courier* , published daily in Conroe, TX. Dated: April 6, 2007. Thomas A. Peterson, Deputy Regional Forester. [FR Doc. 07-1834 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 7

Traces to 7 documents

U.S. Code