Notice of Decision to Issue Permits for the Importation of Sweet Cherries From Australia Into the Continental United States and Hawaii, 5495-5496 [E8-1682]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 20 / Wednesday, January 30, 2008 / Notices
receiving its benefits, and in both
instances, USDA announced its view
not to conduct a referendum regarding
the 1991 amendments to the Order (61
FR 52772 & 67 FR 1714) and
subsequently held sign-up periods for
all eligible persons to request a
continuance referendum on the 1990
Act amendments. The results of both
respective sign-up periods did not meet
the criteria as established by the Act for
a continuance referendum and,
therefore, referenda were not conducted.
In 2006, the Department again
prepared a 5-year report that described
the impact of the Cotton Research and
Promotion Program on the cotton
industry. The review report is available
upon written request to the Chief of the
Cotton Research and Promotion Staff at
the address provided above. Comments
were solicited from all interested parties
including from persons who pay the
assessments as well as from
organizations representing cotton
producers and importers (71 FR 13808;
March 17, 2006). Economic data was
also reviewed in order to report on the
general climate of the cotton industry.
Finally, a number of independent
sources of information were reviewed to
help identify perspectives from outside
the program including the results of
independent program evaluations
assessing the effects of the Cotton
Research and Promotion Program
activities on demand for Upland cotton,
return-on-investment to cotton
producers, the benefit-cost ratio to
companies who import cotton products
and raw cotton, and the overall rate-ofreturn and qualitative benefits and
returns associated with the Cotton
Research and Promotion Program. The
review report cited that the 1990
amendments to the Act were
successfully implemented and are
operating as intended. The report also
noted that there is a consensus within
the cotton industry that the Cotton
Research and Promotion Program and
the 1990 amendments to the Act are
operating as intended. Written
comments, economic data, and results
from independent evaluations support
this conclusion. Industry comments
cited examples of how the additional
funding has yielded benefits by
increasing the demand and
consumption for cotton. Of the 15
comments received, only one
commenter, who represents cotton
importers, argued for a referendum on
the 1990 Act amendments.
USDA found no compelling reason to
conduct a referendum regarding the
1990 Act amendments to the Cotton
Research and Promotion Order although
some program participants support a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:49 Jan 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
referendum. Therefore, USDA allowed
all eligible persons to request the
conduct of a continuance referendum on
the 1990 amendments through a sign-up
period.
With this announcement of the results
of the sign-up period, USDA has
completed all requirements set forth in
section 8(c) (1) and (2) of the Act
regarding the review of the Cotton
Research and Promotion Program to
determine if a continuance referendum
is warranted. A referendum will not be
conducted, and no further actions are
planned in connection with this review.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2101–2118.
Dated: January 24, 2008.
Lloyd C. Day,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. E8–1660 Filed 1–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2007–0128]
Notice of Decision to Issue Permits for
the Importation of Sweet Cherries
From Australia Into the Continental
United States and Hawaii
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We are advising the public of
our decision to begin issuing permits for
the importation into the continental
United States and Hawaii of sweet
cherries from Australia. Based on the
findings of a pest risk analysis, which
we made available to the public for
review and comment through a previous
notice, we believe that the application
of one or more designated phytosanitary
measures will be sufficient to mitigate
the risks of introducing or disseminating
plant pests or noxious weeds via the
importation of sweet cherries from
Australia.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
January 30, 2008.
Ms.
Donna L. West, Senior Import
Specialist, Commodity Import Analysis
and Operations, Plant Health Programs,
PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734–
8758.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the
regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Fruits and
Vegetables’’ (7 CFR 319.56 through
319.56–47, referred to below as the
regulations), the Animal and Plant
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5495
Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of
the U.S. Department of Agriculture
prohibits or restricts the importation of
fruits and vegetables into the United
States from certain parts of the world to
prevent plant pests from being
introduced into and spread within the
United States.
Section 319.56–4 of the regulations
contains a performance-based process
for approving the importation of
commodities that, based on the findings
of a pest risk analysis, can be safely
imported subject to one or more of the
designated phytosanitary measures
listed in paragraph (b) of that section.
Under that process, APHIS publishes a
notice in the Federal Register
announcing the availability of the pest
risk analysis that evaluates the risks
associated with the importation of a
particular fruit or vegetable. Following
the close of the 60-day comment period,
APHIS may begin issuing permits for
importation of the fruit or vegetable
subject to the identified designated
measures if: (1) No comments were
received on the pest risk analysis; (2)
the comments on the pest risk analysis
revealed that no changes to the pest risk
analysis were necessary; or (3) changes
to the pest risk analysis were made in
response to public comments, but the
changes did not affect the overall
conclusions of the analysis and the
Administrator’s determination of risk.
In accordance with that process, we
published a notice 1 in the Federal
Register on October 12, 2007 (72 FR
58047–58048, Docket No. APHIS–2007–
0128), in which we announced the
availability, for review and comment, of
a pest risk analysis that evaluates the
risks associated with the importation
into the continental United States and
Hawaii of sweet cherries from Australia.
We solicited comments on the notice for
60 days ending on December 11, 2007.
We received one comment by that date,
from a representative of Australia’s
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries
and Forestry.
The commenter supported the
findings of the pest risk analysis, but
noted that her agency has concerns
regarding the commercial viability of
one of the treatment options we spelled
out for Australian cherries. The
commenter stated that the methyl
bromide fumigation followed by cold
treatment is considered by the
Australian industry to damage the fruit
and could thus reduce its commercial
appeal. Based on those concerns, the
1 To view the notice, the pest risk analysis, and
the comment we received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/
main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0128.
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
5496
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 20 / Wednesday, January 30, 2008 / Notices
commenter urged APHIS to complete its
review of the data supporting a cold
treatment-only option for treating
cherries. The commenter did not,
however, question the efficacy of the
combination treatment or otherwise
suggest that the overall conclusions of
the analysis and the Administrator’s
determination of risk should be
changed.
Therefore, in accordance with the
regulations in § 319.56–4(c)(2)(ii), we
are announcing our decision to begin
issuing permits for the importation into
the continental United States and
Hawaii of sweet cherries from Australia
subject to the following conditions:
• The fruit must be part of a
commercial consignment as defined in 7
CFR 319.56–2.
• The fruit must either originate from
an APHIS-approved fruit fly free area or
be treated in accordance with the
phytosanitary treatments regulations in
7 CFR part 305. This may entail
treatment with T108-a-1/2/3 [fumigation
with methyl bromide followed by cold
treatment as provided in 7 CFR
305.10(a)] or irradiation using 150 Gy as
the minimum absorbed dose and
meeting all other relevant requirements
in 7 CFR 305.31.
• Each consignment must be
accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate issued by the Australian
National Plant Protection Organization
(NPPO) certifying that the fruit either
received the required treatment or
originated from a fruit fly free area. The
NPPO must also include an additional
declaration in the phytosanitary
certificate that states: ‘‘The fruit in this
shipment was inspected and found free
of Epiphyas postvittana.’’
• The fruit will also be subject to
inspection at the port of entry should
inspectors determine that such
inspection is necessary.
These conditions will be listed in the
fruits and vegetables manual (available
at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/
import_export/plants/manuals/ports/
downloads/fv.pdf). In addition to these
specific measures, the sweet cherries
will be subject to the general
requirements listed in § 319.56–3 that
are applicable to the importation of all
fruits and vegetables.
Done in Washington, DC, this 25th day of
January 2008.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E8–1682 Filed 1–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Summer Food Service Program for
Children; Program Reimbursement for
2008
Food and Nutrition Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice informs the public
of the annual adjustments to the
reimbursement rates for meals served in
the Summer Food Service Program for
Children (SFSP). These adjustments
reflect changes in the Consumer Price
Index and are required by the statute
governing the Program. In addition,
further adjustments are made to these
rates to reflect the higher costs of
providing meals in the States of Alaska
and Hawaii, as authorized by the
William F. Goodling Child Nutrition
Reauthorization Act of 1998.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Keith Churchill, Policy and Program
Development Branch, Child Nutrition
Division, Food and Nutrition Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101
Park Center Drive, Room 640,
Alexandria, Virginia 22302, (703) 305–
2590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
This program is listed in the Catalog
of Federal Domestic Assistance under
No. 10.559 and is subject to the
provisions of Executive Order 12372
which requires intergovernmental
consultation with State and local
officials (7 CFR part 3015, subpart V,
and final rule related notice published
at 48 FR 29114, June 24, 1983).
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3518), no new recordkeeping or
reporting requirements have been
included that are subject to approval
from the Office of Management and
Budget.
This notice is not a rule as defined by
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601–612) and thus is exempt from the
provisions of that Act. Additionally, this
notice has been determined to be
exempt from review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866.
Definitions
The terms used in this Notice shall
have the meaning ascribed to them in
the regulations governing the Summer
Food Service Program for Children (7
CFR Part 225).
Background
In accordance with Section 13 of the
National School Lunch Act (NSLA) (42
U.S.C. 1761), section 12 of the NSLA (42
U.S.C. 1760(f)), and the regulations
governing the SFSP (7 CFR part 225),
notice is hereby given of adjustments in
Program payments for meals served to
children participating in the SFSP in
2008. Adjustments are based on changes
in the food away from home series of
the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All
Urban Consumers for the period
November 2006 through November
2007.
The 2008 reimbursement rates, in
dollars, for all States excluding Alaska
and Hawaii:
MAXIMUM PER MEAL REIMBURSEMENT RATES FOR ALL STATES (NOT AK OR HI)
Administrative costs
Operating costs
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Breakfast ........................................................................................
Lunch or Supper ............................................................................
Snacks ...........................................................................................
Rural or self-preparation
sites
$1.57
2.75
.64
$.1575
.2875
.0775
The 2008 reimbursement rates, in
dollars, for Alaska:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:49 Jan 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
Other types of sites
$.1225
.2375
.0625
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 20 (Wednesday, January 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5495-5496]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1682]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
[Docket No. APHIS-2007-0128]
Notice of Decision to Issue Permits for the Importation of Sweet
Cherries From Australia Into the Continental United States and Hawaii
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are advising the public of our decision to begin issuing
permits for the importation into the continental United States and
Hawaii of sweet cherries from Australia. Based on the findings of a
pest risk analysis, which we made available to the public for review
and comment through a previous notice, we believe that the application
of one or more designated phytosanitary measures will be sufficient to
mitigate the risks of introducing or disseminating plant pests or
noxious weeds via the importation of sweet cherries from Australia.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 30, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Donna L. West, Senior Import
Specialist, Commodity Import Analysis and Operations, Plant Health
Programs, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-
1231; (301) 734-8758.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the regulations in ``Subpart--Fruits
and Vegetables'' (7 CFR 319.56 through 319.56-47, referred to below as
the regulations), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture prohibits or restricts
the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from
certain parts of the world to prevent plant pests from being introduced
into and spread within the United States.
Section 319.56-4 of the regulations contains a performance-based
process for approving the importation of commodities that, based on the
findings of a pest risk analysis, can be safely imported subject to one
or more of the designated phytosanitary measures listed in paragraph
(b) of that section. Under that process, APHIS publishes a notice in
the Federal Register announcing the availability of the pest risk
analysis that evaluates the risks associated with the importation of a
particular fruit or vegetable. Following the close of the 60-day
comment period, APHIS may begin issuing permits for importation of the
fruit or vegetable subject to the identified designated measures if:
(1) No comments were received on the pest risk analysis; (2) the
comments on the pest risk analysis revealed that no changes to the pest
risk analysis were necessary; or (3) changes to the pest risk analysis
were made in response to public comments, but the changes did not
affect the overall conclusions of the analysis and the Administrator's
determination of risk.
In accordance with that process, we published a notice \1\ in the
Federal Register on October 12, 2007 (72 FR 58047-58048, Docket No.
APHIS-2007-0128), in which we announced the availability, for review
and comment, of a pest risk analysis that evaluates the risks
associated with the importation into the continental United States and
Hawaii of sweet cherries from Australia. We solicited comments on the
notice for 60 days ending on December 11, 2007. We received one comment
by that date, from a representative of Australia's Department of
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the notice, the pest risk analysis, and the comment
we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/
main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0128.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The commenter supported the findings of the pest risk analysis, but
noted that her agency has concerns regarding the commercial viability
of one of the treatment options we spelled out for Australian cherries.
The commenter stated that the methyl bromide fumigation followed by
cold treatment is considered by the Australian industry to damage the
fruit and could thus reduce its commercial appeal. Based on those
concerns, the
[[Page 5496]]
commenter urged APHIS to complete its review of the data supporting a
cold treatment-only option for treating cherries. The commenter did
not, however, question the efficacy of the combination treatment or
otherwise suggest that the overall conclusions of the analysis and the
Administrator's determination of risk should be changed.
Therefore, in accordance with the regulations in Sec. 319.56-
4(c)(2)(ii), we are announcing our decision to begin issuing permits
for the importation into the continental United States and Hawaii of
sweet cherries from Australia subject to the following conditions:
The fruit must be part of a commercial consignment as
defined in 7 CFR 319.56-2.
The fruit must either originate from an APHIS-approved
fruit fly free area or be treated in accordance with the phytosanitary
treatments regulations in 7 CFR part 305. This may entail treatment
with T108-a-1/2/3 [fumigation with methyl bromide followed by cold
treatment as provided in 7 CFR 305.10(a)] or irradiation using 150 Gy
as the minimum absorbed dose and meeting all other relevant
requirements in 7 CFR 305.31.
Each consignment must be accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate issued by the Australian National Plant Protection
Organization (NPPO) certifying that the fruit either received the
required treatment or originated from a fruit fly free area. The NPPO
must also include an additional declaration in the phytosanitary
certificate that states: ``The fruit in this shipment was inspected and
found free of Epiphyas postvittana.''
The fruit will also be subject to inspection at the port
of entry should inspectors determine that such inspection is necessary.
These conditions will be listed in the fruits and vegetables manual
(available at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/
ports/downloads/fv.pdf). In addition to these specific measures, the
sweet cherries will be subject to the general requirements listed in
Sec. 319.56-3 that are applicable to the importation of all fruits and
vegetables.
Done in Washington, DC, this 25th day of January 2008.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E8-1682 Filed 1-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
