Importation of Nursery Stock; Postentry Quarantine Requirements for Potential Hosts of Chrysanthemum White Rust and Definition of From, 44425-44433 [E7-15421]
Download as PDF
44425
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 72, No. 152
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. 03–002–4]
RIN 0579–AC55
Importation of Nursery Stock;
Postentry Quarantine Requirements
for Potential Hosts of Chrysanthemum
White Rust and Definition of From
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal and
reproposal.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend
the regulations on importing nursery
stock by providing an option in which
the postentry quarantine growing period
for articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are
imported from certain locations would
be reduced from 6 months to 2 months,
provided that the grower of those plants
has implemented a systems approach to
prevent the imported articles from being
infected with chrysanthemum white
rust. This proposal replaces part of a
previous proposal that would also have
provided an option in which the length
of the postentry quarantine period for
potential hosts of chrysanthemum white
rust would have been reduced provided
that the grower entered into a diseaseprevention program. We are issuing this
reproposal to further discuss the
evidence that led us to conclude that a
2-month postentry quarantine period is
adequate and to clarify how the systems
approach would work. We are also
proposing to amend the definition of
from. The definition proposed in this
document would replace the definition
of from that was included in a previous
proposal. We are proposing the new
definition in response to concerns
raised by comments on the previous
proposal.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
We will consider all comments
that we receive on or before October 9,
2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://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–2005–
0081 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. 03–002–4, 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. 03–002–4.
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
https://www.aphis.usda.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Arnold T. Tschanz, Senior Import
Specialist, Plants for Planting Import
and Analysis, Commodity Import
Analysis and Operations, PPQ, APHIS,
4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale,
MD 20737–1236; (301) 734–5306.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Background
The regulations in 7 CFR part 319
prohibit or restrict the importation of
certain plants and plant products into
the United States to prevent the
introduction of plant pests. The
regulations contained in ‘‘Subpart—
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Nursery Stock, Plants, Roots, Bulbs,
Seeds, and Other Plant Products,’’
§§ 319.37 through 319.37–14 (referred to
below as the regulations), restrict,
among other things, the importation of
living plants, plant parts, and seeds for
propagation.
The regulations in § 319.37–7(a)
designate as restricted articles any
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that
meet the conditions for importation in
§ 319.37–5(c) and that are imported
from any foreign locality except
Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Belarus,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei,
Canada, Canary Islands, Chile, China,
Colombia, Croatia, Ecuador, Iceland,
Japan, Korea, Liechtenstein, Macedonia,
Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco,
New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Republic
of South Africa, Russia, San Marino,
Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Tunisia,
Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela,
Yugoslavia; the European Union
(Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus,
Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and
United Kingdom); and all countries,
territories, and possessions of countries
located in part or entirely between 90°
and 180° East longitude. Articles
designated as restricted articles in
§ 319.37–7(a) must be grown in
postentry quarantine under the
conditions described in paragraphs (c)
and (d) of § 319.37–7. Paragraph
(d)(7)(ii) currently requires restricted
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum to be
grown in postentry quarantine for a
period of 6 months.
The pest of concern with regard to
imported articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum is
chrysanthemum white rust (CWR). CWR
is caused by Puccinia horiana Henn., a
filamentous fungus and obligate
parasite. CWR is not established in the
United States and is a disease of
quarantine significance. This disease
has the potential to be extremely
damaging to the commercial
horticulture and florist industries if it
becomes established in the United
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
44426
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
States. The postentry quarantine
growing period for articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum is intended to allow
symptoms of the disease, if it is present,
to express themselves, so that any
restricted articles that are affected with
CWR can be prevented from entering
U.S. commerce.
On December 15, 2005, we published
in the Federal Register (Docket No. 03–
002–1, 70 FR 74215–74235) a proposal 1
to make several amendments to the
nursery stock regulations. We solicited
comments concerning the proposal for
60 days ending February 13, 2006. We
reopened and extended the deadline for
comments until March 31, 2006, in a
document published in the Federal
Register on February 28, 2006 (71 FR
9978, Docket No. 03–002–2).
Among the changes discussed in the
December 2005 proposal was providing
an option in which the postentry
quarantine growing period for articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum would be reduced from 6
months to 2 months if the articles were
grown in accordance with a best
management practices program
approved by the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The
Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ)
program had evaluated the available
scientific literature and found that 2
months was an adequate amount of time
for CWR to express itself in postentry
quarantine; we proposed to require the
best management practices program as
an additional safeguard.
We received 25 comments on the
proposed rule, from 23 commenters,
including private citizens, State and
local governments, industry
organizations, individual industry
companies, and foreign national plant
protection organizations. Sixteen of
these commenters addressed the
proposed change to the postentry
quarantine requirements for articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum. While many commenters
supported the change, many
commenters were confused regarding
whether the best management practices
program was intended to apply to
production in the country of origin or to
1 To view the proposed rule and the comments
we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/
fdmspublic/component/
main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS–2005–0081.
Note: Since the publication of the proposed rule, a
final rule published in the Federal Register on
April 3, 2007 (Docket No 03–016–3, 72 FR 15805–
15812) expanded the list of countries from which
exportation of CWR hosts is subject to postentry
quarantine restrictions.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
postentry quarantine in the United
States. In addition, some commenters
disputed our conclusion that 2 months
is an adequate amount of time for
symptoms of CWR infection to be
expressed in postentry quarantine.
To address these comments, we are
withdrawing that portion of the
December 2005 proposal that dealt with
postentry quarantine for imported
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum. We are
replacing it with this proposal, which
discusses in greater detail the evidence
that leads us to conclude that a 2-month
postentry quarantine period for
imported articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum is
adequate. This proposal also presents
new requirements for the systems
approach that more clearly indicate that
they apply to growing in the country of
origin. We are also explaining in more
detail how the systems approach would
be used. (We used the term ‘‘best
management practices program’’ to
describe the intended program in the
December 2005 proposed rule. We are
replacing it with the term ‘‘systems
approach’’ in this reproposal to clarify
our terminology.)
We discuss the postentry quarantine
period and the requirements of the
systems approach in detail directly
below.
Evidence Supporting Reducing the
Postentry Quarantine Period for
Articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum From
6 Months to 2 Months
In the December 2005 proposed rule,
we stated the following: ‘‘PPQ’s Center
for Plant Health Science and
Technology has reviewed the available
evidence regarding the time within
which CWR will express symptoms.
Although substantial evidence indicates
that articles affected with CWR will
express symptoms within 2 months,
meaning that 2 months would be an
adequate postentry quarantine period
for these articles, not all the available
evidence confirms that.’’
We received several comments on our
statement that 2 months would be an
adequate postentry quarantine period
for these articles. The issues raised by
these commenters are described below.
Four commenters strongly supported
all aspects of the proposal, including
our determination that a 2-month
postentry quarantine period was
sufficient to allow expression of CWR in
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Nipponanthemum nipponicum. One of
these commenters reviewed the
available literature and concluded that
most available studies indicate that
CWR is expressed in normal conditions
within 2 weeks, with an upper limit of
2 months in extreme conditions such as
high temperatures or massive
inoculations in a research setting.
This commenter also noted that, in
the June 2002 version of the APHIS
document ‘‘Chrysanthemum White
Rust: A National Management Plan for
Exclusion and Eradication,’’ we stated
that in the event that a nursery is found
to be infected with CWR, no plant
should leave the nursery for 8 weeks or
until the nursery has been inspected
and certified as being free of CWR. The
current version of this document
provides for an 8-week host-free period
at any nursery at which plants are found
to be infected with CWR. The
commenter indicated that this
document supports the statement that
the 2-month postentry quarantine is
adequate for expression of CWR
symptoms.
Two more commenters supported the
proposed reduction in the postentry
quarantine period on the condition that
the reduction was based on science.
Three commenters were concerned
about our statement that not all the
available evidence confirms that CWR is
expressed in postentry quarantine
within 2 months, asking us to discuss
any evidence that might show that a
longer postentry quarantine period is
necessary for the expression of CWR.
Seven commenters took issue with the
proposed reduction in the postentry
quarantine period for articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum. Five of these commenters
stated that, under certain environmental
and climatic conditions, CWR would
not be expressed in a 2-month postentry
quarantine period; they stated that the
disease cycle of CWR requires cool, wet
conditions in order to exhibit its
symptoms. One commenter stated
specifically that basidiospores (airborne
spores) of the CWR fungus are produced
and released during periods of relatively
high humidity and when temperatures
are between 40 °F and 73 °F, with
optimum expression at 63 °F. In
southern California, these cool
temperatures occur only from November
through June. Even using APHISapproved best management practices,
the commenter stated, the conditions
necessary for CWR infections could not
be created in a greenhouse during the
hot summer months. Under the
December 2005 proposal, stated the
commenter, cuttings infected with CWR
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
could conceivably be imported in July
and released 2 months later in
September and never show any
symptoms, because climatic conditions
at that time of year preclude symptoms
from being exhibited.
Based on these comments, we again
reviewed the available evidence
regarding the expression of CWR. Our
statement in the December 2005
proposal that ‘‘not all the available
evidence confirms’’ that 2 months is an
adequate postentry quarantine period
for CWR hosts was incorrect. The
longest time between infection and
symptom development that has been
reported is 8 weeks. This was reported
to have been achieved when infected
cuttings were experimentally exposed to
86 °F (30 °C) temperatures for several
hours, in an effort to simulate hot
climatic conditions. However, efforts to
reproduce this effect experimentally
have been unsuccessful, and it has not
been reported in the field.
Most references on CWR concur that
the disease usually expresses itself in
between 5 to 14 days, depending on the
prevailing climatic conditions. Warm
temperatures increase the latency
period, but in most cases not beyond 14
days, and we are not aware of any
reports describing increases in the
latency period beyond 2 months. The
commenter who stated that CWR
requires cool temperatures for
expression, and thus that warm
temperatures will delay expression of
the disease indefinitely, did not provide
a reference to support that statement,
and we have been unable to locate any
references confirming it. We invite
commenters to submit any additional
information that may be pertinent to
this subject.
We would also like to clarify the
difference between the purpose of the 8week host-free period in our CWR
management plan and the time
necessary for expression of symptoms of
CWR in postentry quarantine.
Teliospores of P. horiana can survive for
up to 8 weeks in favorable climatic
conditions on the leaves of CWR hosts,
even in the absence of living plants.
Keeping premises free of host plants for
at least 8 weeks ensures that all the
teliospores in the premises die, making
it safe to repopulate the premises with
CWR hosts. By contrast, the postentry
quarantine period is not used to ensure
disease freedom at a premises, but
rather to determine whether potential
hosts are infected with CWR. If a living
plant is infected with CWR (either with
teliospores or the shorter lived
basidiospores), the disease will express
itself within 5 to 14 days under normal
conditions. The period required for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
eradication of CWR from a premises and
the postentry quarantine period we are
proposing are of similar length, but they
have no relationship to each other.
While 2 months appears to be an
adequate postentry quarantine growing
period for CWR hosts, we would require
that CWR hosts grown in postentry
quarantine for 2 months also be
produced under a systems approach. We
would include this additional safeguard
because of the danger CWR presents to
the domestic floral industry. Efforts to
eradicate CWR outbreaks in the United
States have been costly for growers, who
typically must destroy all plants within
a 1-meter radius of any infected plant,
treat the entire production site to
neutralize any remaining CWR spores,
and implement a host-free period to
prevent reintroduction of the rust. In a
2006 outbreak of CWR in California, the
estimated cost per acre of implementing
the host-free period alone was $54,594.
Given that the entire production site
must implement the host-free period in
order to eradicate CWR, the eradication
costs to producers can be considerable.
The requirements of the systems
approach would provide additional
assurance that CWR-infected plants
would not be introduced into the United
States under the 2-month postentry
quarantine period.
One commenter additionally objected
to the proposed 2-month postentry
quarantine period as too short to allow
for the necessary inspection of the
plants being grown in postentry
quarantine. This commenter stated that
postentry quarantine inspections are
usually conducted in spring and fall to
increase the chances of finding a
quarantine pest. Under the December
2005 proposal, the commenter stated, an
importer could conceivably time the
importation of cuttings to essentially
avoid inspection. In this commenter’s
experience, when plants are imported
for postentry quarantine, 2 or more
months may pass before authorities at
the local level receive notification from
APHIS that the plants have arrived in
the area. With a 2-month postentry
quarantine period, the commenter
stated, the material may have been
shipped throughout the United States
before local authorities have been
notified that it was imported and before
they have had a chance to conduct an
inspection.
The regulations in § 319.37–7(c) set
out requirements for the postentry
quarantine agreements that APHIS
concludes with States. Under paragraph
(c)(3)(iii), the Administrator is required
to notify State officials, in writing and
within 10 days of the arrival, when
plant material destined for postentry
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44427
quarantine in their State arrives in the
United States. Under paragraph
(c)(2)(iii), States are required to provide
the services of State inspectors to
inspect plants for evidence of exotic
pests at least once for plants required to
be grown in quarantine for less than 2
years. After this, again under paragraph
(c)(3)(iii), the Administrator shall notify
State officials in writing when materials
in postentry quarantine may be released
from quarantine in their State. We do
not notify State officials that materials
in postentry quarantine may be released
from quarantine until we have received
the results of the State inspection of the
materials. If an importer removes plant
material in postentry quarantine from
the approved site before the
Administrator notifies State officials
that it may be released, then that
importer is in violation of the
regulations.
Two other commenters objected
generally to what they perceived as the
loosening of restrictions on the
importation of articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum, given that CWR outbreaks
continue to occur occasionally in the
United States. In these commenters’
opinions, unless the reduced postentry
quarantine period and the systems
approach would encourage legal
importation of those articles that are
currently imported without complying
with our regulations, the perceived
additional risk of reducing the postentry
quarantine period would not be
warranted.
As discussed earlier, our decision to
reduce the postentry quarantine period
for imported articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum is
supported by science; it is not motivated
by the goal of reducing illegal trade of
those articles. We do not believe that
providing an option in which the
postentry quarantine period for
imported articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum is
reduced to 2 months will increase the
risk of allowing a plant that is infected
with CWR to enter U.S. commerce,
especially if the plants are produced in
compliance with the requirements of
systems approach.
It is important to note that the
postentry quarantine restrictions placed
on CWR hosts in the regulations apply
to the importation of CWR hosts from
countries where CWR is not known to
occur. We prohibit the importation of
CWR hosts from countries where CWR
is known to occur in § 319.37–2(a). CWR
has not been detected in any host plants
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
44428
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
imported under the current postentry
quarantine program in the last 10 years.
We believe the introductions of CWR
that the commenter cites were the result
of illegal importations. We are
continuing to work through our
Smuggling Interdiction and Trade
Compliance program and with the
Department of Homeland Security’s
Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection to prevent such
introductions.
Because the option we are proposing
would reduce the postentry quarantine
period to the time actually required for
expression of symptoms while imposing
additional phytosanitary safeguards on
the production of CWR host materials,
we believe the program we are
proposing here would be as effective as
our current program.
Two commenters suggested that
APHIS issue a departmental permit to
allow a reduction in the postentry
quarantine period.
Departmental permits are issued
under § 319.37–2(c) and provide for the
importation of articles that are listed as
prohibited under paragraphs (a) and (b)
of § 319.37–2 for experimental or
scientific purposes; APHIS may specify
conditions for such importation that are
adequate to prevent the introduction
into the United States of plant pests.
However, articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are
eligible to be imported under postentry
quarantine conditions are, by definition,
not prohibited articles. Therefore, using
the departmental permit to facilitate
their importation in this way would not
be appropriate. In addition, the
departmental permit is intended for us
only to allow importation for
experimental or scientific purposes.
Systems Approach for Articles of
Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum
Imported Into the United States
As many commenters noted, our
explanation of the best management
practices program cited in the December
2005 proposed rule did not make clear
whether the program would be applied
to imported articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum during
their growth in their country of origin or
to their growth during postentry
quarantine. Many commenters
interpreted our description of the best
management practices program to mean
that it would apply to the growth of
these articles during postentry
quarantine, and objected to the
increased responsibility placed on
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
Federal and State entities to monitor
postentry quarantine under the
conditions of the best management
practices program. Some of these
commenters further stated that a
program to prevent the articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum from being infected with
CWR while being grown in the country
of origin, prior to importation into the
United States, would be more effective,
both in terms of cost and in terms of
phytosanitary security.
We agree with these comments. We
had intended for the best management
practices program described in the
December 2005 proposal to apply to the
growth of these plants in the country of
origin, and the systems approach we are
proposing to require as a condition of
reducing the postentry quarantine
period from 6 to 2 months would also
apply to the growth of articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum in their country of origin.
In this proposal, we have revised the
requirements of the systems approach in
order to make it clear that they would
apply to growth in the country of origin.
In order to be eligible for participation
in this program, the articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum would have to be grown in
a production site that is a greenhouse or
other enclosed building. The proposed
systems approach would specify several
basic requirements to be fulfilled during
the production of those articles and
prior to their importation to the United
States. These requirements are the
following:
• Production sites would have to
generate plants for planting from
propagative material that is free of CWR.
• Production sites would have to
write and implement standard operating
procedures that include provisions for
adequate pest control, isolation of the
production site from host material not
intended for export to the United States,
regular inspection and testing, and
training of production site employees.
• Production sites would have to
keep detailed records of all aspects of
plant production, including the origin of
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that will
be exported so that they may be traced
back if necessary. Production sites
would have to label the containers in
which the articles are shipped in order
to facilitate traceback investigations.
• The national plant protection
organization (NPPO) of the country in
which the production site is located
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
would have to oversee the production
site and perform regular audits to ensure
that all elements of the production
system are in compliance with the
requirements of the systems approach
and the workplan.
• APHIS would have to be allowed to
perform on-site audits of the production
site as well. APHIS would also perform
audits at the port of entry into which the
plants are imported to ensure that these
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum meet the
requirements of the systems approach
and the workplan.
• The NPPO of the country in which
the production site is located and
APHIS would impose penalties and
remedial actions in the case of
noncompliance. The NPPO would not
issue phytosanitary certificates for
shipments of articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum
exported under the systems approach if
an audit revealed that the articles were
not grown in compliance with the
requirements of the systems approach
and the workplan. Penalties that could
be imposed would include, but would
not necessarily be limited to, removal of
the exporting production site from the
list of growers approved by APHIS to
ship these articles to the United States
under this program.
• The government of the country in
which the articles are produced or its
designated representative would have to
enter into a trust fund agreement with
APHIS before each growing season. The
government of the country in which the
articles are produced or its designated
representative would have to pay in
advance all estimated costs that APHIS
expects to incur through its involvement
in overseeing the execution of the
systems approach. (The specific level of
APHIS involvement will vary with the
terms of the workplan; APHIS
involvement may range from regular
inspections of production sites to
occasional on-site audits.) Details on
this requirement can be found in the
proposed regulatory text at the end of
this document.
Two commenters on the December
2005 proposal asked to review the
program we described in that rule. We
are not proposing to add specific
phytosanitary requirements to the
regulations. Instead, we are proposing to
set out the performance standards in the
regulations. If this rule is finalized, the
NPPO of a country that wishes to export
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum to the
United States for a postentry quarantine
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
growing period of 2 months (rather than
6 months) would submit to us a detailed
proposal for operational plans and
procedures that fulfill the performance
standards. We would then work with
the NPPO of the exporting country to
agree upon a final set of operational
plans and procedures, which would be
codified in a bilateral workplan.2 Thus,
the regulations would require that the
articles be produced in accordance with
a workplan that meets the requirements
of the systems approach, as listed in the
regulations. We anticipate that the
specific conditions required by a
workplan will vary according to the
conditions in the country and facility
where the workplan is implemented,
and as such we do not have a single
workplan that we can make available.
The changes discussed in this
proposal would reduce the cost of
postentry quarantine for importers of
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum while
continuing to protect against the
introduction of CWR into the United
States.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
In § 319.37–7, paragraph (d)(7)(ii) lists
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Dendranthema spp.,3 Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum, articles of Dianthus spp.,
and articles of Hydrangea spp. as
articles for which a postentry quarantine
growing period of less than 2 years is
permitted. In the December 2005
proposal, we proposed to add articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum produced in accordance
with a best management practices
program to this list, with a 2-month
postentry quarantine period.
In this document, we are proposing to
amend the regulations in § 319.37–5(c).
This paragraph presently requires that
any restricted article (except seeds) of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, or Nipponanthemum
nipponicum from any foreign place
other than countries where CWR is
2 We published in the Federal Register a notice
providing background information on bilateral
workplans on May 10, 2006 (71 FR 27221–27224,
Docket No. APHIS–2005–0085). It can be accessed
at https://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/
component/
main?main=DocumentDetail&d=APHIS-AOGUS–
2005–0085–0001.
3 The April 2007 final rule referred to earlier was
intended to remove all references to Dendranthema
spp. within the text of the regulations but
inadvertently did not remove the reference in this
paragraph. In this proposed rule, we would correct
that error.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
known to occur shall, at the time of
arrival at the port of first arrival in
United States, be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate of inspection
containing a declaration that the article
was grown in a greenhouse nursery and
found by the NPPO of the country in
which grown to be free from CWR. This
finding must be based on visual
examination of the parent stock, the
articles for importation, and the
greenhouse nursery in which the
articles for importation and the parent
stock were grown, once a month for 4
consecutive months immediately prior
to importation. Imported articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, or Nipponanthemum
nipponicum must satisfy this
requirement in order to be eligible to
enter the United States for postentry
quarantine. We would move these
current requirements into paragraph
(c)(1) and add the systems approach
requirements described earlier in a new
paragraph (c)(2).
In § 319.37–7(d)(7)(ii), we would
break up the list of articles eligible for
postentry quarantine of less than 2 years
into subparagraphs for ease of reading.
Under this proposal, paragraph
(d)(7)(ii)(A) of § 319.37–7 would
indicate that an article of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum that meets the requirements
of § 319.37–5(c)(2) would be required to
be grown in postentry quarantine for 2
months.
Paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(B) would state
that an article of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that
meets the requirements of § 319.37–
5(c)(1) would be required to be grown in
postentry quarantine for 6 months.
Paragraphs (d)(7)(ii)(C) and
(d)(7)(ii)(D) would contain the current
language regarding articles of Dianthus
spp. and Hydrangea spp.
Other Comments on the December 2005
Proposal
Two commenters on the December
2005 proposal suggested that APHIS
include provisions for a trust fund. The
commenters suggested that the fund
could be used to properly administer
the current CWR regulations and
monitor for the disease, and to help
defray the cost of eradication when
outbreaks occur.
We provide for trust funds in the
regulations when the regulations require
that APHIS provide services to foreign
growers, such as monitoring or
certification. The trust fund that would
be required for the implementation of
the systems approach for CWR in this
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44429
proposal is one example. We do not use
trust funds as a means of providing
insurance against the introduction of a
disease. APHIS will continue to enforce
the regulations governing the
importation of all articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum and to survey for signs of
CWR infection in plants in the United
States in cooperation with State
governments.
One commenter, the Netherlands
Ministry of Agriculture, Nature, and
Food Quality (the Netherlands NPPO),
noted that importation of articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum from the Netherlands (as
well as the rest of Europe) is prohibited
under § 319.37–2(a). The Netherlands
NPPO asked that APHIS recognize the
European Union (EU) Directive 2000/29,
Annex IV–A–II, item 21.1, which
requires propagative material of
Chrysanthemum spp. to be regularly
inspected during the growing season
and to be inspected prior to export. The
commenter also noted that the
Netherlands NPPO is not aware of CWR
ever having been detected on
Chrysanthemum spp. cuttings exported
from the Netherlands. The commenter
stated that articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum from the
Netherlands that are produced under
the requirements of this directive
should be admissible.
The commenter further noted that one
grower in its country has a program in
place that appears to satisfy the
requirements of the best management
practices program as we described it in
the December 2005 proposed rule.
As the commenter noted, importation
of articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum from the
Netherlands is currently prohibited
under § 319.37–2(a). The December
2005 proposal did not propose to
change that, nor does this proposal.
The Netherlands has submitted a
formal request for APHIS to evaluate the
conditions provided under the EU
directive and the conditions of these
programs in place at the grower cited in
the comment. APHIS will evaluate the
request to determine whether articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum produced under these
conditions should be either allowed to
be imported subject to postentry
quarantine or generally admissible. If
the evaluation indicates that their
importation should be allowed, we will
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
44430
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
publish a separate proposal to amend
the regulations.
Definition of From
The definition of from in § 319.37–1
currently provides that an article is
considered to be ‘‘from’’ any country or
locality in which it was grown. The
current regulations also provide that an
article imported into Canada from
another country or locality shall be
considered as being solely ‘‘from’’
Canada if it is imported into the United
States directly from Canada after having
been grown for at least 1 year in Canada;
has never been grown in a country from
which it would be a prohibited article
or from which it would be subject to
special foreign inspection, certification,
treatment, or other requirements; was
not grown in a country or locality from
which it would be subject to postentry
quarantine requirements, unless it was
grown in Canada under postentry
growing conditions equivalent to those
specified for the article in § 319.37–7;
and was not imported into Canada in
growing media.
In the December 2005 proposed rule,
we proposed to replace this definition
with a new definition of from, in order
to remove the special provisions related
to the importation of regulated articles
from Canada. The proposed definition
of from read: ‘‘An article is considered
to be ‘from’ an exporting country or area
when it was grown or propagated only
in the exporting country or area, or
when it was grown in the exporting
country or area after it entered the
exporting country or area from another
country or area under conditions that
are equivalent to those that would be
required by the United States if the
plant were imported into the United
States directly from any of the countries
or areas where the plant was grown
prior to its entry into the exporting
country or area.’’
We received several comments on our
proposed definition. Many of these
commenters were concerned that the
proposed definition might weaken our
protections against the importation of
potentially risky nursery stock. Three
commenters asked us to clarify whether
articles whose importation is prohibited
from one country would continue to be
prohibited even after importation to a
second country, regardless of the time
that the articles remained in the second
country.
Some commenters expressed concern
that the proposed definition would be
difficult to enforce, since the NPPOs of
exporting countries would have to keep
track of any plant material that entered
their country and that might be
reexported at some point in the future,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
as well as any propagations of that plant
material. Other commenters expressed
general concern about whether the
restrictions on the importation of
nursery stock in general are adequate to
prevent the introduction of plant pests,
when it can be difficult to determine
what pests a plant has been exposed to.
Based on these comments, we have
rethought our proposed definition of
from. While in theory it would make
sense to provide that nursery stock that
is imported into one country and then
exported from that country to the
United States must satisfy the same
requirements that it would have to if it
was imported directly into the United
States, in practice such a requirement
would be difficult to enforce. As an
example, assume that Country A does
not impose restrictions on the
importation of Pelargonium spp. from
Country B, but the United States allows
Pelargonium spp. from Country A to be
imported with a phytosanitary
certificate with an additional
declaration under § 319.37–5(r)(2) and
requires Pelargonium spp. from Country
B to be imported under the systems
approach described in § 319.37–5(r)(3).
In order for Country A to export
Pelargonium plants to the United States,
the NPPO of Country A would have to
track all Pelargonium plants of foreign
origin, even after they were legally
imported, in order to be able to certify
that any Pelargonium spp. exported
from Country A to the United States
were either not from Country B or were
grown in accordance with a systems
approach for which there would be no
regulatory enforcement mechanism in
place. This would be a logistically
unfeasible task for the NPPO of Country
A to undertake.
The International Plant Protection
Convention’s (IPPC) 2002 Glossary of
Phytosanitary Terms (International
Standards for Phytosanitary Measures
[ISPM] publication number 5) 4 takes a
different approach to the issue. The
Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms
includes a definition of the term country
of origin for consignments of plants that
reads: ‘‘Country where the plants were
grown.’’ (The IPPC definition of country
of origin is thus functionally equivalent
to the term from as it is used in our
regulations.) The definition and the
glossary do not provide any further
guidance on how to determine what
country that is or how long plants need
to be growing in the exporting country,
however, making it difficult for an
4 ISPMs may be viewed on the World Wide Web
at https://www.ippc.int/IPP/En/default.jsp. Click on
the ‘‘Standards’’ link on the home page to view the
ISPMs.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
importing NPPO to evaluate the risk
associated with the plant material if it
has previously been grown in a third
country.
We are proposing a compromise. We
would define the term from as follows:
‘‘An article is considered to be ‘from’
the country where it, or the plants from
which the article was derived, was
actively growing for at least 9 months
immediately prior to export.’’ If the
plant material did not meet this
definition, the NPPO of the exporting
country would not issue a phytosanitary
certificate to accompany it; as a
phytosanitary certificate is required for
almost all imported nursery stock other
than certain articles from Canada and
small lots of seed, this would restrict the
importation of those articles that have
not been grown for 9 months in the
country from which they would be
exported.
We chose 9 months because it is a
common length for a growing season for
nursery stock; if a plant has been
growing in a country for a full growing
season, it is reasonable to assume that
it poses the same potential pest risk as
other plants of the same genus grown in
that country. This definition would
provide an enforceable standard.
We do not mean to minimize the
problem of plants that originate in
countries where the pest risk is high and
are then re-exported to the United States
through countries where the pest risk is
lower. However, to refer again to the
example discussed earlier, if Country A
does not have restrictions on the
importation of Pelargonium spp. from
Country B, it would be difficult for the
country to track those plants once they
have been imported. Another solution
would be simply to impose the same
restrictions on the importation of
Pelargonium spp. from Country A as we
do on Pelargonium spp. from Country B,
given that the importation restrictions in
place in Country A make it difficult to
determine which Pelargonium spp.
exported from Country A may have
originated in Country B and thus pose
an elevated pest risk. We may pursue
this avenue of regulatory action in the
future. However, such regulatory action
would be undertaken independent of
our definitions of the word from.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
Flexibility Act
This proposed 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.
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires agencies to evaluate the
potential effects of their proposed and
final rules on small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions. Section 603 of the Act
requires an agency to prepare and make
available for public comment an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA)
describing the expected impact of a
proposed rule on small entities, unless
the head of the agency certifies that the
rule will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
APHIS has prepared this IRFA in order
that the public may have the
opportunity to offer comments on
expected small-entity effects of this
proposed rule. We address here items as
required by section 603(b) of the Act.
APHIS is proposing to amend the
regulations on importing nursery stock
by providing an option in which the
postentry quarantine growing period for
articles Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are
imported from certain locations would
be reduced from 6 months to 2 months,
provided that the grower of those plants
has implemented a systems approach to
prevent the imported articles from being
infected with CWR.
PPQ has determined that imported
chrysanthemums that might be affected
with CWR are likely to express
symptoms of this disease if it is present
within a 2-month postentry quarantine
period; the fact that the
chrysanthemums would originate in
countries not considered to be affected
with CWR and would be grown in
accordance with an APHIS-approved
workplan that meets the requirements of
the systems approach would reduce the
likelihood that they would be infected
with CWR. Articles identified in
postentry quarantine as being infected
with CWR are then prevented from
entering U.S. commerce.
Under the Plant Protection Act (7
U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), the Secretary of
Agriculture is authorized to implement
programs and policies designed to
prevent the spread of plant pests and
diseases. The objective of this proposed
rule is to provide another option for
importation of chrysanthemums that is
based on current science and does not
compromise the phytosanitary safety of
U.S. floral plants.
This proposed rule may affect the
volume of chrysanthemums imported
into the United States because some
importers may find that the reduction of
costs due to the shortened postentry
quarantine period will be greater than
the additional cost for chrysanthemums
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
produced under the systems approach.
These reduced costs would then
encourage a greater volume of
importation. We expect that this will
occur.
The economic effects of the proposed
change are expected to be positive, if
small, for U.S. importers of
chrysanthemums into the United States.
In 2005, the value of imported
chrysanthemums was around $80.2
million, or 8 percent of the value of all
imported flowers (i.e., fresh cut flowers
and florist plants).5 In the same year, the
wholesale value of the domestic sales of
chrysanthemums reached $210.8
million.6
The shorter postentry quarantine
period for imported chrysanthemums
may benefit U.S. importers/wholesalers
and florist retailers. The proposed
change would reduce the cost to
chrysanthemum importers (categorized
within North American Industry
Classification System [NAICS] code
424930), and those savings may be at
least partially passed along to retailers
of these plants (NAICS code 453110).
The Small Business Administration
(SBA) has established size standards for
determining which economic entities
meet the definition of a small firm. The
small-entity size standard for importers/
wholesalers of flowers, nursery stock,
and florists’ supplies is 100 or fewer
employees. For retail florists, the smallentity size standard is $6.5 million or
less in annual sale receipts.
According to the 2002 Economic
Census, there were approximately 4,854
wholesale establishments importing
flowers, nursery stock, and florists’
supplies, and they employed 59,954
people. All but four of these
establishments were likely small
entities.7 According to the same census,
there were 22,750 retail florist
establishments with total annual sales of
$6.63 billion in 2002. Their size
distribution is not reported. Both
wholesale and retail entities, regardless
of their size, would benefit from the
shorter quarantine period, but we are
5 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign
Agricultural Service, U.S. Trade Statistics,
Harmonized Schedule 10-digit import codes
0603107010, 0603107020, and 0602903010.
6 U.S. Department of Agriculture, NASS,
Agricultural Statistics Board, Floriculture Crops
2005 Summary, April 2006, pages 37 and 53. The
sum of wholesale value of all sales of potted Hardy/
Garden Chrysanthemums ($141,845,000) and
wholesale value of all sales of potted Florist
Chrysanthemums ($68,944,000). And, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service, Floriculture and Nursery Crops Outlook,
Electronic Outlook Report, FLO–05, Table:
Summary 9, September 22, 2006.
7 Personal communication with Joe W. Begley,
General Manager, Technical Services Group, Yoder
Brothers, Inc., Parrish, Florida.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44431
unable to determine the size of the
benefit.
APHIS welcomes information that the
public may provide concerning the
expected magnitude of the benefit of the
proposed rule and the number of small
entities that may be affected.
The proposed change to amend the
definition of from is administrative in
nature. We do not expect that it would
have any impact on any U.S. entities,
whether small or large.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is
adopted: (1) All State and local laws and
regulations that are inconsistent with
this rule will be preempted; (2) no
retroactive effect will be given to this
rule; and (3) administrative proceedings
will not be required before parties may
file suit in court challenging this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with section 3507(d) of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information
collection or recordkeeping
requirements included in this proposed
rule have been submitted for approval to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Please send written comments
to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention:
Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington, DC
20503. Please state that your comments
refer to Docket No. 03–002–4. Please
send a copy of your comments to: (1)
Docket No. 03–002–4, Regulatory
Analysis and Development, PPD,
APHIS, Station 3A–03.8, 4700 River
Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–
1238, and (2) Clearance Officer, OCIO,
USDA, room 404–W, 14th Street and
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250. A comment to
OMB is best assured of having its full
effect if OMB receives it within 30 days
of publication of this proposed rule.
We are proposing to provide an
option in which the postentry
quarantine growing period for articles
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum that are imported from
certain locations would be reduced from
6 months to 2 months, provided that the
grower of those plants has implemented
a systems approach to prevent the
imported articles from being infected
with CWR. This would require the use
of bilateral workplans and phytosanitary
certificates.
We are soliciting comments from the
public (as well as affected agencies)
concerning our proposed information
collection and recordkeeping
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
44432
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
requirements. These comments will
help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
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 proposed
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 (such as through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public reporting
burden for this collection of information
is estimated to average 45.1 hours per
response.
Respondents: Importers of nursery
stock and NPPOs.
Estimated annual number of
respondents: 7.
Estimated annual number of
responses per respondent: 1.4285714.
Estimated annual number of
responses: 10.
Estimated total annual burden on
respondents: 451 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.)
Copies of this information collection
can be obtained from Mrs. Celeste
Sickles, APHIS’ Information Collection
Coordinator, at (301) 734–7477.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
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 proposed rule, please contact
Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS’
Information Collection Coordinator, at
(301) 734–7477.
List of Subjects in 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 proposing to
amend 7 CFR part 319 as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE
NOTICES
1. 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.
2. Section 319.37–1 is amended by
revising the definition of from to read as
follows:
§ 319.37–1
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
From. An article is considered to be
‘‘from’’ the country where it, or the
plants from which the article was
derived, was actively growing for at
least 9 months immediately prior to
export.
*
*
*
*
*
3. In § 319.37–5, paragraph (c) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 319.37–5 Special foreign inspection and
certification requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Any restricted article (except
seeds) of Chrysanthemum spp.
(chrysanthemum, includes
Dendranthema spp.), Leucanthemella
serotina, or Nipponanthemum
nipponicum, from any foreign place
except Andorra, Argentina, Australia,
Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil,
Brunei, Canada, Canary Islands, Chile,
China, Colombia, Croatia, Ecuador,
Iceland, Japan, Korea, Liechtenstein,
Macedonia, Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova,
Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Peru,
Republic of South Africa, Russia, San
Marino, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand,
Tunisia, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela,
Yugoslavia; the European Union; and all
countries, territories, and possessions of
countries located in part or entirely
between 90° and 180° East longitude
must, at the time of arrival at the port
of first arrival in United States, be
accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate of inspection containing one
of the following declarations:
(1) A declaration that such article was
grown in a greenhouse nursery and
found by the plant protection service of
the country in which it was grown to be
free from white rust of chrysanthemum
(caused by the rust fungus Puccinia
horiana P. Henn.) based on visual
examination of the parent stock, the
articles for importation, and the
greenhouse nursery in which the
articles for importation and the parent
stock were grown, once a month for 4
consecutive months immediately prior
to importation; or
(2) A declaration that such article was
grown in a production site that is a
greenhouse or other enclosed building
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and in accordance with an APHISapproved operational workplan that
contains provisions for fulfilling the
systems approach requirements listed
below. The systems approach
requirements are:
(i) Production sites must generate
plants for planting from propagative
material that is free of chrysanthemum
white rust (Puccinia horiana Henn.).
(ii) Production sites must write and
implement standard operating
procedures that include provisions for
adequate pest control, isolation of the
production site from host material not
intended for export to the United States,
regular inspection and testing, and
training of production site employees.
(iii) Production sites must keep
detailed records of all aspects of plant
production, including the origin of
articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that will
be exported so that they may be traced
back if necessary. Production sites must
label the containers in which the
articles are shipped in order to facilitate
traceback investigations.
(iv) The national plant protection
organization of the country in which the
production site is located must oversee
the production site and perform regular
audits to ensure that all elements of the
production system are in compliance
with the requirements set out in this
paragraph (c)(2) and in the workplan.
(v) APHIS must be allowed to perform
on-site audits of the production site as
well. APHIS will perform audits at the
port of entry into which the plants are
imported to ensure that these articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum meet the requirements set
out in this paragraph (c)(2) and in the
workplan.
(vi) The national plant protection
organization of the country in which the
production site is located and APHIS
will impose penalties and remedial
action in the case of noncompliance.
The national plant protection
organization may not issue
phytosanitary certificates for shipments
of articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum
exported under the systems approach if
an audit reveals that the articles were
not grown in compliance with the
requirements set out in this paragraph
(c)(2) and in the workplan. Penalties
that could be imposed will include, but
may not necessarily be limited to,
removal of the exporting production site
from the list of growers approved by
APHIS to ship these articles to the
United States under this program.
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(vii) The government of the country in
which the articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum are
produced or its designated
representative must enter into a trust
fund agreement with APHIS before each
growing season. The government of the
country in which the articles are
produced or its designated
representative is required to pay in
advance all estimated costs that APHIS
expects to incur through its involvement
in overseeing the execution of this
paragraph (c)(2). These costs will
include administrative expenses
incurred in conducting the services
enumerated in this paragraph (c)(2) and
all salaries (including overtime and the
Federal share of employee benefits),
travel expenses (including per diem
expenses), and other incidental
expenses incurred by the inspectors in
performing these services. The
government of the country in which the
articles are produced or its designated
representative is required to deposit a
certified or cashier’s check with APHIS
for the amount of the costs estimated by
APHIS. If the deposit is not sufficient to
meet all costs incurred by APHIS, the
agreement further requires the
government of the country in which the
articles are produced or its designated
representative to deposit with APHIS a
certified or cashier’s check for the
amount of the remaining costs, as
determined by APHIS, before the
services will be completed. After a final
audit at the conclusion of each shipping
season, any overpayment of funds
would be returned to the government of
the country in which the articles are
produced or its designated
representative or held on account until
needed.
*
*
*
*
*
4. Section 319.37–7 is amended by
revising paragraph (d)(7)(ii) to read as
follows:
§ 319.37–7
Postentry quarantine.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(7) * * *
(ii) If an article of a genus or species
listed in this paragraph, to grow the
article or increase therefrom only in a
greenhouse or other enclosed building
for the period listed below:
(A) If an article of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that
meets the requirements of § 319.37–
5(c)(2) of this subpart, for a period of 2
months after importation.
(B) If an article of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Aug 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
meets the requirements of § 319.37–
5(c)(1) of this subpart, for a period of 6
months after importation.
(C) If an article of Dianthus spp.
(carnation, sweet-william), for a period
of 1 year after importation.
(D) If an article of Hydrangea spp., for
a period of 9 months after importation.
*
*
*
*
*
Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of
August 2007.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E7–15421 Filed 8–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2007–28884; Directorate
Identifier 2007–NM–116–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 727 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Boeing Model 727 airplanes. This
proposed AD would require repetitive
external high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspections of the crown skin
for cracks at certain stringer attachment
holes, and repair if necessary. This
proposed AD results from a report of
cracks at multiple locations on certain
areas of the crown skin. We are
proposing this AD to detect and correct
fatigue cracks of the crown skin, which
could result in rapid decompression of
the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by September 24,
2007.
Use one of the following
addresses to submit comments on this
proposed AD.
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to
https://dms.dot.gov and follow the
instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov
and follow the instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44433
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on
the ground floor of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207, for the service
information identified in this proposed
AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone
(425) 917–6577; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant
written data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Send your
comments to an address listed in the
ADDRESSES section. Include the docket
number ‘‘FAA–2007–28884; Directorate
Identifier 2007–NM–116–AD’’ at the
beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of
the proposed AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date
and may amend the proposed AD in
light of those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal
information you provide. We will also
post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD.
Using the search function of that Web
site, anyone can find and read the
comments in any of our dockets,
including the name of the individual
who sent the comment (or signed the
comment on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477–78), or you may visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in
person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The Docket Operations office (telephone
(800) 647–5527) is located on the
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 8, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44425-44433]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15421]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 44425]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. 03-002-4]
RIN 0579-AC55
Importation of Nursery Stock; Postentry Quarantine Requirements
for Potential Hosts of Chrysanthemum White Rust and Definition of From
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal and reproposal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations on importing nursery
stock by providing an option in which the postentry quarantine growing
period for articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are imported from certain locations
would be reduced from 6 months to 2 months, provided that the grower of
those plants has implemented a systems approach to prevent the imported
articles from being infected with chrysanthemum white rust. This
proposal replaces part of a previous proposal that would also have
provided an option in which the length of the postentry quarantine
period for potential hosts of chrysanthemum white rust would have been
reduced provided that the grower entered into a disease-prevention
program. We are issuing this reproposal to further discuss the evidence
that led us to conclude that a 2-month postentry quarantine period is
adequate and to clarify how the systems approach would work. We are
also proposing to amend the definition of from. The definition proposed
in this document would replace the definition of from that was included
in a previous proposal. We are proposing the new definition in response
to concerns raised by comments on the previous proposal.
DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before
October 9, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
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-2005-0081 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. 03-002-4,
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. 03-002-4.
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 https://www.aphis.usda.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Arnold T. Tschanz, Senior Import
Specialist, Plants for Planting Import and Analysis, Commodity Import
Analysis and Operations, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133,
Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 734-5306.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in 7 CFR part 319 prohibit or restrict the
importation of certain plants and plant products into the United States
to prevent the introduction of plant pests. The regulations contained
in ``Subpart--Nursery Stock, Plants, Roots, Bulbs, Seeds, and Other
Plant Products,'' Sec. Sec. 319.37 through 319.37-14 (referred to
below as the regulations), restrict, among other things, the
importation of living plants, plant parts, and seeds for propagation.
The regulations in Sec. 319.37-7(a) designate as restricted
articles any articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina,
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that meet the conditions for importation
in Sec. 319.37-5(c) and that are imported from any foreign locality
except Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Canary Islands, Chile, China, Colombia,
Croatia, Ecuador, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Liechtenstein, Macedonia,
Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Republic
of South Africa, Russia, San Marino, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand,
Tunisia, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia; the European Union
(Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and United Kingdom); and all
countries, territories, and possessions of countries located in part or
entirely between 90[deg] and 180[deg] East longitude. Articles
designated as restricted articles in Sec. 319.37-7(a) must be grown in
postentry quarantine under the conditions described in paragraphs (c)
and (d) of Sec. 319.37-7. Paragraph (d)(7)(ii) currently requires
restricted articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum to be grown in postentry quarantine for a
period of 6 months.
The pest of concern with regard to imported articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum is chrysanthemum white rust (CWR). CWR is caused by Puccinia
horiana Henn., a filamentous fungus and obligate parasite. CWR is not
established in the United States and is a disease of quarantine
significance. This disease has the potential to be extremely damaging
to the commercial horticulture and florist industries if it becomes
established in the United
[[Page 44426]]
States. The postentry quarantine growing period for articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum is intended to allow symptoms of the disease, if it is
present, to express themselves, so that any restricted articles that
are affected with CWR can be prevented from entering U.S. commerce.
On December 15, 2005, we published in the Federal Register (Docket
No. 03-002-1, 70 FR 74215-74235) a proposal \1\ to make several
amendments to the nursery stock regulations. We solicited comments
concerning the proposal for 60 days ending February 13, 2006. We
reopened and extended the deadline for comments until March 31, 2006,
in a document published in the Federal Register on February 28, 2006
(71 FR 9978, Docket No. 03-002-2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the proposed rule and the comments we received, go
to https://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/
main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2005-0081. Note: Since the
publication of the proposed rule, a final rule published in the
Federal Register on April 3, 2007 (Docket No 03-016-3, 72 FR 15805-
15812) expanded the list of countries from which exportation of CWR
hosts is subject to postentry quarantine restrictions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Among the changes discussed in the December 2005 proposal was
providing an option in which the postentry quarantine growing period
for articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum would be reduced from 6 months to 2 months if
the articles were grown in accordance with a best management practices
program approved by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS). The Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) program had
evaluated the available scientific literature and found that 2 months
was an adequate amount of time for CWR to express itself in postentry
quarantine; we proposed to require the best management practices
program as an additional safeguard.
We received 25 comments on the proposed rule, from 23 commenters,
including private citizens, State and local governments, industry
organizations, individual industry companies, and foreign national
plant protection organizations. Sixteen of these commenters addressed
the proposed change to the postentry quarantine requirements for
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum. While many commenters supported the change,
many commenters were confused regarding whether the best management
practices program was intended to apply to production in the country of
origin or to postentry quarantine in the United States. In addition,
some commenters disputed our conclusion that 2 months is an adequate
amount of time for symptoms of CWR infection to be expressed in
postentry quarantine.
To address these comments, we are withdrawing that portion of the
December 2005 proposal that dealt with postentry quarantine for
imported articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum. We are replacing it with this proposal,
which discusses in greater detail the evidence that leads us to
conclude that a 2-month postentry quarantine period for imported
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum is adequate. This proposal also presents new
requirements for the systems approach that more clearly indicate that
they apply to growing in the country of origin. We are also explaining
in more detail how the systems approach would be used. (We used the
term ``best management practices program'' to describe the intended
program in the December 2005 proposed rule. We are replacing it with
the term ``systems approach'' in this reproposal to clarify our
terminology.)
We discuss the postentry quarantine period and the requirements of
the systems approach in detail directly below.
Evidence Supporting Reducing the Postentry Quarantine Period for
Articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum From 6 Months to 2 Months
In the December 2005 proposed rule, we stated the following:
``PPQ's Center for Plant Health Science and Technology has reviewed the
available evidence regarding the time within which CWR will express
symptoms. Although substantial evidence indicates that articles
affected with CWR will express symptoms within 2 months, meaning that 2
months would be an adequate postentry quarantine period for these
articles, not all the available evidence confirms that.''
We received several comments on our statement that 2 months would
be an adequate postentry quarantine period for these articles. The
issues raised by these commenters are described below.
Four commenters strongly supported all aspects of the proposal,
including our determination that a 2-month postentry quarantine period
was sufficient to allow expression of CWR in articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum. One of
these commenters reviewed the available literature and concluded that
most available studies indicate that CWR is expressed in normal
conditions within 2 weeks, with an upper limit of 2 months in extreme
conditions such as high temperatures or massive inoculations in a
research setting.
This commenter also noted that, in the June 2002 version of the
APHIS document ``Chrysanthemum White Rust: A National Management Plan
for Exclusion and Eradication,'' we stated that in the event that a
nursery is found to be infected with CWR, no plant should leave the
nursery for 8 weeks or until the nursery has been inspected and
certified as being free of CWR. The current version of this document
provides for an 8-week host-free period at any nursery at which plants
are found to be infected with CWR. The commenter indicated that this
document supports the statement that the 2-month postentry quarantine
is adequate for expression of CWR symptoms.
Two more commenters supported the proposed reduction in the
postentry quarantine period on the condition that the reduction was
based on science.
Three commenters were concerned about our statement that not all
the available evidence confirms that CWR is expressed in postentry
quarantine within 2 months, asking us to discuss any evidence that
might show that a longer postentry quarantine period is necessary for
the expression of CWR.
Seven commenters took issue with the proposed reduction in the
postentry quarantine period for articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum. Five of these
commenters stated that, under certain environmental and climatic
conditions, CWR would not be expressed in a 2-month postentry
quarantine period; they stated that the disease cycle of CWR requires
cool, wet conditions in order to exhibit its symptoms. One commenter
stated specifically that basidiospores (airborne spores) of the CWR
fungus are produced and released during periods of relatively high
humidity and when temperatures are between 40 [deg]F and 73 [deg]F,
with optimum expression at 63 [deg]F. In southern California, these
cool temperatures occur only from November through June. Even using
APHIS-approved best management practices, the commenter stated, the
conditions necessary for CWR infections could not be created in a
greenhouse during the hot summer months. Under the December 2005
proposal, stated the commenter, cuttings infected with CWR
[[Page 44427]]
could conceivably be imported in July and released 2 months later in
September and never show any symptoms, because climatic conditions at
that time of year preclude symptoms from being exhibited.
Based on these comments, we again reviewed the available evidence
regarding the expression of CWR. Our statement in the December 2005
proposal that ``not all the available evidence confirms'' that 2 months
is an adequate postentry quarantine period for CWR hosts was incorrect.
The longest time between infection and symptom development that has
been reported is 8 weeks. This was reported to have been achieved when
infected cuttings were experimentally exposed to 86 [deg]F (30 [deg]C)
temperatures for several hours, in an effort to simulate hot climatic
conditions. However, efforts to reproduce this effect experimentally
have been unsuccessful, and it has not been reported in the field.
Most references on CWR concur that the disease usually expresses
itself in between 5 to 14 days, depending on the prevailing climatic
conditions. Warm temperatures increase the latency period, but in most
cases not beyond 14 days, and we are not aware of any reports
describing increases in the latency period beyond 2 months. The
commenter who stated that CWR requires cool temperatures for
expression, and thus that warm temperatures will delay expression of
the disease indefinitely, did not provide a reference to support that
statement, and we have been unable to locate any references confirming
it. We invite commenters to submit any additional information that may
be pertinent to this subject.
We would also like to clarify the difference between the purpose of
the 8-week host-free period in our CWR management plan and the time
necessary for expression of symptoms of CWR in postentry quarantine.
Teliospores of P. horiana can survive for up to 8 weeks in favorable
climatic conditions on the leaves of CWR hosts, even in the absence of
living plants. Keeping premises free of host plants for at least 8
weeks ensures that all the teliospores in the premises die, making it
safe to repopulate the premises with CWR hosts. By contrast, the
postentry quarantine period is not used to ensure disease freedom at a
premises, but rather to determine whether potential hosts are infected
with CWR. If a living plant is infected with CWR (either with
teliospores or the shorter lived basidiospores), the disease will
express itself within 5 to 14 days under normal conditions. The period
required for eradication of CWR from a premises and the postentry
quarantine period we are proposing are of similar length, but they have
no relationship to each other.
While 2 months appears to be an adequate postentry quarantine
growing period for CWR hosts, we would require that CWR hosts grown in
postentry quarantine for 2 months also be produced under a systems
approach. We would include this additional safeguard because of the
danger CWR presents to the domestic floral industry. Efforts to
eradicate CWR outbreaks in the United States have been costly for
growers, who typically must destroy all plants within a 1-meter radius
of any infected plant, treat the entire production site to neutralize
any remaining CWR spores, and implement a host-free period to prevent
reintroduction of the rust. In a 2006 outbreak of CWR in California,
the estimated cost per acre of implementing the host-free period alone
was $54,594. Given that the entire production site must implement the
host-free period in order to eradicate CWR, the eradication costs to
producers can be considerable. The requirements of the systems approach
would provide additional assurance that CWR-infected plants would not
be introduced into the United States under the 2-month postentry
quarantine period.
One commenter additionally objected to the proposed 2-month
postentry quarantine period as too short to allow for the necessary
inspection of the plants being grown in postentry quarantine. This
commenter stated that postentry quarantine inspections are usually
conducted in spring and fall to increase the chances of finding a
quarantine pest. Under the December 2005 proposal, the commenter
stated, an importer could conceivably time the importation of cuttings
to essentially avoid inspection. In this commenter's experience, when
plants are imported for postentry quarantine, 2 or more months may pass
before authorities at the local level receive notification from APHIS
that the plants have arrived in the area. With a 2-month postentry
quarantine period, the commenter stated, the material may have been
shipped throughout the United States before local authorities have been
notified that it was imported and before they have had a chance to
conduct an inspection.
The regulations in Sec. 319.37-7(c) set out requirements for the
postentry quarantine agreements that APHIS concludes with States. Under
paragraph (c)(3)(iii), the Administrator is required to notify State
officials, in writing and within 10 days of the arrival, when plant
material destined for postentry quarantine in their State arrives in
the United States. Under paragraph (c)(2)(iii), States are required to
provide the services of State inspectors to inspect plants for evidence
of exotic pests at least once for plants required to be grown in
quarantine for less than 2 years. After this, again under paragraph
(c)(3)(iii), the Administrator shall notify State officials in writing
when materials in postentry quarantine may be released from quarantine
in their State. We do not notify State officials that materials in
postentry quarantine may be released from quarantine until we have
received the results of the State inspection of the materials. If an
importer removes plant material in postentry quarantine from the
approved site before the Administrator notifies State officials that it
may be released, then that importer is in violation of the regulations.
Two other commenters objected generally to what they perceived as
the loosening of restrictions on the importation of articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum, given that CWR outbreaks continue to occur occasionally in
the United States. In these commenters' opinions, unless the reduced
postentry quarantine period and the systems approach would encourage
legal importation of those articles that are currently imported without
complying with our regulations, the perceived additional risk of
reducing the postentry quarantine period would not be warranted.
As discussed earlier, our decision to reduce the postentry
quarantine period for imported articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum is supported by
science; it is not motivated by the goal of reducing illegal trade of
those articles. We do not believe that providing an option in which the
postentry quarantine period for imported articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum is reduced
to 2 months will increase the risk of allowing a plant that is infected
with CWR to enter U.S. commerce, especially if the plants are produced
in compliance with the requirements of systems approach.
It is important to note that the postentry quarantine restrictions
placed on CWR hosts in the regulations apply to the importation of CWR
hosts from countries where CWR is not known to occur. We prohibit the
importation of CWR hosts from countries where CWR is known to occur in
Sec. 319.37-2(a). CWR has not been detected in any host plants
[[Page 44428]]
imported under the current postentry quarantine program in the last 10
years. We believe the introductions of CWR that the commenter cites
were the result of illegal importations. We are continuing to work
through our Smuggling Interdiction and Trade Compliance program and
with the Department of Homeland Security's Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection to prevent such introductions.
Because the option we are proposing would reduce the postentry
quarantine period to the time actually required for expression of
symptoms while imposing additional phytosanitary safeguards on the
production of CWR host materials, we believe the program we are
proposing here would be as effective as our current program.
Two commenters suggested that APHIS issue a departmental permit to
allow a reduction in the postentry quarantine period.
Departmental permits are issued under Sec. 319.37-2(c) and provide
for the importation of articles that are listed as prohibited under
paragraphs (a) and (b) of Sec. 319.37-2 for experimental or scientific
purposes; APHIS may specify conditions for such importation that are
adequate to prevent the introduction into the United States of plant
pests. However, articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are eligible to be
imported under postentry quarantine conditions are, by definition, not
prohibited articles. Therefore, using the departmental permit to
facilitate their importation in this way would not be appropriate. In
addition, the departmental permit is intended for us only to allow
importation for experimental or scientific purposes.
Systems Approach for Articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum Imported Into the United States
As many commenters noted, our explanation of the best management
practices program cited in the December 2005 proposed rule did not make
clear whether the program would be applied to imported articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum during their growth in their country of origin or to their
growth during postentry quarantine. Many commenters interpreted our
description of the best management practices program to mean that it
would apply to the growth of these articles during postentry
quarantine, and objected to the increased responsibility placed on
Federal and State entities to monitor postentry quarantine under the
conditions of the best management practices program. Some of these
commenters further stated that a program to prevent the articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum from being infected with CWR while being grown in the
country of origin, prior to importation into the United States, would
be more effective, both in terms of cost and in terms of phytosanitary
security.
We agree with these comments. We had intended for the best
management practices program described in the December 2005 proposal to
apply to the growth of these plants in the country of origin, and the
systems approach we are proposing to require as a condition of reducing
the postentry quarantine period from 6 to 2 months would also apply to
the growth of articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina,
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum in their country of origin. In this
proposal, we have revised the requirements of the systems approach in
order to make it clear that they would apply to growth in the country
of origin.
In order to be eligible for participation in this program, the
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum would have to be grown in a production site
that is a greenhouse or other enclosed building. The proposed systems
approach would specify several basic requirements to be fulfilled
during the production of those articles and prior to their importation
to the United States. These requirements are the following:
Production sites would have to generate plants for
planting from propagative material that is free of CWR.
Production sites would have to write and implement
standard operating procedures that include provisions for adequate pest
control, isolation of the production site from host material not
intended for export to the United States, regular inspection and
testing, and training of production site employees.
Production sites would have to keep detailed records of
all aspects of plant production, including the origin of articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum that will be exported so that they may be traced back if
necessary. Production sites would have to label the containers in which
the articles are shipped in order to facilitate traceback
investigations.
The national plant protection organization (NPPO) of the
country in which the production site is located would have to oversee
the production site and perform regular audits to ensure that all
elements of the production system are in compliance with the
requirements of the systems approach and the workplan.
APHIS would have to be allowed to perform on-site audits
of the production site as well. APHIS would also perform audits at the
port of entry into which the plants are imported to ensure that these
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum meet the requirements of the systems approach
and the workplan.
The NPPO of the country in which the production site is
located and APHIS would impose penalties and remedial actions in the
case of noncompliance. The NPPO would not issue phytosanitary
certificates for shipments of articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum exported under
the systems approach if an audit revealed that the articles were not
grown in compliance with the requirements of the systems approach and
the workplan. Penalties that could be imposed would include, but would
not necessarily be limited to, removal of the exporting production site
from the list of growers approved by APHIS to ship these articles to
the United States under this program.
The government of the country in which the articles are
produced or its designated representative would have to enter into a
trust fund agreement with APHIS before each growing season. The
government of the country in which the articles are produced or its
designated representative would have to pay in advance all estimated
costs that APHIS expects to incur through its involvement in overseeing
the execution of the systems approach. (The specific level of APHIS
involvement will vary with the terms of the workplan; APHIS involvement
may range from regular inspections of production sites to occasional
on-site audits.) Details on this requirement can be found in the
proposed regulatory text at the end of this document.
Two commenters on the December 2005 proposal asked to review the
program we described in that rule. We are not proposing to add specific
phytosanitary requirements to the regulations. Instead, we are
proposing to set out the performance standards in the regulations. If
this rule is finalized, the NPPO of a country that wishes to export
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum to the United States for a postentry
quarantine
[[Page 44429]]
growing period of 2 months (rather than 6 months) would submit to us a
detailed proposal for operational plans and procedures that fulfill the
performance standards. We would then work with the NPPO of the
exporting country to agree upon a final set of operational plans and
procedures, which would be codified in a bilateral workplan.\2\ Thus,
the regulations would require that the articles be produced in
accordance with a workplan that meets the requirements of the systems
approach, as listed in the regulations. We anticipate that the specific
conditions required by a workplan will vary according to the conditions
in the country and facility where the workplan is implemented, and as
such we do not have a single workplan that we can make available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ We published in the Federal Register a notice providing
background information on bilateral workplans on May 10, 2006 (71 FR
27221-27224, Docket No. APHIS-2005-0085). It can be accessed at
https://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/
main?main=DocumentDetail&d=APHIS-AOGUS-2005-0085-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The changes discussed in this proposal would reduce the cost of
postentry quarantine for importers of articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum while continuing
to protect against the introduction of CWR into the United States.
Proposed Amendments to the Regulations
In Sec. 319.37-7, paragraph (d)(7)(ii) lists articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Dendranthema spp.,\3\ Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum, articles of Dianthus spp., and articles of
Hydrangea spp. as articles for which a postentry quarantine growing
period of less than 2 years is permitted. In the December 2005
proposal, we proposed to add articles of Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum produced in
accordance with a best management practices program to this list, with
a 2-month postentry quarantine period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The April 2007 final rule referred to earlier was intended
to remove all references to Dendranthema spp. within the text of the
regulations but inadvertently did not remove the reference in this
paragraph. In this proposed rule, we would correct that error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this document, we are proposing to amend the regulations in
Sec. 319.37-5(c). This paragraph presently requires that any
restricted article (except seeds) of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, or Nipponanthemum nipponicum from any foreign place other
than countries where CWR is known to occur shall, at the time of
arrival at the port of first arrival in United States, be accompanied
by a phytosanitary certificate of inspection containing a declaration
that the article was grown in a greenhouse nursery and found by the
NPPO of the country in which grown to be free from CWR. This finding
must be based on visual examination of the parent stock, the articles
for importation, and the greenhouse nursery in which the articles for
importation and the parent stock were grown, once a month for 4
consecutive months immediately prior to importation. Imported articles
of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, or Nipponanthemum
nipponicum must satisfy this requirement in order to be eligible to
enter the United States for postentry quarantine. We would move these
current requirements into paragraph (c)(1) and add the systems approach
requirements described earlier in a new paragraph (c)(2).
In Sec. 319.37-7(d)(7)(ii), we would break up the list of articles
eligible for postentry quarantine of less than 2 years into
subparagraphs for ease of reading.
Under this proposal, paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(A) of Sec. 319.37-7
would indicate that an article of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that meets the requirements of
Sec. 319.37-5(c)(2) would be required to be grown in postentry
quarantine for 2 months.
Paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(B) would state that an article of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum that meets the requirements of Sec. 319.37-5(c)(1) would be
required to be grown in postentry quarantine for 6 months.
Paragraphs (d)(7)(ii)(C) and (d)(7)(ii)(D) would contain the
current language regarding articles of Dianthus spp. and Hydrangea spp.
Other Comments on the December 2005 Proposal
Two commenters on the December 2005 proposal suggested that APHIS
include provisions for a trust fund. The commenters suggested that the
fund could be used to properly administer the current CWR regulations
and monitor for the disease, and to help defray the cost of eradication
when outbreaks occur.
We provide for trust funds in the regulations when the regulations
require that APHIS provide services to foreign growers, such as
monitoring or certification. The trust fund that would be required for
the implementation of the systems approach for CWR in this proposal is
one example. We do not use trust funds as a means of providing
insurance against the introduction of a disease. APHIS will continue to
enforce the regulations governing the importation of all articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum and to survey for signs of CWR infection in plants in the
United States in cooperation with State governments.
One commenter, the Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, Nature, and
Food Quality (the Netherlands NPPO), noted that importation of articles
of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum from the Netherlands (as well as the rest of Europe) is
prohibited under Sec. 319.37-2(a). The Netherlands NPPO asked that
APHIS recognize the European Union (EU) Directive 2000/29, Annex IV-A-
II, item 21.1, which requires propagative material of Chrysanthemum
spp. to be regularly inspected during the growing season and to be
inspected prior to export. The commenter also noted that the
Netherlands NPPO is not aware of CWR ever having been detected on
Chrysanthemum spp. cuttings exported from the Netherlands. The
commenter stated that articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella
serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum from the Netherlands that are
produced under the requirements of this directive should be admissible.
The commenter further noted that one grower in its country has a
program in place that appears to satisfy the requirements of the best
management practices program as we described it in the December 2005
proposed rule.
As the commenter noted, importation of articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum from the
Netherlands is currently prohibited under Sec. 319.37-2(a). The
December 2005 proposal did not propose to change that, nor does this
proposal.
The Netherlands has submitted a formal request for APHIS to
evaluate the conditions provided under the EU directive and the
conditions of these programs in place at the grower cited in the
comment. APHIS will evaluate the request to determine whether articles
of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum produced under these conditions should be either allowed to
be imported subject to postentry quarantine or generally admissible. If
the evaluation indicates that their importation should be allowed, we
will
[[Page 44430]]
publish a separate proposal to amend the regulations.
Definition of From
The definition of from in Sec. 319.37-1 currently provides that an
article is considered to be ``from'' any country or locality in which
it was grown. The current regulations also provide that an article
imported into Canada from another country or locality shall be
considered as being solely ``from'' Canada if it is imported into the
United States directly from Canada after having been grown for at least
1 year in Canada; has never been grown in a country from which it would
be a prohibited article or from which it would be subject to special
foreign inspection, certification, treatment, or other requirements;
was not grown in a country or locality from which it would be subject
to postentry quarantine requirements, unless it was grown in Canada
under postentry growing conditions equivalent to those specified for
the article in Sec. 319.37-7; and was not imported into Canada in
growing media.
In the December 2005 proposed rule, we proposed to replace this
definition with a new definition of from, in order to remove the
special provisions related to the importation of regulated articles
from Canada. The proposed definition of from read: ``An article is
considered to be `from' an exporting country or area when it was grown
or propagated only in the exporting country or area, or when it was
grown in the exporting country or area after it entered the exporting
country or area from another country or area under conditions that are
equivalent to those that would be required by the United States if the
plant were imported into the United States directly from any of the
countries or areas where the plant was grown prior to its entry into
the exporting country or area.''
We received several comments on our proposed definition. Many of
these commenters were concerned that the proposed definition might
weaken our protections against the importation of potentially risky
nursery stock. Three commenters asked us to clarify whether articles
whose importation is prohibited from one country would continue to be
prohibited even after importation to a second country, regardless of
the time that the articles remained in the second country.
Some commenters expressed concern that the proposed definition
would be difficult to enforce, since the NPPOs of exporting countries
would have to keep track of any plant material that entered their
country and that might be reexported at some point in the future, as
well as any propagations of that plant material. Other commenters
expressed general concern about whether the restrictions on the
importation of nursery stock in general are adequate to prevent the
introduction of plant pests, when it can be difficult to determine what
pests a plant has been exposed to.
Based on these comments, we have rethought our proposed definition
of from. While in theory it would make sense to provide that nursery
stock that is imported into one country and then exported from that
country to the United States must satisfy the same requirements that it
would have to if it was imported directly into the United States, in
practice such a requirement would be difficult to enforce. As an
example, assume that Country A does not impose restrictions on the
importation of Pelargonium spp. from Country B, but the United States
allows Pelargonium spp. from Country A to be imported with a
phytosanitary certificate with an additional declaration under Sec.
319.37-5(r)(2) and requires Pelargonium spp. from Country B to be
imported under the systems approach described in Sec. 319.37-5(r)(3).
In order for Country A to export Pelargonium plants to the United
States, the NPPO of Country A would have to track all Pelargonium
plants of foreign origin, even after they were legally imported, in
order to be able to certify that any Pelargonium spp. exported from
Country A to the United States were either not from Country B or were
grown in accordance with a systems approach for which there would be no
regulatory enforcement mechanism in place. This would be a logistically
unfeasible task for the NPPO of Country A to undertake.
The International Plant Protection Convention's (IPPC) 2002
Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms (International Standards for
Phytosanitary Measures [ISPM] publication number 5) \4\ takes a
different approach to the issue. The Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms
includes a definition of the term country of origin for consignments of
plants that reads: ``Country where the plants were grown.'' (The IPPC
definition of country of origin is thus functionally equivalent to the
term from as it is used in our regulations.) The definition and the
glossary do not provide any further guidance on how to determine what
country that is or how long plants need to be growing in the exporting
country, however, making it difficult for an importing NPPO to evaluate
the risk associated with the plant material if it has previously been
grown in a third country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ISPMs may be viewed on the World Wide Web at https://
www.ippc.int/IPP/En/default.jsp. Click on the ``Standards'' link on
the home page to view the ISPMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are proposing a compromise. We would define the term from as
follows: ``An article is considered to be `from' the country where it,
or the plants from which the article was derived, was actively growing
for at least 9 months immediately prior to export.'' If the plant
material did not meet this definition, the NPPO of the exporting
country would not issue a phytosanitary certificate to accompany it; as
a phytosanitary certificate is required for almost all imported nursery
stock other than certain articles from Canada and small lots of seed,
this would restrict the importation of those articles that have not
been grown for 9 months in the country from which they would be
exported.
We chose 9 months because it is a common length for a growing
season for nursery stock; if a plant has been growing in a country for
a full growing season, it is reasonable to assume that it poses the
same potential pest risk as other plants of the same genus grown in
that country. This definition would provide an enforceable standard.
We do not mean to minimize the problem of plants that originate in
countries where the pest risk is high and are then re-exported to the
United States through countries where the pest risk is lower. However,
to refer again to the example discussed earlier, if Country A does not
have restrictions on the importation of Pelargonium spp. from Country
B, it would be difficult for the country to track those plants once
they have been imported. Another solution would be simply to impose the
same restrictions on the importation of Pelargonium spp. from Country A
as we do on Pelargonium spp. from Country B, given that the importation
restrictions in place in Country A make it difficult to determine which
Pelargonium spp. exported from Country A may have originated in Country
B and thus pose an elevated pest risk. We may pursue this avenue of
regulatory action in the future. However, such regulatory action would
be undertaken independent of our definitions of the word from.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed 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.
[[Page 44431]]
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to evaluate the
potential effects of their proposed and final rules on small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
Section 603 of the Act requires an agency to prepare and make available
for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA)
describing the expected impact of a proposed rule on small entities,
unless the head of the agency certifies that the rule will not, if
promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities. APHIS has prepared this IRFA in order that the
public may have the opportunity to offer comments on expected small-
entity effects of this proposed rule. We address here items as required
by section 603(b) of the Act.
APHIS is proposing to amend the regulations on importing nursery
stock by providing an option in which the postentry quarantine growing
period for articles Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are imported from certain locations
would be reduced from 6 months to 2 months, provided that the grower of
those plants has implemented a systems approach to prevent the imported
articles from being infected with CWR.
PPQ has determined that imported chrysanthemums that might be
affected with CWR are likely to express symptoms of this disease if it
is present within a 2-month postentry quarantine period; the fact that
the chrysanthemums would originate in countries not considered to be
affected with CWR and would be grown in accordance with an APHIS-
approved workplan that meets the requirements of the systems approach
would reduce the likelihood that they would be infected with CWR.
Articles identified in postentry quarantine as being infected with CWR
are then prevented from entering U.S. commerce.
Under the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), the
Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to implement programs and
policies designed to prevent the spread of plant pests and diseases.
The objective of this proposed rule is to provide another option for
importation of chrysanthemums that is based on current science and does
not compromise the phytosanitary safety of U.S. floral plants.
This proposed rule may affect the volume of chrysanthemums imported
into the United States because some importers may find that the
reduction of costs due to the shortened postentry quarantine period
will be greater than the additional cost for chrysanthemums produced
under the systems approach. These reduced costs would then encourage a
greater volume of importation. We expect that this will occur.
The economic effects of the proposed change are expected to be
positive, if small, for U.S. importers of chrysanthemums into the
United States. In 2005, the value of imported chrysanthemums was around
$80.2 million, or 8 percent of the value of all imported flowers (i.e.,
fresh cut flowers and florist plants).\5\ In the same year, the
wholesale value of the domestic sales of chrysanthemums reached $210.8
million.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural
Service, U.S. Trade Statistics, Harmonized Schedule 10-digit import
codes 0603107010, 0603107020, and 0602903010.
\6\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, NASS, Agricultural
Statistics Board, Floriculture Crops 2005 Summary, April 2006, pages
37 and 53. The sum of wholesale value of all sales of potted Hardy/
Garden Chrysanthemums ($141,845,000) and wholesale value of all
sales of potted Florist Chrysanthemums ($68,944,000). And, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Floriculture
and Nursery Crops Outlook, Electronic Outlook Report, FLO-05, Table:
Summary 9, September 22, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The shorter postentry quarantine period for imported chrysanthemums
may benefit U.S. importers/wholesalers and florist retailers. The
proposed change would reduce the cost to chrysanthemum importers
(categorized within North American Industry Classification System
[NAICS] code 424930), and those savings may be at least partially
passed along to retailers of these plants (NAICS code 453110). The
Small Business Administration (SBA) has established size standards for
determining which economic entities meet the definition of a small
firm. The small-entity size standard for importers/wholesalers of
flowers, nursery stock, and florists' supplies is 100 or fewer
employees. For retail florists, the small-entity size standard is $6.5
million or less in annual sale receipts.
According to the 2002 Economic Census, there were approximately
4,854 wholesale establishments importing flowers, nursery stock, and
florists' supplies, and they employed 59,954 people. All but four of
these establishments were likely small entities.\7\ According to the
same census, there were 22,750 retail florist establishments with total
annual sales of $6.63 billion in 2002. Their size distribution is not
reported. Both wholesale and retail entities, regardless of their size,
would benefit from the shorter quarantine period, but we are unable to
determine the size of the benefit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Personal communication with Joe W. Begley, General Manager,
Technical Services Group, Yoder Brothers, Inc., Parrish, Florida.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
APHIS welcomes information that the public may provide concerning
the expected magnitude of the benefit of the proposed rule and the
number of small entities that may be affected.
The proposed change to amend the definition of from is
administrative in nature. We do not expect that it would have any
impact on any U.S. entities, whether small or large.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is adopted: (1) All State
and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule
will be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will be given to this
rule; and (3) administrative proceedings will not be required before
parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information collection or
recordkeeping requirements included in this proposed rule have been
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Please send written comments to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington,
DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket No. 03-002-4.
Please send a copy of your comments to: (1) Docket No. 03-002-4,
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700
River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238, and (2) Clearance
Officer, OCIO, USDA, room 404-W, 14th Street and Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20250. A comment to OMB is best assured of having
its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication of
this proposed rule.
We are proposing to provide an option in which the postentry
quarantine growing period for articles Chrysanthemum spp.,
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are
imported from certain locations would be reduced from 6 months to 2
months, provided that the grower of those plants has implemented a
systems approach to prevent the imported articles from being infected
with CWR. This would require the use of bilateral workplans and
phytosanitary certificates.
We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection and
recordkeeping
[[Page 44432]]
requirements. These comments will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed 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
proposed 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 (such as through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average 45.1 hours per response.
Respondents: Importers of nursery stock and NPPOs.
Estimated annual number of respondents: 7.
Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.4285714.
Estimated annual number of responses: 10.
Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 451 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.)
Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Mrs.
Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301)
734-7477.
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 proposed rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste
Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 734-7477.
List of Subjects in 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 proposing to amend 7 CFR part 319 as follows:
PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES
1. 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.
2. Section 319.37-1 is amended by revising the definition of from
to read as follows:
Sec. 319.37-1 Definitions.
* * * * *
From. An article is considered to be ``from'' the country where it,
or the plants from which the article was derived, was actively growing
for at least 9 months immediately prior to export.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 319.37-5, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 319.37-5 Special foreign inspection and certification
requirements.
* * * * *
(c) Any restricted article (except seeds) of Chrysanthemum spp.
(chrysanthemum, includes Dendranthema spp.), Leucanthemella serotina,
or Nipponanthemum nipponicum, from any foreign place except Andorra,
Argentina, Australia, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei,
Canada, Canary Islands, Chile, China, Colombia, Croatia, Ecuador,
Iceland, Japan, Korea, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mexico,
Moldova, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Republic of South Africa,
Russia, San Marino, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Tunisia, Ukraine,
Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia; the European Union; and all countries,
territories, and possessions of countries located in part or entirely
between 90[deg] and 180[deg] East longitude must, at the time of
arrival at the port of first arrival in United States, be accompanied
by a phytosanitary certificate of inspection containing one of the
following declarations:
(1) A declaration that such article was grown in a greenhouse
nursery and found by the plant protection service of the country in
which it was grown to be free from white rust of chrysanthemum (caused
by the rust fungus Puccinia horiana P. Henn.) based on visual
examination of the parent stock, the articles for importation, and the
greenhouse nursery in which the articles for importation and the parent
stock were grown, once a month for 4 consecutive months immediately
prior to importation; or
(2) A declaration that such article was grown in a production site
that is a greenhouse or other enclosed building and in accordance with
an APHIS-approved operational workplan that contains provisions for
fulfilling the systems approach requirements listed below. The systems
approach requirements are:
(i) Production sites must generate plants for planting from
propagative material that is free of chrysanthemum white rust (Puccinia
horiana Henn.).
(ii) Production sites must write and implement standard operating
procedures that include provisions for adequate pest control, isolation
of the production site from host material not intended for export to
the United States, regular inspection and testing, and training of
production site employees.
(iii) Production sites must keep detailed records of all aspects of
plant production, including the origin of articles of Chrysanthemum
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that will
be exported so that they may be traced back if necessary. Production
sites must label the containers in which the articles are shipped in
order to facilitate traceback investigations.
(iv) The national plant protection organization of the country in
which the production site is located must oversee the production site
and perform regular audits to ensure that all elements of the
production system are in compliance with the requirements set out in
this paragraph (c)(2) and in the workplan.
(v) APHIS must be allowed to perform on-site audits of the
production site as well. APHIS will perform audits at the port of entry
into which the plants are imported to ensure that these articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum meet the requirements set out in this paragraph (c)(2) and
in the workplan.
(vi) The national plant protection organization of the country in
which the production site is located and APHIS will impose penalties
and remedial action in the case of noncompliance. The national plant
protection organization may not issue phytosanitary certificates for
shipments of articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina,
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum exported under the systems approach if an
audit reveals that the articles were not grown in compliance with the
requirements set out in this paragraph (c)(2) and in the workplan.
Penalties that could be imposed will include, but may not necessarily
be limited to, removal of the exporting production site from the list
of growers approved by APHIS to ship these articles to the United
States under this program.
[[Page 44433]]
(vii) The government of the country in which the articles of
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum
nipponicum are produced or its designated representative must enter
into a trust fund agreement with APHIS before each growing season. The
government of the country in which the articles are produced or its
designated representative is required to pay in advance all estimated
costs that APHIS expects to incur through its involvement in overseeing
the execution of this paragraph (c)(2). These costs will include
administrative expenses incurred in conducting the services enumerated
in this paragraph (c)(2) and all salaries (including overtime and the
Federal share of employee benefits), travel expenses (including per
diem expenses), and other incidental expenses incurred by the
inspectors in performing these services. The government of the country
in which the articles are produced or its designated representative is
required to deposit a certified or cashier's check with APHIS for the
amount of the costs estimated by APHIS. If the deposit is not
sufficient to meet all costs incurred by APHIS, the agreement further
requires the government of the country in which the articles are
produced or its designated representative to deposit with APHIS a
certified or cashier's check for the amount of the remaining costs, as
determined by APHIS, before the services will be completed. After a
final audit at the conclusion of each shipping season, any overpayment
of funds would be returned to the government of the country in which
the articles are produced or its designated representative or held on
account until needed.
* * * * *
4. Section 319.37-7 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(7)(ii) to
read as follows:
Sec. 319.37-7 Postentry quarantine.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(7) * * *
(ii) If an article of a genus or species listed in this paragraph,
to grow the article or increase therefrom only in a greenhouse or other
enclosed building for the period listed below:
(A) If an article of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina,
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that meets the requirements of Sec.
319.37-5(c)(2) of this subpart, for a period of 2 months after
importation.
(B) If an article of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina,
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that meets the requirements of Sec.
319.37-5(c)(1) of this subpart, for a period of 6 months after
importation.
(C) If an article of Dianthus spp. (carnation, sweet-william), for
a period of 1 year after importation.
(D) If an article of Hydrangea spp., for a period of 9 months after
importation.
* * * * *
Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of August 2007.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E7-15421 Filed 8-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P