Movement of Hass Avocados From Areas Where Mediterranean Fruit Fly or South American Fruit Fly Exist, 43804-43808 [2011-18707]

Download as PDF 43804 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations Saguache * SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: * * * * [FR Doc. 2011–18533 Filed 7–21–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325–39–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 7 CFR Parts 301 and 319 [Docket No. APHIS–2010–0127] RIN 0579–AD34 Movement of Hass Avocados From Areas Where Mediterranean Fruit Fly or South American Fruit Fly Exist Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: We are amending the regulations to relieve certain restrictions regarding the movement of fresh Hass variety avocados. Specifically, we are amending our domestic regulations to provide for the interstate movement of Hass avocados from Mediterranean fruit fly quarantined areas in the United States with a certificate if the fruit is safeguarded after harvest in accordance with specific measures. We are also amending our foreign quarantine regulations to remove trapping requirements for Mediterranean fruit fly for Hass avocados imported from the ´ State of Michoacan, Mexico, requirements for treatment or origin from an area free of Mediterranean fruit fly for Hass avocados imported from Peru, and requirements for trapping or origin from an area free of South American fruit fly for Hass avocados imported from Peru. These actions are warranted in light of research demonstrating the limited host status of Hass avocados to Mediterranean fruit fly and South American fruit fly. By amending both our domestic and foreign quarantine regulations, we are making them consistent with each other and relieving restrictions for Mexican and Peruvian Hass avocado producers. In addition, this action provides a means for Hass avocados to be moved interstate if the avocados originate from a Mediterranean fruit fly quarantined area in the United States. DATES: Effective Date: July 22, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. ´ Tony Roman, Import Specialist, Regulations, Permits, and Manuals, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734– 0627. emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:10 Jul 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 Background The domestic fruit fly regulations, contained in 7 CFR 301.32 through 301.32–10 (referred to below as the domestic regulations), were established to prevent the spread of certain fruit fly species, including Ceratitis capitata (Mediterranean fruit fly), into noninfested areas of the United States. The regulations designate soil and many fruits, nuts, vegetables, and berries as regulated articles and impose restrictions on the interstate movement of those regulated articles from regulated areas. Avocado, Persea americana (including the variety Hass), is listed as a regulated article for Mediterranean fruit fly, melon fruit fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae), Mexican fruit fly (Anastrepha ludens), Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis), peach fruit fly (Anastrepha zonata), and sapote fruit fly (Anastrepha serpentina) in the regulations. Because avocados are listed as regulated articles, they may not be moved interstate from an area quarantined for one of those fruit flies unless the movement is authorized by a certificate or limited permit. In general, avocados may be eligible for a certificate if a bait spray is applied to the production site beginning prior to harvest and continuing through the end of harvest or if a post-harvest irradiation treatment is applied to the fruit. To be eligible for a limited permit, a regulated article must be moved to a specific destination for specialized handling, utilization, or processing or for treatment and meet all other applicable provisions of the regulations. For Hass avocados moving interstate from any Mexican fruit fly or sapote fruit fly quarantined area, the avocados may be moved interstate under certificate if the fruit is safeguarded after harvest in accordance with specific measures set out in § 301.32–4(d). We have determined that Hass avocados are a host for Mexican fruit fly and sapote fruit fly only after harvest; these measures are designed to prevent Hass avocados harvested in a quarantined area from being infested with these fruit flies after harvest. Avocados handled in accordance with these measures are thus allowed to move from the quarantined area without further restriction under the certificate. The regulations in ‘‘Subpart–Fruits and Vegetables’’ (7 CFR 319.56–1 through 319.56–50, referred to below as the import regulations) prohibit or restrict the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world to prevent the PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 introduction and dissemination of plant pests that are new to or not widely distributed within the United States. The requirements for importing Hass variety avocados into the United States ´ from Michoacan, Mexico, are described in § 319.56–30. Those requirements include pest surveys and pest riskreducing practices, treatment, packinghouse procedures, inspection, and shipping procedures. Although Mediterranean fruit fly is not known to ´ be present in Michoacan, Mexico, the regulations require that trapping be conducted for Mediterranean fruit fly and that any fruit fly finds are reported to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The regulations in § 319.56–50 allow the importation into the continental United States of Hass avocados from Peru provided, among other things, that the avocados originate from an area free of Mediterranean fruit fly or that the avocados have been treated for Mediterranean fruit fly in accordance with our phytosanitary treatment regulations in 7 CFR part 305. In addition, the regulations in § 319.56–50 require that the avocados must either originate from an area within Peru that is free of South American fruit fly or an area with low pest prevalence for South American fruit fly and where trapping for South American fruit fly is conducted. On April 4, 2011, we published in the Federal Register (76 FR 18419–18421, Docket No. APHIS–2010–0127) a proposal 1 to amend our domestic quarantine regulations to provide for the interstate movement of Hass avocados from Mediterranean fruit fly quarantined areas in the United States with a certificate if the fruit is safeguarded after harvest in accordance with specific measures. We also proposed to amend our foreign quarantine regulations to remove trapping requirements for Mediterranean fruit fly for Hass ´ avocados imported from Michoacan, Mexico, the treatment requirements and origin restrictions for Mediterranean fruit fly for imported Hass avocados from Peru, and the trapping requirements and origin restrictions for South American fruit fly for imported Hass avocados from Peru. These proposed actions were intended to make our domestic and foreign requirements for movement of Hass avocados consistent with each other, relieve restrictions for Mexican and Peruvian 1 To view the proposed rule, the commodity import evaluation document, and the comments we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/ fdmspublic/component/ main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2010-0127. E:\FR\FM\22JYR1.SGM 22JYR1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations Hass avocado producers, and provide an alternative means for Hass avocados to be moved interstate if the avocados originate from a Mediterranean fruit fly quarantined area in the United States. We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 30 days ending May 4, 2011. We reopened and extended the deadline for comments until May 18, 2011, in a document published in the Federal Register on May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26654–26655). We received 30 comments by that date. They were from private citizens, customs brokers, trade associations, a State department of agriculture, growers, industry groups, chambers of commerce, ports, and foreign governments. The majority of commenters supported the proposed rule. Several commenters submitted comments that were not germane to the rule. The issues raised by the other commenters are discussed below. One commenter stated that, because Hass avocados have been proven to be limited hosts for South American fruit fly and Mediterranean fruit fly, APHIS should relieve movement restrictions on Hass avocados from all countries with Mediterranean fruit fly and South American fruit fly that ship Hass avocados to the United States. The commenter stated that this would fulfill our bilateral and multilateral sanitary and phytosanitary agreements. Currently, Hass avocados are allowed entry into the United States from the ´ State of Michoacan, Mexico, and Peru under the regulations in §§ 319.56–30 and 319.56–50, respectively. In addition, Hass avocados are allowed entry into the United States from Chile administratively, provided that the avocados originate from an area free of the Mediterranean fruit fly or that the avocados have been treated by either cold treatment or fumigation with methyl bromide. Because we recognize Chile as free of Mediterranean fruit fly and South American fruit fly, we did not mention Chile in our proposed rule; however, we are also relieving movement restrictions on Hass avocados from Chile due to Mediterranean fruit fly, should Mediterranean fruit fly be reintroduced to Chile. In the event that another country where Mediterranean fruit fly and South American fruit fly are present is authorized to export Hass avocados to the United States, we will not impose movement restrictions associated with those fruit flies, except for post-harvest safeguarding as described in the proposed rule. One commenter expressed concern that Peru’s research protocol and findings, particularly with respect to the host status of Hass avocados for South American fruit fly, were not subjected to VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:10 Jul 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 peer review. The commenter further stated that the NPPO of Peru should conduct additional experiments to test host susceptibility to South American fruit fly using fruit of varying degrees of maturity from stressed trees. The commenter cited the abandonment of the regulatory protocol allowing the movement of Sharwil variety avocados from Hawaii to the continental United States due to repeated finds of Oriental fruit fly larva within avocado fruit during drought conditions. While Peru’s report on the host status of Hass avocado for South American fruit fly was not peer-reviewed, their research corroborated current literature, including peer-reviewed research conducted by Martin Aluja et al.,2 concluding that, under most circumstances, Hass avocados are generally poor hosts for Anastrepha spp. fruit flies. As stated in the commodity import evaluation document published in connection with the proposed rule, APHIS does not consider South American fruit fly to infest Hass avocados in Mexico, but we included it in the pest list for Hass avocados from Peru due to a lack of host records and data. Peru subsequently conducted a study on host status and came to the conclusion that Hass avocados in Peru are not hosts to South American fruit fly. As stated in our commodity import evaluation document, the main risk of fruit fly infestation is from avocado fruit outside of the normal population, i.e., fruit that is left to become overripe on the tree, injured or damaged fruit, fruit picked up from the ground, picked fruit left in the field for days, and fruit that is the wrong cultivar. Therefore, we have determined that Hass avocados are conditional nonhosts for Mediterranean fruit fly and South American fruit fly. We have encouraged Peru to submit the data they submitted to us regarding the host status of Hass avocado to South American fruit fly for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The commenter is correct that the regulatory protocol allowing Sharwil avocados to be moved to the continental United States from Hawaii was abandoned due to repeated finds of Oriental fruit fly larva within avocado fruit. However, the situation within Hawaii was fundamentally different than the situation within Peru for several reasons, not the least of which is the different fruit fly species and avocado varieties involved. 2 Aluja, M., F. Diaz-Fleischer and J. Arredondo. 2004. Nonhost Status of Commercial Persea americana ‘Hass’ to Anastrepha ludens, Anastrepha obliqua, Anastrepha serpentina, and Anastrepha striata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Mexico. J. Econ. Entomol. 97(2): 293–309. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 43805 Apart from variety-host interactions, other factors indicate that the problems with interstate movement of Sharwil variety avocados are not likely to occur in Hass variety avocados. For example, the exocarp of the Hass avocado fruit provides a barrier to infestation by fruit flies that may not be offered by the exocarp of other varieties of avocados. In general, drought conditions may increase incidences of fruit fly infestation of avocados, in particular due to an increase in a specific type of peduncle damage called girdling. However, unlike Sharwil avocados in Hawaii, it has been shown that Hass avocados in Mexico that experience girdling do not reach a size conducive to export (see footnote 2). Therefore, they are not likely to be included in commercial shipments. In addition, it is unlikely that avocado trees in Peru would undergo drought stress because the avocado groves there are irrigated. Mature ripe fruit, including Hass avocados, are also more susceptible to insect infestation than immature or ‘‘green’’ fruit; the greater distance that Peruvian Hass avocados must travel to reach the United States means that mature ripe Hass avocados would not be packed for export to the United States, as they would spoil by the time they arrived on the export market. One commenter asked what sort of oversight APHIS would have over our Hass avocado import programs and what resources will be made available to ensure that the provisions in the regulations are carried out. As signatories to the International Plant Protection Convention, the national plant protection organizations (NPPO) of Mexico, Peru, and Chile are obligated to fulfill their responsibilities for importation of Hass avocados. In addition, we have APHIS employees stationed in countries throughout the world, including Mexico, Peru, and Chile, to monitor import program activities. We have conducted site visits as part of developing our import requirements and found the NPPOs of Mexico, Peru, and Chile to have the necessary resources and capacity to implement them. In addition, all Hass avocado shipments are subject to inspection at the port of entry, which may include fruit cutting to ensure freedom from quarantine pests. This inspection serves as a check on the effectiveness of the required mitigations. One commenter suggested that each avocado importer provide a bond that could be used to pay for mitigating potential pest outbreaks as a result of the importation. We do not consider such a bond requirement to be practical, largely E:\FR\FM\22JYR1.SGM 22JYR1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES 43806 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations because no country in the world requires the indemnification of agricultural products offered for importation; if the United States were to set a precedent and require such indemnification, it would be only a matter of time before our domestic agricultural producers would be required to put up similar bonds for their exports. Any grower or farmer has little control over his or her produce once it has left the grove or farm, let alone once it has been exported to another nation. Finally, requiring such indemnification would run counter to our obligations under current international trade agreements and would certainly be subject to challenge by our trading partners. For these reasons, the use of such bonds is considered impractical. In addition, as our import requirements are sufficient to mitigate the risk of pest introduction via the importation of Hass avocados, we do not believe that such a requirement would be necessary in any case. Several commenters expressed concern regarding the impact of the proposed rule on U.S. avocado producers. One commenter pointed to a historical decrease in U.S. avocado acreage and stated that increasing U.S. regulatory constraints and water costs as well as lower-priced foreign imports have accelerated the decline in avocado acreage in recent years. The commenter further stated that lowering the costs borne by foreign producers and allowing unlimited foreign imports will drive domestic avocado producers out of business, resulting in the permanent loss of the domestic avocado industry, which will have an adverse economic effect for businesses connected with the domestic avocado industry. In addition, the commenter stated that communities in the United States where avocados are currently grown would suffer from fallowed farm land. The commenter recommended that, before additional Peruvian avocados are imported, a farreaching and comprehensive economic impact analysis be prepared, preferably by an independent third party, to evaluate the impacts to the U.S. avocado industry and the effects of additional pressures. While the commenter is correct that U.S. avocado acreage has declined in the past 25 years, many factors could contribute to that decline, including the increasing opportunity cost of avocado production and the conversion of avocado groves to residential or commercial lots. In addition, despite a decrease in avocado acreage, avocado production has remained approximately the same over that period. While APHIS VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:10 Jul 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 does not place specific limits on imports of agricultural products generally, APHIS does allow imports to occur only after pest risks are investigated and appropriate mitigation measures are in place. This rule will allow foreign producers to realize cost savings, and may increase imports. However, we have determined that the domestic avocado industry will not be significantly adversely affected by this rule. Avocados from Chile, Mexico, and Peru are currently allowed importation into the United States and, in the case of Mexico and Chile, have been allowed into the United States for a number of years. Despite this, the U.S. avocado industry is still very active and there have been no introductions of pests that can be traced to avocado imports in the United States. APHIS does realize that additional imports may place downward pressure on domestic Hass avocado prices, but it also may mean greater availability and potentially greater demand by consumers for all avocados, imported and domestic alike. Should domestic avocado production decline as a result of this rule, some land may be removed from avocado production. However, fallowing land implies that opportunity cost of avocado production land is zero. On the contrary, the land will be put to a use that provides the owner with the highest return, which could include noneconomic considerations. We would also like to emphasize that, by allowing imports to occur under reasonable science-based restrictions, we advocate for a more accessible world market for U.S. exports as well. The additional areas of study suggested by the commenter are beyond the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, which requires agencies to evaluate the potential effects of their proposed and final rules on small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions and to prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes expected impacts of a rule on small entities. In addition, we believe a study of that scope is not warranted given that this rule was not intended to allow additional avocados into the United States but to relieve restrictions, which we have deemed no longer necessary, on the importation of Hass avocados already allowed entry. Another commenter stated that, because there are no domestic areas quarantined for the presence of Mediterranean fruit fly, it is not a benefit to U.S. producers to remove restrictions on the interstate movement of Hass avocados for Mediterranean fruit PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 fly. The commenter further expressed concern regarding the economic impact of the rule on small entities and recommended that APHIS consult an economic report put out by the University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, in 2004 regarding how to offset price impacts from imported avocados. While the commenter is correct that there are currently no areas within the United States quarantined for Mediterranean fruit fly, we proposed to remove restrictions on the movement of Hass avocados due to Mediterranean fruit fly if, in the future, areas of the United States were to be quarantined for Mediterranean fruit fly. Since 2005, there have been 13 Mediterranean fruit fly outbreaks in the United States. The last outbreak of Mediterranean fruit fly in California was in 2009, and it affected avocado production areas. As stated previously, avocados from Chile, Mexico, and Peru are already allowed entry into the United States; the final rule merely relieves restrictions on the movement of Hass avocados we have determined are not necessary in light of research demonstrating the limited host status of Hass avocados to Mediterranean and South American fruit fly. Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, without change. Effective Date This is a substantive rule that relieves restrictions and, pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, may be made effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Immediate implementation of this rule is necessary to provide relief to those persons who are adversely affected by restrictions we no longer find warranted. The shipping season for Hass avocados from Mexico, Peru, and Chile is in progress. Making this rule effective immediately will allow interested producers and others in the marketing chain to benefit during this year’s shipping season. Therefore, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this rule should be effective upon publication in the Federal Register. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act This final 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\22JYR1.SGM 22JYR1 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 604, we have performed a final regulatory flexibility analysis, which is summarized below, regarding the economic effects of this rule on small entities. Copies of the full analysis are available on the Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 1 in this document for a link to Regulations.gov) or by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Within the United States, avocado fruit is primarily produced in California, Hawaii, and Florida. There were approximately 8,200 farms producing avocados in those States in 2007. About 180,000 metric tons (MT) of avocados were produced annually in the United States over a 20-year period beginning in the 1990–1991 season. There is an occasional fluctuation with an occasional higher or lower production amount than other years; the variance in avocado production can be attributed to various circumstances including inclement weather. Currently, the costs associated with the Mediterranean fruit fly mitigation measures on Hass avocados from Mexico and Peru have increased the cost of imported avocados for consumers. Removing requirements for treatment, trapping, and origin restrictions for Hass avocados from Mexico and Peru due to Mediterranean fruit fly and South American fruit fly will reduce the cost associated with mitigation for producers, and in consequence, likely lower the cost of imported avocados for U.S. consumers. The impact of the rule on Hass avocado fruit operations in California, Hawaii, and Florida will depend on the volume and season of increased Hass avocado imports from Mexico and Peru, the volume and season of continental U.S. production, the volume and season of imports from other countries, as well as U.S. consumption and export levels. Consumer demand for avocados has increased greatly in the past decade. Imports of Hass avocados increased from 56,000 MT in 2001 to a high of 420,000 MT in 2009. The countries affected by the mitigation treatment changes in this rule already export Hass avocados to the United States. It is worth noting that the increase in imports of Hass avocados has occurred over the last 10 years while U.S. domestic avocado production quantities and values have remained relatively stable. It would appear that the domestic market for avocados continues to expand to absorb both increasing imports and existing domestic production rather than new avocado imports displacing either domestic production or existing VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:10 Jul 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 imports. It therefore does not appear that the current increasing level of imports has had a significant impact on a substantial number of small avocado producers or importers. Executive Order 12372 This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.) Executive Order 12988 This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule. Paperwork Reduction Act This final rule contains no new information collection or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). List of Subjects 7 CFR Part 301 Agricultural commodities, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation. 7 CFR Part 319 Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs, Nursery stock, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rice, Vegetables. Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR parts 301 and 319 as follows: PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE NOTICES 1. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781– 7786; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. Section 301.75–15 issued under Sec. 204, Title II, Public Law 106–113, 113 Stat. 1501A–293; sections 301.75–15 and 301.75– 16 issued under Sec. 203, Title II, Public Law 106–224, 114 Stat. 400 (7 U.S.C. 1421 note). § 301.32–4 [Amended]. 2. In § 301.32–4, paragraph (d) introductory text is amended by removing the word ‘‘Mexican’’ and adding the words ‘‘Mediterranean, Mexican,’’ in its place. ■ PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 43807 PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES 3. The authority citation for part 319 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701 7772, and 7781 7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. § 319.56–30 [Amended]. 4. Section 319.56–30 is amended by removing paragraph (c)(1)(iii). ■ 5. Section 319.56–50 is amended as follows: ■ a. By revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) to read as set forth below. ■ b. By removing paragraphs (d) and (e) and redesignating paragraphs (f) through (j) as paragraphs (d) through (h), respectively. ■ c. By revising newly redesignated paragraph (g) to read as set forth below. ■ d. In newly redesignated paragraph (h) introductory text, by removing the words ‘‘In addition:’’ and by removing newly redesignated paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(3). ■ § 319.56–50 * Hass avocados from Peru. * * * * (b) * * * (1) The NPPO of Peru must visit and inspect registered places of production monthly, starting at least 2 months before harvest and continuing until the end of the shipping season, to verify that the growers are complying with the requirements of paragraphs (c) and (e) of this section and follow pest control guidelines, when necessary, to reduce quarantine pest populations. Any personnel conducting trapping and pest surveys under paragraph (d) of this section must be trained and supervised by the NPPO of Peru. APHIS may monitor the places of production if necessary. (2) In addition to conducting fruit inspections at the packinghouses, the NPPO of Peru must monitor packinghouse operations to verify that the packinghouses are complying with the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section. * * * * * (g) NPPO of Peru inspection. Following any post-harvest processing, inspectors from the NPPO of Peru must inspect a biometric sample of fruit from each place of production at a rate to be determined by APHIS. The inspectors must visually inspect for the quarantine pests listed in the introductory text of this section and must cut fruit to inspect for S. catenifer. If any quarantine pests are detected in this inspection, the place of production where the infested avocados were grown will immediately be suspended from the export program until an investigation has been E:\FR\FM\22JYR1.SGM 22JYR1 43808 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations Constitutionally Protected Property Rights D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 G. Executive Order 12372: Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments I. Paperwork Reduction Act J. E-Government Act K. Congressional Review Act conducted by APHIS and the NPPO of Peru and appropriate mitigations have been implemented. * * * * * Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of July 2011. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. 2011–18707 Filed 7–20–11; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3410–34–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE I. Authority Office of Energy Policy and New Uses 7 CFR Part 2902 RIN 0503–AA36 Designation of Biobased Items for Federal Procurement Departmental Management, USDA. ACTION: Final rule. II. Background AGENCY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is amending the Guidelines for Designating Biobased Products for Federal Procurement, to add 14 sections to designate items within which biobased products will be afforded Federal procurement preference, as provided for under section 9002 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, as amended by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (referred to in this document as ‘‘section 9002’’). USDA is also establishing minimum biobased contents for each of these items. DATES: This rule is effective August 22, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Buckhalt, USDA, Office of Procurement and Property Management, Room 361, Reporters Building, 300 7th St. SW., Washington, DC 20024; e-mail: biopreferred@usda.gov; phone (202) 205–4008. Information regarding the Federal biobased preferred procurement program (one part of the BioPreferred Program) is available on the Internet at https://www.biopreferred.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows: emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: I. Authority II. Background III. Summary of Changes IV. Discussion of Public Comments V. Regulatory Information A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) C. Executive Order 12630: Governmental Actions and Interference With VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:10 Jul 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 These items are designated under the authority of section 9002 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (FSRIA), as amended by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA), 7 U.S.C. 8102 (referred to in this document as ‘‘section 9002’’). As part of the BioPreferred Program, USDA published, on November 23, 2010, a proposed rule in the Federal Register (FR) for the purpose of designating a total of 14 items for the preferred procurement of biobased products by Federal agencies (referred to hereafter in this FR notice as the ‘‘preferred procurement program’’). This proposed rule can be found at 75 FR 71492. This rulemaking is referred to in this preamble as Round 7 (RIN 0503– AA36). In the proposed rule, USDA proposed designating the following 14 items for the preferred procurement program: Animal repellents; bath products; bioremediation materials; compost activators and accelerators; concrete and asphalt cleaners; cuts, burns, and abrasions ointments; dishwashing products; erosion control materials; floor cleaners and protectors; hair care products, including shampoos and conditioners as subcategories; interior paints and coatings; oven and grill cleaners; slide way lubricants; and thermal shipping containers, including durable and non-durable thermal shipping containers as subcategories. Today’s final rule designates the proposed items within which biobased products will be afforded Federal procurement preference. USDA has determined that each of the items being designated under today’s rulemaking meets the necessary statutory requirements; that they are being produced with biobased products; and that their procurement will carry out the following objectives of section 9002: to improve demand for biobased products; to spur development of the industrial base through value-added agricultural PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 processing and manufacturing in rural communities; and to enhance the Nation’s energy security by substituting biobased products for products derived from imported oil and natural gas. When USDA designates by rulemaking an item (a generic grouping of products) for preferred procurement under the BioPreferred Program, manufacturers of all products under the umbrella of that item, that meet the requirements to qualify for preferred procurement, can claim that status for their products. To qualify for preferred procurement, a product must be within a designated item and must contain at least the minimum biobased content established for the designated item. When the designation of specific items is finalized, USDA will invite the manufacturers and vendors of these qualifying products to post information on the product, contacts, and performance testing on its BioPreferred Web site, https://www.biopreferred.gov. Procuring agencies will be able to utilize this Web site as one tool to determine the availability of qualifying biobased products under a designated item. Once USDA designates an item, procuring agencies are required generally to purchase biobased products within these designated items where the purchase price of the procurement item exceeds $10,000 or where the quantity of such items or of functionally equivalent items purchased over the preceding fiscal year equaled $10,000 or more. Subcategorization. Most of the items USDA is considering for designation for preferred procurement cover a wide range of products. For some items, there are subgroups of products within the item that meet different requirements, uses and/or different performance specifications. Where such subgroups exist, USDA intends to create subcategories within the designated items. In sum, USDA looks at the products within each item category to evaluate whether there are subgroups of products within the item that have different characteristics or that meet different performance specifications and, where USDA finds these types of differences, it intends to create subcategories with the minimum biobased content based on the tested products within the subcategory. For some items, however, USDA may not have sufficient information at the time of designation to create subcategories within an item. In such instances, USDA may either designate the item without creating subcategories (i.e., defer the creation of subcategories) or designate one subcategory and defer designation of other subcategories E:\FR\FM\22JYR1.SGM 22JYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43804-43808]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18707]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

7 CFR Parts 301 and 319

[Docket No. APHIS-2010-0127]
RIN 0579-AD34

Movement of Hass Avocados From Areas Where Mediterranean Fruit
Fly or South American Fruit Fly Exist

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations to relieve certain
restrictions regarding the movement of fresh Hass variety avocados.
Specifically, we are amending our domestic regulations to provide for
the interstate movement of Hass avocados from Mediterranean fruit fly
quarantined areas in the United States with a certificate if the fruit
is safeguarded after harvest in accordance with specific measures. We
are also amending our foreign quarantine regulations to remove trapping
requirements for Mediterranean fruit fly for Hass avocados imported
from the State of Michoac[aacute]n, Mexico, requirements for treatment
or origin from an area free of Mediterranean fruit fly for Hass
avocados imported from Peru, and requirements for trapping or origin
from an area free of South American fruit fly for Hass avocados
imported from Peru. These actions are warranted in light of research
demonstrating the limited host status of Hass avocados to Mediterranean
fruit fly and South American fruit fly. By amending both our domestic
and foreign quarantine regulations, we are making them consistent with
each other and relieving restrictions for Mexican and Peruvian Hass
avocado producers. In addition, this action provides a means for Hass
avocados to be moved interstate if the avocados originate from a
Mediterranean fruit fly quarantined area in the United States.

DATES: Effective Date: July 22, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tony Rom[aacute]n, Import
Specialist, Regulations, Permits, and Manuals, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River
Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-0627.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The domestic fruit fly regulations, contained in 7 CFR 301.32
through 301.32-10 (referred to below as the domestic regulations), were
established to prevent the spread of certain fruit fly species,
including Ceratitis capitata (Mediterranean fruit fly), into
noninfested areas of the United States. The regulations designate soil
and many fruits, nuts, vegetables, and berries as regulated articles
and impose restrictions on the interstate movement of those regulated
articles from regulated areas.
Avocado, Persea americana (including the variety Hass), is listed
as a regulated article for Mediterranean fruit fly, melon fruit fly
(Bactrocera cucurbitae), Mexican fruit fly (Anastrepha ludens),
Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis), peach fruit fly (Anastrepha
zonata), and sapote fruit fly (Anastrepha serpentina) in the
regulations. Because avocados are listed as regulated articles, they
may not be moved interstate from an area quarantined for one of those
fruit flies unless the movement is authorized by a certificate or
limited permit. In general, avocados may be eligible for a certificate
if a bait spray is applied to the production site beginning prior to
harvest and continuing through the end of harvest or if a post-harvest
irradiation treatment is applied to the fruit. To be eligible for a
limited permit, a regulated article must be moved to a specific
destination for specialized handling, utilization, or processing or for
treatment and meet all other applicable provisions of the regulations.
For Hass avocados moving interstate from any Mexican fruit fly or
sapote fruit fly quarantined area, the avocados may be moved interstate
under certificate if the fruit is safeguarded after harvest in
accordance with specific measures set out in Sec. 301.32-4(d). We have
determined that Hass avocados are a host for Mexican fruit fly and
sapote fruit fly only after harvest; these measures are designed to
prevent Hass avocados harvested in a quarantined area from being
infested with these fruit flies after harvest. Avocados handled in
accordance with these measures are thus allowed to move from the
quarantined area without further restriction under the certificate.
The regulations in ``Subpart-Fruits and Vegetables'' (7 CFR 319.56-
1 through 319.56-50, referred to below as the import regulations)
prohibit or restrict the importation of fruits and vegetables into the
United States from certain parts of the world to prevent the
introduction and dissemination of plant pests that are new to or not
widely distributed within the United States.
The requirements for importing Hass variety avocados into the
United States from Michoac[aacute]n, Mexico, are described in Sec.
319.56-30. Those requirements include pest surveys and pest risk-
reducing practices, treatment, packinghouse procedures, inspection, and
shipping procedures. Although Mediterranean fruit fly is not known to
be present in Michoac[aacute]n, Mexico, the regulations require that
trapping be conducted for Mediterranean fruit fly and that any fruit
fly finds are reported to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS).
The regulations in Sec. 319.56-50 allow the importation into the
continental United States of Hass avocados from Peru provided, among
other things, that the avocados originate from an area free of
Mediterranean fruit fly or that the avocados have been treated for
Mediterranean fruit fly in accordance with our phytosanitary treatment
regulations in 7 CFR part 305. In addition, the regulations in Sec.
319.56-50 require that the avocados must either originate from an area
within Peru that is free of South American fruit fly or an area with
low pest prevalence for South American fruit fly and where trapping for
South American fruit fly is conducted.
On April 4, 2011, we published in the Federal Register (76 FR
18419-18421, Docket No. APHIS-2010-0127) a proposal \1\ to amend our
domestic quarantine regulations to provide for the interstate movement
of Hass avocados from Mediterranean fruit fly quarantined areas in the
United States with a certificate if the fruit is safeguarded after
harvest in accordance with specific measures. We also proposed to amend
our foreign quarantine regulations to remove trapping requirements for
Mediterranean fruit fly for Hass avocados imported from
Michoac[aacute]n, Mexico, the treatment requirements and origin
restrictions for Mediterranean fruit fly for imported Hass avocados
from Peru, and the trapping requirements and origin restrictions for
South American fruit fly for imported Hass avocados from Peru. These
proposed actions were intended to make our domestic and foreign
requirements for movement of Hass avocados consistent with each other,
relieve restrictions for Mexican and Peruvian

[[Page 43805]]

Hass avocado producers, and provide an alternative means for Hass
avocados to be moved interstate if the avocados originate from a
Mediterranean fruit fly quarantined area in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ To view the proposed rule, the commodity import evaluation
document, and the comments we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2010-0127.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 30 days ending
May 4, 2011. We reopened and extended the deadline for comments until
May 18, 2011, in a document published in the Federal Register on May 9,
2011 (76 FR 26654-26655). We received 30 comments by that date. They
were from private citizens, customs brokers, trade associations, a
State department of agriculture, growers, industry groups, chambers of
commerce, ports, and foreign governments. The majority of commenters
supported the proposed rule. Several commenters submitted comments that
were not germane to the rule. The issues raised by the other commenters
are discussed below.
One commenter stated that, because Hass avocados have been proven
to be limited hosts for South American fruit fly and Mediterranean
fruit fly, APHIS should relieve movement restrictions on Hass avocados
from all countries with Mediterranean fruit fly and South American
fruit fly that ship Hass avocados to the United States. The commenter
stated that this would fulfill our bilateral and multilateral sanitary
and phytosanitary agreements.
Currently, Hass avocados are allowed entry into the United States
from the State of Michoac[aacute]n, Mexico, and Peru under the
regulations in Sec. Sec. 319.56-30 and 319.56-50, respectively. In
addition, Hass avocados are allowed entry into the United States from
Chile administratively, provided that the avocados originate from an
area free of the Mediterranean fruit fly or that the avocados have been
treated by either cold treatment or fumigation with methyl bromide.
Because we recognize Chile as free of Mediterranean fruit fly and South
American fruit fly, we did not mention Chile in our proposed rule;
however, we are also relieving movement restrictions on Hass avocados
from Chile due to Mediterranean fruit fly, should Mediterranean fruit
fly be reintroduced to Chile. In the event that another country where
Mediterranean fruit fly and South American fruit fly are present is
authorized to export Hass avocados to the United States, we will not
impose movement restrictions associated with those fruit flies, except
for post-harvest safeguarding as described in the proposed rule.
One commenter expressed concern that Peru's research protocol and
findings, particularly with respect to the host status of Hass avocados
for South American fruit fly, were not subjected to peer review. The
commenter further stated that the NPPO of Peru should conduct
additional experiments to test host susceptibility to South American
fruit fly using fruit of varying degrees of maturity from stressed
trees. The commenter cited the abandonment of the regulatory protocol
allowing the movement of Sharwil variety avocados from Hawaii to the
continental United States due to repeated finds of Oriental fruit fly
larva within avocado fruit during drought conditions.
While Peru's report on the host status of Hass avocado for South
American fruit fly was not peer-reviewed, their research corroborated
current literature, including peer-reviewed research conducted by
Martin Aluja et al.,\2\ concluding that, under most circumstances, Hass
avocados are generally poor hosts for Anastrepha spp. fruit flies. As
stated in the commodity import evaluation document published in
connection with the proposed rule, APHIS does not consider South
American fruit fly to infest Hass avocados in Mexico, but we included
it in the pest list for Hass avocados from Peru due to a lack of host
records and data. Peru subsequently conducted a study on host status
and came to the conclusion that Hass avocados in Peru are not hosts to
South American fruit fly. As stated in our commodity import evaluation
document, the main risk of fruit fly infestation is from avocado fruit
outside of the normal population, i.e., fruit that is left to become
overripe on the tree, injured or damaged fruit, fruit picked up from
the ground, picked fruit left in the field for days, and fruit that is
the wrong cultivar. Therefore, we have determined that Hass avocados
are conditional nonhosts for Mediterranean fruit fly and South American
fruit fly. We have encouraged Peru to submit the data they submitted to
us regarding the host status of Hass avocado to South American fruit
fly for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ Aluja, M., F. Diaz-Fleischer and J. Arredondo. 2004. Nonhost
Status of Commercial Persea americana `Hass' to Anastrepha ludens,
Anastrepha obliqua, Anastrepha serpentina, and Anastrepha striata
(Diptera: Tephritidae) in Mexico. J. Econ. Entomol. 97(2): 293-309.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The commenter is correct that the regulatory protocol allowing
Sharwil avocados to be moved to the continental United States from
Hawaii was abandoned due to repeated finds of Oriental fruit fly larva
within avocado fruit. However, the situation within Hawaii was
fundamentally different than the situation within Peru for several
reasons, not the least of which is the different fruit fly species and
avocado varieties involved.
Apart from variety-host interactions, other factors indicate that
the problems with interstate movement of Sharwil variety avocados are
not likely to occur in Hass variety avocados. For example, the exocarp
of the Hass avocado fruit provides a barrier to infestation by fruit
flies that may not be offered by the exocarp of other varieties of
avocados. In general, drought conditions may increase incidences of
fruit fly infestation of avocados, in particular due to an increase in
a specific type of peduncle damage called girdling. However, unlike
Sharwil avocados in Hawaii, it has been shown that Hass avocados in
Mexico that experience girdling do not reach a size conducive to export
(see footnote 2). Therefore, they are not likely to be included in
commercial shipments. In addition, it is unlikely that avocado trees in
Peru would undergo drought stress because the avocado groves there are
irrigated. Mature ripe fruit, including Hass avocados, are also more
susceptible to insect infestation than immature or ``green'' fruit; the
greater distance that Peruvian Hass avocados must travel to reach the
United States means that mature ripe Hass avocados would not be packed
for export to the United States, as they would spoil by the time they
arrived on the export market.
One commenter asked what sort of oversight APHIS would have over
our Hass avocado import programs and what resources will be made
available to ensure that the provisions in the regulations are carried
out.
As signatories to the International Plant Protection Convention,
the national plant protection organizations (NPPO) of Mexico, Peru, and
Chile are obligated to fulfill their responsibilities for importation
of Hass avocados. In addition, we have APHIS employees stationed in
countries throughout the world, including Mexico, Peru, and Chile, to
monitor import program activities. We have conducted site visits as
part of developing our import requirements and found the NPPOs of
Mexico, Peru, and Chile to have the necessary resources and capacity to
implement them. In addition, all Hass avocado shipments are subject to
inspection at the port of entry, which may include fruit cutting to
ensure freedom from quarantine pests. This inspection serves as a check
on the effectiveness of the required mitigations.
One commenter suggested that each avocado importer provide a bond
that could be used to pay for mitigating potential pest outbreaks as a
result of the importation.
We do not consider such a bond requirement to be practical, largely

[[Page 43806]]

because no country in the world requires the indemnification of
agricultural products offered for importation; if the United States
were to set a precedent and require such indemnification, it would be
only a matter of time before our domestic agricultural producers would
be required to put up similar bonds for their exports. Any grower or
farmer has little control over his or her produce once it has left the
grove or farm, let alone once it has been exported to another nation.
Finally, requiring such indemnification would run counter to our
obligations under current international trade agreements and would
certainly be subject to challenge by our trading partners. For these
reasons, the use of such bonds is considered impractical. In addition,
as our import requirements are sufficient to mitigate the risk of pest
introduction via the importation of Hass avocados, we do not believe
that such a requirement would be necessary in any case.
Several commenters expressed concern regarding the impact of the
proposed rule on U.S. avocado producers. One commenter pointed to a
historical decrease in U.S. avocado acreage and stated that increasing
U.S. regulatory constraints and water costs as well as lower-priced
foreign imports have accelerated the decline in avocado acreage in
recent years. The commenter further stated that lowering the costs
borne by foreign producers and allowing unlimited foreign imports will
drive domestic avocado producers out of business, resulting in the
permanent loss of the domestic avocado industry, which will have an
adverse economic effect for businesses connected with the domestic
avocado industry. In addition, the commenter stated that communities in
the United States where avocados are currently grown would suffer from
fallowed farm land. The commenter recommended that, before additional
Peruvian avocados are imported, a far-reaching and comprehensive
economic impact analysis be prepared, preferably by an independent
third party, to evaluate the impacts to the U.S. avocado industry and
the effects of additional pressures.
While the commenter is correct that U.S. avocado acreage has
declined in the past 25 years, many factors could contribute to that
decline, including the increasing opportunity cost of avocado
production and the conversion of avocado groves to residential or
commercial lots. In addition, despite a decrease in avocado acreage,
avocado production has remained approximately the same over that
period. While APHIS does not place specific limits on imports of
agricultural products generally, APHIS does allow imports to occur only
after pest risks are investigated and appropriate mitigation measures
are in place.
This rule will allow foreign producers to realize cost savings, and
may increase imports. However, we have determined that the domestic
avocado industry will not be significantly adversely affected by this
rule. Avocados from Chile, Mexico, and Peru are currently allowed
importation into the United States and, in the case of Mexico and
Chile, have been allowed into the United States for a number of years.
Despite this, the U.S. avocado industry is still very active and there
have been no introductions of pests that can be traced to avocado
imports in the United States.
APHIS does realize that additional imports may place downward
pressure on domestic Hass avocado prices, but it also may mean greater
availability and potentially greater demand by consumers for all
avocados, imported and domestic alike.
Should domestic avocado production decline as a result of this
rule, some land may be removed from avocado production. However,
fallowing land implies that opportunity cost of avocado production land
is zero. On the contrary, the land will be put to a use that provides
the owner with the highest return, which could include noneconomic
considerations. We would also like to emphasize that, by allowing
imports to occur under reasonable science-based restrictions, we
advocate for a more accessible world market for U.S. exports as well.
The additional areas of study suggested by the commenter are beyond
the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, which requires
agencies to evaluate the potential effects of their proposed and final
rules on small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions and to prepare and make available for public comment a
regulatory flexibility analysis that describes expected impacts of a
rule on small entities. In addition, we believe a study of that scope
is not warranted given that this rule was not intended to allow
additional avocados into the United States but to relieve restrictions,
which we have deemed no longer necessary, on the importation of Hass
avocados already allowed entry.
Another commenter stated that, because there are no domestic areas
quarantined for the presence of Mediterranean fruit fly, it is not a
benefit to U.S. producers to remove restrictions on the interstate
movement of Hass avocados for Mediterranean fruit fly. The commenter
further expressed concern regarding the economic impact of the rule on
small entities and recommended that APHIS consult an economic report
put out by the University of California, Davis, Department of
Agricultural and Resource Economics, in 2004 regarding how to offset
price impacts from imported avocados.
While the commenter is correct that there are currently no areas
within the United States quarantined for Mediterranean fruit fly, we
proposed to remove restrictions on the movement of Hass avocados due to
Mediterranean fruit fly if, in the future, areas of the United States
were to be quarantined for Mediterranean fruit fly. Since 2005, there
have been 13 Mediterranean fruit fly outbreaks in the United States.
The last outbreak of Mediterranean fruit fly in California was in 2009,
and it affected avocado production areas. As stated previously,
avocados from Chile, Mexico, and Peru are already allowed entry into
the United States; the final rule merely relieves restrictions on the
movement of Hass avocados we have determined are not necessary in light
of research demonstrating the limited host status of Hass avocados to
Mediterranean and South American fruit fly.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this
document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, without
change.

Effective Date

This is a substantive rule that relieves restrictions and, pursuant
to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, may be made effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Immediate
implementation of this rule is necessary to provide relief to those
persons who are adversely affected by restrictions we no longer find
warranted. The shipping season for Hass avocados from Mexico, Peru, and
Chile is in progress. Making this rule effective immediately will allow
interested producers and others in the marketing chain to benefit
during this year's shipping season. Therefore, the Administrator of the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this
rule should be effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

This final 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 43807]]

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 604, we have performed a final
regulatory flexibility analysis, which is summarized below, regarding
the economic effects of this rule on small entities. Copies of the full
analysis are available on the Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 1
in this document for a link to Regulations.gov) or by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Within the United States, avocado fruit is primarily produced in
California, Hawaii, and Florida. There were approximately 8,200 farms
producing avocados in those States in 2007. About 180,000 metric tons
(MT) of avocados were produced annually in the United States over a 20-
year period beginning in the 1990-1991 season. There is an occasional
fluctuation with an occasional higher or lower production amount than
other years; the variance in avocado production can be attributed to
various circumstances including inclement weather.
Currently, the costs associated with the Mediterranean fruit fly
mitigation measures on Hass avocados from Mexico and Peru have
increased the cost of imported avocados for consumers. Removing
requirements for treatment, trapping, and origin restrictions for Hass
avocados from Mexico and Peru due to Mediterranean fruit fly and South
American fruit fly will reduce the cost associated with mitigation for
producers, and in consequence, likely lower the cost of imported
avocados for U.S. consumers.
The impact of the rule on Hass avocado fruit operations in
California, Hawaii, and Florida will depend on the volume and season of
increased Hass avocado imports from Mexico and Peru, the volume and
season of continental U.S. production, the volume and season of imports
from other countries, as well as U.S. consumption and export levels.
Consumer demand for avocados has increased greatly in the past decade.
Imports of Hass avocados increased from 56,000 MT in 2001 to a high of
420,000 MT in 2009.
The countries affected by the mitigation treatment changes in this
rule already export Hass avocados to the United States. It is worth
noting that the increase in imports of Hass avocados has occurred over
the last 10 years while U.S. domestic avocado production quantities and
values have remained relatively stable. It would appear that the
domestic market for avocados continues to expand to absorb both
increasing imports and existing domestic production rather than new
avocado imports displacing either domestic production or existing
imports. It therefore does not appear that the current increasing level
of imports has had a significant impact on a substantial number of
small avocado producers or importers.

Executive Order 12372

This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372,
which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local
officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12988

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws
and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no
retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This final rule contains no new information collection or
recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects

7 CFR Part 301

Agricultural commodities, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

7 CFR Part 319

Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs, Nursery stock, Plant
diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rice, Vegetables.

Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR parts 301 and 319 as follows:

PART 301--DOMESTIC QUARANTINE NOTICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80,
and 371.3.

Section 301.75-15 issued under Sec. 204, Title II, Public Law
106-113, 113 Stat. 1501A-293; sections 301.75-15 and 301.75-16
issued under Sec. 203, Title II, Public Law 106-224, 114 Stat. 400
(7 U.S.C. 1421 note).

Sec. 301.32-4 [Amended].

0
2. In Sec. 301.32-4, paragraph (d) introductory text is amended by
removing the word ``Mexican'' and adding the words ``Mediterranean,
Mexican,'' in its place.

PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES

0
3. The authority citation for part 319 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701 7772, and 7781 7786; 21 U.S.C.
136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

Sec. 319.56-30 [Amended].

0
4. Section 319.56-30 is amended by removing paragraph (c)(1)(iii).
0
5. Section 319.56-50 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) to read as set forth below.
0
b. By removing paragraphs (d) and (e) and redesignating paragraphs (f)
through (j) as paragraphs (d) through (h), respectively.
0
c. By revising newly redesignated paragraph (g) to read as set forth
below.
0
d. In newly redesignated paragraph (h) introductory text, by removing
the words ``In addition:'' and by removing newly redesignated
paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(3).

Sec. 319.56-50 Hass avocados from Peru.

* * * * *
(b) * * * (1) The NPPO of Peru must visit and inspect registered
places of production monthly, starting at least 2 months before harvest
and continuing until the end of the shipping season, to verify that the
growers are complying with the requirements of paragraphs (c) and (e)
of this section and follow pest control guidelines, when necessary, to
reduce quarantine pest populations. Any personnel conducting trapping
and pest surveys under paragraph (d) of this section must be trained
and supervised by the NPPO of Peru. APHIS may monitor the places of
production if necessary.
(2) In addition to conducting fruit inspections at the
packinghouses, the NPPO of Peru must monitor packinghouse operations to
verify that the packinghouses are complying with the requirements of
paragraph (f) of this section.
* * * * *
(g) NPPO of Peru inspection. Following any post-harvest processing,
inspectors from the NPPO of Peru must inspect a biometric sample of
fruit from each place of production at a rate to be determined by
APHIS. The inspectors must visually inspect for the quarantine pests
listed in the introductory text of this section and must cut fruit to
inspect for S. catenifer. If any quarantine pests are detected in this
inspection, the place of production where the infested avocados were
grown will immediately be suspended from the export program until an
investigation has been

[[Page 43808]]

conducted by APHIS and the NPPO of Peru and appropriate mitigations
have been implemented.
* * * * *

Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of July 2011.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-18707 Filed 7-20-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.