[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