Importation of Mangoes From Australia, 65988-65991 [2011-27564]
Download as PDF
65988
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules
RIN 0579–AD52
the mangoes would have to be produced
in accordance with a systems approach
employing a combination of mitigation
measures for the fungus Cytosphaera
mangiferae and would have to be
inspected prior to exportation from
Australia and found free of this disease.
The mangoes would have to be
imported in commercial consignments
only and would have to be treated by
irradiation to mitigate the risk of insect
pests. The mangoes would also have to
be accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate with an additional
declaration that the conditions for
importation have been met. This action
would allow the importation of mangoes
from Australia while continuing to
protect against the introduction of plant
pests into the United States.
DATES: We will consider all comments
that we receive on or before December
27, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2011-00400001.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:
Send your comment to Docket No.
APHIS–2011–0040, 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-2011-0040 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: Ms.
Donna West, Senior Import Specialist,
PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734–
0627.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Importation of Mangoes From Australia
Background
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
The regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Fruits
and Vegetables’’ (7 CFR 319.56–1
through 319.56–52, 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.
may be imported from into the
continental United States from Vietnam
only under the following conditions:
(a) Growing conditions. Litchi fruit
must be grown in orchards registered
with and monitored by the national
plant protection organization (NPPO) of
Vietnam to ensure that the fruit are free
of disease caused by Phytophthora
litchii.
(b) Treatment. Litchi and longan fruit
must be treated with irradiation for
plant pests of the class Insecta, except
pupae and adults of the order
Lepidoptera, in accordance with part
305 of this chapter.
(c) Labeling. In addition to meeting
the labeling requirements in part 305 of
this chapter, cartons containing litchi or
longan must be stamped ‘‘Not for
importation into or distribution in FL.’’
(d) Commercial consignments. The
litchi and longan fruit may be imported
in commercial consignments only.
(e) Phytosanitary certificates. (1) Each
consignment of litchi fruit must be
accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate issued by the NPPO of
Vietnam attesting that the conditions of
this section have been met and that the
consignment was inspected in Vietnam
and found free of Phytophthora litchii.
(2) Each consignment of longan fruit
must be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate issued by the
NPPO of Vietnam attesting that the
conditions of this section have been
met.
Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of
October 2011.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–27574 Filed 10–24–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. APHIS–2011–0040]
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
We are proposing to amend
the regulations concerning the
importation of fruits and vegetables to
allow the importation of fresh mangoes
from Australia into the continental
United States. As a condition of entry,
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:38 Oct 24, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The national plant protection
organization (NPPO) of Australia has
requested that the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
amend the regulations to allow fresh
mangoes from Australia to be imported
into the continental United States.
As part of our evaluation of
Australia’s request, we prepared a pest
risk assessment (PRA), titled
‘‘Importation of Fresh Fruit of Mango,
Mangifera indica L., from Australia into
the Continental United States, A
Pathway-Initiated Risk Analysis’’ (June
2011). The PRA evaluated the risks
associated with the importation of
mangoes into the continental United
States from Australia.
The PRA identified 21 pests of
quarantine significance present in
Australia that could be introduced into
the United States through the
importation of mangoes:
Fruit Flies
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bactrocera aquilonis
B. cucumis
B. frauenfeldi
B. jarvisi
B. kraussi
B. murrayi
B. neohumeralis
B. opiliae
B. tryoni
Ceratitis capitata
Scales
• Red wax scale (Ceroplastes rubens)
• Green scale (Coccus viridis)
Weevil
• Mango seed weevil (Sternochetus
mangiferae)
Fungi
• Cytosphaera mangiferae
• Fusarium spp. complex (associated
with mango malformation disease)
• Lasioddiplodia pseudotheobraomae
• Neofusicoccum mangiferae
• Neoscytalidium novaehollandiae
• Phomopsis mangiferae
• Pseudofusicoccum adansoniae
Bacterium
• Xanthomonas campestris pv.
mangiferaeindicae
According to our PRA, for pests rated
high risk (C. rubens, C. capitata, and the
nine Bactrocera spp. fruit flies), specific
phytosanitary measures beyond
standard port-of-entry inspection are
strongly recommended. For pests rated
medium risk (C. viridis, C. mangiferae,
L. pseudotheobraomae, N. mangiferae,
N. novaehollandiae, P. adansoniae, S.
mangiferae, and X. campestris pv.
mangiferaeindicae), specific
phytosanitary measures beyond
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules
standard port-of-entry inspection may
be necessary. For pests rated as low risk
(the Fusarium spp. complex and P.
mangiferae), specific phytosanitary
measures beyond standard port-of-entry
inspection are not required. To
recommend specific measures to
mitigate the risk posed by the pests
identified in the PRA, we prepared a
risk management document (RMD).
Copies of the PRA and RMD may be
obtained from the person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or
viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site
(see ADDRESSES above for instructions
for accessing Regulations.gov).
Based on the recommendations of the
RMD, we are proposing to allow the
importation of mangoes from Australia
into the continental United States only
if they are produced in accordance with
a systems approach. The systems
approach we are proposing would
require that mangoes be imported only
under the conditions described below.
These conditions would be added to the
regulations in a new § 319.56–54.
Mangoes would have to be imported
in commercial consignments. Produce
grown commercially is less likely to be
infested with plant pests than
noncommercial shipments.
Noncommercial shipments are more
prone to infestations because the
commodity is often ripe to overripe,
could be of a variety with unknown
susceptibility to pests, and is often
grown with little or no pest control.
Commercial consignments, as defined in
§ 319.56–2, are consignments that an
inspector identifies as having been
imported for sale and distribution. Such
identification is based on a variety of
indicators, including, but not limited to:
Quantity of produce, type of packaging,
identification of grower or packinghouse
on the packaging, and documents
consigning the fruits or vegetables to a
wholesaler or retailer.
The mangoes would have to be treated
for insect pests, except pupae and adults
of the order Lepidoptera, with
irradiation in accordance with 7 CFR
part 305, which contains the
phytosanitary treatments regulations.
The Plant Protection and Quarantine
Treatment Manuel, which lists
minimum absorbed irradiation doses for
plant pests and classes of plant pests,
includes a 400-gray dose for such pests.
None of the pests associated with
mangoes from Australia belong to the
order Lepidoptera; therefore, this
treatment would successfully mitigate
the risk of all 13 insect pests associated
with mangoes from Australia.
Within part 305, § 305.9 contains a
number of other requirements for
irradiation treatment, including
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:38 Oct 24, 2011
Jkt 226001
monitoring by APHIS inspectors and
safeguarding of the fruit. Treatment
could be conducted at an approved
facility in Australia or in the United
States.
The required irradiation treatment
would not mitigate the risks posed by
the fungus C. mangiferae. In order to
mitigate the risks posed by C.
mangiferae, which we consider to be of
medium risk of introduction and
dissemination within the continental
United States, we are proposing three
options: (1) The mangoes be treated
with a broad-spectrum post-harvest
fungicidal dip, (2) the mangoes originate
from an orchard that was inspected
prior to the beginning of harvest during
the growing season and the orchard was
found free of C. mangiferae, or (3) the
mangoes originate from an orchard that
was treated with a broad-spectrum
fungicide during the growing season
and was inspected prior to harvest and
the fruit was found free of C.
mangiferae.
Symptoms of C. mangiferae can be
easily seen and detected in the field on
mango leaves and fruit during preharvest inspection. Post-harvest diseases
do not occur without the presence of
fungal symptoms on leaves in the field.
Orchard application of broad-spectrum
fungicide sprays protects fruit from
infection by aerial spores produced on
leaves or stems. In Australia, spraying of
mango plants with broad-spectrum
fungicides during the growing season is
a common practice to control fungal
diseases.
Prior to export from Australia, the
fruit would have to be inspected by the
NPPO of Australia and found free of C.
mangiferae, L. pseudotheobraomae, N.
mangiferae, N. novaehollandiae, P.
adansoniae, P. mangiferae, Fusarium
spp., and X. campestris pv.
mangiferaeindicae. Symptoms of these
pathogens are easily discernible with
the naked eye and would most likely be
detected during visual inspection of the
fruit at the packinghouse. These
practices would effectively remove
these pathogens of concern from the
pathway.
Each consignment of fruit would have
to be accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate (PC) issued by the NPPO of
Australia with additional declarations
that would confirm that: (1) The
mangoes were subjected to one of the
pre- and post-harvest mitigation options
for C. mangiferae described earlier and
(2) the mangoes were inspected prior to
export and found free of C. mangiferae,
L. pseudotheobraomae, N. mangiferae,
N. novaehollandiae, P. adansoniae, P.
mangiferae, Fusarium spp., and X.
campestris pv. mangiferaeindicae.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
65989
In addition, if the fruit is treated with
irradiation outside the United States,
each consignment of fruit would have to
be inspected jointly by APHIS and the
NPPO of Australia, and the PC would
have to include an additional
declaration that the fruit received the
irradiation treatment.
Mangoes imported from Australia into
the United States would also be subject
to inspection at the port of entry.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
Flexibility Act
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and,
therefore, has been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.
We have prepared an economic
analysis for this rule. The economic
analysis provides a cost-benefit analysis,
as required by Executive Order 12866,
and an analysis of the potential
economic effects of this action on small
entities, as required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. The economic analysis
is summarized below. Copies of the full
analysis are available by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT or on the
Regulations.gov Web site (see
ADDRESSES above for instructions for
accessing Regulations.gov).
The United States produces
approximately 3,000 metric tons of
mangoes per year, about one-hundredth
of 1 percent of world production. While
U.S. mango production is limited, the
United States is the world’s leading
importer of fresh mangoes, receiving 33
percent of imports worldwide.
Currently, Australia produces 60,000
metric tons of mangoes during the midSeptember to mid-April season. Mango
imports from Australia are expected to
total about 1,200 metric tons per year.
This represents approximately 0.5
percent of total U.S. mango imports.
U.S. consumers will benefit from
increased access to another variety of
fresh mangoes. In addition, because the
Australian mango season is opposite
that of the United States, fresh mango
imports would not compete with
domestic production and U.S.
consumers can have access to mangoes
the entire year.
Under these circumstances, the
Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has
determined that this action would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule would allow
mangoes to be imported into the United
States from Australia. If this proposed
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
65990
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules
rule is adopted, State and local laws and
regulations regarding mangoes imported
under this rule would be preempted
while the fruit is in foreign commerce.
Fresh fruits are generally imported for
immediate distribution and sale to the
consuming public and would 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-bycase basis. If this proposed rule is
adopted, 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.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with section 3507(d) of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information
collection or recordkeeping
requirements included in this proposed
rule have been submitted for approval to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Please send written comments
to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention:
Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington, DC
20503. Please state that your comments
refer to Docket No. APHIS–2011–0040.
Please send a copy of your comments to:
(1) Docket No. APHIS–2011–0040,
Regulatory Analysis and Development,
PPD, APHIS, Station 3A–03.8, 4700
River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD
20737–1238, and (2) Clearance Officer,
OCIO, USDA, Room 404–W, 14th Street
and Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250. A comment to
OMB is best assured of having its full
effect if OMB receives it within 30 days
of publication of this proposed rule.
APHIS is proposing to amend the
fruits and vegetables regulations to
allow, under certain conditions, the
importation into the United States of
commercial consignments of fresh
mangoes from Australia. The conditions
for the importation of fresh mangoes
from Australia include requirements for
pest exclusion at the production site,
irradiation treatment, pest-excluding
packinghouse procedures and port-ofentry inspections. The mangoes would
also be required to be accompanied by
a phytosanitary certificate issued by the
national plant protection organization
(NPPO) of Australia with an additional
declaration confirming that the mangoes
had been produced in accordance with
the proposed requirements. This action
would allow for the importation of fresh
mangoes from Australia while
continuing to provide protection against
the introduction of injurious plant pests
into the United States.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:38 Oct 24, 2011
Jkt 226001
We are soliciting comments from the
public (as well as affected agencies)
concerning our proposed information
collection and recordkeeping
requirements. These comments will
help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
information collection is necessary for
the proper performance of our agency s
functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our
estimate of the burden of the proposed
information collection, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
information collection on those who are
to respond (such as through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public reporting
burden for this collection of information
is estimated to average 0.5 hours per
response.
Respondents: Foreign business.
Estimated annual number of
respondents: 20.
Estimated annual number of
responses per respondent: 5.
Estimated annual number of
responses: 100.
Estimated total annual burden on
respondents: 50 hours. (Due to
averaging, the total annual burden hours
may not equal the product of the annual
number of responses multiplied by the
reporting burden per response.)
Copies of this information collection
can be obtained from Mrs. Celeste
Sickles, APHIS’ Information Collection
Coordinator, at (301) 851–2908.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act
to promote the use of the Internet and
other information technologies, to
provide increased opportunities for
citizen access to Government
information and services, and for other
purposes. For information pertinent to
E-Government Act compliance related
to this proposed rule, please contact
Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS’
Information Collection Coordinator, at
(301) 851–2908.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 319
Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs,
Nursery stock, Plant diseases and pests,
Quarantine, Reporting and
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
recordkeeping requirements, Rice,
Vegetables.
Accordingly, we propose to amend 7
CFR part 319 as follows:
PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE
NOTICES
1. The authority citation for part 319
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701–7772, and
7781–7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR
2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.
2. A new § 319.56–54 is added to read
as follows:
§ 319.56–54
Mangoes from Australia.
Mangoes (Mangifera indica) may be
imported into the continental United
States from Australia only under the
following conditions:
(a) The mangoes may be imported in
commercial consignments only.
(b) The mangoes must be treated by
irradiation for plant pests of the class
Insecta, except pupae and adults of the
order Lepidoptera, in accordance with
part 305 of this chapter.
(c) The risks presented by
Cytosphaera mangiferae must be
addressed in one of the following ways:
(1) The mangoes are treated with a
broad-spectrum post-harvest fungicidal
dip;
(2) The mangoes originate from an
orchard that was inspected prior to the
beginning of harvest during the growing
season and the orchard was found free
of C. mangiferae; or
(3) The mangoes originate from an
orchard that were treated with a broadspectrum fungicide during the growing
season and was inspected prior to
harvest and the mangoes are found free
of C. mangiferae.
(d) Prior to export from Australia, the
mangoes must be inspected by the
national plant protection organization
(NPPO) of Australia and found free of C.
mangiferae, L. pseudotheobraomae, N.
mangiferae, N. novaehollandiae, P.
adansoniae, P. mangiferae, Fusarium
spp. complex associated with mango
malformation disease, and X. campestris
pv. mangiferaeindicae.
(e) (1) Each consignment of fruit must
be accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate issued by the NPPO of
Australia with additional declarations
that:
(i) The mangoes were subjected to one
of the pre- or post-harvest mitigation
options described in § 319.56–54(c), and
(ii) The mangoes were inspected prior
to export from Australia and found free
of C. mangiferae, L.
pseudotheobraomae, N. mangiferae, N.
novaehollandiae, P. adansoniae, P.
mangiferae, Fusarium spp. complex
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules
[Docket No. FAA–2011–1093; Directorate
Identifier 2010–NM–149–AD]
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data
& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707,
MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124–
2207; telephone 206–544–5000,
extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; e-mail
me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.
For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 425–227–
1221.
RIN 2120–AA64
Examining the AD Docket
associated with mango malformation
disease, and X. campestris pv.
mangiferaeindicae.
(2) If the fruit is treated with
irradiation outside the United States,
each consignment of fruit must be
inspected jointly by APHIS and the
NPPO of Australia, and the
phytosanitary certificate must include
an additional declaration that the fruit
was treated with irradiation in
accordance with part 305 of this
chapter.
Done in Washington, DC this 19th day of
October 2011.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–27564 Filed 10–24–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Model 757 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed
AD would require repetitive detailed
inspections for discrepancies of the
horizontal stabilizer ballscrew assembly;
repetitive lubrication of the horizontal
stabilizer trim control system; repetitive
measurements for discrepancies of the
ballscrew to ballnut freeplay; and
corrective actions if necessary. This
proposed AD was prompted by a report
of extensive corrosion of the ballscrew
of the drive mechanism of the
horizontal stabilizer trim actuator. We
are proposing this AD to prevent
undetected failure of the primary and
secondary load paths for the ballscrew
in the horizontal stabilizer, which could
lead to loss of control of the horizontal
stabilizer and consequent loss of control
of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by December 9, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:38 Oct 24, 2011
Jkt 226001
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelly McGuckin, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–
130S, FAA, Seattle Airplane
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356;
telephone (425) 917–6490; fax (425)
917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2011–1093; Directorate Identifier
2010–NM–149–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
65991
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because of those
comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
We received a report of extensive
corrosion of the ballscrew of the drive
mechanism of the horizontal stabilizer
trim actuator (HSTA). Boeing previously
initiated a design review and safety
analysis of the ballscrews used on all
Model 757 airplanes as a result of an
MD–80 airplane accident which
occurred in January 2000. The cause of
that accident was attributed to an inflight failure of the horizontal stabilizer
jackscrew assembly caused by
inadequate maintenance. Jackscrews
and ballscrews are similar in function
and have similar airplane level failure
modes. During this review a Model 757
airplane operator reported the subject
corrosion. This condition, if not
corrected, could result in undetected
failure of the primary and secondary
load paths for the ballscrew in the
horizontal stabilizer, which could lead
to loss of control of the horizontal
stabilizer and consequent loss of control
of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert
Service Bulletins 757–27A0144 (for
Model 757–200, –200CB, and 200PF
series airplanes) and 757–27A0145 (for
Model 757–300 series airplanes), both
Revision 1, both dated January 20, 2010.
These service bulletins describe
procedures for repetitive detailed
inspections for discrepancies of the
horizontal stabilizer ballscrew assembly
(including but not limited to, damage,
cracking, corrosion, or wear); repetitive
lubrication of the horizontal stabilizer
trim control system; and repetitive
measurements of the ballscrew to
ballnut freeplay for discrepancies.
We have also reviewed Subject 27–
41–10, ‘‘Stabilizer Trim Ballscrew
Freeplay,’’ of Chapter 27, ‘‘Flight
Controls,’’ of the Boeing 757 Airplane
Maintenance Manual (AMM), Revision
101, dated May 20, 2011, which
describes procedures for accomplishing
the subject inspections and freeplay
measurements, and applicable
corrective actions.
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 25, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65988-65991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27564]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. APHIS-2011-0040]
RIN 0579-AD52
Importation of Mangoes From Australia
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations concerning the
importation of fruits and vegetables to allow the importation of fresh
mangoes from Australia into the continental United States. As a
condition of entry, the mangoes would have to be produced in accordance
with a systems approach employing a combination of mitigation measures
for the fungus Cytosphaera mangiferae and would have to be inspected
prior to exportation from Australia and found free of this disease. The
mangoes would have to be imported in commercial consignments only and
would have to be treated by irradiation to mitigate the risk of insect
pests. The mangoes would also have to be accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate with an additional declaration that the conditions for
importation have been met. This action would allow the importation of
mangoes from Australia while continuing to protect against the
introduction of plant pests into the United States.
DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before
December 27, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0040-0001.
Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to
Docket No. APHIS-2011-0040, 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-2011-
0040 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: Ms. Donna West, Senior Import
Specialist, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737-
1231; (301) 734-0627.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in ``Subpart--Fruits and Vegetables'' (7 CFR
319.56-1 through 319.56-52, 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.
The national plant protection organization (NPPO) of Australia has
requested that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
amend the regulations to allow fresh mangoes from Australia to be
imported into the continental United States.
As part of our evaluation of Australia's request, we prepared a
pest risk assessment (PRA), titled ``Importation of Fresh Fruit of
Mango, Mangifera indica L., from Australia into the Continental United
States, A Pathway-Initiated Risk Analysis'' (June 2011). The PRA
evaluated the risks associated with the importation of mangoes into the
continental United States from Australia.
The PRA identified 21 pests of quarantine significance present in
Australia that could be introduced into the United States through the
importation of mangoes:
Fruit Flies
Bactrocera aquilonis
B. cucumis
B. frauenfeldi
B. jarvisi
B. kraussi
B. murrayi
B. neohumeralis
B. opiliae
B. tryoni
Ceratitis capitata
Scales
Red wax scale (Ceroplastes rubens)
Green scale (Coccus viridis)
Weevil
Mango seed weevil (Sternochetus mangiferae)
Fungi
Cytosphaera mangiferae
Fusarium spp. complex (associated with mango malformation
disease)
Lasioddiplodia pseudotheobraomae
Neofusicoccum mangiferae
Neoscytalidium novaehollandiae
Phomopsis mangiferae
Pseudofusicoccum adansoniae
Bacterium
Xanthomonas campestris pv. mangiferaeindicae
According to our PRA, for pests rated high risk (C. rubens, C.
capitata, and the nine Bactrocera spp. fruit flies), specific
phytosanitary measures beyond standard port-of-entry inspection are
strongly recommended. For pests rated medium risk (C. viridis, C.
mangiferae, L. pseudotheobraomae, N. mangiferae, N. novaehollandiae, P.
adansoniae, S. mangiferae, and X. campestris pv. mangiferaeindicae),
specific phytosanitary measures beyond
[[Page 65989]]
standard port-of-entry inspection may be necessary. For pests rated as
low risk (the Fusarium spp. complex and P. mangiferae), specific
phytosanitary measures beyond standard port-of-entry inspection are not
required. To recommend specific measures to mitigate the risk posed by
the pests identified in the PRA, we prepared a risk management document
(RMD). Copies of the PRA and RMD may be obtained from the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or viewed on the Regulations.gov
Web site (see ADDRESSES above for instructions for accessing
Regulations.gov).
Based on the recommendations of the RMD, we are proposing to allow
the importation of mangoes from Australia into the continental United
States only if they are produced in accordance with a systems approach.
The systems approach we are proposing would require that mangoes be
imported only under the conditions described below. These conditions
would be added to the regulations in a new Sec. 319.56-54.
Mangoes would have to be imported in commercial consignments.
Produce grown commercially is less likely to be infested with plant
pests than noncommercial shipments. Noncommercial shipments are more
prone to infestations because the commodity is often ripe to overripe,
could be of a variety with unknown susceptibility to pests, and is
often grown with little or no pest control. Commercial consignments, as
defined in Sec. 319.56-2, are consignments that an inspector
identifies as having been imported for sale and distribution. Such
identification is based on a variety of indicators, including, but not
limited to: Quantity of produce, type of packaging, identification of
grower or packinghouse on the packaging, and documents consigning the
fruits or vegetables to a wholesaler or retailer.
The mangoes would have to be treated for insect pests, except pupae
and adults of the order Lepidoptera, with irradiation in accordance
with 7 CFR part 305, which contains the phytosanitary treatments
regulations. The Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manuel,
which lists minimum absorbed irradiation doses for plant pests and
classes of plant pests, includes a 400-gray dose for such pests. None
of the pests associated with mangoes from Australia belong to the order
Lepidoptera; therefore, this treatment would successfully mitigate the
risk of all 13 insect pests associated with mangoes from Australia.
Within part 305, Sec. 305.9 contains a number of other
requirements for irradiation treatment, including monitoring by APHIS
inspectors and safeguarding of the fruit. Treatment could be conducted
at an approved facility in Australia or in the United States.
The required irradiation treatment would not mitigate the risks
posed by the fungus C. mangiferae. In order to mitigate the risks posed
by C. mangiferae, which we consider to be of medium risk of
introduction and dissemination within the continental United States, we
are proposing three options: (1) The mangoes be treated with a broad-
spectrum post-harvest fungicidal dip, (2) the mangoes originate from an
orchard that was inspected prior to the beginning of harvest during the
growing season and the orchard was found free of C. mangiferae, or (3)
the mangoes originate from an orchard that was treated with a broad-
spectrum fungicide during the growing season and was inspected prior to
harvest and the fruit was found free of C. mangiferae.
Symptoms of C. mangiferae can be easily seen and detected in the
field on mango leaves and fruit during pre-harvest inspection. Post-
harvest diseases do not occur without the presence of fungal symptoms
on leaves in the field. Orchard application of broad-spectrum fungicide
sprays protects fruit from infection by aerial spores produced on
leaves or stems. In Australia, spraying of mango plants with broad-
spectrum fungicides during the growing season is a common practice to
control fungal diseases.
Prior to export from Australia, the fruit would have to be
inspected by the NPPO of Australia and found free of C. mangiferae, L.
pseudotheobraomae, N. mangiferae, N. novaehollandiae, P. adansoniae, P.
mangiferae, Fusarium spp., and X. campestris pv. mangiferaeindicae.
Symptoms of these pathogens are easily discernible with the naked eye
and would most likely be detected during visual inspection of the fruit
at the packinghouse. These practices would effectively remove these
pathogens of concern from the pathway.
Each consignment of fruit would have to be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate (PC) issued by the NPPO of Australia with
additional declarations that would confirm that: (1) The mangoes were
subjected to one of the pre- and post-harvest mitigation options for C.
mangiferae described earlier and (2) the mangoes were inspected prior
to export and found free of C. mangiferae, L. pseudotheobraomae, N.
mangiferae, N. novaehollandiae, P. adansoniae, P. mangiferae, Fusarium
spp., and X. campestris pv. mangiferaeindicae.
In addition, if the fruit is treated with irradiation outside the
United States, each consignment of fruit would have to be inspected
jointly by APHIS and the NPPO of Australia, and the PC would have to
include an additional declaration that the fruit received the
irradiation treatment.
Mangoes imported from Australia into the United States would also
be subject to inspection at the port of entry.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has been reviewed
by the Office of Management and Budget.
We have prepared an economic analysis for this rule. The economic
analysis provides a cost-benefit analysis, as required by Executive
Order 12866, and an analysis of the potential economic effects of this
action on small entities, as required by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. The economic analysis is summarized below. Copies of the full
analysis are available by contacting the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or on the Regulations.gov Web site (see
ADDRESSES above for instructions for accessing Regulations.gov).
The United States produces approximately 3,000 metric tons of
mangoes per year, about one-hundredth of 1 percent of world production.
While U.S. mango production is limited, the United States is the
world's leading importer of fresh mangoes, receiving 33 percent of
imports worldwide. Currently, Australia produces 60,000 metric tons of
mangoes during the mid-September to mid-April season. Mango imports
from Australia are expected to total about 1,200 metric tons per year.
This represents approximately 0.5 percent of total U.S. mango imports.
U.S. consumers will benefit from increased access to another variety of
fresh mangoes. In addition, because the Australian mango season is
opposite that of the United States, fresh mango imports would not
compete with domestic production and U.S. consumers can have access to
mangoes the entire year.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule would allow mangoes to be imported into the
United States from Australia. If this proposed
[[Page 65990]]
rule is adopted, State and local laws and regulations regarding mangoes
imported under this rule would be preempted while the fruit is in
foreign commerce. Fresh fruits are generally imported for immediate
distribution and sale to the consuming public and would 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. If this proposed rule is adopted, 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
In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information collection or
recordkeeping requirements included in this proposed rule have been
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Please send written comments to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington,
DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket No. APHIS-
2011-0040. Please send a copy of your comments to: (1) Docket No.
APHIS-2011-0040, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS,
Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238,
and (2) Clearance Officer, OCIO, USDA, Room 404-W, 14th Street and
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250. A comment to OMB is
best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30
days of publication of this proposed rule.
APHIS is proposing to amend the fruits and vegetables regulations
to allow, under certain conditions, the importation into the United
States of commercial consignments of fresh mangoes from Australia. The
conditions for the importation of fresh mangoes from Australia include
requirements for pest exclusion at the production site, irradiation
treatment, pest-excluding packinghouse procedures and port-of-entry
inspections. The mangoes would also be required to be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate issued by the national plant protection
organization (NPPO) of Australia with an additional declaration
confirming that the mangoes had been produced in accordance with the
proposed requirements. This action would allow for the importation of
fresh mangoes from Australia while continuing to provide protection
against the introduction of injurious plant pests into the United
States.
We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection and
recordkeeping requirements. These comments will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is
necessary for the proper performance of our agency s functions,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average 0.5 hours per response.
Respondents: Foreign business.
Estimated annual number of respondents: 20.
Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 5.
Estimated annual number of responses: 100.
Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 50 hours. (Due to
averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of
the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per
response.)
Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Mrs.
Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301)
851-2908.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the Internet
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste
Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2908.
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 propose to amend 7 CFR part 319 as follows:
PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES
1. The authority citation for part 319 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701-7772, and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136
and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.
2. A new Sec. 319.56-54 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 319.56-54 Mangoes from Australia.
Mangoes (Mangifera indica) may be imported into the continental
United States from Australia only under the following conditions:
(a) The mangoes may be imported in commercial consignments only.
(b) The mangoes must be treated by irradiation for plant pests of
the class Insecta, except pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera, in
accordance with part 305 of this chapter.
(c) The risks presented by Cytosphaera mangiferae must be addressed
in one of the following ways:
(1) The mangoes are treated with a broad-spectrum post-harvest
fungicidal dip;
(2) The mangoes originate from an orchard that was inspected prior
to the beginning of harvest during the growing season and the orchard
was found free of C. mangiferae; or
(3) The mangoes originate from an orchard that were treated with a
broad-spectrum fungicide during the growing season and was inspected
prior to harvest and the mangoes are found free of C. mangiferae.
(d) Prior to export from Australia, the mangoes must be inspected
by the national plant protection organization (NPPO) of Australia and
found free of C. mangiferae, L. pseudotheobraomae, N. mangiferae, N.
novaehollandiae, P. adansoniae, P. mangiferae, Fusarium spp. complex
associated with mango malformation disease, and X. campestris pv.
mangiferaeindicae.
(e) (1) Each consignment of fruit must be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate issued by the NPPO of Australia with
additional declarations that:
(i) The mangoes were subjected to one of the pre- or post-harvest
mitigation options described in Sec. 319.56-54(c), and
(ii) The mangoes were inspected prior to export from Australia and
found free of C. mangiferae, L. pseudotheobraomae, N. mangiferae, N.
novaehollandiae, P. adansoniae, P. mangiferae, Fusarium spp. complex
[[Page 65991]]
associated with mango malformation disease, and X. campestris pv.
mangiferaeindicae.
(2) If the fruit is treated with irradiation outside the United
States, each consignment of fruit must be inspected jointly by APHIS
and the NPPO of Australia, and the phytosanitary certificate must
include an additional declaration that the fruit was treated with
irradiation in accordance with part 305 of this chapter.
Done in Washington, DC this 19th day of October 2011.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-27564 Filed 10-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P