32636 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

referred to in paragraph (c)(1) of this

section whose ownership of property

required to be divested is attributable to

such person by 18 U.S.C. 208, or any

other Federal conflict of interest statute,

regulation, rule, or executive order; and

(3) Any trustee holding property in

trust required to be divested in which:

(i) An individual referred to in

paragraph (c)(1) of this section has a

beneficial interest in principal or

income; or

(ii) A spouse or any minor or

dependent child of an individual

referred to in paragraph (c)(2) of this

section has a beneficial interest in

principal or income which is

attributable to a person referred to in

paragraph (c)(1) of this section by 18

U.S.C. 208, or any other Federal conflict

of interest statute, regulation, rule, or

executive order.

(d) Special rules in the case of a

trustee who is an eligible person. (1)

Notwithstanding any other rule of this

subpart, in the case of a trustee who is

an eligible person pursuant to paragraph

(c)(3) of this section, a Certificate of

Divestiture will not be issued unless the

parties take those actions which, in the

opinion of the Director of the Office of

Government Ethics, are appropriate to

exclude parties in addition to those

referred to in paragraph (c) (1) and (2)

of this section from participation in the

nonrecognition mechanism. Such

measures may include, as permitted by

applicable State trust and estate law,

division of the trust into separate

portfolios, special distributions,

dissolution of the trust, or any other

method deemed by the Director, in his

sole discretion, to be feasible under the

facts and circumstances to exclude

additional parties from benefiting from

the nonrecognition mechanism.

(2) In view of the further analysis

which must be undertaken by the Office

of Government Ethics in the case of a

Certificate of Divestiture request with

respect to a trustee, the required

submissions in such a case shall include

in addition to the materials described in

paragraph (b)(1) of this section, a copy

of the trust instrument, full details as to

its current portfolio, and a

memorandum analyzing all beneficial

interests in principal and income. To

the extent that there may be additional

parties with beneficial interests, the staff

of the Office of Government Ethics may

consult with representatives of the

Government official, trustee, and other

concerned parties, as appropriate, in

order to resolve the issues presented in

light of the principles described in

paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(e) Special rules in the case of

employees; unfair and unintended

benefits—(1) In general.

Notwithstanding any other rule of this

subpart, a Certificate of Divestiture will

not be issued in any case in which, in

the opinion of the Director of the Office

of Government Ethics, in his sole

discretion, an unfair or unintended

benefit would be conferred on an

eligible person. Paragraphs (e)(2)

through (g)(6) of this section give

examples of the application of the

general rule of this paragraph (e)(1).

(2) Employee benefit plans. With

respect to interests in pension, profitsharing, stock bonus and other

employee benefit plans, such an unfair

or unintended benefit would occur

upon certification of property held or

received during one step of a sequence

in avoidance of transferring an

otherwise qualifying rollover

distribution to an eligible retirement

plan within 60 days. In other words,

Certificates of Divestiture may not be

used to achieve a tax advantaged

removal of employee benefit plan funds

from the rules which normally pertain

to such plans in cases where no capital

gains tax would be imposed if those

rules were followed. Accordingly, in the

absence of a demonstration that an

interest in an employee benefit plan is

not eligible for rollover treatment, a

certificate will not be issued with

respect to such an interest. Such a

demonstration must satisfy the Office of

Government Ethics that the plan

administrator cannot make a qualifying

distribution in the case of the eligible

person to which the provisions of

section 402(f) of the Internal Revenue

Code of 1986 would apply and that the

particular property interest proposed for

certification falls within the statutory

scheme.

(3) Certain property received as

compensation for services. Such an

unfair and unintended benefit would

occur upon certification of property

received as compensation for services,

the gain from which would otherwise be

treated as earned income. For example,

with respect to the contemplated

exercise of a stock option granted by an

employer, such an unfair and

unintended benefit would occur upon

certification if such exercise or the sale

of the resultant stock would otherwise

result in earned income to the

employee.

(4) Nontimely divestitures. With

respect to any contemplated divestiture,

such an unfair or unintended benefit

would occur upon certification after the

three-month period referred to by

§ 2634.802(b) (or a similarly structured

agreement in any case to which

paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B) of this section

applies) has lapsed, unless there is an

extension of time in a case of unusual

hardship as determined pursuant to

such section by the Office of

Government Ethics or the designated

agency ethics official (with the written

concurrence of the Office of

Government Ethics). In the case of such

an agreement to implement a divestiture

required by statute, regulation, rule, or

executive order, such three-month

period shall be deemed, for purposes of

this subpart, to have started no later

than 10 days after such requirement had

become applicable.

(5) Similar or related interests. With

respect to any contemplated divestiture,

such an unfair or unintended benefit

would occur unless all similar or related

interests in property were also subject to

a divestiture commitment.

(6) Property acquired under improper

circumstances. With respect to any

contemplated divestiture, such an unfair

advantage or unintended benefit would

occur if the property was acquired at a

time when the holding of such property

was prohibited by any law or regulation

or under circumstances which

otherwise would create the appearance

of a conflict with the conscientious

performance of governmental

responsibilities.

[FR Doc. 96–15970 Filed 6–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6345–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

7 CFR Part 301

[Docket No. 95–087–1]

Japanese Beetle; Domestic Quarantine

and Regulations

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Interim rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the

Japanese beetle quarantine and

regulations to add Minnesota and

Wisconsin to the list of quarantined

States and to provide greater specificity

about what actions must be taken to

prevent the spread of Japanese beetle by

aircraft from regulated airports. The

actions specified by these amendments

are necessary to prevent the spread of

Japanese beetle into noninfested areas of

the United States. We are also amending

the regulations to allow carriers at

regulated airports the option of

performing some activities under a

compliance agreement with the Animal

and Plant Health Inspection Service,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 32637

rather than in the presence of an

inspector.

DATES: Interim rule effective June 20,

1996. Consideration will be given only

to comments received on or before

August 26, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and

three copies of your comments to

Docket No. 95–087–1, Regulatory

Analysis and Development, PPD,

APHIS, suite 3C03, 4700 River Road

Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.

Please state that your comments refer to

Docket No. 95–087–1. Comments

received may be inspected at USDA,

room 1141, South Building, 14th Street

and Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except holidays. Persons wishing to

inspect comments are requested to call

ahead on (202) 690–2817 to facilitate

entry into the comment reading room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Mario A. Rodriguez, Operations Officer,

Domestic and Emergency Operations,

PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 134,

Riverdale, MD 20737–1236, (301) 734–

8247.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Japanese beetle feeds on fruits,

vegetables, and ornamental plants and is

capable of causing damage to over 300

potential hosts. The Japanese beetle

quarantine and regulations, contained in

7 CFR 301.48 through 301.48–7 (referred

to below as the regulations), quarantine

the States of Alabama, Connecticut,

Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana,

Kentucky, Maine, Maryland,

Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri,

New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,

North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania,

Rhode Island, South Carolina,

Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West

Virginia, and the District of Columbia

and restrict the interstate movement of

aircraft from regulated airports in these

States in order to prevent the spread of

the Japanese beetle.

The Japanese beetle is active during

daylight hours only. Under § 301.48–2

of the regulations, an inspector of the

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS) may designate any

airport within a quarantined State as a

regulated airport if he or she determines

that adult populations of Japanese beetle

exist during daylight hours at the airport

to the degree that aircraft using the

airport constitute a threat to spread the

Japanese beetle to the seven States listed

in § 301.48(b) (Arizona, California,

Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and

Washington). An inspector may

terminate an airport’s designation as

regulated when he or she determines

that adult populations of Japanese beetle

no longer exist at the airport to the

degree that aircraft using the airport

pose a threat to spread this pest.

Also, under § 301.48–4 of the

regulations, a regulated article may

move interstate from a regulated airport

to the protected States only if: (1) The

regulated article has been treated in

accordance with the Plant Protection

and Quarantine Treatment Manual,

which is incorporated into the

regulations by reference at 7 CFR 300.1;

or (2) the inspector, upon visual

inspection, determines that the

regulated article does not present a

threat to spread the Japanese beetle

because adult beetle populations are not

present with regard to the particular

regulated article; or (3) the regulated

article arrives and leaves the regulated

airport during the same nondaylight

period.

APHIS and State plant health officials

constantly monitor the Japanese beetle

population in the United States. Recent

trapping surveys indicate that the States

of Minnesota and Wisconsin are now

infested with Japanese beetle. Therefore,

we are amending the regulations in

§ 301.48(a) to add Minnesota and

Wisconsin to the list of States

quarantined for Japanese beetle. We are

also amending the regulations to

provide greater specificity about what

actions must be taken to ensure aircraft

do not spread Japanese beetle from

regulated airports. The actions specified

by these amendments are necessary to

prevent the spread of Japanese beetle to

noninfested areas of the United States.

We are also amending the regulations to

allow carriers the option of performing

some activities under a compliance

agreement with APHIS, rather than in

the presence of an inspector.

We are also amending the definition

of ‘‘regulated airport’’ in § 301.48–1 of

the regulations to include portions of

airports, as well as entire airports. The

current definition pertains only to

airports in their entirety. This change

will allow APHIS inspectors to

quarantine only those portions of an

airport that are at significant risk of

being infested with Japanese beetles.

Generally, these areas are at the

periphery of airports, where commercial

carriers of goods are frequently located.

Passenger airlines generally use the

portion of an airport closest to the

terminal, where the risk of Japanese

beetle infestation is low. This change

would remove a burden on carriers that

use airport areas at low risk of Japanese

beetle infestation because these parts of

airports could be excluded from

regulation.

We are amending the regulations so

that an aircraft may move interstate

from a regulated airport to a protected

State only if: (1) An inspector, upon

visual inspection of the airport and/or

aircraft, determines that the aircraft does

not present a threat to spread the

Japanese beetle because adult beetle

populations are not present; or (2) the

aircraft is opened and loaded only while

it is enclosed in a hangar that APHIS

has determined to be free of and

safeguarded against Japanese beetle; or

(3) the aircraft is loaded during the

hours of 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

(generally nondaylight) only or lands

and departs during those hours and, in

either situation, is kept completely

closed while on the ground during the

hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.; or (4) if

opened and loaded during daylight

hours, the aircraft is inspected, treated,

and safeguarded.

If the fourth alternative is chosen, the

inspection, treatment, and safeguarding

must be done either under the

supervision of an inspector or under

compliance agreement with APHIS. The

inspection, treatment, and safeguarding

shall include some or all of the

following eight requirements and any

other conditions determined by APHIS

to be necessary to prevent the spread of

Japanese beetle:

1. All openings of the aircraft must be

closed or safeguarded during the hours

of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. by exclusionary

devices or by other means approved by

APHIS.

2. All cargo containers that have not

been safeguarded in a protected area

must be inspected immediately prior to

and during the loading process. All

personnel must check their clothing

immediately prior to entering the

aircraft. All Japanese beetles found must

be removed and destroyed.

3. All areas around doors and hatches

or other openings in the aircraft must be

inspected prior to removing the

exclusionary devices. All Japanese

beetles found must be removed and

destroyed. All doors and hatches must

be closed immediately after the

exclusionary devices are moved away

from the aircraft.

4. Aircraft must be treated in

accordance with the Treatment Manual

no more than 1 hour before loading. The

approved pesticide should be held at a

45-degree angle toward the floor of the

aircraft to ensure full coverage at the

specified rate. Particular attention

should be paid to the ball mat area and

the holes around the main entrance. The

aircraft must then be aerated under

safeguard conditions for 15 minutes.

5. Aircraft treatment records must be

maintained for 2 years by the applicator
32638 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

completing or supervising the treatment.

These records must be provided upon

request for review by an inspector.

Treatment records shall include the

pesticide used, the date of application,

the location where the pesticide was

applied (airport and aircraft), the

amount of pesticide applied, and the

name of the applicator.

6. When ‘‘tail swapping’’ procedures

are implemented (replacement of a

designated aircraft with an alternate one

when mechanical or other problems

occur in the designated aircraft before

departure), the alternate aircraft must be

inspected and all Japanese beetles must

be removed. The aircraft must be

safeguarded by closing all openings and

hatches or by equipping the aircraft

with exclusionary devices until the

aircraft is ready for use. During loading,

all treatment and safeguard

requirements applicable to regularly

scheduled aircraft must be

implemented.

7. Aircraft may be retreated in the

noninfested State if Japanese beetles are

found.

8. Notification of unscheduled

commercial flights and of all military

flights must be given at least 1 hour

before departure to the appropriate

person in the destination airport of any

of the States listed in § 301.48(b).

Notification of arriving military flights

should also be given to base

commanders to facilitate the entrance of

Federal and/or State inspectors onto the

base, if necessary.

Inspectors will determine which of

these eight requirements are appropriate

for each individual carrier on a case-bycase basis. The requirements could vary

not only among carriers at different

airports but also among carriers at the

same airport based on varying degrees of

pest risk. As described previously, the

location of a carrier at an airport plays

a large part in determining the risk of

Japanese beetle infestation.

Any person who enters into a

compliance agreement, and employees

or agents of that person, must allow

inspectors access to all records

regarding treatment of aircraft and to all

areas where loading, unloading, and

treatment of aircraft occurs. Approval

for a compliance agreement may be

canceled at any time if the

Administrator determines that the

requirements of the agreement are not

being met.

We are also amending the regulations

by making some changes that pertain to

internal agency management. The

regulations indicate that the Deputy

Administrator, Plant Protection and

Quarantine, APHIS, is the official

responsible for various decisions under

the regulations. We are revising the

regulations to indicate that the primary

responsibility for various decisions

under these regulations belongs to the

APHIS Administrator. We are replacing

all references to ‘‘Deputy

Administrator’’ with references to

‘‘Administrator’’ and are replacing all

references to ‘‘Plant Protection and

Quarantine’’ with references to ‘‘Animal

and Plant Health Inspection Service.’’

Similar changes have been made to

other APHIS regulations.

Nonsubstantive Changes

We are making one nonsubstantive

change to correct an error in a previous

rulemaking that pertained to the

Japanese beetle regulations. On January

12, 1987, we published in the Federal

Register (52 FR 1179–1180, Docket No.

86–351) a final rule that, among other

things, amended 7 CFR 300,

‘‘Incorporation by Reference,’’ to remove

the Japanese Beetle Program Manual

from the list of materials incorporated

into the regulations by reference.

However, this change was not reflected

in the Japanese beetle regulations. We

are therefore removing the reference to

the ‘‘Japanese Beetle Program Manual’’

in the definition of ‘‘Treatment manual’’

at § 301.48–1 of the regulations to reflect

the change that became effective upon

publication of the final rule of January

12, 1987.

We are making several editorial

changes to improve the regulations.

Immediate Action

The Administrator of the Animal and

Plant Health Inspection Service has

determined that there is good cause for

publishing this interim rule without

prior opportunity for public comment.

Immediate action is necessary to

implement improved procedures for

preventing the spread of Japanese beetle

to noninfested areas of the United States

prior to the beginning of the 1996

season of Japanese beetle activity (midJune in many parts of the country).

Because prior notice and other public

procedures with respect to this action

are impracticable and contrary to the

public interest under these conditions,

we find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553

to make this rule effective upon

publication in the Federal Register. We

will consider comments that are

received within 60 days of publication

of this rule in the Federal Register.

After the comment period closes, we

will publish another document in the

Federal Register. It will include a

discussion of any comments we receive

and any amendments we are making to

the rule as a result of the comments.

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.

The Japanese beetle regulations are

being amended to add Minnesota and

Wisconsin to the list of States regulated

for Japanese beetle and to state in more

detail the requirements for the interstate

movement of aircraft from regulated

airports. Thus, the rule clarifies

Japanese beetle domestic quarantine

regulations, but actual practices at the

regulated airports will not be

significantly altered.

While the status of certain airports

under regulation has changed from year

to year, the total number of regulated

airports has averaged about eight for

several years and is not expected to

change in the foreseeable future. Nearly

all regulated flights are loaded in

accordance with inspection, treatment,

and safeguarding procedures under

APHIS supervision. The costs incurred

by the affected air carriers for complying

with the inspection, treatment, and

safeguarding requirements of the

regulations are not expected to change.

The only significant change in actual

program operations is that inspection,

treatment, and safeguarding

requirements for aircraft may be done

under a compliance agreement with

APHIS, without the direct supervision

of an inspector. The possibility of

compliance agreements may create timesaving opportunities for the affected air

carriers due to increased flexibility in

timing and flight schedules. These timesaving opportunities may translate into

lower costs for the affected air carriers.

According to the Small Business

Administration, an air carrier with 1,500

employees or less is considered small.

The exact number or percentage of small

air carriers is not known. Even though

most of the affected flights from

regulated airports are those of large air

carriers, other, smaller companies may

benefit indirectly from the more timely

and perhaps more frequent departures

that may result from the compliance

agreements.

Regulated airports and affected air

carriers consider it important to

minimize the risk of transporting the

Japanese beetle. Some of them volunteer

turf treatments in areas surrounding the

airports. In addition, APHIS encourages

the planting of nonhost plants near the

regulated airports. According to airport

authorities and air carriers, such

activities entail costs that are

worthwhile when compared to the

potential costs of disrupted business
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 32639

that would result if the Japanese beetle

were transported.

Under these circumstances, the

Administrator of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service has

determined that this action would not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12372

This program/activity is listed in the

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

under No. 10.025 and is subject to

Executive Order 12372, which requires

intergovernmental consultation with

State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part

3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12778

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12778, 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.

National Environmental Policy Act

An environmental assessment and

finding of no significant impact have

been prepared for this rule. The

assessment provides a basis for the

conclusion that the amendments to the

Japanese beetle regulations will not

present a risk of introducing or

disseminating plant pests and will not

have a significant impact on the quality

of the human environment. Based on

the finding of no significant impact, the

Administrator of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service has

determined that an environmental

impact statement need not be prepared.

The environmental assessment and

finding of no significant impact were

prepared in accordance with: (1) The

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (NEPA) (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).

Copies of the environmental

assessment and finding of no significant

impact are available for public

inspection at USDA, room 1141, South

Building, 14th Street and Independence

Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between

8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except holidays. Persons

wishing to inspect copies are requested

to call ahead on (202) 690–2817 to

facilitate entry into the reading room. In

addition, copies may be obtained by

writing to the individual listed under

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The

environmental assessment and finding

of no significant impact are also posted

on the Worldwide Web. The URL is

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/bbep/ead/

ppqdocs.html.

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with section 3507(j) of

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information

collection and recordkeeping

requirements included in this interim

rule have been submitted for emergency

approval to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB). This interim rule

amends the existing information

collections approved by OMB under

control number 0579–0088, and OMB

has granted emergency approval under

this control number. Notwithstanding

any other provision of the law, no

person is required to respond to, nor

shall any person be subject to a penalty

for failure to comply with a collection

of information, subject to the

requirements of the Paperwork

Reduction Act, unless that collection of

information displays a currently valid

OMB control number. 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. 95–087–1. Please send a copy of

your comments to: (1) Docket No. 95–

087–1, Regulatory Analysis and

Development, PPD, APHIS, suite 3C03,

4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale,

MD 20737–1238, and (2) Clearance

Officer, OIRM, USDA, room 404–W,

14th Street and Independence Avenue,

SW., Washington, DC 20250.

Abstract

We are publishing an interim rule

(95–087–1) to add two new States

(Minnesota and Wisconsin) to the list of

States quarantined because of the

Japanese beetle and to provide greater

specificity concerning what actions

need to be taken to ensure that aircraft

do not spread Japanese beetles from

regulated airports.

Aircraft that depart from regulated

airports in quarantined States are

subject to regulations designed to

prevent the spread of the Japanese

beetle to other States.

Our interim rule also provides carriers

engaged in the transportation of goods

from regulated airports with the option

of performing some activities (such as

treating and safeguarding the aircraft)

under a compliance agreement with us,

rather than in the presence of an

inspector.

This regulatory action is designed to

prevent the spread of the Japanese

beetle within the United States. Its

implementation will require us to

engage in certain information collection

activities that will necessitate the use of

several forms, including aircraft

treatment records, notifications of

arrival, and compliance agreements.

We are seeking OMB approval to use

these forms.

Aircraft treatment records: An aircraft

that is preparing to depart from a

regulated airport must be treated with

an approved pesticide no more than 1

hour before it is loaded. The individual

completing or supervising this treatment

must maintain these treatment records

for 2 years. The records must be made

available to an inspector upon request.

The records must include the pesticide

used, the date of application, the

location where the pesticide was

applied (airport and aircraft), the

amount of pesticide applied, and the

name of the individual who performed

the treatment.

Notification of arrival: Appropriate

personnel at the destination airport

must be notified of an incoming,

unscheduled commercial flight (and all

military flights) at least 1 hour before

the aircraft departs from a regulated

airport. This notification is always

accomplished via a telephone call.

Inspectors in the destination area need

this information to schedule their work,

thus minimizing delays in

accomplishing inspections and

necessary treatments of regulated

articles upon their arrival.

Compliance agreement and

cancellation: Certain precautions must

be taken before an aircraft departs from

a regulated airport. The aircraft may

depart if an inspector determines that

adult Japanese beetles are not present at

the airport; or the aircraft may depart if

it has been opened and loaded only in

a hangar that we have determined is free

of Japanese beetles; or it may depart if

it has been loaded only during

nondaylight hours (since Japanese

beetles are active during daylight hours

only); or the aircraft may depart if it is

opened and loaded during the day but

is subsequently inspected, treated, and

safeguarded.

Our interim rule provides the carrier

with the option of having the

inspection, treatment, and safeguarding

performed under the direct supervision

of an inspector or under a compliance

agreement with APHIS. The compliance

agreement would specify what

procedures and precautions the carrier

must undertake to prevent the aircraft
32640 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

1Requirements under all other applicable Federal

domestic plant quarantines must be met.

from spreading the Japanese beetle to

noninfested areas of the United States.

Approval of a compliance agreement

can be withdrawn if we determine that

the requirements in the agreement are

not being met.

If a compliance agreement has been

canceled or denied, the applicant may

appeal in writing within 10 days after

receiving written notification.

The information collection activities

described above are a crucial

component of our program to prevent

the spread of the Japanese beetle.

The purpose of this notice is to solicit

comments from the public (as well as

affected agencies) concerning this

information collection activity. We need

this outside input to help us:

Evaluate whether the information

collection is necessary for the proper

performance of our agency’s functions,

including whether the information will

have practical utility;

Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate

of the burden of the information

collection, including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

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 2 hours and 51

minutes per response.

Respondents: Importers, airport

personnel, carriers.

Estimated number of respondents: 29.

Estimated number of responses per

respondent: 1.41.

Estimated total annual burden on

respondent: 117 hours.

Copies of this information collection

can be obtained from the Department of

Agriculture, Clearance Officer, OIRM,

Ag. Box 7630, Washington, DC 20250.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301

Agricultural commodities, Plant

diseases and pests, Quarantine,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Transportation.

Accordingly, 7 CFR part 301 is

amended as follows:

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE

NOTICES

1. The authority citation for part 301

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150bb, 150dd, 150ee,

150ff, 161, 162, and 164–167; 7 CFR 2.22,

2.80, and 371.2(c).

§ 301.48 [Amended]

2. In § 301.48, paragraph (a) is

amended by adding the word

‘‘Minnesota,’’ after the word

‘‘Michigan,’’ and by adding the word

‘‘Wisconsin,’’ after the words ‘‘West

Virginia,’’.

3. Section 301.48–1 is amended as

follows:

a. By removing the definitions for

Deputy Administrator and Plant

Protection and Quarantine Programs.

b. By adding definitions in

alphabetical order for Administrator,

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS), and Compliance

agreement to read as set forth below.

c. By revising the definitions of

Inspector, Regulated airport, and

Treatment manual to read as set forth

below.

§ 301.48–1 Definitions.

* * * * *

Administrator. The Administrator of

the Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service or any person authorized to act

for the Administrator.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS). The Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service of the U.S.

Department of Agriculture.

Compliance agreement. A written

agreement between the Animal and

Plant Health Inspection Service and a

person engaged in the business of

moving regulated articles interstate, in

which the person agrees to comply with

the provisions of this subpart.

Inspector. Any employee of the

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

or other person, authorized by the

Administrator to enforce the provisions

of the quarantine and regulations in this

subpart.

* * * * *

Regulated airport. Any airport or

portions of an airport in a quarantined

State declared regulated in accordance

with provisions in § 301.48–2 of this

subpart.

* * * * *

Treatment Manual. The Plant

Protection and Quarantine Treatment

Manual, which is incorporated by

reference at § 300.1 of this chapter.

* * * * *

§ 301.48–2 [Amended]

4. Section 301.48–2 is amended by

adding the words ‘‘or she’’ after the

word ‘‘he’’ where it appears in

paragraphs (a) and (b).

§ 301.48–3 [Amended]

5. Section 301.48–3 is amended by

removing the word ‘‘Deputy’’.

6. Section 301.48–4 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 301.48–4 Conditions governing the

interstate movement of regulated articles

from quarantined States.

A regulated article may be moved

interstate from a regulated airport to any

State 1 designated in § 301.48(b) only if:

(a) An inspector, upon visual

inspection of the airport and/or the

aircraft, determines that the regulated

article does not present a threat to

spread the Japanese beetle because adult

beetle populations are not present; or

(b) The aircraft is opened and loaded

only while it is enclosed inside a hangar

that an inspector has determined to be

free of and safeguarded against Japanese

beetle; or

(c) The aircraft is loaded during the

hours of 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. only or

lands and departs during those hours

and, in either situation, is kept

completely closed while on the ground

during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00

p.m.; or

(d) If opened and loaded between the

hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., the

aircraft is inspected, treated, and

safeguarded. Inspection, treatment, and

safeguarding must be done either under

a compliance agreement in accordance

with § 301.48–8 or under the direct

supervision of an inspector. On a caseby-case basis, inspectors will determine

which of the following conditions, and

any supplemental conditions deemed

necessary by the Administrator to

prevent the spread of Japanese beetle,

are required:

(1) All openings of the aircraft must

be closed or safeguarded during the

hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. by

exclusionary devices or by other means

approved by the Administrator.

(2) All cargo containers that have not

been safeguarded in a protected area

must be inspected immediately prior to

and during the loading process. All

personnel must check their clothing

immediately prior to entering the

aircraft. All Japanese beetles found must

be removed and destroyed.

(3) All areas around doors and

hatches or other openings in the aircraft

must be inspected prior to removing the

exclusionary devices. All Japanese

beetles found must be removed and

destroyed. All doors and hatches must

be closed immediately after the

exclusionary devices are moved away

from the aircraft.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 32641

(4) Aircraft must be treated in

accordance with the Treatment Manual

no more than 1 hour before loading. The

approved pesticide should be held at a

45-degree angle toward the floor of the

aircraft to ensure full coverage at the

specified rate. Particular attention

should be paid to the ball mat area and

the holes around the main entrance. The

aircraft must then be aerated under

safeguard conditions for 15 minutes.

(5) Aircraft treatment records must be

maintained by the applicator

completing or supervising the treatment

for a period of 2 years. These records

must be provided upon request for

review by an inspector. Treatment

records shall include the pesticide used,

the date of application, the location

where the pesticide was applied (airport

and aircraft), the amount of pesticide

applied, and the name of the applicator.

(6) When ‘‘tail swapping’’ procedures

are implemented (replacement of a

designated aircraft with an alternate one

when mechanical or other problems

occur in the designated aircraft before

departure), the alternate aircraft must be

inspected and all Japanese beetles must

be removed. The aircraft must be

safeguarded by closing all openings and

hatches or by equipping the aircraft

with exclusionary devices until the

aircraft is ready for use. During loading,

all treatment and safeguard

requirements applicable to regularly

scheduled aircraft must be

implemented.

(7) Aircraft may be retreated in the

noninfested State if live Japanese beetles

are found.

(8) Notification of unscheduled

commercial flights and of all military

flights must be given at least 1 hour

before departure to the appropriate

person in the destination airport of any

of the States listed in § 301.48(b).

Notification of arriving military flights

should also be given to base

commanders to facilitate the entrance of

Federal and/or State inspectors onto the

base if necessary.

§ 301.48–5 [Amended]

7. Section 301.48–5 is amended by

removing the word ‘‘Deputy’’.

§ 301.48–6 [Amended]

8. Section 301.48–6 is amended by

removing the word ‘‘Deputy’’.

9. A new § 301.48–8 is added to read

as set forth below.

§ 301.48–8 Compliance agreements and

cancellation.

(a) Any person engaged in the

business of moving regulated articles

may enter into a compliance agreement

to facilitate the movement of such

articles under this subpart. Any person

who enters into a compliance

agreement, and employees or agents of

that person, must allow an inspector

access to all records regarding treatment

of aircraft and to all areas where

loading, unloading, and treatment of

aircraft occurs.

(b) A compliance agreement may be

canceled by an inspector, orally or in

writing, whenever he or she determines

that the person who has entered into the

compliance agreement has failed to

comply with the agreement or this

subpart. If the cancellation is oral, the

cancellation and the reasons for the

cancellation will be confirmed in

writing within 20 days of oral

notification. Any person whose

compliance agreement has been

canceled may appeal the decision, in

writing, to the Administrator within 10

days after receiving written notification

of the cancellation. The appeal must

state all of the facts and reasons upon

which the person relies to show that the

compliance agreement was wrongfully

canceled. A hearing will be held to

resolve any conflict as to any material

fact. The Administrator shall adopt

rules of practice for the hearing. An

appeal shall be granted or denied, in

writing, as promptly as circumstances

allow, and the reasons for the decision

shall be stated. The compliance

agreement will remain canceled

pending the decision on the appeal.

Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of

June 1996.

Donald W. Luchsinger,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 96–16160 Filed 6–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

Farm Service Agency

7 CFR Part 782

RIN 0560–AE37

End-Use Certificate Program

AGENCY: Farm Service Agency,

Agriculture.

ACTION: Final Rule.

SUMMARY: A proposed rule was

published on November 14, 1995, (60

FR 57198) with respect to the End-Use

Certificate Program. This final rule

adopts, with minor changes, the

provisions of the proposed rule.

Accordingly, this rule amends reporting

requirements, reporting deadlines, and

the required notification process in a

manner that increases program

effectiveness and efficiency for

government and affected industries by

requiring all grain handlers to provide

immediate notification to the buyer

when wheat being purchased or

handled is of Canadian origin. The

provisions of this regulation also

simplify the reporting burden placed on

importers, subsequent buyers, end

users, and exporters by extending

reporting deadlines from 10 workdays to

15 workdays, and by permitting the

computer generation and facsimile

transmission of required reporting

documentation.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 25, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Helen Linden, Agricultural Service

Agency, P.O. Box 2415, Ag Box 0553,

Washington, DC 20013–2415;

Telephone (202) 690–4321.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866

This final 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 (OMB).

Executive Order 12778

This final rule has been reviewed in

accordance with Executive Order 12778.

The provisions of this final rule do not

preempt State laws, are not retroactive,

and do not involve administrative

appeals.

Environmental Evaluation

It has been determined by an

environmental evaluation that this

action will not have a significant impact

on the quality of the human

environment. Therefore, neither an

Environmental Assessment nor an

Environmental Impact Analysis is

needed.

Executive Order 12372

This program/activity is not subject to

the provisions of Executive Order

12372, which requires

intergovernmental consultation with

State and local officials. See notice

related to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V,

published at 48 FR 29115 (June 24,

1983).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule amends the reporting

requirements by extending reporting

deadlines and incorporating alternative

reporting methods. Since the effective

date of the End-Use Certificate Program,

the Farm Service Agency (FSA) has

determined that entities required to file

form FSA–750, End-Use Certificate for

Wheat, and form FSA–751, Wheat

Consumption and Resale Report, have

encountered some difficulty in meeting