Importation of Peppers From Panama, 52544-52547 [2011-21522]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
52544
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
assisted spread of ELC to noninfested
areas. Under these circumstances, the
Administrator has determined that prior
notice and opportunity for public
comment are contrary to the public
interest and that there is good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553 for making this rule
effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.
We will consider comments we
receive during the comment period for
this interim rule (see DATES above).
After the comment period closes, we
will publish another document in the
Federal Register. The document will
include a discussion of any comments
we receive and any amendments we are
making to the rule.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
Flexibility Act
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
This interim rule is subject to
Executive Order 12866. However, for
this action, the Office of Management
and Budget has waived its review under
Executive Order 12866.
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, we have analyzed the
potential economic effects of this action
on small entities.
Maine has expanded its intrastate ELC
quarantine to include the townships of
Beddington, Boothbay, South Bristol,
T24 Middle Division Bingham’s
Penobscot Purchase, and T25 Middle
Division Bingham’s Penobscot Purchase.
This interim rule amends our domestic
ELC quarantine regulations to include
additional those areas in Maine and to
correct some misidentifications of
previously listed regulated areas.
The only small entities in the newly
federally regulated townships that may
be affected are forestry operations. The
number of these operations in the 5
townships has ranged between 8 and 18
over the past 5 years. It is estimated that
the annual value of harvested larch sold
from the newly quarantined areas
averages about $375. Any potential
impact of the rule is further minimized
by the opportunity for forestry
operations to enter into compliance
agreements with lumber mills to process
larch from quarantined areas.
Under these circumstances, the
Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has
determined that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:22 Aug 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part
3015, subpart V.)
Executive Order 12988
This 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 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 in 7 CFR Part 301
Agricultural commodities, Plant
diseases and pests, Quarantine,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation.
Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR
part 301 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. 1501
A–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).
2. In § 301.91–3, paragraph (c), the
entry for Maine is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 301.91–3
Regulated areas.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
Maine
Hancock County. The entire
townships of Gouldsboro, Sorrento,
Sullivan, T7 SD, T9 SD, T10 SD, and
T16 MD, and Winter Harbor.
Knox County. The entire townships of
Appleton, Camden, Cushing,
Friendship, Hope, Owls Head,
Rockland, Rockport, Saint George,
South Thomaston, Thomaston, Union,
Warren, and Washington.
Lincoln County. The entire townships
of Alna, Boothbay, Boothbay Harbor,
Bremen, Bristol, Damariscotta,
Edgecomb, Jefferson, Newcastle,
Nobleboro, Somerville, South Bristol,
Southport, Waldoboro, Westport Island,
and Wiscasset.
Waldo County. The entire townships
of Lincolnville and Searsmont.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Washington County. The entire
townships of Addison, Baring
Plantation, Beals, Beddington, Berry
Township, Calais, Cathance Township,
Centerville Township, Charlotte,
Cherryfield, Columbia, Columbia Falls,
Cooper, Cutler, Deblois, Dennysville,
East Machias, Eastport, Edmunds
Township, Harrington, Jonesboro,
Jonesport, Lubec, Machias, Machiasport,
Marion Township, Marshfield,
Meddybemps, Milbridge, Northfield,
Pembroke, Perry, Robbinston, Roque
Bluffs, Steuben, T18 MD BPP, T19 MD
BPP, T24 MD BPP, T25 MD BPP,
Trescott Township, Whiting, and
Whitneyville.
Done in Washington, DC, this 17th day of
August 2011.
Gregory L. Parham,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–21519 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. APHIS–2010–0002]
RIN 0579–AD16
Importation of Peppers From Panama
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are amending the
regulations to allow, under certain
conditions, the importation of
commercial shipments of peppers from
Panama into the United States without
treatment. Conditions of entry to which
the peppers will be subject include
trapping, pre-harvest inspection, and
shipping procedures. This action will
allow for the importation of peppers
from Panama into the United States
while continuing to provide protection
against the introduction of quarantine
pests.
DATES: Effective Date: September 22,
2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
David Lamb, Import Specialist,
Regulatory Coordination and
Compliance, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River
Road, Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737–
1236; (301) 734–0627.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
The regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Fruits
and Vegetables’’ (7 CFR 319.56–1
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
through 319.56–51, referred to below as
the regulations) prohibit or restrict the
importation of fruits and vegetables into
the United States from certain parts of
the world to prevent the introduction
and dissemination of plant pests that are
new to or not widely distributed within
the United States.
On June 1, 2010, we published in the
Federal Register (75 FR 30303–30305,
Docket No. APHIS–2010–0002) a
proposal 1 to amend the regulations in
§ 319.56–40 by allowing, under certain
conditions, the importation of
commercial shipments of peppers from
Panama into the United States without
treatment. We also proposed to add two
additional pests to the list of pests for
which inspection is required: Bacterial
wilt and tomato severe leaf curl virus.
Finally, we proposed removing two
pests from the list of pests for which
peppers from Central America must be
inspected: The banana moth (Opogona
sacchari) and tomato yellow mosaic
virus.
We solicited comments concerning
our proposal for 60 days ending August
2, 2010. We received five comments by
that date. They were from producers,
representatives of State and foreign
governments, and private individuals.
The issues raised in those comments are
discussed below by topic.
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
Pest List
Section 319.56–40 requires the
national plant protection organizations
(NPPOs) of Central American countries
exporting peppers to the United States
to inspect growing sites or greenhouses
for certain pests prior to harvest. We
proposed to add Panama to the list of
countries eligible to export peppers
under these conditions. Among the
pests listed in § 319.56–40 are the
weevil Faustinus ovatipennis, bacterial
wilt, Andean potato mottle virus,
Lantana mealybug, Passionvine
mealybug, and the rust fungus Puccinia
pampeana.
One commenter pointed out that there
was no record of the presence of any of
these pests in Panama; therefore, the
NPPO of Panama should not be required
to inspect for them.
Because the pest risk assessment
(PRA) completed in relation to the
importation of peppers from certain
Central American countries was a
regional PRA, the pest list includes
those 12 pests of quarantine significance
present in Central America, including
Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
1 To view the proposed rule and the comments
we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/
fdmspublic/component/
main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2010-0002.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:22 Aug 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
Honduras, Panama, and Nicaragua. We
recognize that not all of the pests listed
in the regulations may be present in
each of those countries. The systems
approach for the importation of peppers
from each country includes the
submission of a bilateral workplan to
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS) by the NPPO of each
exporting country. That workplan will
include the specific pests of concern for
which inspection will be required as
listed by country in the PRA. In this
final rule, we are amending paragraphs
(a)(2), (b)(3)(v), and (c)(3)(v) of the
regulations, which provide for the preharvest inspections, to reflect this
process.
Mitigation Measures for Pea Leafminer
One of the pests of concern listed in
§ 319.56–40 is pea leafminer (Liriomyza
huidobrensis). A commenter suggested
that this pest is of particular concern for
purposes of potential infestation and
detection for several reasons: Larvae in
this family are typically not identified
beyond the family level, thus leaving
them indistinguishable from other pests
in this family during early stages of
development; the 1.6 mm screening
required to be placed across all
openings in the pest-exclusionary
greenhouses might not be sufficiently
small to exclude the insect; and the pea
leafminer’s early larval stages and
associated mines are relatively small,
therefore making their potential
detection via inspection at origin and
destination problematic.
For those varieties of peppers that are
listed in the regulations and imported
from areas in which Mediterranean fruit
fly (Medfly, Ceratitis capitata) and/or
Mexican fruit fly (Mexfly, Anastrepha
ludens) are considered to exist,
production sites must consist of pestexclusionary greenhouses, which must
have double self-closing doors and have
all other openings and vents covered
with 1.6 mm (or less) screening. The
screening requirements listed in the
regulations are intended only to provide
protection from infestation by Medfly or
Mexfly. However, the other mitigation
measures established in the systems
approach provide protection against a
number of pests, including pea
leafminer. Those measures include preharvest inspection, shipping
procedures, and port-of-entry
inspection, which provide an
appropriate cumulative level of
protection.
In reference to the commenter’s
concern about the difficulty of detecting
the presence of pea leafminer based on
visual inspection, we are confident that
pre-harvest inspections coupled with
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52545
port-of-entry inspections will prove
effective. In addition, pea leafminer
infestations principally occur in the
leaves and not the fruit of the pepper
plant, reducing the risk that imported
peppers will be infested with pea
leafminer. Finally, the systems approach
was established in 2004 to allow for the
importation of peppers from Costa Rica,
El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and
Nicaragua. Based on our experience
inspecting for pea leafminer in
shipments of peppers from those
countries, we are confident that we will
continue to successfully prevent the
entry of any infested shipments.
Inspection
The regulations require that pepper
production sites and shipments be
inspected prior to harvest by the NPPO
for pests of concern. One commenter
wanted to know what sort of training
the inspectors in Panama were required
to undergo.
APHIS has audited Panama’s export
program, including its inspector
training, and has found it is sufficient to
meet the conditions set forth in the
systems approach in § 319.56–40. In
addition, it should be noted that
peppers from Panama will be inspected
at the port of entry into the United
States, providing a check on the efficacy
of the inspection in Panama as well as
another layer of phytosanitary
protection.
Another commenter opposed the
proposal, stating that, since sampling for
inspection purposes will not be
conducted on all of the peppers in each
given shipment, the associated risk of
pest entry into the United States is too
great.
We disagree. The rate at which
sampling is conducted has been
determined to detect a 1 to 2 percent
level of infestation with a 95 percent
rate of confidence. Further, inspection
of samples of peppers is only one
element of the established systems
approach. We are confident that the
systems approach in § 319.56–40 will
effectively mitigate the risk associated
with peppers imported from Panama.
General Comments
One commenter asked what specific
measures would be enacted to ensure
that the phytosanitary requirements for
shipments of peppers from Panama
would be properly monitored and met.
For those areas where Medfly or
Mexfly are considered to exist, the
systems approach provides that APHIS
will maintain oversight of the program
by participating in the approval and
monitoring of production sites and by
reviewing the trapping records that
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
52546
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
must be maintained for each site. For
shipments of peppers from those areas
that are free of Medfly or Mexfly, portof-entry inspections will be conducted.
If, through trapping records, site visits,
or port-of-entry inspections, we find
that any of the required mitigation
measures are not being properly
administered, we will suspend
shipments from the offending sites.
Another commenter observed that the
measures established as elements of the
systems approach were not individually
preventative. An additional commenter
stated that APHIS should not allow any
commodities to enter the United States
without treatment.
Under a systems approach, a set of
phytosanitary conditions, at least two of
which have an independent effect in
mitigating the pest risk associated with
the movement of commodities, is
specified. Accordingly, each individual
measure assigned under a systems
approach is designed to work in concert
with at least one other element of the
systems approach to achieve the
appropriate level of phytosanitary
security. We are confident that the
systems approach in § 319.56–40 will
effectively mitigate the risk associated
with peppers imported from Panama, as
it has for peppers from Costa Rica, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and
Nicaragua.
One commenter, from the Florida
Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services, Division of Plant
Industry, stated that U.S. stakeholders
from those areas potentially affected by
any pest or disease outbreak from
imported commodities should be
invited to participate in site visits prior
to the proposal of any rulemakings such
as the one finalized by this document.
APHIS is committed to a transparent
process and an inclusive role for
stakeholders in our risk analysis
process. To that end, we are currently
considering ways to facilitate further
stakeholder involvement, including site
visits, during the initial stages of the
development of PRAs. However, since
this comment relates to the structure of
APHIS’s overall risk analysis process,
and not to the importation of peppers
from Panama, it is outside the scope of
the current rulemaking.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the
proposed rule and in this document, we
are adopting the proposed rule as a final
rule, with the changes discussed in this
document.
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,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:22 Aug 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, we have analyzed the
potential economic effects of this action
on small entities. The analysis is
summarized below. 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.
Panama exported an average of about
20 metric tons (MT) of peppers to the
United States annually from 1998 to
2001. The United States has not
imported peppers from Panama since
2001. In the economic analysis, we
model three levels of pepper exports to
the United States from Panama, of
increasing magnitude: (i) 20 MT; (ii) the
maximum annual quantity exported by
Panama to all countries in the most
recent years it had export data (29 MT);
and (iii) 10 times the maximum quantity
exported (290 MT). The largest assumed
level of U.S. imports is less than 0.02
percent of average annual U.S.
consumption. Even when assuming the
largest import quantity and no
displacement of imports from other
countries, the welfare loss for U.S.
small-entity producers would be
equivalent to less than 0.05 percent of
their average revenue. U.S. producers of
peppers are predominantly small. Other
small entities that could be affected by
the rule include fresh pepper importers.
Under these circumstances, the
Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has
determined that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule allows peppers to be
imported into the United States from
Panama. State and local laws and
regulations regarding peppers imported
under this rule will be preempted while
the fruit is in foreign commerce. Fresh
fruits and vegetables are generally
imported for immediate distribution and
sale to the consuming public, and
remain in foreign commerce until sold
to the ultimate consumer. The question
of when foreign commerce ceases in
other cases must be addressed on a caseby-case basis. No retroactive effect will
be given to this rule, and this rule will
not require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court
challenging this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule contains no new
information collection or recordkeeping
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
requirements under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
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 amending 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 319.56–40 is amended by
revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (a)(2), (b)(3)(v), and (c)(3)(v)
to read as follows:
■
§ 319.56–40 Peppers from certain Central
American countries.
Fresh peppers (Capsicum spp.) may
be imported into the United States from
Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama only
under the following conditions and in
accordance with all other applicable
provisions of this subpart:
(a) * * *
(2) A pre-harvest inspection of the
growing site must be conducted by the
national plant protection organization
(NPPO) of the exporting country for
those pests listed in the bilateral
workplan provided to APHIS by the
NPPO of the exporting country,
including any of the following pests:
The weevil Faustinus ovatipennis, pea
leafminer, tomato fruit borer, lantana
mealybug, passionvine mealybug, melon
thrips, bacterial wilt, the rust fungus
Puccinia pampeana, Andean potato
mottle virus, and tomato severe leaf curl
virus. If any of the pests listed in the
workplan are found to be generally
infesting the growing site, the NPPO
may not allow export from that
production site until the NPPO has
determined that risk mitigation has been
achieved.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(v) The greenhouse must be inspected
prior to harvest for those pests listed in
the bilateral workplan provided to
APHIS by the NPPO of the exporting
country, including any of the following
pests: The weevil Faustinus
ovatipennis, pea leafminer, tomato fruit
borer, lantana mealybug, passionvine
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
mealybug, melon thrips, bacterial wilt,
the rust fungus Puccinia pampeana,
Andean potato mottle virus, and tomato
severe leaf curl virus. If any of pests
listed in the workplan, or other
quarantine pests, are found to be
generally infesting the greenhouse,
export from that production site will be
halted until the exporting country’s
NPPO determines that the pest risk has
been mitigated.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(v) The greenhouse must be inspected
prior to harvest for those pests listed in
the bilateral workplan provided to
APHIS by the NPPO of the exporting
country, including any of the following
pests: The weevil Faustinus
ovatipennis, pea leafminer, tomato fruit
borer, lantana mealybug, passionvine
mealybug, melon thrips bacterial wilt,
the rust fungus Puccinia pampeana,
Andean potato mottle virus, and tomato
severe leaf curl virus. If any of the pests
listed in the workplan, or other
quarantine pests, are found to be
generally infesting the greenhouse,
export from that production site will be
halted until the exporting country’s
NPPO determines that the pest risk has
been mitigated.
*
*
*
*
*
Done in Washington, DC, this 17th day of
August 2011.
Gregory L. Parham,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–21522 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
9 CFR Part 93
[Docket No. APHIS–2008–0112]
RIN 0579–AD31
Importation of Horses From
Contagious Equine Metritis-Affected
Countries
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Interim rule; delay of
enforcement and reopening of comment
period.
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
We are reopening the
comment period for an interim rule that
amended the regulations regarding the
testing requirements for importation of
horses from countries affected with
contagious equine metritis. We are also
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:22 Aug 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
delaying the enforcement of all
provisions of the interim rule until a
final rule is published and effective.
This action will allow interested
persons additional time to comment on
the interim rule and provide the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service
with time to make adjustments to the
interim rule that may be necessary in
order to successfully implement it.
DATES: Enforcement of the interim rule
amending 9 CFR part 93, published at
76 FR 16683–16686 on March 25, 2011,
and delayed until July 25, 2011, in a
document published at 76 FR 31220–
31221 on May 31, 2011, is delayed until
further notice. We will consider all
comments that we receive on or before
September 7, 2011. APHIS will publish
a document in the Federal Register
announcing any future action.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2008-01120020.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:
Send your comment to Docket No.
APHIS–2008–0112, Regulatory Analysis
and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station
3A–03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.
Supporting documents and any
comments we receive on this docket
may be viewed at https://
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2008-0112 or
in our reading room, which 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Ellen Buck, Senior Staff Veterinarian,
Equine Imports, National Center for
Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700
River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD
20737–1231; (301) 734–8364.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in 9 CFR part 93
(referred to below as the regulations)
prohibit or restrict the importation of
certain animals into the United States to
prevent the introduction of
communicable diseases of livestock and
poultry. ‘‘Subpart C—Horses,’’ §§ 93.300
through 93.326, pertains to the
importation of horses into the United
States. Sections 93.301 and 93.304 of
the regulations contain specific
provisions for the importation of horses
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52547
from regions affected with contagious
equine metritis (CEM), which is a highly
contagious venereal disease of horses
and other equines caused by an
infection with the bacterium Taylorella
equigenitalis.
On March 25, 2011, we published an
interim rule in the Federal Register (76
FR 16683–16686, Docket No. APHIS–
2008–0112) to amend the regulations
regarding the importation of horses from
countries affected with CEM by
incorporating an additional certification
requirement for imported horses 731
days of age or less and adding new
testing protocols for test mares and
imported stallions and mares more than
731 days of age. The provisions of the
interim rule became effective upon
publication.
On May 31, 2011, we published a
document in the Federal Register (76
FR 31220–31221, Docket No. APHIS–
2008–0112) to delay the enforcement of
the interim rule until July 25, 2011. This
action was taken after a request was
made by affected entities to allow them
additional time to adjust their operation
procedures.
Delay of Enforcement
Based on comments received
following the March 2011 interim rule,
we are considering two changes to the
interim rule. The interim rule required
that three sets of cultures from imported
stallions be collected for the detection of
the CEM organism, with negative results
obtained from at least two sets prior to
test breeding. However, based on the
comments received, we are considering
amending the requirement so that only
one set of cultures would be collected
from an imported stallion with negative
results prior to test breeding. The
purpose of culturing a stallion prior to
test breeding is to reduce the risk of
infecting a test mare. Therefore, test
breeding should not take place until
negative culture results have been
reported. Under the regulations, a
stallion may be released from CEM
quarantine only if all cultures and tests
of specimens from the mares used for
test breeding are negative for CEM and
all cultures performed on specimens
taken from the stallion are negative for
CEM.
The interim rule also required that
three sets of cultures be collected from
imported mares and test mares with an
additional culture sample taken from
either the distal cervix or the
endometrium. Based on the comments
received, we are considering replacing
that requirement with a provision that
would require a culture to be collected
from the distal cervix or the
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 23, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52544-52547]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21522]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. APHIS-2010-0002]
RIN 0579-AD16
Importation of Peppers From Panama
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations to allow, under certain
conditions, the importation of commercial shipments of peppers from
Panama into the United States without treatment. Conditions of entry to
which the peppers will be subject include trapping, pre-harvest
inspection, and shipping procedures. This action will allow for the
importation of peppers from Panama into the United States while
continuing to provide protection against the introduction of quarantine
pests.
DATES: Effective Date: September 22, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Lamb, Import Specialist,
Regulatory Coordination and Compliance, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road,
Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 734-0627.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in ``Subpart--Fruits and Vegetables'' (7 CFR
319.56-1
[[Page 52545]]
through 319.56-51, referred to below as the regulations) prohibit or
restrict the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United
States from certain parts of the world to prevent the introduction and
dissemination of plant pests that are new to or not widely distributed
within the United States.
On June 1, 2010, we published in the Federal Register (75 FR 30303-
30305, Docket No. APHIS-2010-0002) a proposal \1\ to amend the
regulations in Sec. 319.56-40 by allowing, under certain conditions,
the importation of commercial shipments of peppers from Panama into the
United States without treatment. We also proposed to add two additional
pests to the list of pests for which inspection is required: Bacterial
wilt and tomato severe leaf curl virus. Finally, we proposed removing
two pests from the list of pests for which peppers from Central America
must be inspected: The banana moth (Opogona sacchari) and tomato yellow
mosaic virus.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the proposed rule and the comments we received, go
to https://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2010-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending
August 2, 2010. We received five comments by that date. They were from
producers, representatives of State and foreign governments, and
private individuals. The issues raised in those comments are discussed
below by topic.
Pest List
Section 319.56-40 requires the national plant protection
organizations (NPPOs) of Central American countries exporting peppers
to the United States to inspect growing sites or greenhouses for
certain pests prior to harvest. We proposed to add Panama to the list
of countries eligible to export peppers under these conditions. Among
the pests listed in Sec. 319.56-40 are the weevil Faustinus
ovatipennis, bacterial wilt, Andean potato mottle virus, Lantana
mealybug, Passionvine mealybug, and the rust fungus Puccinia pampeana.
One commenter pointed out that there was no record of the presence
of any of these pests in Panama; therefore, the NPPO of Panama should
not be required to inspect for them.
Because the pest risk assessment (PRA) completed in relation to the
importation of peppers from certain Central American countries was a
regional PRA, the pest list includes those 12 pests of quarantine
significance present in Central America, including Costa Rica, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, and Nicaragua. We recognize that
not all of the pests listed in the regulations may be present in each
of those countries. The systems approach for the importation of peppers
from each country includes the submission of a bilateral workplan to
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) by the NPPO of
each exporting country. That workplan will include the specific pests
of concern for which inspection will be required as listed by country
in the PRA. In this final rule, we are amending paragraphs (a)(2),
(b)(3)(v), and (c)(3)(v) of the regulations, which provide for the pre-
harvest inspections, to reflect this process.
Mitigation Measures for Pea Leafminer
One of the pests of concern listed in Sec. 319.56-40 is pea
leafminer (Liriomyza huidobrensis). A commenter suggested that this
pest is of particular concern for purposes of potential infestation and
detection for several reasons: Larvae in this family are typically not
identified beyond the family level, thus leaving them indistinguishable
from other pests in this family during early stages of development; the
1.6 mm screening required to be placed across all openings in the pest-
exclusionary greenhouses might not be sufficiently small to exclude the
insect; and the pea leafminer's early larval stages and associated
mines are relatively small, therefore making their potential detection
via inspection at origin and destination problematic.
For those varieties of peppers that are listed in the regulations
and imported from areas in which Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly,
Ceratitis capitata) and/or Mexican fruit fly (Mexfly, Anastrepha
ludens) are considered to exist, production sites must consist of pest-
exclusionary greenhouses, which must have double self-closing doors and
have all other openings and vents covered with 1.6 mm (or less)
screening. The screening requirements listed in the regulations are
intended only to provide protection from infestation by Medfly or
Mexfly. However, the other mitigation measures established in the
systems approach provide protection against a number of pests,
including pea leafminer. Those measures include pre-harvest inspection,
shipping procedures, and port-of-entry inspection, which provide an
appropriate cumulative level of protection.
In reference to the commenter's concern about the difficulty of
detecting the presence of pea leafminer based on visual inspection, we
are confident that pre-harvest inspections coupled with port-of-entry
inspections will prove effective. In addition, pea leafminer
infestations principally occur in the leaves and not the fruit of the
pepper plant, reducing the risk that imported peppers will be infested
with pea leafminer. Finally, the systems approach was established in
2004 to allow for the importation of peppers from Costa Rica, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. Based on our experience
inspecting for pea leafminer in shipments of peppers from those
countries, we are confident that we will continue to successfully
prevent the entry of any infested shipments.
Inspection
The regulations require that pepper production sites and shipments
be inspected prior to harvest by the NPPO for pests of concern. One
commenter wanted to know what sort of training the inspectors in Panama
were required to undergo.
APHIS has audited Panama's export program, including its inspector
training, and has found it is sufficient to meet the conditions set
forth in the systems approach in Sec. 319.56-40. In addition, it
should be noted that peppers from Panama will be inspected at the port
of entry into the United States, providing a check on the efficacy of
the inspection in Panama as well as another layer of phytosanitary
protection.
Another commenter opposed the proposal, stating that, since
sampling for inspection purposes will not be conducted on all of the
peppers in each given shipment, the associated risk of pest entry into
the United States is too great.
We disagree. The rate at which sampling is conducted has been
determined to detect a 1 to 2 percent level of infestation with a 95
percent rate of confidence. Further, inspection of samples of peppers
is only one element of the established systems approach. We are
confident that the systems approach in Sec. 319.56-40 will effectively
mitigate the risk associated with peppers imported from Panama.
General Comments
One commenter asked what specific measures would be enacted to
ensure that the phytosanitary requirements for shipments of peppers
from Panama would be properly monitored and met.
For those areas where Medfly or Mexfly are considered to exist, the
systems approach provides that APHIS will maintain oversight of the
program by participating in the approval and monitoring of production
sites and by reviewing the trapping records that
[[Page 52546]]
must be maintained for each site. For shipments of peppers from those
areas that are free of Medfly or Mexfly, port-of-entry inspections will
be conducted. If, through trapping records, site visits, or port-of-
entry inspections, we find that any of the required mitigation measures
are not being properly administered, we will suspend shipments from the
offending sites.
Another commenter observed that the measures established as
elements of the systems approach were not individually preventative. An
additional commenter stated that APHIS should not allow any commodities
to enter the United States without treatment.
Under a systems approach, a set of phytosanitary conditions, at
least two of which have an independent effect in mitigating the pest
risk associated with the movement of commodities, is specified.
Accordingly, each individual measure assigned under a systems approach
is designed to work in concert with at least one other element of the
systems approach to achieve the appropriate level of phytosanitary
security. We are confident that the systems approach in Sec. 319.56-40
will effectively mitigate the risk associated with peppers imported
from Panama, as it has for peppers from Costa Rica, El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua.
One commenter, from the Florida Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, stated that U.S.
stakeholders from those areas potentially affected by any pest or
disease outbreak from imported commodities should be invited to
participate in site visits prior to the proposal of any rulemakings
such as the one finalized by this document.
APHIS is committed to a transparent process and an inclusive role
for stakeholders in our risk analysis process. To that end, we are
currently considering ways to facilitate further stakeholder
involvement, including site visits, during the initial stages of the
development of PRAs. However, since this comment relates to the
structure of APHIS's overall risk analysis process, and not to the
importation of peppers from Panama, it is outside the scope of the
current rulemaking.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this
document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, with the
changes discussed in this document.
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.
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we have analyzed
the potential economic effects of this action on small entities. The
analysis is summarized below. 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.
Panama exported an average of about 20 metric tons (MT) of peppers
to the United States annually from 1998 to 2001. The United States has
not imported peppers from Panama since 2001. In the economic analysis,
we model three levels of pepper exports to the United States from
Panama, of increasing magnitude: (i) 20 MT; (ii) the maximum annual
quantity exported by Panama to all countries in the most recent years
it had export data (29 MT); and (iii) 10 times the maximum quantity
exported (290 MT). The largest assumed level of U.S. imports is less
than 0.02 percent of average annual U.S. consumption. Even when
assuming the largest import quantity and no displacement of imports
from other countries, the welfare loss for U.S. small-entity producers
would be equivalent to less than 0.05 percent of their average revenue.
U.S. producers of peppers are predominantly small. Other small entities
that could be affected by the rule include fresh pepper importers.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule allows peppers to be imported into the United
States from Panama. State and local laws and regulations regarding
peppers imported under this rule will be preempted while the fruit is
in foreign commerce. Fresh fruits and vegetables are generally imported
for immediate distribution and sale to the consuming public, and remain
in foreign commerce until sold to the ultimate consumer. The question
of when foreign commerce ceases in other cases must be addressed on a
case-by-case basis. No retroactive effect will be given to this rule,
and this rule will not require administrative proceedings before
parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.
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 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 amending 7 CFR part 319 as follows:
PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES
0
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.
0
2. Section 319.56-40 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (a)(2), (b)(3)(v), and (c)(3)(v) to read as follows:
Sec. 319.56-40 Peppers from certain Central American countries.
Fresh peppers (Capsicum spp.) may be imported into the United
States from Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua,
and Panama only under the following conditions and in accordance with
all other applicable provisions of this subpart:
(a) * * *
(2) A pre-harvest inspection of the growing site must be conducted
by the national plant protection organization (NPPO) of the exporting
country for those pests listed in the bilateral workplan provided to
APHIS by the NPPO of the exporting country, including any of the
following pests: The weevil Faustinus ovatipennis, pea leafminer,
tomato fruit borer, lantana mealybug, passionvine mealybug, melon
thrips, bacterial wilt, the rust fungus Puccinia pampeana, Andean
potato mottle virus, and tomato severe leaf curl virus. If any of the
pests listed in the workplan are found to be generally infesting the
growing site, the NPPO may not allow export from that production site
until the NPPO has determined that risk mitigation has been achieved.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(v) The greenhouse must be inspected prior to harvest for those
pests listed in the bilateral workplan provided to APHIS by the NPPO of
the exporting country, including any of the following pests: The weevil
Faustinus ovatipennis, pea leafminer, tomato fruit borer, lantana
mealybug, passionvine
[[Page 52547]]
mealybug, melon thrips, bacterial wilt, the rust fungus Puccinia
pampeana, Andean potato mottle virus, and tomato severe leaf curl
virus. If any of pests listed in the workplan, or other quarantine
pests, are found to be generally infesting the greenhouse, export from
that production site will be halted until the exporting country's NPPO
determines that the pest risk has been mitigated.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(v) The greenhouse must be inspected prior to harvest for those
pests listed in the bilateral workplan provided to APHIS by the NPPO of
the exporting country, including any of the following pests: The weevil
Faustinus ovatipennis, pea leafminer, tomato fruit borer, lantana
mealybug, passionvine mealybug, melon thrips bacterial wilt, the rust
fungus Puccinia pampeana, Andean potato mottle virus, and tomato severe
leaf curl virus. If any of the pests listed in the workplan, or other
quarantine pests, are found to be generally infesting the greenhouse,
export from that production site will be halted until the exporting
country's NPPO determines that the pest risk has been mitigated.
* * * * *
Done in Washington, DC, this 17th day of August 2011.
Gregory L. Parham,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-21522 Filed 8-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
