Treatments for Fruits and Vegetables, 33857-33873 [05-11460]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 111 (Friday, June 10, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33857-33873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-11460]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 111 / Friday, June 10, 2005 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 33857]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

7 CFR Parts 301, 305, 318, and 319

[Docket No. 03-077-1]


Treatments for Fruits and Vegetables

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations to revise the 
approved doses for irradiation treatment of imported fruits and 
vegetables. This proposal would establish a new minimum generic dose of 
irradiation for most arthropod plant pests, establish a new minimum 
generic dose for the fruit fly family, reduce the minimum dose of 
irradiation for some specific fruit fly species, and add nine pests to 
the list of pests for which irradiation is an approved treatment. These 
actions would allow the use of irradiation to neutralize more pests and 
to neutralize some pests at lower doses. Furthermore, we are proposing 
to provide for the irradiation of fruits and vegetables moved 
interstate from Hawaii at the pest-specific irradiation doses that are 
now approved for imported fruits and vegetables. We are also proposing 
to provide for the use of irradiation to treat fruits and vegetables 
moved interstate from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. These 
actions would allow irradiation to serve as an alternative to other 
approved treatments for additional fruits and vegetables moved 
interstate from Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 
Finally, we are proposing to add irradiation as a treatment for bananas 
from Hawaii and to add vapor-heat treatment as an optional treatment 
for sweetpotatoes from Hawaii. These actions would provide an 
alternative to the currently approved treatments for those commodities 
while continuing to provide protection against the spread of plant 
pests from Hawaii into the continental United States.

DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before 
August 9, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     EDOCKET: Go to https://www.epa.gov/feddocket to submit or 
view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the 
official public docket, and to access those documents in the public 
docket that are available electronically. Once you have entered 
EDOCKET, click on the ``View Open APHIS Dockets'' link to locate this 
document.
     Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies 
of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. 03-077-1, 
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3C71, 4700 
River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your 
comment refers to Docket No. 03-077-1.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for locating this 
docket and submitting comments.
    Reading Room: You may read any comments that we receive on this 
docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of 
the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to 
help you, please call (202) 690-2817 before coming.
    Other Information: You may view APHIS documents published in the 
Federal Register and related information on the Internet at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/webrepor.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Inder P. Gadh, Treatment 
Specialist, Phytosanitary Issues Management, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River 
Road Unit 140, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 734-6799.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The phytosanitary treatments regulations contained in 7 CFR part 
305 set out standards and schedules for treatments required in 7 CFR 
parts 301, 318, and 319 for fruits, vegetables, and articles to prevent 
the introduction or dissemination of plant pests or noxious weeds into 
or through the United States. Within 7 CFR part 305, the irradiation 
treatments subpart (Sec. Sec.  305.31 through 305.34, referred to below 
as the regulations) sets out standards and minimum doses for 
irradiation treatment for imported fruits and vegetables and for 
regulated articles moved interstate from quarantined areas within the 
United States, along with other requirements for performing irradiation 
treatments.
    We are proposing to make several amendments to the irradiation 
treatment regulations for imported fruits and vegetables, for fruits 
and vegetables moved interstate from Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. 
Virgin Islands, and for regulated articles moved interstate from areas 
quarantined for Mexican fruit fly or Mediterranean fruit fly. We are 
also proposing to provide for the use of irradiation treatment for 
bananas moved interstate from Hawaii and to provide for the use of a 
vapor heat treatment for sweetpotatoes moved interstate from Hawaii. 
The changes we are proposing are discussed below by topic.

Irradiation Treatment for Imported Fruits and Vegetables

Generic Minimum Irradiation Dose for Most Arthropod Plant Pests

    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) published a 
notice of policy titled ``The Application of Irradiation to 
Phytosanitary Problems'' in the Federal Register on May 15, 1996 (61 FR 
24433-24439, Docket No. 95-088-1). In that notice, among other things, 
we stated that we may develop minimum irradiation doses that are 
generic to a pest group or a commodity. We also stated that APHIS' 
Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) program will confer with the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Research Service (ARS) 
concerning the adequacy of treatment data, research protocols, and 
treatment design and that ARS will identify or concur with the minimum 
dose for efficacy at the level defined by PPQ as providing quarantine 
security for a pest or complex of pests.
    Currently, the regulations for irradiation of imported fruits and 
vegetables specify minimum doses for 11 fruit flies and the mango seed 
weevil. The doses required range from 150 gray

[[Page 33858]]

to 300 gray. The fact that the required irradiation doses are specific 
to plant pests rather than the commodities they are associated with 
reflects the fact that the effectiveness of irradiation treatment is 
dependent entirely on the dose that is absorbed by the commodity. 
Specific characteristics of the fruits or vegetables being treated, 
which may need to be considered in developing other phytosanitary 
treatments, are irrelevant to the effectiveness of irradiation as long 
as the required minimum dose is absorbed.
    This approach provides importers who must treat fruits and 
vegetables for plant pests prior to their entry into the United States 
with some flexibility: As long as the only pests for which a commodity 
is required by the fruits and vegetables subpart of 7 CFR part 319 
(Sec. Sec.  319.56 through 319.56-8) to be treated or be subject to a 
systems approach prior to importation into the United States are pests 
for which irradiation is an approved treatment, then that commodity may 
be imported into the United States after it undergoes irradiation in 
accordance with Sec.  305.31, with no need for additional rulemaking. 
However, it is not uncommon that multiple plant pests of quarantine 
concern are associated with a fruit or vegetable approved for 
importation into the United States; irradiation may be currently listed 
as an approved treatment for only some of these plant pests. In such 
cases, the fruit or vegetable must either undergo a different treatment 
capable of neutralizing all the pests or must undergo multiple 
treatments to neutralize all of those pests.
    A generic minimum irradiation dose that is approved to treat a 
group of plant pests would solve this problem by allowing, in many 
cases, irradiation to be used as the sole treatment for the pests 
associated with a particular fruit or vegetable, as long as it could be 
shown that any quarantine pests identified as being associated with the 
fruit or vegetable were members of the group of plant pests that were 
approved for treatment by the generic minimum irradiation dose. Because 
the generic minimum dose would be approved for a group of plant pests, 
a pest-specific minimum dose would not have to be approved through the 
rulemaking process before irradiation could be used to treat the pest 
or pests of concern associated with a commodity. Thus, such a dose 
would facilitate international commerce while continuing to provide 
phytosanitary protection against the group of plant pests that are 
neutralized by the dose.
    In consultation with ARS, PPQ has determined that a dose of 400 
gray is sufficient to neutralize all arthropod plant pests other than 
pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera, for which we lack sufficient 
information to establish a safe generic dose. Therefore, we are 
proposing to establish 400 gray as a generic minimum dose for arthropod 
plant pests except pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera. 
Irradiation treatment of fruits and vegetables with the proposed 
minimum dose of 400 gray would have to be conducted in accordance with 
all the current requirements for dosimetry, packaging, and 
recordkeeping in Sec.  305.31.
    We would not provide for the use of the proposed generic minimum 
dose to treat mites, mollusks, nematodes, and plant pathogens, none of 
which are arthropod plant pests, because the irradiation doses 
necessary to neutralize those plant pests are either not determined or 
typically much higher than for arthropod plant pests.
    ARS and APHIS will continue to review data relating to recommended 
minimum doses for pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera, and if we 
determine that these plant pests can be neutralized with the generic 
dose included in this proposal, we will undertake rulemaking to allow 
them to be treated with the generic dose. However, as indicated above, 
sufficient information to establish a generic dose for pupae and adults 
of the order Lepidoptera does not exist at this time.
    We believe the proposed generic 400 gray dose for arthropod plant 
pests, except pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera, would be a 
conservative requirement given other available evidence on the doses 
required to neutralize a wide variety of plant pests. The International 
Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) Guidelines for the Use of 
Irradiation as a Phytosanitary Measure (ISPM Publication No. 18) lists 
recommended minimum dose ranges for 8 types of plant pests, excluding 
mites, mollusks, nematodes, plant pathogens, and pupae and adults of 
the order Lepidoptera; these recommendations were developed based on 
literature reviews by G.J. Hallman \1\ and the research summarized in 
the International Atomic Energy Agency's International Database on 
Insect Disinfestation and Sterilization.\2\ The proposed 400 gray 
minimum dose would be equal to the upper bound of the recommended 
minimum dose range for stored product beetles of the family Coleoptera; 
it would be at least 100 gray higher than the recommended minimum dose 
ranges for all the other pests for which the generic dose would be an 
approved treatment. We believe that the proposed generic minimum dose 
of 400 gray would neutralize the targeted arthropod plant pests 
effectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Irradiation as a quarantine treatment,'' in Food 
Irradiation Principles and Applications, Molins, R.A. (ed.). New 
York: J. Wiley & Sons, 2001, p. 113-130, and ``Expanding radiation 
quarantine treatments beyond fruit flies,'' Agricultural and Forest 
Entomology 2:85-95, 2000.
    \2\ Available at https://www-ididas.iaea.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To accomplish this change, we would add an entry for ``Plant pests 
of the phylum Arthropoda not listed above, except pupae and adults of 
the order Lepidoptera'' to the bottom of the table of approved 
irradiation doses in Sec.  305.31(a). Because the heading of that table 
presently reads ``Irradiation for Fruit Flies and Seed Weevils in 
Imported Fruits and Vegetables,'' we would revise it to read 
``Irradiation for Certain Plant Pests in Imported Fruits and 
Vegetables.'' We would also revise the section heading of Sec.  305.31 
to read ``Irradiation treatment of imported fruits and vegetables for 
certain plant pests.''
    We would retain the list of pests for which lower doses of 
irradiation are an effective treatment in Sec.  305.31(a), so that the 
generic minimum dose of 400 gray would exist as an option for treating 
any arthropod plant pest, except pupae and adults of the order 
Lepidoptera, for which irradiation is not approved as a treatment 
elsewhere in Sec.  305.31(a).
    The generic minimum dose would be available as an option for 
persons wishing to import fruits and vegetables that are affected by 
arthropod pests, except pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera, that 
are not listed in the regulations. However, APHIS does not intend to 
halt research on the doses necessary to neutralize individual pests for 
which the regulations do not currently prescribe a minimum dose. (For 
example, in this proposal we are proposing to reduce the minimum doses 
required to treat several fruit fly species and proposing to add 
minimum doses to treat nine plant pests for which irradiation has not 
been approved as a treatment before, as described later in this 
document.) If the generic minimum dose of 400 gray for most arthropod 
pests that we are proposing is adopted in a final rule, APHIS will 
continue to evaluate data on pest irradiation in consultation with ARS 
and will, if appropriate, undertake rulemaking to add new minimum doses 
for individual pests to the regulations.

Generic Minimum Dose for Fruit Flies and Minimum Dose Reductions for 
Individual Fruit Fly Species

    Although the generic minimum dose proposed above could be used to 
treat

[[Page 33859]]

many arthropod plant pests, it is important that required irradiation 
doses for plant pests be set at the lowest effective level. Higher 
doses of irradiation treatment cost more to administer, and irradiation 
causes many fruits and vegetables to undergo changes in color and 
texture that increase at higher doses.
    Accordingly, ARS has undertaken research to determine whether fruit 
flies currently approved to be treated with irradiation in the 
regulations can be neutralized at lower doses than are presently 
required in Sec.  305.31(a), and whether species of fruit flies that 
are not currently listed in the regulations can be neutralized at a 
lower dose than the proposed 400 gray generic minimum dose for 
arthropod pests other than pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera.
    This research demonstrated that all fruit flies of the family 
Tephritidae would be neutralized by a dose of 150 gray. Therefore, we 
are proposing to add the entire family Tephritidae to the list of pests 
for which irradiation is an approved treatment, and to set the required 
irradiation dose for those fruit flies at 150 gray. This change would 
reduce the required dose for the Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera 
dorsalis), for which a 250 gray dose is currently required; the 
Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata), for which a 225 gray dose 
is currently required; and the melon fly (Bactrocera curcurbitae), for 
which a 210 gray dose is currently required. It would also set a dose 
for irradiation treatment for any fruit fly not currently listed in 
Sec.  305.31(a) that is lower than the proposed generic minimum dose of 
400 gray for arthropod pests other than pupae and adults of the order 
Lepidoptera.
    The research ARS undertook also demonstrated that the proposed 150 
gray generic minimum fruit fly dose would be higher than necessary to 
neutralize certain fruit flies. Specifically, the research found that 
the Mexican fruit fly (Anastrepha ludens) and the Caribbean fruit fly 
(Anastrepha suspensa) are neutralized at 70 gray and that the West 
Indian fruit fly (Anastrepha obliqua), the sapote fruit fly (Anastrepha 
serpentina), the Jarvis fruit fly (Bactrocera jarvisi), and the 
Queensland fruit fly (Bactrocera tryoni) are neutralized at 100 gray. 
Accordingly, we are proposing to allow those fruit flies to be treated 
at those lower doses rather than at the proposed generic fruit fly 
minimum of 150 gray.
    To accomplish these changes, we would add a new entry to the table 
in Sec.  305.31(a) for ``Fruit flies of the family Tephritidae not 
listed above'' and set a minimum dose of 150 gray for those fruit 
flies. We would also revise the minimum doses approved to treat the 
species mentioned above.

Proposed New Doses for Nine Other Plant Pests

    ARS research also indicates that irradiation can be used as a 
treatment for nine plant pests not currently listed in Sec.  305.31(a). 
These pests are listed below, along with the irradiation dose at which 
the ARS research indicates they are neutralized:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Scientific name                  Common name        Dose (gray)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brevipalpus chilensis............  False red spider mite...          300
Coccus viridis...................  Green scale.............          400
Conotrachelus nenuphar...........  Plum curculio...........           92
Croptophlebia ombrodelta.........  Litchi fruit moth.......          250
Cryptophlebia illepida...........  Koa seedworm............          250
Cylas formicarius elegantulus....  Sweetpotato weevil......          165
Cydia pomonella..................  Codling moth............          200
Grapholita molesta...............  Oriental fruit moth.....          200
Rhagoletis pomonella.............  Apple maggot............           60
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are proposing to add these pests to the table in Sec.  
305.31(a), along with the doses of irradiation that are sufficient to 
neutralize them. Irradiation treatment for these plant pests would be 
conducted in accordance with the other provisions of Sec.  305.31.
    Currently, the regulations in Sec.  319.56-2(k) authorize the use 
of irradiation as a treatment for imported fruits or vegetables to 
neutralize ``one or more of the 11 species of fruit flies and one 
species of seed weevil listed in Sec.  305.31(a).'' To reflect the 
proposed changes to the pest list in Sec.  305.31(a), we would revise 
the quoted text to read ``one or more of the plant pests listed in 
Sec.  305.31(a).'' We would make a similar change to the introductory 
text of paragraph (a) in Sec.  319.56-2x.

Irradiation Treatment for Fruits and Vegetables Moved Interstate

Pest-Specific Irradiation Doses for Treating Fruits and Vegetables 
Moved Interstate

    The regulations in 7 CFR part 318 prohibit or restrict the 
interstate movement of fruits, vegetables, and certain other articles 
from Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam to prevent 
the introduction and dissemination of plant pests into the continental 
United States.
    The Hawaiian fruits and vegetables regulations (Sec. Sec.  318.13 
through 318.13-17) prohibit or restrict the interstate movement of 
fruits and vegetables from Hawaii to prevent the introduction and 
dissemination of plant pests into the continental United States. 
Section 318.13-4f of the Hawaiian fruits and vegetables regulations, 
titled ``Administrative instructions prescribing methods for 
irradiation treatment of certain fruits and vegetables from Hawaii,'' 
lists required doses for irradiation treatment for certain fruits and 
vegetables and sets out facility approval, packaging, and commodity 
movement requirements.
    We are proposing to remove the bulk of Sec.  318.13-4f, because 
this section is currently duplicated in Sec.  305.34 of the irradiation 
treatment regulations. In place of current Sec.  318.13-4f, we would 
set out a single paragraph listing the commodities for which 
irradiation is an approved treatment and referring the reader to Sec.  
305.34 for instructions on how the treatment must be conducted. Because 
the section heading of Sec.  318.13-4f currently reads ``Administrative 
instructions prescribing methods for irradiation treatment of certain 
fruits and vegetables from Hawaii,'' but the methods for irradiation 
treatment would only be set out in Sec.  305.34, we would amend the 
section heading to read: ``Irradiation treatment of certain fruits and 
vegetables from Hawaii.'' (Here and elsewhere, we are proposing to 
simplify

[[Page 33860]]

our section titles by removing references to administrative 
instructions.)
    Because we would remove the substantive treatment provisions from 
Sec.  318.13-4f and direct readers to Sec.  305.34, we are also 
proposing to update a reference to movement under a limited permit ``if 
the provisions of Sec.  318.13-4f are met'' in paragraph (b)(3) of 
Sec.  318.13-3 to refer to Sec.  305.34. We would make a similar change 
in the definition of compliance agreement in Sec.  318.13-1.
    In Sec.  305.34, paragraph (a) lists the Hawaiian commodities for 
which irradiation is an approved treatment. Unlike the pest-specific 
required doses in Sec.  305.31 of the irradiation treatment regulations 
for imported fruits and vegetables, the required doses in Sec.  305.34 
are specific to commodities. We have prescribed doses for specific 
commodities moved interstate from Hawaii, rather than for specific 
plant pests that are present in Hawaii and that must be neutralized to 
allow interstate movement, because the minimum doses that we require in 
our regulations were based on pest risk analyses that were also 
commodity-specific. The approved irradiation doses for certain fruits 
and vegetables in the Hawaiian irradiation regulations have been 
determined to be capable of neutralizing all the pests that might 
otherwise be introduced to nonquarantined areas of the United States 
via the interstate movement of these fruits and vegetables.
    However, some of the fruits and vegetables for which we receive 
requests to allow interstate movement from Hawaii are only associated 
with pests listed in Sec.  305.31(a). Those commodities could be 
effectively treated according to the pest-specific doses approved for 
the treatment of imported fruits and vegetables. Accordingly, we are 
proposing to amend Sec.  305.34 to allow Hawaiian fruits and vegetables 
to be treated with irradiation for any pests listed in Sec.  305.31(a) 
at the pest-specific doses listed there and in accordance with the 
other requirements in Sec.  305.34.
    As discussed above, as long as the only pests for which a commodity 
is required by the fruits and vegetables subpart of 7 CFR part 319 to 
be treated or be subject to a systems approach prior to importation 
into the United States are pests for which irradiation is an approved 
treatment, then that commodity may be imported into the United States 
after it undergoes irradiation in accordance with Sec.  305.31, with no 
need for additional rulemaking. Similarly, as long as the only pests 
for which a commodity is required by the Hawaiian quarantine 
regulations to be treated or be subject to a systems approach prior to 
interstate movement are pests for which irradiation is an approved 
treatment in Sec.  305.31(a), then that commodity would be able to be 
moved interstate after it undergoes irradiation for those pests at the 
doses listed in Sec.  305.31(a) and in accordance with the other 
requirements in Sec.  305.34, with no need for additional rulemaking.
    For commodities that are not currently allowed to be moved 
interstate under the Hawaiian territorial quarantine regulations, PPQ 
would conduct a risk assessment to determine whether irradiation alone 
or in combination with other phytosanitary measures can treat all the 
quarantine pests that might be associated with its interstate movement 
from Hawaii. If it was determined that irradiation would be an 
effective treatment for these commodities, they would be added to the 
list of commodities for which irradiation is an approved treatment in 
Sec.  305.34(a)(1) through notice-and-comment rulemaking. If it was 
determined that irradiation in combination with other measures would be 
an effective treatment for these commodities, the regulations setting 
out the conditions for the importation of such commodities would refer 
to the provisions of Sec.  305.34 and, if necessary, the pest-specific 
irradiation doses listed in Sec.  305.31(a). (For example, we are 
proposing to allow the interstate movement of bananas from Hawaii that 
have been inspected for certain pests and treated with irradiation; the 
proposed regulations would be added to Sec.  318.13-4i but would refer 
to the Hawaiian irradiation regulations in Sec.  305.34 and the pest-
specific irradiation doses in Sec.  305.31(a). This proposed change is 
discussed in more detail below.)
    To accomplish this change, we would redesignate the current text of 
Sec.  305.34(a) as Sec.  305.34(a)(1) and add a new paragraph (a)(2) 
that would read: ``Any fruits or vegetables not listed in paragraph 
(a)(1) of this section that are required by this subpart to be treated 
or subjected to inspection to control one or more of the plant pests 
listed in Sec.  305.31(a) of this chapter may instead be treated with 
irradiation. Fruits and vegetables treated with irradiation for plant 
pests listed in Sec.  305.31(a) must be irradiated at the doses listed 
in Sec.  305.31(a), and the irradiation treatment must be conducted in 
accordance with the other requirements of Sec.  305.34.'' We would also 
add this text to the list of Hawaiian commodities for which irradiation 
is an approved treatment in our proposed revision of Sec.  318.13-4f.
    This change would also allow Hawaiian fruits and vegetables that 
are otherwise eligible for interstate movement to be irradiated for 
plant pests at the doses we have proposed to add to the approved 
irradiation doses for imported fruits and vegetables in Sec.  
305.31(a), including the proposed generic minimum dose of 400 gray for 
arthropod plant pests other than pupae and adults of the order 
Lepidoptera, the proposed generic dose of 150 gray for all fruit flies, 
the proposed lower doses for certain fruit flies, and the proposed new 
doses for nine plant pests.

Minimum Dose Reductions for Fruits and Vegetables Moved Interstate From 
Hawaii

    As previously mentioned, paragraph (a) of Sec.  305.34 lists fruits 
and vegetables moved interstate from Hawaii for which irradiation is an 
approved treatment. The pests of concern with regard to the interstate 
movement of all but two of these fruits and vegetables (the mango and 
the sweetpotato) are the Mediterranean fruit fly, the melon fly, and 
the Oriental fruit fly, known collectively as the Trifly complex. To 
treat the fruits and vegetables affected by the Trifly complex, the 
regulations presently require a minimum irradiation dose of 250 gray to 
neutralize these pests.
    Research conducted by ARS, as discussed under the heading ``Generic 
Minimum Dose for Fruit Flies and Minimum Dose Reductions for Individual 
Fruit Fly Species'' earlier in this document, has determined that the 
three fruit flies of concern for these commodities are neutralized at a 
dose of 150 gray.
    Therefore, we are proposing to reduce the minimum required dose of 
irradiation from 250 gray to 150 gray for the Hawaiian fruits and 
vegetables affected by the Trifly complex: Abiu, atemoya, bell pepper, 
carambola, eggplant, litchi, longan, papaya, pineapple (other than 
smooth Cayenne), rambutan, sapodilla, Italian squash, and tomato. This 
action would make our minimum dose requirements for irradiation 
treatment of Hawaiian fruits and vegetables moved interstate consistent 
with our proposed minimum dose requirements for irradiation treatment 
of imported fruits and vegetables.

Irradiation Treatment for Fruits and Vegetables Moved Interstate From 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands

    The Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands fruits and vegetables 
regulations (Sec. Sec.  318.58 through 318.58-16) prohibit or restrict 
the interstate movement of

[[Page 33861]]

fruits and vegetables from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands to 
prevent the introduction and dissemination of plant pests into the 
continental United States. Currently, these regulations do not provide 
for the use of irradiation as a treatment for fruits and vegetables 
moved interstate from these locations. We believe that irradiation for 
fruits and vegetables from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands can 
serve as an effective alternative treatment to those treatments 
currently authorized for fruits and vegetables moved interstate from 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands in part 305 if those fruits and 
vegetables are only associated with pests listed in Sec.  305.31(a) as 
pests for which irradiation is an approved treatment.
    Therefore, we are also proposing to amend Sec.  305.34 to provide 
for the use of irradiation as a treatment for fruits and vegetables 
moved interstate from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands as well 
as from Hawaii. The section heading would be amended to read: 
``Irradiation treatment of certain fruits and vegetables from Hawaii, 
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.'' We would make similar 
changes throughout the section. We would retain the information in 
Sec.  305.34 that is specific to Hawaiian commodities, such as the list 
of Hawaiian commodities for which irradiation is an approved treatment 
in proposed Sec.  305.34(a)(1) and the additional requirements for the 
issuance of a certificate or limited permit for the interstate movement 
of litchi and sweetpotato from Hawaii in Sec.  305.34(b)(7).
    We are also proposing to add a new Sec.  318.58-4b, ``Irradiation 
treatment of fruits and vegetables from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands,'' to the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands fruits and 
vegetables regulations. Because no commodity-specific irradiation 
treatment schedules have been developed for fruits and vegetables from 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, this section would read, in 
its entirety, ``Any fruits or vegetables from Puerto Rico or the U.S. 
Virgin Islands that are required by this subpart to be treated or 
subjected to inspection to control one or more of the plant pests 
listed in Sec.  305.31(a) may instead be treated with irradiation. 
Fruits and vegetables treated with irradiation for plant pests listed 
in Sec.  305.31(a) of this chapter must be irradiated at the doses 
listed in Sec.  305.31(a), and the irradiation treatment must be 
conducted in accordance with the other requirements of Sec.  305.34.''
    Currently, no irradiation facilities exist in Puerto Rico or the 
U.S. Virgin Islands, and PPQ has received no requests to approve the 
construction of irradiation facilities in either territory. However, 
these proposed changes to the regulations in Sec.  305.34 would give 
persons moving fruits or vegetables interstate from Puerto Rico or the 
U.S. Virgin Islands the option of moving the fruits and vegetables 
under limited permit to an irradiation facility in the continental 
United States for treatment before the fruits and vegetables enter 
interstate commerce. If moved interstate in this manner, fruits and 
vegetables from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands would be 
treated for plant pests listed in Sec.  305.31(a) in accordance with 
the required doses listed there and in accordance with the other 
requirements in Sec.  305.34.
    As with Hawaiian commodities, as long as the only pests for which a 
commodity is required by the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands 
quarantine regulations to be treated or be subject to a systems 
approach prior to interstate movement are pests for which irradiation 
is an approved treatment in Sec.  305.31, then that commodity would be 
able to be moved interstate after it undergoes irradiation for those 
pests at the doses listed in Sec.  305.31(a) and in accordance with the 
other requirements in Sec.  305.34, with no need for additional 
rulemaking. For commodities that are not currently allowed to be moved 
interstate under the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands territorial 
quarantine regulations, PPQ would conduct a risk assessment to 
determine whether irradiation alone or in combination with other 
phytosanitary measures can treat all the quarantine pests that might be 
associated with its interstate movement from Puerto Rico and the U.S. 
Virgin Islands. If it was determined that irradiation would be an 
effective treatment for these commodities, they would be approved for 
treatment with irradiation through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
    Under this proposed rule, fruits and vegetables from Puerto Rico 
and the U.S. Virgin Islands that are listed in Sec.  305.31(h)(2)(ii) 
and associated with pests for which irradiation is an approved 
treatment would be allowed to be irradiated for plant pests at the 
doses we have proposed to add to the approved irradiation doses for 
imported fruits and vegetables in Sec.  305.31(a), including the 
proposed generic minimum dose of 400 gray for arthropod plant pests 
other than pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera, the proposed 
generic dose of 150 gray for all fruit flies, the proposed lower doses 
for certain fruit flies, and the proposed new doses for nine plant 
pests.
    In addition, to reflect all of the proposed changes to irradiation 
treatment for fruits and vegetables from foreign localities and from 
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, we would revise 
paragraph Sec.  305.2(h)(1), which currently lists the plant pests 
associated with imported fruits and vegetables for which irradiation is 
an approved treatment, to read: ``Treatment of fruits and vegetables 
from foreign localities by irradiation in accordance with Sec.  305.31 
may be substituted for other approved treatments for any of the pests 
listed in Sec.  305.31(a). Treatment of fruits and vegetables from 
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands by irradiation at the 
minimum doses listed in Sec.  305.31(a) and in accordance with Sec.  
305.34 may be substituted for other approved treatments for any of the 
pests listed in Sec.  305.31(a).''

Irradiation Treatment for Regulated Articles Moved Interstate From 
Areas Quarantined for Mexican Fruit Fly and Mediterranean Fruit Fly

    The Mexican fruit fly regulations contained in Sec. Sec.  301.64 
through 301.64-10 restrict the interstate movement of regulated 
articles from quarantined areas to prevent the spread of Mexican fruit 
fly (Anastrepha ludens) to noninfested areas of the United States. 
Similarly, the Mediterranean fruit fly regulations contained in 
Sec. Sec.  301.78 through 301.78-10 restrict the interstate movement of 
regulated articles from quarantined areas to prevent the spread of 
Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) to noninfested areas of 
the United States.
    Within the Mexican fruit fly regulations and the Mediterranean 
fruit fly regulations, paragraphs Sec. Sec.  301.64-10(g) and 301.78-
10(c), respectively, set out the conditions under which certain 
regulated articles may be treated with irradiation in order to prevent 
the spread of those fruit flies via the interstate movement of those 
regulated articles. We are proposing to remove the bulk of these 
paragraphs because their provisions are currently duplicated in part 
305; Sec.  305.32 duplicates the irradiation provisions relating to the 
Mexican fruit fly, while Sec.  305.33 duplicates the irradiation 
provisions relating to the Mediterranean fruit fly. In place of the 
detailed provisions currently contained in paragraphs Sec. Sec.  
301.64-10(g) and 301.78-10(c), we would indicate that regulated 
articles may be treated with irradiation in accordance with the 
provisions of 7 CFR part 305.
    In Sec.  305.32, the required dose for Mexican fruit fly is 150 
gray; in

[[Page 33862]]

Sec.  305.33, the required dose for Mediterranean fruit fly is 225 
gray. Research conducted by ARS, as discussed under the heading 
``Generic Minimum Dose for Fruit Flies and Minimum Dose Reductions for 
Individual Fruit Fly Species'' earlier in this document, has determined 
that the Mexican fruit fly is neutralized at a dose of 70 gray, while 
the Mediterranean fruit fly is part of the family of fruit flies that 
are neutralized at a dose of 150 gray. Therefore, we are proposing to 
update the dose requirements for those fruit flies in Sec.  305.31(a).
    In order to make the Mexican fruit fly and Mediterranean fruit fly 
irradiation treatment regulations consistent with the other changes 
proposed in this document, we are proposing to remove references to 
specific required doses from Sec. Sec.  305.32 and 305.33 and instead 
refer to the doses listed in Sec.  305.31(a). For example, the 
requirement in paragraph Sec.  305.32(d) that fruits and vegetables 
treated with irradiation for Mexican fruit fly must receive a minimum 
absorbed ionizing radiation dose of 150 gray (15 krad) would be 
replaced with a requirement that such fruits and vegetables must 
receive the approved dose for Mexican fruit fly listed in Sec.  
305.31(a). This change would make the required irradiation doses for 
regulated articles moved interstate from areas quarantined for Mexican 
fruit fly and Mediterranean fruit fly consistent with the proposed 
irradiation doses for those fruit flies with regard to fruits and 
vegetables that are imported or moved interstate from Hawaii, Puerto 
Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Irradiation and Inspection for Bananas Moved Interstate From Hawaii

    The regulations in Sec.  318.13-4i allow green bananas of the 
cultivars ``Williams,'' ``Valery,'' ``Grand Nain,'' and standard and 
dwarf ``Brazilian'' may be moved interstate from Hawaii under a systems 
approach. A systems approach is a combination of overlapping 
phytosanitary measures that provide quarantine security against plant 
pests.
    We are proposing to add two combinations of irradiation and 
inspection as treatments for bananas from Hawaii. Specifically, 
bananas, regardless of cultivar or ripeness, from Hawaii would be 
eligible for interstate movement if they have been inspected in Hawaii 
for the banana moth, Opogona sacchari (Bojen), and have undergone 
irradiation treatment with a minimum dose of 400 gray at an approved 
facility. Bananas from Hawaii would also be eligible for interstate 
movement if they have been inspected in Hawaii for the banana moth and 
the green scale, Coccus viridis (Green), and have undergone irradiation 
treatment with a minimum dose of 150 gray at an approved facility. We 
believe either of these measures, which are discussed in detail in the 
following paragraphs, would provide the necessary phytosanitary 
protection to prevent the introduction and dissemination of plant pests 
into the continental United States.
    A 1998 report completed by APHIS on the inspection requirements for 
green bananas from Hawaii identified five pests of concern that could 
be spread from Hawaii to the rest of the United States by the 
interstate movement of bananas. These pests are: The banana moth, the 
green scale, the Mediterranean fruit fly, the melon fly, and the 
Oriental fruit fly. Copies of this report may be requested from the 
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Of the five pests identified in the report, we believe the green 
scale and the banana moth can be detected by visual inspection. The 
green scale is a surface pest, which means that any infestations of 
green scale on bananas are readily apparent. Although the banana moth 
is an internal pest, we believe that it can also be detected by visual 
inspection; bananas infested with banana moth show numerous external 
signs of infestation, such as holes in the skin and deformed nipples. 
For both of these pests, we believe that visual inspection can 
effectively mitigate the risk of their introduction into other areas in 
the United States via the interstate movement of bananas from Hawaii.
    The Mediterranean fruit fly, the melon fruit fly, and the Oriental 
fruit fly infest bananas only where injury or some fault has exposed 
the flesh of the fruit. For the fruit flies, visual inspections would 
not be an effective means of interception; they must be neutralized by 
treatment.
    As discussed above under the heading ``Generic Minimum Dose for 
Fruit Flies and Minimum Dose Reductions for Individual Fruit Fly 
Species,'' ARS research indicates that the fruit flies of concern are 
neutralized at a dose of 150 gray. As discussed above under the heading 
``Proposed New Doses for Nine Other Plant Pests,'' ARS research 
indicates that the green scale is neutralized at a dose of 400 gray. 
However, we currently lack information on what irradiation dose would 
be necessary to neutralize the banana moth.
    Therefore, we are proposing to provide two options for the 
irradiation treatment of bananas from Hawaii: The bananas could either 
be irradiated at 150 gray, a dose sufficient to neutralize the fruit 
flies associated with bananas from Hawaii, and inspected for the green 
scale and the banana moth, or the bananas could be irradiated at 400 
gray, a dose sufficient to neutralize both the fruit flies and the 
green scale, and inspected for the banana moth.
    We expect that the combinations of treatment with irradiation and 
inspection would be effective alternatives to the current systems 
approach for green bananas of certain cultivars. Furthermore, treatment 
with irradiation would allow bananas of any ripeness or cultivar to be 
moved interstate from Hawaii; the current regulations, as noted above, 
only allow certain cultivars of green bananas to be moved interstate 
under the systems approach described in Sec.  318.13-4i.
    To accomplish this change, we would amend Sec.  318.13-4i, which 
currently describes the systems approach under which green bananas of 
certain cultivars may currently be imported into the United States. 
Specifically, we would add a new paragraph indicating that bananas from 
Hawaii would be eligible to move interstate if they were irradiated at 
the doses listed in Sec.  305.31(a) and in accordance with the other 
requirements in Sec.  305.34 for the fruit flies and the green scale 
and inspected for the banana moth or if they were irradiated for the 
fruit flies and inspected for the green scale and the banana moth. We 
would amend the section heading of Sec.  318.13-4i to reflect the fact 
that it would no longer concern only green bananas.
    We would also indicate in paragraph Sec.  318.13-4i(b) that, to be 
eligible for a certificate for interstate movement, the bananas would 
have to be treated and inspected in Hawaii. (For litchi and 
sweetpotato, the two commodities for which inspection is required for 
certification in Sec.  305.34(b)(7)(i), the regulations require that 
the inspection be conducted before the treatment is performed. Hawaiian 
producers have requested that we allow the bananas to be inspected 
after irradiation treatment; therefore, we have proposed to allow 
inspection to be conducted before or after irradiation treatment. If 
bananas from Hawaii were inspected for the banana moth after undergoing 
irradiation treatment in Hawaii and found to be infested with the 
banana moth or the green scale, the bananas would not be eligible for 
interstate movement. In such a case, the cost of performing the 
treatment would be borne by the grower, as it normally is.)
    In addition, to be eligible for a limited permit for the interstate 
movement of

[[Page 33863]]

untreated bananas from Hawaii for treatment on the mainland United 
States, bananas from Hawaii would have to be inspected for the relevant 
pests in Hawaii.
    Finally, we would add a sentence to Sec.  318.13-3(b)(3) indicating 
that untreated bananas from Hawaii may be moved interstate for 
irradiation treatment on the mainland United States if the provisions 
of Sec.  318.13-4i(b) are met and if the bananas are accompanied by a 
limited permit issued by an inspector in accordance with Sec.  318.13-
4(c).

Vapor Heat Treatment for Sweetpotatoes Moved Interstate From Hawaii

    Within part 318, ``Subpart--Sweetpotatoes'' (Sec. Sec.  318.30 and 
318.30a) quarantines Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands 
because of the sweetpotato scarabee (Euscepes postfasciatus Fairm. 
[Coleoptera: Cucurlionidae], also known as the West Indian sweetpotato 
weevil) and the sweetpotato stem borer (Omphisa anastomosalis Guen. 
[Lepidoptera: Crambidae], also known as the sweetpotato vine borer) and 
restricts the interstate movement of sweetpotatoes (Ipomoea batatas 
Poir.) from those places.
    Paragraph (c) of Sec.  318.30 allows sweetpotatoes to be moved 
interstate from Hawaii only if they have been subjected to fumigation 
with methyl bromide or irradiated in accordance with Sec.  318.13-4f or 
if they are being moved by the USDA for scientific or experimental 
purposes. We are proposing to add a vapor heat treatment, combined with 
tuber cutting and inspection, for sweetpotatoes moved interstate from 
Hawaii as an alternative to fumigation with methyl bromide and 
irradiation.
    A pest risk assessment completed by APHIS in 2002 and updated in 
May 2003 identified five pests of concern that could be spread from 
Hawaii to the rest of the United States by the interstate movement of 
sweetpotatoes: The two pests already named in the regulations, the 
sweetpotato scarabee and the sweetpotato stem borer; the gray pineapple 
mealybug, Dysmicoccus neobrevipes (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae); the 
ginger weevil, Elytrotreinus subtruncatus (Coleoptera: Cucurlionidae); 
and the Kona coffee root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne konaensis 
(Tylenchida: Heteroderidae). Copies of this risk assessment may be 
requested from the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Two of these pests, the gray pineapple mealybug and the Kona coffee 
root-knot nematode, are external pests. We believe they can be 
effectively detected by visual inspection, and we would require such 
visual inspection as a condition of the interstate movement of 
sweetpotato from Hawaii. This is consistent with the recommendations of 
the pest risk assessment.
    The other three pests, the ginger weevil, the sweetpotato scarabee, 
and the sweetpotato stem borer, are internal pests, meaning that visual 
inspection would not be an effective means to intercept them; thus, 
they must be neutralized by treatment. We believe that the vapor heat 
treatment we are proposing to allow, combined with the tuber cutting 
and visual inspection that we would require, would be an effective 
alternative to the methyl bromide and irradiation treatments currently 
prescribed by the regulations to control these pests.
    The vapor heat treatment would be required to be performed 
according to the following schedule:
     Temperature probes would have to be placed in the 
approximate centers of individual sweetpotato roots.
     The air surrounding the sweetpotato roots would have to be 
heated. After the temperature of the air surrounding the sweetpotato 
roots reaches 87.8 [deg]F (31 [deg]C), its temperature would have to be 
incrementally raised from 87.8 [deg]F (31 [deg]C) to 111.2 [deg]F (44 
[deg]C) over a period of 240 minutes.
     Using saturated water vapor at 118.4 [deg]F (48 [deg]C), 
the core temperature of the individual sweetpotato roots would then 
have to be raised to 116.6 [deg]F (47 [deg]C).
     After the core temperature of the sweetpotato roots 
reaches 116.6 [deg]F (47 [deg]C), the core temperature would have to be 
held at 116.6 [deg]F (47 [deg]C) or higher for 190 minutes.
    This vapor heat treatment was developed in Japan to treat 
sweetpotatoes moved from Okinawa to mainland Japan for the West Indian 
sweetpotato weevil, the sweetpotato vine borer, and the sweetpotato 
weevil (Cylas formicarius elegantulus). A review by ARS has confirmed 
that this treatment is effective at neutralizing the West Indian 
sweetpotato weevil and the sweetpotato vine borer.
    There is no research available at this time on the use of this 
vapor heat treatment to neutralize the ginger weevil, which was named 
as a pest of concern in APHIS' pest risk assessment. Although the 
sweetpotato is not a known host of the ginger weevil, it may move with 
sweetpotatoes as a hitchhiker. However, vapor heat treatment has been 
used effectively in Japan against other weevils, such as the 
sweetpotato weevil mentioned above. Additionally, no live pests have 
ever been found in sweetpotatoes treated according to this vapor heat 
treatment schedule. For these reasons, we believe that this vapor heat 
treatment would be effective against the ginger weevil. However, as an 
additional phytosanitary precaution, we are proposing to require that 
sweetpotatoes treated according to this vapor heat treatment schedule 
be sampled, cut, and inspected and found to be free of the ginger 
weevil before the sweetpotatoes would be allowed to move from the 
treatment facility to their destination. The sampling, cutting, and 
inspection for the ginger weevil would not have to be performed at the 
same time as the inspection for the gray pineapple mealybug and the 
Kona coffee root-knot nematode, although both inspections would be 
required to be conducted prior to treatment. However, the sampling, 
cutting, and inspection for ginger weevil would have to be performed 
under conditions that would prevent any pests that may emerge from the 
sampled sweetpotatoes from infesting any other sweetpotatoes intended 
for interstate movement in accordance with these proposed requirements.
    Sweetpotatoes treated according to these requirements would also 
have to be packaged according to certain requirements including fruit 
fly-proof cartons, wrapping of entire pallet loads, and identification 
requirements. Untreated sweetpotatoes moved interstate to the mainland 
United States for treatment would be required to be shipped in sealed 
shipping containers. These proposed requirements would ensure that 
quarantine pests would be prevented from infesting shipments of treated 
sweetpotatoes and that any quarantine pests that may be present in 
untreated sweetpotatoes do not enter the environment. The proposed 
requirements are identical to the packaging requirements in Sec.  
305.34 for sweetpotatoes treated using irradiation and moved interstate 
from Hawaii.
    We would allow this treatment to be administered either in Hawaii 
or at an approved treatment facility in the mainland United States. If 
the sweetpotatoes were treated in Hawaii, they would move from Hawaii 
under a certificate for interstate movement; if they were treated in 
the mainland United States, they would move from Hawaii under limited 
permit, and they would have to be inspected for the gray pineapple 
mealybug and the Kona coffee root-knot nematode and sampled, cut, and 
inspected for ginger weevil prior to interstate movement from Hawaii.

[[Page 33864]]

    To accomplish this change, we would add a new paragraph (k) to the 
vapor heat treatment regulations in Sec.  305.24 that would set out the 
vapor heat treatment schedule for sweetpotatoes moved interstate from 
Hawaii. We would also add a new section Sec.  318.13-4d to the Hawaiian 
quarantine regulations to set out the additional conditions that must 
be fulfilled in order to allow the interstate movement of sweetpotatoes 
from Hawaii that are treated in accordance with proposed Sec.  
305.24(k). Finally, we would add a new paragraph (b)(4) to Sec.  
318.13-3, which currently sets out conditions of movement for regulated 
articles moved interstate from Hawaii, that would indicate that 
sweetpotatoes could be moved under a limited permit for treatment at an 
approved treatment facility in the continental United States if they 
have been prepared in accordance with the conditions of the Hawaiian 
quarantine regulations.

Removal of the Subpart for Sweetpotatoes and Dispersal of Its 
Provisions

    As mentioned earlier in this document, within part 318, ``Subpart--
Sweetpotatoes'' (Sec. Sec.  318.30 and 318.30a) quarantines Hawaii, 
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands because of the sweetpotato 
scarabee and the sweetpotato stem borer and restricts the interstate 
movement of sweetpotatoes from those places.
    Section 318.30 prohibits the interstate movement of sweetpotatoes 
from Hawaii unless the sweetpotatoes are fumigated with methyl bromide 
or irradiated and prohibits the interstate movement of sweetpotatoes 
from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands unless they are fumigated 
with methyl bromide. Section 318.30a sets out a systems approach using 
inspection, washing, grading, and application of insecticide under 
which sweetpotatoes may be moved interstate from Puerto Rico to certain 
locations in the mainland United States.
    With the exception of sweetpotatoes, cotton, cottonseed, and 
cottonseed products, and soil, the regulations in part 318 are 
organized first by locality and then by commodity; e.g., if a person 
wishes to move tomatoes interstate from Puerto Rico, that person would 
look in the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands quarantine regulations 
to determine whether tomatoes from Puerto Rico could be moved 
interstate and, if so, under what conditions they would be allowed to 
move. We believe that this organization reflects how regulated parties 
use the Code of Federal Regulations, as persons who wish to move a 
commodity interstate typically are seeking to move that commodity 
interstate from a specific location. Therefore, we are proposing to 
remove ``Subpart--Sweetpotatoes'' from part 318 and to disperse its 
provisions to the Hawaiian quarantine regulations and the Puerto Rico 
and U.S. Virgin Islands quarantine regulations.
    Because the sweetpotatoes subpart has set out restrictions on the 
interstate movement of sweetpotatoes from Hawaii and from Puerto Rico 
and the U.S. Virgin Islands, sweetpotatoes are not listed as regulated 
articles in either the list of regulated articles from Hawaii in Sec.  
318.13-2(b) or the list of regulated articles from Puerto Rico and the 
U.S. Virgin Islands in Sec.  318.58-2(b). Accordingly, we would add an 
entry for sweetpotatoes to each of those lists.
    In the Hawaiian quarantine regulations, Sec.  318.13-4b authorizes 
the interstate movement of any fruit listed in paragraph (b) of that 
section if that fruit is inspected by an inspector and treated for 
fruit flies in accordance with 7 CFR part 305. The treatment 
requirements and schedule for fumigating sweetpotatoes with methyl 
bromide are found in 7 CFR part 305. Accordingly, we are proposing to 
amend the references to ``eligible fruits'' in that paragraph to read 
``eligible fruits and vegetables,'' to amend the reference to ``fruit 
flies'' to read ``plant pests,'' and to add sweetpotatoes to the list 
of commodities authorized to move interstate in that paragraph. The 
other treatment available for Hawaiian sweetpotatoes, irradiation, is 
already authorized in the Hawaiian quarantine regulations at Sec.  
318.13-4f. (As described earlier in this document, we are proposing to 
replace the requirements currently in Sec.  318.13-4f with a list of 
Hawaiian commodities for which irradiation is an approved treatment. In 
addition, we are proposing to add a new treatment schedule and a new 
section Sec.  318.13-4d to authorize vapor heat treatment as a 
treatment for sweetpotatoes moved interstate from Hawaii. Neither of 
these changes would be complicated by our removal of the sweetpotatoes 
subpart.)
    In the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands quarantine regulations, 
Sec.  318.58-4 allows an inspector to issue a certificate for 
interstate movement for regulated fruits and vegetables after 
undergoing an approved treatment from 7 CFR part 305 and if the 
articles are handled after treatment in accordance with all conditions 
that the inspector requires. Since fumigation with methyl bromide is 
already listed in 7 CFR part 305 as an approved treatment for 
sweetpotatoes from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands and the 
schedule and conditions of the treatment are also already set out in 7 
CFR part 305, there is no need to modify the Puerto Rico and U.S. 
Virgin Islands quarantine regulations to accommodate the removal of 
Sec.  318.30.
    However, Sec.  318.30a, as discussed above, sets out a systems 
approach using inspection, washing and grading, and application of 
insecticide under which sweetpotatoes may be moved interstate from 
Puerto Rico. To preserve this option for persons who wish to move 
sweetpotatoes interstate from Puerto Rico, we would establish a new 
section Sec.  318.58-4c with the same requirements as Sec.  318.30a. In 
transferring this section to the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands 
quarantine regulations, however, we would update the language in Sec.  
318.30a and reorganize some of its requirements to make it easier to 
understand.
    We would also make several other editorial changes in the Hawaiian 
quarantine regulations and the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands 
quarantine regulations to reflect the removal of the sweetpotatoes 
subpart.

Definition of Inspector

    We are also proposing to amend the definitions of inspector in the 
Hawaiian quarantine regulations and the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin 
Islands quarantine regulations to reflect the fact that some inspection 
responsibilities have been transferred to the Department of Homeland 
Security's Bureau of Customs and Border Protection.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. 
For this action, the Office of Management and Budget has waived its 
review under Executive Order 12866.
    This proposed rule would make several amendments to the current 
provisions for the use of irradiation as a treatment for various plant 
pests, allow the use of irradiation and inspection as a treatment for 
bananas moved interstate from Hawaii as an alternative to the systems 
approach currently described in the regulations, and allow the use of a 
vapor heat treatment for sweetpotatoes moved interstate from Hawaii as 
an alternative to fumigation with methyl bromide and irradiation. The 
potential economic impacts of the proposed changes are discussed below.

[[Page 33865]]

Irradiation Treatment for Fruits and Vegetables

    The regulations in Sec.  305.31 set out standards, minimum doses, 
and other requirements for performing irradiation treatments on 
imported fruits and vegetables and set out minimum doses necessary to 
neutralize 11 fruit flies and the mango seed weevil. This proposed rule 
would add minimum doses for more pests and lower the minimum doses for 
others. Specifically, this proposal would establish:
     A minimum generic dose of 400 Gy for all arthropod plant 
pests other than pupae and adults of the order Lepidoptera;
     A minimum generic dose of 150 Gy for all fruit flies of 
the family Tephriditae;
     Lower minimum doses for certain fruit flies; and
     New approved minimum doses for nine plant pests.
    This proposed rule would also allow irradiation to serve as an 
alternative to other approved treatments for additional fruits and 
vegetables moved interstate from Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. 
Virgin Islands. Fruits and vegetables from Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the 
U.S. Virgin Islands that are required to be treated by other means for 
pests listed in Sec.  305.31(a) prior to interstate movement would be 
allowed to be moved interstate if they are treated with irradiation at 
the doses listed in Sec.  305.31(a) and in accordance with the other 
conditions specified in Sec.  305.34.
    At present, Sec.  305.34 only provides for irradiation treatment of 
fruits and vegetables from Hawaii; however, we have determined that 
irradiation treatment can be used effectively for commodities from 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands if the safeguards in Sec.  
305.34 are implemented. Currently, no irradiation facilities exist in 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and no requests have been 
received to approve the construction of such facilities. However, the 
proposed rule would provide for the option of moving the commodities 
under limited permit to an irradiation facility on the U.S. mainland 
for treatment prior to entering interstate commerce.

Impact on Small Entities of Proposed Changes in Irradiation Treatment 
of Fruits and Vegetables

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that agencies specifically 
consider the economic impact of their regulations on small entities. 
The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established size criteria 
using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) to 
determine which economic entities meet the definition of a small firm.
    Irradiation facilities affected by the proposed rule change would 
belong to one of the following two NAICS categories: (1) Firms 
providing irradiation services for the treatment of fruits and 
vegetables, which would fall within NAICS category 115114, 
``Postharvest Crop Activities (except Cotton Ginning)''; or (2) firms 
providing irradiation services for decontamination or sterilization 
purposes, which would fall within NAICS category 811219, which includes 
``Medical and surgical equipment repair and maintenance services.''
    Most treatments of Hawaiian produce are likely to occur at an 
existing irradiation facility on the island of Hawaii. This facility is 
used to treat other fruits and vegetables for which irradiation is an 
approved treatment and can be classified under NAICS category 115114, 
``Postharvest Crop Activities (except Cotton Ginning).'' The SBA 
criteria classify this facility as a small entity, since its annual 
sales are less than $6 million.
    Another firm on the U.S. mainland operates two facilities in 
Illinois and one facility in New Jersey. Its primary service is to 
provide irradiation treatment for the sanitation of medical devices on 
contract. This firm is classified within NAICS category 811219, which 
includes ``Medical and surgical equipment repair and maintenance 
services.'' However, since it is part of a larger corporation for which 
annual receipts may exceed $6 million, this firm is not classified as a 
small entity under the SBA criteria. Thus, at least one firm that could 
be affected by the proposed changes is a small entity.
    However, irradiation facilities, whether large or small, would 
benefit from the proposed changes. The range of commodities imported 
and moved interstate for which irradiation would be an approved 
treatment would increase. At the same time, dosage levels, and 
therefore operating costs, would decrease for many commodities. The 
proposed changes to irradiation doses and proposed provisions allowing 
the use of pest-specific doses to treat commodities for interstate 
movement would facilitate the importation of fruits and vegetables and 
their interstate movement from Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands. For certain pests for which irradiation is already an approved 
treatment, required irradiation dosages would be lowered to the minimum 
level necessary. In other instances, irradiation would be newly allowed 
as an alternative phytosanitary treatment.
    The proposed changes would result in lower costs and increased 
flexibility for importers, gain