Importation of Tomato Plantlets in Approved Growing Media From Mexico, 59557-59561 [2015-25100]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 191 (Friday, October 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59557-59561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25100]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

7 CFR Part 319

[Docket No. APHIS-2014-0099]
RIN 0579-AE06


Importation of Tomato Plantlets in Approved Growing Media From 
Mexico

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations governing the importation of 
plants for planting to authorize the importation of tomato plantlets 
from Mexico in approved growing media, subject to a systems approach. 
The systems approach consists of measures currently specified for 
tomato plants for planting not imported in growing media, as well as 
measures specific to all plants for planting imported into the United 
States in approved growing media. Additionally, the plantlets must be 
imported into greenhouses in the continental United States and the 
importers of the plantlets from Mexico or the owners of the greenhouses 
in the continental United States must enter into compliance agreements 
regarding the conditions under which the plants from Mexico must enter 
and be maintained within the greenhouses. This rule allows for the 
importation into the continental United States of tomato plantlets from 
Mexico in approved growing media, while providing protection against 
the introduction of plant pests. The rule also allows the imported 
greenhouse plantlets to produce tomato fruit for commercial sale within 
the United States.

DATES: Effective November 2, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lydia E. Colon, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 
River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 851-2302.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The regulations in 7 CFR part 319 prohibit or restrict the 
importation of certain plants and plant products into the United States 
to prevent the introduction of quarantine plant pests. The regulations 
contained in ``Subpart--Plants for Planting,'' Sec. Sec.  319.37 
through 319.37-14 (referred to below as the regulations), prohibit or 
restrict, among other things, the importation of living plants, plant 
parts, and seeds for propagation or planting.
    The regulations differentiate between prohibited articles and 
restricted articles. Prohibited articles are plants for planting whose 
importation into the United States is not authorized due to the risk 
the articles present for introducing or disseminating plant pests. 
Restricted articles are articles authorized for importation into the 
United States, provided that the articles are subject to measures to 
address such risk.
    Section 319.37-5 of the regulations lists restricted articles that 
may be imported into the United States only if they are accompanied by 
a phytosanitary certificate that contains an additional declaration 
either that the restricted articles are free of specified quarantine 
pests or that the restricted articles have been produced in accordance 
with certain mitigation requirements. Within the section, paragraph (r) 
contains requirements for the importation of restricted articles 
(except seeds) of Pelargonium or Solanum spp. into the United States. 
Solanum spp. restricted articles include tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) 
plantlets, in addition to other species and cultivars within the genus.
    Paragraph (r)(1) of Sec.  319.37-5 authorizes the importation into 
the United States of Pelargonium or Solanum spp. restricted articles 
from Canada under the provisions of a greenhouse-grown restricted plant 
program. Paragraph (r)(3) contains conditions for the importation into 
the United States of Pelargonium or Solanum spp. restricted articles 
that do not meet the conditions in paragraph (r)(1), and are from a 
country in which Ralstonia solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 is known to 
occur.
    Conditions for the importation into the United States of restricted 
articles in growing media are specifically found in Sec.  319.37-8. 
Within that section, the introductory text of paragraph (e) lists taxa 
of restricted articles that may be imported into the United States in 
approved growing media, subject to the mandatory provisions of a 
systems approach. In Sec.  319.37-8, paragraph (e)(1) lists the 
approved growing media, and paragraph (e)(2) contains the provisions of 
the systems approach. Within paragraph (e)(2), paragraphs (i) through 
(viii) contain provisions that are generally applicable to all the taxa 
listed in the introductory text of paragraph (e), and paragraphs (ix) 
through (xi) contain additional taxon-specific conditions.
    In response to a request from the national plant protection 
organization (NPPO) of Mexico, in a proposed rule \1\ published in the 
Federal Register (80 FR 11946-11950, Docket No. APHIS-2014-0099) on 
March 5, 2015, we proposed to amend the regulations to authorize the 
importation into the continental United States of tomato (Solanum 
lycopersicum) plantlets from Mexico in growing media, subject to a 
systems approach. Because we considered R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 
to exist in Mexico, the proposed systems approach included the measures 
specified in paragraph (r)(3) of Sec.  319.37-5. Because the plantlets 
would be imported in growing media, the systems approach also included 
the general conditions in Sec.  318.37-8 for all taxa of plants for 
planting imported into the United States in growing media. Finally, we 
also proposed that the plantlets would have

[[Page 59558]]

to be imported into greenhouses in the continental United States and 
the importers of the plantlets from Mexico or the owners of the 
greenhouses in the continental United States would have to enter into 
compliance agreements regarding the conditions under which the plants 
from Mexico must enter and be maintained within the greenhouses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ To view the proposed rule, its supporting documents, or the 
comments that we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0099.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending 
May 4, 2015. We received 19 comments by that date. They were from an 
NPPO, two State departments of agriculture, an organization 
representing State departments of agriculture, U.S. tomato producers, 
importers of tomato plantlets, professors who specialize in U.S. tomato 
production, a U.S. Senator, local and municipal governments, and a 
private citizen.
    Most of the commenters urged us to finalize the proposed rule, as 
written. Several commenters were generally supportive of the rule, but 
requested clarifications regarding the provisions of the rule, or 
modification to those provisions. Finally, several commenters did not 
support the rule. We discuss the comments that we received below, by 
topic.

Comments Regarding the Presence of Ralstonia Solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 
2 in Mexico

    In the request that we received from the NPPO of Mexico to 
authorize the importation of tomato plantlets into the continental 
United States in approved growing media, the NPPO specified that the 
plantlets would be produced from certified seed, would be produced in 
greenhouses constructed and maintained to be pest-exclusionary, would 
be shipped in growing media maintained under similar conditions, and 
would be safeguarded during movement to the continental United States 
to prevent plant pests from being introduced to the plantlets.
    To evaluate this request, we prepared a pest risk assessment (PRA) 
that analyzed the potential pest risks associated with the importation 
of tomato plantlets from Mexico produced under such conditions. The PRA 
concluded that a number of quarantine pests of tomato plantlets exist 
in Mexico, including R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2, but that, if the 
plantlets are produced in accordance with the conditions specified by 
the NPPO, they would present a negligible risk of quarantine pests 
being introduced into the continental United States through their 
importation in approved media.
    Based on the findings of the PRA, a risk management document (RMD) 
that also accompanied the proposed rule recommended that, among other 
requirements, the plantlets should be authorized importation subject to 
paragraph (r)(3) of Sec.  319.37-5 because of the presence of R. 
solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 in Mexico.
    A commenter disputed the presence of R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 
2 in Mexico. The commenter stated that, of the ten references \2\ that 
APHIS cited in the PRA regarding the presence of R. solanacearum race 3 
biovar 2 in Mexico, five only stated that R. solanacearum race 3 is 
present in Mexico, and did not identify the biovar; three isolated R. 
solanacearum from samples obtained from Mexico, but did not state that 
the samples became infected in Mexico or delineate where in Mexico the 
samples originated; and the remaining two suggested that plantlets 
affected with R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 have been detected in 
Mexico, but did not rule out that the plantlets were germinated from 
infected, imported seed. The commenter also stated that most of the 
references cited could be classified as ``unreliable'' pursuant to the 
International Plant Protection Convention's International Standards for 
Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No. 8, and that ISPM No. 8 prohibits 
importing countries from assessing the pest status of a foreign region 
based on unreliable records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ These were:
    CABI, 1999. Ralstonia solanacearum race 3 [Distribution Map] 
(Map 785). April, 1999. Referred to in this document as ``CABI 
1999.''
    CABI, 2012. Crop Protection Compendium. Commonwealth 
Agricultural Bureau International. https://www.cabi.org/cpc/. 
Archived at PERAL. Referred to in this document as ``CABI 2012.''
    EPPO, 1997. Data Sheets on Quarantine Pests: Ralstonia 
solanacerum. European and Mediterranean Plant Pest Organization 
(EPPO) A2 List No. 58. Last accessed March 10, 2010. Referred to in 
this document as ``EPPO 1997.''
    EPPO, 2006. Distribution Maps of Quarantine Pests for Europe: 
Ralstonia solanacearum race 3.
    EPPO. Found at https://pqr.eppo.org/datas/PSDMS3/PSDMS3.pdf. 
Referred to in this document as ``EPPO 2006.''
    Hern[aacute]ndez-Romano, J., et al., 2012. First report of 
Ralstonia solanacearum causing tomato bacterial wilt in Mexico. New 
Disease Reports (November 2012). Referred to in this document as 
``Hern[aacute]ndez-Romano et al.''
    Meng, F., et al., 2008. Interactions with hosts at cool 
temperature, not cold tolerance, explain the unique epidemiology of 
Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 biovar 2. Poster presented at the 2008 
American Phytopathological Society Meeting, Minneapolis, MN. July 26 
and 28, 2008. Referred to in this document as ``Meng et al.''
    Milling, A., et al., 2009. Interactions with Hosts at Cool 
Temperatures, Not Cold Tolerance, Explain the Unique Epidemiology of 
Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2. Phytopathology 99 (10):1127-
1134. Referred to in this document as ``Milling et al.''
    Perea, S.J.M., et al., 2011. Identificaci[oacute]n de razas y 
biovares de Ralstonia solanacearum aisladas de plantas de tomate. 
Revista Mexicana de Fitopatolog[iacute]a (29):98-108. Referred to 
this in this document as ``Perea et al.''
    Sanchez-Perez, A., et al., 2008. Diversity and distribution of 
Ralstonia solanacearum strains in Guatemala and rare occurrence of 
tomato fruit infection. Plant Pathology 57:320-331. Referred to in 
this document as ``Sanchez-Perez et al.''
    Xu, J., et al., 2009. Genetic diversity of Ralstonia 
solanacearum strains from China. European Journal of Plant Pathology 
125:641-653. Referred to in this document as ``Xu et al.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For these reasons, the commenter concluded that APHIS should state 
that the presence of R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 in Mexico is 
unknown because of unreliable pest detection records, and remove the R. 
solanacearum race 3 biovar 2-specific provisions from the systems 
approach.
    Similarly, another commenter pointed out that R. solanacearum race 
3 biovar 2 has been detected in the United States on two occasions, yet 
there are no R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2-specific restrictions on 
the interstate movement of tomato plantlets within the United States. 
The commenter asked us to explain or address this discrepancy.
    Unlike other phytopathogenic bacteria, race classifications for R. 
solanacearum are not based on gene-for-gene interactions across host 
species, but rather on pathogenicity in different types of host plants. 
Biovars of R. solanacearum, in contrast, do cross species. There is, 
accordingly, generally no correlation between races and biovars of R. 
solanacearum, and, in general, one cannot presume a specific biovar of 
R. solanacearum has been detected in a host plant based on knowledge of 
the race isolated.
    However, this is not true of race 3 and biovar 2 of R. 
solanacearum. There exists a distinct and close correlation between 
this race and biovar of the disease, such that, in the international 
taxonomic community, references to race 3 of R. solanacearum are 
presumed to refer to biovar 2, and references to biovar 2 of R. 
solanacearum are presumed to refer to race 3. The five references in 
the PRA that referred to the presence of R. solanacearum race 3 in 
Mexico (CABI 1999, CABI 2012, EPPO 1997, EPPO 2012, and 
Hern[aacute]ndez-Romano et al.) used this common taxonomic practice, 
and thus do refer to R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2.
    Of the three articles that the PRA referenced in which R. 
solanacearum was isolated from samples obtained from Mexico (Meng et 
al., Milling et al., and Sanchez-Perez et al.), one (Meng et al.) 
explicitly states that the isolate of R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 
used in the study is from Mexico. The other two state that the isolates 
were obtained from a collection that is housed at the University of 
Wisconsin, and is identified as being of Mexican origin. While none of 
the references identify

[[Page 59559]]

the exact location in Mexico where the isolates originated, that 
location is not germane to determining whether or not R. solanacearum 
race 3 biovar 2 is present in Mexico.
    Of the remaining two articles, we agree that one (Xu et al.) does 
not conclude that R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 is present in Mexico, 
and will no longer use it as a reference in future discussions of the 
presence of R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 in Mexico.
    We disagree, however, that the other article (Perea et al.) could 
merely provide evidence that infected imported seed was used to 
germinate tomato plantlets within Mexico. Seed transmission of R. 
solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 is extremely rare; soil, water, and plant 
debris are far more common pathways for the disease. Additionally, the 
infected plantlets identified by Perea et al. exhibited no signs of 
infection during the early stages of production, when they were potted 
and housed in greenhouses; the plantlets only appeared symptomatic well 
after they were planted in an outdoor field. When potted plants are 
infected with R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2, however, they tend to 
appear symptomatic within 30 days. This suggests that the seed from 
which the plantlets were germinated was not infected with R. 
solanacearum race 3 biovar 2. Rather the evidence provided in Perea et 
al. strongly suggests that the plantlets became infected in an outdoor 
field through contact with infected soil, water, or debris.
    We agree with the commenter that the references are of varying 
reliability, but disagree with the commenter's interpretation of ISPM 
No. 8. ISPM No. 8 does not distinguish between reliable and unreliable 
records, but rather provides criteria by which an importing country 
should assess the relative reliability of a record in comparison to 
other records. The ISPM acknowledges that determining whether a 
particular plant pest exists in a foreign region is, however, 
ultimately a subjective ``expert judgment'' made by the importing 
country.
    After reviewing the records available to us in light of the 
commenter's concerns, we have determined that there is significant 
evidence that R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 exists in the natural 
environment within Mexico. This differs from the United States, where 
outbreaks of R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 have been limited to 
greenhouses and arisen from the importation of infected plants.
    Accordingly, we consider it appropriate to maintain R. solanacearum 
race 3 biovar 2-specific provisions as part of our systems approach for 
the importation of tomato plantlets in growing media from Mexico, and 
have made no changes to the provisions of the proposed rule in response 
to this comment.
    In a similar vein, a commenter asked us why the proposed rule had 
contained R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2-specific provisions, given 
that the PRA found that it ``highly unlikely'' that tomato plantlets 
from Mexico would become infected with the disease.
    The PRA found such transmission to be highly unlikely, provided 
that the plantlets are produced under the provisions of the systems 
approach. The PRA did not evaluate the likelihood that plantlets 
produced under different conditions would become infected with R. 
solanacearum race 3 biovar 2. Because we consider that disease to exist 
in the natural environment within Mexico, the risk would be 
considerably higher, and thus the need for the required provisions.

Comments Regarding Organic Certification

    Several tomato producers within the United States supported the 
proposed rule, and stated that they would like to import tomato 
plantlets in growing media from Mexico if the rule is finalized. 
However, the commenters stated that they are certified organic by the 
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and expressed concern 
that several of the mitigation measures specified in the risk 
management document (RMD) that accompanied the proposed rule appeared 
to require fumigation with methyl bromide and the use of disinfectants 
that are not approved by USDA for organic production. The commenters 
noted, however, that the proposed rule itself did not appear to require 
either fumigation or the use of such disinfectants. The commenters 
inquired whether there was a discrepancy between the RMD and the 
proposed rule, and, if so, which provisions they would be expected to 
adhere to.
    Paragraph (r)(3)(viii) of Sec.  319.37-5 requires Solanum spp. 
plants for planting from countries in which R. solanacearum race 3 
biovar 2 is known to occur to be grown in growing media that is free of 
R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2. In order for growing media to be 
considered free of R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2, guidance that we 
have developed for producers states that the growing media should 
either be fumigated with methyl bromide at 3 grams per liter of media 
for 72 hours at 21[deg] Celsius or above, or steam sterilized so that 
the media reaches a temperature of 80[deg] Celsius for at least 2 
hours. The RMD referred to both of these options, and either option 
would fulfill the requirements of the regulations.
    Paragraph (r)(3)(vi) of Sec.  319.37-5 requires all equipment that 
comes in contact with articles of Solanum spp. within a production site 
to be adequately sanitized so that R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 
cannot be transmitted between plants or enter from outside the 
production site via equipment, while paragraph (r)(3)(vii) of Sec.  
319.37-5 requires production site personnel to adequately sanitize 
their clothing before entering the production site to prevent the entry 
of R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 into the production site.
    APHIS has determined that several disinfectants may be used to meet 
these sanitation requirements. One of them, hydrogen peroxide, is 
approved by USDA for organic production.

General Comments on the Proposed Rule

    One commenter suggested that we should authorize the importation of 
tomato seeds from Mexico, rather than tomato plantlets in growing 
media.
    The regulations already authorize the importation of tomato seeds 
from Mexico. The market access request from the NPPO of Mexico was for 
tomato plantlets in growing media.
    One commenter suggested that we consider authorizing the 
importation of tomato plantlets from Mexico under ``Good Seed and Plant 
Production Practices'' (GSPPPs), an international accreditation 
standard for pest-free production of plants for planting.
    Generally applicable standards such as the GSPPPs may not always 
address taxon-specific plant pest risks. Additionally, the regulations 
are currently written in a manner which does not facilitate the use of 
such generally applicable standards. However, if finalized, a proposed 
rule \3\ published in the Federal Register on April 25, 2013 (78 FR 
24634-24663; Docket No. APHIS-2008-0011) would restructure the 
regulations to facilitate the potential use of GSPPPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ To view the proposed rule, its supporting documents, or the 
comments that we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2008-0011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Two commenters stated that certain areas of the continental United 
States are more hospitable to the establishment of quarantine pests of 
tomatoes than others, and the rule should be amended to prohibit the 
importation of tomato plantlets in growing media from Mexico into those 
areas.

[[Page 59560]]

    If the provisions of the proposed rule are adhered to, the 
plantlets will present a negligible risk of introducing quarantine 
pests into any area of the continental United States. Therefore, the 
relative likelihood of establishment of these pests in a particular 
part of the continental United States is not germane, and we are making 
no changes to the provisions of the systems approach based on these 
comments.

Comments Regarding Specific Provisions of the Systems Approach

    We proposed that the production site where the plantlets were 
produced would have to test for R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 and 
maintain records regarding such testing for at least two growing 
seasons.
    A commenter stated that indoor production facilities have growing 
cycles, rather than growing seasons, and inquired whether maintaining 
the records for two growing cycles would suffice to meet this 
requirement.
    Operationally, we rely on the definition of ``growing season'' 
provided in ISPM No. 5, ``Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms.'' \4\ This 
definition considers a growing season to be the period or periods of 
the year when plants actively grow in an area, place of production, or 
production site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ To view this ISPM, go to https://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/plant_exports/downloads/pimglossary.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commenter did not specify what they meant by ``growing cycle.'' 
However, if the commenter meant the time period during which a 
particular set of tomato plantlets are in active growth within the 
producer's facility, from establishment to harvest, then the term 
``growing season'' is equivalent to the term ``growing cycle.''
    We proposed that the greenhouses in which the plantlets are 
produced in Mexico would have to be surrounded by a 1-meter sloped 
buffer.
    One commenter asked whether the buffer had to be around the 
perimeter of each of the greenhouses, or whether the greenhouses could 
collectively be surrounded by the buffer.
    Either type of buffer suffices to meet this requirement.
    We proposed that the plantlets would have to be handled and packed 
in a manner which precludes the introduction of R. solanacearum race 3 
biovar 2 to the articles.
    One commenter asked whether these procedures would prevent insect 
pests from being introduced onto the plantlets during movement to the 
United States.
    Safeguarding procedures which prevent the introduction of R. 
solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 onto host plants are also sufficient to 
prevent the introduction of insect pests.
    Finally, we proposed that the plantlets would have to be imported 
directly into a pest-exclusionary greenhouse in the continental United 
States.
    One commenter asked whether the plantlets could be offloaded into a 
pest-exclusionary docking station at the same production site in the 
United States that contains the pest-exclusionary greenhouses, then 
resealed and moved to the greenhouses at a further stage of production.
    Provided that the docking station has been evaluated by APHIS and 
provides an equivalent level of pest exclusion as do the greenhouses 
themselves, they may.
    Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this 
document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, without 
change.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This 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 1 
in this document for a link to Regulations.gov) or by contacting the 
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    The rule will allow the importation of tomato plantlets in approved 
growing media from Mexico into the continental United States. 
Currently, tomato plantlets in growing media are not admissible into 
the United States except from Canada. The imported plantlets will be 
allowed to be imported only to APHIS-approved facilities under 
compliance agreements, and will be used only for fruit production.
    Data are not available on the production or trade of tomato 
plantlets. However, U.S. greenhouse (more generally termed protected-
culture) tomato production and import levels provide evidence of the 
expanding derived demand for tomato plantlets. In 2011, protected-
culture tomatoes made up 40 percent of the U.S. tomato supply, up from 
less than 10 percent in 2004; they now dominate retail tomato sales. 
The value of protected-culture tomato imports by the United States grew 
by two-thirds between 2009 and 2013, in response to expanding consumer 
demand, from $795 million to $1.33 billion.
    Reportedly, there are few nurseries in the United States that 
produce tomato plantlets and their volume of production is relatively 
small. The final rule will enable U.S. producers of protected-culture 
tomatoes to draw upon Mexican plantlet suppliers in addition to imports 
from Canada, and is expected to have a positive economic impact on the 
protected-culture tomato industry.
    Protected-culture tomato producers are classified in the North 
American Industry Classification System within Other Vegetable (except 
Potato) and Melon Farming (NAICS 111219), for which the Small Business 
Administration small-entity standard is annual receipts of not more 
than $750,000. The average market value of agricultural products sold 
by operations in this industry in 2012 was about $314,000. While we are 
unable to determine the number of businesses that will be affected by 
the final rule, we can assume that at least some of them are small 
entities.

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.

National Environmental Policy Act

    An environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
have been prepared for this final rule. The environmental assessment 
provides a basis for the conclusion that the importation into the 
continental United States of tomato plantlets in growing media from 
Mexico, subject to a required systems approach, will not have a 
significant impact on the quality of the human environment. Based on 
the finding of no significant impact, the Administrator of the Animal 
and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that an 
environmental impact statement need not be prepared.
    The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
were prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) 
regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing 
the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA 
regulations implementing NEPA

[[Page 59561]]

(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR 
part 372).
    The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site. Copies of the 
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact are also 
available for public inspection at USDA, room 1141, South Building, 
14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. 
and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing 
to inspect copies are requested to call ahead on (202) 799-7039 to 
facilitate entry into the reading room. In addition, copies may be 
obtained by writing to the individual listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

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 final rule, which were 
filed under 0579-0431, have been submitted for approval to the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB). When OMB notifies us of its decision, 
if approval is denied, we will publish a document in the Federal 
Register providing notice of what action we plan to take.

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 final rule, please contact Ms. Kimberly 
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2727.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 319

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

    Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR part 319 as follows:

PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES

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

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


0
2. Section 319.37-1 is amended by adding, in alphabetical order, a 
definition for compliance agreement to read as follows:


Sec.  319.37-1  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Compliance agreement. A written agreement between APHIS and a 
person (individual or corporate) engaged in the production, processing, 
handling, or moving of restricted articles imported pursuant to this 
subpart, in which the person agrees to comply with the subpart and the 
terms and conditions specified within the agreement itself.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 319.37-8 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (e), introductory text, by removing the period after 
the entry for ``Schlumberga spp. from the Netherlands and Denmark'' and 
adding, in alphabetical order, an entry for ``Solanum lycopersicum from 
Mexico.''.
0
b. By adding paragraph (e)(2)(xii).
0
c. By revising the OMB citation at the end of the section.
    The addition and revision read as follows:


Sec.  319.37-8  Growing media.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (xii) Plantlets of Solanum lycopersicum from Mexico must also meet 
the following conditions:
    (A) The plantlets must be produced in accordance with Sec.  319.37-
5(r)(3);
    (B) The plantlets can only be imported into the continental United 
States, and may not be imported into Hawaii or the territories of the 
United States; and
    (C) The plantlets must be imported from Mexico directly into a 
greenhouse in the continental United States, the owner or owners of 
which have entered into a compliance agreement with APHIS. The required 
compliance agreement will specify the conditions under which the plants 
must enter and be maintained within the greenhouse, and will prohibit 
the plantlets from being moved from the greenhouse following 
importation, other than for the appropriate disposal of dead plantlets.
    (D) If all of the above requirements are correctly complied with, 
then the tomato fruit produced from the imported greenhouse plantlets 
may be shipped from the greenhouses for commercial sale within the 
United States.
* * * * *
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
numbers 0579-0266 and 0579-0431)

    Done in Washington, DC, this 28th day of September 2015.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-25100 Filed 10-1-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P