[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 101 (Thursday, May 25, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27665-27682]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12789]
========================================================================
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. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 27665]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Parts 300 and 319
[Docket No. 91-074-6]
RIN 0579-AA47
Importation of Logs, Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured Wood
Articles
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are establishing comprehensive regulations concerning
imported unmanufactured wood articles. The new regulations will affect
persons importing logs, lumber, bark chips, wood chips, certain wood
packing materials, and other unmanufactured wood articles. We are also
amending several existing regulations to remove provisions concerning
the importation of certain wood articles, and to state that such
articles will instead be covered under the new regulations. We are also
incorporating by reference Agriculture Handbook 188, the ``Dry Kiln
Operator's Manual,'' which contains treatments authorized by this final
rule. We are taking these actions because there is increased interest
in importing large volumes of unmanufactured wood articles into the
United States, and prohibitions and restrictions are necessary to
eliminate any significant plant pest risk associated with importing
these articles.
DATES: Final rule effective August 23, 1995. The Director of the Office
of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 on August 23, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard L. Orr, Senior
Entomologist, APHIS, Policy and Program Development, Planning and Risk
Analysis Systems, 4700 River Road Unit 117, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238,
301-734-8939.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is
establishing comprehensive regulations to eliminate any significant
plant pest risks presented by the importation 1 of logs, lumber,
and other unmanufactured wood articles.
\1\ Throughout this document, the words ``import'' and
``importation'' are used to mean moving or bringing articles into
the territorial limits of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A changing national and world economy has recently increased the
incentives to import wood that may present a significant increase in
the risk of plant pest introduction into the United States. An example
of this change is the interest of sawmills and other wood processors in
utilizing foreign sources of wood to offset expected harvest reductions
in the United States, or to provide raw materials for their facilities
at prices competitive with or better than domestic prices.
Trees produced in many foreign locations are attacked by a wide
variety of exotic plant pests and pathogens that do not occur in this
country. Logs and other unmanufactured wood articles imported into the
United States could pose a significant hazard of introducing plant
pests and pathogens detrimental to agriculture and to natural,
cultivated, and urban forest resources. Plant pests and pathogens
introduced into the United States in the past, such as the gypsy moth
and the agents of Dutch elm disease and chestnut blight, have caused
billions of dollars of damage to United States forest and plant
resources.
Until recently, the quantity and variety of unmanufactured wood
imported were very limited, and there was little need to develop
regulations specifically to address such imports. With few exceptions
(see the discussion below of interim regulations allowing importation
of certain logs from Chile and New Zealand), APHIS has been dealing
with such imports only by detaining shipments at ports of first arrival
for inspection, and ordering further action if warranted pursuant to
the Federal Plant Pest Act and regulations issued under that Act (7 CFR
part 330). In addition, APHIS has prohibited the entry into the United
States of logs from the former Soviet Far East and Siberia because a
detailed plant pest risk assessment found that dangerous plant pests
could occur in such logs and may be introduced with them.
However, when large volumes of wood imports are involved,
inspection at the port of first arrival without other conditions
relating to the wood imports is not practical or adequate for
preventing the introduction of plant pests associated with imported
wood. Interest in importing logs and other unmanufactured wood articles
from various countries is increasing rapidly toward a point where
inspection and control activities solely at the port of first arrival
will not be feasible. There is currently an intense commercial interest
in developing a long-term industry in the Pacific Northwest for
importing and processing logs from foreign countries. There is also
potential for increased log and other unmanufactured wood article
imports into other areas of the United States.
Interim Rules Affecting Certain Logs From Chile and New Zealand
An interim rule published in the Federal Register on February 16,
1993, and effective January 19, 1993 (58 FR 8524-8533, Docket No. 91-
074-4), established importation requirements for Monterey pine and
Douglas-fir logs from New Zealand. Plant pest risks associated with
importing these articles, and import requirements that would reduce
these risks to insignificant levels, were identified early in the
course of developing comprehensive wood import regulations. Therefore,
to reduce these plant pest risks as soon as possible, we established
regulatory requirements in 7 CFR 319.40-1 through 319.40-8 for certain
logs from New Zealand.
A second interim rule published in the Federal Register on November
9, 1993 (58 FR 59348-59353, Docket No. 91-074-5), and effective
November 2, 1993, established importation requirements for Monterey
pine logs from Chile. This interim rule applied the same requirements
to Monterey pine logs from Chile that the first interim rule applied to
Monterey pine and Douglas-fir logs from New Zealand. [[Page 27666]]
This final rule replaces the regulations established by the interim
rules with comprehensive regulations affecting importation of
unmanufactured wood articles from all places, including Chile and New
Zealand. The provisions contained in this rule for Monterey pine logs
from Chile, and for Monterey pine and Douglas-fir logs from New Zealand
are essentially the same as the requirements imposed by the interim
rule, except that the interim rule used slightly different definitions
due to its limited scope.
Proposed Rule
On January 20, 1994, we published a document in the Federal
Register (59 FR 3002-3029, Docket No. 91-074-3) proposing to replace
the interim regulations, ``Subpart--Logs from Chile and New Zealand,''
with a new ``Subpart--Logs, Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured Wood
Articles'' containing prohibitions and restrictions concerning imported
unmanufactured wood articles.
The proposed rule, and this final rule, are based on an approach
that gives importers three complementary options for importing
regulated articles. These are:
(1) If the regulations contain specific requirements for importing
a specific article from a specific country or area, you may import the
article by complying with those requirements. Examples of this option
include the importation of Monterey pine logs and raw lumber from Chile
and New Zealand in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 319.40-5,
``Importation and entry requirements for specified articles.'' We
intend to add more articles, countries or areas from which articles may
be imported, and importation requirements to this section as new
requests to import various articles are evaluated and approved.
(2) If the regulations do not contain specific requirements for
importing the article you wish to import, or if you believe the article
may be safely imported under less stringent conditions than the
regulations require, you may submit an application for a permit to
import the article, and describe in the application information about
the article's origin, processing, treatment, and handling. We will
evaluate the permit request, conducting plant pest risk assessments as
necessary, and if we determine that the article may be safely imported
under conditions not already in the regulations, we will institute
rulemaking to add the appropriate articles and conditions to
Sec. 319.40-5, ``Importation and entry requirements for specified
articles.''
(3) If the regulations do not contain specific requirements for
importing the article you wish to import, you may wish to import the
article before there is time to complete plant pest risk assessments
and add the article and the necessary specific importation requirements
to the regulations. In this case, you may import the article by
complying with one of the universal importation options in Sec. 319.40-
6. These universal options employ heat treatment and other conditions
for importing logs and lumber not otherwise enterable. These universal
options are relatively stringent, because they must eliminate the
spectrum of potential plant pests and address risks that have not been
characterized. The universal options are designed to give importers a
way to import articles that would otherwise be prohibited until
detailed plant pest risk assessments are completed. Whenever feasible,
importers may choose to employ universal options while plant pest risk
assessments and rulemaking are underway to establish less stringent
requirements for the articles they wish to import. Importers of some
articles may find that complying with a universal option is the most
feasible and cost-effective way to import their articles.
Comments on the Proposed Rule
We solicited comments concerning our proposal for a 90-day comment
period ending April 20, 1994. We received 56 comments by that date.
Eleven were from companies and industrial associations involved in the
harvesting and importation of logs and other wood products, or the
manufacturing of wood products that could be derived from such imports,
or the sale of products or processes used in such manufacturing. Eleven
comments were from environmental organizations. Six comments were from
universities. Four comments were from State agencies involved in
forestry or agriculture. Four comments were from agencies of the
Canadian government, and one from the Delegation of the Commission of
the European Communities. National associations representing Federal
and State employees involved in forestry, American growers of nursery
stock, and interested members of the public also submitted comments.
We carefully evaluated these comments. While most supported
implementing regulations addressing the importation of wood, many
raised questions about how to do so in an optimally effective manner.
These comments are discussed below in detail.
In response to the comments, APHIS is making eight changes to the
proposed requirements. These changes are:
1. Change the standard for heat treatment and heat treatment with
moisture reduction from 56 deg.C for 30 minutes to 71.1 deg.C for 75
minutes. This change is in response to several commenters who
recommended that APHIS use 71.1 deg.C for 75 minutes as reported in
the Forest Service's Scientific Panel Review of January 10, 1992--
Proposed Test Shipment Protocol for Importing Siberian Larch Logs. Upon
reviewing this research and our data from the proposal supporting a
lesser temperature-time combination, we believe we were in error in
believing that the proposed heat treatment would effectively eliminate
all plant pests of concern. Specifically, a heat treatment of 56 deg.C
for 30 minutes could allow various harmful fungi to survive. Research
reports show that various fungi in wood can survive 1 to several hours
of heat treatment at temperatures ranging from 56 deg.C to 70 deg.C,
but are destroyed by a treatment of 71.1 deg.C for 75 minutes. The
heat treatment required by the regulations must be able to effectively
destroy all potentially dangerous fungi. Therefore, we are changing the
requirements for heat treatment and heat treatment with moisture
reduction in Sec. 319.40-7 (c) and (d) to specify 71.1 deg.C for 75
minutes. We will allow heat treatment at lower temperatures only in
specific kiln drying processes where the fungicidal action of the heat
is extended over a long period of time and is complemented by moisture
reduction (see below).
2. Allow kiln drying conducted in accordance with acceptable
industry practices to qualify as heat treatment with moisture
reduction, in lieu of a specific temperature-time combination. As
proposed, heat treatment with moisture reduction had to raise the
temperature at the center of the treated article to 56 deg.C for 30
minutes. If we changed this provision consistent with the above change
in the temperature and time of heat treatments (i.e., 71.1 deg.C for
75 minutes), then most articles kiln dried according to industry
practices would not qualify as heat treated with moisture reduction,
even though they meet the dryness standard of the regulations (a
moisture content of 20 percent or less, as specified in Sec. 319.40-
7(d)).
In fact, research shows that while some fungi survive temperatures
between 56 deg.C and 70 deg.C for relatively short periods, all
harmful fungi are destroyed by kiln drying that is conducted according
to standard [[Page 27667]] industry practice, which often dries wood at
lower temperatures over a period of 1 to many days, reducing the
moisture content eventually to 20 percent or less.
In summary, heat treatment with moisture reduction is an effective
treatment if it is employed in either of two ways. It may reduce the
moisture content of the article quickly, by employing a temperature of
71.1 deg.C for 75 minutes or more; or, it may reduce the moisture
content more slowly by employing standard industrial dry kiln practices
using a lower temperature.
Several commenters suggested that to allow industry to use commonly
employed kiln drying techniques to the extent they are effective, we
should modify the requirement for heat treatment with moisture
reduction. They cited a publication of the Forest Service which the
wood industry relies on to specify acceptable kiln drying practices.
This publication is the Dry Kiln Operator's Manual, Agriculture
Handbook 188.
We agree with these comments, and are changing the requirement for
heat treatment with moisture reduction in Sec. 319.40-7(d) to provide
that heat treatment with moisture reduction may employ:
1. Kiln drying conducted in accordance with the schedules
prescribed for the regulated article in the Dry Kiln Operator's Manual,
Agriculture Handbook 188, which is incorporated by reference at
Sec. 300.1 of this chapter; or,
2. Dry heat, exposure to microwave energy, or any other method that
raises the temperature of the center of each treated regulated article
to at least 71.1 deg.C, maintains the regulated articles at that
center temperature for at least 75 minutes, and reduces the moisture
content of the regulated article to 20 percent or less as measured by
an electrical conductivity meter.
We are also incorporating by reference, in 7 CFR 300.1, the Dry
Kiln Operator's Manual.
3. Allow noncontainerized wood chips to be imported under certain
conditions. Many industry commenters cited a substantial economic
burden if they had to import wood chips only in sealed containers,
rather than on deck or in open containers. Several suggested allowing
some wood chips to be imported on barges or other vessels, covered by
tarpaulins, if the wood chips come from a relatively low-risk source
(live healthy trees from a managed tropical plantation) and are alone
on a vessel (no other regulated articles) that is moved directly to the
United States.
We agree with this suggestion. Wood chips derived from live healthy
trees from a managed tropical plantation are not likely to present
plant pest risks that would not be controlled by the limits imposed by
the regulations on the use of the chips. This is because there are few
forest pests present in tropical climates that can survive winters in
temperate climates. The few tropical plant pests that can survive
temperate winters would likely be excluded from managed tropical
plantations by the plant pest control practices employed at such
plantations. If such chips are imported alone on a vessel and covered
by a tarpaulin, there is little risk that the chips will be infested
during transit by plant pests from higher-risk wood products. On the
other hand, wood chips from unmanaged trees and trees in temperate
areas are more likely to present serious plant pest risks. These chips
should be subject to the full restrictions proposed for wood chips in
the proposed rule, i.e., they should be imported in sealed containers,
and subject to fumigation or heat treatment, to prevent the
introduction of plant pests they may harbor.
Therefore, we are changing Sec. 319.40-6(c)(2), the universal
importation requirement for wood chips and bark chips, by adding the
following sentence: ``If the wood chips or bark chips are derived from
live, healthy, plantation-grown trees in tropical areas, they may be
shipped on deck if no other regulated articles are present on the
vessel, and the wood chips or bark chips are completely covered by a
tarpaulin during the entire journey directly to the United States.''
4. Allow pallets to be imported in accordance with the requirements
for solid wood packing materials, even if the pallets are imported as
cargo. Several commenters noted that pallets should be allowed to be
imported as cargo under no greater restrictions than if they are
imported in actual use as packing. They pointed out that in normal
shipping practice, large amounts of pallets are used to ship articles
to a port, and then may be shipped as cargo from ports with a pallet
surplus to ports with a pallet shortage. Commenters felt that pallets
that have been in use, and have met the regulatory requirements for
importation in use, do not present significant risks and should not
have to meet additional requirements if they are subsequently moved as
cargo.
We agree. We are changing Sec. 319.40-3(b) to allow pallets that
are imported as cargo to be imported under the same requirements that
apply to pallets that are in use as packing materials at the time of
importation. Briefly, these requirements are that if the pallets are
free from bark and are used for articles that are not regulated
articles, they must be accompanied by an importer document stating that
they are totally free from bark, and apparently free from live plant
pests. If the pallets are free from bark and are used for regulated
articles, they must be accompanied by an importer document stating that
they are totally free from bark, apparently free from live plant pests,
and have been heat treated, fumigated, or treated with preservatives in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7, or meet all the importation and entry
conditions required for the regulated article the solid wood packing
material is used to move. If the pallets are not free from bark, they
must be accompanied by an importer document stating that the pallets
have been heat treated, fumigated, or treated with preservatives in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7. In all cases, the pallets are also
subject to the inspection and other port of arrival requirements of
Sec. 319.40-9.
5. Exclude European Russia from the group of Asian countries to
which more severe prohibitions and restrictions apply. Several
commenters noted that the apparent intent to exclude European Russia
from these more severe requirements was not carried out by the precise
language, allowing many importations to occur from all places ``except
countries in Asia that are wholly or in part east of 60 deg. East
Longitude and north of the Tropic of Cancer.'' Russia does extend east
of 60 deg. East Longitude. It was not our intent to include European
Russia in this area, as can be seen from the context of the language in
the preamble of the proposed rule. Therefore, we are changing this
geographic description each time it appears to read ``except places in
Asia that are east of 60 deg. East Longitude and north of the Tropic of
Cancer.''
6. Continue to allow the ongoing importation of railroad ties from
countries outside Asia, for subsequent pressure treatment and use in
the United States, which APHIS has allowed to occur for some time.
Commenters noted that these articles are normally treated within 30
days, and have been considered low risk. We agree that the regulations
should continue to allow the importation of these railroad ties. We are
adding the following new paragraph (f) to Sec. 319.40-5, the section
concerning importation requirements for specified articles: ``Cross-
ties (railroad ties) from all countries except places in Asia that are
east of 60 deg. East Longitude and north of the Tropic of Cancer may be
imported if completely [[Page 27668]] free of bark and accompanied by
an importer document stating that the cross-ties will be pressure
treated within 30 days following the date of importation.''
7. Amend the definition of ``Log'' so that it includes cants sawn
from logs. One commenter pointed out that by his reading of the
regulations, it seemed likely that cants (partly trimmed logs) were
subject to the same requirements as logs, but the regulations did not
make this point absolutely clear. We did in fact intend that the
regulations treat logs and cants the same. To make this clear, we are
revising the proposed definition of ``Log,'' which read ``The bole of a
tree; trimmed timber that has not been further sawn,'' to read ``The
bole of a tree; trimmed timber that has not been sawn further than to
form cants.''
8. Amend the requirements for completing an application for an
import permit to require that the applicant specify not only any
chemical treatments that will be employed prior to or after
importation, but also the dosage of the chemicals that is employed. One
commenter pointed out that the permit application procedure in proposed
Sec. 319.40-4(a) required the applicant to provide, among other
information, the names of any chemicals employed in treatments prior to
or after importation (proposed Sec. 319.40-4(a) (4) and (5)). He
suggested that the application should also include the dosage used for
such treatments, so that APHIS and the public can judge whether the
treatments are effectively applied. We agree, and are adding a
requirement for dosage information to the affected sections.
With the exception of the changes just discussed, and minor
editorial changes, we are adopting the provisions of the proposed rule
as a final rule. Additional comments are discussed below.
Goals and Mission of APHIS as They Relate to the Proposed Rule
Comment: APHIS should not consider the needs of international trade
but should focus exclusively on pest exclusion as worded in the Federal
Plant Pest Act of 1957.
Response: It is important to recognize that APHIS has a number of
responsibilities and legal mandates beyond the Federal Plant Pest Act.
These include international trade agreements such as the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the North American Free Trade
Agreement, statutes such as the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the
Paperwork Reduction Act, Executive Orders, and additional legal and
policy guides. One of APHIS's basic responsibilities is plant pest
exclusion, but this has to be conducted in balance with other national
needs and goals.
The majority of comments which specifically addressed the issue of
balancing the needs of international commerce with prevention of pest
introduction clearly favored such a balancing. However, some commenters
believed that APHIS should reduce or terminate raw wood exports, so
that wood could be used to meet domestic needs, removing the need for
the importation of raw wood. APHIS does not have statutory authority to
stop or reduce the export of raw logs by U.S. private land owners and
companies so that the wood can be used for domestic needs.
Opposition to the Importation of Unmanufactured Wood
Comment: APHIS should restrict imports to manufactured and/or
finished wood products only.
Response: APHIS believes that this approach is too extreme. With
proper mitigation and monitoring, the importation of some raw wood
material from certain locations presents an insignificant plant pest
risk.
Limitations of the Pest Risk Assessment Process
Comment: Some comments were directed toward the risk assessment
process. A few were concerned that the process did not fully address
the unknowns, did not address enough pests, or did not incorporate the
full scope of experts needed.
Response: The risk assessments conducted by the Forest Service were
the most resource extensive risk assessments ever utilized by APHIS to
determine the plant pest risk associated with an imported commodity.
Great care was taken to choose which assessments needed to be completed
before the rule was written. The first assessment focused on raw timber
from Siberia, which was identified as extremely high risk. From this
assessment, some universal requirements for the rule were derived. Two
additional risk assessments were conducted on those timber commodities
which were identified as lower risk (specific species of plantation
grown trees from New Zealand and Chile). The specific requirements for
these commodities were developed from these assessments.
APHIS recognizes both the need for future assessments and the need
to improve the risk assessment process. The risk assessment process
used for the various assessments was derived from the National Research
Council's section on ecological risk assessment as published in its
1993 ``Issues in Risk Assessment'' and represents the state of the art
as it now stands for conducting ecological risk assessments.
APHIS recognizes that the process is not perfect and that evolution
will continue to be necessary. The risk assessment process is being,
and will continue to be, modified and improved to make sure that it is
the best that the science of ecological risk assessment can provide.
One of the most difficult issues is how to assess the risk
associated with unknown organisms, or with known organisms that do not
have well-described characteristics or survival and spread
capabilities. The regulations are designed to ensure that there is an
insignificant risk that importing regulated articles will result in the
entry and establishment of either known or unknown dangerous plant
pests.
Need for More Assessments of Additional Log Species
Comment: APHIS needs to complete additional assessments for various
timber products considered for importation.
Response: APHIS agrees, and with the cooperation of the Forest
Service, will continue to conduct risk assessments and amend
regulations based on them, as appropriate.
Packing Material
Comment: The regulations proposed for solid wood packing materials
are too restrictive.
Response: We also received comments stating that the regulations
proposed for solid wood packing materials are necessary and
appropriate. We believe that the requirements in this final rulemaking
document for the importation of solid wood packing materials are
necessary to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United
States.
Temperate Hardwoods, Tropical Hardwoods, and Chips
Comment: Temperate and tropical hardwoods should be subject to
entry requirements that are as strict as those for temperate softwoods.
Response: The volume of imported temperate and tropical hardwoods
has remained at a low sustained level. These small shipments of high
priced logs and lumber can be monitored and controlled much more easily
than the proposed large shipments of softwood logs.
Comment: The proposed regulations for wood chip importations are
too restrictive and it would not be feasible for importers to meet the
requirements. The 30-day time limit for processing [[Page 27669]] wood
chips after importation is too short, and the proposed requirement for
containerized transportation of wood chips is unnecessary and costly.
Response: APHIS believes that the 30-day limit for processing the
chips is reasonable. The extension to 60 days requested by several
commenters would present additional concerns with monitoring and
increased plant pest risk. One commenter was under the incorrect
assumption that the chips still had to be processed within the 30-day
period if they had been subjected to an approved fumigation. This is
not the case. The 30-day limitation is directed toward raw, untreated
chips.
The changes we are making to the proposed requirement for
containerized transportation of wood chips are discussed above.
Methyl Bromide
Comment: In view of the negative effects of methyl bromide (MB) on
the ozone layer, APHIS should not rely upon use of MB. Also, the
regulations do not include plans for how APHIS will deal with articles
requiring MB fumigation after MB is removed from regulatory use around
the year 2001.
Response: APHIS is concerned about the effects of MB on the ozone
layer and will abide by the Environmental Protection Agency's phase-out
schedule. However, present reliance by commerce on MB is such that
immediately terminating all regulatory use of MB is not realistic.
The regulations were written with the phase out of MB in mind. All
MB requirements presented in the regulations have alternative
treatments. It is APHIS's hope that industry will develop and implement
alternative mitigation schedules (e.g. irradiation, heat, borate, etc.)
to replace its reliance on methyl bromide for the importation of
regulated articles.
Bark Removal on Temperate Softwood Logs
Comment: Temperate softwood logs should be required to have 100
percent of the bark removed before importation, since even small
patches of bark can harbor insect pests.
Response: APHIS recognizes that 100 percent debarking of logs is
not realistic. It is important to remember that APHIS requires either a
heat treatment or fumigation to complement the debarking of temperate
softwood logs. This combination of debarking with other mitigation
requirements is sufficient to destroy plant pests of concern in the
bark or directly under the bark.
Other Comments and Responses
Comment: APHIS should add other treatments, such as irradiation and
borates, to the universal importation requirements.
Response: APHIS recognizes the potential value of irradiation,
borates, and other treatments for use as universal or specific
treatments. Ongoing research into the use of irradiation and borates on
timber products looks promising. However, the data is not yet complete
to the extent necessary for APHIS to propose specific treatments.
Irradiation treatments as well as other alternatives will be added to
the regulations as they are developed and proven both effective and
operationally feasible.
Comment: For logs imported from Chile and New Zealand, APHIS should
change the regulations to facilitate on-deck fumigation and transport
of logs, and extend the time period for processing such imported logs
after they are imported (currently 60 days).
Response: The restrictions associated with the movement of logs
from Chile and New Zealand prompted a number of responses from
industry. Extending the time allowed to process the logs once they
enter the United States and allowing the fumigation and movement of
logs on the deck of ships were the two most stated requests.
APHIS believes that allowing additional time beyond 60 days for
processing the logs would make monitoring difficult and increase the
plant pest risk. Therefore, APHIS will maintain the 60-day requirement.
APHIS has prohibited the movement of logs on the open deck of ships
because of the possibility of infestation of the logs while at the port
of origin and/or other foreign ports visited while the ship is in
transit. APHIS believes that until the issue of infestation during
shipment to the United States is satisfactorily answered, the movement
of logs on the open deck of ships must continue to be prohibited.
Comment: The regulations should specify strong penalties that will
be imposed on persons who do not comply with the regulations. The
regulations should also make importers financially responsible for
damages and control costs resulting from pests introduced through their
shipments.
Response: For an importer, the primary practical consequence for
non-compliance is future ineligibility to import additional shipments.
USDA has no authority to require importers to post bonds or
otherwise stipulate their financial responsibility for costs that may
result from introduced plant pests. However, individual shipments will
be refused entry unless the shipments comply with regulatory
requirements.
APHIS can also respond to violations by canceling compliance
agreements. Because domestic processing facilities must hold a current
compliance agreement to import and process many types of regulated
articles in the regulations, APHIS can stop violators from importing
articles by canceling or refusing to sign a compliance agreement.
In addition, statutory authority allows us to impose civil and
criminal penalties on violators. Individuals also have recourse through
the courts; persons who believe they suffered harm due to an importer
who did not comply with regulatory requirements may file a civil suit
against that importer.
Comment: APHIS must allocate additional resources and personnel,
especially inspectors at ports and sawmills processing imported wood,
if the regulations are to be successfully enforced and monitored.
Response: We agree that adequate resources and personnel,
especially inspectors, must be devoted to prevent the introduction of
plant pests into the United States. Adjustments in the level of
personnel and resources devoted to APHIS programs are a normal part of
management in the agency. Duties and staffing levels will be adjusted,
at ports and elsewhere, to take the needs of the new wood import
program into account.
While APHIS will assign some personnel to major ports to work
specifically with wood imports, and will assign some personnel to work
specifically with monitoring compliance both overseas and in domestic
processing facilities, we believe much of the resources needed for this
program are already in place, in the form of existing APHIS port
personnel and cooperating personnel from State plant protection
agencies.
Funding levels and agency personnel may vary from year to year.
Import authorizations will not be provided if the level of resources
decreases below the level needed to ensure that all imported regulated
articles are subject to the level of inspection and monitoring
necessary to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United
States.
Regarding APHIS resources needed to ensure compliance with the
regulations, commenters should be aware that user fees we collect for
some program operations will help to ensure that the needed resources
are available.
Comment: The regulations would allow importers to self-certify, in
the ``importer document,'' information [[Page 27670]] about the type,
quantity, and origin of imported articles and any treatments that have
been applied to them. This self-certification is not an adequate
substitute for a certificate issued by a plant protection organization
recording the required information. You cannot rely on importers to
honestly and completely record the necessary information in an informal
importer document. In particular, exports from the former Soviet Union
are subject to rampant corruption, forgery of documents, and smuggling.
Response: Questions about enforcement of regulations and how to
deter violators who may present inaccurate information and documents
opens up a complex nest of issues much larger than any single
regulation. The general position of APHIS on these issues is as
follows:
1. Violations are most likely when the profit for the violator is
high and the risk is low. APHIS plans its enforcement activities
accordingly. We tend to scrutinize carefully large shipments of
regulated articles, especially those of particularly valuable species.
We employ various means to independently verify the accuracy of
documents associated with these shipments--whether the documents are
issued by an importer or by a government agency. We keep importers
aware of the risks they face if they file inaccurate documents or fail
to meet regulatory requirements. These risks include civil penalties,
criminal fines and jail sentences, and loss of business due to APHIS
rejection of permit applications and compliance agreement applications.
Generally, wood commodities are not so lucrative that an importer would
risk these penalties, especially long-term loss of business, for the
sake of fraudulently importing any one shipment. We intend to
vigorously publicize our enforcement activities related to this final
rule during the initial implementation period, to make potential
violators aware of the risks they face.
2. Self-certification has worked in other programs. Many APHIS and
other Federal agencies have programs that rely in part on regulated
individuals providing accurate certifications to the agency. Experience
has shown that these programs can work when the interests of both the
regulated party and the agency are served by accurate self-
certification. Examples of APHIS programs that have successfully
employed self-certification include the domestic Gypsy Moth quarantine
under 7 CFR 301.45 through 301.45-12 (in which businesses operating
under compliance agreements may issue certificates), and the
importation program for greenhouse-grown potted plants from Canada
under 7 CFR 319.37-4(c) (in which greenhouse growers apply labels which
certify that their plants meet certain growing requirements). Such
programs work, in part, because our inspectors learn to evaluate the
accuracy of self-certifications through visual examination of the
materials and through independent sources of information. The programs
also work because they are generally employed where the regulated
parties have a financial reason to desire a continuing relationship of
trust with the regulating agency, so they can continue to do business.
This is the case with importer documents employed in this final rule.
3. The accuracy of self-certifications is often empirically tested
at the port of first arrival. Much of the information in importer
documents can be independently checked, sometimes by direct inspection
and testing. Inspectors can discover a great deal about the accuracy of
documents concerning a shipment by looking for plant pests and evidence
of treatments in the articles. Moisture content can be directly
measured at ports to determine whether kiln drying has occurred.
Fraudulent importer documents will often conflict with waybills, valid
importer documents from earlier shipments, and other records. We intend
to use all of these opportunities to enhance enforcement and create a
culture in which importers see that issuing inaccurate documents is not
worth the risk.
4. Individual ``high-crime'' areas of international trade must be
addressed in a larger forum than just the wood regulations. We agree
that doing business in the former Soviet Union presents severe problems
for honest businesspersons and the customs services of many countries.
There is widespread smuggling, forgery of documents, and coercion of
officials related to exports from this area. While we are not aware of
significant criminal activities affecting unmanufactured wood exports
from the former Soviet Union, this may be because such exports to the
United States have not been allowed to occur in significant quantities
until now.
For these reasons, we will take particular care in enforcing
regulatory requirements with regard to the importation of regulated
articles from the former Soviet Union. As discussed above, there are
numerous methods available to APHIS to confirm that the importation of
regulated articles meets the regulatory requirements. We intend to
employ them vigorously.
There is an ongoing, international effort to reduce the level of
smuggling, fraud, and other criminal activity associated with exports
from the former Soviet Union. The State Department and the Federal
Bureau of Investigation are working with their counterparts in other
countries and in the former Soviet republics to try to stabilize the
situation, and APHIS will monitor the results of these efforts to
determine what level of enforcement activity needs to be directed
toward shipments of regulated articles from the former Soviet Union.
Comment: The regulations should minimize the costs associated with
importing wood by imposing requirements that are both effective in pest
control and cost efficient. To keep costs under control, the
regulations should not include additional controls beyond those needed
to control pest risk.
Response: We agree, and believe we have designed the regulations to
effectively exclude plant pests at minimal cost. Wherever we had two or
more alternative, equally effective control methods, we wrote the
regulations to allow importers to choose whichever method was less
costly and disruptive to commerce in their particular cases. Whenever
control methods with significant costs were necessary, such as heat
treatment, we avoided using detailed ``design standards'' that can add
to costs by requiring treatment facilities to be built and operated in
particular ways. Instead, we have employed ``performance standards''
that allow maximum freedom for innovation and cost savings to regulated
parties.
Comment: In developing the proposed rule, APHIS failed to
adequately communicate with the affected parties and the public. Only
10 representatives of environmental public interest organizations were
on the distribution list for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
materials associated with the rule, and Indian Tribes with extensive
forest holdings were not contacted.
Response: We disagree. APHIS had numerous contacts with potentially
affected groups prior to rulemaking. We actively sought information
from academic, environmental, and industry organizations and encouraged
them to involve their constituents in contributing to APHIS development
of a proposed rule. We sent representatives to forestry conferences to
explain APHIS perspectives early in the process. We developed a mailing
list of persons and organizations interested in potential rulemaking
for wood imports, which grew to over 500 members by the time
[[Page 27671]] the proposal was drafted. Persons on this list were
informed of each significant step that preceded the proposal, for
example, public meetings, plant pest risk analyses, and interim APHIS
requirements at ports. We published an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking prior to the proposed rule. We also established an
electronic bulletin board, accessible by direct dial and through the
Internet, to distribute copies of the proposed rule and associated
documents and to accept public comments on the proposal. These
activities resulted in far greater early public involvement than is
usual for a Federal informal rulemaking proceeding.
Also, publication of the proposed rule in the Federal Register
meets the minimum procedural standard for adequate public notice. We
believe our outreach activities far exceeded this minimum standard.
Certainly, any individual or group that was interested in the wood
imports issue and was involved with the media and forums where wood and
forestry issues are normally discussed had ample notice of, and
opportunity to participate in, APHIS decisionmaking prior to the
issuance of the proposed rule.
Comment: To ensure consistent nationwide requirements for importing
wood, and to facilitate interstate and international commerce, the
APHIS regulations should preempt all State and local requirements for
wood imports. Officials in various States appear to have very different
understandings of what authority they have over imports and how they
are to interact with APHIS personnel.
Response: Executive Order 12612, ``Federalism,'' instructs Federal
agencies not to take actions that exceed the powers enumerated for the
Federal government in the Constitution, and not to unnecessarily
preempt State law or preclude States from developing policies and
taking actions at their discretion. We do not believe the proposed
changes to the regulations raise Federalism implications in terms of
the Executive Order. The regulations address how a Federal agency will
conduct operations of a Federal program, and do not preclude States
from developing policies or exercising their authority to involve their
employees in any plant protection programs developed by a State. States
are free to pass laws or implement regulations for State plant
protection programs. However, State programs may not add requirements
for importing regulated articles that are inconsistent or in conflict
with the requirements established by the Federal regulations. States
may not cite their participation in the enforcement of the Federal
regulations as the basis for also enforcing additional requirements
that are not contained in the Federal regulations.
In the ``Executive Order 12778'' section of the proposed rule, we
stated ``If this proposed rule is adopted: (1) All State and local laws
and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule will be preempted
* * *.'' We believe State and local laws and regulations would be
inconsistent with our rule if they prohibit imports allowed by our
regulations, or if they impose conditions on importation that are in
addition to the conditions set forth in this final rule. States may
impose requirements in accordance with State law that are not
inconsistent with our regulations.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
We are issuing this final rule in conformance with Executive Order
12866. This rule has been determined to be significant and has been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866.
We have prepared an economic analysis concerning this final rule.
This analysis indicates that this rule will not have significant annual
effects on the economy. Copies of the economic analysis may be obtained
by sending a written request to APHIS, Policy and Program Development,
Regulatory Analysis and Development, 4700 River Road Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Copies of the economic analysis are also
available for 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 the analysis are requested to call ahead on (202) 690-2817 to
facilitate entry at the reading room.
The United States has become the world's leading importer of
unmanufactured wood. In 1990, the United States imported the equivalent
of 34.4 million cubic meters (CBM) of logs, lumber, and other
unmanufactured wood valued at about $5.1 billion. Total imports nearly
tripled between 1950 and 1990, with most of this increase occurring
after 1970. Historically, Canada has supplied the United States with
virtually all of its unmanufactured wood imports.
Domestic production of logs, lumber, and other unmanufactured wood
has increased steadily since 1950. In roundwood equivalents, production
in 1990 was 1.6 times greater than in 1950. Most timber production
occurs in southern and western States. In 1990, Oregon and Washington
accounted for about 16 percent of the total U.S. tree harvest.
Domestic logging companies are facing increasing challenges from
conservation groups. Conservationists are opposed to many tree
harvesting practices, especially clear cutting. In addition, concern
over habitats for wildlife has raised questions about replacement of
old growth/diversified forests with monoculture. Conservation issues
are likely to limit future tree harvests in several northwestern
States.
Nationally, commercial forest lands are projected to decrease by
about 4 percent over the next 50 years. Production is likely to decline
in the Pacific Northwest and increase in the South and Rocky Mountain
States.\2\ A slightly limited domestic harvest combined with higher
consumer demand would likely result in an increased demand for imported
wood and wood products. Alternative supplies of logs and other wood
products have been located in the former Soviet Union, New Zealand,
Chile, Brazil, and other countries. Wood imports from alternative
sources have the potential to introduce and disseminate exotic plant
pests and diseases throughout the United States.
\2\ Over the next 50 years, new technologies may allow wood
products companies to remove larger amounts of wood products from
each tree.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule regulates the importation of logs and other
unmanufactured wood products from all areas. There are exemptions from
some requirements for imports from Canada and Mexican border states
because most insects and other wood pests in these areas are also
indigenous to the United States, or will become so through natural
migration. Therefore, wood imports from Canada and Mexican border
states do not pose a significant risk of exotic plant pest
introduction.
The regulations will reduce to an insignificant level the risk of
entry and dissemination of plant pests associated with unmanufactured
wood imports. Some regulated wood products are prohibited importation
based on plant pest risk assessments that reveal more than an
insignificant risk of the introduction of plant pests. Unrestricted
trade in unmanufactured wood would likely result in losses to domestic
agriculture from plant pest damage. Without governmental regulation,
private entities might engage in trading activities that would result
in the introduction of plant pests into the United States.
[[Page 27672]]
The following items are subject to the regulations: logs; wood
chips; lumber; whole trees; portions of trees not consisting solely of
leaves, flowers, fruits, buds, or seeds; bark; cork; laths; hog fuel;
sawdust; painted raw wood products; excelsior; wood mulch; wood
shavings; pickets; stakes; shingles; solid wood packing materials;
humus; compost; and litter. Manufactured wood products are not
regulated by the rule. The regulations require that certain specified
imported unmanufactured wood products be treated prior to arrival in
the United States.
In 1990 the United States imported about 255,800 CBM of
unmanufactured wood that would require treatment under the final
regulations. These unmanufactured wood imports accounted for less than
one percent of total 1990 domestic supplies. Imported shipments of kiln
dried lumber are not required to be treated.
About 4.1 million newly manufactured units of wood dunnage were
imported as cargo from regulated areas in 1990. Dunnage imported as
cargo can be manufactured from rough untreated lumber that has not been
stripped of all tree bark.\3\ Imports comprised about 27 percent of the
newly manufactured dunnage products available in the United States
during 1990.
\3\ For the purpose of this economic analysis, dunnage imported
as cargo includes dunnage produced for first time use, and does not
include dunnage manufactured from used or scrap lumber.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imports of regulated articles that will now require treatment
totaled about $27.4 million in 1990. Total domestic supplies of these
articles exceeded $80 billion during the same year. Therefore, the
value of imports that will require treatment under the final
regulations represented less than one percent of total domestic
supplies in 1990.
Our economic analysis estimates that this action would increase
economic welfare for domestic producers of logs, lumber, and other
regulated wood products by about $35.2 million. However, U.S. consumers
of these products will incur a welfare loss of about $171.9 million.
About 98.8 percent of total estimated losses are attributable to
treatment costs for dunnage (including scrap lumber) used to pack
various commodities that are imported into the United States. APHIS
anticipates that this loss will be mitigated as shipping companies
switch to bark free dunnage materials to avoid Q-40 related treatment
costs. Shippers will take precautions to ensure that dunnage is bark
free before commodities are loaded at the foreign port of origin. The
Agency maintains that bark free dunnage material is readily available
throughout the world and can be substituted at little or no cost.
Therefore, APHIS estimates that the required use of bark free dunnage
will result in a negligible cost increase to shippers in the long run.
Complying with the rule's requirements may cost U.S. society up to
$136.7 million; this represents the cost of plant pest exclusion. This
cost estimate does not include the opportunity cost associated with
importation of timber products like Siberian larch that might be
imported in the absence of this rule. Data are not available to make
this estimate. Additionally, this cost figure does not take into
account either the benefits that would be accrued by excluding pests,
or the probability that businesses would be able to reduce cost by
switching to less costly options such as bark free dunnage.
If the United States does not expend resources to exclude plant
pests through regulation or other means, such pests could become
established and cause significant damage to domestic agriculture. For
example, in the past few years plant pests including the Asian gypsy
moth and pine shoot beetle have recently been introduced into the U.S.,
and several million dollars have been spent on efforts to control and
prevent further spread to noninfested areas of the country. A recent
USDA Forest Service pest risk assessment concerning potential Siberian
timber imports evaluated the potential costs to U.S. society of several
nonindigenous plant pests. The risk assessment estimated that
introduction of a single pest, larch canker, could cause direct timber
losses of $129.0 million annually. The same study estimated that a
worst-case scenario involving heavy establishment of exotic defoliators
in the United States could cost $58 billion (about $4.1 billion
annually). This is a damage estimate of resources that would be lost to
established defoliators.
The benefits that would accrue from pest exclusion may be less
because control efforts would be put in place to regulate the spread of
exotic pests. Total benefits should be calculated as the avoided cost
of such control efforts and avoided damages to agricultural and forest
resources. However, past experiences with introduced exotic defoliators
indicate that control measures would not likely prevent further spread
and thus make eradication extremely unlikely.
The initial estimated losses will be offset over time as businesses
adapt to new international wood marketing channels. If resource
constraints remain constant after this rule is implemented, consumers
will purchase a slightly higher volume of domestic wood products at
prices that are slightly higher than those that currently prevail in
the U.S. market. However, domestic consumers will continue to
supplement their wood and wood product purchases with imports whenever
the imported price is lower than the domestic price.
Each year about 6 to 7.5 million non-bulk shipments of various
commodities are imported into the United States. APHIS estimates that
between 3.6 and 4.5 million (60 percent) of annual imported non-bulk
shipments arrive in the United States packed in dunnage made of rough
untreated wood with bark. The regulations will prohibit untreated
dunnage with bark from entering the United States.
APHIS does not expect the economic impact on U.S. producers of
regulated articles to be uniform across the country. Producers in
southern and Rocky Mountain States will likely gain more than producers
in the Pacific Northwest. Conservation issues and resource constraints
will likely limit the amount of welfare gain acquired by loggers and
sawmills in Oregon and Washington.
Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``the Act''), which the President signed into law on March 22, 1995,
USDA has assessed the effects of this rulemaking action on State,
local, and tribal governments, and the private sector. This action does
not compel the expenditure of $100 million or more by any State, local
or tribal governments, or by anyone in the private sector, and
therefore a statement under section 202 of the Act is not required.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that APHIS specifically
consider the economic impact of regulations on small entities. Small
Business Administration (SBA) data indicates that about 25,998 domestic
entities could be impacted by the restrictions on regulated articles.
About 25,769 (99 percent) of these entities are classified as small
according to SBA criteria. These consist of approximately 14,662 small
logging companies or sawmills that produce domestic wood articles, and
approximately 15,642 entities that could import foreign wood for
processing or resale. (These two figures total more than 25,769 because
some firms process or resell both domestic and imported wood.) These
small entities should experience most of the anticipated $35.2 million
increase in domestic welfare. This increase will be a small average
economic benefit for [[Page 27673]] affected small entities, as it
represents less than one percent of combined average annual sales for
impacted small entities. A few small entities will undoubtedly accrue a
disproportionate share of the domestic welfare increase due to their
individual positions in their markets and variations in business
strategies for dealing with new opportunities. The overall impact on
small businesses is expected to be minor.
Under these circumstances, the Acting Administrator of the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
Executive Order 12778
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778, 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
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), APHIS has prepared an environmental
impact statement (EIS) addressing the importation of logs, lumber, and
other unmanufactured wood in accordance with this rule. On August 12,
1994, a notice was published in the Federal Register (59 FR 41441)
informing the public of the availability of the final EIS.
The final EIS considered and evaluated the six following
alternatives:
Alternative 1--No Action (No Regulations)
Alternative 2--Final Regulations (Preferred Alternative)
Alternative 3--Prohibit Untreated Wood Except Packing Material
Alternative 4--Prohibit Untreated Wood
Alternative 5--Prohibit Unmanufactured Wood Except Packing Material
Alternative 6--Prohibit Unmanufactured Wood
The final EIS addressed the potential impacts to the human
environment, including possible risks to human health, impacts to
forest resources, impacts to biodiversity, impacts from the use of
methyl bromide, and impacts to global climate change, cultural
resources, and endangered and threatened species. A detailed analysis
of potential impacts from the use of methyl bromide was prepared
because of the classification of methyl bromide as an ozone depletor.
The analysis of the environmental impacts to all aspects of the
human environment revealed that impacts attributable to the six
alternatives are virtually identical, but are entirely dependent upon
the degree to which plant pests are able to be excluded. Each
alternative demonstrated a different likelihood of success.
Alternative 6 is the most protective, that is, the most likely to
minimize the risk of plant pest introduction. However, it is also the
most restrictive with regard to importation of unmanufactured wood
articles. Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, is believed to be
the least protective, and more likely than the other alternatives to
result in inadvertent plant pest introductions.
Alternative 4 is similar to Alternative 6 in that it is protective
but may unnecessarily interfere with trade. The protective capacity of
Alternatives 3 and 5 is diminished by the exclusion of packing
materials from treatment requirements.
Alternative 2, the Preferred Alternative, offers a balanced
approach to the importation of logs, lumber, and other unmanufactured
wood articles that requires plant pest treatments in all cases in which
APHIS has identified a risk of plant pest introductions. This
alternative was selected by the agency and is reflected by this final
rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements
included in this rule have been submitted for approval to the Office of
Management and Budget.
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 are amended to read as
follows:
PART 300--INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
1. Part 300 is revised 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).
Sec. 300.1 Materials incorporated by reference; availability.
(a) Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual. The Plant
Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual, which was reprinted on
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.
(1) The treatments specified in the Plant Protection and Quarantine
Treatment Manual and its revisions are required to authorize the
movement of certain articles regulated by domestic quarantines (7 CFR
parts 301 and 318) and foreign quarantines (7 CFR part 319).
(2) Availability. Copies of the Plant Protection and Quarantine
Treatment Manual:
(i) Are available for inspection at the Office of the Federal
Register Library, 800 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 700, Washington,
DC; or,
(ii) May be obtained by writing or calling the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service, Documents Management Branch, Printing
Distribution and Mail Section, 4700 River Road Unit 1, Riverdale, MD
20737-1229, (301) 734-5524; or
(iii) May be obtained from field offices of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine. Addresses
of these offices may be found in local telephone directories.
(b) Dry Kiln Operator's Manual. The Dry Kiln Operator's Manual,
which was published in August 1991 as Agriculture Handbook No. 188 by
the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 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.
(1) The kiln drying schedules specified in the Dry Kiln Operator's
Manual provide a method by which certain articles regulated by
``Subpart--Logs, Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured Wood Articles'' (7
CFR 319.40-1 through 319.40-11) may be imported into the United States.
(2) Availability. Copies of the Dry Kiln Operator's Manual are
available for inspection at the Office of the Federal Register Library,
800 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC, or are for sale
as ISBN 0-16-035819-1 by the U.S. Government Printing Office,
Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-
9328. [[Page 27674]]
PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES
2. The authority citation for part 319 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150dd, 150ee, 150ff, 151-167, 450, 2803, and
2809; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and 371.2(c).
Subpart--Citrus Canker and Other Citrus Diseases
3. In Sec. 319.19, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) are revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 319.19 Notice of quarantine.
(a) In order to prevent the introduction into the United States of
the citrus canker disease (Xanthomonas citri (Hasse) Dowson) and other
citrus diseases, the importation into the United States of plants or
any plant part, except fruit and seeds, of all genera, species, and
varieties of the subfamilies Aurantioideae, Rutoideae, and
Toddalioideae of the botanical family Rutaceae is prohibited, except as
provided in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section.
(b) Plants or plant parts of all genera, species, and varieties of
the subfamilies Aurantioideae, Rutoideae, and Toddalioideae of the
botanical family Rutaceae may be imported into the United States for
experimental or scientific purposes in accordance with conditions
prescribed by the Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service, United States Department of Agriculture.
(c) Plants or plant parts of all genera, species, and varieties of
the subfamilies Aurantioideae, Rutoideae, and Toddalioideae of the
botanical family Rutaceae may be imported into Guam in accordance with
Sec. 319.37-6.
(d) Plants or plant parts of all genera, species, and varieties of
the subfamilies Aurantioideae, Rutoideae, and Toddalioideae of the
botanical family Rutaceae that are regulated articles under
Secs. 319.40-1 through 319.40-11 may be imported into the United States
in accordance with Secs. 319.40-1 through 319.40-11 and without
restriction by this subpart.
* * * * *
Subpart--Bamboo
4. The title ``Subpart--Bamboo'' is revised to read ``Subpart--
Bamboo Capable of Propagation''.
5. In Sec. 319.34, paragraphs (a) and (c) are removed; paragraphs
(b) and (d) are redesignated as paragraphs (a) and (b); and newly
designated paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 319.34 Notice of quarantine.
(a) In order to prevent the introduction into the United States of
dangerous plant diseases, including bamboo smut (Ustilago shiraiana),
the importation into the United States of any variety of bamboo seed,
bamboo plants, or bamboo cuttings capable of propagation,1
including all genera and species of Bambuseae, is prohibited unless
imported:
\1\ Regulations concerning the importation into the United
States of bamboo not capable of propagation are set forth in
Secs. 319.40-1 through 319.40-11.
\1\ The Plant Protection and Quarantine Program also enforces
regulations promulgated under the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(P.L. 93-205, as amended) which contains additional prohibitions and
restrictions on importation into the United States of articles
subject to this subpart (See 50 CFR parts 17 and 23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) For experimental or scientific purposes by the United States
Department of Agriculture;
(2) For export, or for transportation and exportation in bond, in
accordance with Secs. 352.2 through 352.15 of this chapter; or,
(3) Into Guam in accordance with Sec. 319.37-4(b).
* * * * *
Subpart--Nursery Stock, Plants, Roots, Bulbs, Seeds, and Other
Plant Products 1 2
\2\ One or more common names of articles are given in
parentheses after most scientific names (when common names are
known) for the purpose of helping to identify the articles
represented by such scientific names; however, unless otherwise
specified, a reference to a scientific name includes all articles
within the category represented by the scientific name regardless of
whether the common name or names are as comprehensive in scope as
the scientific name.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. In Sec. 319.37-1, the definition of ``Prohibited article'' is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 319.37-1 Definitions
* * * * *
Prohibited article. Any nursery stock, plant, root, bulb, seed, or
other plant product designated in Sec. 319.37-2 (a) or (b), except wood
articles regulated under Secs. 319.40-1 through 319.40-11, ``Subpart--
Logs, Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured Wood Articles.''
* * * * *
7. ``Subpart--Logs from Chile and New Zealand'' of this part is
revised to read as follows:
Subpart--Logs, Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured Wood Articles
Sec.
319.40-1 Definitions.
319.40-2 General prohibitions and restrictions; relation to other
regulations.
319.40-3 General permits; articles that may be imported without a
specific permit; articles that may be imported without either a
specific permit or an importer document.
319.40-4 Application for a permit to import regulated articles;
issuance and withdrawal of permits.
319.40-5 Importation and entry requirements for specified articles.
319.40-6 Universal importation options.
319.40-7 Treatments and safeguards.
319.40-8 Processing at facilities operating under compliance
agreements.
319.40-9 Inspection and other requirements at port of first
arrival.
319.40-10 Costs and charges.
319.40-11 Plant pest risk assessment standards.
Subpart--Logs, Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured Wood Articles
Sec. 319.40-1 Definitions.
Administrator. The Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, or any
employee of the United States Department of Agriculture delegated to
act in his or her stead.
APHIS. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United
States Department of Agriculture.
Bark chips. Bark fragments broken or shredded from log or branch
surfaces.
Certificate. A certificate of inspection relating to a regulated
article, which is issued by an official authorized by the national
government of the country in which the regulated article was produced
or grown, which contains a description of the regulated article, which
certifies that the regulated article has been inspected, is believed to
be free of plant pests, and is believed to be eligible for importation
pursuant to the laws and regulations of the United States, and which
may contain any specific additional declarations required under this
subpart.
Compliance agreement. A written agreement between APHIS and a
person engaged in processing, handling, or moving regulated articles,
in which the person agrees to comply with requirements contained in the
agreement.
Departmental permit. A document issued by the Administrator
authorizing the importation of a regulated article for experimental,
scientific, or educational purposes.
Free from rot. No more than two percent by weight of the regulated
articles in a lot show visual evidence of fructification of fungi or
growth of other microorganisms that cause decay and the breakdown of
cell walls in the regulated articles.
General permit. A written authorization contained in Sec. 319.40-3
[[Page 27675]] for any person to import the articles named by the
general permit, in accordance with the requirements specified by the
general permit, without being issued a specific permit.
Humus, compost, and litter. Partially or wholly decayed plant
matter.
Import (imported, importation). To bring or move into the
territorial limits of the United States.
Importer document. A written declaration signed by the importer of
regulated articles, which must accompany the regulated articles at the
time of importation, in which the importer accurately declares
information about the regulated articles required to be disclosed by
Sec. 319.40-2(b).
Inspector. Any individual authorized by the Administrator to
enforce this subpart.
Log. The bole of a tree; trimmed timber that has not been sawn
further than to form cants.
Loose wood packing material. Excelsior (wood wool), sawdust, and
wood shavings, produced as a result of sawing or shaving wood into
small, slender, and curved pieces.
Lot. All the regulated articles on a single means of conveyance
that are derived from the same species of tree and were subjected to
the same treatments prior to importation, and that are consigned to the
same person.
Lumber. Logs that have been sawn into boards, planks, or structural
members such as beams.
Permit. A specific permit to import a regulated article issued in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-4, or a general permit promulgated in
Sec. 319.40-3.
Plant pest. Any living stage of any insects, mites, nematodes,
slugs, snails, protozoa, or other invertebrate animals, bacteria,
fungi, other parasitic plants or reproductive parts of parasitic
plants, noxious weeds, viruses, or any organism similar to or allied
with any of the foregoing, or any infectious substances, which can
injure or cause disease or damage in any plants, parts of plants, or
any products of plants.
Port of first arrival. The area (such as a seaport, airport, or
land border station) where a person or a means of conveyance first
arrives in the United States, and where inspection of regulated
articles is carried out by inspectors.
Primary processing. Any of the following processes: cleaning
(removal of soil, limbs, and foliage), debarking, rough sawing (bucking
or squaring), rough shaping, spraying with fungicide or insecticide
sprays, and fumigation.
Regulated article. The following articles, if they are unprocessed
or have received only primary processing: logs; lumber; any whole tree;
any cut tree or any portion of a tree, not solely consisting of leaves,
flowers, fruits, buds, or seeds; bark; cork; laths; hog fuel; sawdust;
painted raw wood products; excelsior (wood wool); wood chips; wood
mulch; wood shavings; pickets; stakes; shingles; solid wood packing
materials; humus; compost; and litter.
Sealed container; sealable container. A completely enclosed
container designed for the storage or transportation of cargo, and
constructed of metal or fiberglass, or other rigid material, providing
an enclosure which prevents the entrance or exit of plant pests and is
accessed through doors that can be closed and secured with a lock or
seal. Sealed (sealable) containers are distinct and separable from the
means of conveyance carrying them.
Solid wood packing material. Wood packing materials other than
loose wood packing materials, used or for use with cargo to prevent
damage, including, but not limited to, dunnage, crating, pallets,
packing blocks, drums, cases, and skids.
Specific permit. A written document issued by APHIS to the
applicant in accordance with Sec. 319.40-4 that authorizes importation
of articles in accordance with this subpart and specifies or refers to
the regulations applicable to the particular importation.
Treatment Manual. The Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment
Manual, which is incorporated by reference at Sec. 300.1 of this
chapter in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
Tropical hardwoods. Hardwood timber species which grow only in
tropical climates.
United States. All of the States of the United States, the District
of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands of the United States, and all other territories and
possessions of the United States.
Wood chips. Wood fragments broken or shredded from any wood.
Wood mulch. Bark chips, wood chips, wood shavings, or sawdust
intended for use as a protective or decorative ground cover.
Sec. 319.40-2 General prohibitions and restrictions; relation to other
regulations.
(a) Permit required. Except for regulated articles exempted from
this requirement by paragraph (c) of this section or Sec. 319.40-3, no
regulated article may be imported unless a specific permit has been
issued for importation of the regulated article in accordance with
Sec. 319.40-4, and unless the regulated article meets all other
applicable requirements of this subpart and any requirements specified
by APHIS in the specific permit.
(b) Importer document; documentation of type, quantity, and origin
of regulated articles. Except for regulated articles exempted from this
requirement by paragraph (c) of this section or Sec. 319.40-3, no
regulated article may be imported unless it is accompanied by an
importer document stating the following information. A certificate that
contains this information may be used in lieu of an importer document
at the option of the importer:
(1) The genus and species of the tree from which the regulated
article was derived;
(2) The country, and locality if known, where the tree from which
the regulated article was derived was harvested;
(3) The quantity of the regulated article to be imported;
(4) The use for which the regulated article is imported; and
(5) Any treatments or handling of the regulated article required by
this subpart that were performed prior to arrival at the port of first
arrival.
(c) Regulation of articles imported for propagation or human
consumption. The requirements of this subpart do not apply to regulated
articles that are allowed importation in accordance with Sec. 319.19,
``Subpart--Citrus Canker and Other Citrus Diseases''; Sec. 319.34,
``Subpart--Bamboo Capable of Propagation''; or Secs. 319.37 through
319.37-14, ``Subpart--Nursery Stock, Plants, Roots, Bulbs, Seeds, and
Other Plant Products''; or to regulated articles imported for human
consumption that are allowed importation in accordance with
Secs. 319.56 through 319.56-8, ``Subpart--Fruits and Vegetables.''
(d) Regulated articles imported for experimental, scientific or
educational purposes. Any regulated article may be imported without
further restriction under this subpart if:
(1) Imported by the United States Department of Agriculture for
experimental, scientific, or educational purposes;
(2) Imported pursuant to a Departmental permit issued by APHIS for
the regulated article prior to its importation and kept on file at the
port of first arrival; and
(3) Imported under conditions specified on the Departmental permit
and found by the Administrator to be adequate to prevent the
introduction into the United States of plant pests.
(e) Designation of additional regulated articles. An inspector may
designate any article as a regulated article by giving written notice
of the [[Page 27676]] designation to the owner or person in possession
or control of the article. APHIS will implement rulemaking to add
articles designated as regulated articles to the definition of
regulated article in Sec. 319.40-1 if importation of the article
appears to present a recurring significant risk of introducing plant
pests. Inspectors may designate an article as a regulated article after
determining that:
(1) The article was imported in the same container or hold as a
regulated article;
(2) Other articles of the same type imported from the same country
have been found to carry plant pests; or
(3) The article appears to be contaminated with regulated articles
or soil.
Sec. 319.40-3 General permits; articles that may be imported without a
specific permit; articles that may be imported without either a
specific permit or an importer document.
(a) Canada and Mexico. APHIS hereby issues a general permit to
import articles authorized by this paragraph. Regulated articles from
Canada and from states in Mexico adjacent to the United States border,
other than regulated articles of the subfamilies Aurantioideae,
Rutoideae, and Toddalioideae of the botanical family Rutaceae, may be
imported without restriction under this subpart, except that they must
be accompanied by an importer document stating that the regulated
articles are derived from trees harvested in, and have never been moved
outside, Canada or states in Mexico adjacent to the United States
border, and except that they are subject to the inspection and other
requirements in Sec. 319.40-9.
(b) Solid wood packing materials--(1) Free of bark; used with non-
regulated articles. APHIS hereby issues a general permit to import
regulated articles authorized by this paragraph. Solid wood packing
materials that are completely free of bark and are in actual use at the
time of importation as packing materials for articles which are not
regulated articles may be imported without restriction under this
subpart, except that:
(i) The solid wood packing materials are subject to the inspection
and other requirements in Sec. 319.40-9; and
(ii) The solid wood packing materials must be accompanied at the
time of importation by an importer document, stating that the solid
wood packing materials are totally free from bark, and apparently free
from live plant pests.
(2) Free of bark; used with regulated articles. APHIS hereby issues
a general permit to import regulated articles authorized by this
paragraph. Solid wood packing materials that are completely free of
bark and are in actual use at the time of importation as packing
materials for regulated articles may be imported without restriction
under this subpart, except that:
(i) The solid wood packing materials are subject to the inspection
and other requirements in Sec. 319.40-9;
(ii) The solid wood packing materials must be accompanied at the
time of importation by an importer document, stating that the solid
wood packing materials are totally free from bark, and apparently free
from live plant pests; and
(iii) The solid wood packing materials must be accompanied at the
time of importation by an importer document, stating that the solid
wood packing materials have been heat treated, fumigated, or treated
with preservatives in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7, or meet all the
importation and entry conditions required for the regulated article the
solid wood packing material is used to move.
(3) Not free of bark; used with regulated or nonregulated articles.
APHIS hereby issues a general permit to import regulated articles
authorized by this paragraph. Solid wood packing materials that are not
completely free of bark and are in actual use as packing at the time of
importation may be imported without restriction under this subpart,
except that:
(i) The solid wood packing materials are subject to the inspection
and other requirements in Sec. 319.40-9;
(ii) The solid wood packing materials must be accompanied at the
time of importation by an importer document, stating that the solid
wood packing materials have been heat treated, fumigated, or treated
with preservatives in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7.
(4) Pallets moved as cargo. APHIS hereby issues a general permit to
import regulated articles authorized by this paragraph. Pallets that
are completely free of bark and that are not in actual use as packing
at the time of importation (i.e., pallets moved as cargo) may be
imported without restriction under this subpart, except that:
(i) The pallets are subject to the inspection and other
requirements in Sec. 319.40-9; and
(ii) The pallets are accompanied by an importer document stating
that the pallets were previously eligible for importation in accordance
with paragraph (b) of this section and have not had wood added to them
since that use. Solid wood packing materials other than pallets that
are imported as cargo must be imported in accordance with the
requirements of this subpart for raw lumber.
(c) Loose wood packing materials. APHIS hereby issues a general
permit to import regulated articles authorized by this paragraph. Loose
wood packing materials (whether in use as packing or imported as cargo)
that are dry may be imported subject to the inspection and other
requirements in Sec. 319.40-9 and without further restriction under
this subpart.
(d) Bamboo timber. APHIS hereby issues a general permit to import
regulated articles authorized by this paragraph. Bamboo timber which is
free of leaves and seeds and has been sawn or split lengthwise and
dried may be imported subject to the inspection and other requirements
in Sec. 319.40-9 and without further restriction under this subpart.
(e) Regulated articles the permit process has determined to present
no plant pest risk. Regulated articles for which a specific permit has
been issued in accordance with Sec. 319.40-4(b)(2)(i) may be imported
without other restriction under this subpart, except that they are
subject to the inspection and other requirements in Sec. 319.40-9.
Sec. 319.40-4 Application for a permit to import regulated articles;
issuance and withdrawal of permits.
(a) Application procedure. A written application for a permit
1 must be submitted to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Port Operations Permit Unit,
4700 River Road Unit 136, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236. The completed
application must include the following information:
\1\ Application forms for permits are available without charge
from the Administrator, c/o the Permit Unit, Plant Protection and
Quarantine, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, 4700 River Road, Riverdale, MD 20737, or
local offices of Plant Protection and Quarantine, which are listed
in telephone directories.
(1) The specific type of regulated article to be imported,
including the genus and species name of the tree from which the
regulated article was derived;
(2) Country, and locality if known, where the tree from which the
regulated article was derived was harvested;
(3) The quantity of the regulated article to be imported;
(4) A description of any processing, treatment or handling of the
regulated article to be performed prior to importation, including the
location where any processing or treatment was or will be performed and
the names and dosage of any chemicals employed in treatments;
[[Page 27677]]
(5) A description of any processing, treatment, or handling of the
regulated article intended to be performed following importation,
including the location where any processing or treatment will be
performed and the names and dosage of any chemicals employed in
treatments;
(6) Whether the regulated article will or will not be imported in a
sealed container or in a hold;
(7) The means of conveyance to be used to import the regulated
article;
(8) The intended port of first arrival in the United States of the
regulated article, and any subsequent ports in the United States at
which regulated articles may be unloaded;
(9) The destination and general intended use of the regulated
article;
(10) The name and address of the applicant and, if the applicant's
address is not within the United States, the name and address of an
agent in the United States whom the applicant names for acceptance of
service of process; and
(11) A statement certifying the applicant as the importer of
record.
(b) Review of application and issuance of permit. After receipt and
review of the application, APHIS shall determine whether it appears
that the regulated article at the time of importation will meet either
the specific importation requirements in Sec. 319.40-5 or the universal
importation requirements in Sec. 319.40-6.
(1) If it appears that the regulated article proposed for
importation will meet the requirements of either Sec. 319.40-5 or
Sec. 319.40-6, a permit stating the applicable conditions for
importation under this subpart shall be issued for the importation of
the regulated article identified in the application.
(2) If it appears that the regulated article proposed for
importation will not meet the requirements of either Sec. 319.40-5 or
Sec. 319.40-6 because these sections do not address the particular
regulated article identified in the application, APHIS shall review the
application by applying the plant pest risk assessment standards
specified in Sec. 319.40-11.
(i) If this review reveals that importation of the regulated
article under a permit and subject to the inspection and other
requirements in Sec. 319.40-9, but without any further conditions, will
not result in the introduction of plant pests into the United States, a
permit for importation of the regulated article shall be issued. The
permit may only be issued in unique and unforeseen circumstances when
the importation of the regulated article is not expected to recur.
(ii) If this review reveals that the regulated article may be
imported under conditions that would reduce the plant pest risk to an
insignificant level, APHIS may implement rulemaking to add the
additional conditions to this subpart, and after the regulations are
effective, may issue a permit for importation of the regulated article.
(3) No permit will be issued to an applicant who has had a permit
withdrawn under paragraph (d) of this section during the 12 months
prior to receipt of the permit application by APHIS, unless the
withdrawn permit has been reinstated upon appeal.
(c) Permit does not guarantee eligibility for import. Even if a
permit has been issued for the importation of a regulated article, the
regulated article may be imported only if all applicable requirements
of this subpart are met and only if an inspector at the port of first
arrival determines that no emergency measures pursuant to the Federal
Plant Pest Act or other measures pursuant to the Plant Quarantine Act
are necessary with respect to the regulated article.2
\2\ Section 105(a) of the Federal Plant Pest Act (7 U.S.C.
150dd(a)) provides, among other things, that the Secretary of
Agriculture may, whenever he deems it necessary as an emergency
measure in order to prevent the dissemination of any plant pest new
to or not theretofore known to be widely prevalent or distributed
within and throughout the United States, seize, quarantine, treat,
apply other remedial measures to, destroy, or dispose of, in such
manner as he deems appropriate, subject to section 105(d) of the
Federal Plant Pest Act (7 U.S.C. 150dd(d)), any product or article,
including any article subject to this subpart, which is moving into
or through the United States, and which he has reason to believe is
infested with any such plant pest at the time of the movement, or
which has moved into the United States, and which he has reason to
believe was infested with any such plant pest at the time of the
movement. Section 10 of the Plant Quarantine Act (7 U.S.C. 164a) and
section 107 of the Federal Plant Pest Act (7 U.S.C. 150ff) also
authorize measures against regulated articles which are not in
compliance with this subpart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Denial and withdrawal of permits. Any permit which has been
issued may be withdrawn by an inspector or the Administrator if he or
she determines that the person to whom the permit was issued has
violated any requirement of this subpart. If the withdrawal is oral,
the decision to withdraw the permit and the reasons for the withdrawal
of the permit shall be confirmed in writing as promptly as
circumstances permit. Any person whose permit has been denied or
withdrawn may appeal the decision in writing to the Administrator
within 10 days after receiving the written notification of the
withdrawal. The appeal shall state all of the facts and reasons upon
which the person relies to show that the permit was wrongfully denied
or withdrawn. The Administrator shall grant or deny the appeal, in
writing, stating the reasons for granting or denying the appeal as
promptly as circumstances permit. If there is a conflict as to any
material fact and the person from whom the permit is withdrawn requests
a hearing, a hearing shall be held to resolve the conflict. Rules of
practice concerning the hearing shall be adopted by the Administrator.
Sec. 319.40-5 Importation and entry requirements for specified
articles.
(a) Bamboo timber. Bamboo timber consisting of whole culms or canes
may be imported into Guam or the Northern Mariana Islands subject to
inspection and other requirements of Sec. 319.40-9. Bamboo timber
consisting of whole culms or canes that are completely dry as evidenced
by lack of moisture in node tissue may be imported into any part of the
United States subject to inspection and other requirements of
Sec. 319.40-9.
(b) Monterey pine logs and lumber from Chile and New Zealand;
Douglas-fir logs and lumber from New Zealand--(1) Logs. (i)
Requirements prior to importation. Monterey or Radiata pine (Pinus
radiata) logs from Chile or New Zealand and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga
menziesii) logs from New Zealand that are accompanied by a certificate
stating that the logs meet the requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(i) (A)
through (D) of this section, and that are consigned to a facility in
the United States that operates in accordance with Sec. 319.40-8, may
be imported in accordance with paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(A) through
(b)(1)(iii) of this section.
(A) The logs must be from live healthy trees which are apparently
free of plant pests, plant pest damage, and decay organisms.
(B) The logs must be debarked in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(b)
prior to fumigation.
(C) The logs and any solid wood packing materials to be used with
the logs during shipment to the United States must be fumigated in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(f)(1), within 45 days following the date
the trees are felled and prior to arrival of the logs in the United
States, in the holds or in sealable containers. Fumigation must be
conducted in the same sealable container or hold in which the logs and
solid wood packing materials are exported to the United States.
(D) During shipment to the United States, no other regulated
article is permitted on the means of conveyance with the logs, unless
the logs and the other regulated articles are in separate
[[Page 27678]] holds or separate sealed containers, or, if the logs and
other regulated articles are mixed in a hold or sealed container, the
other regulated articles either have been heat treated with moisture
reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d), or have been fumigated
in the hold or sealable container in accordance with paragraph
(b)(1)(i)(C) of this section.
(ii) Requirements upon arrival in the United States. The following
requirements apply upon arrival of the logs in the United States.
(A) The logs must be kept segregated from other regulated articles
from the time of discharge from the means of conveyance until the logs
are completely processed at a facility in the United States that
operates under a compliance agreement in accordance with Sec. 319.40-8.
(B) The logs must be moved from the port of first arrival to the
facility that operates under a compliance agreement in accordance with
Sec. 319.40-8 by as direct a route as reasonably possible.
(iii) Requirements at the processing facility. The logs must be
consigned to a facility operating under a compliance agreement in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-8 that includes the following requirements:
(A) Logs or any products generated from logs, including lumber,
must be heat treated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c), or heat
treated with moisture reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d).
(B) The logs, including sawdust, wood chips, or other products
generated from the logs in the United States, must be processed in
accordance with paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section within 60 days
from the time the logs are released from the port of first arrival.
(C) Sawdust, wood chips, and waste generated by sawing or
processing the logs must be disposed of by burning, heat treatment in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c), heat treatment with moisture
reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d), or other processing that
will destroy any plant pests associated with the sawdust, wood chips,
and waste. Composting and use of the sawdust, wood chips, and waste as
mulch are prohibited unless composting and use as mulch are preceded by
fumigation in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(f)(3), heat treatment in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c), or heat treatment with moisture
reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d). Wood chips, sawdust, and
waste may be moved in enclosed trucks for processing at another
facility operating under a compliance agreement in accordance with
Sec. 319.40-8.
(2) Raw lumber. Raw lumber, including solid wood packing materials
imported as cargo, from Chile or New Zealand derived from Monterey or
Radiata pine (Pinus radiata) logs and raw lumber from New Zealand
derived from Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) logs may be imported
in accordance with paragraphs (b)(2) (i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) During shipment to the United States, no other regulated
article (other than solid wood packing materials) is permitted on the
means of conveyance with the raw lumber, unless the raw lumber and the
other regulated articles are in separate holds or separate sealed
containers; Except for mixed shipments of logs and raw lumber fumigated
in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(f)(2) and moved in accordance with
paragraph (b)(1)(i)(D) of this section. Raw lumber on the vessel's deck
must be in a sealed container.
(ii) The raw lumber must be consigned to a facility operating under
a compliance agreement in accordance with Sec. 319.40-8 that requires
the raw lumber to be heat treated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c)
or heat treated with moisture reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-
7(d) before any cutting, planing, or sawing of the raw lumber, and
within 30 days from the time the lumber is released from the port of
first arrival.
(c) Tropical hardwoods.--(1) Debarked. Tropical hardwood logs and
lumber that have been debarked in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(b) may
be imported subject to the inspection and other requirements of
Sec. 319.40-9.
(2) Not debarked. Tropical hardwood logs that have not been
debarked may be imported if fumigated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-
7(f)(1) prior to arrival in the United States.
(3) Not debarked; small lots. Tropical hardwood logs that have not
been debarked may be imported into the United States, other than into
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, or the Virgin Islands of the United States, if
imported in a lot of 15 or fewer logs and subject to the inspection and
other requirements of Sec. 319.40-9.
(d) Temperate hardwoods. Temperate hardwood logs and lumber (with
or without bark) from all places except places in Asia that are east of
60 deg. East Longitude and north of the Tropic of Cancer may be
imported if fumigated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(f) prior to
arrival in the United States and subject to the inspection and other
requirements of Sec. 319.40-9.
(e) Regulated articles associated with exclusively tropical climate
pests. Regulated articles that have been identified by a plant pest
risk assessment as associated solely with plant pests that can
successfully become established only in tropical or subtropical
climates may be imported if:
(1) The regulated article is imported only to a destination in the
continental United States; and,
(2) the regulated article is not imported into any tropical or
subtropical areas of the United States specified in the permit.
(f) Cross-ties (railroad ties) from all places except places in
Asia that are east of 60 deg. East Longitude and north of the Tropic of
Cancer may be imported if completely free of bark and accompanied by an
importer document stating that the cross-ties will be pressure treated
within 30 days following the date of importation.
Sec. 319.40-6 Universal importation options.
(a) Logs. Logs may be imported if prior to importation the logs
have been debarked in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(b) and heat treated
in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c). During the entire interval between
treatment and export, the logs must be stored and handled in a manner
which excludes any access to the logs by plant pests.
(b) Lumber.--(1) Heat treated or heat treated with moisture
reduction. Lumber that prior to importation has been heat treated in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c), or heat treated with moisture
reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d), may be imported in
accordance with paragraphs (b)(1) (i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) During shipment to the United States, no other regulated
article (other than solid wood packing materials) is permitted on the
means of conveyance with the lumber, unless the lumber and the other
regulated articles are in separate holds or separate sealed containers,
or, if the lumber and other regulated articles are mixed in a hold or
sealed container, all the regulated articles have been heat treated in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c), or heat treated with moisture
reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d). Lumber on the vessel's
deck must be in a sealed container, unless it has been heat treated
with moisture reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d).
(ii) If lumber has been heat treated in accordance with
Sec. 319.40-7(c), that fact must be stated on the importer document, or
by a permanent marking on each piece of lumber in the form of the
letters ``HT'' or the words ``Heat Treated.'' If lumber has been heat
treated with moisture reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d),
that fact must be stated on the importer [[Page 27679]] document, or by
a permanent marking, on each piece of lumber or on the cover of bundles
of lumber, in the form of the letters ``KD'' or the words ``Kiln
Dried.''
(2) Raw lumber. Raw lumber, including solid wood packing materials
imported as cargo, from all places except places in Asia that are
wholly east of 60 deg. East Longitude and north of the Tropic of Cancer
may be imported in accordance with paragraphs (b)(2) (i) and (ii) of
this section.
(i) During shipment to the United States, no other regulated
article (other than solid wood packing materials) is permitted on the
means of conveyance with the raw lumber, unless the raw lumber and the
other regulated articles are in separate holds or separate sealed
containers. Raw lumber on the vessel's deck must be in a sealed
container.
(ii) The raw lumber must be consigned to a facility operating under
a compliance agreement in accordance with Sec. 319.40-8 that requires
the raw lumber to be heat treated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c)
or heat treated with moisture reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-
7(d), within 30 days from the time the lumber is released from the port
of first arrival. Heat treatment must be completed before any cutting,
planing, or sawing of the raw lumber.
(c) Wood chips and bark chips. Wood chips and bark chips from any
place except countries in Asia that are wholly east of 60 deg. East
Longitude and wholly or in part north of the Tropic of Cancer may be
imported in accordance with this paragraph.
(1) The wood chips or bark chips must be accompanied by an importer
document stating that the wood chips or bark chips were either:
(i) Derived from live, healthy, tropical species of plantation-
grown trees grown in tropical areas; or
(ii) Fumigated with methyl bromide in accordance with Sec. 319.40-
7(f)(3), heat treated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c), or heat
treated with moisture reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d).
(2) During shipment to the United States, no other regulated
articles (other than solid wood packing materials) are permitted in the
holds or sealed containers carrying the wood chips or bark chips. Wood
chips or bark chips on the vessel's deck must be in a sealed container;
Except that; If the wood chips or bark chips are derived from live,
healthy, plantation-grown trees in tropical areas, they may be shipped
on deck if no other regulated articles are present on the vessel, and
the wood chips or bark chips are completely covered by a tarpaulin
during the entire journey directly to the United States.
(3) The wood chips or bark chips must be free from rot at the time
of importation, unless accompanied by an importer document stating that
the entire lot was fumigated with methyl bromide in accordance with
Sec. 319.40-7(f)(3), heat treated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c),
or heat treated with moisture reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-
7(d).
(4) Wood chips or bark chips imported in accordance with this
paragraph must be consigned to a facility operating under a compliance
agreement in accordance with Sec. 319.40-8. The wood chips or bark
chips must be burned, heat treated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c),
heat treated with moisture reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-
7(d), or otherwise processed in a manner that will destroy any plant
pests associated with the wood chips or bark chips, within 30 days of
arrival at the facility. If the wood chips or bark chips are to be used
for mulching or composting, they must first be fumigated in accordance
with Sec. 319.40-7(f)(3), heat treated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-
7(c), or heat treated with moisture reduction in accordance with
Sec. 319.40-7(d).
(d) Wood mulch, humus, compost, and litter. Wood mulch, humus,
compost, and litter may be imported if accompanied by an importer
document stating that the wood mulch, humus, compost, or litter was
fumigated in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(f)(3), heat treated in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(c), or heat treated with moisture
reduction in accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(d).
(e) Cork and bark. Cork and cork bark, cinnamon bark, and other
bark to be used for food, manufacture of medicine, or chemical
extraction may be imported if free from rot at the time of importation
and subject to the inspection and other requirements of Sec. 319.40-9.
Sec. 319.40-7 Treatments and safeguards.
(a) Certification of treatments or safeguards. If APHIS determines
that a document required for the importation of regulated articles is
inaccurate, the regulated articles which are the subject of the
certificate or other document shall be refused entry into the United
States. In addition, APHIS may determine not to accept any further
certificates for the importation of regulated articles in accordance
with this subpart from a country in which an inaccurate certificate is
issued, and APHIS may determine not to allow the importation of any or
all regulated articles from any such country, until corrective action
acceptable to APHIS establishes that certificates issued in that
country will be accurate.
(b) Debarking. Except for raw lumber, no more than 2 percent of the
surface of all regulated articles in a lot may retain bark, with no
single regulated article retaining bark on more than 5 percent of its
surface. For raw lumber, debarking must remove 100 percent of the bark.
(c) Heat treatment. Heat treatment must be performed only at a
facility where APHIS or an inspector authorized by the Administrator
and the national government of the country in which the facility is
located has inspected the facility and determined that its operation
complies with the standards of this paragraph. Heat treatment
procedures may employ steam, hot water, kilns, exposure to microwave
energy, or any other method (e.g., the hot water and steam techniques
used in veneer production) that raises the temperature of the center of
each treated regulated article to at least 71.1 deg.C and maintains
the regulated article at that center temperature for at least 75
minutes. For regulated articles heat treated prior to arrival in the
United States, during the entire interval between treatment and export
the regulated article must be stored, handled, or safeguarded in a
manner which excludes any infestation of the regulated article by plant
pests.
(d) Heat treatment with moisture reduction. (1) Heat treatment with
moisture reduction may employ:
(i) Kiln drying conducted in accordance with the schedules
prescribed for the regulated article in the Dry Kiln Operator's Manual,
Agriculture Handbook 188, which is incorporated by reference at
Sec. 300.1 of this chapter; or,
(ii) Dry heat, exposure to microwave energy, or any other method
that raises the temperature of the center of each treated regulated
article to at least 71.1 deg.C, maintains the regulated articles at
that center temperature for at least 75 minutes, and reduces the
moisture content of the regulated article to 20 percent or less as
measured by an electrical conductivity meter.
(2) For regulated articles heat treated with moisture reduction
prior to arrival in the United States, during the entire interval
between treatment and export the regulated article must be stored,
handled, or safeguarded in a manner which excludes any infestation of
the regulated article by plant pests.
(e) Surface pesticide treatments. All United States Environmental
Protection Agency registered surface pesticide treatments are
authorized for regulated articles imported in accordance with this
subpart. Surface pesticide [[Page 27680]] treatments must be conducted
in accordance with label directions approved by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency. When used on heat treated logs, a
surface pesticide treatment must be first applied within 48 hours
following heat treatment. The surface pesticide treatment must be
repeated at least every 30 days during storage of the regulated
article, with the final treatment occurring no more than 30 days prior
to departure of the means of conveyance that carries the regulated
articles to the United States.
(f) Methyl bromide fumigation. The following minimum standards for
methyl bromide fumigation treatment are authorized for the regulated
articles listed in paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(3) of this section.
Any method of fumigation that meets or exceeds the specified
temperature/time/concentration products is acceptable.
(1) Logs. (i) T-312 schedule. The entire log and the ambient air
must be at a temperature of 5 deg.C or above throughout fumigation.
The fumigation must be conducted using schedule T-312 contained in the
Treatment Manual. In lieu of the schedule T-312 methyl bromide
concentration, fumigation may be conducted with an initial methyl
bromide concentration of at least 240 g/m3 with exposure and
concentration levels adequate to provide a concentration-time product
of at least 17,280 gram-hours calculated on the initial methyl bromide
concentration.
(ii) T-404 schedule. The entire log and the ambient air must be at
a temperature of 5 deg.C or above throughout fumigation. The
fumigation must be conducted using schedule T-404 contained in the
Treatment Manual. In lieu of the schedule T-404 methyl bromide
concentration, fumigation may be conducted with an initial methyl
bromide concentration of at least 120 g/m3 with exposure and
concentration levels adequate to provide a concentration-time product
of at least 1920 gram-hours calculated on the initial methyl bromide
concentration.
(2) Lumber. The lumber and the ambient air must be at a temperature
of 5 deg.C or above throughout fumigation. The fumigation must be
conducted using schedule T-404 contained in the Treatment Manual. In
lieu of the schedule T-404 methyl bromide concentration, fumigation may
be conducted with an initial methyl bromide concentration of at least
120 g/m3 with exposure and concentration levels adequate to
provide a concentration-time product of at least 1920 gram-hours
calculated on the initial methyl bromide concentration.
(3) Regulated articles other than logs or lumber. (i) If the
ambient air and the regulated articles other than logs or lumber are at
a temperature of 21 deg.C or above throughout fumigation, the
fumigation must be conducted using schedule T-404 contained in the
Treatment Manual. In lieu of the schedule T-404 methyl bromide
concentration, fumigation may be conducted with an initial methyl
bromide concentration of at least 48 g/m3 with exposure and
concentration levels adequate to provide a concentration-time product
of at least 760 gram-hours calculated on the initial methyl bromide
concentration.
(ii) If the ambient air and the regulated articles other than logs
or lumber are at a temperature of 4.5-20.5 deg.C throughout
fumigation, the fumigation must be conducted using schedule T-404
contained in the Treatment Manual. In lieu of the schedule T-404 methyl
bromide concentration, fumigation may be conducted with an initial
methyl bromide concentration of at least 120 g/m3 with exposure
and concentration levels adequate to provide a concentration-time
product of at least 1920 gram-hours calculated on the initial methyl
bromide concentration.
(g) Preservatives. All preservative treatments that use a
preservative product that is registered by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency are authorized for treatment of
regulated articles imported in accordance with this subpart.
Preservative treatments must be performed in accordance with label
directions approved by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency.
Sec. 319.40-8 Processing at facilities operating under compliance
agreements.
(a) Any person who operates a facility in which imported regulated
articles are processed may enter into a compliance agreement to
facilitate the importation of regulated articles under this subpart.
The compliance agreement shall specify the requirements necessary to
prevent spread of plant pests from the facility, requirements to ensure
the processing method effectively destroys plant pests, and the
requirements for the application of chemical materials in accordance
with the Treatment Manual. The compliance agreement shall also state
that inspectors must be allowed access to the facility to monitor
compliance with the requirements of the compliance agreement and of
this subpart. Compliance agreement forms may be obtained from the
Administrator or an inspector.
(b) Any compliance agreement may be canceled by the inspector who
is supervising its enforcement, orally or in writing, whenever the
inspector finds that the person who entered into the compliance
agreement has failed to comply with the conditions of the compliance
agreement. If the cancellation is oral, the decision to cancel the
compliance agreement and the reasons for cancellation of the compliance
agreement shall be confirmed in writing, as promptly as circumstances
permit. Any person whose compliance agreement has been canceled may
appeal the decision in writing to the Administrator within 10 days
after receiving written notification of the cancellation. The appeal
shall state all of the facts and reasons upon which the person relies
to show that the compliance agreement was wrongfully canceled. The
Administrator shall grant or deny the appeal, in writing, stating the
reasons for granting or denying the appeal, as promptly as
circumstances permit. If there is a conflict as to any material fact
and the person whose compliance agreement has been canceled requests a
hearing, a hearing shall be held to resolve the conflict. Rules of
practice concerning the hearing will be adopted by the Administrator.
Sec. 319.40-9 Inspection and other requirements at port of first
arrival.
(a) Procedures for all regulated articles. (1) All imported
regulated articles shall be inspected at the port of first arrival. If
the inspector finds signs of plant pests on or in the regulated
article, or finds that the regulated article may have been associated
with other articles infested with plant pests, the regulated article
shall be cleaned or treated as required by an inspector, and the
regulated article and any products of the regulated article shall also
be subject to reinspection, cleaning, and treatment at the option of an
inspector at any time and place before all applicable requirements of
this subpart have been accomplished.
(2) Regulated articles shall be assembled for inspection at the
port of first arrival, or at any other place prescribed by an
inspector, at a place and time and in a manner designated by an
inspector.
(3) If an inspector finds that an imported regulated article is so
infested with a plant pest that, in the judgment of the inspector, the
regulated article cannot be cleaned or treated, or contains soil or
other prohibited contaminants, the entire lot may be refused entry into
the United States.
(4) No person shall move any imported regulated article from the
port [[Page 27681]] of first arrival unless and until an inspector
notifies the person, in writing or through an electronic database, that
the regulated article:
(i) Is in compliance with all applicable regulations and has been
inspected and found to be apparently free of plant pests; \3\ or,
\3\ Certain regulated articles may also be subject to
Secs. 319.56 through 319.56-8, ``Subpart--Fruits and Vegetables,''
or to Noxious Weed Act regulations under part 360 of this chapter,
or to Endangered Species Act regulations under parts 355 and 356 of
this chapter and 50 CFR parts 17 and 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Has been inspected and the inspector requires reinspection,
cleaning, or treatment of the regulated article at a place other than
the port of first arrival.
(b) Notice of arrival; visual examination of regulated articles at
port of first arrival. (1) At least 7 days prior to the expected date
of arrival in the United States of a shipment of regulated articles
imported in accordance with this subpart, the permittee or his or her
agent must notify the APHIS Officer in Charge at the port of arrival of
the date of expected arrival. The address and telephone number of the
APHIS Officer in Charge will be specified in any specific permit issued
by APHIS \4\. This notice may be in writing or by telephone. The notice
must include the number of any specific permit issued for the regulated
articles; the name, if any, of the means of conveyance carrying the
regulated articles; the type and quantity of the regulated articles;
the expected date of arrival; the country of origin of the regulated
articles; the name and the number, if any, of the dock or area where
the regulated articles are to be unloaded; and the name of the importer
or broker at the port of arrival.
\4\ A list of APHIS Officers in Charge may be obtained from the
Administrator, c/o Port Operations, Plant Protection and Quarantine,
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road,
Riverdale, MD 20737.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Imported regulated articles which have been debarked in
accordance with Sec. 319.40-7(b) and can be safely and practically
inspected will be visually examined for plant pests by an inspector at
the port of first arrival. If plant pests are found on or in the
regulated articles or if the regulated article cannot be safely and
practically inspected, the regulated articles must be treated in
accordance with the Treatment Manual.
(c) Marking and identity of regulated articles. Any regulated
article, at the time of importation shall bear on the outer container
(if in a container), on the regulated article (if not in a container),
or on a document accompanying the regulated article the following
information:
(1) General nature and quantity of the regulated articles;
(2) Country and locality, if known, where the tree from which the
regulated article was derived was harvested;
(3) Name and address of the person importing the regulated article;
(4) Name and address of consignee of the regulated article;
(5) Identifying shipper's mark and number; and
(6) Number of the permit (if one was issued) authorizing the
importation of the regulated article into the United States.
(d) Sampling for plant pests at port of first arrival. Any imported
regulated article may be sampled for plant pests at the port of first
arrival. If an inspector finds it necessary to order treatment of a
regulated article at the port of first arrival, any sampling will be
done prior to treatment.
Sec. 319.40-10 Costs and charges.
The services of an inspector during regularly assigned hours of
duty and at the usual places of duty shall be furnished without cost to
the importer.\5\ The inspector may require the importer to furnish any
labor, chemicals, packing materials, or other supplies required in
handling regulated articles under this subpart. APHIS will not be
responsible for any costs or charges, other than those identified in
this section.
\5\ Provisions relating to costs for other services of an
inspector are contained in part 354 of this chapter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 319.40-11 Plant pest risk assessment standards.
When evaluating a request to import a regulated article not allowed
importation under this subpart, or a request to import a regulated
article under conditions other than those prescribed by this subpart,
APHIS will conduct the following analysis to determine the plant pest
risks associated with each requested importation in order to determine
whether or not to issue a permit under this subpart or to propose
regulations establishing conditions for the importation into the United
States of the regulated article.
(a) Collecting commodity information. (1) APHIS will evaluate the
application for information describing the regulated article and the
origin, processing, treatment, and handling of the regulated article;
and
(2) APHIS will evaluate history of past plant pest interceptions or
introductions (including data from foreign countries) associated with
the regulated article.
(b) Cataloging quarantine pests. For the regulated article
specified in an application, APHIS will determine what plant pests or
potential plant pests are associated with the type of tree from which
the regulated article was derived, in the country and locality from
which the regulated article is to be exported. A plant pest that meets
one of the following criteria is a quarantine pest and will be further
evaluated in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section:
(1) Non-indigenous plant pest not present in the United States;
(2) Non-indigenous plant pest, present in the United States and
capable of further dissemination in the United States;
(3) Non-indigenous plant pest that is present in the United States
and has reached probable limits of its ecological range, but differs
genetically from the plant pest in the United States in a way that
demonstrates a potential for greater damage potential in the United
States;
(4) Native species of the United States that has reached probable
limits of its ecological range, but differs genetically from the plant
pest in the United States in a way that demonstrates a potential for
greater damage potential in the United States; or
(5) Non-indigenous or native plant pest that may be able to vector
another plant pest that meets one of the criteria in paragraphs (b)(1)
through (4) of this section.
(c) Determining which quarantine pests to assess. (1) APHIS will
divide quarantine pests identified in paragraph (b) of this section
into groups depending upon where the plant pest is most likely to be
found. The plant pests would be grouped as follows:
(i) Plant pests found on the bark;
(ii) Plant pests found under the bark; and
(iii) Plant pests found in the wood.
(2) APHIS will subdivide each of the groups in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section into associated taxa.
(3) APHIS will rank the plant pests in each group in paragraph
(c)(2) of this section according to plant pest risk, based on the
available biological information and demonstrated plant pest
importance.
(4) APHIS will identify any plant pests ranked in paragraph (c)(3)
of this section for which plant pest risk assessments have previously
been performed in accordance with this section. APHIS will conduct
individual plant pest risk assessments for the remaining plant pests,
starting with the highest ranked plant pest(s) in each group.
(5) The number of plant pests in each group to be evaluated through
individual plant pest risk assessment will be based on biological
similarities [[Page 27682]] of members of the group as they relate to
measures taken in connection with the importation of the regulated
article to mitigate the plant pest risk associated with the regulated
article. For example, if the plant pest risk assessment for the highest
ranked plant pest indicates a need for a mitigation measure that would
result in the same reduction of risk for other plant pests ranked in
the group, the other members need not be subjected to individual plant
pest risk assessment.
(d) Conducting individual plant pest risk assessments. APHIS will
evaluate each of the plant pests identified in paragraph (c)(4) of this
section by:
(1) Estimation of the probability of the plant pest being on, with,
or in the regulated article at the time of importation;
(2) Estimation of the probability of the plant pest surviving in
transit on the regulated article and entering the United States
undetected;
(3) Estimation of the probability of the plant pest colonizing once
it has entered into the United States;
(4) Estimation of the probability of the plant pest spreading
beyond any colonized area; and
(5) Estimation of the damage to plants that could be expected upon
introduction and dissemination within the United States of the plant
pest.
(e) Estimating unmitigated overall plant pest risk. APHIS will
develop an estimation of the overall plant pest risk associated with
importing the regulated article based on compilation of individual
plant pest risk assessments performed in accordance with paragraph (d)
of this section.
(f) Evaluating available requirements to determine whether they
would allow safe importation of the regulated article. The requirements
of this subpart, and any other requirements relevant to the regulated
article and plant pests involved, will be compared with the individual
plant pest risk assessments in order to determine whether particular
conditions on the importation of the regulated article would reduce the
plant pest risk to an insignificant level. If APHIS determines that the
imposition of particular conditions on the importation of the regulated
article could reduce the plant pest risk to an insignificant level, and
determines that sufficient APHIS resources are available to implement
or ensure implementation of the conditions, APHIS will implement
rulemaking to allow importation of the requested regulated article
under the conditions identified by the plant pest risk assessment
process.
Subpart--Packing Materials
Sec. 319.69 [Amended]
8. The introductory text to Sec. 319.69 is removed.
9. In Sec. 319.69, paragraph (a), the phrase ``On and after July 1,
1933, the'' is removed and the word ``The'' is added in its place.
10. In Sec. 319.69, paragraph (b), the phrase ``On and after June
8, 1953, the'' is removed and the word ``The'' is added in its place.
11. In Sec. 319.69, paragraph (b)(3) is removed, and paragraphs
(b)(4) and (b)(5) are redesignated as paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4),
respectively.
Sec. 319.69a [Amended]
12. In Sec. 319.69a, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the
reference ``(b)(1), (3), and (4)'' and adding the reference ``(b)(1)
and (3)'' in its place.
Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of May 1995.
Terry L. Medley,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 95-12789 Filed 5-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
