Interstate Movement of Carambola from Hawaii

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