Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 38177

2Logs from Canada are also subject to restrictions

under ‘‘Subpart—Logs, Lumber, and Other

Unmanufactured Wood Articles’’ (§§ 319.40

through 319.40–11 of this part).

(iii) Are Christmas trees destined for

a U.S. infested area and will not be

moved through any U.S. noninfested

areas other than noninfested areas in the

counties of Aroostock, Franklin, Oxford,

Piscataquis, Penobscot, and Somerset,

ME (i.e., areas in those counties that are

not listed in 7 CFR 301.45–3).

* * * * *

(b) Logs and pulpwood with bark

attached.2 (1) Logs or pulpwood with

bark attached that are destined for a U.S.

infested area and that will not be moved

through any U.S. noninfested area other

than noninfested areas in the counties of

Aroostock, Franklin, Oxford,

Piscataquis, Penobscot, and Somerset,

ME (i.e., areas in those counties that are

not listed in 7 CFR 301.45–3) may be

imported from any area of Canada

without restriction under this subpart.

* * * * *

Done in Washington, DC, this 14th day of

June 2000.

Richard L. Dunkle,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 00–15470 Filed 6–19–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Parts 93, 98, and 130

[Docket No. 98–013–2]

Hawaii Animal Import Center

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the

regulations by removing Honolulu, HI,

from the lists of animal import centers

and ports of entry that provide U.S.

Department of Agriculture quarantine

facilities for animals, birds, and poultry

imported into the United States. We are

also amending the regulations by adding

Honolulu, HI, as a limited port for the

importation of animals, birds, poultry,

poultry products, and animal germ

plasm that do not require U.S.

Department of Agriculture quarantine

facilities. These actions will update the

regulations to reflect the June 1997

closure of the Hawaii Animal Import

Center.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 20, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Gary Colgrove, Chief Staff Veterinarian,

Import/Export Animals, National Center

for Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700

River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD

20737–1231; (301) 734–3276.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The regulations in 9 CFR parts 93 and

98 restrict the importation of specified

animals and animal products into the

United States to prevent the

introduction of communicable diseases

of livestock and poultry. The regulations

designate animal import centers and

ports of entry for the importation of

certain animals, birds, poultry, poultry

products, and animal germ plasm that

require inspection or quarantine

services.

The regulations in 9 CFR part 130 set

forth the user fees that are assessed to

reimburse the Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service for the cost of

import-and export-related services

provided at animal import centers and

ports of entry.

On March 9, 2000, we published in

the Federal Register (65 FR 12486–

12488, Docket No. 98–013–1) a proposal

to amend the regulations by removing

Honolulu, HI, from the lists of animal

import centers and ports of entry that

provide quarantine services. In addition,

we proposed to amend part 130 by

removing all references to the animal

import center in Honolulu, HI. We also

proposed to amend the regulations in

part 93 by adding Honolulu, HI, as a

limited port for the importation of

animals, birds, poultry, and poultry

products that do not require U.S.

Department of Agriculture (USDA)

quarantine facilities. We further

proposed to amend the regulations in

part 98 by adding Honolulu, HI, as a

limited port for the importation of

animal semen. (Section 98.6 provides

that embryos may be imported only at

a port of entry listed in § 93.303 for

horses, § 93.403 for ruminants, and

§ 93.503 for swine. Under the proposal,

embryos could be imported through

Honolulu, HI, because it would be listed

in those sections as a limited port.) We

also proposed minor, nonsubstantive

changes to part 93.

We solicited comments concerning

our proposal for 60 days ending May 8,

2000. We did not receive any comments.

Therefore, for the reasons given in the

proposed rule, we are adopting the

proposed rule as a final rule, without

change.

Miscellaneous

In § 93.308, paragraph (a)(2) lists the

regions that we consider affected with

African horse sickness as: All the

regions on the continent of Africa,

except Morocco; Oman; Saudi Arabia;

and the Yemen Arab Republic. For

clarity, we are rewording the list to read:

Oman, Saudi Arabia, the Yemen Arab

Republic, and all the regions on the

continent of Africa except Morocco.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12866. For this action,

the Office of Management and Budget

has waived its review process required

by Executive Order 12866.

This rule will amend the regulations

in 9 CFR parts 93, 98, and 130 by

removing Honolulu, HI, from the lists of

animal import centers and ports of entry

that provide USDA quarantine facilities

for animals, birds, and poultry imported

into the United States. These changes

are necessary to reflect the closure of the

facility known as the Hawaii Animal

Import Center (HAIC). However, we will

add Honolulu, HI, as a limited port for

the importation of animals, birds,

poultry, poultry products, and animal

germ plasm that do not require USDA

quarantine facilities.

The removal of Honolulu, HI, from

the lists of animal import centers is

primarily an editorial change following

the previously announced closure of the

HAIC. That closure primarily affected

U.S. importers of animals, birds, and

poultry that required quarantine

services. After HAIC closed, those

importers could no longer import these

items into the United States through

Honolulu, HI. However, prior to the

closure of the HAIC, the number of

animals, birds, and poultry imported

through and quarantined at the port of

Honolulu, HI, was low compared to the

number imported through other animal

import centers located in Miami, FL,

and Newburgh, NY. For instance, in

fiscal year 1997, the HAIC provided

inspection and quarantine services for

40 animals and birds. However, in fiscal

year 1997, the animal import center in

Miami, FL, provided inspection and

quarantine services for over 1,500

animals and birds; and the animal

import center located in Newburgh, NY,

provided services for over 4,000 animals

from January 1, 1997, to December 31,

1997.

Based on the availability of the

remaining animal import centers and

ports of entry and the low level of use

prior to closure of the HAIC, we believe

that removing Honolulu, HI, from the

lists of animal import centers and ports

of entry that provide USDA quarantine

facilities for animals, birds, and poultry

imported into the United States will not

38178 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

have a significant economic effect on

importers. In addition, our designation

of Honolulu, HI, as a limited port for the

importation of animals, birds, poultry,

poultry products, and animal germ

plasm that do not require USDA

quarantine facilities will continue to

provide a port of entry for U.S.

importers of certain animals, birds,

poultry, poultry products, and animal

germ plasm.

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 final 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.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule contains no information

collection or recordkeeping

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

List of Subjects

9 CFR Part 93

Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock,

Poultry and poultry products,

Quarantine, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

9 CFR Part 98

Animal diseases and Imports.

9 CFR Part 130

Animals, Birds, Diagnostic reagents,

Exports, Imports, Poultry and poultry

products, Quarantine, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Tests.

Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR

parts 93, 98, and 130 as follows:

PART 93—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN

ANIMALS, BIRDS, AND POULTRY,

AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, AND

POULTRY PRODUCTS;

REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF

CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING

CONTAINERS

1. The authority citation for part 93

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306;

21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114a, 134a, 134b,

134c, 134d, 134f, 136, and 136a; 31 U.S.C.

9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).

§ 93.102 [Amended]

2. In § 93.102, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, HI;’’ and paragraph (d) is

amended by adding the words

‘‘Honolulu, HI;’’ immediately after the

words ‘‘Atlanta, GA;’’.

§ 93.103 [Amended]

3. In § 93.103, paragraph (a)(4)(ii) is

removed, and paragraph (a)(4)(iii) is

redesignated as paragraph (a)(4)(ii) and

the last two sentences are removed.

§ 93.105 [Amended]

4. In § 93.105, paragraph (c)(2) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Miami, FL; and Honolulu, HI’’ and by

adding the words ‘‘and Miami, FL’’ in

their place.

§ 93.106 [Amended]

5. Section 93.106 is amended as

follows:

a. In paragraph (a), by removing the

words ‘‘paragraph (c)(7)’’ and by adding

the words ‘‘paragraph (c)(5)’’ in their

place.

b. In paragraph (b)(1), by removing the

words ‘‘the Hawaii Animal Import

Center at Honolulu, HI, when the port

of entry is Honolulu, HI;’’.

§ 93.107 [Amended]

6. In § 93.107, paragraph (b)(2) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, HI;’’.

§ 93.203 [Amended]

7. In § 93.203, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’ and paragraph (d)

is amended by adding the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’ immediately after

the words ‘‘Atlanta, Georgia;’’.

§ 93.303 [Amended]

8. In § 93.303, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’ and paragraph (d)

is amended by adding the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii,’’ immediately after

the words ‘‘Atlanta, Georgia;’’.

9. In § 93.308, the last sentence in

paragraph (a)(2) is amended as follows:

§ 93.308 Quarantine requirements.

(a) * * *

(2) * * * APHIS considers the

following regions to be affected with

African horse sickness: Oman, Saudi

Arabia, the Yemen Arab Republic, and

all the regions on the continent of Africa

except Morocco.

* * * * *

§ 93.403 [Amended]

10. In § 93.403, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’ and paragraph (e)

is amended by adding the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii,’’ immediately after

the words ‘‘Atlanta, Georgia;’’.

§ 93.404 [Amended]

11. In § 93.404, paragraph (a)(2) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘, except as provided in § 93.430’’.

§ 93.503 [Amended]

12. In § 93.503, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’ and paragraph (e)

is amended by adding the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’ immediately after

the words ‘‘Atlanta, Georgia;’’.

§ 93.703 [Amended]

13. In § 93.703, paragraph (a)(1) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, HI;’’.

§ 93.805 [Amended]

14. In § 93.805, paragraph (a)(1) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’.

PART 98—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN

ANIMAL EMBRYOS AND ANIMAL

SEMEN

15. The authority citation for part 98

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306;

21 U.S.C. 103–105, 111, 134a, 134b, 134c,

134d, 134f, 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7

CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).

§ 98.33 [Amended]

16. In § 98.33, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’ and paragraph (d)

is amended by adding the words

‘‘Honolulu, Hawaii;’’ immediately after

‘‘Atlanta, Georgia;’’.

PART 130—USER FEES

17. The authority citation for part 130

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5542; 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19

U.S.C. 1306; 21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114,

114a, 134a, 134c, 134d, 134f, 136, and 136a;

31 U.S.C. 3701, 3716, 3717, 3719, and 3720A;

7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).

§ 130.1 [Amended]

18. Section 130.1 is amended as

follows:

a. In the definition of Animal Import

Center, by removing the words

‘‘Newburgh, New York; Miami, Florida;

and Honolulu, Hawaii’’ and adding the

words ‘‘Newburgh, New York, and

Miami, Florida’’ in their place.

b. In the definition of Nonstandard

care and handling, by removing from

footnote 2 the words ‘‘7:30 a.m. to 11:30

a.m., Honolulu, HI;’’.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 38179

Done in Washington, DC, this 14th day of

June 2000.

Richard L. Dunkle,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 00–15469 Filed 6–19–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Part 130

[Docket No. 98–045–2]

Veterinary Services User Fees; Pet

Food Facility Inspection and Approval

Fees

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending user fees for

the inspection and approval of pet food

manufacturing, rendering, blending,

digest, and spraying and drying

facilities. We are replacing hourly rate

user fees previously used to cover costs

for this service with flat rate user fees

that cover the cost of all inspections

required for annual approval. We are

taking this action in order to make it

easier for users to know their costs in

advance, while still ensuring that we

recover our costs.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 20, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Donna Ford, Section Head, Financial

Systems and Services Branch, Budget

and Accounting Service Enhancement

Unit, MRPBS, APHIS, 4700 River Road

Unit 54, Riverdale, MD 20737–1232;

(301) 734–8351.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

User fees to reimburse APHIS for the

costs of providing veterinary diagnostic

services and import- and export-related

services for live animals and birds and

animal products are contained in 9 CFR

part 130. Section 130.8 lists

miscellaneous flat rate user fees. Section

130.21 lists the hourly rate user fees

charged for APHIS’ export services.

Prior to this final rule, the hourly rate

user fees listed in § 130.21 included fees

for inspecting and approving pet food

facilities under 9 CFR part 156,

‘‘Voluntary Inspection and Certification

Service.’’

On January 5, 2000, we published in

the Federal Register (65 FR 391–394,

Docket No. 98–045–1) a proposal to

replace the hourly rate user fees for the

inspection and approval of pet food

manufacturing, rendering, blending,

digest, and spraying and drying

facilities with flat rate user fees that

would cover the cost of all inspections

required for annual approval.

We solicited comments concerning

our proposal for 60 days ending March

6, 2000. We did not receive any

comments. Therefore, for the reasons

given in the proposed rule, we are

adopting the proposed rule as a final

rule without change.

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.

User fees to reimburse APHIS for the

costs of providing veterinary diagnostic

services and import- and export-related

services for live animals and birds and

animal products are contained in 9 CFR

part 130. Prior to the effective date of

this rule, we charged hourly rate user

fees for inspection and approval of

manufacturing, rendering, blending,

digest, and spraying and drying

facilities. This rule replaces those

hourly rate user fees with two sets of flat

rate annual user fees: One for the

inspection and approval of pet food

manufacturing, rendering, blending, and

digest facilities, and one for the

inspection and approval of pet food

spraying and drying facilities.

We arrived at the flat rate annual user

fees by calculating the average number

of hours required for an APHIS

inspector to complete an inspection

(including travel time), multiplying by

the average number of inspections

performed during a year (two per

facility), and adding the average direct

labor involved and proportional shares

of support costs, overhead, and

departmental charges.

The resulting flat rate user fees for

manufacturing, rendering, blending, or

digest facilities are $404.75 for initial

inspection and approval and $289.00 for

renewal of approval; for spraying and

drying facilities, they are $275.00 for

initial inspection and approval and

$162.50 for renewal of approval. These

fees are not significantly different from

the amount customers have paid yearly

in the past at hourly rates for initial

inspection and approval.

The table below shows the difference

between the average cost for initial and

renewed inspection and approval for

each of the five categories of pet food

facilities using hourly rate user fees and

the new flat rate user fees.

CHANGE IN COST OF INSPECTION AND APPROVAL UNDER THE FLAT RATE USER FEES

Type of pet food facility

Average cost to facilities at

hourly rate user fees

Cost to facilities under new

flat rate user fees

Change in user fee

collections

Initial

approval

Renewed

approval

Initial

approval

Renewed

approval

Initial

approval

Renewed

approval

Manufacturing .................................................................. $415.00 $353.25 $404.75 $289.00 -$10.25 -$64.25

Rendering ......................................................................... 376.75 272.75 404.75 289.00 28.00 16.25

Blending ........................................................................... 436.25 316.00 404.75 289.00 -31.50 27.00

Digest ............................................................................... 390.75 213.75 404.75 289.00 14.00 76.00

Spraying/Drying ................................................................ 275.00 162.50 275.00 162.50 0 0

As shown in the table, the user fees

collected for the inspection and

approval of pet food manufacturing and

blending facilities are expected to

decrease overall when the flat fees are

implemented. Pet food spraying and

drying facilities will not be affected by

this rule. For the inspection and

approval of the rendering and digest

facilities, user fee collections are

expected to increase.

However, as shown in the table

below, the total amount of fees collected

is not expected to change significantly.