Mexican Hass Avocado Import Program

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

7 CFR Part 319

[Docket No. 99-020-2]

Mexican Hass Avocado Import Program

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are amending our regulations governing the importation of

Hass avocados from Mexico to require handlers and distributors to enter

into compliance agreements with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service. We are also adding requirements regarding the repackaging of

the avocados after their entry into the United States. These amendments

are necessary to ensure that distributors and handlers are familiar

with the distribution restrictions and other requirements of the

regulations and to ensure that any boxes used to repackage the avocados

in the United States bear the same information that is required to be

displayed on the original boxes in which the fruit was packed in

Mexico. These amendments will serve to reinforce the existing

safeguards of the avocado import program.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 5, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Donna L. West, Import Specialist,

Phytosanitary Issues Management Team, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit

140, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 734-6799.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The regulations in ``Subpart--Fruits and Vegetables'' (7 CFR 319.56

through 319.56-8, referred to below as the regulations) prohibit or

restrict the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United

States from certain parts of the world to prevent the introduction and

dissemination of plant pests, including fruit flies, that are new to or

not widely distributed within the United States.

The regulations in Sec. 319.56-2ff allow fresh Hass avocado fruit

grown in approved orchards in approved municipalities in Michoacan,

Mexico, to be imported into certain areas of the United States subject

to certain conditions. Those conditions, which include pest surveys and

pest risk-reducing cultural practices, packinghouse procedures,

inspection and shipping procedures, and restrictions on the time of

year (November through February) that shipments may enter the United

States, are designed to reduce the risk of pest introduction to a

negligible level. Further, the regulations in Sec. 319.56-2ff limit the

distribution of the avocados to 19 northeastern States and the District

of Colombia, where climatic conditions preclude the establishment in

the United States of any of the exotic plant pests that may attack

avocados in Michoacan, Mexico.

On June 25, 1999, we published in the Federal Register (64 FR

34141-34144, Docket No. 99-020-1) a proposal to amend the regulations

to require handlers and distributors of Mexican Hass avocados to enter

into compliance agreements with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS). In that same document, we also proposed to amend the

stickering requirement for the avocados and add provisions regarding

the repackaging of the avocados after their entry into the United

States.

We solicited comments concerning our proposal rule for 60 days

ending on August 24, 1999. We received 10 comments by that date. They

were from two Mexican government officials, two State agricultural

agencies, a domestic avocado growers group, an agricultural trade

organization, three avocado distributors, and a Mexican avocado grower.

Four of the commenters supported the proposed rule, although two of

those commenters suggested some changes. The remaining commenters

opposed one or more aspects of the proposed rule. The comments are

discussed below.

Comment: Unless properly monitored and enforced, the new

requirements will not be effective at reducing the incidence of illegal

transshipment of Mexican avocados. The Department should provide

additional information in the final rule concerning the steps it

intends to take to monitor whether the appropriate compliance

agreements are in place and describe the communications outreach

efforts it will take to ensure that produce handlers and distributors

are made aware of the new regulations.

Response: Our efforts to ensure that affected persons are made

aware of the requirements of the regulations and to monitor whether the

appropriate compliance agreements are in place will be closely related.

To ensure that all the requirements of the regulations are known,

including those requirements added by this final rule, we have created

an industry newsletter in both English and Spanish and will forward

press releases to trade newspapers and provide information to market

owners during regular market surveys outside of the approved States. We

will visit distributors and markets, send out mailings, establish an

avocado program information website, and create a toll-free regulatory

incident hotline prior to the beginning of the shipping season. We will

contact all of the distributors and handlers we are aware of who handle

Mexican avocados to arrange compliance agreements and will have the

opportunity to contact and arrange compliance agreements with

additional handlers or distributors during market visits. Finally, this

rule's requirement that permittees and handlers confirm that subsequent

handlers have entered into a compliance agreement with APHIS will serve

as an additional mechanism to ensure that the necessary compliance

agreements are in place.

Comment: The final rule must clarify whether the persons involved

in the in-transit movement of Mexican avocados to Canada are required

to enter into compliance agreements. Additionally, the final rule must

specifically state the conditions that must be observed in order for

Mexican avocados shipped in-transit to Canada to be eligible to be

reshipped into the United States. Such guidance is needed to remove any

question regarding whether the Mexican avocado program requirements

extend to such fruit.

Response: This rule's compliance agreement requirement applies to

persons involved in the handling and distribution of Mexican Hass

avocados imported into the United States in accordance with

Sec. 319.56-2ff; the in-transit movement of avocados to Canada is a

separate matter that is addressed in Sec. 352.29 of the plant

quarantine safeguard regulations (7 CFR part 352). Mexican avocados

shipped in-transit to Canada are not eligible for reshipment into the

United States, even if they were produced in accordance with the

requirements of the Mexican avocado import program in Sec. 319.56-2ff.

Comment: We endorse the aspect of the proposed rule that would deny

an import permit or compliance agreement to any person who has

repeatedly disregarded or violated the terms of an import permit or

compliance agreement. However, we believe that the Department should

expand this proposed provision to any person who has been found by a

court--either an administrative court or a Federal court--to have

violated the requirements of other regulatory programs administered by

the Department. Inasmuch as such persons have demonstrated their

disregard for the Department's regulations, they

[[Page 68002]]

cannot be relied upon or expected to fulfill the requirements of the

Mexican avocado import program.

Response: It is the exception, rather than the rule, for our

enforcement actions against a regulatory violator to reach the level of

an administrative hearing or a Federal court; most often, a person

cited for a violation will settle by agreeing to pay a civil or

criminal penalty. Given that, it does not appear that the commenter's

recommendation would be as useful a mechanism for ensuring compliance

as it might seem. Further, expanding the denial provisions described in

the proposal to include violations of any of the Department's

regulatory programs would have ramifications for those programs as well

as for the Mexican avocado import program.

Comment: We do not believe that it is proper for the Animal and

Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) to use regulatory procedures

(i.e., the proposed compliance agreement requirement) as an educational

tool, particularly when penalties and restraints on trade may be

imposed on parties who are in lawful compliance with the substance of

the regulations pertaining to handling and distribution of Mexican Hass

avocados.

Response: APHIS would have no reason to impose any kind of penalty

on any person who is ``in lawful compliance with the substance of the

regulations.'' Further, we believe that it is completely appropriate to

use compliance agreements as an educational tool, as they are furnished

free of charge, take a minimal amount of time to execute, and provide

an excellent opportunity for the APHIS personnel who will be meeting

with those persons entering into compliance agreements to provide

information and answer questions.

Comment: It is neither proper nor necessary for APHIS to require

handlers and distributors to enter into compliance agreements in order

to educate them as to the requirements of the regulations and to ensure

that they receive copies of the regulations. There are a limited number

of persons engaged in the handling and distribution of Mexican Hass

avocados, and there are many venues (e.g., industry publications,

direct mail, and trade show presentations) available through which

APHIS could provide full notice of the import program's requirements.

APHIS should not be using the proposed compliance agreement requirement

as a substitute for discharging its own responsibilities for making its

regulations known to the public and enforcing those regulations.

Response: We have pursued the venues suggested by the commenter in

disseminating information about the regulations; press releases

explaining the import program were distributed at the time the

regulations were established, stories were printed in the popular press

and in industry publications, and APHIS personnel have visited large

markets and individual firms in an effort to inform avocado handlers

about the requirements of the regulations, especially the distribution

limitations. Further, those distribution limitations are printed on

every box of Mexican Hass avocados. Even with those measures, some

distributors and handlers still claim to be unaware that the

distribution and sale of Mexican Hass avocados is limited to the

approved 19 States and the District of Colombia. The compliance

agreement is one more way to spread the word, an attempt to reach each

and every one of the ``limited number of persons engaged in the

handling and distribution of Mexican Hass avocados'' in order to ensure

that they are aware of the requirements of the regulations. Beyond its

value as an educational tool, the compliance agreement will make it

that much easier to take action against those persons who choose to

violate the regulations.

Comment: Private firms are neither empowered nor authorized to

``ensure'' compliance with Federal laws and regulations. That is the

duty and responsibility of the Government. The proposed regulations are

not enforceable by private firms against another firm, but the

penalties would be imposed on the first party for the possible wrongful

acts of a second or third party. This is not appropriate.

Response: We are not asking private firms to enforce the

regulations; we are simply calling on those firms to themselves observe

the regulations, i.e., to not transfer avocados to another party for

movement or distribution unless that party possesses a compliance

agreement. If you confirm that the person to whom you are transferring

avocados for movement or distribution possesses a compliance agreement,

you have met your obligations under Sec. 319.56-2ff(k)(2) or (3). What

that person subsequently does with the avocados is beyond your control

and certainly not your responsibility. In such a situation, it is

simply not the case that ``penalties would be imposed on the first

party for the possible wrongful acts of a second or third party.''

Comment: It is not proper for APHIS to impose penalties (i.e., the

denial of import permits or compliance agreements to repeat violators)

on one party for the wrongful acts of secondary and subsequent parties.

Each permittee, distributor, or handler should be accountable for its

actions directly to the Government. Such regulatory and compliance

relations between a regulated firm and APHIS are properly the business

of those parties only, and not other parties. It is simply not

practicable for a permittee, distributor, or handler to ``ensure that

any person to whom he or she released the avocados for movement or

distribution . . . has entered into a compliance agreement.''

Response: As discussed in the response to the previous comment, a

permittee or subsequent handler who observes the requirements of the

regulations is in no danger of having a request for an import permit or

compliance agreement denied. We disagree with the commenter's assertion

that ensuring that a person has a compliance agreement is ``simply not

practicable.'' Meeting that requirement can be accomplished quickly and

would add only a relatively small amount of time to a typical

transaction between buyer and seller.

Comment: The proposed changes to the Mexican Hass avocado import

program are unnecessary. The current regulations contain sufficient

safeguards, as is evidenced by the fact that APHIS was able to detect

the presence of Mexican Hass avocados that were shipped outside the

approved States.

Response: The fact that we were able to detect the presence of

Mexican Hass avocados in markets outside the approved States highlights

the value of market surveys and the requirement that individual

avocados be marked with a sticker, but does not mean that there is no

need to amend the existing regulations. For example, some of the

Mexican Hass avocados found in markets outside the approved States

appear to have been shipped by distributors who were simply unaware of

the movement restrictions of the regulations. The compliance agreement

requirement will ensure that all distributors are aware of those

restrictions, which means that this measure alone will reduce the

number of violations. We believe that the other measures included in

this rule will prove similarly useful in reinforcing the existing

safeguards of the regulations.

Comment: As written, the registration of handlers will negatively

impact the marketing of Mexican avocados by creating a barrier that

will eliminate many sales from wholesale marketers in the northeastern

United States to customers who buy avocados in less

[[Page 68003]]

than truckload lots. For example, the operator of a small neighborhood

store in New York City may wish to purchase four cartons of avocados on

a particular day at the Hunts Point Terminal Market, but will be unable

to do so because he is not registered with APHIS. It is not practical

to expect purchasers such as the store operator or the owner of an

independent restaurant to have to register with APHIS and deliver a

copy of the compliance agreement to all potential suppliers in order to

have the right to buy Mexican avocados.

Response: The store operator and the restauranteur described by the

commenter would not be required to enter into a compliance agreement in

order to buy avocados for their store or restaurant, as they will be

offering the avocados for sale to consumers. The focus of this rule is

on making the requirements of the regulations clear to the operators of

businesses that normally buy and sell, move, or distribute commercial

lots of avocados, such as grocery chains, wholesalers, and

distributors. For example, a grocery chain or a chain's regional

distribution centers would have to enter into a compliance agreement

with APHIS, while the chain's individual retail store managers would

not. To make this clear, we have added a new sentence to Sec. 319.56-

2ff(k)(1) in this final rule that states that a compliance agreement

will not be required for an individual place of business that only

offers the avocados for sale directly to consumers.

Comment: The proposed requirement for the marking of the boxes in

which fruit is repackaged in the United States would create additional

liabilities for the growers, packers, and exporters of avocados, even

though these parties have no control over the fruit during the

repacking stage. Additional problems such as microbial contamination

from improper handling or commingling with other product may arise even

though the listed parties bear no true responsibility for the problem.

Response: The commenter did not elaborate as to what types of

``microbial contamination'' might occur during repackaging, nor did he

elaborate as to what sorts of liability might attach to a Mexican

grower, packer, or exporter in the event of such contamination. If a

repackaged box of fruit was found to be somehow contaminated, it would

be obvious from the new box that the fruit had been handled by someone

other than the original packer/exporter. Clearly, the assignment of

liability in such a situation--if indeed there was a need to assign

liability--would be a tenuous proposition. Importers and distributors

have little choice when it comes to damaged boxes of fruit. They can

repack the fruit in new boxes, or they can leave the fruit in the

damaged box; the latter option is not likely to be chosen given the

risk of further damage to the fruit, plus the fact that most of their

customers would not care to receive damaged produce. Since it is quite

likely that an importer or distributor is going to repackage the fruit

anyway, this rule's provisions regarding the marking of repackaged

fruit are a matter of ensuring that the identifying measures required

for the original boxes are maintained, thus preserving the important

information regarding the origin and identity of the avocados that

those measures provide.

Comment: The proposed compliance agreement requirement is an

additional burden that may discourage avocado distributors in the

United States from conducting business with Mexican growers altogether,

leading them to opt instead for fruit from California or from other

countries. If that is the case, the compliance agreement requirement

will be acting as a nontariff trade barrier.

Response: The time required on the part of a handler or distributor

to enter into a compliance agreement will be minimal. That person will

need to write down the name, mailing address, and location of the

person or firm entering into the agreement; review the movement and

other restrictions that apply; and sign and date the document. We

expect that an APHIS inspector would spend about 30 minutes with each

handler or distributor explaining the requirements of the regulations

and filling out the compliance agreement; the mail or a fax machine may

be used when an inspector is unable to make a personal visit. There is

no charge or user fee associated with the compliance agreement. In

addition, Mexican Hass avocados are typically available to wholesalers

at attractive prices that make the minimal effort of entering into a

compliance worthwhile. (In one of the comments we received, a

wholesaler reported that at the end of the 1998/1999 shipping season,

his fill-in supplier quoted a price of $50 to $52 for California Hass

avocados and $20 for Mexican Hass avocados.) Thus, we do not believe

that the minimal burden of entering into a compliance agreement will be

likely to discourage persons in the United States from handling or

distributing Mexican Hass avocados.

Comment: The proposed rule would increase the restrictions that

apply to the Mexican Hass avocado import program; APHIS' phytosanitary

justification for these restrictions has been that Hass avocados from

Mexico present a risk of introducing fruit flies into the United

States. Because avocados from California and Florida are not subject to

such restrictions despite the presence of fruit flies in those States,

the restrictions on Mexican Hass avocados constitute discriminatory

treatment under article 712.4 of the North American Free Trade

Agreement (NAFTA), which states, in part, that ``Each Party shall

ensure that a sanitary or phytosanitary measure that it adopts,

maintains or applies does not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate

between its goods and like goods of another Party . . . where identical

or similar conditions prevail.''

Response: Fruit flies are not the only pests of concern addressed

by the regulations; there are seed and stem pests as well. However,

even if fruit flies were the only pest of concern, we do not believe

that our restrictions on the movement of Mexican Hass avocados is in

any way discriminatory, as avocados are specifically listed as

regulated articles in all three of our domestic fruit fly quarantines

in 7 CFR part 301, i.e., Mexican fruit fly (Secs. 301.64 through

301.64-10), Mediterranean fruit fly (Secs. 301.78 through 301.78-10),

and Oriental fruit fly (Secs. 301.93 through 301.93-10).

Comment: The proposed rule, which would increase the restrictions

that apply to the Mexican Hass avocado import program, is at odds with

Mexico's request that APHIS consider expanding both the number of

States to which Mexican Hass avocados could be shipped and the length

of the shipping season. It has been scientifically and practically

demonstrated that the Hass avocado is not a fruit fly host, so APHIS

does not have the scientific basis to adopt additional restrictions or

even maintain some of its current restrictions (NAFTA article 712.1).

In the absence of a scientific basis for their application, those

restrictions could be viewed as disguised restrictions on trade (NAFTA

articles 712.5 and 713.3).

Response: Although we do consider commercially grown Hass avocados

to be a nonpreferred host for fruit flies, and thus a low risk for

introducing fruit flies, we do not yet possess conclusive, published

evidence that they are a nonhost as asserted by the commenter. We

understand that Mexico is working on research in that area, and we

would certainly consider conclusive evidence proving the nonhost status

of Hass avocados as the grounds for changes to the Mexican avocado

import program, as well as to our domestic fruit fly regulations. That

being said, however, it is important to remember that fruit flies are

not the only pests of concern addressed by the requirements of the

[[Page 68004]]

Mexican Hass avocado import regulations. Those regulations also address

the risks presented by the avocado seed pests Heilipus lauri,

Conotrachelus aquacatae, C. perseae, and Stenoma catenifer, as well as

the stem weevil Copturus aguacatae.

Proposed Amendments to Stickering Requirement

In our proposed rule, we had proposed to amend the current fruit-

stickering requirement of Sec. 319.56-2ff(c)(3)(vi) of the regulations

to require that the stickers not only bear the Sanidad Vegetal

registration number of the packinghouse, but that they also bear the

letters ``M/US'' after that number, and that those stickers be used

only for fruit produced in accordance with Sec. 319.56-2ff for export

to the United States. The Mexican Government officials who responded to

the proposed rule objected to the proposed limitations on the use of

the stickers on the grounds that such limitations are an intrusion on

Mexico's sovereignty. Those officials stated that APHIS does not have

the authority to restrict Mexican producers from using any particular

label on fruit that is distributed within Mexico, arguing that only

Mexico can issue regulations affecting its domestic market.

Our intent in proposing those amendments to the stickering

requirement was to ensure that the stickers would serve their intended

purpose of making it easier to identify Mexican-origin avocados and

would further allow us to differentiate between program fruit and

nonprogram fruit that may have been smuggled into the United States. We

acknowledge, however, that the proposed limitation on the use of the

stickers would also have the effect of placing restrictions on domestic

commerce within Mexico. Therefore, in deference to the concerns raised

by the Mexican Government, we have omitted from this final rule the

proposed requirement that the stickers required by Sec. 319.56-

2ff(c)(3)(vi) be used only for fruit produced in accordance with

Sec. 319.56-2ff for export to the United States. Further, because the

inclusion of the letters ``M/US'' on the required sticker would serve

no practical purpose in the absence of the proposed limitations on the

use of the stickers, we have also omitted that aspect of the proposed

rule from this final rule.

Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this

document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, with the

changes discussed in this document.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule

has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive

Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of

Management and Budget.

This rule amends our regulations governing the importation of Hass

avocados from Mexico to require handlers and distributors to enter into

compliance agreements with APHIS and adds requirements regarding the

repackaging of the avocados after their entry into the United States.

These amendments will ensure that distributors and handlers are

familiar with the distribution restrictions and other requirements of

the regulations and will ensure that any boxes used to repackage the

avocados in the United States bear the same information that is

required to be displayed on the original boxes in which the fruit was

packed in Mexico.

During the first shipping season for Mexican Hass avocados

(November 1997 through February 1998), Mexico exported 13.296 million

pounds of fresh avocados to the northeastern United States (U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, GAIN Report

No. MX8140, November 24, 1998). During the second shipping season

(November 1998 through February 1999), Mexico exported approximately 22

million pounds of fresh avocados to the northeastern United States.

Although it was anticipated that the importation of fresh Hass

avocados from Mexico into the northeastern United States would result

in lower prices for consumers and losses for domestic avocado

producers, there has, to date, been little or no price change. The

average wholesale price for avocados in the approved 19 northeastern

States and the District of Columbia before the first shipping season

began in November 1997 was $1.47 per pound, while after the shipping

season began, the average wholesale price was $1.60 per pound. For the

nonapproved States, the average wholesale prices were $1.46 before

November 1997 and $1.57 after the first shipping season began. (The

wholesale prices in the approved States are based on averages in

Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, New York, and Philadelphia; the

wholesale prices for the nonapproved States are based on averages in

Atlanta, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, San Francisco, and Seattle.) There

was no statistically significant difference between the wholesale

prices in the approved States and the nonapproved States before or

after Mexican Hass avocados entered the domestic market. It should be

noted that the average wholesale prices for fresh avocados in Mexico

were only about $0.33 and $0.32 per pound in 1997 and 1998,

respectively.

Because compliance agreements are available from APHIS free of

charge, the only aspect of this rule that may result in additional

costs for any U.S. entities, large or small, is the requirement for the

marking of new boxes in cases where the avocados are repackaged after

their entry into the United States. According to industry sources, the

cost of the current identification requirements of the regulations,

which includes both box marking and fruit stickering, is approximately

$0.06 per pound. This cost is borne at the Mexican production/export

end of the Hass avocado export program. If 20 percent of all shipments

had to be repackaged following their arrival in the United States due

to damage to original shipping boxes or for other reasons, this rule's

requirement for the marking of new boxes could result in additional

costs to U.S. importers or distributors of approximately $160,000 to

$264,000. This estimate was arrived at using 20 percent of the total

volume of Mexican Hass avocados shipped to the northeastern United

States during the two export seasons of 1997-1998 (13.296 million

pounds x $0.06 x 0.2 = $159,552) and 1998-1999 (22 million pounds

x $0.06 x 0.2 = $264,000). However, because the $0.06 figure used

includes the costs of the required stickering as well as box marking,

it is likely that the costs to U.S. importers or distributors of

marking new boxes in the United States will actually be less than that

estimate. Since, as noted above, the price spread between domestic and

Mexican wholesale prices is so large, U.S. importers and distributors

may be able to absorb any additional costs resulting from the

requirement for marking new boxes without passing those costs on to

consumers.

Under these circumstances, the 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 12988

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil

Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws and

regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no

retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.

[[Page 68005]]

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements

included in this rule have been approved by the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) under OMB control number 0579-0129.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 319

Bees, Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Honey, Imports, Logs, Nursery Stock,

Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Rice, Vegetables.

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

PART 319--FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES

1. The authority citation for part 319 continues 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 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(c).

2. In Sec. 319.56-2ff, new paragraphs (j) and (k) are added to read

as follows:

Sec. 319.56-2ff Administrative instructions governing movement of Hass

avocados from Mexico to the Northeastern United States.

* * * * *

(j) Repackaging. If any avocados are removed from their original

shipping boxes and repackaged, the stickers required by paragraph

(c)(3)(vi) of this section may not be removed or obscured and the new

boxes must be clearly marked with all the information required by

paragraph (c)(3)(vii) of this section.

(k) Compliance agreements. (1) Any person, other than the

permittee, who moves or distributes the avocados following their

importation into the United States (i.e., a second-party or subsequent

handler) must enter into a compliance agreement with APHIS. In the

compliance agreement, the person must acknowledge, and agree to

observe, the requirements of paragraph (a) and paragraphs (f) through

(k) of this section. Compliance agreement forms are available, free of

charge, from local offices of Plant Protection and Quarantine, which

are listed in local telephone directories. A compliance agreement will

not be required for an individual place of business that only offers

the avocados for sale directly to consumers.

(2) Before transferring the avocados to any person (i.e., a second-

party handler) for movement or distribution, the permittee must confirm

that the second-party handler has entered into a compliance agreement

with APHIS as required by paragraph (k)(1) of this section. If the

permittee transfers the avocados to a second-party handler who has not

entered into a compliance agreement, APHIS may revoke the permittee's

import permit for the remainder of the current shipping season.

(3) Any second-party or subsequent handler who transfers the

avocados to another person for movement or distribution must confirm

that the person receiving the avocados has entered into a compliance

agreement with APHIS as required by paragraph (k)(1) of this section.

If the second-party or subsequent handler transfers the avocados to a

person who has not entered into a compliance agreement, APHIS may

revoke the handler's compliance agreement for the remainder of the

current shipping season.

(4) Action on repeat violators. APHIS may deny an application for

an import permit from, or refuse to enter into a compliance agreement

with, any person who has had his or her import permit or compliance

agreement revoked under paragraph (k)(2) or (k)(3) of this section

twice within any 5-year period.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control

number 0579-0129.)

Done in Washington, DC, this 30th day of November 1999.

Craig A. Reed,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 99-31513 Filed 12-3-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-34-U