Importation of Sand Pears From China, 75007-75011 [2012-30532]
Download as PDF
75007
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 77, No. 244
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. APHIS–2011–0007]
RIN 0579–AD42
Importation of Sand Pears From China
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are amending the fruits
and vegetables regulations to allow the
importation of sand pears (Pyrus
pyrifolia) from China into the United
States. As a condition of entry, sand
pears from areas in China in which the
Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis) is
not known to exist will have to be
produced in accordance with a systems
approach that includes requirements for
registration of places of production and
packinghouses, sourcing of pest-free
propagative material, inspection for
quarantine pests at set intervals by the
national plant protection organization of
China, bagging of fruit, safeguarding,
labeling, and importation in commercial
consignments. Sand pears from areas in
China in which Oriental fruit fly is
known to exist may be imported into the
United States if, in addition to these
requirements, the places of production
and packinghouses have a monitoring
system in place for Oriental fruit fly and
the pears are treated with cold
treatment. All sand pears from China
will also be required to be accompanied
by a phytosanitary certificate with an
additional declaration stating that all
conditions for the importation of the
pears have been met and that the
consignment of pears has been
inspected and found free of quarantine
pests. This action will allow for the
importation of sand pears from China
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:12 Dec 18, 2012
Jkt 229001
into the United States while continuing
to provide protection against the
introduction of quarantine pests.
DATES: Effective Date: January 18, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Farrell Wise, Supervisory Agriculturist,
Regulatory Coordination and
Compliance, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River
Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737;
(301) 851–2280.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Fruits
and Vegetables’’ (7 CFR 319.56–1
through 319.56–56, 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. The
regulations currently allow for the
importation of both Ya pears (Pyrus
bretschneideri) and fragrant pears (Pyrus
sp. nr. communis) from China.
The national plant protection
organization (NPPO) of China requested
that the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) amend the
regulations to allow sand pears 1 (Pyrus
pyrifolia) from China also to be
imported into the United States.
As part of our evaluation of China’s
request, we prepared a pest risk
assessment (PRA), titled ‘‘Importation of
Fresh Fruit of Chinese Sand Pear, Pyrus
pyrifolia, from China, including the
Special Administrative Regions of Hong
Kong and Macau, into the Entire United
States, Including all Territories’’ (July
2009). The PRA evaluated the risks
associated with the importation of sand
pears into the United States from China,
and identified 16 pests of quarantine
significance present in China that could
be introduced into the United States
through the importation of sand pears.
The PRA presented a number of
potential options to mitigate the risks
posed by these plant pests. Based on
these options, we prepared a risk
management document (RMD). The
RMD recommended specific measures
to mitigate these risks.
Based on the recommendations of the
RMD, on December 16, 2011, we
1 We previously referred to Pyrus pyrifolia as
‘‘Chinese sand pear.’’ However, we have discovered
that the accepted international nomenclature for
Pyrus pyrifolia is simply ‘‘sand pear.’’ Hence,
throughout this document, we refer to Pyrus
pyrifolia as sand pear.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
published a proposed rule 2 in the
Federal Register (76 FR 78168–78172,
Docket No. APHIS–2011–0007) to
authorize the importation of sand pears
from China into the United States. We
solicited comments concerning the
proposed rule for 60 days ending
February 14, 2012. We received five
comments by that date. They were from
the NPPO of China, a State department
of agriculture, an organization
representing State departments of
agriculture, a technical committee
representing the U.S. pear industry, and
a private citizen. The comments we
received are discussed below, by topic.
Comments Regarding the Pest Risk
Assessment
The PRA identified the following
pests of quarantine significance as being
likely to follow the pathway on
imported sand pears from China:
• Acrobasis pyrivorella, pear fruit
moth.
• Alternaria gaisen Nagano, the cause
of black spot of pear.
• Amphitetranychus viennensis
(Zacher), Hawthorn spider mite.
• Aphanostigma iaksuiense (Kishida),
an aphid.
• Bactrocera dorsalis, Oriental fruit
fly.
• Caleptrimerus neimongolensis
Kuang and Geng, a mite.
• Carposina sasakii Matsumora,
peach fruit moth.
• Ceroplastes japonicus Green,
Japanese wax scale.
• Ceroplastes rubens Maskell, red
wax scale.
´
• Congothes punctiferalis (Guenee),
yellow peach moth.
• Grapholita inopinata, Manchurian
fruit moth.
• Guignardia pyricola (Nose) W.
Yamamoto, a phytopathogenic fungus.
• Monilinia fructigena Honey in
Whetzel, the cause of brown rot.
• Phenacoccus pergandei Cockerell, a
mealybug.
• Planococcus kraunhiae (Kuwana), a
mealybug.
• Venturia nashicola Tanaka &
Yamamoto, pear scab fungus.
One commenter stated that recent
research conducted on diseases of
Malus spp. has discovered that the
2 To view the proposed rule, supporting
documents, and the comments we received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0007.
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
75008
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
causal agent of apple and pear ring spot,
which had long been considered to be
G. pyricola (Nose) W. Yamamoto, is in
fact Botryosphaeria dothidea. The
commenter pointed out that B. dothidea
is widely prevalent in the United States,
and stated that it thus should not be
considered a pest of quarantine
significance. The commenter also stated
that, based on this research, G. pyricola
should not be considered a pest of
quarantine significance for sand pears
from China. The commenter cited a
peer-reviewed article 3 (referred to
below as Tang et al.) detailing the
research that had been conducted.
We agree that Tang et al. provides
evidence in support of B. dothidea being
a causal agent of apple ring spot.
However, we do not consider this
evidence sufficient to remove G.
pyricola from the list of pests of
quarantine significance for sand pears
from China. The research detailed in
Tang et al. appears to have focused
primarily on Malus spp. Researchers
included only a few fungi of Pyrus spp.
for evaluation, and the discussion
section of Tang et al. refers exclusively
to fungi isolated from Malus spp. It is
even unclear whether B. dothidea was
the only Botryosphaeria species that
researchers isolated from Pyrus spp.
The scope and nature of the research
conducted on Pyrus spp. is unclear in
Tang et al. In order for us to consider
removing G. pyricola from the list of
pests of quarantine significance for sand
pears from China, Tang et al. would
have to specify that the research
conducted on Malus spp. is directly
applicable to Pyrus spp. It does not do
so; hence we continue to consider G.
pyricola a pest of quarantine
significance for sand pears from China.
Another commenter stated that the
list of pests of quarantine significance
for sand pears from China should be
expanded to include two additional
pests, Alternaria yaliinficiens, a
phytopathogenic fungus, and Monilia
polystroma, the cause of Asiatic brown
rot. The commenter pointed out that A.
yaliinficiens is frequently detected on
Ya pears in China, and M. polystroma,
a well-documented pest of sand pears,
is known to exist in China.
We have been able to find no
evidence suggesting that sand pears are
a host of A. yaliinficiens, and the
commenter did not provide any
references on this subject. Ya pears are
Pyrus bretschneideri, a separate species
from sand pears.
3 Tang et al., ‘‘Phylogenetic and pathogenic
analyses show that the causal agent of apple ring
rot in China is Botryosphaeria dothidea,’’ Plant
Disease 4 (April 2012), 486–497.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:12 Dec 18, 2012
Jkt 229001
We agree that M. polystroma is known
to exist in China, and sand pears are a
known host of this pest. However, to
date, M. polystroma has only been
detected in Heilongjiang province. This
province does not produce sand pears
for export and is geographically isolated
from the provinces in China that
account for the bulk of pear exports
from China, Hebei and Shandong. There
is, moreover, no evidence of artificial
spread of M. polystroma within China.
For these reasons, at this time, we do
not consider M. polystroma likely to
follow the pathway of sand pears
imported from China. We will, however,
continue to monitor the presence of M.
polystroma in China and, if necessary,
take appropriate action to prevent its
introduction.
A commenter asked that the PRA be
updated to include a list of all pests of
quarantine significance that have been
detected on sand pears from China
exported to other countries.
Foreign countries are free to designate
plant pests as being of quarantine
significance, without reference to the
designations of other countries. Thus,
there is no guarantee that a foreign
country’s pest list for sand pears is
equivalent to our own. Moreover,
foreign countries’ conditions for
importation of fruits and vegetables
often vary significantly from those of the
United States. Accordingly, a foreign
country’s pest interception data for a
particular commodity should not be
considered a reliable predictor of
possible pest interceptions for that same
commodity at ports of entry within the
United States. We are therefore not
amending the PRA in the manner
requested by the commenter.
The same commenter pointed out that
the PRA contained a list of pest
interceptions on Ya and fragrant pears
from China imported into the United
States between 1995 and 2009, but this
list did not include information for 2010
or 2011. The commenter also pointed
out that the list did not group detections
based on the port of entry at which the
pest was detected. The commenter
asked that the list be updated to include
information through 2011 and to sort
this information by port of entry.
We do not consider such updates to
be necessary. Interceptions in 2010 and
2011 do not disclose any additional
pests of quarantine significance that had
not previously been detected on the
pears. Moreover, the list was provided
in order to illustrate the starting point
from which we conducted our
evaluation of the pests of quarantine
significance that could follow the
pathway on sand pears from China
imported into the United States. Hence,
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
changing the scope of the list or its
presentation would not alter the results
of our evaluation.
Comments Regarding the Proposed Rule
One commenter stated that, based on
the number of pests of quarantine
significance likely to follow the
pathway on sand pears imported into
the United States from China, the plant
pest risk associated with the
importation of sand pears from China
was significant, and we should therefore
not authorize such importation.
Similarly, two commenters stated that
the proposed conditions for importation
of sand pears from China in the
proposed rule did not take into
consideration the unique climate of
Florida, which the commenters asserted
is more conducive to the establishment
of fruit flies than that of other States.
The commenters pointed out that
imported fruit containing dead fruit fly
larvae had been discovered in Florida,
and stated that these detections call into
question the efficacy of APHIS’ systems
approaches for these pests.
We agree that there are many pests on
the pest list for sand pears from China,
and one of these, B. dorsalis, could
become established in Florida, if
introduced. However, for the reasons
described in the RMD that accompanied
the proposed rule, we have determined
that the measures specified in the
proposed rule will effectively mitigate
the risk associated with the importation
of sand pears from China into any area
of the United States. The commenters
did not provide any evidence suggesting
that the mitigations are not effective.
To that end, we note that the
discovery of dead larvae in imported
fruit does not call into question the
efficacy of the systems approaches
under which the fruit has been
imported. Rather, it suggests the systems
approaches have been effective in
neutralizing the larvae.
A commenter asked whether the
proposed rule had provisions that
would address the risk that V. nashicola
or M. fructigena would follow the
pathway on sand pears from China.
As detailed in the RMD that
accompanied the proposed rule, there
are several provisions of the proposed
rule that address the risk posed by
phytopathogenic fungi such as V.
nashicola and M. fructigena. These
include: Registration of places of
production and packinghouses with the
NPPO of China, inspections for
quarantine pests at set intervals, bagging
of fruit, safeguarding, labeling, and
importation in commercial
consignments.
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
One commenter stated that fertility
management, that is, the use of nutrientrich soil composed primarily of
decaying organic matter, has been
demonstrated to be effective in reducing
population densities of certain plant
pests on host plants. The commenter
suggested that fertility management be
explored as an alternative to the systems
approach of the proposed rule, or, at
least, certain provisions of that
approach.
APHIS will continue to monitor the
efficacy of this and other possible
mitigation measures for sand pears from
China. If we determine alternate
measures to be effective in reducing the
risk associated with the importation of
sand pears from China, we may initiate
rulemaking to add them to the
regulations.
In the proposed rule, we proposed to
require all sand pears imported into the
United States from China to be grown at
places of production that are registered
with the NPPO of China. We also
proposed that the NPPO of China would
have to inspect registered places of
production prior to harvest for signs of
infestations and allow APHIS to monitor
the inspections. Finally, we proposed
that, if any of the pests of quarantine
significance likely to follow the
pathway on sand pears from China were
detected at a registered place of
production, we could reject individual
consignments from that place of
production or prohibit the importation
of sand pears from the place of
production for the remainder of the
season.
The NPPO of China stated that it had
entered into a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) with APHIS
regarding inspections of sand pears that
would take place at ports of entry in the
United States if the proposed rule was
finalized. The NPPO stated that it was
their understanding that these port-ofentry inspections obviated pre-harvest
inspections of registered places of
production. Accordingly, the NPPO
asked that we modify the proposed rule
to remove references to such pre-harvest
inspections.
We are making no change in response
to this comment. The MOU referenced
by the NPPO pertains to general
inspections of imported fruits and
vegetables that APHIS conducts in
accordance with § 319.56–3 of the
regulations. As specified in the MOU,
such inspections are meant to
complement, rather than supplant, the
provisions of the proposed rule,
including pre-harvest inspections of
registered places of production.
Moreover, we note that such pre-harvest
inspections are necessary not only to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:12 Dec 18, 2012
Jkt 229001
prevent infested fruit from being
imported to the United States, but also
so that APHIS has assurances that
places of production have implemented
and are maintaining all provisions of the
proposed rule that pertain to them, such
as bagging of sand pears destined for
export to the United States.
Miscellaneous
In our December 2011 proposed rule,
proposed paragraph (f)(1) of § 319.56–55
contained minimum requirements for
the trapping systems that places of
production and packinghouses would
need to have in place for B. dorsalis in
order to export sand pears from areas in
China south of the 33rd parallel to the
United States. Additionally, proposed
paragraph (f)(4) proposed to require
pears from such areas to be treated in
accordance with 7 CFR part 305, which
contains our requirements governing
approved treatments of imported
commodities.
Since the proposed rule was issued,
we have adopted a general Agency
policy of adding minimum trapping
requirements to operational workplans.
Among other reasons, this allows us to
change the frequency and distance at
which traps must be placed in response
to changes in population densities for B.
dorsalis in an exporting region. We have
also begun to add standards for
application of treatments to operational
workplans; among other reasons, this
allows us to prescribe in greater detail
best practices for the application of
various treatments.
Hence, in this final rule, we are
amending paragraph (f)(1) to specify
that the trapping systems must meet the
requirements of the operational
workplan, and (f)(3) to specify the
treatments must be applied in
accordance with not only 7 CFR part
305 but also the operational workplan.
In the proposed rule, we proposed to
add the conditions governing the
importation of sand pears from China as
§ 319.56–55. In this final rule, they are
added as § 319.56–57.
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 change 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 5 U.S.C. 604, we
have performed a final regulatory
flexibility analysis, which is
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
75009
summarized below, regarding the
economic effects of this rule on small
entities. Copies of the full analysis are
available on the Regulations.gov Web
site (see footnote 2 in this document for
a link to Regulations.gov) or by
contacting the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
This rule will amend the regulations
to allow, under certain conditions, the
importation into the United States of
sand pear from China. This fruit is
produced in the United States in limited
quantities, primarily in Illinois,
Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland.
Farms producing pears are classified
within the North American Industry
Classification System under Other
Noncitrus Fruit Farming. The average
2007 market value of crops sold by
farms classified within the industry
Fruit and Tree Nut Farming (which
includes Other Noncitrus Fruit Farming)
was less than $188,000, an amount well
below the Small Business
Administration’s small-entity standard
of annual receipts of not more than
$750,000. We infer that the majority of
farms producing pears, including sand
pears, are small entities.
China is expecting to export 24,000
metric tons of sand pear annually to the
United States. This amount is less than
5 percent of average annual production
of all varieties of pear produced in the
United States. We do not know the
quantity or value of sand pear produced
in the United States, or the quantity or
value of sand pear imported from other
countries. Nor do we know the
substitutability of sand pear for other
types of pears produced domestically.
While the United States is a net exporter
of pears overall, it is likely that the U.S.
supply of sand pear is largely imported.
Without information on the domestic
and foreign quantities supplied and the
substitutability of sand pear for other
pear varieties, we are unable to evaluate
potential effects of the rule for U.S.
producers.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts
all State and local laws and regulations
that are inconsistent with this rule; (2)
has no retroactive effect; and (3) does
not require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court
challenging this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), the information collection or
recordkeeping requirements included in
this rule have been approved by the
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
75010
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under OMB control number
0579–0390.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the EGovernment 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 rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste
Sickles, APHIS’ Information Collection
Coordinator, at (301) 851–2908.
Lists 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. A new § 319.56–57 is added to read
as follows:
■
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
§ 319.56–57
Sand pears from China.
Fresh sand pears (Pyrus pyrifolia)
from China may be imported into the
United States from China only under the
conditions described in this section.
These conditions are designed to
prevent the introduction of the
following quarantine pests: Acrobasis
pyrivorella, pear fruit moth; Alternaria
gaisen Nagano, the cause of black spot
of sand pear; Amphitetranychus
viennensis (Zacher), Hawthorn spider
mite; Aphanostigma iaksuiense
(Kishida), an aphid; Bactrocera dorsalis,
Oriental fruit fly; Caleptrimerus
neimongolensis Kuang and Geng, a mite;
Carposina sasakii Matsumora, peach
fruit moth; Ceroplastes japonicus Green,
Japanese wax scale; Ceroplastes rubens
Maskell, red wax scale; Conogothes
´
punctiferalis (Guenee), yellow peach
moth; Grapholita inopinata,
Manchurian fruit moth; Guignardia
pyricola (Nose) W. Yamamoto, a
phytopathogenic fungus; Monilinia
fructigena Honey in Whetzel, the cause
of brown fruit rot; Phenacoccus
pergandei Cockerell, a mealybug;
Planococcus kraunhiae (Kuwana), a
mealybug; and Venturia nashicola
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:12 Dec 18, 2012
Jkt 229001
Tanaka and Yamamoto, pear scab
fungus. The conditions for importation
of all fresh sand pears from China are
found in paragraphs (a) through (e) of
this section; additional conditions for
sand pears imported from areas of China
south of the 33rd parallel are found in
paragraph (f) of this section.
(a) General requirements. (1) The
national plant protection organization
(NPPO) of China must provide an
operational workplan to APHIS that
details the activities that the NPPO of
China will, subject to APHIS’ approval
of the workplan, carry out to meet the
requirements of this section.
(2) The pears must be grown at places
of production that are registered with
the NPPO of China.
(3) The pears must be packed for
export to the United States in pestexclusionary packinghouses that are
registered with the NPPO of China.
(4) Sand pears from China may be
imported in commercial consignments
only.
(b) Place of production requirements.
(1) All propagative material entering a
registered place of production must be
tested and certified by the NPPO of
China as being free of quarantine pests.
(2) The place of production must
carry out any phytosanitary measures
specified for the place of production
under the operational workplan.
(3) When any sand pears destined for
export to the United States are still on
the tree and are no more than 2.5
centimeters in diameter, double-layered
paper bags must be placed wholly over
the pears. The bags must remain intact
and on the pears until the pears arrive
at the packinghouse.
(4) The NPPO of China must visit and
inspect registered places of production
prior to harvest for signs of infestations
and allow APHIS to monitor the
inspections. The NPPO must provide
records of pest detections and pest
detection practices to APHIS, and
APHIS must approve these practices.
(5) If any of the quarantine pests listed
in the introductory text of this section
is detected at a registered place of
production, APHIS may reject the
consignment or prohibit the importation
into the United States of sand pears
from the place of production for the
remainder of the season. The
exportation to the United States of sand
pears from the place of production may
resume in the next growing season if an
investigation is conducted and APHIS
and the NPPO conclude that appropriate
remedial action has been taken.
(c) Packinghouse requirements. (1)
During the time registered
packinghouses are in use for packing
sand pears for export to the United
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
States, the packinghouses may only
accept sand pears that are from
registered places of production and that
are produced in accordance with the
requirements of this section.
(2) Packinghouses must have a
tracking system in place to readily
identify all sand pears that enter the
packinghouse destined for export to the
United States back to their place of
production.
(3) The NPPO of China or officials
authorized by the NPPO must inspect
the pears for signs of pest infestation
and allow APHIS to monitor the
inspections. If any of the quarantine
pests listed in the introductory text of
this section is detected in a consignment
at the packinghouse, APHIS may reject
the consignment.
(4) Following the inspection, the
packinghouse must follow a handling
procedure for the pears that is mutually
agreed upon by APHIS and the NPPO of
China.
(5) The pears must be packed in
cartons that are labeled with the identity
of the place of production and the
packinghouse.
(6) The cartons must be placed in
insect-proof containers, and the
containers sealed. The containers of
sand pears must be safeguarded during
transport to the United States in a
manner that will prevent pest
infestation.
(d) Shipping requirements. Sealed
containers of sand pears destined for
export to the United States must be held
in a cold storage facility while awaiting
export.
(e) Phytosanitary certificate. Each
consignment of sand pears imported
from China into the United States must
be accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate issued by the NPPO of China
with an additional declaration stating
that the requirements of this section
have been met and the consignment has
been inspected and found free of
quarantine pests.
(f) Additional conditions for sand
pears from areas of China south of the
33rd parallel. In addition to the
conditions in paragraphs (a) through (e)
of this section, sand pears from areas of
China south of the 33rd parallel must
meet the following conditions for
importation into the United States:
(1) The place of production of the
pears and the packinghouse in which
they are packed must have a trapping
system in place for B. dorsalis. At a
minimum, the trapping system must
meet the requirements of the operational
work plan.
(2) The place of production or the
packinghouse must retain data regarding
the number and location of the traps, as
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
well as any pests other than B. dorsalis
that have been caught, and make this
information available to APHIS upon
request.
(3)(i) The place of production or
packinghouse must notify the NPPO of
China, and the NPPO of China must
notify APHIS, regarding the detection of
a single B. dorsalis in a place of
production, packinghouse, or
surrounding area within 48 hours of the
detection.
(ii) If a single B. dorsalis is detected
in a registered place of production,
APHIS will prohibit the importation
into the United States of sand pears
from the place of production until any
mitigation measures determined by
APHIS to be necessary to prevent future
infestations are taken.
(iii) If a single B. dorsalis is detected
in a registered packinghouse, the
packinghouse may not be used to pack
sand pears for export to the United
States until any mitigation measures
determined by APHIS to be necessary to
prevent future infestations are taken.
(4) The pears must be treated in
accordance with 7 CFR part 305 and the
operational workplan.
(Approved by the Office of Management and
Budget under control number 0579–0390.)
Done in Washington, DC, this 13th day of
December 2012.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–30532 Filed 12–18–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Part 748
[Docket No. 110331231–2684–01]
RIN 0694–AF19
Revisions to Authorization Validated
End-User Provisions: Requirement for
Notice of Export, Reexport or Transfer
(In-Country) and Clarification
Regarding Termination of Conditions
on VEU Authorizations
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
AGENCY:
In this rule, the Bureau of
Industry and Security (BIS) amends the
Export Administration Regulations
(EAR) by adding a requirement for
persons shipping under Authorization
Validated End-User (VEU) to send
written notice of such shipments to the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:12 Dec 18, 2012
Jkt 229001
recipient VEU. BIS further amends the
EAR to clarify that when items subject
to item-specific conditions under
Authorization VEU no longer require a
license for export or reexport or become
eligible for shipment under a license
exception, as set forth in the EAR, VEUs
are no longer bound by the conditions
associated with the original receipt of
such items. On April 17, 2012, BIS
published a proposed rule and
requested public comments on these
topics (77 FR 22689). The comment
period closed June 18, 2012. BIS has
addressed the public comments
received in response to the proposed
rule in this final rule.
DATES: This rule is effective January 18,
2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen H. Nies-Vogel, Chair, End-User
Review Committee, Bureau of Industry
and Security, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th St. and Pennsylvania
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; by
telephone: (202) 482–5991, fax: (202)
482–3911, or email: ERC@bis.doc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Authorization Validated End-User
(VEU)
Validated end-users (VEUs) are those
entities located in eligible destinations
to which eligible items may be exported,
reexported, or transferred (in-country)
under a general authorization instead of
a license. VEUs and their respective
eligible destinations and eligible items
are identified in Supplement No. 7 to
Part 748 of the EAR. VEUs may obtain
eligible items without having to wait for
their suppliers to obtain export licenses
from BIS.
VEUs are reviewed and approved by
the U.S. Government in accordance with
the provisions of Section 748.15 and
Supplement Nos. 8 and 9 to Part 748 of
the EAR. The End-User Review
Committee (ERC), composed of
representatives from the Departments of
State, Defense, Energy and Commerce,
and other agencies, as appropriate, is
responsible for administering the VEU
program.
On April 17, 2012, BIS published a
rule soliciting public comments on two
proposed amendments to Section 748.15
of the EAR (Authorization Validated
End-User (VEU)) (77 FR 22689). BIS
proposed requiring persons exporting,
reexporting, or transferring (in-country)
under Authorization VEU to send
written notification to the recipient VEU
with details about their shipment within
seven days of the shipment. In addition,
BIS proposed explicitly clarifying in the
EAR that VEUs that are subject to item-
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
75011
specific conditions and have received
items subject to such conditions under
Authorization VEU would no longer be
bound by the conditions associated with
the items if the items no longer require
a license for export or reexport to the
VEU’s location or become eligible for
shipment under a license exception to
the destination. BIS received comments
from two entities, which are
summarized and responded to below.
Comments and Responses
Comment 1: Both commenters
indicated their overall support for the
proposed changes and the VEU
authorization as a whole. One
commenter specifically noted that
Authorization VEU had benefited a VEU
and its supplier by allowing the
purchase and supply of equipment to
proceed without the additional leadtime issues often caused by potentially
lengthy government approvals.
Response: BIS appreciates this input
regarding the VEU program, particularly
in light of BIS’s efforts to improve the
program and make it more effective for
U.S. exporters.
Comment 2: Both commenters
explained that individual shipments
may include items shipped under
‘‘multiple authorizations’’ including
Authorization VEU. They asked BIS to
clarify that proposed paragraph (g) of
Section 748.15 would only require that
shippers notify VEUs of items shipped
under Authorization VEU and not of
items shipped under other
authorizations in the same shipment as
VEU items. Specifically, one commenter
recommended that notification be
required to include ‘‘a list of the VEU
authorized contents and a list of their
respective ECCNs.’’
Response: BIS recognizes that
individual shipments may include items
authorized for shipment or transfer
under Authorization VEU as well as
items being shipped under other EAR
authorizations, such as licenses or
license exceptions. BIS intends that the
notification be required only for items
shipped under Authorization VEU and
not for any other items shipped with the
VEU-authorized items. BIS has amended
the text of Section 748.15(g) to specify
that the notification requirement applies
only to the ‘‘VEU-authorized’’ items in
a shipment and to specify that the list
suggested by the commenter be
included as part of the notification.
Comment 3: Both commenters asked
BIS to review its approach to the timing
and frequency of notifications under
Section 748.15(g). Both commenters
recommended that BIS permit
consolidated notifications under
Authorization VEU, rather than require
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 19, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 75007-75011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30532]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 75007]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. APHIS-2011-0007]
RIN 0579-AD42
Importation of Sand Pears From China
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the fruits and vegetables regulations to allow
the importation of sand pears (Pyrus pyrifolia) from China into the
United States. As a condition of entry, sand pears from areas in China
in which the Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis) is not known to
exist will have to be produced in accordance with a systems approach
that includes requirements for registration of places of production and
packinghouses, sourcing of pest-free propagative material, inspection
for quarantine pests at set intervals by the national plant protection
organization of China, bagging of fruit, safeguarding, labeling, and
importation in commercial consignments. Sand pears from areas in China
in which Oriental fruit fly is known to exist may be imported into the
United States if, in addition to these requirements, the places of
production and packinghouses have a monitoring system in place for
Oriental fruit fly and the pears are treated with cold treatment. All
sand pears from China will also be required to be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate with an additional declaration stating that
all conditions for the importation of the pears have been met and that
the consignment of pears has been inspected and found free of
quarantine pests. This action will allow for the importation of sand
pears from China into the United States while continuing to provide
protection against the introduction of quarantine pests.
DATES: Effective Date: January 18, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Farrell Wise, Supervisory
Agriculturist, Regulatory Coordination and Compliance, PPQ, APHIS, 4700
River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-2280.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in ``Subpart--Fruits and Vegetables'' (7 CFR
319.56-1 through 319.56-56, 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. The regulations
currently allow for the importation of both Ya pears (Pyrus
bretschneideri) and fragrant pears (Pyrus sp. nr. communis) from China.
The national plant protection organization (NPPO) of China
requested that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
amend the regulations to allow sand pears \1\ (Pyrus pyrifolia) from
China also to be imported into the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We previously referred to Pyrus pyrifolia as ``Chinese sand
pear.'' However, we have discovered that the accepted international
nomenclature for Pyrus pyrifolia is simply ``sand pear.'' Hence,
throughout this document, we refer to Pyrus pyrifolia as sand pear.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of our evaluation of China's request, we prepared a pest
risk assessment (PRA), titled ``Importation of Fresh Fruit of Chinese
Sand Pear, Pyrus pyrifolia, from China, including the Special
Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau, into the Entire United
States, Including all Territories'' (July 2009). The PRA evaluated the
risks associated with the importation of sand pears into the United
States from China, and identified 16 pests of quarantine significance
present in China that could be introduced into the United States
through the importation of sand pears. The PRA presented a number of
potential options to mitigate the risks posed by these plant pests.
Based on these options, we prepared a risk management document (RMD).
The RMD recommended specific measures to mitigate these risks.
Based on the recommendations of the RMD, on December 16, 2011, we
published a proposed rule \2\ in the Federal Register (76 FR 78168-
78172, Docket No. APHIS-2011-0007) to authorize the importation of sand
pears from China into the United States. We solicited comments
concerning the proposed rule for 60 days ending February 14, 2012. We
received five comments by that date. They were from the NPPO of China,
a State department of agriculture, an organization representing State
departments of agriculture, a technical committee representing the U.S.
pear industry, and a private citizen. The comments we received are
discussed below, by topic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ To view the proposed rule, supporting documents, and the
comments we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments Regarding the Pest Risk Assessment
The PRA identified the following pests of quarantine significance
as being likely to follow the pathway on imported sand pears from
China:
Acrobasis pyrivorella, pear fruit moth.
Alternaria gaisen Nagano, the cause of black spot of pear.
Amphitetranychus viennensis (Zacher), Hawthorn spider
mite.
Aphanostigma iaksuiense (Kishida), an aphid.
Bactrocera dorsalis, Oriental fruit fly.
Caleptrimerus neimongolensis Kuang and Geng, a mite.
Carposina sasakii Matsumora, peach fruit moth.
Ceroplastes japonicus Green, Japanese wax scale.
Ceroplastes rubens Maskell, red wax scale.
Congothes punctiferalis (Guen[eacute]e), yellow peach
moth.
Grapholita inopinata, Manchurian fruit moth.
Guignardia pyricola (Nose) W. Yamamoto, a phytopathogenic
fungus.
Monilinia fructigena Honey in Whetzel, the cause of brown
rot.
Phenacoccus pergandei Cockerell, a mealybug.
Planococcus kraunhiae (Kuwana), a mealybug.
Venturia nashicola Tanaka & Yamamoto, pear scab fungus.
One commenter stated that recent research conducted on diseases of
Malus spp. has discovered that the
[[Page 75008]]
causal agent of apple and pear ring spot, which had long been
considered to be G. pyricola (Nose) W. Yamamoto, is in fact
Botryosphaeria dothidea. The commenter pointed out that B. dothidea is
widely prevalent in the United States, and stated that it thus should
not be considered a pest of quarantine significance. The commenter also
stated that, based on this research, G. pyricola should not be
considered a pest of quarantine significance for sand pears from China.
The commenter cited a peer-reviewed article \3\ (referred to below as
Tang et al.) detailing the research that had been conducted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Tang et al., ``Phylogenetic and pathogenic analyses show
that the causal agent of apple ring rot in China is Botryosphaeria
dothidea,'' Plant Disease 4 (April 2012), 486-497.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We agree that Tang et al. provides evidence in support of B.
dothidea being a causal agent of apple ring spot. However, we do not
consider this evidence sufficient to remove G. pyricola from the list
of pests of quarantine significance for sand pears from China. The
research detailed in Tang et al. appears to have focused primarily on
Malus spp. Researchers included only a few fungi of Pyrus spp. for
evaluation, and the discussion section of Tang et al. refers
exclusively to fungi isolated from Malus spp. It is even unclear
whether B. dothidea was the only Botryosphaeria species that
researchers isolated from Pyrus spp.
The scope and nature of the research conducted on Pyrus spp. is
unclear in Tang et al. In order for us to consider removing G. pyricola
from the list of pests of quarantine significance for sand pears from
China, Tang et al. would have to specify that the research conducted on
Malus spp. is directly applicable to Pyrus spp. It does not do so;
hence we continue to consider G. pyricola a pest of quarantine
significance for sand pears from China.
Another commenter stated that the list of pests of quarantine
significance for sand pears from China should be expanded to include
two additional pests, Alternaria yaliinficiens, a phytopathogenic
fungus, and Monilia polystroma, the cause of Asiatic brown rot. The
commenter pointed out that A. yaliinficiens is frequently detected on
Ya pears in China, and M. polystroma, a well-documented pest of sand
pears, is known to exist in China.
We have been able to find no evidence suggesting that sand pears
are a host of A. yaliinficiens, and the commenter did not provide any
references on this subject. Ya pears are Pyrus bretschneideri, a
separate species from sand pears.
We agree that M. polystroma is known to exist in China, and sand
pears are a known host of this pest. However, to date, M. polystroma
has only been detected in Heilongjiang province. This province does not
produce sand pears for export and is geographically isolated from the
provinces in China that account for the bulk of pear exports from
China, Hebei and Shandong. There is, moreover, no evidence of
artificial spread of M. polystroma within China. For these reasons, at
this time, we do not consider M. polystroma likely to follow the
pathway of sand pears imported from China. We will, however, continue
to monitor the presence of M. polystroma in China and, if necessary,
take appropriate action to prevent its introduction.
A commenter asked that the PRA be updated to include a list of all
pests of quarantine significance that have been detected on sand pears
from China exported to other countries.
Foreign countries are free to designate plant pests as being of
quarantine significance, without reference to the designations of other
countries. Thus, there is no guarantee that a foreign country's pest
list for sand pears is equivalent to our own. Moreover, foreign
countries' conditions for importation of fruits and vegetables often
vary significantly from those of the United States. Accordingly, a
foreign country's pest interception data for a particular commodity
should not be considered a reliable predictor of possible pest
interceptions for that same commodity at ports of entry within the
United States. We are therefore not amending the PRA in the manner
requested by the commenter.
The same commenter pointed out that the PRA contained a list of
pest interceptions on Ya and fragrant pears from China imported into
the United States between 1995 and 2009, but this list did not include
information for 2010 or 2011. The commenter also pointed out that the
list did not group detections based on the port of entry at which the
pest was detected. The commenter asked that the list be updated to
include information through 2011 and to sort this information by port
of entry.
We do not consider such updates to be necessary. Interceptions in
2010 and 2011 do not disclose any additional pests of quarantine
significance that had not previously been detected on the pears.
Moreover, the list was provided in order to illustrate the starting
point from which we conducted our evaluation of the pests of quarantine
significance that could follow the pathway on sand pears from China
imported into the United States. Hence, changing the scope of the list
or its presentation would not alter the results of our evaluation.
Comments Regarding the Proposed Rule
One commenter stated that, based on the number of pests of
quarantine significance likely to follow the pathway on sand pears
imported into the United States from China, the plant pest risk
associated with the importation of sand pears from China was
significant, and we should therefore not authorize such importation.
Similarly, two commenters stated that the proposed conditions for
importation of sand pears from China in the proposed rule did not take
into consideration the unique climate of Florida, which the commenters
asserted is more conducive to the establishment of fruit flies than
that of other States. The commenters pointed out that imported fruit
containing dead fruit fly larvae had been discovered in Florida, and
stated that these detections call into question the efficacy of APHIS'
systems approaches for these pests.
We agree that there are many pests on the pest list for sand pears
from China, and one of these, B. dorsalis, could become established in
Florida, if introduced. However, for the reasons described in the RMD
that accompanied the proposed rule, we have determined that the
measures specified in the proposed rule will effectively mitigate the
risk associated with the importation of sand pears from China into any
area of the United States. The commenters did not provide any evidence
suggesting that the mitigations are not effective.
To that end, we note that the discovery of dead larvae in imported
fruit does not call into question the efficacy of the systems
approaches under which the fruit has been imported. Rather, it suggests
the systems approaches have been effective in neutralizing the larvae.
A commenter asked whether the proposed rule had provisions that
would address the risk that V. nashicola or M. fructigena would follow
the pathway on sand pears from China.
As detailed in the RMD that accompanied the proposed rule, there
are several provisions of the proposed rule that address the risk posed
by phytopathogenic fungi such as V. nashicola and M. fructigena. These
include: Registration of places of production and packinghouses with
the NPPO of China, inspections for quarantine pests at set intervals,
bagging of fruit, safeguarding, labeling, and importation in commercial
consignments.
[[Page 75009]]
One commenter stated that fertility management, that is, the use of
nutrient-rich soil composed primarily of decaying organic matter, has
been demonstrated to be effective in reducing population densities of
certain plant pests on host plants. The commenter suggested that
fertility management be explored as an alternative to the systems
approach of the proposed rule, or, at least, certain provisions of that
approach.
APHIS will continue to monitor the efficacy of this and other
possible mitigation measures for sand pears from China. If we determine
alternate measures to be effective in reducing the risk associated with
the importation of sand pears from China, we may initiate rulemaking to
add them to the regulations.
In the proposed rule, we proposed to require all sand pears
imported into the United States from China to be grown at places of
production that are registered with the NPPO of China. We also proposed
that the NPPO of China would have to inspect registered places of
production prior to harvest for signs of infestations and allow APHIS
to monitor the inspections. Finally, we proposed that, if any of the
pests of quarantine significance likely to follow the pathway on sand
pears from China were detected at a registered place of production, we
could reject individual consignments from that place of production or
prohibit the importation of sand pears from the place of production for
the remainder of the season.
The NPPO of China stated that it had entered into a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) with APHIS regarding inspections of sand pears that
would take place at ports of entry in the United States if the proposed
rule was finalized. The NPPO stated that it was their understanding
that these port-of-entry inspections obviated pre-harvest inspections
of registered places of production. Accordingly, the NPPO asked that we
modify the proposed rule to remove references to such pre-harvest
inspections.
We are making no change in response to this comment. The MOU
referenced by the NPPO pertains to general inspections of imported
fruits and vegetables that APHIS conducts in accordance with Sec.
319.56-3 of the regulations. As specified in the MOU, such inspections
are meant to complement, rather than supplant, the provisions of the
proposed rule, including pre-harvest inspections of registered places
of production. Moreover, we note that such pre-harvest inspections are
necessary not only to prevent infested fruit from being imported to the
United States, but also so that APHIS has assurances that places of
production have implemented and are maintaining all provisions of the
proposed rule that pertain to them, such as bagging of sand pears
destined for export to the United States.
Miscellaneous
In our December 2011 proposed rule, proposed paragraph (f)(1) of
Sec. 319.56-55 contained minimum requirements for the trapping systems
that places of production and packinghouses would need to have in place
for B. dorsalis in order to export sand pears from areas in China south
of the 33rd parallel to the United States. Additionally, proposed
paragraph (f)(4) proposed to require pears from such areas to be
treated in accordance with 7 CFR part 305, which contains our
requirements governing approved treatments of imported commodities.
Since the proposed rule was issued, we have adopted a general
Agency policy of adding minimum trapping requirements to operational
workplans. Among other reasons, this allows us to change the frequency
and distance at which traps must be placed in response to changes in
population densities for B. dorsalis in an exporting region. We have
also begun to add standards for application of treatments to
operational workplans; among other reasons, this allows us to prescribe
in greater detail best practices for the application of various
treatments.
Hence, in this final rule, we are amending paragraph (f)(1) to
specify that the trapping systems must meet the requirements of the
operational workplan, and (f)(3) to specify the treatments must be
applied in accordance with not only 7 CFR part 305 but also the
operational workplan.
In the proposed rule, we proposed to add the conditions governing
the importation of sand pears from China as Sec. 319.56-55. In this
final rule, they are added as Sec. 319.56-57.
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
change 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 5 U.S.C. 604, we have performed a final
regulatory flexibility analysis, which is summarized below, regarding
the economic effects of this rule on small entities. Copies of the full
analysis are available on the Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 2
in this document for a link to Regulations.gov) or by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
This rule will amend the regulations to allow, under certain
conditions, the importation into the United States of sand pear from
China. This fruit is produced in the United States in limited
quantities, primarily in Illinois, Virginia, West Virginia, and
Maryland.
Farms producing pears are classified within the North American
Industry Classification System under Other Noncitrus Fruit Farming. The
average 2007 market value of crops sold by farms classified within the
industry Fruit and Tree Nut Farming (which includes Other Noncitrus
Fruit Farming) was less than $188,000, an amount well below the Small
Business Administration's small-entity standard of annual receipts of
not more than $750,000. We infer that the majority of farms producing
pears, including sand pears, are small entities.
China is expecting to export 24,000 metric tons of sand pear
annually to the United States. This amount is less than 5 percent of
average annual production of all varieties of pear produced in the
United States. We do not know the quantity or value of sand pear
produced in the United States, or the quantity or value of sand pear
imported from other countries. Nor do we know the substitutability of
sand pear for other types of pears produced domestically. While the
United States is a net exporter of pears overall, it is likely that the
U.S. supply of sand pear is largely imported. Without information on
the domestic and foreign quantities supplied and the substitutability
of sand pear for other pear varieties, we are unable to evaluate
potential effects of the rule for U.S. producers.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws
and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no
retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements
included in this rule have been approved by the
[[Page 75010]]
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB control number 0579-
0390.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the EGovernment 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 rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles,
APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2908.
Lists 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. A new Sec. 319.56-57 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 319.56-57 Sand pears from China.
Fresh sand pears (Pyrus pyrifolia) from China may be imported into
the United States from China only under the conditions described in
this section. These conditions are designed to prevent the introduction
of the following quarantine pests: Acrobasis pyrivorella, pear fruit
moth; Alternaria gaisen Nagano, the cause of black spot of sand pear;
Amphitetranychus viennensis (Zacher), Hawthorn spider mite;
Aphanostigma iaksuiense (Kishida), an aphid; Bactrocera dorsalis,
Oriental fruit fly; Caleptrimerus neimongolensis Kuang and Geng, a
mite; Carposina sasakii Matsumora, peach fruit moth; Ceroplastes
japonicus Green, Japanese wax scale; Ceroplastes rubens Maskell, red
wax scale; Conogothes punctiferalis (Guen[eacute]e), yellow peach moth;
Grapholita inopinata, Manchurian fruit moth; Guignardia pyricola (Nose)
W. Yamamoto, a phytopathogenic fungus; Monilinia fructigena Honey in
Whetzel, the cause of brown fruit rot; Phenacoccus pergandei Cockerell,
a mealybug; Planococcus kraunhiae (Kuwana), a mealybug; and Venturia
nashicola Tanaka and Yamamoto, pear scab fungus. The conditions for
importation of all fresh sand pears from China are found in paragraphs
(a) through (e) of this section; additional conditions for sand pears
imported from areas of China south of the 33rd parallel are found in
paragraph (f) of this section.
(a) General requirements. (1) The national plant protection
organization (NPPO) of China must provide an operational workplan to
APHIS that details the activities that the NPPO of China will, subject
to APHIS' approval of the workplan, carry out to meet the requirements
of this section.
(2) The pears must be grown at places of production that are
registered with the NPPO of China.
(3) The pears must be packed for export to the United States in
pest-exclusionary packinghouses that are registered with the NPPO of
China.
(4) Sand pears from China may be imported in commercial
consignments only.
(b) Place of production requirements. (1) All propagative material
entering a registered place of production must be tested and certified
by the NPPO of China as being free of quarantine pests.
(2) The place of production must carry out any phytosanitary
measures specified for the place of production under the operational
workplan.
(3) When any sand pears destined for export to the United States
are still on the tree and are no more than 2.5 centimeters in diameter,
double-layered paper bags must be placed wholly over the pears. The
bags must remain intact and on the pears until the pears arrive at the
packinghouse.
(4) The NPPO of China must visit and inspect registered places of
production prior to harvest for signs of infestations and allow APHIS
to monitor the inspections. The NPPO must provide records of pest
detections and pest detection practices to APHIS, and APHIS must
approve these practices.
(5) If any of the quarantine pests listed in the introductory text
of this section is detected at a registered place of production, APHIS
may reject the consignment or prohibit the importation into the United
States of sand pears from the place of production for the remainder of
the season. The exportation to the United States of sand pears from the
place of production may resume in the next growing season if an
investigation is conducted and APHIS and the NPPO conclude that
appropriate remedial action has been taken.
(c) Packinghouse requirements. (1) During the time registered
packinghouses are in use for packing sand pears for export to the
United States, the packinghouses may only accept sand pears that are
from registered places of production and that are produced in
accordance with the requirements of this section.
(2) Packinghouses must have a tracking system in place to readily
identify all sand pears that enter the packinghouse destined for export
to the United States back to their place of production.
(3) The NPPO of China or officials authorized by the NPPO must
inspect the pears for signs of pest infestation and allow APHIS to
monitor the inspections. If any of the quarantine pests listed in the
introductory text of this section is detected in a consignment at the
packinghouse, APHIS may reject the consignment.
(4) Following the inspection, the packinghouse must follow a
handling procedure for the pears that is mutually agreed upon by APHIS
and the NPPO of China.
(5) The pears must be packed in cartons that are labeled with the
identity of the place of production and the packinghouse.
(6) The cartons must be placed in insect-proof containers, and the
containers sealed. The containers of sand pears must be safeguarded
during transport to the United States in a manner that will prevent
pest infestation.
(d) Shipping requirements. Sealed containers of sand pears destined
for export to the United States must be held in a cold storage facility
while awaiting export.
(e) Phytosanitary certificate. Each consignment of sand pears
imported from China into the United States must be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate issued by the NPPO of China with an
additional declaration stating that the requirements of this section
have been met and the consignment has been inspected and found free of
quarantine pests.
(f) Additional conditions for sand pears from areas of China south
of the 33rd parallel. In addition to the conditions in paragraphs (a)
through (e) of this section, sand pears from areas of China south of
the 33rd parallel must meet the following conditions for importation
into the United States:
(1) The place of production of the pears and the packinghouse in
which they are packed must have a trapping system in place for B.
dorsalis. At a minimum, the trapping system must meet the requirements
of the operational work plan.
(2) The place of production or the packinghouse must retain data
regarding the number and location of the traps, as
[[Page 75011]]
well as any pests other than B. dorsalis that have been caught, and
make this information available to APHIS upon request.
(3)(i) The place of production or packinghouse must notify the NPPO
of China, and the NPPO of China must notify APHIS, regarding the
detection of a single B. dorsalis in a place of production,
packinghouse, or surrounding area within 48 hours of the detection.
(ii) If a single B. dorsalis is detected in a registered place of
production, APHIS will prohibit the importation into the United States
of sand pears from the place of production until any mitigation
measures determined by APHIS to be necessary to prevent future
infestations are taken.
(iii) If a single B. dorsalis is detected in a registered
packinghouse, the packinghouse may not be used to pack sand pears for
export to the United States until any mitigation measures determined by
APHIS to be necessary to prevent future infestations are taken.
(4) The pears must be treated in accordance with 7 CFR part 305 and
the operational workplan.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control
number 0579-0390.)
Done in Washington, DC, this 13th day of December 2012.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-30532 Filed 12-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P