Importation of Table Grapes From Namibia, 55087-55090 [06-7891]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
55087
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 71, No. 183
Thursday, September 21, 2006
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
7 CFR Part 305 and 319
[Docket No. APHIS–2006–0025]
Importation of Table Grapes From
Namibia
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
SUMMARY: We are amending the fruits
and vegetables regulations to allow the
importation into the United States of
fresh table grapes from Namibia under
certain conditions. As a condition of
entry, the grapes must undergo cold
treatment and fumigation with methyl
bromide and must be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate with an
additional declaration stating that the
commodity has been inspected and
found free of the specified pests. In
addition, the grapes will also be subject
to inspection at the port of first arrival.
This action allows for the importation of
grapes from Namibia into the United
States while continuing to provide
protection against the introduction of
quarantine pests.
DATES: Effective Date: October 23, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Sharon Porsche, Import Specialist,
Commodity Import Analysis and
Operations, Plant Health Programs,
PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 133,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734–
8758.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Fruits
and Vegetables’’ (7 CFR 319.56 through
319.56–8, referred to below as the
regulations) prohibit or restrict the
importation of fruits and vegetables into
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:49 Sep 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
the United States from certain parts of
the world to prevent the introduction
and dissemination of plant pests that are
new to or not widely distributed within
the United States.
On June 26, 2006, we published in the
Federal Register (71 FR 36221–36225,
Docket No. APHIS–2006–0025) a
proposal 1 to amend the fruits and
vegetables regulations to allow the
importation of fresh table grapes, in
commercial shipments only, from
Namibia into the United States under
certain conditions. As a condition of
entry, we proposed that the grapes
would be subject to a combined
treatment of cold treatment in
accordance with schedule T107–e and
methyl bromide fumigation in
accordance with schedule T104–a–1. In
addition, because the cold and methyl
bromide treatments would not
effectively mitigate the pest risk posed
by the mealybugs Maconellicoccus
hirsutus, Nipaecoccus vastator, and
Rastrococcus iceryoides or the mollusks
Cochlicella ventricosa and Theba
pisana, we proposed that the National
Plant Protection Organization of
Namibia would be required to conduct
phytosanitary inspections for those
pests and that each shipment of grapes
would have to be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate bearing the
additional declaration: ‘‘The grapes in
this shipment have been inspected and
found free of Maconellicoccus hirsutus,
Nipaecoccus vastator, Rastrococcus
iceryoides, Cochlicella ventricosa and
Theba pisana.’’
We solicited comments concerning
our proposal for 60 days ending August
25, 2006. We received two comments by
that date. The first comment was from
a producer who was in favor of the
importation of table grapes from
Namibia. The second comment was
from an industry group that expressed
concern that the pest Scirtothrips
dorsalis was not included in the
preamble of the proposed rule on the
list of pests that can be addressed by
methyl bromide treatment. This was an
inadvertent omission; the risks
associated with Scirtothrips dorsalis
were addressed within the pest risk
1 To view the proposed rule and the comments
we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov, click
on the ‘‘Advanced Search’’ tab, and select ‘‘Docket
Search.’’ In the Docket ID field, enter APHIS–2006–
0025, then click on ‘‘Submit.’’ Clicking on the
Docket ID link in the search results page will
produce a list of all documents in the docket.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
assessment and risk mitigation
documents associated with the
proposed rule and the pest was cited
specifically in the regulatory text of
proposed § 319.56–2ss(b) as a pest for
which treatment is required.
The commenter also expressed
concern that Namibian table grapes
would be shipped into the United States
during a time period when they would
be in direct competition with domestic
table grapes (October and November)
and that the economic analysis provided
in the proposed rule focused too much
on grapes intended for processed
utilization (i.e., wine, juice, or raisins)
rather than on grapes grown for the
fresh market. Therefore, the commenter
disagreed that the competitive impact of
Namibian table grapes on domestic
producers would be minimal. As stated
in the proposed rule, grapes in Namibia
mature in November, however, given
that the grapes will be transported to the
United States by cargo ship with a
transit time of approximately 4 weeks,
most grape shipments from Namibia
would arrive from mid to late December
until the end of January, well after peak
harvest for domestic table grapes. The
economic analysis in this final rule has
been updated to reflect the additional
information provided by the commenter
regarding domestic grape production;
however, that information did not affect
the conclusions of our analysis. The
impact of this rule on domestic table
grape producers is still expected to be
minimal.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the
proposed rule and in this document, we
are adopting the proposed rule as a final
rule, without change.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12866. The rule has
been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866
and, therefore, has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget.
We are amending the fruits and
vegetables regulations to allow the
importation into the United States of
fresh table grapes from Namibia under
certain conditions. As a condition of
entry, the grapes will be subject to both
cold treatment and fumigation with
methyl bromide and will have to be
accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate with an additional
declaration stating that the commodity
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
55088
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
has been inspected and found free of the
specified pests. In addition, the grapes
will also be subject to inspection at the
port of first arrival. This action will
allow for the importation of grapes from
Namibia into the United States while
continuing to provide protection against
the introduction of quarantine pests.
According to the Trade Law Center for
Southern Africa, 7 grape companies in
Namibia are currently cultivating 1,300
hectares, irrigated by water from the
Orange River, and another 2,000
hectares are expected to be put to
cultivation soon. Because of the climate
in Namibia, grapes mature in November,
which gives producers there a
competitive advantage over producers
in other southern hemisphere countries
where the grape harvest begins in
December. Imports of Namibian table
grapes into the United States in the first
year are expected to reach 22.5 40-foot
containers (approximately 744,000
pounds), which would account for less
than one-tenth of 1 percent of fresh table
grape imports into the United States and
less than one-tenth of 1 percent of total
domestic utilized production of fresh
table grapes. Total domestic utilized
production accounted for approximately
50 percent of the total domestic
consumption of fresh table grapes in
2004.2 Gross revenue of utilized
production of fresh table grapes
produced in the United States was
approximately $794 million.3 Any
displacement resulting from imports of
Namibian fresh table grapes is likely to
result in a reduction of less than onetenth of 1 percent in gross revenue for
producers, with at least part of the loss
borne by foreign suppliers that share the
same shipping season as Namibia, such
as Chile.
The small business size standard for
grape farming without making wine, as
identified by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) based upon North
American Industry Classification
System code 111332, is $750,000 or less
in annual receipts.4 While the available
data do not provide the number of U.S.
grape-producing entities according to
size distribution as it relates to annual
receipts, it is reasonable to assume that
the majority of the operations are
considered small businesses by SBA
standards. According to the 2002
Census of Agriculture data, there were
2 USDA ERS Briefing Room, Fruit and Tree Nut
Yearbook, 2005.
3 Gross revenue of fresh table grape utilization is
derived assuming a grower price of $0.45 per pound
(ERS).
4 Based upon 2002 Census of Agriculture—State
Data and the ‘‘Small Business Size Standards by
NAICS Industry,’’ Code of Federal Regulations,
Title 13, Chapter 1.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:49 Sep 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
23,856 grape farms in the United States
in 2002.5 It is estimated that
approximately 93 percent of these grape
farms had annual sales in 2002 of
$500,000 or less, and are considered to
be small entities by SBA standards.
The United States is a net importer of
fresh table grapes. In 2004, the United
States imported 1,322.8 million pounds
of fresh table grapes with approximately
79 and 19 percent arriving from Chile
and Mexico, respectively. In that same
year, the United States exported
approximately 606.3 million pounds of
table grapes. Canada is the largest
importer of U.S. fresh grapes,
accounting for 44 percent of U.S.
exports. The second and third largest
importers of U.S. fresh grapes are
Malaysia and Mexico, accounting for
approximately 9 and 7 percent of U.S.
grape exports, respectively.6 U.S.
imports of table grapes experienced an
average increase of 6.6 percent annually
over the last decade while exports have
increased an average of 3.4 percent.7
Fresh utilization of U.S. grape
production only accounts, on average,
for 13 percent of total utilized U.S.
grape production annually. U.S. wine
production and raisin production
account for an average of 60 percent and
25 percent, respectively, of U.S. grape
utilization annually.8
Domestic consumers would benefit
because Namibian table grapes mature a
month earlier than table grapes from
other countries in the southern
hemisphere, providing access to an
increased supply of fresh table grapes
for a longer period of time. The negative
impact of imports from Namibia is
expected to be minimal for domestic
producers. Utilized production of fresh
table grapes accounted for
approximately 50 percent of total
domestic consumption in 2004. Total
gross revenue associated with the
estimated quantity of Namibian imports
is equivalent to less than one-tenth of 1
percent of the total gross revenue
generated by U.S. fresh table grapes in
2004. In addition, any displacement of
existing U.S. table grape supplies by
Namibian imports is likely to be borne
at least in part by foreign suppliers such
as Chile, which shares the same
shipping season as Namibia.
5 The number of grape farms in the United States,
as reported by the 2002 Census of Agriculture, is
the total number of grape-producing operations,
which also include grapes produced for processed
utilization.
6 Source: Global Trade Atlas.
7 Source: USDA FAS, PS&D Online. ‘‘Table
Grapes: Production, Supply and Distribution in
Selected Countries,’’ https://www.fas.usda.gov/psd/
complete_tables/HTP-table6-104.htm.
8 USDA ERS Briefing Room, Fruit and Tree Nut
Yearbook, 2005.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Under these circumstances, the
Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has
determined that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule allows fresh table
grapes to be imported into the United
States from Namibia. State and local
laws and regulations regarding table
grapes imported under this rule will be
preempted while the fruit is in foreign
commerce. Fresh table grapes are
generally imported for immediate
distribution and sale to the consuming
public, and remain in foreign commerce
until sold to the ultimate consumer. The
question of when foreign commerce
ceases in other cases must be addressed
on a case-by-case basis. No retroactive
effect will be given to this rule, and this
rule will not require administrative
proceedings before parties may file suit
in court challenging this rule.
Use of Methyl Bromide
Under this rule, table grapes imported
into the United States from Namibia
must be fumigated with methyl bromide
in accordance with schedule T104–a–1
to kill external feeder insects. We
estimate that between 1 and 22.5 40-foot
containers of fresh table grapes will be
imported from Namibia during the first
shipping season. Importations may
increase in future years. Fumigation
using schedule T104–a–1 would require
no more than 10 pounds of methyl
bromide per container. No alternative
treatment is currently available for these
pests.
The United States is fully committed
to the objectives of the Montreal
Protocol, including the reduction and
ultimately the elimination of reliance on
methyl bromide for quarantine and
preshipment uses in a manner that is
consistent with the safeguarding of U.S.
agriculture and ecosystems. APHIS
reviews its methyl bromide policies and
their effect on the environment in
accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
Decision XI/13 (paragraph 5) of the 11th
Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal
Protocol, which calls on the Parties to
review their ‘‘national plant, animal,
environmental, health, and stored
product regulations with a view to
removing the requirement for the use of
methyl bromide for quarantine and
preshipment where technically and
economically feasible alternatives
exist.’’
The United States Government
encourages methods that do not use
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
55089
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
methyl bromide to meet phytosanitary
standards where alternatives are
deemed to be technically and
economically feasible. In some
circumstances, however, methyl
bromide continues to be the only
technically and economically feasible
treatment against specific quarantine
pests. In addition, in accordance with
Montreal Protocol Decision XI/13
(paragraph 7), APHIS is committed to
promoting and employing gas recapture
technology and other methods
whenever possible to minimize harm to
the environment caused by methyl
bromide emissions.
National Environmental Policy Act
An environmental assessment was
prepared for, and made available for
public comment through, the proposed
rule for this rulemaking. No comments
regarding the environmental assessment
were received during the comment
period for the proposed rule. The
environmental assessment provides a
basis for the conclusion that the
importation of fresh table grapes under
the conditions specified in this rule will
not have a significant impact on the
quality of the human environment.
Based on the finding of no significant
impact, the Administrator of the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service has
determined that an environmental
impact statement need not be prepared.
The environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact were
prepared in accordance with: (1) The
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the
Council on Environmental Quality for
implementing the procedural provisions
of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3)
USDA regulations implementing NEPA
(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part
372).
The environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact may be
viewed on the Regulations.gov Web
site.9 Copies of the environmental
assessment and finding of no significant
impact are also available for public
inspection at USDA, room 1141, South
Building, 14th Street and Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between
8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except holidays. Persons
wishing to inspect copies are requested
to call ahead on (202) 690–2817 to
facilitate entry into the reading room. In
addition, copies may be obtained by
writing to the individual listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), the information collection or
recordkeeping requirements included in
this rule have been approved by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under OMB control number
0579–0300.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act
to promote the use of the Internet and
other information technologies, to
provide increased opportunities for
citizen access to Government
information and services, and for other
purposes. For information pertinent to
E-Government Act compliance related
to this rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste
Sickles, APHIS’ Information Collection
Coordinator, at (301) 734–7477.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 305
Irradiation, Phytosanitary treatment,
Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
7 CFR Part 319
Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs,
Nursery stock, Plant diseases and pests,
Quarantine, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Rice,
Vegetables.
Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR
parts 305 and 319 as follows:
I
PART 305—PHYTOSANITARY
TREATMENTS
1. The authority citation for part 305
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781–
7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.3.
2. In § 305.2, paragraph (h)(2)(i), the
table is amended by adding, in
alphabetical order, an entry for Namibia
to read as follows:
I
§ 305.2
*
Approved treatments.
*
*
(h) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
*
Treatment
schedule
Location
Commodity
Pest
*
Namibia ..............................
*
*
Grape .................................
*
*
*
External feeders .............................................................
Cryptophlebia leucotreta, Ceratitis capitata, Ceratitis
rosa, Epichoristodes acerbella.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
§ 319.56–2ss Conditions governing the
entry of grapes from Namibia.
3. The authority citation for part 319
continues to read as follows:
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
I
Grapes (Vitis vinifera) may be
imported into the United States from
Namibia only under the following
conditions:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701–7772, and
7781–7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR
2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.
9 Go to https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘Advanced Search’’ tab and select ‘‘Docket Search.’’
In the Docket ID field, enter APHIS–2006–0025,
14:49 Sep 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
*
I 4. A new § 319.56–2ss is added to read
as follows:
PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE
NOTICES
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
click on ‘‘Submit,’’ then click on the Docket ID link
in the search results page. The environmental
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
MB T104–a–1.
CT T107–e.
*
(a) The grapes must be cold treated for
Cryptophlebia leucotreta, Ceratitis
capitata, Ceratitis rosa, and
Epichoristodes acerbella in accordance
with part 305 of this chapter.
(b) The grapes must be fumigated for
Aleurocanthus spiniferus, Apate
monachus, Bustomus setulosus,
Ceroplastes rusci, Cryptoblabes
gnidiella, Dischista cincta, Empoasca
assessment and finding of no significant impact will
appear in the resulting list of documents.
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
55090
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
lybica, Eremnus atratus, Eremnus
cerealis, Eremnus setulosus,
Eutetranychus orientalis, Helicoverpa
armigera, Icerya seychellarum,
Macchiademus diplopterus, Oxycarenus
hyalinipennis, Pachnoda sinuata,
Phlyctinus callosus, Scirtothrips
aurantii, Scirtothrips dorsalis,
Spodoptera littoralis, and
Tanyrhynchus carinatus in accordance
with part 305 of this chapter.
(c) Each shipment of grapes must be
accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate of inspection issued by the
national plant protection organization of
Namibia bearing the following
additional declaration: ‘‘The grapes in
this shipment have been inspected and
found free of Maconellicoccus hirsutus,
Nipaecoccus vastator, Rastrococcus
iceryoides, Cochlicella ventricosa, and
Theba pisana.’’
(d) The grapes may be imported in
commercial shipments only.
(Approved by the Office of Management and
Budget under control number 0579–0300)
Done in Washington, DC, this 18th day of
September 2006.
W. Ron DeHaven,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 06–7891 Filed 9–20–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Parts 916 and 917
[Docket No. FV06–916/917–1 FIR]
Nectarines and Peaches Grown in
California; Revision of Handling
Requirements for Fresh Nectarines
and Peaches
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Department of
Agriculture is adopting, as a final rule,
with a change, an interim final rule
revising the handling requirements for
California nectarines and peaches by
modifying the grade, size, maturity, and
pack requirements for fresh shipments
of these fruits, beginning with 2006
season shipments. This rule also
continues in effect the authorization for
continued shipments of ‘‘CA Utility’’
quality nectarines and peaches, the
establishment of weight-count standards
for Peento type nectarines in volumefilled containers, and the elimination of
the varietal container marking
requirements. The marketing orders
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:49 Sep 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
regulate the handling of nectarines and
peaches grown in California and are
administered locally by the Nectarine
Administrative and Peach Commodity
Committees (committees). This rule
enables handlers to continue to ship
fresh nectarines and peaches in a
manner that meets consumer needs,
increases returns to producers and
handlers, and reflects current industry
practices.
DATES: Effective Date: October 23, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laurel May, Marketing Specialist, or
Kurt Kimmel, Regional Manager,
California Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street,
Suite 102B, Fresno, California, 93721;
Telephone (559) 487–5901, Fax: (559)
487–5906, or e-mail:
Laurel.May@usda.gov or
Kurt.Kimmel@usda.gov.
Small businesses may request
information on complying with this
regulation by contacting Jay Guerber,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720–
2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or e-mail:
Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule
is issued under Marketing Order Nos.
916 and 917 (7 CFR parts 916 and 917)
regulating the handling of nectarines
and peaches grown in California,
respectively, hereinafter referred to as
the ‘‘orders.’’ The orders are effective
under the Agricultural Marketing
Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7
U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to
as the ‘‘Act.’’
USDA is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Order
12866.
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. This rule is not intended to
have retroactive effect. This rule will
not preempt any State or local laws,
regulations, or policies, unless they
present an irreconcilable conflict with
this rule.
The Act provides that administrative
proceedings must be exhausted before
parties may file suit in court. Under
section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any
handler subject to an order may file
with USDA a petition stating that the
order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with
the order is not in accordance with law
and request a modification of the order
or to be exempted therefrom. A handler
is afforded the opportunity for a hearing
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
on the petition. After the hearing, USDA
would rule on the petition. The Act
provides that the district court of the
United States in any district in which
the handler is an inhabitant, or has his
or her principal place of business, has
jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on
the petition, provided an action is filed
not later than 20 days after the date of
the entry of the ruling.
This rule continues in effect: (1)
Revisions to the nectarine and peach
grade, size, maturity, and pack
requirements to better reflect current
industry operating and marketing
practices; (2) authorization for
continued shipments of ‘‘CA Utility’’
quality nectarines and peaches during
the 2006 and subsequent seasons to
meet buyer needs; (3) establishment of
weight-count standards for Peento type
nectarines packed in volume-filled
containers to assure pack uniformity;
and (4) elimination of the varietal
container marking requirements for
nectarines and peaches to provide
handlers more marketing flexibility.
Sections 916.52 and 917.41 of the
orders provide authority for regulating
the handling of fresh California
nectarines and peaches. The regulations
include grade, size, maturity, quality,
pack, and container marking
requirements. Such regulations are in
effect on a continuing basis. The
Nectarine Administrative Committee
(NAC) and the Peach Commodity
Committee (PCC), which are responsible
for local administration of the orders,
meet prior to and during each season to
review the regulations. Committee
meetings are open to the public and
interested persons are encouraged to
express their views at these meetings.
USDA reviews committee
recommendations and information, as
well as information from other sources,
and determines whether modification,
suspension, or termination of the rules
and regulations would tend to effectuate
the declared policy of the Act.
The committees held such meetings
on February 3, 2006, and unanimously
recommended that the handling
requirements be revised for the 2006
season, which was expected to begin at
the end of March. No official crop
estimates were available at the time of
the committees’ February meetings
because the nectarine and peach trees
were dormant. The committees
subsequently met on April 27, 2006, and
recommended 2006 crop estimates of
17,824,000 containers of nectarines and
20,242,000 containers of peaches. The
2006 nectarine crop is expected to be
slightly smaller than the 2005 crop,
which totaled approximately 18,618,000
containers. The 2006 peach crop is
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 183 (Thursday, September 21, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55087-55090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7891]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 55087]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Part 305 and 319
[Docket No. APHIS-2006-0025]
Importation of Table Grapes From Namibia
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the fruits and vegetables regulations to allow
the importation into the United States of fresh table grapes from
Namibia under certain conditions. As a condition of entry, the grapes
must undergo cold treatment and fumigation with methyl bromide and must
be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate with an additional
declaration stating that the commodity has been inspected and found
free of the specified pests. In addition, the grapes will also be
subject to inspection at the port of first arrival. This action allows
for the importation of grapes from Namibia into the United States while
continuing to provide protection against the introduction of quarantine
pests.
DATES: Effective Date: October 23, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sharon Porsche, Import Specialist,
Commodity Import Analysis and Operations, Plant Health Programs, PPQ,
APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-
8758.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in ``Subpart--Fruits and Vegetables'' (7 CFR 319.56
through 319.56-8, referred to below as the regulations) prohibit or
restrict the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United
States from certain parts of the world to prevent the introduction and
dissemination of plant pests that are new to or not widely distributed
within the United States.
On June 26, 2006, we published in the Federal Register (71 FR
36221-36225, Docket No. APHIS-2006-0025) a proposal \1\ to amend the
fruits and vegetables regulations to allow the importation of fresh
table grapes, in commercial shipments only, from Namibia into the
United States under certain conditions. As a condition of entry, we
proposed that the grapes would be subject to a combined treatment of
cold treatment in accordance with schedule T107-e and methyl bromide
fumigation in accordance with schedule T104-a-1. In addition, because
the cold and methyl bromide treatments would not effectively mitigate
the pest risk posed by the mealybugs Maconellicoccus hirsutus,
Nipaecoccus vastator, and Rastrococcus iceryoides or the mollusks
Cochlicella ventricosa and Theba pisana, we proposed that the National
Plant Protection Organization of Namibia would be required to conduct
phytosanitary inspections for those pests and that each shipment of
grapes would have to be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate
bearing the additional declaration: ``The grapes in this shipment have
been inspected and found free of Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Nipaecoccus
vastator, Rastrococcus iceryoides, Cochlicella ventricosa and Theba
pisana.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the proposed rule and the comments we received, go
to https://www.regulations.gov, click on the ``Advanced Search'' tab,
and select ``Docket Search.'' In the Docket ID field, enter APHIS-
2006-0025, then click on ``Submit.'' Clicking on the Docket ID link
in the search results page will produce a list of all documents in
the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending
August 25, 2006. We received two comments by that date. The first
comment was from a producer who was in favor of the importation of
table grapes from Namibia. The second comment was from an industry
group that expressed concern that the pest Scirtothrips dorsalis was
not included in the preamble of the proposed rule on the list of pests
that can be addressed by methyl bromide treatment. This was an
inadvertent omission; the risks associated with Scirtothrips dorsalis
were addressed within the pest risk assessment and risk mitigation
documents associated with the proposed rule and the pest was cited
specifically in the regulatory text of proposed Sec. 319.56-2ss(b) as
a pest for which treatment is required.
The commenter also expressed concern that Namibian table grapes
would be shipped into the United States during a time period when they
would be in direct competition with domestic table grapes (October and
November) and that the economic analysis provided in the proposed rule
focused too much on grapes intended for processed utilization (i.e.,
wine, juice, or raisins) rather than on grapes grown for the fresh
market. Therefore, the commenter disagreed that the competitive impact
of Namibian table grapes on domestic producers would be minimal. As
stated in the proposed rule, grapes in Namibia mature in November,
however, given that the grapes will be transported to the United States
by cargo ship with a transit time of approximately 4 weeks, most grape
shipments from Namibia would arrive from mid to late December until the
end of January, well after peak harvest for domestic table grapes. The
economic analysis in this final rule has been updated to reflect the
additional information provided by the commenter regarding domestic
grape production; however, that information did not affect the
conclusions of our analysis. The impact of this rule on domestic table
grape producers is still expected to be minimal.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this
document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, without
change.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule
has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive
Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
We are amending the fruits and vegetables regulations to allow the
importation into the United States of fresh table grapes from Namibia
under certain conditions. As a condition of entry, the grapes will be
subject to both cold treatment and fumigation with methyl bromide and
will have to be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate with an
additional declaration stating that the commodity
[[Page 55088]]
has been inspected and found free of the specified pests. In addition,
the grapes will also be subject to inspection at the port of first
arrival. This action will allow for the importation of grapes from
Namibia into the United States while continuing to provide protection
against the introduction of quarantine pests.
According to the Trade Law Center for Southern Africa, 7 grape
companies in Namibia are currently cultivating 1,300 hectares,
irrigated by water from the Orange River, and another 2,000 hectares
are expected to be put to cultivation soon. Because of the climate in
Namibia, grapes mature in November, which gives producers there a
competitive advantage over producers in other southern hemisphere
countries where the grape harvest begins in December. Imports of
Namibian table grapes into the United States in the first year are
expected to reach 22.5 40-foot containers (approximately 744,000
pounds), which would account for less than one-tenth of 1 percent of
fresh table grape imports into the United States and less than one-
tenth of 1 percent of total domestic utilized production of fresh table
grapes. Total domestic utilized production accounted for approximately
50 percent of the total domestic consumption of fresh table grapes in
2004.\2\ Gross revenue of utilized production of fresh table grapes
produced in the United States was approximately $794 million.\3\ Any
displacement resulting from imports of Namibian fresh table grapes is
likely to result in a reduction of less than one-tenth of 1 percent in
gross revenue for producers, with at least part of the loss borne by
foreign suppliers that share the same shipping season as Namibia, such
as Chile.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ USDA ERS Briefing Room, Fruit and Tree Nut Yearbook, 2005.
\3\ Gross revenue of fresh table grape utilization is derived
assuming a grower price of $0.45 per pound (ERS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The small business size standard for grape farming without making
wine, as identified by the Small Business Administration (SBA) based
upon North American Industry Classification System code 111332, is
$750,000 or less in annual receipts.\4\ While the available data do not
provide the number of U.S. grape-producing entities according to size
distribution as it relates to annual receipts, it is reasonable to
assume that the majority of the operations are considered small
businesses by SBA standards. According to the 2002 Census of
Agriculture data, there were 23,856 grape farms in the United States in
2002.\5\ It is estimated that approximately 93 percent of these grape
farms had annual sales in 2002 of $500,000 or less, and are considered
to be small entities by SBA standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Based upon 2002 Census of Agriculture--State Data and the
``Small Business Size Standards by NAICS Industry,'' Code of Federal
Regulations, Title 13, Chapter 1.
\5\ The number of grape farms in the United States, as reported
by the 2002 Census of Agriculture, is the total number of grape-
producing operations, which also include grapes produced for
processed utilization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States is a net importer of fresh table grapes. In 2004,
the United States imported 1,322.8 million pounds of fresh table grapes
with approximately 79 and 19 percent arriving from Chile and Mexico,
respectively. In that same year, the United States exported
approximately 606.3 million pounds of table grapes. Canada is the
largest importer of U.S. fresh grapes, accounting for 44 percent of
U.S. exports. The second and third largest importers of U.S. fresh
grapes are Malaysia and Mexico, accounting for approximately 9 and 7
percent of U.S. grape exports, respectively.\6\ U.S. imports of table
grapes experienced an average increase of 6.6 percent annually over the
last decade while exports have increased an average of 3.4 percent.\7\
Fresh utilization of U.S. grape production only accounts, on average,
for 13 percent of total utilized U.S. grape production annually. U.S.
wine production and raisin production account for an average of 60
percent and 25 percent, respectively, of U.S. grape utilization
annually.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Source: Global Trade Atlas.
\7\ Source: USDA FAS, PS&D Online. ``Table Grapes: Production,
Supply and Distribution in Selected Countries,'' https://
www.fas.usda.gov/psd/complete_tables/HTP-table6-104.htm.
\8\ USDA ERS Briefing Room, Fruit and Tree Nut Yearbook, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Domestic consumers would benefit because Namibian table grapes
mature a month earlier than table grapes from other countries in the
southern hemisphere, providing access to an increased supply of fresh
table grapes for a longer period of time. The negative impact of
imports from Namibia is expected to be minimal for domestic producers.
Utilized production of fresh table grapes accounted for approximately
50 percent of total domestic consumption in 2004. Total gross revenue
associated with the estimated quantity of Namibian imports is
equivalent to less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the total gross
revenue generated by U.S. fresh table grapes in 2004. In addition, any
displacement of existing U.S. table grape supplies by Namibian imports
is likely to be borne at least in part by foreign suppliers such as
Chile, which shares the same shipping season as Namibia.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule allows fresh table grapes to be imported into the
United States from Namibia. State and local laws and regulations
regarding table grapes imported under this rule will be preempted while
the fruit is in foreign commerce. Fresh table grapes are generally
imported for immediate distribution and sale to the consuming public,
and remain in foreign commerce until sold to the ultimate consumer. The
question of when foreign commerce ceases in other cases must be
addressed on a case-by-case basis. No retroactive effect will be given
to this rule, and this rule will not require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.
Use of Methyl Bromide
Under this rule, table grapes imported into the United States from
Namibia must be fumigated with methyl bromide in accordance with
schedule T104-a-1 to kill external feeder insects. We estimate that
between 1 and 22.5 40-foot containers of fresh table grapes will be
imported from Namibia during the first shipping season. Importations
may increase in future years. Fumigation using schedule T104-a-1 would
require no more than 10 pounds of methyl bromide per container. No
alternative treatment is currently available for these pests.
The United States is fully committed to the objectives of the
Montreal Protocol, including the reduction and ultimately the
elimination of reliance on methyl bromide for quarantine and
preshipment uses in a manner that is consistent with the safeguarding
of U.S. agriculture and ecosystems. APHIS reviews its methyl bromide
policies and their effect on the environment in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.) and Decision XI/13 (paragraph 5) of the 11th Meeting of the
Parties to the Montreal Protocol, which calls on the Parties to review
their ``national plant, animal, environmental, health, and stored
product regulations with a view to removing the requirement for the use
of methyl bromide for quarantine and preshipment where technically and
economically feasible alternatives exist.''
The United States Government encourages methods that do not use
[[Page 55089]]
methyl bromide to meet phytosanitary standards where alternatives are
deemed to be technically and economically feasible. In some
circumstances, however, methyl bromide continues to be the only
technically and economically feasible treatment against specific
quarantine pests. In addition, in accordance with Montreal Protocol
Decision XI/13 (paragraph 7), APHIS is committed to promoting and
employing gas recapture technology and other methods whenever possible
to minimize harm to the environment caused by methyl bromide emissions.
National Environmental Policy Act
An environmental assessment was prepared for, and made available
for public comment through, the proposed rule for this rulemaking. No
comments regarding the environmental assessment were received during
the comment period for the proposed rule. The environmental assessment
provides a basis for the conclusion that the importation of fresh table
grapes under the conditions specified in this rule will not have a
significant impact on the quality of the human environment. Based on
the finding of no significant impact, the Administrator of the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that an
environmental impact statement need not be prepared.
The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact
were prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2)
regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing
the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA
regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact
may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site.\9\ Copies of the
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact are also
available for public inspection at USDA, room 1141, South Building,
14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between 8
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons
wishing to inspect copies are requested to call ahead on (202) 690-2817
to facilitate entry into the reading room. In addition, copies may be
obtained by writing to the individual listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Go to https://www.regulations.gov, click on the ``Advanced
Search'' tab and select ``Docket Search.'' In the Docket ID field,
enter APHIS-2006-0025, click on ``Submit,'' then click on the Docket
ID link in the search results page. The environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact will appear in the resulting list
of documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements
included in this rule have been approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under OMB control number 0579-0300.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the Internet
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act
compliance related to this rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles,
APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 734-7477.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 305
Irradiation, Phytosanitary treatment, Plant diseases and pests,
Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
7 CFR Part 319
Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs, Nursery stock, Plant
diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rice, Vegetables.
0
Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR parts 305 and 319 as follows:
PART 305--PHYTOSANITARY TREATMENTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 305 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and
136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.
0
2. In Sec. 305.2, paragraph (h)(2)(i), the table is amended by adding,
in alphabetical order, an entry for Namibia to read as follows:
Sec. 305.2 Approved treatments.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Commodity Pest Treatment schedule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Namibia............................ Grape................. External feeders........... MB T104-a-1.
Cryptophlebia leucotreta, CT T107-e.
Ceratitis capitata,
Ceratitis rosa,
Epichoristodes acerbella.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES
0
3. The authority citation for part 319 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701-7772, and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136
and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.
0
4. A new Sec. 319.56-2ss is added to read as follows:
Sec. 319.56-2ss Conditions governing the entry of grapes from
Namibia.
Grapes (Vitis vinifera) may be imported into the United States from
Namibia only under the following conditions:
(a) The grapes must be cold treated for Cryptophlebia leucotreta,
Ceratitis capitata, Ceratitis rosa, and Epichoristodes acerbella in
accordance with part 305 of this chapter.
(b) The grapes must be fumigated for Aleurocanthus spiniferus,
Apate monachus, Bustomus setulosus, Ceroplastes rusci, Cryptoblabes
gnidiella, Dischista cincta, Empoasca
[[Page 55090]]
lybica, Eremnus atratus, Eremnus cerealis, Eremnus setulosus,
Eutetranychus orientalis, Helicoverpa armigera, Icerya seychellarum,
Macchiademus diplopterus, Oxycarenus hyalinipennis, Pachnoda sinuata,
Phlyctinus callosus, Scirtothrips aurantii, Scirtothrips dorsalis,
Spodoptera littoralis, and Tanyrhynchus carinatus in accordance with
part 305 of this chapter.
(c) Each shipment of grapes must be accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate of inspection issued by the national plant protection
organization of Namibia bearing the following additional declaration:
``The grapes in this shipment have been inspected and found free of
Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Nipaecoccus vastator, Rastrococcus
iceryoides, Cochlicella ventricosa, and Theba pisana.''
(d) The grapes may be imported in commercial shipments only.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control
number 0579-0300)
Done in Washington, DC, this 18th day of September 2006.
W. Ron DeHaven,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 06-7891 Filed 9-20-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
