Importation of Logs, Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured Wood Articles

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