[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 8, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44425-44433]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15421]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 44425]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

7 CFR Part 319

[Docket No. 03-002-4]
RIN 0579-AC55


Importation of Nursery Stock; Postentry Quarantine Requirements 
for Potential Hosts of Chrysanthemum White Rust and Definition of From

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal and reproposal.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations on importing nursery 
stock by providing an option in which the postentry quarantine growing 
period for articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are imported from certain locations 
would be reduced from 6 months to 2 months, provided that the grower of 
those plants has implemented a systems approach to prevent the imported 
articles from being infected with chrysanthemum white rust. This 
proposal replaces part of a previous proposal that would also have 
provided an option in which the length of the postentry quarantine 
period for potential hosts of chrysanthemum white rust would have been 
reduced provided that the grower entered into a disease-prevention 
program. We are issuing this reproposal to further discuss the evidence 
that led us to conclude that a 2-month postentry quarantine period is 
adequate and to clarify how the systems approach would work. We are 
also proposing to amend the definition of from. The definition proposed 
in this document would replace the definition of from that was included 
in a previous proposal. We are proposing the new definition in response 
to concerns raised by comments on the previous proposal.

DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before 
October 9, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov, select ``Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service'' from the agency drop-down menu, then click ``Submit.'' In the 
Docket ID column, select APHIS-2005-0081 to submit or view public 
comments and to view supporting and related materials available 
electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including 
instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing 
the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through 
the site's ``User Tips'' link.
     Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies 
of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. 03-002-4, 
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 
River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your 
comment refers to Docket No. 03-002-4.
    Reading Room: You may read any comments that we receive on this 
docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of 
the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to 
help you, please call (202) 690-2817 before coming.
    Other Information: Additional information about APHIS and its 
programs is available on the Internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Arnold T. Tschanz, Senior Import 
Specialist, Plants for Planting Import and Analysis, Commodity Import 
Analysis and Operations, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, 
Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 734-5306.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The regulations in 7 CFR part 319 prohibit or restrict the 
importation of certain plants and plant products into the United States 
to prevent the introduction of plant pests. The regulations contained 
in ``Subpart--Nursery Stock, Plants, Roots, Bulbs, Seeds, and Other 
Plant Products,'' Sec. Sec.  319.37 through 319.37-14 (referred to 
below as the regulations), restrict, among other things, the 
importation of living plants, plant parts, and seeds for propagation.
    The regulations in Sec.  319.37-7(a) designate as restricted 
articles any articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, 
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that meet the conditions for importation 
in Sec.  319.37-5(c) and that are imported from any foreign locality 
except Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Canary Islands, Chile, China, Colombia, 
Croatia, Ecuador, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, 
Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Republic 
of South Africa, Russia, San Marino, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, 
Tunisia, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia; the European Union 
(Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, 
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, 
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, 
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and United Kingdom); and all 
countries, territories, and possessions of countries located in part or 
entirely between 90[deg] and 180[deg] East longitude. Articles 
designated as restricted articles in Sec.  319.37-7(a) must be grown in 
postentry quarantine under the conditions described in paragraphs (c) 
and (d) of Sec.  319.37-7. Paragraph (d)(7)(ii) currently requires 
restricted articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum to be grown in postentry quarantine for a 
period of 6 months.
    The pest of concern with regard to imported articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum is chrysanthemum white rust (CWR). CWR is caused by Puccinia 
horiana Henn., a filamentous fungus and obligate parasite. CWR is not 
established in the United States and is a disease of quarantine 
significance. This disease has the potential to be extremely damaging 
to the commercial horticulture and florist industries if it becomes 
established in the United

[[Page 44426]]

States. The postentry quarantine growing period for articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum is intended to allow symptoms of the disease, if it is 
present, to express themselves, so that any restricted articles that 
are affected with CWR can be prevented from entering U.S. commerce.
    On December 15, 2005, we published in the Federal Register (Docket 
No. 03-002-1, 70 FR 74215-74235) a proposal \1\ to make several 
amendments to the nursery stock regulations. We solicited comments 
concerning the proposal for 60 days ending February 13, 2006. We 
reopened and extended the deadline for comments until March 31, 2006, 
in a document published in the Federal Register on February 28, 2006 
(71 FR 9978, Docket No. 03-002-2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ To view the proposed rule and the comments we received, go 
to http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2005-0081. Note: Since the 
publication of the proposed rule, a final rule published in the 
Federal Register on April 3, 2007 (Docket No 03-016-3, 72 FR 15805-
15812) expanded the list of countries from which exportation of CWR 
hosts is subject to postentry quarantine restrictions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among the changes discussed in the December 2005 proposal was 
providing an option in which the postentry quarantine growing period 
for articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum would be reduced from 6 months to 2 months if 
the articles were grown in accordance with a best management practices 
program approved by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 
(APHIS). The Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) program had 
evaluated the available scientific literature and found that 2 months 
was an adequate amount of time for CWR to express itself in postentry 
quarantine; we proposed to require the best management practices 
program as an additional safeguard.
    We received 25 comments on the proposed rule, from 23 commenters, 
including private citizens, State and local governments, industry 
organizations, individual industry companies, and foreign national 
plant protection organizations. Sixteen of these commenters addressed 
the proposed change to the postentry quarantine requirements for 
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum. While many commenters supported the change, 
many commenters were confused regarding whether the best management 
practices program was intended to apply to production in the country of 
origin or to postentry quarantine in the United States. In addition, 
some commenters disputed our conclusion that 2 months is an adequate 
amount of time for symptoms of CWR infection to be expressed in 
postentry quarantine.
    To address these comments, we are withdrawing that portion of the 
December 2005 proposal that dealt with postentry quarantine for 
imported articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum. We are replacing it with this proposal, 
which discusses in greater detail the evidence that leads us to 
conclude that a 2-month postentry quarantine period for imported 
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum is adequate. This proposal also presents new 
requirements for the systems approach that more clearly indicate that 
they apply to growing in the country of origin. We are also explaining 
in more detail how the systems approach would be used. (We used the 
term ``best management practices program'' to describe the intended 
program in the December 2005 proposed rule. We are replacing it with 
the term ``systems approach'' in this reproposal to clarify our 
terminology.)
    We discuss the postentry quarantine period and the requirements of 
the systems approach in detail directly below.

Evidence Supporting Reducing the Postentry Quarantine Period for 
Articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum From 6 Months to 2 Months

    In the December 2005 proposed rule, we stated the following: 
``PPQ's Center for Plant Health Science and Technology has reviewed the 
available evidence regarding the time within which CWR will express 
symptoms. Although substantial evidence indicates that articles 
affected with CWR will express symptoms within 2 months, meaning that 2 
months would be an adequate postentry quarantine period for these 
articles, not all the available evidence confirms that.''
    We received several comments on our statement that 2 months would 
be an adequate postentry quarantine period for these articles. The 
issues raised by these commenters are described below.
    Four commenters strongly supported all aspects of the proposal, 
including our determination that a 2-month postentry quarantine period 
was sufficient to allow expression of CWR in articles of Chrysanthemum 
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum. One of 
these commenters reviewed the available literature and concluded that 
most available studies indicate that CWR is expressed in normal 
conditions within 2 weeks, with an upper limit of 2 months in extreme 
conditions such as high temperatures or massive inoculations in a 
research setting.
    This commenter also noted that, in the June 2002 version of the 
APHIS document ``Chrysanthemum White Rust: A National Management Plan 
for Exclusion and Eradication,'' we stated that in the event that a 
nursery is found to be infected with CWR, no plant should leave the 
nursery for 8 weeks or until the nursery has been inspected and 
certified as being free of CWR. The current version of this document 
provides for an 8-week host-free period at any nursery at which plants 
are found to be infected with CWR. The commenter indicated that this 
document supports the statement that the 2-month postentry quarantine 
is adequate for expression of CWR symptoms.
    Two more commenters supported the proposed reduction in the 
postentry quarantine period on the condition that the reduction was 
based on science.
    Three commenters were concerned about our statement that not all 
the available evidence confirms that CWR is expressed in postentry 
quarantine within 2 months, asking us to discuss any evidence that 
might show that a longer postentry quarantine period is necessary for 
the expression of CWR.
    Seven commenters took issue with the proposed reduction in the 
postentry quarantine period for articles of Chrysanthemum spp., 
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum. Five of these 
commenters stated that, under certain environmental and climatic 
conditions, CWR would not be expressed in a 2-month postentry 
quarantine period; they stated that the disease cycle of CWR requires 
cool, wet conditions in order to exhibit its symptoms. One commenter 
stated specifically that basidiospores (airborne spores) of the CWR 
fungus are produced and released during periods of relatively high 
humidity and when temperatures are between 40 [deg]F and 73 [deg]F, 
with optimum expression at 63 [deg]F. In southern California, these 
cool temperatures occur only from November through June. Even using 
APHIS-approved best management practices, the commenter stated, the 
conditions necessary for CWR infections could not be created in a 
greenhouse during the hot summer months. Under the December 2005 
proposal, stated the commenter, cuttings infected with CWR

[[Page 44427]]

could conceivably be imported in July and released 2 months later in 
September and never show any symptoms, because climatic conditions at 
that time of year preclude symptoms from being exhibited.
    Based on these comments, we again reviewed the available evidence 
regarding the expression of CWR. Our statement in the December 2005 
proposal that ``not all the available evidence confirms'' that 2 months 
is an adequate postentry quarantine period for CWR hosts was incorrect. 
The longest time between infection and symptom development that has 
been reported is 8 weeks. This was reported to have been achieved when 
infected cuttings were experimentally exposed to 86 [deg]F (30 [deg]C) 
temperatures for several hours, in an effort to simulate hot climatic 
conditions. However, efforts to reproduce this effect experimentally 
have been unsuccessful, and it has not been reported in the field.
    Most references on CWR concur that the disease usually expresses 
itself in between 5 to 14 days, depending on the prevailing climatic 
conditions. Warm temperatures increase the latency period, but in most 
cases not beyond 14 days, and we are not aware of any reports 
describing increases in the latency period beyond 2 months. The 
commenter who stated that CWR requires cool temperatures for 
expression, and thus that warm temperatures will delay expression of 
the disease indefinitely, did not provide a reference to support that 
statement, and we have been unable to locate any references confirming 
it. We invite commenters to submit any additional information that may 
be pertinent to this subject.
    We would also like to clarify the difference between the purpose of 
the 8-week host-free period in our CWR management plan and the time 
necessary for expression of symptoms of CWR in postentry quarantine. 
Teliospores of P. horiana can survive for up to 8 weeks in favorable 
climatic conditions on the leaves of CWR hosts, even in the absence of 
living plants. Keeping premises free of host plants for at least 8 
weeks ensures that all the teliospores in the premises die, making it 
safe to repopulate the premises with CWR hosts. By contrast, the 
postentry quarantine period is not used to ensure disease freedom at a 
premises, but rather to determine whether potential hosts are infected 
with CWR. If a living plant is infected with CWR (either with 
teliospores or the shorter lived basidiospores), the disease will 
express itself within 5 to 14 days under normal conditions. The period 
required for eradication of CWR from a premises and the postentry 
quarantine period we are proposing are of similar length, but they have 
no relationship to each other.
    While 2 months appears to be an adequate postentry quarantine 
growing period for CWR hosts, we would require that CWR hosts grown in 
postentry quarantine for 2 months also be produced under a systems 
approach. We would include this additional safeguard because of the 
danger CWR presents to the domestic floral industry. Efforts to 
eradicate CWR outbreaks in the United States have been costly for 
growers, who typically must destroy all plants within a 1-meter radius 
of any infected plant, treat the entire production site to neutralize 
any remaining CWR spores, and implement a host-free period to prevent 
reintroduction of the rust. In a 2006 outbreak of CWR in California, 
the estimated cost per acre of implementing the host-free period alone 
was $54,594. Given that the entire production site must implement the 
host-free period in order to eradicate CWR, the eradication costs to 
producers can be considerable. The requirements of the systems approach 
would provide additional assurance that CWR-infected plants would not 
be introduced into the United States under the 2-month postentry 
quarantine period.
    One commenter additionally objected to the proposed 2-month 
postentry quarantine period as too short to allow for the necessary 
inspection of the plants being grown in postentry quarantine. This 
commenter stated that postentry quarantine inspections are usually 
conducted in spring and fall to increase the chances of finding a 
quarantine pest. Under the December 2005 proposal, the commenter 
stated, an importer could conceivably time the importation of cuttings 
to essentially avoid inspection. In this commenter's experience, when 
plants are imported for postentry quarantine, 2 or more months may pass 
before authorities at the local level receive notification from APHIS 
that the plants have arrived in the area. With a 2-month postentry 
quarantine period, the commenter stated, the material may have been 
shipped throughout the United States before local authorities have been 
notified that it was imported and before they have had a chance to 
conduct an inspection.
    The regulations in Sec.  319.37-7(c) set out requirements for the 
postentry quarantine agreements that APHIS concludes with States. Under 
paragraph (c)(3)(iii), the Administrator is required to notify State 
officials, in writing and within 10 days of the arrival, when plant 
material destined for postentry quarantine in their State arrives in 
the United States. Under paragraph (c)(2)(iii), States are required to 
provide the services of State inspectors to inspect plants for evidence 
of exotic pests at least once for plants required to be grown in 
quarantine for less than 2 years. After this, again under paragraph 
(c)(3)(iii), the Administrator shall notify State officials in writing 
when materials in postentry quarantine may be released from quarantine 
in their State. We do not notify State officials that materials in 
postentry quarantine may be released from quarantine until we have 
received the results of the State inspection of the materials. If an 
importer removes plant material in postentry quarantine from the 
approved site before the Administrator notifies State officials that it 
may be released, then that importer is in violation of the regulations.
    Two other commenters objected generally to what they perceived as 
the loosening of restrictions on the importation of articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum, given that CWR outbreaks continue to occur occasionally in 
the United States. In these commenters' opinions, unless the reduced 
postentry quarantine period and the systems approach would encourage 
legal importation of those articles that are currently imported without 
complying with our regulations, the perceived additional risk of 
reducing the postentry quarantine period would not be warranted.
    As discussed earlier, our decision to reduce the postentry 
quarantine period for imported articles of Chrysanthemum spp., 
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum is supported by 
science; it is not motivated by the goal of reducing illegal trade of 
those articles. We do not believe that providing an option in which the 
postentry quarantine period for imported articles of Chrysanthemum 
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum is reduced 
to 2 months will increase the risk of allowing a plant that is infected 
with CWR to enter U.S. commerce, especially if the plants are produced 
in compliance with the requirements of systems approach.
    It is important to note that the postentry quarantine restrictions 
placed on CWR hosts in the regulations apply to the importation of CWR 
hosts from countries where CWR is not known to occur. We prohibit the 
importation of CWR hosts from countries where CWR is known to occur in 
Sec.  319.37-2(a). CWR has not been detected in any host plants

[[Page 44428]]

imported under the current postentry quarantine program in the last 10 
years. We believe the introductions of CWR that the commenter cites 
were the result of illegal importations. We are continuing to work 
through our Smuggling Interdiction and Trade Compliance program and 
with the Department of Homeland Security's Bureau of Customs and Border 
Protection to prevent such introductions.
    Because the option we are proposing would reduce the postentry 
quarantine period to the time actually required for expression of 
symptoms while imposing additional phytosanitary safeguards on the 
production of CWR host materials, we believe the program we are 
proposing here would be as effective as our current program.
    Two commenters suggested that APHIS issue a departmental permit to 
allow a reduction in the postentry quarantine period.
    Departmental permits are issued under Sec.  319.37-2(c) and provide 
for the importation of articles that are listed as prohibited under 
paragraphs (a) and (b) of Sec.  319.37-2 for experimental or scientific 
purposes; APHIS may specify conditions for such importation that are 
adequate to prevent the introduction into the United States of plant 
pests. However, articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella 
serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are eligible to be 
imported under postentry quarantine conditions are, by definition, not 
prohibited articles. Therefore, using the departmental permit to 
facilitate their importation in this way would not be appropriate. In 
addition, the departmental permit is intended for us only to allow 
importation for experimental or scientific purposes.

Systems Approach for Articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella 
serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum Imported Into the United States

    As many commenters noted, our explanation of the best management 
practices program cited in the December 2005 proposed rule did not make 
clear whether the program would be applied to imported articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum during their growth in their country of origin or to their 
growth during postentry quarantine. Many commenters interpreted our 
description of the best management practices program to mean that it 
would apply to the growth of these articles during postentry 
quarantine, and objected to the increased responsibility placed on 
Federal and State entities to monitor postentry quarantine under the 
conditions of the best management practices program. Some of these 
commenters further stated that a program to prevent the articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum from being infected with CWR while being grown in the 
country of origin, prior to importation into the United States, would 
be more effective, both in terms of cost and in terms of phytosanitary 
security.
    We agree with these comments. We had intended for the best 
management practices program described in the December 2005 proposal to 
apply to the growth of these plants in the country of origin, and the 
systems approach we are proposing to require as a condition of reducing 
the postentry quarantine period from 6 to 2 months would also apply to 
the growth of articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, 
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum in their country of origin. In this 
proposal, we have revised the requirements of the systems approach in 
order to make it clear that they would apply to growth in the country 
of origin.
    In order to be eligible for participation in this program, the 
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum would have to be grown in a production site 
that is a greenhouse or other enclosed building. The proposed systems 
approach would specify several basic requirements to be fulfilled 
during the production of those articles and prior to their importation 
to the United States. These requirements are the following:
     Production sites would have to generate plants for 
planting from propagative material that is free of CWR.
     Production sites would have to write and implement 
standard operating procedures that include provisions for adequate pest 
control, isolation of the production site from host material not 
intended for export to the United States, regular inspection and 
testing, and training of production site employees.
     Production sites would have to keep detailed records of 
all aspects of plant production, including the origin of articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum that will be exported so that they may be traced back if 
necessary. Production sites would have to label the containers in which 
the articles are shipped in order to facilitate traceback 
investigations.
     The national plant protection organization (NPPO) of the 
country in which the production site is located would have to oversee 
the production site and perform regular audits to ensure that all 
elements of the production system are in compliance with the 
requirements of the systems approach and the workplan.
     APHIS would have to be allowed to perform on-site audits 
of the production site as well. APHIS would also perform audits at the 
port of entry into which the plants are imported to ensure that these 
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum meet the requirements of the systems approach 
and the workplan.
     The NPPO of the country in which the production site is 
located and APHIS would impose penalties and remedial actions in the 
case of noncompliance. The NPPO would not issue phytosanitary 
certificates for shipments of articles of Chrysanthemum spp., 
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum exported under 
the systems approach if an audit revealed that the articles were not 
grown in compliance with the requirements of the systems approach and 
the workplan. Penalties that could be imposed would include, but would 
not necessarily be limited to, removal of the exporting production site 
from the list of growers approved by APHIS to ship these articles to 
the United States under this program.
     The government of the country in which the articles are 
produced or its designated representative would have to enter into a 
trust fund agreement with APHIS before each growing season. The 
government of the country in which the articles are produced or its 
designated representative would have to pay in advance all estimated 
costs that APHIS expects to incur through its involvement in overseeing 
the execution of the systems approach. (The specific level of APHIS 
involvement will vary with the terms of the workplan; APHIS involvement 
may range from regular inspections of production sites to occasional 
on-site audits.) Details on this requirement can be found in the 
proposed regulatory text at the end of this document.
    Two commenters on the December 2005 proposal asked to review the 
program we described in that rule. We are not proposing to add specific 
phytosanitary requirements to the regulations. Instead, we are 
proposing to set out the performance standards in the regulations. If 
this rule is finalized, the NPPO of a country that wishes to export 
articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum to the United States for a postentry 
quarantine

[[Page 44429]]

growing period of 2 months (rather than 6 months) would submit to us a 
detailed proposal for operational plans and procedures that fulfill the 
performance standards. We would then work with the NPPO of the 
exporting country to agree upon a final set of operational plans and 
procedures, which would be codified in a bilateral workplan.\2\ Thus, 
the regulations would require that the articles be produced in 
accordance with a workplan that meets the requirements of the systems 
approach, as listed in the regulations. We anticipate that the specific 
conditions required by a workplan will vary according to the conditions 
in the country and facility where the workplan is implemented, and as 
such we do not have a single workplan that we can make available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ We published in the Federal Register a notice providing 
background information on bilateral workplans on May 10, 2006 (71 FR 
27221-27224, Docket No. APHIS-2005-0085). It can be accessed at 
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&d=APHIS-AOGUS-2005-0085-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The changes discussed in this proposal would reduce the cost of 
postentry quarantine for importers of articles of Chrysanthemum spp., 
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum while continuing 
to protect against the introduction of CWR into the United States.

Proposed Amendments to the Regulations

    In Sec.  319.37-7, paragraph (d)(7)(ii) lists articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Dendranthema spp.,\3\ Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum, articles of Dianthus spp., and articles of 
Hydrangea spp. as articles for which a postentry quarantine growing 
period of less than 2 years is permitted. In the December 2005 
proposal, we proposed to add articles of Chrysanthemum spp., 
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum produced in 
accordance with a best management practices program to this list, with 
a 2-month postentry quarantine period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The April 2007 final rule referred to earlier was intended 
to remove all references to Dendranthema spp. within the text of the 
regulations but inadvertently did not remove the reference in this 
paragraph. In this proposed rule, we would correct that error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this document, we are proposing to amend the regulations in 
Sec.  319.37-5(c). This paragraph presently requires that any 
restricted article (except seeds) of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella 
serotina, or Nipponanthemum nipponicum from any foreign place other 
than countries where CWR is known to occur shall, at the time of 
arrival at the port of first arrival in United States, be accompanied 
by a phytosanitary certificate of inspection containing a declaration 
that the article was grown in a greenhouse nursery and found by the 
NPPO of the country in which grown to be free from CWR. This finding 
must be based on visual examination of the parent stock, the articles 
for importation, and the greenhouse nursery in which the articles for 
importation and the parent stock were grown, once a month for 4 
consecutive months immediately prior to importation. Imported articles 
of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, or Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum must satisfy this requirement in order to be eligible to 
enter the United States for postentry quarantine. We would move these 
current requirements into paragraph (c)(1) and add the systems approach 
requirements described earlier in a new paragraph (c)(2).
    In Sec.  319.37-7(d)(7)(ii), we would break up the list of articles 
eligible for postentry quarantine of less than 2 years into 
subparagraphs for ease of reading.
    Under this proposal, paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(A) of Sec.  319.37-7 
would indicate that an article of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella 
serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that meets the requirements of 
Sec.  319.37-5(c)(2) would be required to be grown in postentry 
quarantine for 2 months.
    Paragraph (d)(7)(ii)(B) would state that an article of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum that meets the requirements of Sec.  319.37-5(c)(1) would be 
required to be grown in postentry quarantine for 6 months.
    Paragraphs (d)(7)(ii)(C) and (d)(7)(ii)(D) would contain the 
current language regarding articles of Dianthus spp. and Hydrangea spp.

Other Comments on the December 2005 Proposal

    Two commenters on the December 2005 proposal suggested that APHIS 
include provisions for a trust fund. The commenters suggested that the 
fund could be used to properly administer the current CWR regulations 
and monitor for the disease, and to help defray the cost of eradication 
when outbreaks occur.
    We provide for trust funds in the regulations when the regulations 
require that APHIS provide services to foreign growers, such as 
monitoring or certification. The trust fund that would be required for 
the implementation of the systems approach for CWR in this proposal is 
one example. We do not use trust funds as a means of providing 
insurance against the introduction of a disease. APHIS will continue to 
enforce the regulations governing the importation of all articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum and to survey for signs of CWR infection in plants in the 
United States in cooperation with State governments.
    One commenter, the Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, Nature, and 
Food Quality (the Netherlands NPPO), noted that importation of articles 
of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum from the Netherlands (as well as the rest of Europe) is 
prohibited under Sec.  319.37-2(a). The Netherlands NPPO asked that 
APHIS recognize the European Union (EU) Directive 2000/29, Annex IV-A-
II, item 21.1, which requires propagative material of Chrysanthemum 
spp. to be regularly inspected during the growing season and to be 
inspected prior to export. The commenter also noted that the 
Netherlands NPPO is not aware of CWR ever having been detected on 
Chrysanthemum spp. cuttings exported from the Netherlands. The 
commenter stated that articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella 
serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum from the Netherlands that are 
produced under the requirements of this directive should be admissible.
    The commenter further noted that one grower in its country has a 
program in place that appears to satisfy the requirements of the best 
management practices program as we described it in the December 2005 
proposed rule.
    As the commenter noted, importation of articles of Chrysanthemum 
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum from the 
Netherlands is currently prohibited under Sec.  319.37-2(a). The 
December 2005 proposal did not propose to change that, nor does this 
proposal.
    The Netherlands has submitted a formal request for APHIS to 
evaluate the conditions provided under the EU directive and the 
conditions of these programs in place at the grower cited in the 
comment. APHIS will evaluate the request to determine whether articles 
of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum produced under these conditions should be either allowed to 
be imported subject to postentry quarantine or generally admissible. If 
the evaluation indicates that their importation should be allowed, we 
will

[[Page 44430]]

publish a separate proposal to amend the regulations.

Definition of From

    The definition of from in Sec.  319.37-1 currently provides that an 
article is considered to be ``from'' any country or locality in which 
it was grown. The current regulations also provide that an article 
imported into Canada from another country or locality shall be 
considered as being solely ``from'' Canada if it is imported into the 
United States directly from Canada after having been grown for at least 
1 year in Canada; has never been grown in a country from which it would 
be a prohibited article or from which it would be subject to special 
foreign inspection, certification, treatment, or other requirements; 
was not grown in a country or locality from which it would be subject 
to postentry quarantine requirements, unless it was grown in Canada 
under postentry growing conditions equivalent to those specified for 
the article in Sec.  319.37-7; and was not imported into Canada in 
growing media.
    In the December 2005 proposed rule, we proposed to replace this 
definition with a new definition of from, in order to remove the 
special provisions related to the importation of regulated articles 
from Canada. The proposed definition of from read: ``An article is 
considered to be `from' an exporting country or area when it was grown 
or propagated only in the exporting country or area, or when it was 
grown in the exporting country or area after it entered the exporting 
country or area from another country or area under conditions that are 
equivalent to those that would be required by the United States if the 
plant were imported into the United States directly from any of the 
countries or areas where the plant was grown prior to its entry into 
the exporting country or area.''
    We received several comments on our proposed definition. Many of 
these commenters were concerned that the proposed definition might 
weaken our protections against the importation of potentially risky 
nursery stock. Three commenters asked us to clarify whether articles 
whose importation is prohibited from one country would continue to be 
prohibited even after importation to a second country, regardless of 
the time that the articles remained in the second country.
    Some commenters expressed concern that the proposed definition 
would be difficult to enforce, since the NPPOs of exporting countries 
would have to keep track of any plant material that entered their 
country and that might be reexported at some point in the future, as 
well as any propagations of that plant material. Other commenters 
expressed general concern about whether the restrictions on the 
importation of nursery stock in general are adequate to prevent the 
introduction of plant pests, when it can be difficult to determine what 
pests a plant has been exposed to.
    Based on these comments, we have rethought our proposed definition 
of from. While in theory it would make sense to provide that nursery 
stock that is imported into one country and then exported from that 
country to the United States must satisfy the same requirements that it 
would have to if it was imported directly into the United States, in 
practice such a requirement would be difficult to enforce. As an 
example, assume that Country A does not impose restrictions on the 
importation of Pelargonium spp. from Country B, but the United States 
allows Pelargonium spp. from Country A to be imported with a 
phytosanitary certificate with an additional declaration under Sec.  
319.37-5(r)(2) and requires Pelargonium spp. from Country B to be 
imported under the systems approach described in Sec.  319.37-5(r)(3). 
In order for Country A to export Pelargonium plants to the United 
States, the NPPO of Country A would have to track all Pelargonium 
plants of foreign origin, even after they were legally imported, in 
order to be able to certify that any Pelargonium spp. exported from 
Country A to the United States were either not from Country B or were 
grown in accordance with a systems approach for which there would be no 
regulatory enforcement mechanism in place. This would be a logistically 
unfeasible task for the NPPO of Country A to undertake.
    The International Plant Protection Convention's (IPPC) 2002 
Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms (International Standards for 
Phytosanitary Measures [ISPM] publication number 5) \4\ takes a 
different approach to the issue. The Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms 
includes a definition of the term country of origin for consignments of 
plants that reads: ``Country where the plants were grown.'' (The IPPC 
definition of country of origin is thus functionally equivalent to the 
term from as it is used in our regulations.) The definition and the 
glossary do not provide any further guidance on how to determine what 
country that is or how long plants need to be growing in the exporting 
country, however, making it difficult for an importing NPPO to evaluate 
the risk associated with the plant material if it has previously been 
grown in a third country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ISPMs may be viewed on the World Wide Web at https://www.ippc.int/IPP/En/default.jsp. Click on the ``Standards'' link on 
the home page to view the ISPMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are proposing a compromise. We would define the term from as 
follows: ``An article is considered to be `from' the country where it, 
or the plants from which the article was derived, was actively growing 
for at least 9 months immediately prior to export.'' If the plant 
material did not meet this definition, the NPPO of the exporting 
country would not issue a phytosanitary certificate to accompany it; as 
a phytosanitary certificate is required for almost all imported nursery 
stock other than certain articles from Canada and small lots of seed, 
this would restrict the importation of those articles that have not 
been grown for 9 months in the country from which they would be 
exported.
    We chose 9 months because it is a common length for a growing 
season for nursery stock; if a plant has been growing in a country for 
a full growing season, it is reasonable to assume that it poses the 
same potential pest risk as other plants of the same genus grown in 
that country. This definition would provide an enforceable standard.
    We do not mean to minimize the problem of plants that originate in 
countries where the pest risk is high and are then re-exported to the 
United States through countries where the pest risk is lower. However, 
to refer again to the example discussed earlier, if Country A does not 
have restrictions on the importation of Pelargonium spp. from Country 
B, it would be difficult for the country to track those plants once 
they have been imported. Another solution would be simply to impose the 
same restrictions on the importation of Pelargonium spp. from Country A 
as we do on Pelargonium spp. from Country B, given that the importation 
restrictions in place in Country A make it difficult to determine which 
Pelargonium spp. exported from Country A may have originated in Country 
B and thus pose an elevated pest risk. We may pursue this avenue of 
regulatory action in the future. However, such regulatory action would 
be undertaken independent of our definitions of the word from.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed 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.

[[Page 44431]]

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to evaluate the 
potential effects of their proposed and final rules on small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. 
Section 603 of the Act requires an agency to prepare and make available 
for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) 
describing the expected impact of a proposed rule on small entities, 
unless the head of the agency certifies that the rule will not, if 
promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities. APHIS has prepared this IRFA in order that the 
public may have the opportunity to offer comments on expected small-
entity effects of this proposed rule. We address here items as required 
by section 603(b) of the Act.
    APHIS is proposing to amend the regulations on importing nursery 
stock by providing an option in which the postentry quarantine growing 
period for articles Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and 
Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are imported from certain locations 
would be reduced from 6 months to 2 months, provided that the grower of 
those plants has implemented a systems approach to prevent the imported 
articles from being infected with CWR.
    PPQ has determined that imported chrysanthemums that might be 
affected with CWR are likely to express symptoms of this disease if it 
is present within a 2-month postentry quarantine period; the fact that 
the chrysanthemums would originate in countries not considered to be 
affected with CWR and would be grown in accordance with an APHIS-
approved workplan that meets the requirements of the systems approach 
would reduce the likelihood that they would be infected with CWR. 
Articles identified in postentry quarantine as being infected with CWR 
are then prevented from entering U.S. commerce.
    Under the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), the 
Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to implement programs and 
policies designed to prevent the spread of plant pests and diseases. 
The objective of this proposed rule is to provide another option for 
importation of chrysanthemums that is based on current science and does 
not compromise the phytosanitary safety of U.S. floral plants.
    This proposed rule may affect the volume of chrysanthemums imported 
into the United States because some importers may find that the 
reduction of costs due to the shortened postentry quarantine period 
will be greater than the additional cost for chrysanthemums produced 
under the systems approach. These reduced costs would then encourage a 
greater volume of importation. We expect that this will occur.
    The economic effects of the proposed change are expected to be 
positive, if small, for U.S. importers of chrysanthemums into the 
United States. In 2005, the value of imported chrysanthemums was around 
$80.2 million, or 8 percent of the value of all imported flowers (i.e., 
fresh cut flowers and florist plants).\5\ In the same year, the 
wholesale value of the domestic sales of chrysanthemums reached $210.8 
million.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural 
Service, U.S. Trade Statistics, Harmonized Schedule 10-digit import 
codes 0603107010, 0603107020, and 0602903010.
    \6\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, NASS, Agricultural 
Statistics Board, Floriculture Crops 2005 Summary, April 2006, pages 
37 and 53. The sum of wholesale value of all sales of potted Hardy/
Garden Chrysanthemums ($141,845,000) and wholesale value of all 
sales of potted Florist Chrysanthemums ($68,944,000). And, U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Floriculture 
and Nursery Crops Outlook, Electronic Outlook Report, FLO-05, Table: 
Summary 9, September 22, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The shorter postentry quarantine period for imported chrysanthemums 
may benefit U.S. importers/wholesalers and florist retailers. The 
proposed change would reduce the cost to chrysanthemum importers 
(categorized within North American Industry Classification System 
[NAICS] code 424930), and those savings may be at least partially 
passed along to retailers of these plants (NAICS code 453110). The 
Small Business Administration (SBA) has established size standards for 
determining which economic entities meet the definition of a small 
firm. The small-entity size standard for importers/wholesalers of 
flowers, nursery stock, and florists' supplies is 100 or fewer 
employees. For retail florists, the small-entity size standard is $6.5 
million or less in annual sale receipts.
    According to the 2002 Economic Census, there were approximately 
4,854 wholesale establishments importing flowers, nursery stock, and 
florists' supplies, and they employed 59,954 people. All but four of 
these establishments were likely small entities.\7\ According to the 
same census, there were 22,750 retail florist establishments with total 
annual sales of $6.63 billion in 2002. Their size distribution is not 
reported. Both wholesale and retail entities, regardless of their size, 
would benefit from the shorter quarantine period, but we are unable to 
determine the size of the benefit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Personal communication with Joe W. Begley, General Manager, 
Technical Services Group, Yoder Brothers, Inc., Parrish, Florida.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    APHIS welcomes information that the public may provide concerning 
the expected magnitude of the benefit of the proposed rule and the 
number of small entities that may be affected.
    The proposed change to amend the definition of from is 
administrative in nature. We do not expect that it would have any 
impact on any U.S. entities, whether small or large.

Executive Order 12988

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 
Civil Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is adopted: (1) All State 
and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule 
will be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will be given to this 
rule; and (3) administrative proceedings will not be required before 
parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information collection or 
recordkeeping requirements included in this proposed rule have been 
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 
Please send written comments to the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington, 
DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket No. 03-002-4. 
Please send a copy of your comments to: (1) Docket No. 03-002-4, 
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 
River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238, and (2) Clearance 
Officer, OCIO, USDA, room 404-W, 14th Street and Independence Avenue 
SW., Washington, DC 20250. A comment to OMB is best assured of having 
its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication of 
this proposed rule.
    We are proposing to provide an option in which the postentry 
quarantine growing period for articles Chrysanthemum spp., 
Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that are 
imported from certain locations would be reduced from 6 months to 2 
months, provided that the grower of those plants has implemented a 
systems approach to prevent the imported articles from being infected 
with CWR. This would require the use of bilateral workplans and 
phytosanitary certificates.
    We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected 
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection and 
recordkeeping

[[Page 44432]]

requirements. These comments will help us:
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is 
necessary for the proper performance of our agency s functions, 
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the 
proposed information collection, including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used;
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and
    (4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who 
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic 
submission of responses).
    Estimate of burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of 
information is estimated to average 45.1 hours per response.
    Respondents: Importers of nursery stock and NPPOs.
    Estimated annual number of respondents: 7.
    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.4285714.
    Estimated annual number of responses: 10.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 451 hours. (Due to 
averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of 
the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per 
response.)
    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Mrs. 
Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 
734-7477.

E-Government Act Compliance

    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to 
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the Internet 
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities 
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for 
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act 
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste 
Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 734-7477.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 319

    Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs, Nursery stock, Plant 
diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Rice, Vegetables.
    Accordingly, we are proposing to amend 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. 450, 7701-7772, and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 
and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

    2. Section 319.37-1 is amended by revising the definition of from 
to read as follows:


Sec.  319.37-1  Definitions.

* * * * *
    From. An article is considered to be ``from'' the country where it, 
or the plants from which the article was derived, was actively growing 
for at least 9 months immediately prior to export.
* * * * *
    3. In Sec.  319.37-5, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  319.37-5  Special foreign inspection and certification 
requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) Any restricted article (except seeds) of Chrysanthemum spp. 
(chrysanthemum, includes Dendranthema spp.), Leucanthemella serotina, 
or Nipponanthemum nipponicum, from any foreign place except Andorra, 
Argentina, Australia, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei, 
Canada, Canary Islands, Chile, China, Colombia, Croatia, Ecuador, 
Iceland, Japan, Korea, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mexico, 
Moldova, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Republic of South Africa, 
Russia, San Marino, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Tunisia, Ukraine, 
Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia; the European Union; and all countries, 
territories, and possessions of countries located in part or entirely 
between 90[deg] and 180[deg] East longitude must, at the time of 
arrival at the port of first arrival in United States, be accompanied 
by a phytosanitary certificate of inspection containing one of the 
following declarations:
    (1) A declaration that such article was grown in a greenhouse 
nursery and found by the plant protection service of the country in 
which it was grown to be free from white rust of chrysanthemum (caused 
by the rust fungus Puccinia horiana P. Henn.) based on visual 
examination of the parent stock, the articles for importation, and the 
greenhouse nursery in which the articles for importation and the parent 
stock were grown, once a month for 4 consecutive months immediately 
prior to importation; or
    (2) A declaration that such article was grown in a production site 
that is a greenhouse or other enclosed building and in accordance with 
an APHIS-approved operational workplan that contains provisions for 
fulfilling the systems approach requirements listed below. The systems 
approach requirements are:
    (i) Production sites must generate plants for planting from 
propagative material that is free of chrysanthemum white rust (Puccinia 
horiana Henn.).
    (ii) Production sites must write and implement standard operating 
procedures that include provisions for adequate pest control, isolation 
of the production site from host material not intended for export to 
the United States, regular inspection and testing, and training of 
production site employees.
    (iii) Production sites must keep detailed records of all aspects of 
plant production, including the origin of articles of Chrysanthemum 
spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that will 
be exported so that they may be traced back if necessary. Production 
sites must label the containers in which the articles are shipped in 
order to facilitate traceback investigations.
    (iv) The national plant protection organization of the country in 
which the production site is located must oversee the production site 
and perform regular audits to ensure that all elements of the 
production system are in compliance with the requirements set out in 
this paragraph (c)(2) and in the workplan.
    (v) APHIS must be allowed to perform on-site audits of the 
production site as well. APHIS will perform audits at the port of entry 
into which the plants are imported to ensure that these articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum meet the requirements set out in this paragraph (c)(2) and 
in the workplan.
    (vi) The national plant protection organization of the country in 
which the production site is located and APHIS will impose penalties 
and remedial action in the case of noncompliance. The national plant 
protection organization may not issue phytosanitary certificates for 
shipments of articles of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, 
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum exported under the systems approach if an 
audit reveals that the articles were not grown in compliance with the 
requirements set out in this paragraph (c)(2) and in the workplan. 
Penalties that could be imposed will include, but may not necessarily 
be limited to, removal of the exporting production site from the list 
of growers approved by APHIS to ship these articles to the United 
States under this program.

[[Page 44433]]

    (vii) The government of the country in which the articles of 
Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, and Nipponanthemum 
nipponicum are produced or its designated representative must enter 
into a trust fund agreement with APHIS before each growing season. The 
government of the country in which the articles are produced or its 
designated representative is required to pay in advance all estimated 
costs that APHIS expects to incur through its involvement in overseeing 
the execution of this paragraph (c)(2). These costs will include 
administrative expenses incurred in conducting the services enumerated 
in this paragraph (c)(2) and all salaries (including overtime and the 
Federal share of employee benefits), travel expenses (including per 
diem expenses), and other incidental expenses incurred by the 
inspectors in performing these services. The government of the country 
in which the articles are produced or its designated representative is 
required to deposit a certified or cashier's check with APHIS for the 
amount of the costs estimated by APHIS. If the deposit is not 
sufficient to meet all costs incurred by APHIS, the agreement further 
requires the government of the country in which the articles are 
produced or its designated representative to deposit with APHIS a 
certified or cashier's check for the amount of the remaining costs, as 
determined by APHIS, before the services will be completed. After a 
final audit at the conclusion of each shipping season, any overpayment 
of funds would be returned to the government of the country in which 
the articles are produced or its designated representative or held on 
account until needed.
* * * * *
    4. Section 319.37-7 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(7)(ii) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  319.37-7  Postentry quarantine.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (7) * * *
    (ii) If an article of a genus or species listed in this paragraph, 
to grow the article or increase therefrom only in a greenhouse or other 
enclosed building for the period listed below:
    (A) If an article of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, 
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that meets the requirements of Sec.  
319.37-5(c)(2) of this subpart, for a period of 2 months after 
importation.
    (B) If an article of Chrysanthemum spp., Leucanthemella serotina, 
and Nipponanthemum nipponicum that meets the requirements of Sec.  
319.37-5(c)(1) of this subpart, for a period of 6 months after 
importation.
    (C) If an article of Dianthus spp. (carnation, sweet-william), for 
a period of 1 year after importation.
    (D) If an article of Hydrangea spp., for a period of 9 months after 
importation.
* * * * *

    Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of August 2007.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-15421 Filed 8-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P