[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 185 (Monday, September 26, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-23638]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: September 26, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Parts 300 and 318
[Docket No. 93-118-2]
Interstate Movement of Carambola from Hawaii
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are allowing the fruit of carambola to be moved interstate
from Hawaii. As a condition of movement, the fruit of carambola must
undergo prescribed treatment for fruit flies under the supervision of
an inspector of Plant Protection and Quarantine, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service. This action allows the interstate movement
from Hawaii of this fruit while continuing to provide protection
against the spread of injurious plant pests from Hawaii to other parts
of the United States.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 26, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Frank Cooper, Senior Operations
Officer, or Mr. Peter Grosser, Senior Operations Officer, Permit Unit,
Port Operations, Plant Protection and Quarantine, APHIS, USDA, room
635, Federal Building, 6505 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, MD 20782, (301)
436-8645.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Hawaiian Fruits and Vegetable regulations (contained in 7 CFR
318.13 through 318.13-17 and referred to below as the regulations)
govern the movement of raw and unprocessed fruits and vegetables, cut
flowers, rice straw, mango seeds, and cactus plants and cactus parts,
from Hawaii into or through the continental United States, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands of the United
States, or any other territory or possession of the United States.
Under the regulations, any such movement is defined as ``interstate
movement.''
Of the articles governed by the regulations, some are absolutely
prohibited interstate movement. Others are prohibited such movement if
they fail to meet certain qualifying criteria. Before the effective
date of this final rule, the interstate movement of carambola from
Hawaii was prohibited because of the risk that it could spread
injurious insects from Hawaii to other parts of the United States.
On March 21, 1994, we published in the Federal Register (59 FR
13256-13257, Docket No. 93-118-1) a proposal to allow the fruit of
carambola (Averrhoa carambola) to be moved interstate from Hawaii under
specified conditions. One of the proposed conditions for interstate
movement was that the fruit be treated with a specified cold treatment.
This treatment has been determined to be effective against the insects
in Hawaii that attack carambola--i.e., the Mediterranean fruit fly
(Ceratitis capitata), the melon fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae), and the
Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis).
We solicited comments concerning our proposed rule for 60 days
ending May 20, 1994. We received six comments by that date. The
comments were from a municipality in Hawaii, an agricultural
association, and other members of the public.
Five of the commenters supported the proposal as written. One
commenter expressed concerns regarding the testing done on the
prescribed treatment. We discuss below each of the issues raised by the
commenter.
The commenter stated that it appeared that the research done to
test a cold treatment against insect pests of carambola did not include
phytotoxicity tests, or the impact of the proposed treatment upon the
quality of Hawaiian carambola. We are making no changes based on this
comment. The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) of the U.S. Department
of Agriculture conducted tests on a preliminary basis in conjunction
with the Hawaii carambola industry to determine whether the fruit would
tolerate the proposed cold treatment. Fruit of carambola was stored at
1.10.6 oC for 12 days. No adverse impact on fruit
quality or marketability was observed, which follows the trend of
previous observations by Campbell,1 Campbell et al.,2 and
Miller et al.,3 showing that the fruit of carambola tends to
tolerate refrigeration relatively well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Campbell, C. A. 1987. Carambola Fruit Development and Storage
in Florida. M.S. thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
\2\Campbell, C. A., D. J. Huber and K. E. Koch, 1987.
Postharvest Response of Carambolas to Storage at Low Temperatures.
Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 100: 272-275.
\3\Miller, W. R., R. E. McDonald and M. Nisperos-Carriedo. 1991.
Quality of ``Arkin'' Carambolas with or without Conditioning
Followed by Low-Temperature Quarantine Treatment. Proc. Fla. State
Hort. Soc. 104: 118-122.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notwithstanding the tests discussed above, it should be emphasized
that all quarantine treatments may affect fruit quality in some way.
For this reason, the APHIS Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ)
Treatment Manual, which is incorporated by reference into the
regulations at 7 CFR 300.1, states that all treatments are applied at
the importer's risk, and that PPQ cannot be held responsible for loss
or damage as a result of any prescribed treatments.
The commenter also stated that the study did not specify the
cultivar of fruit used for testing. According to the commenter, sweet
and tart varieties of carambola may have very different host
characteristics, and fruit size may have an impact upon the application
of the treatment. We are making no changes based on this comment. In
its cold treatment tests, ARS used both ``sweet'' and ``tart''
cultivars. Nel showed that temperatures and exposure times required to
disinfest Mediterranean fruit fly from different host fruits remained
constant regardless of host fruit.4 This ``generic'' approach to
cold treatments has been accepted for other fruit fly species,
including Mexican fruit fly, A. ludens (Loew), and Queensland fruit
fly, Bactrocera tryoni Froggatt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\Nel, R. G. 1936. The Utilization of Low Temperatures in the
Sterilization of Deciduous Fruit Infested with the Immature Stages
of the Mediterranean Fruit Fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann). Sci.
Bull. Dept. Agric. S. Afr. No. 155.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With regard to the effect of fruit size on cold treatment
application, ARS made the same observation as Gould and Sharp, who
concluded that ``* * * in terms of total treatment time, there is a
small difference in cool-down time between a large and a small
carambola.''5 In other words, fruit size is not an important
consideration in treatment application. Additionally, APHIS closely
regulates treatments by means of temperature-monitoring devices, and
the treatment time is not considered to have begun until the fruit has
reached the required treatment temperature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Gould, W. P. and J. L. Sharp. 1990. Cold-Storage Quarantine
Treatment for Carambolas Infested with the Caribbean Fruit Fly
(Diptera: Tephritidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 83: 458-460.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The commenter stated that the artificial infestation procedure used
in the study may have placed stress on the fruit fly larvae, making
them more susceptible to cold than would be wild flies in a natural
infestation. According to the commenter, the large number of larvae
artificially raised on the small amount of fruit used in the study
could have produced overcrowding effects not representative of field
conditions.
We are making no changes based on these comments. Because of the
difficulty in obtaining infestation through adult oviposition, ARS
turned to artificial infestation methods. The most successful
artificial infestation method used by ARS did not attempt to rear the
insects on carambola, except during the cold treatment period, during
which eggs and larvae were reared on both treated and control
carambola. Following the treatment period, the eggs and larvae were
removed from both the treated and control carambola and were placed
onto a moist larval diet. This significantly increased survival of eggs
and larvae from the controls, and provided optimum conditions for
survival to occur among the treated eggs and larvae. This method biased
the tests toward the insects' survival, rather than toward mortality.
With regard to the commenter's statement regarding the number of
fruit flies raised on carambola, ARS concluded that the effects of the
treatment could not be attributed to infestation load. ARS reported
that, although the results were erratic, occasional large numbers of
fruit flies, greatly exceeding the ``normal'' field infestations, were
reared from artificially infested carambola controls. From this, ARS
concluded that the effects of the treatment could not be attributed to
infestation load. ARS indicated that it chose the optimum infestation
methods that provided insect recovery while testing the quarantine
security limits of the treatment.
The commenter also stated that field populations of flies might
naturally be better adapted to surviving the cold than the laboratory-
reared flies used. We are making no changes based on this comment. ARS
concluded that there is no evidence that fruit flies from different
elevations in Hawaii respond differently to cold treatments. According
to ARS, this is consistent with previous testing that revealed no
evidence that Caribbean fruit flies from their northernmost range in
Florida respond differently to cold treatments of carambola.
The commenter also stated that, although the tested treatment
satisfied statistical security requirements, the fact that some fruit
flies survived the treatment might indicate an unacceptable risk when
the treatment is applied on a commercial scale. We are making no
changes based on this comment. The data provided by ARS indicates that
``probit 9'' security (at least 99.968 percent insect mortality rate)
was obtained by storage of carambola at 1.10.6 deg.C for
12 days.
Effective Date
This is a substantive rule that relieves restrictions and, pursuant
to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, may be made effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Immediate
implementation of this rule is necessary to provide relief to those
persons who are adversely affected by restrictions we no longer find
warranted. The shipping season for carambola from Hawaii is imminent.
Making this rule effective immediately will allow interested producers
and others in the marketing chain to benefit during this year's
shipping season. Therefore, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has determined that this rule should be
effective upon publication in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866 and therefore has not been reviewed by the Office
of Management and Budget.
We are allowing the fruit of carambola to move from Hawaii to other
parts of the United States, under safeguards to prevent the
introduction of injurious plant pests from Hawaii.
At present, there are approximately 5 to 10 farms in Hawaii that
produce commercial quantities of carambola. These farms are small,
family-owned, operations.
This rule will provide Hawaiian producers with access to markets in
other parts of the United States. We estimate that approximately 1,500
to 3,000 pounds of fresh carambola fruit might be shipped from Hawaii
to other parts of the United States annually. These shipments would
have an estimated annual market value of between $3,000 and $9,800,
depending on market prices. This represents less than .0002 percent of
total Hawaiian agricultural production. The average annual market value
of Hawaiian agricultural products totals about $600 million.
Small shippers of Hawaiian fruits and vegetables may also receive
some benefits from this rule. We estimate that between 10 and 15 small
entities will be able to increase marginally the volume of products
shipped to other parts of the United States.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
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.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements
included in this rule have been approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), and there are no new requirements. The assigned OMB
control number is 0579-0049.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 300
Incorporation by reference, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine.
7 CFR Part 318
Cotton, Cottonseeds, Fruits, Guam, Hawaii, Plant diseases and
pests, Puerto Rico, Quarantine, Transportation, Vegetables, Virgin
Islands.
Accordingly, 7 CFR parts 300 and 318 are amended as follows:
PART 300--INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150ee, 154, 161, 162, 167; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51,
and 371.2(c).
2. In Sec. 300.1, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 300.1 Materials incorporated by reference.
(a) The Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual, which was
revised and reprinted November 30, 1992, and includes all revisions
through August 1994, has been approved for incorporation by reference
in 7 CFR chapter III by the Director of the Office of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
* * * * *
PART 318--HAWAIIAN AND TERRITORIAL QUARANTINE NOTICES
3. The authority citation for part 318 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150bb, 150dd, 150ee, 150ff, 161, 162, 164a,
167; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and 371.2(c).
Sec. 318.13-4 [Amended]
4. Section 318.13-4 is amended by adding, at the end of the
section, the following: ``(Approved by the Office of Management and
Budget under control number 0579-0049)''
5. A new Sec. 318.13-4h is added to read as follows:
Sec. 318.13-4h Administrative instructions; conditions governing the
movement of the fruit of carambola from Hawaii.
(a) Subject to the requirements of Secs. 318.13-3 and 318.13-4 and
any other applicable regulations, the fruit of carambola may be moved
interstate from Hawaii only if it is treated under the supervision of
an inspector with a treatment authorized by the Administrator for the
following pests: the Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata), the
melon fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae), and the Oriental fruit fly
(Bactrocera dorsalis).
(b) Treatments authorized by the Administrator are listed in the
Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual, which is incorporated
by reference at Sec. 300.1 of this chapter.
Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of September 1994.
Terry L. Medley,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 94-23638 Filed 9-23-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
