[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 51 (Thursday, March 16, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14202-14209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6370]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Parts 300 and 319
[Docket No. 94-036-2]
Importation of Fruits and Vegetables
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are allowing a number of previously prohibited fruits and
vegetables to be imported into the United States from certain parts of
the world. All of the fruits and vegetables, as a condition of entry,
will be subject to inspection, disinfection, or both, at the port of
first arrival as may be required by a U.S. Department of Agriculture
inspector. In addition, some of the fruits and vegetables will be
required to undergo prescribed treatments for fruit flies or other
injurious insects as a condition of entry, or to meet other special
conditions. This action will provide the United States with additional
kinds and sources of fruits and vegetables while continuing to provide
protection against the introduction and dissemination of injurious
plant pests by imported fruits and vegetables.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 16, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Frank E. Cooper or Mr. Peter
Grosser, Senior Operations Officers, Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Port Operations, 4700 River
Road Unit 139, Riverdale, Maryland 20737-1228; (301) 734-8645.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in 7 CFR 319.56 through 319.56-8 (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 injurious insects that
are new to or not widely distributed within and throughout the United
States.
On October 25, 1994, we published in the Federal Register (59 FR
53606-53612, Docket No. 94-036-1) a proposal to amend the regulations
by allowing additional fruits and vegetables to be imported into the
United States from certain parts of the world under specified
conditions. The importation of these fruits and vegetables had been
prohibited because of the risk that the [[Page 14203]] fruits and
vegetables could introduce injurious insects into the United States. We
proposed to allow these importations at the request of various
importers and foreign ministries of agriculture, and after conducting
pest risk analyses that indicated that the fruits or vegetables could
be imported under certain conditions without significant pest risk.
We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 30 days ending
November 25, 1994. We received nine comments by that date. They were
from industry representatives and growers, State departments of
agriculture, an academic institution, a foreign department of
agriculture, and a foreign ambassador. One comment supported the
proposal as written. One commenter was concerned about being able to
move fruits and vegetables from Puerto Rico into other parts of the
United States. The remainder of the commenters opposed the rule for
specific fruits or vegetables. We carefully considered all of the
comments we received. They are discussed below by topic.
Carambola From Taiwan
We proposed to amend Sec. 319.56-2x to allow the importation of
carambola from Taiwan. We specified that carambola would undergo cold
treatment for the Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis) in
accordance with the Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) Treatment
Manual, which has been incorporated by reference into the Code of
Federal Regulations at 7 CFR 300.1. In accordance with Sec. 319.56-6 of
the regulations, carambola would be subject to inspection,
disinfection, or both at the port of first arrival. As discussed in the
proposal, the pest risk assessment conducted by the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (APHIS) determined that any injurious plant
pests that might be carried by carambola would be readily detectable by
an inspector.
Several commenters expressed concerns about the economic analysis
in the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. These comments are
addressed in the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
One commenter was concerned about U.S. producers' ability to export
carambola to the Taiwanese market. Our proposal and decision to allow
importation of carambola from Taiwan, as well as other fruits and
vegetables, are based solely on whether these importations can be made
without significant risk of pest introduction. We have no authority to
limit importations based on the presence or absence of reciprocal
arrangements. Therefore, we have made no change based on this comment.
Two commenters expressed concern that Taiwanese producers use
pesticides which are illegal in the United States. The Food and Drug
Administration takes samples of imported commodities to determine
whether illegal pesticides are present, and seizes shipments that do
not meet its standards. Therefore, we have made no change based on this
comment.
One commenter stated that there was no mention of the certification
procedures to ensure fruits are treated properly and not infested with
the Oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis. We ensure the fruits are
treated properly by verifying the results of treatment in accordance
with the PPQ Treatment Manual. Cold treatments, as required for
carambola from Taiwan, may be conducted either in the country of origin
or in the United States, under an inspector's supervision. Treatments
may also be conducted on board vessels en route to the United States.
In this case, a sealed temperature recording device is read by an
inspector upon the fruit's arrival in the United States, and the fruit
is released from treatment only if the temperature record indicates the
required cold treatment has been successfully completed.
Several commenters stated concerns about the fruit piercing moth
(Othreis spp.) and fruit borer (Eucosma notanthes), which attack
carambola. They questioned whether cold or other treatments would kill
these pests and raised concerns about the effectiveness of the
Taiwanese practice of covering the fruit with pesticide impregnated
bags to manage these pests. One commenter felt that there was no way to
ensure that all fruit imported into the United States had been bagged
in the field. Another commenter felt that there was no guarantee that
shipments of carambola from Taiwan would be free of larvae or eggs of
the Eucosma or that the young larvae in the fruit would have caused
sufficient damage for an inspector to detect. Commenters expressed
concerns that these pests, if introduced into the United States, could
feed on related fruits and become a significant problem for carambola
and other crops in Florida.
The fruit borer, Eucosma notanthes, is recognized as a pest of
carambola. However, routine cultural practices for carambola production
in Taiwan, such as the bagging of fruit, provide deterrents against the
carambola becoming infested with these pests. In addition, the
following pest management activities are carried out to reduce the risk
posed by this insect: Pesticides are applied weekly, from the end of
the bloom season until the fruit measures 5 cm in length. Infestation
in young fruit results in premature fruit drop. The dropped fruit is
collected and destroyed, reducing pest pressure and risk. Fruits are
then bagged to prevent adult moths from laying eggs on the growing
fruit. APHIS representatives will schedule periodic visits to carambola
production areas in Taiwan to monitor these procedures. If an adult
moth circumvents the bagging and lays eggs on more mature fruits, the
action of the larvae boring into the fruit extrudes frass from the hole
as well as exudate from the fruit. These obvious symptoms enhance our
confidence in our being able to visually detect any fruit that may be
infested.
Bagging fruits to prevent insects from laying their eggs on or in
the fruit, and subsequent larval forms boring into the fruit, has
proven successful with similar pests and imports of sand pears from
Japan and the Republic of Korea. The bagging will also exclude other
moths, including Othreis spp.
We consider the measures taken in the exporting country, coupled
with the safeguards required by the regulations, including inspection
and cold treatment, to be adequate to prevent the introduction of
injurious plant pests into the United States by carambola from Taiwan.
Therefore, we are not making any changes based on these comments.
Onion Bulbs From Indonesia
We proposed to amend Sec. 319.56-2t to allow the importation of
onion bulbs, Allium cepa, from Indonesia. One commenter stated that
onion bulbs from Indonesia should not be allowed entry with the tops
due to the risk of introduction of the listed leafminer and noctuids.
We are making no change based on this comment, because, as indicated in
the proposal, only bulbs of the onion will be allowed. Bulbs with tops
will be refused entry.
Jicama From Tonga
We proposed to amend Sec. 319.56-2t to allow the importation of
Jicama, Pachyrhizus tuberous, from Tonga. One commenter felt that
jicama from Tonga should not be admitted until the nematodes mentioned
in the pest risk assessment are identified and their impact evaluated.
We are making no change based on this comment. The pest risk assessment
reported on two root-knot nematodes on this host. As the name implies,
attacks by species within this genus result in a root-knot forming on
the host material. In general, these are predictable visible symptoms
that [[Page 14204]] inspectors are trained to look for, and APHIS
inspects jicama for these nematodes. If these nematodes are detected at
the time of importation, the jicama will be rejected.
Currant and Gooseberry, From Argentina and Australia
We proposed to amend Sec. 319.56-2t to allow the importation of
currant and gooseberry, Ribes spp., from Argentina and Australia. One
commenter felt that Ribes spp. fruits could harbor the mites that
vector the reversion disease, even though the fruit would not carry the
pathogen for the disease. The commenter recommended that surface
treatment should be required to allow entry for these fruits. We are
making no change based on this comment. The reversion disease is not
known to occur in Argentina or Australia. Therefore, we believe there
is no risk of mites serving as vectors.
White Asparagus From Austria
We proposed to amend Sec. 319.56-2t to allow the importation of
white asparagus, Asparagus officinalis, from Austria. As specified in
the proposal, the only plant part eligible for importation is the
shoot, with no visible green on the shoot. One commenter suggested that
white asparagus from Austria should be harvested before shoot emergence
and washed to eliminate soil. We are making no changes based on this
comment. If the asparagus is harvested after shoot emergence, it will
not be white, and, therefore, will not be enterable. We will reject all
shipments that are not white. In accordance with 7 CFR 330.300, soil
contamination is a reason for rejecting shipments of all agricultural
products from nearly all countries. Therefore, the asparagus shoots
must be completely white and free of soil when presented for inspection
and entry.
Sage From Belize
We proposed to amend Sec. 319.56-2t to allow the importation of
sage, Salvia, from Belize. In accordance with Sec. 319.56-6 of the
regulations, sage would be subject to inspection, disinfection, or both
at the port of first arrival. As discussed in the proposal, the pest
risk assessment conducted by APHIS determined that sage from Belize is
not attacked by fruit flies or other injurious plant pests. In
addition, any other injurious plant pests that might be carried by sage
from Belize would be readily detectable by an inspector.
One commenter was concerned about the rust pathogens in Central
America. The commenter questioned the status of rust pathogens in
Belize. We have no evidence that any of these rust pathogens occur in
Belize. In addition, our experience with Salvia imports from countries
where these rust pathogens occur has not demonstrated that imported
Salvia serves as a pathway.
Blueberry From Argentina
We proposed to amend Sec. 319.56-2t to allow the importation of
blueberry, Vaccinium spp., from Argentina. We specified that
blueberries will undergo cold treatment for the Mediterranean fruit fly
(Ceratitis capitata) in accordance with the PPQ Treatment Manual.
One commenter suggested that fumigation schedules for Vaccinium
spp. fruit from Argentina should target Anastrepha spp., which has been
intercepted on Vaccinium spp. in Mexico. We are making no changes based
on this comment. Although it is true that a fruit fly of an Anastrepha
sp. was found in blueberry fruit, the fruit was carried by an airline
passenger and is the only record we have of an interception of this
species in blueberry fruit. This information was weighed against the
larger body of information of repeated commercial importation without
any evidence of Anastrepha infestation. We believe the interception
represented an aberration or incidental report from a possible over-
ripe or damaged fruit.
Kiwi From the Republic of Korea
We proposed to amend Sec. 319.56-2t to allow the importation of
kiwi, Actinidia deliciosa, from the Republic of Korea. One commenter
was concerned by the lack of reciprocal commitment from the Republic of
Korea to treat California kiwifruit exported to the Republic of Korea
fairly in the context of phytosanitary and food issues.
Our proposal and decision to allow importation of kiwi from the
Republic of Korea, as well as other fruits and vegetables, are based
solely on whether these importations can be made without significant
risk of pest introduction. We have no authority to limit importations
based on the presence or absence of reciprocal arrangements.
Inspection Upon Arrival
One commenter questioned the ability of inspectors to adequately
inspect the increasing number of commodities that arrive in the United
States. Inspection at the port of first arrival is only one aspect of
our approach to plant pest exclusion, and is never the sole means of
plant pest exclusion for any commodity. Before a fruit or vegetable is
approved for importation into the United States, a plant pest risk
assessment is conducted for the commodity. If a plant pest risk is
found to be associated with a commodity proposed for importation, APHIS
then determines what, if any, measures can be taken to reduce the risk
to a level that would allow the commodity to be safely imported into
the United States. For example, in certain cases our regulations impose
restrictions such as specific growing and shipping requirements or
inspection in the country of origin, or treatment. As a final
precaution, all fruits and vegetables are subject to inspection at the
port of first arrival. Inspectors are aware of potential pest risks
associated with a particular commodity and conduct their inspections
accordingly. We consider the measures taken in the exporting countries,
coupled with the safeguards required by the regulations, including
inspection, to be adequate to prevent the introduction of injurious
plant pests into the United States.
General
One commenter stated that pest risk assessments consist only of a
cursory look at the interception histories of commodities which are
currently prohibited and do not adequately investigate pest problems
associated with the commodities in their countries of origin. We do
investigate pest problems associated with commodities in their
countries of origin during our pest risk assessments. Our current
method of performing pest risk assessments is to do an exhaustive
search of literature and review our historical plant pest database and
interception information. When available, we also use information from
other sources, and occasionally conduct on-site investigations in
proposed export areas. The pest risk assessments are largely dependent
upon literature on plant pest problems in countries of origin. This
literature is primarily investigative findings published by scientific
communities. Our experience has shown that if a pest causes damage to
an economic crop, the scientific community investigates the pest's
biology and extent of pest damage in prescribing remedial actions.
One commenter felt that commodities that can be planted or
otherwise propagated, such as onion and shallot bulbs, cornsalad, and
jicama, should be evaluated by stricter criteria. We are making no
change based on this comment. We have long recognized that some
products imported for consumption are capable of being propagated and
that individuals, occasionally out of curiosity, may plant them. While
we do not believe that the extent of the practice makes it a
[[Page 14205]] significant pest risk, we have, in the past, explored
three ways of preventing the practice: (1) Prohibit the importation of
all commodities that could potentially be propagated; (2) treat all
commodities capable of propagation with sprout inhibitor; or (3)
devitalize the products prior to export. We believe that the first
option, prohibition, should be applied only to products that present
pest risks that cannot be mitigated in other ways. We have experimented
with the second option, using sprout inhibitors, but they do not offer
sufficient quarantine security for high-risk products and are not
registered for most products. The third option, devitalization, in most
cases renders a product unacceptable for the fresh fruit and vegetable
market.
Countries are becoming more and more sophisticated in their
production and phytosanitary practices, so the quality of fruits and
vegetables in general is increasing. Products are graded and inspected
during packing and prior to export, and the products are inspected
again upon arrival in the United States. All of this reduces the
likelihood of a pest entering the United States. If, once a commodity
has been imported into the United States, a person chooses to try to
propagate that commodity, the person would likely choose the
healthiest-looking material, thus further reducing the probability that
a plant pest would be spread. The limited degree of risk that remains
must be accepted if free trade is to be maintained.
Puerto Rico
One commenter felt that the proposal should not be approved since
it would provide foreign countries importation rights and benefits
which are currently being denied to other States and Territories. The
commenter requested that we review and, if necessary, revise many of
our regulations covering Puerto Rico to increase the number and kinds
of fruits and vegetables moving into other parts of the United States
from Puerto Rico. We will consider specific requests from Puerto Rico
to allow the movement of specific fruits and vegetables to other parts
of the United States. Once a request is received, we will perform a
pest risk assessment to determine if there is significant risk of
introducing injurious plant pests into other parts of the United
States. After determining that the fruits or vegetables could be moved
under certain conditions without significant pest risk, we would
publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register to allow the movement
of those fruits or vegetables into other parts of the United States.
Miscellaneous
We have made minor, editorial changes by removing the references to
``South Korea'' and by replacing them with ``the Republic of Korea,''
the official name for that country.
Therefore, based on the rationale set forth in the proposed rule
and in this document, we are adopting the provisions of the proposal as
a final rule, with the change noted above.
Effective Date
This is a substantive rule that relieves restrictions and, pursuant
to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, may be made effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Immediate
implementation of this rule is necessary to provide relief to those
persons who are adversely affected by restrictions we no longer find
warranted. Therefore, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service has determined that this rule should be effective
upon publication in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The 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. 601 et seq., we have performed a Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, set forth below, regarding the
economic impact of this rule on small entities.
Under the Plant Quarantine Act and the Federal Plant Pest Act (7
U.S.C. 150dd, 150ee, 150ff, 151-167), the Secretary of Agriculture is
authorized to regulate the importation of fruits and vegetables to
prevent the introduction of injurious plant pests.
This final rule amends the regulations governing the importation of
fruits and vegetables by allowing a number of previously prohibited
fruits and vegetables to be imported into the United States from
certain foreign countries and localities under specified conditions.
The importation of these fruits and vegetables has been prohibited
because of the risk that they could introduce injurious plant pests
into the United States. This rule revises the status of certain
commodities from certain countries and localities, allowing their
importation into the United States for the first time.
These revisions are based on pest risk assessments that were
conducted by APHIS at the request of various importers and foreign
ministries of agriculture. The pest risk assessments indicate that the
fruits or vegetables listed in this rule, under certain conditions, may
be imported into the United States without significant pest risk. All
of the fruits and vegetables, as a condition of entry, will be subject
to inspection, disinfection, or both, at the port of first arrival as
may be required by an inspector. In addition, some of the fruits and
vegetables will be required to undergo mandatory treatment for fruit
flies or other injurious insects as a condition of entry, or to meet
other special conditions. This action will provide the United States
with additional kinds and sources of fruits and vegetables while
continuing to provide protection against the introduction into the
United States of injurious plant pests by imported fruits and
vegetables.
Apples
This rule allows apples to be imported into the United States from
Spain under certain conditions. Spain's production of apples in 1993
was approximately 821,000 metric tons (mt). Spain's export level over
the past 5 years has averaged 20,000 mt. In the unlikely event that
Spain's apple exports were fully diverted to the United States, they
would represent about 0.4 percent of U.S. production, an amount that
would not significantly affect the U.S. market. Moreover, there would
not be any off-season advantages, since Spain's main production season,
June through September, inclusive, is the same as for U.S. apple
producers.
In addition, the United States is a net exporter of apples. Total
U.S. utilized production of apples in 1993 was 4,760,682 mt (fresh
equivalent). (Utilized production of apples refers to the amount of
apples sold plus the quantities of apples used on farms where grown and
quantities of apples held in storage, thus those apples actually used
in some way.) Imports of fresh apples in 1992 totaled 120,412 mt, or
2.5 percent of domestic utilized production that year, whereas exports
totaled 507,614 mt, or 10.7 percent. Given this trade flow, the U.S.
market for apples is not expected to exhibit the excess demand in the
near future that could encourage increased foreign supply. The main
commercial varieties grown in Spain (Golden Delicious, 50 percent;
Granny Smith, 30 percent) are common varieties in the United States,
and their export, therefore, would not satisfy any special market
demand.
Asparagus (White)
This rule allows white asparagus to be imported into the United
States from [[Page 14206]] Austria under certain conditions. Total U.S.
asparagus production in 1993 was 2,204,000 hundredweight (cwt), or
99,973 mt. Austria's current production of asparagus is around 400 mt,
95 percent of which is white asparagus.
APHIS expects that annual exports to the United States may reach
between 1 and 2 tons. This quantity represents less than 0.002 percent
of U.S. production, and therefore will not affect prices received by
U.S. growers.
Blueberries
This rule allows blueberries to be imported into the United States
from Argentina under certain conditions. Total U.S. blueberry
production in 1993 was 170,397,000 pounds, or 77,292 mt. About 40
percent was produced for the fresh fruit market, and about 60 percent
was processed. APHIS estimates Argentina's current production of
blueberries to be 40 mt per year, and we expect that figure to expand
to 200 mt by 1997-98. At present, all blueberry exports from Argentina
(80 percent of production) are sent to Europe. If approved for entry
into the United States, we expect that 19.2 mt or 60 percent of
blueberry exports from Argentina will be directed to U.S. ports. This
quantity represents less than 0.03 percent of U.S. production, and
therefore will not noticeably affect prices received by U.S. growers.
Carambola
This rule allows carambola to be imported into the United States
from Taiwan under certain conditions. Ninety percent of domestic
production of carambola takes place in southern Florida, where 60 to 90
growers cultivate a total of about 400 acres. Most of the producers are
considered small entities, according to the Small Business
Administration definition of annual gross receipts of $500,000 or less.
U.S. production of carambola in 1994 reached between 5 and 6 million
pounds, a quantity expected to gradually increase as consumer
familiarity with carambola grows. At present, carambola is unknown to
most U.S. consumers, and the industry faces the challenges of creating
broader market appeal for this fruit.
Besides Florida, a relatively small amount of carambola is produced
in Hawaii (58,400 pounds in 1992). A regulatory change last year now
allows carambola grown in Hawaii to be marketed on the mainland. The
initial volume to be shipped this year is estimated at 1,500 to 3,000
pounds.
Taiwan is reportedly the world's largest producer of carambola. In
1992, 35,738 mt (78.8 million pounds) were produced, about 12 times
that of the United States. However, less than 10 mt (0.03 percent) of
Taiwan's production is exported annually, mainly to Hong Kong and
Canada. As an initial trial shipment, about 1 mt is expected to be
exported to the United States per year.
California is a large and growing domestic market for carambola and
the likely destination of carambola from Taiwan. It receives from 40 to
50 percent of Florida's carambola crop. California requires that
carambola from Florida be cold treated, and APHIS requires cold
treatment for shipments from Hawaii to the mainland. Imports from
Taiwan will also require cold treatment.
Average prices received by U.S. carambola producers between 1989
and 1993 ranged from about $0.67 to $1.55 per pound. Farm prices in
Taiwan vary from $0.60 to $4.00 per kg ($0.27 to $1.81 per pound),
depending on the quality, size of production, and season. While prices
are generally lower in Taiwan, high quality carambolas suitable for
export sell well in Taiwan's domestic market. Relatively high farm
prices and the fruit's well-established domestic market largely explain
Taiwan's limited exports.
Carambola is sensitive to chilling, which can cause the skin to
turn brown and become pitted. Since all carambola entering California
will require cold treatment, effects of the treatment on the appearance
and marketability of the fruit will be similar, whether the carambola
comes from Florida, Hawaii, or Taiwan.
We received four comments disagreeing with the results of our
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for carambola from Taiwan. They
were from three domestic growers associations and an academic
institution. The commenters were concerned with unfair competition and
the impact on domestic producers. None of the commenters provided
additional data, however, to dispute our figures. We carefully
considered all of the comments. The comments and responses are
summarized below.
One commenter stated that the classification of U.S. carambola
producers as ``small entities'' does not change the fact that U.S.
citizens are making their livelihood from producing carambola.
Examination of the possible impact on U.S. carambola producers as
``small entities'' is required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. No
other significance is attached to the ``small entities''
classification.
One commenter felt that the United States is currently in a trade
deficit with Taiwan, and allowing carambolas to be imported will only
increase this deficit. APHIS bases its decisions to allow importation
of fruits and vegetables on whether these importations can be made
without significant risk of pest introduction. We have no authority to
limit importations based on the size of a trade deficit.
Two commenters raised concerns that since the carambola is still a
relatively unknown product in the United States, the marketing efforts
for carambola by U.S. carambola producers would provide free benefits
to Taiwan, and, Taiwan would gain as a result. While carambola imported
from Taiwan may well benefit from U.S. efforts, U.S. producers may also
benefit from Taiwanese marketing efforts.
All four commenters were concerned about the impact on U.S.
carambola producers and disagreed with our evaluation that allowing the
importation of carambola from Taiwan would have a positive impact on
the U.S. economy. Since the extent of the impact is not known, one
commenter questioned, ``Why experiment on an unknown outcome with the
livelihood of American Citizens and small businesses?'' The commenter
also stated, ``The carambola as a commercial crop in the U.S. is still
an emerging industry with many unknowns. It would only seem wise to
concentrate all of our resources on establishing the domestic side of
this industry before allowing additional unknown elements to be added
to the equation.'' Three commenters questioned our conclusion that a
loss of income by U.S. producers would be positive for the U.S.
economy.
The level of expected near-term imports is very small compared to
U.S. carambola production (less than 0.1 percent). In fact, all of
Taiwan's current carambola exports equals less than one percent of
current U.S. production. If carambola retail prices in the United
States declines with imports from Taiwan, then U.S. consumers will gain
and U.S. producers will lose. The impact for the economy will be
positive if the gains exceed the losses.
Assuming the market for carambola expands, and fruit from Taiwan is
routinely imported, domestic producers' income will be less than it
would be otherwise, due to a price decline and/or lower volumes than
would be sold were there not imports. The critical question is what
this reduction in income will be. There is no evidence to suggest that
it will be significant.
From a broader perspective, sales and income lost by domestic
producers should be balanced against benefits to U.S. consumers in
terms of greater availability and/or lower prices. Again,
[[Page 14207]] lack of information on how much carambola prices can be
expected to decline as a result of imports, and the responsiveness of
producers and consumers to a decline, precludes estimation of
consumers' gains and domestic producers' losses. Nevertheless, APHIS
believes that the net benefit to the U.S. economy will be positive.
Currants and Gooseberries
This rule allows currants and gooseberries to be imported into the
United States from Argentina under certain conditions. Argentina's area
of Ribes spp. production totals only four hectares, one of which is
being used for experiments on the suitability of various species. The
Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, estimates
the annual crop at 30 mt, of which 40 percent, or 12 mt, could be
exported to the United States.
Although published data on U.S. Ribes spp. production is not
available, trade statistics show the United States to be a net
importer. In 1992, 64 mt of currants and gooseberries were exported,
and 264 mt of currants were imported. The quantity of Ribes spp.
expected to be imported from Argentina is only 6 percent of 1992 net
imports for the United States. APHIS does not expect this relatively
small change in the quantity imported to significantly affect the
market for U.S. producers.
Eggplant
This rule allows eggplant to be imported into the United States
from the Republic of Korea under certain conditions. U.S. commercial
production of eggplant in 1993 was 776,000 cwt (35,199 mt). The
Republic of Korea's annual production of eggplant in 1993 totaled
22,751 mt, of which 30.3 mt were exported to Japan and Guam. If all of
the Republic of Korea's eggplant exports were sent to the United
States, it will represent less than 0.09 percent of U.S. commercial
production.
Even in the very unrealistic scenario that the Republic of Korea's
eggplant exports are fully diverted to the United States, the
quantities will not be large enough to affect the U.S. market.
Kiwi
This rule allows kiwi to be imported into the United States from
the Republic of Korea under certain conditions. Utilized U.S.
production of kiwi in 1992 totaled 47,700 mt. Imports of kiwi into the
United States for 1992 were estimated at 20,236 mt, or more than 40
percent of domestic production. The Republic of Korea's annual
production of kiwi in 1993 totaled 8,538 mt, of which none was
exported. Assuming 5 percent of the Republic of Korea's production
(426.9 mt) were exported to the United States, this amount will
represent only about 0.6 percent of U.S. supply (produced domestically
and imported) in 1991.
Even in the very unrealistic scenario that the Republic of Korea
exports 5 percent of its kiwi production to the United States, the
quantities will not be large enough to affect the U.S. market.
Lettuce
This rule allows lettuce to be imported into the United States from
Israel and the Republic of Korea under certain conditions. Total U.S.
production of head, leaf, and romaine lettuce in 1993 was 82,790,000
cwt (3,755,330 mt). In Israel, insect-free lettuce produced in
greenhouses for the 1993/94 season reached about 4,480,000 pounds.
Exports planned for 1994/95 are estimated at 1,600,000 pounds. If all
of these exports were destined for the United States, they would
comprise less than 0.02 percent of U.S. production and, therefore, will
not noticeably affect the U.S. market.
The Republic of Korea's annual production of leaf lettuce in 1993
totaled 149,611 mt, of which 23.9 mt were exported to Japan, Guam, Hong
Kong, and Saipan. If all of the Republic of Korea's lettuce exports
were sent to the United States, it would represent only about 0.0006
percent of U.S. production.
Even in the very unrealistic scenario that the Republic of Korea's
lettuce exports are fully diverted to the United States, the quantities
will not be large enough to affect the U.S. market.
The aggregate economic impact of this rule is expected to be
positive. U.S. consumers will benefit from a greater availability of
fruits and vegetables. U.S. importers will also benefit from a greater
availability of fruits and vegetables to import.
The alternative to this rule was to make no changes in the fruits
and vegetables regulations. After consideration, we rejected this
alternative since there was no pest risk reason to maintain the
prohibitions on the affected produce.
In the course of rulemaking, if we had come across evidence
indicating that importation of any of the concerned fruits or
vegetables would pose a significant risk of plant pest introduction, we
would have considered either developing alternative requirements
regarding that importation or continuing to prohibit the importation of
that fruit or vegetable. However, our initial pest risk assessments and
our review of public comments on the proposal indicated that
importation of any of the concerned fruits and vegetables would pose no
significant risk of plant pest introduction.
This rule contains no paperwork or recordkeeping requirements.
Executive Order 12778
This rule allows certain fruits and vegetables to be imported into
the United States from certain parts of the world. State and local laws
and regulations regarding fruits and vegetables imported under this
rule will be preempted while the fruits and vegetables are in foreign
commerce. Fresh fruits and vegetables are generally imported for
immediate distribution and sale to the consuming public, and will
remain in foreign commerce until sold to the ultimate consumer. The
question of when foreign commerce ceases in other cases must be
addressed on a case-by-case basis. No retroactive effect will be given
to this rule; and this rule will not require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.
National Environmental Policy Act
An environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact
have been prepared for this rule. The assessment provides a basis for
the conclusion that the importation of fruits and vegetables under the
conditions specified in this rule will not present a significant risk
of introducing or disseminating plant pests and 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) (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 (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) National Environmental
Policy Act Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
Copies of the environmental assessment and finding of no
significant impact are 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 [[Page 14208]] wishing to inspect copies are
requested to call ahead on (202) 690-2817 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
This rule contains no information collection or recordkeeping
requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 300
Incorporation by reference, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine.
7 CFR Part 319
Bees, Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Honey, Imports, Incorporation by
reference, Nursery stock, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rice, Vegetables.
Accordingly, 7 CFR parts 300 and 319 is amended as follows:
PART 300--INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150ee, 154, 161, 162, and 167; 7 CFR 2.17,
2.51, and 371.2(c).
2. In Sec. 300.1, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 300.1 Materials incorporated by reference.
(a) The Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual, which was
reprinted November 30, 1992 and includes all revisions through March
1995, has been approved for incorporation by reference in 7 CFR chapter
III by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
* * * * *
PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES
3. The authority citation for part 319 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150dd, 150ee, 150ff, 151-167, and 450; 21
U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and 371.2(c).
Sec. 319.56-2r [Amended]
4. In Sec. 319.56-2r, paragraph (a)(1) is amended by adding, in
alphabetical order, ``Spain,''.
5. In Sec. 319.56-2r, paragraph (g)(1) is amended by adding
``Spain,'' immediately before ``Sweden''.
6. In Sec. 319.56-2t, the table is amended by revising ``South
Korea'' to read ``Republic of Korea'' and by adding in alphabetical
order, the following:
Sec. 319.56-2t Administrative instructions: conditions governing the
entry of certain fruits and vegetables.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Country/locality Common name Botanical name Plant part(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Argentina
* * * *
* * *
Currant.......... Ribes spp....... Fruit.
* * * *
* * *
Gooseberry....... Ribes spp....... Fruit.
Australia........ Currant.......... Ribes spp....... Fruit.
Gooseberry....... Ribes spp....... Fruit.
Austria.......... Asparagus, white. Asparagus Shoot.\3\
officinalis.
* * * *
* * *
Belize
* * * *
* * *
Sage............. Salivia Leaf and stem.
officinalis.
* * * *
* * *
El Salvador...... Cilantro......... Coriandrum Above ground
sativum. parts.
Dill............. Anethum Above ground
graveolens. parts.
* * * *
* * *
Honduras
* * * *
* * *
Cilantro......... Coriandrum Above ground
sativum. parts.
* * * *
* * *
Indonesia
* * * *
* * *
Onion............ Allium cepa..... Bulb.
Shallot.......... Allium Bulb.
ascalonicum.
* * * *
* * *
Nicaragua........ Cilantro......... Coriandrum Above ground
sativum. parts.
* * * *
* * *
Peru
* * * *
* * *
Cornsalad........ Valerianella spp Whole plant.
* * * *
* * *
Lambsquarters.... Chenopodium Above ground
album. parts.
[[Page 14209]]
* * * *
* * *
Republic of Korea
* * * *
* * *
Eggplant......... Solanum Fruit.
melongena.
Kiwi............. Actinidia Fruit.
deliciosa.
Lettuce.......... Lactuca sativa.. Leaf.
* * * *
* * *
Tonga
* * * *
* * *
Jicama........... Pachyrhizus Root.
tuberosus.
* * * *
* * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\No green may be visible on the shoot.
7. In Sec. 319.56-2x, paragraph (a), the table is amended by
adding, in alphabetical order, the following:
Sec. 319.56-2x Administrative instructions: conditions governing the
entry of certain fruits and vegetables for which treatment is required.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Country/locality Common name Botanical name Plant part(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Argentina........ Blueberry........ Vaccinium spp... Fruit.
* * * *
* * *
El Salvador...... Garden bean...... Phaseolus Pod or shelled.
vulgaris.
* * * *
* * *
Israel
* * * *
* * *
Lettuce.......... Lactuca sativa.. Leaf.
* * * *
* * *
Taiwan........... Carambola........ Averrhoa Fruit.
carambola.
* * * *
* * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of March 1995.
Lonnie J. King,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 95-6370 Filed 3-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
