### Analysis in Support of Certification that the Rule will not

have a Significant Economic Impact on a Substantial

Number of Small Entities

Final Rule

Importation of Fresh Unshu Oranges from Korea to the

Continental United States

APHIS 20 10

- 022

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

August 20102

Summary

The Republic of Korea has requested USDA authorization to resume commercial

shipments of fresh Unshu oranges into the continental United States. An administrat ive

suspension of Korean imports of the fruit into the United States was imposed in 2002

after interceptions of the causal agent of citrus canker. A systems approach would be

used to mitigate pest risks. APHIS has determined that there would be a low ris k of pest

introduction into the United States under the rule.

The impact of Unshu orange imports from Korea is expected to be minimal for

domestic producers. The United States does not commercially produce Unshu oranges,

and price differences suggest th at they are not a close substitute for U.S.

- grown mandarin

varieties, such as tangerines. Effects of the rule in terms of product displacement may be

borne by Japanese exporters, since Japan is currently the other major supplier of Unshu

oranges to the Un ited States.

E ven if all Unshu orange imports from Korea were to directly replace a portion of

U.S.

- grown tangerine consumption, the effect on U.S. producers would be still

insignificant. Under such a scenario, annual imports of Unshu oranges from Korea o f

2,000 metric tons (the upper limit of the projected range of imports, which would well

surpass the peak import volume of 1,611 metric tons recorded in 2002) would displace

only 0.6 percent of fresh tangerines produced by U.S. operations in 2008

- 09. Even a

small impact such as this for U.S. producers is highly unlikely.

The rule would not entail reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance

requirements beyond those set forth in existing regulations, such as in 7 CFR 319.56

- 6,

which requires that all impo rted fruits or vegetables be subject to inspection at the port of

first arrival. All costs associated with the field pest control program, labeling, inspection

and certification, and packinghouse procedures, would be incurred by the owner or the

agent of the owner of the fruit prior to importation.

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 entit ies.3

Introduction

When an agency promulgates a final rule, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

requires the agency to “prepare a final regulatory flexibility analysis” which, among other

things, describes the impact of the rule on small entities (5 U.S. C. 604). Section 605 of

the RFA allows an agency to certify that the rule will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities. As specified by § 605 of the RFA, the

following economic analysis provides the basis for cert ification of the rule to allow

importation of fresh Unshu oranges from the Republic of Korea into the continental

United States.

APHIS has received a request from the national plant protection organization

(NPPO) of the Republic of Korea (South Korea) to a llow the importation of Unshu

oranges ( Citrus reticulata Blanco var. unshu Swingle) from Cheju Island into the

continental United States. 1 In 1994, APHIS approved the importation of Unshu oranges

produced in Cheju Island into any area of the United States except several citrus

producing States. In 2002, the importation of Unshu oranges from Korea was suspended

due to interceptions of citrus canker during pre

- clearance inspections and subsequent

detections of citrus canker at U.S. ports of entry. 2 In 2007 , in response to a request from

Korea, APHIS allowed the importation of Unshu oranges produced in Cheju Island to

resume, but only to the State of Alaska. 3 Currently, the regulations (7 CFR 319.28) allow

the importation of Unshu oranges from certain areas in Japan and from Cheju Island in

Korea into the United States under a permit and after the specified safeguards of a

preclearance program are satisfied.

In 2009, in response to Korea’s request to allow the importation of Unshu oranges

from Cheju Island to the continental United States, APHIS developed a pest risk analysis

(PRA) using the previous PRA for imports into Alaska as a baseline for pest listing. The

PRA incorporates new evidence that citrus canker bacteria ( Xanthomonas citri subsp.

1 In this analysis, we refer to South Korea s imply as Korea.

2 Citrus canker is a bacterial disease that affects citrus and is caused by the infectious bacterium

Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri (also known as Xanthomonas campestris pv. citri and

Xanthomonas citri ) . While not harmful to humans, the disease affects the health and marketability of

infected fruit. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/citruscanker/index.shtml

. 3 Federal Register (FR 72, 60537

- 60541), Docket No. APHIS

- 2006

- 0133, Final Rule: Importation of fresh

Unshu or anges from Korea to Alaska (7 CFR 319.28).4

citri ) and sweet orange scab fungus ( Elsinoë australis ) are pests of quarantine

significance associated with Unshu oranges. 4 The two pests are rated as having a

medium pest risk potential. Pests receiving a rating within the medium range may

require specific phyto sanitary measures in addition to standard port

- of

- entry inspection.

The PRA included a risk management document outlining the conditions under which

Unshu oranges from Cheju Island could safely be imported into the continental United

States and Alaska.

AP HIS is including these conditions and requirements in § 319.28 for the

importation of Unshu oranges from Korea. APHIS is taking this action based on the

determination that there is a low risk of introduction of citrus canker and sweet orange

scab into the United States via imports of fresh Unshu oranges from Cheju Island, Korea.

The rule is consistent with World Trade Organization agreements that sanitary and

phytosanitary regulatory restrictions should be based on scientific evidence and applied

only to the extent necessary to protect human, animal, and plant health.

Specifically, the rule will amend the regulations concerning the importation of

citrus fruit to remove certain requirements for the importation of Unshu oranges from

Korea that are no longe r necessary and make those regulations consistent with our

domestic regulations for citrus canker. We are removing requirements for the fruit to be

grown in specified canker

- free export areas and for joint inspection in the groves and

packinghouses by the Government of Korea and APHIS. We are also clarifying that

surface sterilization of the fruit must be conducted using one of the approved

phytosanitary treatments listed in 7 CFR part 305, and we will extend the area in the

United States where Unshu oran ges from Korea may be distributed to include the entire

continental United States, as well as Alaska. Finally, we will require that each shipment

be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate containing an additional declaration stating

that the fruit was given the required surface sterilization and inspected and found free of

sweet orange scab.

4 “ Importation of Unshu Orange Fruit, Citrus reticulat a that Blanco var. unshu Swingle, from Korea int o the Continental United States, A qualitative, pathway

- initiated risk analysis ” December 23, 2009 Rev 003,

US DA, APHIS, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology5

Potential Impact on Small Entities

This rule may affect domestic mandarin variety growers, especially those who

engage in the production of tangerines, as well as the importers, wholesalers and

distributors of mandarin varieties. The United States is not a commercial producer of

Unshu oranges ( Citrus reticulata var. unshu ). The United States produces other

mandarin varieties of Citrus reticulata , such as tangerin es and Satsuma mandarins.

Nonetheless, the action is expected to have minimal economic effect on U.S. entities,

small or large, given the relatively small impact of current Unshu orange imports from

Japan and Korea. Any increase in the quantity of Unshu oranges from Korea is expected

to be insignificant.

According to the Small Business Administration (SBA) standard, a business

engaged in orange production is considered to be a small entity if its annual receipts are

not more than $750,000. 5 Table 1 sum marizes 2007 Census of Agriculture data for

tangerine growers, and table 2 summarizes 2007 Census of Agriculture data classified

under “other

- orange” growers which include all orange varieties other than Valencia

oranges. “Other orange” varieties include: navels, tangerines, tangelos, temples, Satsuma

and other mandarin varieties. Of the “other orange” varieties, tangerines are considered

to be most like Unshu oranges, although they are not close substitutes.

In 2007, there were a total of 1,976 tangeri ne growers. By far, Florida and

California are the two largest producers of tangerines, with tangerine growers in Florida

and California accounting for 78 percent of the U.S. total and the tangerine acreage in

these two States accounting for 98 percent of the U.S. total. These percentages are

similar for the 9,659 “other orange” growers overall, with growers in Florida and

California accounting for 89 percent of the U.S. total and the Florida and California

acreage accounting for 98 percent of the U.S. to tal. Average annual sales per “other

orange” grower are estimated to have been about $102,347 in 2007. 6 Clearly, “other

5 U.S. Small Business Administration, Table of Small Business Size Standards.
http://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf

6 Average sales per entity is based on the number of non

- Valencia orange growers recorded in the 2007
Agricultural Census, i.e., 9,659 operations, and the total value of fresh and processed non

- Valencia oranges
reported in the 2009 USDA

- NASS Citrus fruits 2009 Summary, i.e., $1.2 billion.

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/CitrFrui/CitrFrui

- 09

- 24

- 2009.pdf6

orange” growers are predominantly small entities according to the SBA standard of

$750,000.

Table 1

. Number of tangerine growers and acres , by State, 2007

State Number of T angerine G rowers

and P ercentage S hare of U.S.

T otal Tangerine A cres and P ercentage

S hare of U.S. T otal

Florida 839 ( 42 %) 14,604 (39.5 %)

California 706 ( 36 %) 21,528 (58.2 %)

Hawaii 300 (15 %) 87 (0.2 %)

Texas 59 ( 3 %) 174 (0.5 %)

Arizona 36 (2 %) 544 (1.5 %)

Louisiana 36 (2 %) 28 ( < 0. 1 %)

United States 1,976 (100%) 36,965 (100%)

Sourc e: USDA NASS

, 2007 Census of Agriculture

, T able 32

, Fruits and nuts.

Table 2

. Number of non

- Valencia (“other orange ” ) growers and acres , by State. 2007

State Number of non

- Valencia (“Other

O range ”) G rowers and P ercentage

S hare of U.S. T otal Non

- Valencia (“Other Orange”)

A cres and P ercentage S hare of

U.S. total

Florida 4,575 ( 47 %) 264,751 ( 61.3 %)

California 4,052 ( 42 %) 158,263 ( 36.7 %)

Hawaii 407 ( 4 %) 186 (0. 4 %)

Texas 384 ( 4 %) 6,141 ( 1.4 %)

Arizona 118 ( 1 %) 1,718 (0.4 %)

Louisiana 116 ( 1 %) 503 ( 0.1 %)

Alabama 7 ( < 0. 1 %) 6 ( <0.1 %)

United States 9,659 (100%) 431,568 (100%)

Sourc e: USDA NASS

, 2007 Census of Agriculture

, T able 32

, Fruits and nuts.

Table 3 shows the percentages of tangerine growers and tangerine acreage relative

to the total number of “other orange ” growers and acreage in 2007

. In Florida and

California, the two dominant tangerine

- producing States

, tange rine growers comprise d 17

to 18 percent of “other orange ” operations . However, the tangerine acreag e in Florida

was much smaller than in California, i.e.

, 5.5 percent compared to 13.6 percent

,
indicating smaller operations in Florida , on average

. The num ber of tangerine growers7

and the total tangerine acreage in Hawaii comprise d large shares of that State’s “other

orange” operations and acreage, 73.7 percent and 46.8 percent respectively.

Table 3

. T angerine growers and acres as percentages of non

- Valenc ia (“other orange”)
growers and acres, by State , 2007

State T angerine G rowe r s (Percent) T angerine A cres (Percent)

Florida 18.3 5.5

California 17.4 13.6

Hawaii 73.7 46.8

Texas 15.4 2.8

Arizona 30.5 31.7

Louisiana 31.0 5.6

Alabama 0.0 0.0

United Sta tes 20.5 8.6

Sourc e: USDA NASS

, 2007 Census of Agriculture.

Table 4 summarizes 2007 Census of Agriculture data for “other orange ” growers

by ac reage. According to the data, 1 6 percent of growers had less than 1 acre of “other

orange” varieties , and the vast majority o f growers, 93 percent, had less than 10 0 acres of

“other orange” varieties.

Table 4. Size distribution of non

- Valencia (“other orange ”) operations, by number of farms
and acreage

, 2007

Acres Number

of farms Share

(percent) Cumulative

S hare

(Percent) Acres Share

(Percent) Cumulative

Share

(Percent)

0.1 to 0.9 acres 1,540 16 16 463 0 0

1.0 to 4.9 acres 2,378 25 41 5,575 1 1

5.0 to 14.9 acres 2,391 25 65 20,056 5 6

15.0 to 24.9 acres 987 10 76 18,618 4 10

25.0 to 49.9 acres 1,0 38 11 86 36,111 8 19

50.0 to 99.9 acres 620 6 93 42,829 10 29

100.0 to 249.9 acres 422 4 97 63,930 15 43

250.0 to 499.9 acres 153 2 99 50,699 12 558 Acres Number

of farms Share

(percent) Cumulative

S hare

(Percent) Acres Share

(Percent) Cumulative

Share

(Percent)

500.0 to 749.9 acres 50 1 99 29,718 7 62

750.0 to 999.9 acres 26 0 99 22,400 5 67

1,000.0 to 1,499.9

a cres 23 0 100 27,322 6 74

1,500.0 acres or more 31 0 100 113,847 26 100

United States 9,659 100 431,568 100

Source: USDA NASS

, 2007 Census of Agriculture , Table 35

, Specified fruits and nuts by acres

.

Tables 5 and 6 summarize data on certain categor ies of tangerine growers

enumerated in the 2007 Census of Agriculture

. These categories are small family farms,

limited resource farms

, and farms having operators who belong to socially disadvantaged

groups. 7 A tangerine grower may qualify as a small fam ily farm (or as a limited resource

farm) and also be counted among those for which one or more of the operators belong to

a socially disadvantaged group.

Table 5 shows that a mong the 1,976 farms that grew tangerines

, 1,415 ( over 70

percent) were limited re source or small family farms. It is notable that t he combined

number of retirement farms (399 farms) and residential/lifestyle farms (527 farms)

accounted for almost half o f all tangerine farms

.

7 USDA ERS. Structure and Finances of U.S. Family Farms: Family Farm Report, 2007 editi on , EIB

- 24.

Any farm where the operator and persons related to the operator own a majority of the business is
considered a family farm. Small family farms have annual gross sales of less than $250,000. This category

of farms is further divided into retir ement farms (operators reporting they are retired), residential/ lifestyle
farms (operators reporting a major occupation other than farming), and farming

- occupation farms
(operators reporting farming as their major occupation). Farming

- occupation farms ar e further classified as

low

- sales small family farms (gross sales less than $100,000) and high

- sales small family farms (gross sales between $100,000 and $249,999).

Limited resource farms have (a) direct or indirect gross farm sales of not more than $100, 000 and (b) a total
household income at or below the national poverty level for a family of four, or less than 50 percent of
county median household income. By definition, limited resource farms qualify as small family farms, but
they are identified as a separate category in the 2007 Census of Agriculture and a re excluded from the
enumeration of small family farms.

Socially disadvantaged operators are members of groups that historically have been subjected to bias and
prejudice. The categories are women; persons of Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino origin; American Indian or

Alaska Native; Asian; Black or African American; and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander

. These
farm operators, themselves, may not have experienced bias or prejudice, but identify with one or more of
these gender, ethnic, and racial groups.9

Table 5

. Number and percentage of limited resource and s mall family tangerine farms, 2007

Limited

resource

farms Retirement

farms Residential/

lifestyle

farms Farming

occupation/

lower sales Farming

occupation/
higher sales All

small
family

farms Limited

resource farms plus
small family

farms All tangerine

Fa rms

US 192 399 527 221 76 1,223 1,415 1,976

Percentage

in total
tangerine

growers 10 20 27 11 4 62 72 100

Source: USDA NASS, 2007 Census of Agriculture

.

Table 6 shows the number and percentage of tangerine farms having operators

belonging to socially disadvantaged groups . There were 321 tangerine farms (16 percent)

for which the principal operator was a woman . In terms of ethnicity, 178 tangerine farms

(9 percent) were operated by Hispanics and 185 tangerine farms (9 percent) were

operated by Asians. One percent of tangerine farms were operated by African

American s

.

Tab le 6. Number and percentage of tangerine farms with operators belonging to socially
disadvantaged group , 2007

Farms where
the principal
operator is

female Farms where

an operator

is of
Spanish,
Hispanic, or
Latino origin Farms where

an operator

reports race

as American

Indian or

Alaska

Native Farms where

an operator

reports race

as Asian Farms where

an operator

reports race

as Black or

African

American Farms where

an operator

reports race

as Native

Hawaiian or

Other Pacific

Islander All

T angerine

Farms

321 178 59 185 19 58 1,976

Percentage

in total
tangerine

growers 16 9 3 9 1 3 100

Source: USDA NASS, 2007 Census of Agriculture

.

Although most tangerine operations are small famil y farms and significant

percentages of tangerine farm operators belong to socially disadvantaged groups,

economic effects of the rule for these farms are not expected to differ from the effects for10

tangerine growers generally. We do not expect the rule to have any appreciable impact

on U.S. tangerine growers regardless of the size of operation or operator classification

.

In the case of fresh fruit merchant wholesalers (NAICS 424480), establishments

with no more than 100 employees are considered small by the SBA standard. In 2002,

there were 5,376 fresh fruit and vegetable merchant wholesalers in the United States with

a total of 110,578 paid employees, or on average, 21 paid employees per establishment.

Hence, it is likely that domestic fruit merchant wholesalers that may be affected by the

rule are predominantly, if not entirely, small entities.

Prior to the administrative suspension in 2002, Korea and Japan were principal

suppliers of Unshu oranges to the United States

. Quantities of Unshu oranges im ported

from Korea and Japan , 19 95 to 2009 , are shown in t able 7

. Unshu orange imports from

Japan between 1995 and 2009 averaged 206 metric tons per year. 8 Average imports of

Unshu orange s from Korea between 1995 and 2002 were 646 metric tons per year, wi th

significant year

- to

- year fluctuations . T he average for 2001 and 2002 jump ed to 1,611

metric tons. I mport s from Korea became marginal after 2002. Imports of Unshu oranges

from Japan have been also declining , even in the recent years during which Unshu

oranges fr om Korea have been prohibited.

According to the PRA which was prepared in 2006 to allow the importation of

Unshu orange s from Cheju Island to Alaska , the quantity of Unshu oranges that would be

imported was estimated to be between 200 and 2,000 metric tons (440,925 and 4,409,245

pounds)

. 9 The actual volumes exported from Korea during 2007

- 2009 were much less

than the original prediction. The historical import data suggest that Korea ’s suppl y of

Unshu oranges to the United States would not be si gnificant under the rule and would

have little effect on U.S. producers of mandarin varieties such as tangerine and Satsuma

.
This expectation is strengthened by the fact that the various mandarin varieties grown in

the United States do not appear to be cl ose substitutes for Unshu oranges

.

8 This average does not include 2002, since it is likely that Japan would have exported Unshu oranges to
the United States in that year had the United States not required fumigation for all of J apan.

9 USDA APHIS PPQ CHPST, “A Qualitative Pest Risk Analysis for the Importation of Fresh Unshu
Orange Fruit ( Citrus reticulate Blanco var. unshu Swingle) from the Republic of Korea,” May 25, 2006, pg

33.11

Table 7 . Unshu o range e xports to the United States from Korea and
Japan, 1995

- 200 9

Calendar y ear Korea Japan Total

m etric tons

1995 50 231 281

1996 2 14 160 374

1997 1,1 83 143 1326

1998 31 22 4 255

1999 3 77 342 71 9

2000 24 2 106 348

2001 1,4 61 291 1752

2002 1,6 11

- 1,611

2003

- 275 285

2004

- 27 2 282

2005

- 256 265

2006

- 156 165

2007 10 218 228

2008 39 109 148

2009 10 103 113

Sou rce: Global Trade Atlas; HTS 080520

, Mandarins (including tangerines and S at sumas);

clementines

, wilkings and similar citrus hybrids

. Note 1: The export data reported by Korea and Japan differ from the import data compiled by the U.S.
Department of Commerce.

Note 2 : Prior to 2002, Unshu oranges imported from Japan did not require fumigation. Imports were

allowed from certain areas in Japan , but not from Kyushu. In 2002, the United States allowed
importation of Unshu oranges also from Kyushu, but required fumigation of all imports from Japan.
That year, Japan did not export Unshu oranges to the United States

. In 2003, the U.S

. regulations were
amended to only require fumigation of Unshu oranges imported from Kyushu.

U.S. tangerine production, imports, exports and domest ic consumption are shown

in t able 8

. Except 1995/1996, t he United States was a net importer of mandarins

(including Satsumas and tangerines). I mports were below 20 percent of supply in the

1990’s (table 9 )

. During the past ten years , except for the 2001/2002 season , imports

increased to the range of 20 to 30 per cent of supply. Exports have been relatively stable

since 1995/1996

, at around 4 to 8 percent of total utilization.

Between 1995

- 1996 and 2008

- 2009, domestic fresh tangerine production

increased by 16 percent, while imports increased more than five

- fold. The level of

supply were relatively stable at around 380,000 tons between 2000/01 and 2007/08, but

showed a sharp increase in 2007/08 to 458,402 tons. The United States has become more

dependent on impo rts of mandarin varieties to supplement increased de mand. U.S.12

grower revenue from fresh tangerine and other mandarin variety production in 2006

- 07

was $141 million. 10

Table 8

. U.S. f

resh t angerine a supply and utilization

, 1995/96 through 2008/09 ( excludes
processed fruit )

Supply Utilization

Season b U.S. Domestic

Production Imports Total Export U.S. Domestic
Consumption

metric tons (‘000)

1995/ 19 96 293 20 312 22 290

1996/97 299 35 335 23 312

1997/98 258 39 296 25 271

1998/99 249 57 306 14 291

1999/20 00 298 96 395 28 367

2000/ 01 267 100 367 14 352

2001/ 02 297 53 349 15 334

2002/ 03 289 86 376 17 359

2003/ 04 296 92 388 20 368

2004/ 05 258 97 355 20 335

2005/06 282 103 385 21 364

2006/07 245 122 367 16 350

2007/08 361 97 458 32 427

2008/09 c 338 129 467 29 438

Source: USDA ERS Briefing Room

, Fruit and Tree Nut Yearbook , 2009

.

a Includes all tangerine varieties, such as Fallglo, Sunburst, Honey, cl ementine, mandarin, and S atsuma

. b Season begins in October of first year shown.

c Preliminary

.

Table 9

. U.S. f

resh t angerine a p roducti on and imports as percent of supply

, and export s and consumption as percent of utilization

, s easons 1995/96 through 2008/09 (excludes
processed fruit )

Season b Production Imports Exports Consumption

1995/ 19 96 94 6 7 93

1996/97 89 11 7 93

1997/98 87 13 8 92

199 8/99 81 19 5 95

1999/2000 76 24 7 93

2000/01 73 27 4 96

2001/02 85 15 4 96

2002/03 77 23 5 95

2003/04 76 24 5 95

10 USDA NASS , “Citrus fruits final estimates 20 03

- 2007

– December 2008”

. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/SB997/sb1009.pdf13

Season b Production Imports Exports Consumption

2004/05 73 27 5 95

2005/06 73 27 5 95

2006/07 67 33 4 96

2007/08 79 21 7 93

2008/09 c 72 28 6 94

Source: USDA ERS Briefing Room, Fru it and Tree Nut Yearbook , 2009.

a Includes all tangerine varieties, such as Fallglo, Sunburst, Honey, cl ementine, mandarin, and S atsuma

. b Season begins in October of first year shown.

c Preliminary

.

As shown in table 7

, Korea’s Unshu orange export s to the United States peaked in

2002

, with a total volume of 1,611 metric tons . This quantity was 2 percent ( 3 percent )

of total U.S. tangerine imports in the 2001/02 ( 2002/03 ) season (table 8 )

. Between the

2002/03 and 2008

- 09 season s , U.S. imports of mandar in oranges increased by 42,504

tons, or 49 percent

. However, import s from Korea failed to increase even after the impor t

prohibition was lifted in 2007 to allow import s in to Alaska.

Table 10 shows the value of recent U.S. imports of mandarin varieties

. In 2009

,
U.S. imports were valued at $156 million , of which approximately 46 percent was

supplied by Spain ($72 million)

. The second and third largest exporters were Chile ($29

million) and Morocco ($23 million) , with a combined share of 33 percent

. The se three

countries supplied almost 80 percent of U.S. imports of mandarin variet ies in 2009.

Japan

, which supplied the majority of Unshu oranges to the United States, had a share of

only 0.1 percent

.

Table 10

. U.S. import s of mandarin varieties by partne r country , 2007

- 2009 (HTS:

080520, M andarins ( including t ang erines and S ats uma s ) ; clementines, w ilkings and

similar citrus h ybrids, fresh/d ried )

Partner Country 2007 2008 2009 2009 %

Share

million dollars

World $ 159.7 $ 157.6 $ 156.1 100.0%

Spain 100.5 87.9 72.4 46.4%

Chile 13.5 17.4 28.9 18.5%

Morocco 14.4 26.1 23.0 14.7%

Peru 11.8 8.6 11.4 7.3%

Australia 8.6 6.3 7.5 4.8%

South Africa 6.2 6.0 7.1 4.5%14

Mexico 3.0 3.8 2.9 1.9%

Israel 0.3 0.7 1.9 1.2%

Jamaica 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.3%

Dominican Republic 0. 0 0.2 0.2 0.1%

Japan 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1%

China

- - 0.1 0.1%

Italy 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.0%

Switzerland

- - 0.0 0.0%

Source : Global Trade Atlas

.

Table 11 shows yearly domestic production of Unshu oranges in Korea. Cheju

Island is the primary production area for Unshu oranges and other mandarin varieties

.
Production capacity is con s trained by the limited availability of cultiva ble land on the

island. Harvest time for Korean Unshu oranges is from early September to early

December

, and the period of export s lasts about 40 days

, from November 1 to December

10. Korea’s average production for the last 10 years was 6 3 7,451 metric tons

.

Table 11

. P roduction of U nshu oranges in Korea , 2000

- 2009, metric tons

Year P roduction

m etric tons (‘000)

2000 553

2001 635

2002 776

2003 631

2004 574

2005 638

2006 604

2007 718

2008 561

2009 686

Average 637

Source : National Agricultural Cooperative Federation/Jeju Regional HQ/Orange Team

.

Table 12 summarizes Kore a n mandarin variety exports for 2001

- 2009. Russia

and Canada are by far the largest importers. In 2009, Russia imported 1,475 tons (5315

percent of Korea’s mandarin variety exports ) and Canada imported 878 tons (30 percent)

.

The U.S. share was less than 0.4 percent in 2009, although it was Korea’s third large st

customer in 2002 and second largest in 2001.

Tab le 12

. Korea’s mandarin variety exports, 2001

- 2009 (HTS: 080520, M andarins (including

t ang erines and S ats uma s ) ; clementines, w ilkings and similar citrus h ybrids, fresh/d ried )

Calendar year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Partner country Metric tons

World 5,038 8,938 8,405 5,722 3,600 2,913 3,399 2,536 2,783

Russia 476 1,777 2,342 364 266 1,351 2,584 1,785 1,475

Canada 125 4,811 5,089 4,223 2,493 705 389 465 828

Indonesia 60 49 146 224 70 182 116 13 96

China 11

- 516 4

- - - - 66
Singapore 111 33 0 111 9 141 67 45 55

Guam 33 46 36 172 83 75 58 62 51

Hong Kong 15 7 11 38 79 54 5 25 44

Mongolia

- - 42

- 9

- - 66 40

Malaysia 94 171

- 147 112 80 43

- 24

Taiwan

- 68 21 17

- 3 20 8 20

Un ited Kingdom

- - - - - - - 3 19

Japan 2,619 358 189 390 326 285 93 13 15

Vietnam 9

- - - 0 18 9

- 13

United States 1,461 1,611

- - - - 10 39 10

Others 24 6 4 22 144 11 6 13 27

Source : Global Trade Atlas

. Note: Data as reported by the Republic of Korea

.

Table 13 compares Korean production and exports of mandarin varieties . On

average, only 0.7 percent of domestic production was exported. From 2005 to 2009, the

export percentages averaged 0.5 percent

.

Table 13

. Korea’s mandarin variety production an d exports, 2000

- 2009

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Average

Metric tons

Production 552,724 634,892 775,633 631,242 573,939 637,696 603,737 718,129 560,616 685,901 637,451

Exports 2,572 5,038 8,938 8,405 5,722 3,600 2,913 3 ,399 2,536 2,783 4,590

E xport s as a percentage of
production 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.7

Source s : National Agricultural Cooperative Federation/Jeju Regional HQ/Orange Team

, Global Trade Atlas

.

Table 14 shows the value, volume a nd unit pr ice of Korea’s exports of mandarin

varieties . The total export values for 2007

- 2009 ranged between $2 million and $3

million, and the average unit price ranged between $0.78/KG and $1.09/KG during this16

period. The value of export s to the United States wa s merely $ 13,000 in 2009 , and the

unit price was $1.30/KG

.

Table 14

. V alue, volume and unit price of Korea’s exports of mandarin varieties , 2007

- 2009

(HTS: 080520, M andarins ( including t ang erines and S ats uma s ) ; clementines, w ilkings and

similar citrus h y brids, fresh/d ried )

Calendar year 2007 2008 2009

Partner
Country US$

('000) Quantity

(MT) Unit

Price

/KG US$

('000) Quantity

(MT) Unit

Price

/KG US$

('000) Quantity

(MT) Unit

Price

/KG % share

in total
quantity

World 2,998 3,399 0. 88 1,972 2,536 0.78 3,023 2,783 1.09 100.0

Russia 1,736 2,584 0.67 1,085 1,785 0.61 1,383 1,475 0.94 53.0

Canada 624 389 1.61 477 465 1.03 964 828 1.16 29.7

Guam 149 58 2.56 91 62 1.47 117 51 2.31 1.8

Indonesia 155 116 1.34 17 13 1.29 116 96 1.21 3.5

Japan 133 93 1.42 98 13 7.65 98 15 6.65 0.5

Singapore 88 67 1.32 55 45 1.23 77 55 1.39 2.0

Hong Kong 9 5 1.68 34 25 1.36 53 44 1.19 1.6

China

- - - - - - 52 66 0.79 2.4

Mongolia

- - - 36 66 0.54 35 40 0.87 1.4

Taiwan 23 20 1.11 10 8 1.35 31 20 1.57 0. 7

Malaysia 50 43 1.18

- - - 27 24 1.11 0.9

Northern

Mariana

Islands 8 6 1.47 9 7 1.32 13 9 1.50 0.3

United States 13 10 1.31 38 39 0.98 13 10 1.30 0.4

Others 11 9 1.39 23 9 7.2 44 50 6.2 1.9

Source : Global Trade Atlas

. Note: Data as reported by the Re public of Korea

.

For comparison, Table 15 shows the value, volume and unit price of U.S. exports

of mandarin varieties

. T otal export values for 2007

- 2009 ranged between $2 1 million

and $ 40 million, and the average unit price ranged between $ 1.22 /KG and $ 1. 34 /KG

during this period. The value of export s to Korea in 2008 and 2009 was $760,000 and

$ 162 ,000 , respectively, with unit price s of $1 .04 /KG and $ 0.98 /KG.

Table 1 5

. V alue, volume and unit price of U.S. exports of mandarin varieties , 2007

- 2009 (HTS:

080520, M andarins ( including t ang erines and S ats uma s ) ; clementines, w ilkings and similar citrus

h ybrids, fresh/d ried )

Calendar year 2007 2008 200917

Partner

country US$

('000) Quantity

(MT) Unit

Price US$

('000) Quantity

(MT) Unit

Price US$

('000) Qu antity

(MT) Unit

Price % Share

total
quantity

World 21,032 17,234 1.22 39,381 30,810 1.28 40,214 30,112 1.34 100

Canada 16,789 13,870 1.21 24,793 18,850 1.32 27,306 18,446 1.48 61.3

Japan 2,156 1,791 1.20 5,836 4,442 1.31 7,014 6,778 1.03 22.5

Austral ia 1,147 682 1.68 3,137 1,996 1.57 2,835 2,027 1.4 6.7

Netherlands

- - - 2,614 2,726 0.96 1,033 1,128 0.92 3.7

New Zealand 428 415 1.03 964 785 1.23 668 474 1.41 1.6

Barbados 203 169 1.21 74 75 0.98 311 258 1.2 0.9

Korea

- - - 760 732 1.04 162 166 0.98 0.6

Mexico 43 62 0.70 250 340 0.74 150 193 0.78 0.6

Russia

- - - 19 13 1.44 144 182 0.8 0.6

United
Kingdom 45 49 0.91 324 299 1.08 82 79 1.03 0.3

Source : Global Trade Atlas

. Note: Data as reported by the United States Department of Commerce

.

If Unshu oranges and U.S.

- grown mandarin varieties were close substitutes, then

U.S. entities could be affected to the extent that Unshu orange imports from Korea would

displace sales of the U.S.

- grown mandarin varieties. Small entities would be affected,

since t hey comprise a substantial number of the producers of mandarin varieties.

However, even if all Unshu orange imports from Korea were to directly replace a portion

of U.S.

- grown tangerine c o nsumption , the effect on U.S. producers would be very small

.

Under such a scenario, annual imports of Unshu oranges from Korea of 2,000 metric tons

(the upper limit of the projected range of imports

, which would well surpass the peak

import volume of 1,611 tons recorded in 2002 ) would displace only 0.6 percent of fresh

t angerines pro duced by U.S. operations in 2008

- 09 . We emphasize that even a small

impact such as this for U.S. producers is highly unlikely.

We expect that any product displacement that may occur because of the rule

would be borne by other foreign supplier s of Unshu oranges, in particular, Japan’s

exporters. However, we do not expect any significant product displacement as a result of

Korean supplies. C onsumers may benefit, to the extent that the competition results in

price declines and increased availab ility of Unshu oranges . We welcome public

comment that would improve our understanding of possible effects of the rule for U.S.

small entities.18 An alternative to this rule would be to continue with the 2002 administrative

suspension of the importation of Unshu oranges from Korea into all parts of the United

States except Alaska. Continuing the suspension of Korean Unshu orange imports into

the c ontinental United States is not a satisfactory alternative to the rule. The rule’s

s pecified mitigation measure s would ensure a low risk of introduction of citrus canker

and sweet orange scab into the United States. Resumption of imports would reestablish

import competition with Japanese suppliers, benefiting U.S. consumers but with little if

any expected effect f

or U.S. producers.

Th e rule would not entail reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance

requirements beyond those set forth in existing regulations, such as in 7 CFR 319.56

- 6,

which requires that all imported fruits or vegetables be subject to inspectio n at the port of

first arrival. All costs associated with the field pest control program, labeling, inspection

and certification, and packinghouse procedures, would be incurred by the owner or the

agent of the owner of the fruit prior to importation.

Unde r 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.