### 26654 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Secretary for Management is the lead Department of State official for overall operational implementation of the Executive Order. The retrospective team answers to that official, not to the rule writers. With respect to prospective rules, proposed drafts of such rules must be cleared by the Office of the Legal Adviser, the Bureau of Resource Management, and other offices relevant to the regulation’s subject matter, which are typically independent of the rule writers. For example, rules affecting visa policy and procedures require clearance by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) while various additional circumstances may require clearance by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). These required clearance steps ensure objective channels of review for rule drafts. f. Describe Agency Actions, If Any, To Strengthen Internal Review Expertise. This Could Include Training Staff, Regrouping Staff, Hiring New Staff, or Other Methods

A working group was created to enforce the Department’s efforts for making the most up-to-date information available online for the public and Department staff, for discussing information about the requirements of the E.O. and for planning the initial and on-going annual reviews. Looking forward, the Department’s bureaus will participate in the rule writing process by contributing staff to the retrospective team. This approach will provide a rich retrospective review exchange with the public and will ensure that all aspects of the Department’s broad expertise are reflected in the E.O.’s retrospective analysis of existing rules efforts. g. How will the agency plan for retrospective analysis over the next two years, and beyond?

This plan has been developed collaboratively under the direction of the Under Secretary of Management. The team is composed of leading bureau representatives currently active in the rule writing and rule review process. Because the Department regulatory procedures are dynamic in nature, there are triggers that promote our on-going review and amendment to our rules and other guidance. h. How will the agency decide what to do with analysis?

The Under Secretary for Management will decide, with input from the retrospective team and input from the public received in response to this notice. i. What are the agency’s plans for revising rules? How will agencies periodically revisit rules (e.g., though sunset provisions, during regular intervals)?

The Department will review each rule and determine whether or not it should be revised.
j. Describe How the Agency Will Coordinate With Other Federal Agencies That Have Jurisdiction or Similar
Interests

As administrators of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and rules dealing with passport/visa issues, the Department already coordinates with other Federal agencies when it promulgates rules, and will do the same if the retrospective analysis reveals existing rules that must be changed.
k. Will the plan be peer reviewed?

This plan was developed by a team led by the Department’s Under Secretary for Management, composed of employees throughout the Department. The public will be given an opportunity to comment on the plan, but it will not be peer-reviewed in the scientific sense.
VI. Components of Retrospective CostBenefit Analysis
a. What metrics will the agency use to evaluate regulations after they have been implemented? For example, will the agency use increases in net benefits, increases in cost effectiveness ratios, or something else?

During the initial review process, each specific rule will be evaluated individually. The Department generally implements rules based on statutory requirements, recouping the cost of service, and increase in net benefits.
b. What steps has the agency taken to ensure that it has the data available with which to conduct a robust retrospective analysis?

A working group has been formed consisting of individuals with expertise in rule writing, which will ensure an effective retrospective analysis.
c. How, if at all, will the agency incorporate experimental designs into retrospective analyses?

This does not apply to the Department of State. VII. Publishing the Agency’s Plan Online a. Will the agency publish its retrospective review plan and available data on its Open Government Web site (http://www.agency.gov/open).

Yes. The point of contact will be T. J. Furlong (FurlongTJ@state.gov) in the Department’s Bureau of Administration.

Dated: April 27, 2011. Patrick F. Kennedy, Under Secretary for Management,

Department of State. [FR Doc. 2011–11242 Filed 5–6–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4710–24–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service** 

**7 CFR Parts 301 and 319**

**[Docket No. APHIS–2010–0127]**

**RIN 0579–AD34**

**Movement of Hass Avocados From Areas Where Mediterranean Fruit Fly**  **or South American Fruit Fly Exist**

**AGENCY :**  Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.

**SUMMARY :**  We are reopening the comment period for our proposed rule that would relieve certain restrictions regarding the movement of fresh Hass variety avocados. This action will allow interested persons additional time to prepare and submit comments.

**DATES :**  We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May 18,
2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS2010-0127 to submit or view comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically.

• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send one copy of your comment to Docket No. APHIS–2010–0127, 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. APHIS–
2010–0127.

Reading Room: You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading


### 26655 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules

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 :**  Mr. Tony Roma  ́ n, Import Specialist, Regulations, Permits, and Manuals, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734–
0627.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  On April 4, 2011, we published in the Federal Register (76 FR 18419–18421, Docket No. APHIS–2010–0127) a proposal to relieve certain restrictions regarding the movement of fresh Hass variety avocados. Specifically, we proposed to amend our domestic regulations to provide for the interstate movement of Hass avocados from Mediterranean fruit fly quarantined areas in the United States with a certificate if the fruit is safeguarded after harvest in accordance with specific measures. We also proposed to amend our foreign quarantine regulations to remove trapping requirements for Mediterranean fruit fly for Hass avocados imported from the State of Michoaca  ́ n, Mexico, requirements for treatment or origin from an area free of Mediterranean fruit fly for Hass avocados imported from Peru, and requirements for trapping or origin from an area free of South American fruit fly for Hass avocados imported from Peru.

Comments on the proposed rule were required to be received on or before May 4, 2011. We are reopening the comment period on Docket No. APHIS–2010– 0127 for an additional 14 days, until May 18, 2011. This action will allow interested persons additional time to prepare and submit comments. We will also consider all comments received between May 5, 2011, and the date of this document.

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.

Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of May 2011. Gregory L. Parham, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–11173 Filed 5–6–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–34–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE** 

**Food Safety and Inspection Service**

**9 CFR Parts 300, 441, 530–534, 537, 539, 540, 541, 544, 548, 550, 552, 555,**  **557, and 559–561**

**[Docket No. FSIS–2011–0010]**

**Public Meetings on the Proposed Rule for Mandatory Inspection of Catfish**  **and Catfish Products**

**AGENCY :**  Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

**ACTION :**  Notice of public meetings; request for comment.

**SUMMARY :**  The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is announcing that it will hold two public meetings to receive comments on the proposed regulation to implement a program for mandatory inspection of catfish and catfish products (Docket No. FSIS– 2008–0031), published February 24, 2011 in the Federal Register

. **DATES :**  The first meeting will be held in Washington, DC, on May 24, 2011; 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. EDT, in the USDA Jefferson Auditorium (South Building), 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250. Attendees must provide a photo ID to enter the building. The Jefferson Auditorium is located at Wing 6 in the South Building. Attendees should enter the building via Wing 5 or 7 on 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW.

The second meeting will be held in Stoneville, Mississippi, on May 26, 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., in the Charles Capp Center at the Delta Research and Extension Center of the Mississippi State University. The Charles Capp Center is located at 82 Stoneville Road, Stoneville, MS 38776. The telephone contact number is (662) 686–3442.

Registration will begin at 8:30 a.m. local time at each location.

Meeting times may be adjusted according to public participation and
comments.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Joan Lindenberger, Office of Public Affairs and Consumer Education, (202) 720– 6755, or by e-mail at Joan.Lindenberger@fsis.usda.gov.

Registration: Pre-registration for thismeeting is recommended. To preregister, access the FSIS Web site, at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News/ Meetings

_&

_Events/. Select the meeting(s) you wish to attend and complete the registration form as requested. Persons requiring a sign language interpreter or other special accommodations should notify Ms. Lindenberger 15 business days prior to the meeting.

Public Comment: Anyone wishing to make a public comment must indicate that preference during the registration process. In addition to these meetings, interested persons may submit comments on the proposed rule (76 FR 10434) on or before June 24, 2011, using either of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions at that site for submitting comments.

Mail, including CD–ROMs, and handor courier-delivered items: Send to Docket Clerk, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, Room 2–2127 George Washington Carver Center, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Mailstop 5272, Beltsville, MD 20705–5272.

Instructions: All items submitted by mail or electronic mail must include the Agency name and docket number FSIS—2008–0031. Comments received in response to this docket will be made available for public inspection and posted without change, including any personal information, to: http:// www.regulations.gov.

Docket: For access to background documents or comments received, go to the FSIS Docket Room at the address listed above between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background

U.S. catfish processors, exporters, and importers are currently subject to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) regulations for seafood (9 CFR part 123), including catfish, and to other requirements under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq. ). The National Marine Fisheries Service conducts voluntary, fee-for-service inspection and certification programs for catfish under provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Act (7 U.S.C. 1622, 1624) and regulations implementing that Act (50 CFR part 260).

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110–246, § 10016(b)), known as the 2008 Farm Bill, amended the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) to provide that

‘‘catfish, as defined by the Secretary, ’’ is a species amenable to the FMIA (21 U.S.C. 601 (w)(2)) and amended the FMIA in other ways to provide for catfish inspection. FSIS, the Agency that administers the FMIA, has proposed regulations to implement the Farm Bill amendments of the FMIA that require inspection of catfish and catfish