[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 98 (Friday, May 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28643-28647]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12213]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R4-R-2010-N051; 40136-1265-0000-S3]


Pine Island, Matlacha Pass, Island Bay, and Caloosahatchee 
National Wildlife Refuges, Lee and Charlotte Counties, FL

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability: draft comprehensive conservation plan 
and environmental assessment; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 
availability of a draft comprehensive conservation plan and 
environmental assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for Pine Island, Matlacha Pass, 
Island Bay, and Caloosahatchee National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) for 
public review and comment. In the Draft CCP/EA, we describe the 
alternative we propose to use to manage these four refuges for the 15 
years following approval of the final CCP.

DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments 
by June 21, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the Draft CCP/EA by contacting Ms. 
Cheri M. Ehrhardt, via U.S. mail at J.N. ``Ding'' Darling National 
Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1 Wildlife Drive, Sanibel, FL 33957, or via e-
mail at [email protected]. Alternatively, you may download the 
document from our Internet Site at http://southeast.fws.gov/planning 
under ``Draft Documents.'' Submit comments on the Draft CCP/EA to the 
above postal address or e-mail address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Cheri M. Ehrhardt, Natural 
Resource Planner, telephone: 321/861-2368; or Mr. Paul Tritaik, Refuge 
Manager, telephone: 239/472-1100.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction

    With this notice, we continue the CCP process for Pine Island, 
Matlacha Pass, Island Bay, and Caloosahatchee NWRs. We started the 
process through a notice in the Federal Register on June 27, 2007 (72 
FR 35254), and extended the comment period in a notice in the Federal 
Register on April 2, 2008 (73 FR 17991). For more about the refuges, 
their purposes, and our CCP process, please see those notices.

Background

The CCP Process

    The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System 
Improvement Act of 1997, requires us to develop a CCP for each national 
wildlife refuge. The purpose for developing a CCP is to provide refuge 
managers with a 15-year strategy for achieving refuge purposes and 
contributing toward the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, 
consistent with sound principles of fish and wildlife management, 
conservation, legal mandates, and our policies. In addition to 
outlining broad management direction on conserving wildlife and their 
habitats, CCPs identify wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities 
available to the public, including opportunities for hunting, fishing, 
wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education 
and interpretation. We will review and update the CCP at least every 15 
years in accordance with the Administration Act.
    Totaling approximately 1,201 acres, the four refuges were 
established ``as a preserve and breeding ground for native birds'' and 
are managed as part of the J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR Complex (Complex). 
Predominantly mangrove swamp, these four refuges provide for native 
wildlife and habitat diversity through a mix of habitats, including 
mangrove islands and shorelines, saltwater marshes and ponds, tidal 
flats, and upland hardwood forests. They also provide protection for 12 
Federal-listed and 25 State-listed species, as well as for wading 
birds, waterbirds, raptors and birds of prey, neotropical migratory 
birds, shorebirds, and seabirds. Although all four refuges are closed 
to public access to protect their sensitive resources, they exist in an 
estuarine system and are all viewable from the water.
    The priority management issues facing these four refuges are 
addressed in the Draft CCP/EA, including: (1) Increasing and changing 
human population, development of the landscape, recreational uses and 
demands, and associated impacts; (2) issues and impacts associated with 
water quality, water quantity, and timing; (3) invasion and spread of 
exotic, invasive, and nuisance species; (4) climate change impacts; (5) 
need for long-term protection of important resources; (6) declines in 
and threats to rare, threatened, and endangered species; (7) 
insufficient baseline wildlife and habitat data and lack of

[[Page 28644]]

comprehensive habitat management plan; and (8) insufficient resources 
to address refuge needs.

CCP Alternatives, Including Our Proposed Alternative

    We developed four alternatives for managing the Complex and chose 
Alternative C as the proposed alternative. A full description of each 
alternative is in the Draft CCP/EA. We summarize each alternative 
below.

Alternative A (Current Management, No Action)

    Alternative A would continue management activities and programs at 
levels similar to past management, providing a baseline for the 
comparison of the action alternatives.
    Under Alternative A, wildlife and habitat management activities for 
the Complex would continue to be limited. The rare, threatened, and 
endangered species of management concern would continue to be wood 
storks, roseate spoonbills, roseate terns, black skimmers, American 
oystercatchers, snowy and piping plovers, and bald eagles. We would 
continue to coordinate with the partners to survey rookeries, monitor 
black skimmer nesting, survey for snowy plovers, and restore mangroves 
on four islands, as well as address exotic, invasive, and nuisance 
species through the Southwest Florida Cooperative Invasive Species 
Management Area (SWFL CISMA). Since wintering critical habitat for the 
piping plover has been designated on the Terrapin Creek Tract at 
Matlacha Pass NWR, we would continue to protect this area and limit 
human disturbances. We would continue to work with the partners to 
address water quality, quantity, and timing concerns associated with 
the refuges' watersheds, including Lake Okeechobee regulatory releases, 
the Caloosahatchee Basin and Cape Coral drainages, and local runoff 
issues. Several climate change models have included these refuges, 
helping us to begin to develop an understanding of the impacts of 
climate change on these resources.
    Under Alternative A, resource protection management activities for 
Pine Island, Matlacha Pass, Island Bay, and Caloosahatchee NWRs would 
continue to be very minimal. Law enforcement staff would continue to 
patrol known cultural resource sites. The full extent of cultural 
resources on the refuges would continue to remain unknown. Boundaries 
would be reposted as possible. Violations of the closed areas would 
continue to occur. Boundary discrepancies would likely continue to 
exist (e.g., at Caloosahatchee NWR and Givney Key at Matlacha Pass 
NWR). Caloosahatchee NWR would develop a Minor Expansion Proposal (MEP) 
to include Manatee Island under refuge management, since Florida Power 
and Light donated the island to the ``Ding'' Darling Wildlife Society 
for future inclusion in the refuge. The Island Bay NWR Wilderness Area 
would continue to remain closed with no active management.
    Under Alternative A, the four refuges would remain closed to 
visitors, resulting in limited visitor service activities and programs. 
However, since the area around the refuges receives high use and since 
the refuges are part of the Great Calusa Blueway, the refuges would 
continue to be identified on maps distributed by partners, providing 
limited visitor welcome and orientation. Various activities, including 
fishing, canoeing, kayaking, motor boating, parasailing, windsurfing, 
ski tubing, using personal watercraft, and participating in wildlife 
observation and photography, would continue to occur in the State 
waters adjacent to the refuges. Environmental education and 
interpretation activities would continue to be conducted at the 
``Ding'' Darling Education Center on Sanibel Island and at off-site 
locations.
    J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR staff would continue to conduct minimal 
management and periodic patrols of Pine Island, Matlacha Pass, Island 
Bay, and Caloosahatchee NWRs.

Alternative B (Native Wildlife and Habitat Diversity)

    Alternative B would increase refuge management actions, with a 
focus on native wildlife and habitat diversity.
    The rare, threatened, and endangered species of management concern 
to the refuges would be expanded to include the wood stork, roseate 
spoonbill, roseate tern, black skimmer, American oystercatcher, snowy 
plover, Wilson's plover, red knot, piping plover, bald eagle, mangrove 
cuckoo, black-whiskered vireo, gray kingbird, Florida prairie warbler, 
West Indian manatee, ornate diamondback terrapin, loggerhead sea 
turtle, green sea turtle, Kemp's ridley sea turtle, gopher tortoise, 
American alligator, American crocodile, eastern indigo snake, Sanibel 
Island rice rat, Gulf sturgeon, and smalltooth sawfish. Increased 
surveying and monitoring activities, minimized disturbances to wildlife 
and habitats, increased habitat management, increased intergovernmental 
coordination, and increased information would enhance decision-making, 
benefitting a variety of resources. The establishment of buffer zones 
around known rookery locations and key foraging and resting areas would 
benefit a variety of birds. In relation to the proposed widening of I-
75, we would work with the partners to identify and address wildlife 
and habitat impacts associated with the proposed project, with an 
emphasis on minimizing impacts to wildlife and habitat diversity. 
Focusing on native diversity, we would expand exotic, invasive, and 
nuisance species plant control activities with updated priority plant 
lists and identification and location of new plant infestations, with 
initial efforts focused on elimination. Further, we would work with the 
partners to control and eradicate exotic, invasive, and nuisance animal 
species and would coordinate with the partners to increase the public's 
awareness of the negative impacts of these species. The refuges would 
adapt management as necessary to eradicate new invasive species and 
increase active participation in the SWFL CISMA. We would increase 
management activities related to water quality, quantity, and timing 
concerns. We would evaluate the need to expand the existing water 
quality monitoring stations to cover all four refuges. We would work 
with the partners to foster and conduct research to better understand 
the impacts of climate change on wildlife and habitat diversity and to 
refine and run appropriate climate change models to better predict sea 
level change impacts on resources of the refuges. Further, we would 
work with the partners to establish benchmarks to record sea level rise 
and beach profiles and shoreline changes, which could potentially 
impact a variety of species.
    A complete archaeological and historical survey of the satellite 
refuges would be conducted, allowing for the protection of any newly 
identified sites. To resolve boundary and ownership discrepancies, we 
would conduct legal boundary surveys and historical research. To serve 
the purposes of the refuges and wildlife and habitat management goals 
and objectives, we would work with the partners to develop agreements 
to establish closed area buffers to protect key resources. We would 
prioritize acquisition efforts for those sites with high native 
wildlife and habitat values and would pursue completion of the approved 
acquisition boundaries from willing sellers. We would pursue Western 
Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network designation. To improve management 
of the Island Bay NWR Wilderness Area, Alternative B would initiate 
coordination with the Charlotte County Mosquito Control

[[Page 28645]]

District to eliminate the use of larvicides in the Wilderness Area 
during mosquito control activities. To increase understanding and 
awareness regarding the Wilderness Area, we would incorporate Island 
Bay NWR Wilderness Area into programs and materials delivered at the 
``Ding'' Darling Education Center and at the proposed annual event for 
the satellite refuges.
    Although the refuges would likely remain closed throughout the life 
of the CCP, we would expand the Visitor Services program of the refuges 
with a focus on native diversity through coordination with the 
partners, expanded environmental education and interpretation 
opportunities, and increased outreach efforts and activities. Since 
numerous area visitors also visit the nearby J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR, 
we would update the exhibits and activities at the ``Ding'' Darling 
Education Center to highlight the satellite refuges and provide 
wilderness stewardship principles. Since numerous uses occur adjacent 
to these refuges, we would work with the partners to minimize the 
impacts to resources of the refuges from these adjacent activities 
(e.g., impacts from disturbance and from abandoned monofilament fishing 
line, cast nets, and crab traps on birds, manatees, sea turtles, and 
terrapins) and to improve the ethical outdoor behavior of area users. 
We would incorporate messages that focus on native wildlife and habitat 
diversity, the role and importance of these refuges in the landscape, 
and the importance of minimizing the impacts of human activities into 
on-site (at the ``Ding'' Darling Education Center) and off-site 
curriculum-based environmental education programs, as well as into 
interpretive and outreach materials developed for all refuges in the 
Complex. We would train volunteers, teachers, and staff to conduct 
educational and interpretive programs; increase outreach efforts and 
activities to the local communities; and work with partners to develop 
an annual satellite refuges event in one of the local communities.
    Alternative B would create five staff positions specific to these 
refuges: Biological science technician, law enforcement officer, 
wildlife refuge specialist (assistant refuge manager), hydrologist, and 
park ranger (Environmental Education). The lead biologist at the J.N. 
``Ding'' Darling NWR would continue to design and oversee the 
biological program and activities at the satellite refuges. We would 
work with the partners to evaluate and install interpretive signage at 
partner sites. A key refuge administration activity would be to work to 
improve the visibility and image of the Service in communities around 
these refuges to build support for refuge management, including through 
the development of an annual event in one of the local communities to 
highlight the satellite refuges.

Alternative C (Migratory Birds, Proposed Action)

    Alternative C would propose actions and activities that focus 
management on the needs of migratory birds. This alternative addresses 
the management needs of all birds covered under the Migratory Bird 
Treaty Act, including resident species of native birds that are found 
using the refuge year-round.
    The needs of migratory birds would be prioritized in all management 
and restoration plans. The rare, threatened, and endangered species of 
management concern to the refuges would be expanded to include the wood 
stork, roseate spoonbill, roseate tern, black skimmer, American 
oystercatcher, snowy plover, Wilson's plover, red knot, piping plover, 
bald eagle, mangrove cuckoo, black-whiskered vireo, gray kingbird, 
Florida prairie warbler, West Indian manatee, ornate diamondback 
terrapin, loggerhead sea turtle, green sea turtle, Kemp's ridley sea 
turtle, gopher tortoise, American alligator, American crocodile, 
eastern indigo snake, Gulf sturgeon, and smalltooth sawfish. Increased 
and improved surveying and monitoring activities, minimized 
disturbances to wildlife and habitats, increased habitat creation and 
management, increased intergovernmental coordination, and increased 
information would enhance decisionmaking, benefitting a variety of 
resources. We would work with the partners to evaluate the Turtle Bay 
area of Island Bay NWR for designation as a Manatee Sanctuary, since it 
is an important manatee natality area within Charlotte Harbor. The 
establishment of buffer zones around known rookery locations and key 
foraging and resting areas would benefit a variety of birds. In 
relation to the proposed widening of I-75, we would work with the 
partners to identify and address wildlife and habitat impacts 
associated with the proposed project, with an emphasis on minimizing 
impacts to migratory birds. Focusing on the needs of migratory birds, 
we would expand exotic, invasive, and nuisance plant species control 
activities with a focus on migratory birds with updated lists of 
priorities and identification and location of new plant infestations 
with initial efforts focused on elimination. Further, we would work 
with the partners to control and eradicate exotic, invasive, and 
nuisance animals and would coordinate with the partners to increase the 
public's awareness of the negative impacts of these species. In all 
these efforts, we would adapt management as necessary to eradicate new 
invasive species and increase active participation in the SWFL CISMA. 
We would increase management activities related to water quality, 
quantity, and timing concerns with a focus on migratory birds. We would 
evaluate the need to expand the existing water quality monitoring 
stations to cover all four refuges. We would work with the partners to 
foster and conduct research to better understand the impacts of climate 
change on migratory birds and to refine and run appropriate climate 
change models to better predict sea level change impacts on resources 
of the refuges. Further, we would work with the partners to establish 
benchmarks to record sea level rise and beach profiles and shoreline 
changes, which could potentially impact a variety of species.
    A complete archaeological and historical survey of the satellite 
refuges would be conducted, allowing for the protection of any newly 
identified sites. To resolve boundary and ownership discrepancies, we 
would conduct legal boundary surveys and historical research. To serve 
the purposes of the refuges and wildlife and habitat management goals 
and objectives, we would work with the partners to develop agreements 
to establish closed area buffers to protect key resources. We would 
prioritize acquisition efforts for those sites with high values for 
migratory birds and would pursue completion of the approved acquisition 
boundaries from willing sellers. We would pursue the designation of 
lands and waters within the current management boundaries of Pine 
Island and Matlacha Pass NWRs for inclusion in the Western Hemisphere 
Shorebird Reserve Network and of all four refuges as RAMSAR Wetlands of 
International Importance, as part of the application for J.N. ``Ding'' 
Darling NWR. To improve management of the Island Bay NWR Wilderness 
Area, we would initiate coordination with the Charlotte County Mosquito 
Control District to eliminate the use of larvicides in the Wilderness 
Area during mosquito control activities. To increase understanding and 
awareness regarding the Wilderness Area, we would incorporate Island 
Bay NWR Wilderness Area into programs and materials delivered at the 
``Ding'' Darling Education Center and at the proposed annual event for 
the satellite refuges.

[[Page 28646]]

    Although the refuges would likely remain closed throughout the life 
of the CCP, we would expand the Visitor Services program of the refuges 
with a focus on migratory birds through coordination with the partners, 
expanded environmental education and interpretation opportunities, and 
increased outreach efforts and activities. Since numerous area visitors 
also visit the nearby J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR, we would update the 
exhibits and activities at the ``Ding'' Darling Education Center to 
highlight the satellite refuges and provide wilderness stewardship 
principles. Since numerous uses occur adjacent to these refuges, we 
would work with the partners to minimize the impacts to resources of 
the refuges from these adjacent activities (e.g., impacts from 
disturbance and from abandoned monofilament fishing line, cast nets, 
and crab traps on birds, manatees, sea turtles, and terrapins) and to 
improve the ethical outdoor behavior of area users. We would 
incorporate messages that focus on migratory birds, the role and 
importance of these refuges in the landscape, and the importance of 
minimizing the impacts of human activities into on-site (at the 
``Ding'' Darling Education Center) and off-site curriculum-based 
environmental education programs, as well as into interpretive and 
outreach materials developed for all refuges in the Complex. The 
Complex would train volunteers, teachers, and staff to conduct 
educational and interpretive programs; increase outreach efforts and 
activities to the local communities; and work with partners to develop 
an annual satellite refuge event in one of the local communities.
    Alternative C would create five staff positions specific to these 
refuges: Biological science technician, law enforcement officer, 
wildlife refuge specialist (assistant refuge manager), hydrologist, and 
park ranger (environmental education). The lead biologist at the J.N. 
``Ding'' Darling NWR would continue to design and oversee the 
biological program and activities at the satellite refuges. We would 
work with the partners to evaluate and install interpretive signage at 
partner sites. And, we would expand existing partnerships and develop 
new partnerships. A key refuge administration activity would be to work 
to improve the visibility and image of the Service in communities 
around these refuges to build support for refuge management, including 
through the development of an annual event in one of the local 
communities to highlight the satellite refuges.

Alternative D (Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species)

    Alternative D would focus on increasing refuge management actions 
that promote the recovery of rare, threatened, and endangered species 
occurring within the four refuges.
    The rare, threatened, and endangered species of management concern 
to the refuges would be expanded to include the wood stork, roseate 
spoonbill, roseate tern, black skimmer, American oystercatcher, snowy 
plover, Wilson's plover, red knot, piping plover, bald eagle, mangrove 
cuckoo, black-whiskered vireo, gray kingbird, Florida prairie warbler, 
West Indian manatee, Sanibel Island rice rat, ornate diamondback 
terrapin, loggerhead sea turtle, green sea turtle, Kemp's ridley sea 
turtle, gopher tortoise, American alligator, American crocodile, 
eastern indigo snake, Gulf sturgeon, and smalltooth sawfish. Increased 
and improved survey and monitoring activities, minimized disturbances 
to wildlife and habitats, increased habitat creation and management, 
increased intergovernmental coordination, and increased information 
would enhance decision-making, benefitting a variety of resources and 
helping serve recovery goals. We would work with the partners to 
evaluate the Turtle Bay area of Island Bay NWR for designation as a 
Manatee Sanctuary, since it is an important manatee natality area 
within Charlotte Harbor. The establishment of buffer zones around known 
rookery locations and key foraging and resting areas would benefit a 
variety of rare, threatened, and endangered species. In relation to the 
proposed widening of I-75, we would work with the partners to identify 
and address wildlife and habitat impacts associated with the proposed 
project with an emphasis on minimizing impacts to rare, threatened, and 
endangered species. The refuges would expand exotic, invasive, and 
nuisance plant species control activities with a focus on rare, 
threatened, and endangered species, with updated lists of priorities 
and identification and location of new plant infestations with initial 
efforts focused on elimination. Further, we would work with the 
partners to control and eradicate exotic, invasive, and nuisance 
animals and would coordinate with the partners to increase the public's 
awareness of the negative impacts of these species. In all these 
efforts, we would adapt management as necessary to eradicate new 
invasive species and increase active participation in the SWFL CISMA. 
We would increase management activities related to water quality, 
quantity, and timing concerns with a focus on rare, threatened, and 
endangered species. We would evaluate the need to expand the existing 
water quality monitoring stations to cover all four refuges. We would 
work with the partners to foster and conduct research to better 
understand the impacts of climate change on rare, threatened, and 
endangered species and to refine and run appropriate climate change 
models to better predict sea level change impacts on resources of the 
refuges. Further, we would work with the partners to establish 
benchmarks to record sea level rise and beach profiles and shoreline 
changes, which could potentially impact a variety of species.
    A complete archaeological and historical survey of the satellite 
refuges would be conducted, allowing for the protection of any newly 
identified sites. To resolve boundary and ownership discrepancies, we 
would conduct legal boundary surveys and historical research. To serve 
the purposes of the refuges and wildlife and habitat management goals 
and objectives, we would work with the partners to develop agreements 
to establish closed area buffers to protect key resources. We would 
prioritize acquisition efforts for those sites with high values for 
rare, threatened, and endangered species and would pursue completion of 
the approved acquisition boundaries from willing sellers. We would 
pursue Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network designation. To 
improve management of the Island Bay NWR Wilderness Area, we would 
initiate coordination with the Charlotte County Mosquito Control 
District to eliminate the use of larvicides in the Wilderness Area 
during mosquito control activities. To increase understanding and 
awareness regarding the Wilderness Area, we would incorporate Island 
Bay NWR Wilderness Area into programs and materials delivered at the 
``Ding'' Darling Education Center and at the proposed annual event for 
the satellite refuges.
    Although the refuges would likely remain closed throughout the life 
of the CCP, we would expand the Visitor Services program of the refuges 
through coordination with the partners, expanded environmental 
education and interpretation opportunities, and increased outreach 
efforts and activities. Visitor services programs and activities would 
be focused on rare, threatened, and endangered species. Since numerous 
area visitors also visit the nearby J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR, we would 
update the exhibits and activities at the ``Ding'' Darling Education 
Center to highlight the satellite refuges and

[[Page 28647]]

provide wilderness stewardship principles. Since numerous uses occur 
adjacent to these refuges, we would work with the partners to minimize 
the impacts to resources of the refuges from these adjacent activities 
(e.g., impacts from disturbance and from abandoned monofilament fishing 
line, cast nets, and crab traps on rare, threatened, and endangered 
species) and to improve the ethical outdoor behavior of area users. We 
would incorporate messages that focus on rare, threatened, and 
endangered species, the role and importance of these refuges in the 
landscape, and the importance of minimizing the impacts of human 
activities into on-site (at the ``Ding'' Darling Education Center) and 
off-site curriculum-based environmental education programs, as well as 
into interpretive and outreach materials developed for all refuges in 
the Complex. We would train volunteers, teachers, and staff to conduct 
educational and interpretive programs; increase outreach efforts and 
activities to the local communities; and work with partners to develop 
an annual satellite refuge event in one of the local communities.
    Alternative D would create five staff positions specific to these 
refuges: Biological science technician, law enforcement officer, 
wildlife refuge specialist (assistant refuge manager), hydrologist, and 
park ranger (Environmental Education). The lead biologist at the J.N. 
``Ding'' Darling NWR would continue to design and oversee the 
biological program and activities at the satellite refuges. We would 
work with the partners to evaluate and install interpretive signage at 
partner sites. We would expand existing partnerships and develop new 
partnerships. A key refuge administration activity would be to work to 
improve the visibility and image of the Service in communities around 
these refuges to build support for refuge management, including through 
the development of an annual event in one of the local communities to 
highlight the satellite refuges.

Next Step

    After the comment period ends, we will analyze the comments and 
address them.

Public Availability of Comments

    Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

    Authority:  This notice is published under the authority of the 
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Pub. L. 
105-57.

    Dated: April 14, 2010.
Mark J. Musaus,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2010-12213 Filed 5-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P