Comment from Cerinda Loschinkohl

I think this proposed rule will help clear up some confusions in the permit process and is a good idea. I have a few questions, though. (1) “(c) Application process” “(2) APHIS may issue a CIP if the Administrator determines that the plant pest risks associated with the plant material and its intended experimental, therapeutic, or developmental use can be effectively mitigated.” THIS IS VAUGE. WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS THAT GO INTO THE DETERMINATION THAT THE RISKS CAN BE MITIGATED? (2) “(d) shipping conditions” “(1) The plant material must be selected from apparently disease-free and pest-free sources. HOW IS “APPARENTLY DISEASE FREE” DEFINED? WHO DECIDES IF A SOURCE IS SUITABLE? DOES APHIS INSPECT THE SOURCE FACILITY? (3) “(d) shipping conditions” (2) The plant material must be free of soil, other foreign matter or debris, other prohibited plants, noxious weed seeds, and living organisms such as parasitic plants, pathogens, insects, snails, and mites.” THIS CONTRADICTS THE DEFINITION OF ONE OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE PERMIT: “(a) Definitions” “Therapeutic purposes. The application of specific scientific processes designed to eliminate, isolate, or remove potential plant pests or diseases.” SO DOES THE PLANT MATERIAL HAVE TO BE FREE OF ALL PESTS AND PATHOGENS, OR CAN IT BE IMPORTED WITH PESTS AND OR PATHOGENS AND BE ‘CLEANED UP’ BY THE IMPORTER? IT CAN’T BE BOTH. (4) “e) Post-importation conditions.” “(4) Plant material imported under a CIP must not be moved or distributed to another person without prior written permission from the PPQ Permit Unit.” WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENT TO GET THIS PERMISSION? IS THE PERMISSION ONLY TO TRANSFER THE MATERIAL TO ANOTHER PERSON UNDER THE SAME PERMIT CONDITIONS , OR CAN THE MATERIAL BE DISTRIBUTED COMMERCIALLY, FOR PLANTING OR AS BREEDING STOCK? WILL THIS CLAUSE ALLOW THE ORIGINAL PERMIT HOLDER TO ACT AS AN APHIS QUARANTINE CENTER AND DISTRIBUTE OTHERWISE PROHIBITED MATERIAL WITHOUT RESTICTION?