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.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

16146 

Vol. 74, No. 67 

Thursday, April 9, 2009 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

7 CFR Parts 305 and 319 

[Docket No. APHIS–2007–0117] 

RIN 0579–AC90 

Importation of Wooden Handicrafts 

From China 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend 

the regulations to provide for the 

importation of wooden handicrafts from 

China under certain conditions. From 

2002 to 2005, the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Services (APHIS) 

issued more than 300 emergency action 

notices and conducted national recalls 

to remove infested Chinese-origin 

wooden handicrafts from the U.S. 

marketplace. In 2005, APHIS suspended 

the importation of certain Chinese 

wooden handicrafts until we could 

more fully analyze the pest risks 

associated with those articles. Based on 

the evidence in a recent pest risk 

analysis, APHIS has determined that 

these articles can be safely imported 

from China, provided certain conditions 

are met. This action would allow for 

trade in Chinese wooden handicrafts to 

resume while continuing to protect the 

United States against the introduction of 

plant pests. 

DATES: We will consider all comments 

that we receive on or before June 8, 

2009. 

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=APHIS2007-0117 to submit or view comments 

and to view supporting and related 

materials available electronically. 

• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: 

Please send two copies of your comment 

to Docket No. APHIS–2007–0117, 

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– 

2007–0117. 

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: Mr. 

John Tyrone Jones, Trade Director 

(Forestry Products), Phytosanitary 

Issues Management, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 

River Road Unit 140, Riverdale, MD 

20737–1231; (301) 734–8860. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Logs, 

Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured 

Wood Articles’’ (7 CFR 319.40–1 

through 319.40–11, referred to below as 

the regulations) govern the importation 

of various logs, lumber, and other 

unmanufactured wood products into the 

United States. Under § 319.40–9 of the 

regulations, all regulated articles must 

be inspected at the port of first arrival. 

If a regulated article shows any signs of 

pest infestation, the inspector may 

require treatment, if an approved 

treatment exists, or refuse entry of the 

consignment. 

In recent years, wood decorative items 

and craft products (wooden handicrafts) 

from China have been entering the 

United States in increasing quantities. 

Since 2002, the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has 

issued more than 300 emergency action 

notices for wooden handicrafts from 

China, including artificial trees 

manufactured from a composite of 

natural and synthetic materials, garden 

trellis towers, home and garden wood 

de ́cor, and craft items. In 2004, the 

United States Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) intercepted live wood boring 

beetles, Callidiellum villosulum 

(Coleoptera: Cerambycidae), on artificial 

trees manufactured from wood 

components and on other craft products 

imported from China. Subsequent to 

these interceptions, shipments of those 

articles were recalled from retail stores. 

Based on these pest interceptions, we 

suspended the importation of most 

wooden handicrafts (i.e., all handicrafts 

made from wooden logs, limbs, 

branches, or twigs greater than 1 

centimeter in diameter) from China in 

2005 until a more thorough evaluation 

of the pest risks associated with those 

articles could be conducted. 

APHIS prepared a pest risk 

assessment, titled ‘‘Pests and 

mitigations for manufactured wood 

de ́cor and craft products from China for 

importation into the United States,’’ to 

evaluate the risks associated with the 

importation of such wooden handicrafts 

into the United States from China. 

APHIS also prepared a risk management 

document, titled ‘‘Pests and mitigations 

for manufactured wood de ́cor and craft 

products from China for importation 

into the United States,’’ to determine 

mitigations necessary to prevent pest 

entry, introduction, or establishment 

associated with imported wooden 

handicrafts from China. Copies of the 

pest risk assessment and risk 

management document may be obtained 

from the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or 

viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site 

(see ADDRESSES above for instructions 

for accessing Regulations.gov). 

Based on the conclusions in the pest 

risk assessment and the accompanying 

risk management document, we have 

determined that wooden handicrafts can 

be imported from China provided 

certain conditions are met. The details 

of those conditions would be set out in 

a new paragraph (o) in § 319.40–5, 

‘‘Importation and entry requirements for 

specified articles.’’ The new paragraph 

would require treatments, phytosanitary 

certificates and inspection, and box 

identifications. These requirements are 

discussed in more detail in the 

following paragraphs. 

Change to the Title of ‘‘Subpart—Logs, 

Lumber, and Other Unmanufactured 

Wood Articles’’ 

For reasons that we discuss below, we 

are proposing to remove the word 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 16147 

‘‘unmanufactured’’ from the title of the 

subpart. 

Definitions 

Section 319.40–1 contains definitions 

for certain terms used in the regulations 

pertaining to logs, lumber, and other 

wood articles. In § 319.40–1, we are 

proposing to add a new definition, 

wooden handicraft, and to revise the 

definition of regulated article. We 

would define wooden handicraft as a 

commodity class of articles derived or 

made of natural components of wood, 

twigs, and vines, and including bamboo 

poles and garden stakes. Handicrafts 

would include the following products 

where wood is present: Carvings, 

baskets, boxes, bird houses, 

manufactured Christmas trees, garden 

and lawn/patio furniture (rustic), 

potpourri, silk trees (typically artificial 

ficus trees), trellis towers, garden 

fencing and edging, and other items 

composed of wood. This new definition 

would establish the meaning of this 

term in the context of the regulations. 

Currently, we define a regulated 

article as ‘‘the following articles, if they 

are unprocessed or have received only 

primary processing: Logs; lumber; any 

whole tree; any cut tree or any portion 

of a tree, not solely consisting of leaves, 

flowers, fruits, buds, or seeds; bark; 

cork; laths; hog fuel; sawdust; painted 

raw wood products; excelsior (wood 

wool); wood chips; wood mulch; wood 

shavings; pickets; stakes; shingles; solid 

wood packing materials; humus; 

compost; and litter.’’ Based on this 

definition, insofar as wooden 

handicrafts are often composed 

primarily of products that have 

undergone more than primary 

processing, we recognize that it is not 

immediately apparent that they would 

fall within the scope of articles 

regulated by the subpart. 

However, we have long construed one 

of the clauses of the definition of 

regulated article, designating any 

unmanufactured or partially processed 

portion of a tree as a regulated article, 

to mean that any article that contains an 

unmanufactured or partially processed 

part that cannot feasibly be separated 

from the other parts of the article for the 

purposes of inspection and treatment is, 

in fact, a regulated article. For example, 

we would consider a crate constructed 

of processed (e.g., plywood) sides but 

unprocessed lumber bracing to be a 

regulated article, and thus subject to 

inspection and treatment. Moreover, 

wooden handicrafts, as we are 

proposing to define them, would always 

contain unmanufactured or partially 

processed parts that cannot easily be 

extricated from the other parts of the 

handicraft. Therefore, we consider 

wooden handicrafts to fall within the 

scope of regulated articles. 

However, we do consider it useful to 

amend and clarify the definition of 

regulated articles at this time based on 

our long-standing interpretation of that 

definition. As amended, regulated 

articles would be ‘‘the following 

articles, if they are unprocessed, have 

received only primary processing, or 

contain parts that are either 

unprocessed or have received only 

primary processing and are not feasibly 

separable from the other parts of the 

article: Logs; lumber; any whole tree; 

any cut tree or any portion of a tree, not 

solely consisting of leaves, flowers, 

fruits, buds, or seeds; bark; cork; laths; 

hog fuel; sawdust; painted raw wood 

products; excelsior (wood wool); wood 

chips; wood mulch; wood shavings; 

pickets; stakes; shingles; solid wood 

packing materials; humus; compost; 

litter; and wooden handicrafts.’’ 

Accordingly, since we have long 

applied the requirements of this subpart 

to articles that are partially processed or 

manufactured, we also consider it useful 

to amend the title of the subpart by 

removing the word ‘‘unmanufactured’’ 

from it. 

Treatments 

Wood boring beetles in the families 

Buprestidae, Cerambycidae, and 

Scolytidae were the pests of greatest 

concern identified in the pest risk 

assessment as likely to follow the 

pathway on imported wooden 

handicrafts from China. Because the 

immature stages of wood boring beetles 

develop completely inside wood, wood 

boring beetles are considered to present 

a high risk of entering the United States 

undetected within untreated wood. 

Until adult insects leave the wood, there 

is often no sign of the internally feeding 

pest. Therefore, to address the risks 

presented by those pests, we are 

proposing to amend the regulations to 

require that all wooden handicrafts from 

China be treated with heat treatment or 

heat treatment with moisture reduction. 

In certain instances, which we specify 

below, we are also proposing to allow 

methyl bromide as an alternative 

treatment method. 

The requirements for heat treatment 

and heat treatment with moisture 

reduction are currently set forth in 

§ 319.40–7(c) and (d), respectively. As 

provided in § 319.40–7(c), heat 

treatment may take place only at a 

facility where APHIS or an inspector 

authorized by the Administrator and the 

national government of the country in 

which the facility is located has 

inspected the facility and determined 

that its operation complies with the 

treatment specifications as follows: Heat 

treatment procedures may employ 

steam, hot water, kilns, exposure to 

microwave energy, or any other method 

(e.g., the hot water and steam 

techniques used in veneer production) 

that raises the temperature of the center 

of each treated regulated article to at 

least 71.1 °C (160 °F) and maintains the 

regulated article at that center 

temperature for at least 75 minutes. 

Section 319.40–7(d) provides that 

heat treatment with moisture reduction 

may include kiln drying conducted in 

accordance with the schedules 

prescribed for the regulated article in 

the Dry Kiln Operator’s Manual, 

Agriculture Handbook 188, which we 

have incorporated by reference into our 

regulations (see 7 CFR 300.2), or dry 

heat, exposure to microwave energy, or 

any other method that raises the 

temperature of the center of each treated 

regulated article to at least 71.1 °C (160 

°F), maintains the regulated articles at 

that center temperature for at least 75 

minutes, and reduces the moisture 

content of the regulated article to 20 

percent or less as measured by an 

electrical conductivity meter. 

For regulated articles that are heat 

treated or heat treated with moisture 

reduction prior to arrival in the United 

States, the regulated article must be 

stored, handled, or safeguarded in a 

manner which excludes any infestation 

of the regulated article by plant pests, 

particularly the pests of greatest concern 

identified in the risk management 

document, during the entire interval 

between treatment and export. 

Proposed § 319.40–5(o)(1) provides 

for the use of methyl bromide 

fumigation as an additional treatment 

option for wooden handicrafts that are 

less than 6 inches in diameter. The 

methyl bromide treatment we would 

prescribe, which is listed in 7 CFR part 

305 as treatment schedule T404–d, is 

not an effective treatment for wood 

pieces that are larger than 6 inches in 

diameter. 

Phytosanitary Certificate 

Proposed § 319.40–5(o)(2) would 

require that all consignments of wooden 

handicrafts be accompanied by a 

phytosanitary certificate issued by the 

national plant protection organization 

(NPPO) of China. The phytosanitary 

certificate would have to contain an 

additional declaration stating that the 

handicrafts were treated as required 

under § 319.40–5(o) and inspected and 

found free from quarantine pests. The 

phytosanitary certificate would serve to 

verify that treatment took place in China 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
16148 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

1U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of 

Manufactures: 2005 Statistics for industry groups 

and industries, November 2006. The value added 

and shipment values are for wood products 

manufacturing, paper manufacturing, and furniture 

and related product manufacturing. 2USDA/FAS, Solid Wood Products: China’s 

Wood processing Sector and Re-exports of Imported 

U.S. Wood products, 2007, GAIN Report Number 

CH7061. 

3World Trade Atlas, 1993–2007. Global Trade 

Information Services, Inc., July 2007. 

and that the consignment was free of 

quarantine pests upon exportation. 

Identification of Shipping Packages 

Proposed § 319.40–5(o)(3) would 

require that all individual packages of 

wooden handicrafts be labeled with a 

merchandising tag containing the 

identity of the product manufacturer. 

We would require that the tag be 

applied to each package in China prior 

to exportation and that the identifying 

tag remain in place until the package 

reaches the store at which it will be sold 

in the United States. The identification 

tag would serve as a means for APHIS 

to track shipments should a recall be 

required. 

Changes to Treatment Schedules 

We are also proposing to amend 

§ 305.28, ‘‘Kiln sterilization treatment 

schedule.’’ Currently, this section 

contains a treatment schedule, T–404– 

b–4, that, while correct, is ambiguous. 

Therefore, we would have T–404–b–4 

refer to the kiln sterilization techniques 

prescribed in the Dry Kiln Operator’s 

Manual, Agriculture Handbook 188, 

which is incorporated by reference into 

our regulations. The Dry Kiln Operator’s 

Manual, Agriculture Handbook 188, 

would provide exporters of wood 

products with equivalent kiln 

sterilization treatment schedules that 

are clearer. 

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. 

We have prepared an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis that 

considers the potential economic effects 

of this proposed rule on small entities, 

as required by the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act. 

We are proposing to amend the 

regulations to provide for the 

importation of wooden handicrafts from 

China under certain conditions. From 

2002 to 2005, APHIS issued more than 

300 emergency action notices and 

conducted national recalls to remove 

infested Chinese-origin wooden 

handicrafts from the U.S. marketplace. 

In 2005, APHIS suspended the 

importation of certain Chinese wooden 

handicrafts until further analysis of pest 

risk could be conducted. Based on the 

evidence in a recent pest risk 

assessment, APHIS has determined that 

these articles can be safely imported 

from China, provided certain conditions 

are met. This action would allow for 

trade in Chinese wooden handicrafts to 

resume while continuing to protect the 

United States against the introduction of 

plant pests. 

U.S.-Chinese Trade in Wood Products 

The U.S. forest products industry is 

among the nation’s leading 

manufacturers. It contributes about $167 

billion to the gross domestic product, 

with annual shipments valued at $359 

billion.1 The industry tends to locate 

near its resource base and therefore is 

important to many local rural 

economies. It employs directly more 

than 1.5 million people. Many other 

jobs depend on such forest-related 

activities as hunting, hiking, fishing, 

and the production and sale of 

alternative forest products. 

The United States is one of the major 

players in international wood products 

trade. It is a top five exporter and the 

leading importer of wood and wood 

products. In 2006, the United States 

exported wood and wood products 

valued at $6.6 billion to a variety of 

destinations. The major destinations 

included Canada, Japan, Mexico, China, 

Spain, the United Kingdom, Italy, 

Germany, South Korea, and Hong Kong. 

That same year, the U.S. imported wood 

and wood products valued at $22.9 

billion. Canada, Brazil, China, Chile, 

and Germany supplied 83 percent of 

U.S. total imports of wood and wood 

products. 

According to a recent report by 

USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Services 

(FAS), the United States imported wood 

products (including furniture and paper 

products) from China valued at $4.55 

billion, while it exported to China wood 

products valued at $1.11 billion in 

2006.2 Most of the Chinese exports to 

the United States are value-added 

products such as furniture and paper, 

while the U.S. exports to China are 

mainly raw or semi-processed materials 

such as timber, lumber, and veneer. 

Trade between the two countries in all 

products is expanding at a rapid rate. 

China jumped from being the United 

States’ fourth largest trade partner in 

2002 to being our second largest partner 

in 2006. If this rate of expansion 

continues, China will likely pass 

Canada and become the United States’ 

largest trading partner in the near 

future. China’s overall mercantile 

exports to the United States increased 

from $102 billion in 2001 to $288 

billion in 2006, a 181 percent increase. 

Over the same period of time, U.S. 

imports increased overall by about 62 

percent. The increase in imports of 

Chinese wood products was even larger, 

about 256 percent over the same period, 

compared to an overall increase in U.S. 

imports of wood products of 53 

percent.3

Benefits and Costs 

The brown fir longhorned beetle, 

Callidiellum villosulum, and the 

Japanese cedar longhorned beetle, 

Callidiellum rufipenne, are both related 

to Anoplophora glabripennis, the Asian 

longhorned beetle (ALB). The ALB is a 

pest that is destructive of many tree 

species found in U.S. forests and is 

currently being eradicated in the United 

States. Its host ranges include cedar, 

cypress, pine, redwood, and other 

conifers. The host range of the tiger 

longhorned beetle, Chlorophorus 

annularis, includes grapes, citrus, pears, 

and cotton. (U.S.-produced grapes, 

citrus, pears, and cotton had combined 

domestic sales of over $12 billion in 

2006.) The introduction of one of these 

pests to an area could result in reduced 

yields, reduced commodity value, and 

loss of both domestic and international 

markets. The damage caused by these 

pests becomes additive when there are 

mixed populations of closely related 

species. The United States is susceptible 

to establishment of these pests because 

our climatic zones are similar to those 

of China. 

The potential destructiveness and 

economic impacts of these insects are 

exemplified by APHIS’ most recent 

experience with ALB and Agrilus 

planipennis, the emerald ash borer 

(EAB). The ALB continues to attack 

hosts with significant commercial value, 

killing the host or predisposing it to 

destruction by other organisms. Affected 

areas lose aesthetic and property values 

as large infested trees are replaced by 

young and less desirable ALB-resistant 

trees. Eradication efforts in New York 

and Illinois have resulted in the 

destruction and removal of thousands of 

trees. APHIS has spent more than $300 

million on eradication efforts and tree 

replacement. A study by Nowak et al. 

(2002), using the New York and Illinois 

experience as a basis, estimated that the 

potential national urban impact of ALB 

could reach a loss of 34.9 percent of 

total canopy cover, with 30.3 percent 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 16149 

4Nowak, D.J., D.E. Crane, and J.F. Dwyer. July 

2002. ‘‘Compensatory Value of Urban Trees in the 

United States.’’ Journal of Arboriculture, Vol. 28: 

194–199. 

5http://www.ca.uky.edu/AGC/NEWS/2006/Dec/ 

ashborer.htm. 

6Sydnor, T.D., M. Bumgardner, and A. Todd, 

(January 2007). ‘‘The potential economic impacts of 

emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) on Ohio, 

U.S., communities.’’ Arboriculture and Urban 

Forestry, Vol. 33: 48–54. 

7Pallet Enterprise Web site: http:// 

www.palletenterprise.com/pests/fumigation101.asp. 8U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 economic census, 

Manufacturing-Subject Series. 9U.S. Small Business Administration Table of 

Small Business Size Standards. (http:// 

www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/ 

sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf). 

tree mortality and a value loss of $669 

billion.4

Similarly, EAB is a destructive woodboring insect that attacks ash trees 

(Fraxinus spp., including green ash, 

white ash, black ash, and several 

horticultural varieties of ash). This 

destructive pest has already killed more 

than 20 million ash trees since it was 

discovered in Michigan in the summer 

of 2002.5 The mortality rate for infested 

trees is 100 percent. If EAB spreads from 

infested areas to the surrounding forests 

of the northeastern United States, where 

nursery, landscaping, and timber 

industries and forest-based recreation 

and tourism industries play vital 

economic roles, its impact would be 

severe. The pest has the potential to 

destroy entire stands of ash, and any 

incursion of the pest can result in 

substantial losses to forest ecosystems, 

urban trees, and the timber industry. 

Sydnor et al. (2007) estimate total 

potential losses from this one pest in 

one State (Ohio), including ash 

landscape losses, tree removal, and 

replacements, to be between $1.8 billion 

and $7.6 billion.6

Eradication and control costs for ALB 

and EAB, and potential losses that could 

be caused by these pests if nothing were 

done to prevent their spread, are similar 

to the costs and losses that could be 

incurred if the pests addressed by this 

proposed rule were to become 

established in the United States. 

The cost of meeting the regulatory 

requirements of this proposed rule 

would be borne by Chinese 

manufacturers and exporters before the 

products are exported to the United 

States. The treatment options include 

heat treatment and heat treatment with 

moisture reduction, and for articles with 

a diameter of less than 6 inches, 

fumigation with methyl bromide. Heat 

treatment can increase the value of 

wood, while green wood products 

treated by methyl bromide do not gain 

additional value. 

Reportedly, fumigation tends to be a 

bit more expensive than heat treatment 

per treated load, but it does not have the 

considerable upfront expenditure 

associated with installing a heat 

treatment system. The cost for a 

fumigation service depends on a 

number of factors, including distance 

from the nearest service center, volume, 

frequency, and services requested. 

Fumigation services can range anywhere 

from $175–$500 per load.7 U.S. entities 

that import wooden handicraft articles 

from China may therefore experience 

some increase in prices because of the 

treatment requirements imposed by this 

rule, but the effect is not expected to be 

significant. For one thing, due to the 

treatment of wooden packing material 

currently required of incoming 

shipments from China, China already 

has in place the heat treatment and 

fumigation facilities and operations that 

would be needed. Therefore, while we 

lack information regarding the total 

number of treatments that would need 

to be conducted because of this rule, we 

are confident that China has in place 

means to minimize the cost of 

treatment. 

Finally, the cost of heat treatment or 

fumigation is expected to be small in 

comparison to the value of the wooden 

handicrafts that would be shipped. 

Wooden handicrafts are a value-added 

product for which there is an 

established market in the United States, 

as indicated by imports of wooden 

handicrafts from China prior to 2005. 

Accordingly, we expect that any portion 

of treatment costs that may be passed on 

to U.S. consumers would be minor 

compared to the benefits that would be 

accrued by U.S. consumers based on 

consumer access to a product for which 

there has been a clear market in recent 

years. Moreover, we expect these costs 

to be less than benefits that may be 

accrued based on the aggregate value of 

the handicrafts themselves and the 

potentiality, based on this value, for the 

facilitation of greater trade between the 

United States and China. 

Effects on Small Entities 

As a part of the rulemaking process, 

APHIS evaluates whether regulations 

are likely to have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The Small Business 

Administration has established 

guidelines for determining the number 

of firms considered small under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The entities 

that may be affected by this proposed 

rule are those engaged in wood product 

manufacturing, importing of the 

regulated articles, or furniture and 

related products manufacturing.8 These 

establishments are considered small if 

they employ 500 or fewer workers.9

There were 2,129 establishments 

engaged in other miscellaneous wood 

product manufacturing (North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

Code 321999), of which only 4 

establishments (less than 0.2 percent) 

could be considered to be large. The 

average annual value of their shipments 

in 2002 was $154 million. The 2,125 

small establishments had an average 

annual shipment value in 2002 of $1.9 

million. 

Alternatives 

The Agency does not foresee any 

significant impact of the proposed rule 

and therefore has not set forth any 

significant alternatives to minimize the 

impact on small entities. Any costs due 

to the treatments required by the 

proposed rule would be directly borne 

by the manufacturer or exporter in 

China. A portion of this cost may be 

passed on to the U.S. importer, but it 

would not be significant. 

Summary 

The application of the required 

treatments would take place in China 

before the products are exported to the 

United States. The entities that would 

be directly affected by the rule are 

Chinese manufacturers and exporters of 

wooden handicrafts. Domestically, the 

entities that may be marginally affected 

by the rule would be those engaged in 

wood product manufacturing, and 

importers and users of wooden 

handicrafts from China. These 

establishments are considered small if 

they employ 500 or fewer workers. In 

2002, there were 2,129 establishments 

engaged in other miscellaneous wood 

product manufacturing (NAICS Code 

321999), of which 4 establishments (less 

than 0.2 percent) could be considered to 

be large. The average annual value of 

their shipments in 2002 was $154 

million. That same year, small 

establishments had an average annual 

shipment value of $1.9 million. We 

expect any indirect impact of the rule 

for U.S. entities large or small, in terms 

of increased prices for wooden 

handicrafts from China because of the 

treatment requirements, to be minor. 

The U.S. forest industry has an 

important role in the U.S. economy, and 

the proposed amendments would help 

protect the industry from the 

establishment of pests introduced in 

wooden handicrafts imported from 

China. 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
16150 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

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. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To provide the public with 

documentation of APHIS’ review and 

analysis of any potential environmental 

impacts associated with the importation 

of wooden handicrafts from China, we 

have prepared an environmental 

assessment. The environmental 

assessment was prepared in accordance 

with: (1) The National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended 

(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) regulations 

of the Council on Environmental 

Quality for implementing the 

procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 

parts 1500–1508), (3) USDA regulations 

implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), 

and (4) APHIS’ NEPA Implementing 

Procedures (7 CFR part 372). 

The environmental assessment may 

be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web 

site or in our reading room. (A link to 

Regulations.gov and information on the 

location and hours of the reading room 

are provided under the heading 

ADDRESSES at the beginning of this 

proposed rule.) In addition, copies may 

be obtained by calling or writing to the 

individual listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Use of Methyl Bromide 

The United States is fully committed 

to the objectives of the Montreal 

Protocol, including the reduction and 

ultimately the elimination of reliance on 

methyl bromide for quarantine and preshipment uses in a manner that is 

consistent with the safeguarding of U.S. 

agriculture and ecosystems. APHIS 

reviews its methyl bromide policies and 

their effect on the environment in 

accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and 

Decision XI/13 (paragraph 5) of the 11th 

Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal 

Protocol, which calls on the Parties to 

review their ‘‘national plant, animal, 

environmental, health, and stored 

product regulations with a view to 

removing the requirement for the use of 

methyl bromide for quarantine and preshipment where technically and 

economically feasible alternatives 

exist.’’ 

The United States Government 

encourages methods that do not use 

methyl bromide to meet phytosanitary 

standards where alternatives are 

deemed to be technically and 

economically feasible. In some 

circumstances, however, methyl 

bromide continues to be the only 

technically and economically feasible 

treatment against specific quarantine 

pests. In addition, in accordance with 

Montreal Protocol Decision XI/13 

(paragraph 7), APHIS is committed to 

promoting and employing gas recapture 

technology and other methods 

whenever possible to minimize harm to 

the environment cause by methyl 

bromide emissions. As noted above, we 

welcome data or other information 

regarding other treatments that may be 

efficacious and technically and 

economically feasible that we may 

consider as alternatives to methyl 

bromide. 

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. APHIS–2007–0117. 

Please send a copy of your comments to: 

(1) Docket No. APHIS–2007–0117, 

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 amend the 

regulations to provide for the 

importation of wooden handicrafts from 

China under certain conditions. This 

action would allow for trade in Chinese 

wooden handicrafts to resume while 

continuing to protect the United States 

against the introduction of plant pests. 

Allowing the importation of wooden 

handicrafts from China would 

necessitate the use of certain 

information collection activities, 

including the completion of 

phytosanitary certificates and 

identification tags of packages of 

wooden handicrafts. 

We are soliciting comments from the 

public (as well as affected agencies) 

concerning our proposed information 

collection and recordkeeping 

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 0.003984 hours 

per response. 

Respondents: Chinese exporters. 

Estimated Annual Number of 

Respondents: 140. 

Estimated Annual Number of 

Responses per Respondent: 2,259. 

Estimated Annual Number of 

Responses: 316,260. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 1,260 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) 851–2908. 

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) 851–2908. 

Lists of Subjects 

7 CFR Part 305 

Irradiation, Phytosanitary treatment, 

Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 16151 

7 CFR Part 319 

Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs, 

Nursery stock, Plant diseases and pests, 

Quarantine, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Rice, 

Vegetables. 

Accordingly, we propose to amend 7 

CFR parts 305 and 319 as follows: 

PART 305—PHYTOSANITARY 

TREATMENTS 

1. The authority citation for part 305 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781– 

7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 

2.80, and 371.3. 

2. Section 305.2 is amended as 

follows: 

a. In the introductory text of 

paragraph (v), in the first sentence, by 

adding the word ‘‘handicrafts,’’ after the 

word ‘‘containers,’’. 

b. In the table in paragraph (v), by 

adding, in alphabetical order, a new 

entry for ‘‘wooden handicrafts’’ to read 

as set forth below. 

§ 305.2 Approved treatments. 

* * * * * 

(v) * * * 

Material Pest Treatment schedule 

* * * * * * * 

Wooden handicrafts .................... Wood-boring beetles (including the families Buprestidae, Cerambycidae, and 

Scolytidae) and other pests associated 

with wooden handicrafts.

MB–T404-d (less than 6 inches in diameter), heat treatment 

(§ 319.40–7(c) of this chapter), or heat treatment with moisture reduction (§ 319.40–7(d) of this chapter). 

3. Section 305.28 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 305.28 Kiln sterilization treatment 

schedule. 

T404–b–4: See kiln sterilization 

treatments contained in the ‘‘Dry Kiln 

Operator’s Manual,’’ which is 

incorporated by reference at § 300.2 of 

this chapter. 

PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE 

NOTICES 

4. 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. 

5. Following § 319.37–14, the subpart 

heading ‘‘Subpart—Logs, Lumber, and 

Other Unmanufactured Wood Articles’’ 

is amended by removing the word 

‘‘Unmanufactured’’. 

6. Section 319.40–1 is amended by 

revising the definition of regulated 

article and adding, in alphabetical 

order, a definition for wooden 

handicraft to read as follows: 

§ 319.40–1 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Regulated article. The following 

articles, if they are unprocessed, have 

received only primary processing, or 

contain parts that are either 

unprocessed or have received only 

primary processing and are not feasibly 

separable from the other parts of the 

article: Logs; lumber; any whole tree; 

any cut tree or any portion of a tree, not 

solely consisting of leaves, flowers, 

fruits, buds, or seeds; bark; cork; laths; 

hog fuel; sawdust; painted raw wood 

products; excelsior (wood wool); wood 

chips; wood mulch; wood shavings; 

pickets; stakes; shingles; solid wood 

packing materials; humus; compost; 

litter; and wooden handicrafts. 

* * * * * 

Wooden handicraft. A commodity 

class of articles derived or made from 

natural components of wood, twigs, and 

vines, and including bamboo poles and 

garden stakes. Handicrafts include the 

following products where wood is 

present: Carvings, baskets, boxes, bird 

houses, manufactured Christmas trees, 

garden and lawn/patio furniture (rustic), 

potpourri, silk trees (typically artificial 

ficus trees), trellis towers, garden 

fencing and edging, and other items 

composed of wood. 

* * * * * 

7. Section 319.40–5 is amended by 

adding a new paragraph (o) to read as 

follows: 

§ 319.40–5 Importation and entry 

requirements for specified articles. 

* * * * * 

(o) Wooden handicrafts from China. 

Wooden handicrafts may be imported 

into the United States from China only 

in accordance with this paragraph and 

all other applicable provisions of this 

title. 

(1) Treatment. (i) Wooden handicrafts 

must be treated with heat treatment in 

accordance with § 319.40–7(c) or heat 

treatment with moisture reduction in 

accordance with § 319.40–7(d). 

(ii) Wooden handicrafts that are less 

than 6 inches in diameter may also be 

treated with methyl bromide fumigation 

in accordance with part 305 of this 

chapter. 

(2) Phytosanitary certificate. All 

consignments of wooden handicrafts 

must be accompanied by a 

phytosanitary certificate issued by the 

national plant protection organization of 

China. The phytosanitary certificate 

must contain an additional declaration 

stating that the handicrafts were treated 

in accordance with this section and 

inspected and found free from 

quarantine pests. 

(3) Identification tag. All individual 

packages of wooden handicrafts must be 

labeled with a merchandise tag 

containing the identity of the product 

manufacturer. The identification tag 

must be applied to each package in 

China prior to exportation and remain 

attached to the package until it reaches 

the location at which the wooden 

handicraft will be sold in the United 

States. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of 

April 2009. 

Kevin Shea, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–8102 Filed 4–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS