Introduction of Nonindigenous Organisms

SUMMARY: We are withdrawing a proposed rule to establish regulations

governing the introduction (importation, interstate movement, and

release into the environment) of certain nonindigenous organisms.

Additionally, we are notifying the public of our intent to publish an

advance notice of proposed rulemaking to solicit further public comment

regarding what should be proposed in any new proposed rule. We are

taking this action after considering the comments on the proposed rule.

DATES: Withdrawal of proposed rule effective June 16, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Matthew H. Royer, Chief Operations

Officer, Biological Assessment and Taxonomic Support, PPQ, APHIS, Suite

4A01, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 734-

7654.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 26, 1995, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

(APHIS) published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (60 FR 5288-

5307, Docket No. 93-026-1) to establish regulations governing the

introduction (importation, interstate movement, and release into the

environment) of certain nonindigenous organisms. In that document,

APHIS stated that the proposed rule appeared to be necessary because

the plant pest regulations under which the movement of certain

nonindigenous organisms are currently regulated do not adequately

address the introduction of nonindigenous organisms that may

potentially be plant pests. The proposed regulations were intended to

provide a means of screening certain nonindigenous organisms prior to

their introduction to determine the potential plant pest risk

associated with a particular introduction.

We initially solicited comments on the proposed rule for 60 days

ending on March 27, 1995. We also hosted three public hearings

regarding the proposed rule during that initial comment period, in

Kansas City, MO, on March 6, 1995; in Sacramento, CA, on March 7, 1995;

and in Washington, DC, on March 10, 1995. We received several requests

for an extension of the comment period to allow interested parties

additional time to comment on the proposal, as well as a request that

we hold a public hearing in Hawaii. In response to those requests, we

published a notice in the Federal Register on March 21, 1995 (60 FR

14928-14929, Docket No. 93-026-2), that extended the comment period for

the proposed rule until May 26, 1995, and announced that a public

hearing would be held in Honolulu, HI, on April 6, 1995.

By the close of the extended comment period, we had received a

total of 251 comments. The comments were submitted by farmers; weed

control committees and districts; university researchers; biological

control researchers, producers, distributors, and practitioners; waste

treatment and recycling facilities; composters; members of Congress;

local, State, and Federal agencies; commercial laboratories; organic

farmers and cooperatives; private citizens; a fish hatchery;

collections and museums; industry associations; scientific societies;

and foreign government agencies.

None of the commenters supported the proposed rule as written. Some

commenters requested that the proposed rule be withdrawn and

reconsidered, while others recommended that we incorporate changes in

any final rule to be published. Many commenters disagreed with the

proposed lists of regulated organisms and exempted organisms, or

expressed the belief that the proposed rule would impose unnecessary

restrictions on the introduction of organisms. Finally, many commenters

disagreed with APHIS' analysis of the economic impact of the proposed

rule, stating that they believed that the costs of complying with the

proposed regulations would be greater than APHIS had anticipated.

After considering all the comments, we have concluded that we

should not proceed with a final rule based on the proposal because the

revisions that would be necessary to reconcile the proposed regulations

with the very diverse views expressed in the comments would be so

significant that the final rule would be substantially different from

the proposed rule on which the public had the opportunity to comment.

Therefore, we are withdrawing the January 26, 1995, proposed rule. We

do, however, plan to develop new proposed regulations to address the

inadequacies in our current plant pest regulations and to provide a

means of screening organisms prior to their introduction to determine

the potential plant pest risks associated with such introductions. The

concerns and recommendations of all those who commented on the proposed

rule that we are withdrawing will be considered during the development

of any new proposed regulations. Further, we will publish an advance

notice of proposed rulemaking in a future issue of the Federal Register

to solicit additional input from interested persons and to present

opportunities for additional public participation in discussions of the

scope, rationale, and basis of any new proposed regulations.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150aa-150jj, 151-164a, 167, and 1622(n); 31

U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 4331 and 4332; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and

371.2(c).

Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of June 1995.

Terry L. Medley,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 95-14815 Filed 6-13-95; 1:45 pm]

BILLING CODE 3410-34-P