**Importation of**

***Litchi chinensis* (litchi or lychee**), ***Dimocarpus longan*
(longan), *Mangifera indica* (mango), *Garcinia mangostana* L.
(mangosteen), *Nephelium lappaceum* L. (rambutan), and *Ananas comosus*
(pineapple) into the United States from Thailand**

**Risk Management**

January 25, 2007

Ver. 1.5

**United States Department of Agriculture**

**Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service**

**Agency Contact: Alex Belano, alex.belano@aphis.usda.gov**

**I. Executive Summary:**

The Government of Thailand requested permission to export *Litchi
chinensis* (lychee or litchi), *Dimocarpus longan* (longan), *Mangifera
indica* (mango), *Garcinia mangostana* L. (mangosteen), *Nephelium
lappaceum* L. (rambutan), and *Ananas comosus* (pineapple) fruits into
the United States (U.S.). These commodities have not been exported from
Thailand before, so Thailand provided a detailed information on pests
associated with these commodities in that country. The information was
based on (1) extensive survey data on litchi grown in Thailand, (2) the
published scientific literature and (3) pest interception records of the
United States Department of Agriculture (PIN309, 2003). Thailand further
proposed to treat each fruit with an APHIS approved generic irradiation
treatment that would mitigate all pathway risks from insect pests.

Based on the pest information provided by Thailand and the fact that
Thailand would treat all six export commodities with an APHIS approved
irradiation treatment, APHIS determined that a pest list that would
identify all quarantine pests associated with the commodities that would
be likely to follow the pathway would be suficient information to
evaluate pathway risks, and that more detailed pest risk assessments
analyzing likelihood of introduction of each pest were not needed. This
streamlined approach would also meet one of APHIS' objectives behind the
development of a generic irradiation treatment for most plant pests.
APHIS' Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST) therefore
compiled a pest list for each commodity, identified pests of quarantine
significance that had the possibility to be introduced via import of
fresh fruit and discussed the risk potential of the pests not targeted
by the irradiation treatment.

Analysis of the pest lists for each commodity indicated that all but
three pests likely to follow the pathway are insect pests and could be
effectively neutralized[^1] with the irradiation generic dose of 400 Gy
(USDA 2006). A litchi rust mite, *Aceria litchi*, on litchi and longan a
pathogens, *Peronophythora litchii,* on litchis and a pathogen,
*Phomopsis mangiferae,* on mangoes, however, may not effectively be
neutralized by irradiation and require additional measures to prevent
their introduction into the United States.

A commmodity by commodity analysis of pest risks and mitigations are
further discussed.

**II. Litchi:**

A. Introduction

The pest list completed by CPHST for litchis from Thailand identified
twelve potential quarantine pests that could follow the pathway on
*Litchi chinensis* fruit (USDA 2007, Table A4). These include ten insect
pests, one mite and one fungus as follows:

[Insect pests:]{.underline}

> *Bactrocera cucurbitae* (Coquillet) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Bactrocera dorsalis* (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

*Ceroplastes rubens* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Coccidae)

*Coccus viridis* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Coccidae)

*Dysmicoccus neobrevipes* (Beardsley) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

*Planococcus lilacinus* (Cockerell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

*Planococcus minor* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)

*Conopomorpha sinensis* (Bradley) (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae)

*Cryptophlebia ombrodelta* (Lower) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)

*Deudorix epijarbas* (Moore) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae)

[Mites:]{.underline}

> *Aceria litchii* (Keiffer) = *Eriophyes litchii* (Acari: Eriophydae)

[Fungi:]{.underline}

> *Peronophythora litchii* (Pythiales: Pythiaceae)

The proposed importation of litchi fruit from Thailand, if approved,
would be regulated by an amendment to the existing fruits and vegetables
regulations \[7 CFR § 319.56\]. This document outlines the phytosanitary
measures that APHIS will require if the proposed importation of litchi
from Thailand is approved and documents the evidence used by APHIS to
conclude that these measures will effectively prevent the introduction
of quarantine pests.

B. Proposed Risk Mitigation Measures for Litchis

We propose that, if approved, litchi fruit from Thailand may be imported
into the United States (except Florida) only under the following
conditions:

(a) Litchis are grown in orchards registered with and monitored by the
    National Plant Protection Oraganization (NPPO) of Thailand to ensure
    that fruits are produced free of disease and other quarantine pests.

(b) The fruit for export must be treated by irradiation in Thailand at a
    minimum absorbed dose of 400 Gy and the treatment monitored by APHIS
    in certified facilities.

(c) Each shipment must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate
    (PC) certifying that the fruit received the above irradiation
    treatment and including an additional declaration (AD) that "the
    fruit were inspected and found free of *Peronophythora litchi."*

(d) The fruit is inspected. The regulations in § 319.56-6 provide that
    all imported fruits and vegetables shall be inspected, and shall be
    subject to such disinfection at the port of first arrival as may be
    required by an inspector. The pre-export inspection that will be
    conducted by APHIS personnel as part of preclearance activities in
    Thailand will serve to satisfy the inspection requirement. Section
    319.56-6 also provides that any shipment of fruits and vegetables
    may be refused entry if the shipment is so infested with plant pests
    that an inspector determines that it cannot be cleaned or treated.

C. Historical Performance of Importing Irradiated Litchis

Current regulations 7CFR 305.31 and 7CFR.319-56.2(k) allow the use of
irradiation to treat fruit for importation into the United States. No
country has taken advantage of the technology to import litchi or any
other fruits into the United States with this treatment. Regulations
7CFR318.13-4f allow interstate movement of fifteen different fruit,
including litchi, from Hawaii using a minimum absorbed dose of 150 Gy to
400 Gy. There are four fruit flies associated with litchis from Hawaii:
*Ceratitis capitata* (Mediterranean fruit fly), *Bactrocera dorsalis*
(oriental fruit fly), *B. cucurbitae* (melon fruit fly), and *B.
latifrons* (Malasian fruit fly). The 150 Gy dose is considered adequate
to mitigate risk from all these fruit flies (USDA 2006). Fruits and
vegetables treated with irradiation in Hawaii and moved to the mainland
U.S. have had no live pests of quarantine significance intercepted from
irradiated fruits (Uyeda 2005).

D. Evidence for the Effective Removal of Pests of Concern from the
Pathway

The following paragraph summarizes key mitigation measures for litchi
fruit from Thailand and provides a general discussion of their efficacy.
The evidence APHIS uses to determine that the measures described above
in Section B effectively remove pests of concern from the pathway are
also discussed. The FAO (2002) defines "pathway" as "Any means that
allows the entry or spread of a pest."

\(i\) Insect Pests

Ten pests likely to follow the pathway are insect pests out of which
only three belong to the order Lepidoptera. A minimum abosorbed dose of
400 Gy is required by U.S. regulations 7CFR305.31 and has been
determined by APHIS to be adequate to neutralize or mitigate all insect
pests excluding adults and pupae in the order Lepidoptera. The three
insect pests likely to follow the pathway and belonging to the order
Lepidoptera are: *Conopomorpha sinensis, Cryptophlebia ombrodelta,* and
*Deudorix epijarbas***.** The generic irradiation treatment is a valid
treatment for all three of these pests (as it is for other insect pests)
because the life stages of concern are the eggs and larvae (USDA 2007).

There is no record of importing irradiated litchis from Thailand, but
records of interstate movement of irradiated litchis from HI since 2003
show no interceptions of quarantine pests. (Uyeda 2005).

As part of the US requirements (7CFR305.34) governing the use of
irradiation as a phytosanitary treatment, APHIS and the National Plant
Protection Organization (NPPO) of Thailand must jointly develop a
preclearance work plan. The work plan shall include details of
activities including inspection of articles that APHIS may perform
before or after the treatment. Inspection of litchi fruit for the
presence of pests not targeted by irradiation during preclearance
activities will further ensure that all pests of concern are removed
from the pathway.

(ii) Mites:

The litchi mite, *Aceria litchii*, is found associated with litchi and
longan only (USDA 2007). The mite is primarily a pest of foliage and
flower parts but is also sometime associated with the fruit. In severe
cases, flowers may be completely destroyed and setting of fruit is
prevented or the set fruit may be damaged cosmetically (Waite 1999).
Being external and because of the damage it causes on fruits, inspection
and culling of the damaged fruit are considered effective in mitigating
risk from such pests. Although it is unlikely that commercially produced
fruit is a pathway for the mite, because of its microscopic size,
shipments should be prohibited into Florida, where litchis are grown, as
an added precaution. This is consistent with other import programs where
shipments of litchis and/or longans are probited into Florida for the
same pest. Shipments of litchi and/or longans from China, India and
Hawaii into the mainland U.S. with inspection for the pest over the past
few years show no record of interception.

\(iii\) Fungi:

Commercial litchi production areas where *Peronophythora litchii* is
present and active will require fungicidal field treatments to reduce
fruit drop. In nature the disease is confined to a single host (litchi),
although in laboratory conditions, tomatoes, papayas and loofah (*Luffa
cylindrical*) may also be infected (CABI, 2003). Most infected litchi
fruit will be culled because trained harvesters, packinghouse personnel,
and plant quarantine inspectors can easily detect the distinctive signs
of the disease on fruit. Infected, non-symptomatic fruit may go
undetected, but the likelihood of introduction via the few fruit that
may escape detection is very low. It is highly unlikely that market
fruit will be in a situation to introduce the disease because free water
is required for the spores to infect a host. Additionally, there is no
record of interception of this disease on litchis imported into the U.S.
from other countries in regions where this pathogen is present.
Therefore no measures are recommended for this pathogen beyond
certification for freedom based on inspection (USDA 2007).

**III. Longans:**

A. Introduction

The pest list completed by CPHST for longans from Thailand identified
twelve potential quarantine pests that could follow the pathway on
*Dimocarpus longan* (longan) fruit (USDA 2007, Table B4). These include
eleven insect pests and one mite as follows:

Insect Pests:

> *Bactrocera correcta* (Bezzi) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Bactrocera dorsalis* (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Ceroplastes rubens* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Coccidae)
>
> *Drepanococcus chiton* (Williams and Watson) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Coccidae)
>
> *Dysmicoccus neobrevipes* (Beardsley) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Maconellicoccus hirsutus* (Green*)* (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Planococcus lilacinus* (Cockerell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Planococcus minor* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Conopomorpha sinensis* (Bradley) (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae)
>
> *Cryptophlebia ombrodelta* (Lower) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)
>
> *Deudorix epijarbas* (Moore) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae)
>
> Mites:
>
> *Aceria litchii* (Keiffer) = *Eriophyes litchii* (Acari: Eriophydae)

The proposed importation of longan fruit from Thailand, if approved,
would be regulated by an amendment to the existing fruits and vegetables
regulations \[7 CFR § 319.56\]. This document outlines the phytosanitary
measures that APHIS will require if the proposed importation of longan
from Thailand is approved and documents the evidence used by APHIS to
conclude that these measures will effectively prevent the introduction
of quarantine pests.

B. Proposed Risk Mitigation Measures for Longans

We propose that, if approved, longan fruit from Thailand may be imported
into the United States (except Florida) only under the following
conditions:

(a) Longans are grown in orchards registered with and monitored by the
    National Plant Protection Oraganization (NPPO) of Thailand to ensure
    that fruits are produced free of quarantine pests.

(b) The fruit for export must be treated by irradiation in Thailand at a
    minimum absorbed dose of 400 Gy and the treatment monitored by APHIS
    in certified facilities.

(c) Each shipment must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate
    (PC) certifying that the fruit received the above irradiation
    treatment.

(d) The fruit is inspected. The regulations in § 319.56-6 provide that
    all imported fruits and vegetables shall be inspected, and shall be
    subject to such disinfection at the port of first arrival as may be
    required by an inspector. The pre-export inspection that will be
    conducted by APHIS personnel as part of preclearance activities in
    Thailand will serve to satisfy the inspection requirement. Section
    319.56-6 also provides that any shipment of fruits and vegetables
    may be refused entry if the shipment is so infested with plant pests
    that an inspector determines that it cannot be cleaned or treated.

C. Historical Performance of Importing Irradiated Longans

Current regulations 7CFR 305.31 and 7CFR.319-56.2(k) allow the use of
irradiation to treat fruit for importation into the United States. No
country has taken advantage of the technology to import longan or any
other fruits into the United States with this treatment. Regulations
7CFR318.13-4f allow interstate movement of fifteen different fruit,
including longan, from Hawaii using a minimum absorbed dose of 150 Gy to
400 Gy. There are four fruit flies associated with longan from Hawaii:
*Ceratitis capitata* (Mediterranean fruit fly), *Bactrocera dorsalis*
(oriental fruit fly), *B. cucurbitae* (melon fruit fly), and *B.
latifrons* (Malasian fruit fly). The 150 Gy dose is considered adequate
to mitigate risk from all these fruit flies (USDA 2006). Fruits and
vegetables treated with irradiation in Hawaii and moved to the mainland
U.S. have had no live pests of quarantine significance intercepted from
irradiated fruits (Uyeda 2005).

D. Evidence for the Effective Removal of Pests of Concern from the
Pathway

The following paragraph summarizes key mitigation measures for longan
fruit from Thailand and provides a general discussion of their efficacy.
The evidence APHIS uses to determine that the measures described above
in Section B effectively remove pests of concern from the pathway are
also discussed. The FAO (2002) defines "pathway" as "Any means that
allows the entry or spread of a pest."

\(i\) Insect Pests

Eleven pests likely to follow the pathway are ~~all~~ insect pests out
of which only three belong to the order Lepidoptera. A minimum abosorbed
dose of 400 Gy is required by U.S. regulations 7CFR305.31 and has been
determined by APHIS to be adequate to neutralize or mitigate all insect
pests excluding adults and pupae of the order Lepidoptera. The three
insect pests likely to follow the pathway and belonging to the order
Lepidoptera are: *Conopomorpha sinensis, Cryptophlebia ombrodelta,* and
*Deudorix epijarbas***.** The generic irradiation treatment is a valid
treatment for all three of these pests (as it is for other insect pests)
because the life stages of concern are the eggs and larvae (USDA 2007).

There is no record of importing irradiated longans from Thailand, but
records of interstate movement of irradiated longans from HI since 2000
show no interceptions of quarantine pests. (Uyeda 2005).

As part of the US requirements (7CFR305.34) governing the use of
irradiation as a phytosanitary treatment, APHIS and the National Plant
Protection Organization (NPPO) of Thailand must jointly develop a
preclearance work plan. The work plan shall include details of
activities including inspection of articles that APHIS may perform
before or after the treatment. Inspection of the longan fruit for the
presence of pests not targeted by irradiation during preclearance
activities will further ensure that the pests of concern are removed
from the pathway.

\(ii\) Mite:

The litchi mite, *Aceria litchii*, is found associated with litchi and
longan only (USDA 2007). The mite is primarily a pest of foliage and
flower parts but is also sometime associated with the fruit. In severe
cases, flowers may be completely destroyed and setting of fruit is
prevented or the set fruit may be damaged cosmetically (Waite 1999,
Waite and Hwang 2002). Being external and because of the damage it
causes on fruits, inspection and culling of the damaged fruit are
considered effective in mitigating risk from such pests. Although it is
unlikely that commercially produced fruit is a pathway for the mite,
because of its microscopic size, shipments should be prohibited into
Florida, where litchis are grown, as an added precaution. This is
consistent with other import programs where shipments of litchis and/or
longans are probited into Florida for the same pest. Shipments of litchi
and/or longans from China, India and Hawaii into the mainland U.S. with
inspection for the pest over the past few years show no record of
interception.

**IV. Mangoes:**

A. Introduction

The pest list completed by CPHST for mangoes from Thailand identified
twenty one potential quarantine pests that could follow the pathway on
*Mangifera indica* fruit (USDA 2007, Table C4). These include twenty
insect pests and one fungi as follows:

> [Insect Pests:]{.underline}
>
> *Sternochetus frigidus* (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
>
> *Sternochetus mangiferae* (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
>
> *Sternochetus olivieri* (Faust) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
>
> *Bactrocera carambolae* (Drew and Hancock) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Bactrocera correcta* (Bezzi) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Bactrocera cucurbitae* (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Bactrocera dorsalis* (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Bactrocera papayae* (Drew and Hancock) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Bactrocera tuberculata* (Bezzi) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Bactrocera zonata* (Saunders) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
>
> *Cereoplastes rubens* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Coccidae)
>
> *Coccus viridis* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Coccidae)
>
> *Aulacaspis tubercularis* (Newstead) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Diaspididae)
>
> *Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Diaspididae)
>
> *Dysmicoccus neobrevipes* (Beardsley) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Maconellicoccus hirsutus* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Nipaecoccus viridis* (Newstead) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Planococcus lilacinus* (Cockerell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Planacoccus minor* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)
>
> *Rastrococcus spinosus* (Robinson) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Pseudococcidae)
>
> [Fungi:]{.underline}
>
> *Phomopsis mangiferae* (Ahmad)

The proposed importation of mango fruit from Thailand, if approved,
would be regulated by an amendment to the existing fruits and vegetables
regulations \[7 CFR § 319.56\]. This document outlines the phytosanitary
measures that APHIS will require if the proposed importation of mango
from Thailand is approved and documents the evidence used by APHIS to
conclude that these measures will effectively prevent the introduction
of quarantine pests.

B. Proposed Risk Mitigation Measures for Mangoes

We propose that, if approved, mango fruit from Thailand may be imported
into the United States only under the following conditions:

> \(a\) Mangoes are grown in orchards registered with and monitored by
> NPPO of Thailand to ensure that fruits are produced free of disease
> and other quarantine pests
>
> \(b\) The fruit for export must be treated by irradiation in Thailand
> at a minimum absorbed dose of 400 Gy and monitored by APHIS in
> certified facilities
>
> \(c\) Each shipment must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate
> (PC) certifying that the fruit received the above irradiation
> treatment.
>
> \(d\) The fruit is inspected. The regulations in § 319.56-6 provide
> that all imported fruits and vegetables shall be inspected, and shall
> be subject to such disinfection at the port of first arrival as may be
> required by an inspector. The pre-export inspection that will be
> conducted by APHIS personnel as part of preclearance activities in
> Thailand will serve to satisfy the inspection requirement. Section
> 319.56-6 also provides that any shipment of fruits and vegetables may
> be refused entry if the shipment is so infested with plant pests that
> an inspector determines that it cannot be cleaned or treated.

C. Historical Performance of Importing Irradiated Mangoes

Current regulations 7CFR 305.31 and 7CFR.319-56.2(k) allow the use of
irradiation to treat fruit for importation into the United States. No
country has taken advantage of the technology to import mangoes or any
other fruits into the United States with this treatment. Regulations
7CFR318.13-4f allow interstate movement of fifteen different fruit,
including mango, from Hawaii using a minimum absorbed dose of 150 Gy to
400 Gy. There are four fruit flies and one seed weevil associated with
fruit from Hawaii: *Ceratitis capitata* (Mediterranean fruit fly),
*Bactrocera dorsalis* (oriental fruit fly), *B. cucurbitae* (melon fruit
fly), *B. latifrons* (Malasian fruit fly) and Sternochetus mangiferae
(mango seed weevil). The 300 Gy dose is considered adequate to mitigate
mango seed weevil while oriental fruit fly, Mediterranean fruit fly,
melon fruit fly and Malasian fruit fly, require a lesser dose (USDA
2006). Fruits and vegetables treated with irradiation in Hawaii and
moved to the mainland U.S. have had no live pests of quarantine
significance intercepted from irradiated fruits (Uyeda 2005).

D. Evidence for the Effective Removal of Pests of Concern from the
Pathway

The following paragraph summarizes key mitigation measures for mango
fruit from Thailand and provides a general discussion of their efficacy.
The evidence APHIS uses to determine that the measures described above
in Section B effectively remove pests of concern from the pathway are
also discussed. The FAO (2002) defines "pathway" as "Any means that
allows the entry or spread of a pest."

\(i\) Insect Pests

Twenty of the twenty one pests likely to follow the pathway are insect
pests, not one belongs to the order Lepidoptera. A minimum abosorbed
dose of 400 Gy is required by U.S. regulations 7CFR305.31 and has been
determined by APHIS to be adequate to neutralize or mitigate all insect
pests excluding adults and pupae in the order Lepidoptera. Therefore the
generic irradiation treatment is a valid treatment for all these insect
pests.

There is no record of importing irradiated mangoes from Thailand, but
records of interstate movement of mangoes from HI since 2000 after being
irradiated with 300 Gy minimum absorbed dose show no interceptions of
quarantine pests. (Uyeda 2005). Also, of the twelve shipments of mangoes
irradiated with a 150 Gy minimum absorbed dose that New Zealand has
imported to date from Australia since November 2004, no record of
interception of quarantine pests from the irradiated mangoes has been
reported by NZ (Edwards 2005).

As part of the US requirements (7CFR305.34) governing the use of
irradiation as a phytosanitary treatment, APHIS and the National Plant
Protection Organization (NPPO) of Thailand must jointly develop a
preclearance work plan. The work plan shall include details of
activities including inspection of articles that APHIS may perform
before or after the treatment. Inspection of the mango fruit for the
presence of pests not targeted by irradiation during preclearance
activities will further ensure that the pests of concern are removed
from the pathway.

\(ii\) Fungi:

The signs and symptoms of *Phomopsis mangiferae* on mangos are also
likely to be detected at harvest, and during packing and inspection.
However, latent infections may evade detection, and the use of
post-harvest storage conditions, which slow down symptom expression, may
lead to increased numbers of infected fruit not being detected. If
infected fruit is consumed and the seed is discarded as waste, then
infected fruit is not a pathway because dispersal assumes the infected
seed is subsequently used in mango production. Discarded fruit however
are likely to create a possible source of inoculum that could provide
the means for introduction, but spores must be dispersed from discarded
fruit into mango orchards at a time when susceptible tissue is available
(Johns*on et a*l., 1993; Johns*on et a*l., 1989; Kishun and Chand, 1989;
Pruvo*st et a*l., 1990; Pruvost and Luisetti, 1991). The likelihood that
infected mangoes will reach these habitats is very low because (1) the
host range is limited to mango (ARS, 2001; Johnson *et al*., 1993) and
(2) the portion of the total number of mango shipments expected to be
transported to mango producing areas in California, Florida, Hawaii or
Texas is expected to be small and the likelihood of fruit being
discarded in mango orchards at an appropriate time is likewise very low.
This is consistent with pest risk analyses of mangoes from Australia,
India and Pakistan. For these reasons, no measures are recommended for
this pathogen beyond inspection.

**V. Mangosteen:**

A. Introduction

The pest list completed by CPHST for mangosteen from Thailand identified
eleven potential quarantine pests that could follow the pathway on
*Garcinia mangostana* (mangosteen) fruit (USDA 2007, Table D4). All
eleven are insect pests and are as follows:

*Bactrocera carambola* (Drew and Hancock) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

*Bactrocera dorsalis* (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

*Bactrocera papayae* (Drew) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

> *Coccus viridis* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Coccidae)
>
> *Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Diaspididae)

*Cataenococcus hispidus* (Morrison) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

*Dysmicoccus neobrevipes* (Beardsley) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

*Paracoccus interceptus* Lit (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)

*Planococcus lilacinus* (Cockerell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

*Planococcus minor* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)

*Pseudococcus cryptus* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)

The proposed importation of mangosteen fruit from Thailand, if approved,
would be regulated by an amendment to the existing fruits and vegetables
regulations \[7 CFR § 319.56\]. This document outlines the phytosanitary
measures that APHIS will require if the proposed importation of
mangosteen from Thailand is approved and documents the evidence used by
APHIS to conclude that these measures will effectively prevent the
introduction of quarantine pests.

B. Proposed Risk Mitigation Measures for Mangosteen

We propose that, if approved, mangosteen fruit from Thailand may be
imported into the United States only under the following conditions:

(a) Mangosteen are grown in orchards registered with and monitored by
    the plant protection oraganization of Thailand to ensure that fruits
    are produced free of quarantine pests.

(b) The fruit for export must be treated by irradiation in Thailand at a
    minimum absorbed dose of 400 Gy and monitored by APHIS in certified
    facilities.

(c) Each shipment must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate
    (PC) certifying that the fruit received the above irradiation
    treatment.

(d) The fruit is inspected. The regulations in § 319.56-6 provide that
    all imported fruits and vegetables shall be inspected, and shall be
    subject to such disinfection at the port of first arrival as may be
    required by an inspector. The pre-export inspection that will be
    conducted by APHIS personnel as part of preclearance activities in
    Thailand will serve to satisfy the inspection requirement. Section
    319.56-6 also provides that any shipment of fruits and vegetables
    may be refused entry if the shipment is so infested with plant pests
    that an inspector determines that it cannot be cleaned or treated.

C. Historical Performance of Importing Irradiated Mangosteen

Current regulations 7CFR 305.31 and 7CFR.319-56.2(k) allow the use of
irradiation to treat fruit for importation into the United States. No
country has taken advantage of the technology to import mangosteen or
any other fruits into the United States with this treatment. Regulations
7CFR318.13-4f allow interstate movement of fifteen different fruit
(mangosteen not being one of them) from Hawaii using a minimum absorbed
dose of 150 Gy to 400 Gy. Among pests associated with many of these
fruits from Hawaii, four fruit flies, *Ceratitis capitata*
(Mediterranean fruit fly), *Bactrocera dorsalis* (oriental fruit fly),
*B. cucurbitae* (melon fruit fly), and *B. latifrons* (Malasian fruit
fly) are the primary pests of concern for which fruit is irradiated. The
150 Gy dose is considered adequate to mitigate risk from all these fruit
flies (USDA 2006). Fruits and vegetables treated with irradiation in
Hawaii and moved to the mainland U.S. have had no live pests of
quarantine significance intercepted from irradiated fruits (Uyeda 2005).

D. Evidence for the Effective Removal of Pests of Concern from the
Pathway

The following paragraph summarizes key mitigation measures for
mangosteen fruit from Thailand and provides a general discussion of
their efficacy. The evidence APHIS uses to determine that these measures
described above in Section B effectively remove pests of concern from
the pathway are also discussed. The FAO (2002) defines "pathway" as "Any
means that allows the entry or spread of a pest."

\(i\) Insect Pests

Eleven pests likely to follow the pathway are all insect pests, not one
of these belong to the order Lepidoptera. A minimum abosorbed dose of
400 Gy is required by U.S. regulations 7CFR305.31 and has been
determined by APHIS to be adequate to neutralize or mitigate all insect
pests excluding adults and pupae in the order Lepidoptera. Therefore,
the generic irradiation treatment is a valid treatment for all these
insect pests.

There is no record of importation or movement interstate of irradiated
mangosteen from Thailand or other areas, and hence there is no record of
interception of any quarantine pests from irradiated mangosteen. There
is no record of interception of any pests of quarantine significance
from any fruit or vegetables irradiated with 400 Gy dose, so it is safe
to assume that the dose is high enough for the insect pests of
mangosteen as well.

As part of the US requirements (7CFR305.34) governing the use of
irradiation as a phytosanitary treatment, APHIS and the National Plant
Protection Organization (NPPO) of Thailand must jointly develop a
preclearance work plan. The work plan shall include details of
activities including inspection of articles that APHIS may perform
before or after the treatment. Inspection of the mangosteen fruit for
the presence of pests not targeted by irradiation during preclearance
activities will further ensure that the pests of concern are removed
from the pathway.

**VI. Pineapple:**

A. Introduction

The pest list completed by CPHST for pineapple from Thailand identified
four potential quarantine pests that could follow the pathway on *Ananas
comosus* (pineapple) fruit (USDA 2007, Table F4). All four are insect
pests and are as follows:

*Coccus viridis* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Coccidae)

*Dysmicoccus neobrevipes* (Beardsley) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

*Planococcus minor* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)

*Frankliniella schultzei* (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

The proposed importation of pineapple fruit from Thailand, if approved,
would be regulated by an amendment to the existing fruits and vegetables
regulations \[7 CFR § 319.56\]. This document outlines the phytosanitary
measures that APHIS will require if the proposed importation of
pineapple from Thailand is approved and documents the evidence used by
APHIS to conclude that these measures will effectively prevent the
introduction of quarantine pests.

B. Proposed Risk Mitigation Measures for Pineapple

We propose that if approved pineapple fruit from Thailand may be
imported into the United States only under the following conditions:

(a) Pineapple are grown in orchards registered with and monitored by the
    NPPO of Thailand to ensure that fruits are produced free of
    quarantine pests,

(b) The fruit for export must be treated by irradiation in Thailand at a
    minimum absorbed dose of 400 Gy and monitored by APHIS in certified
    facilities,

(c) Each shipment must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate
    (PC) certifying that the fruit received the above irradiation
    treatment, and

(d) The fruit is inspected. The regulations in § 319.56-6 provide that
    all imported fruits and vegetables shall be inspected, and shall be
    subject to such disinfection at the port of first arrival as may be
    required by an inspector. The pre-export inspection that will be
    conducted by APHIS personnel as part of preclearance activities in
    Thailand will serve to satisfy the inspection requirement. Section
    319.56-6 also provides that any shipment of fruits and vegetables
    may be refused entry if the shipment is so infested with plant pests
    that an inspector determines that it cannot be cleaned or treated.

C. Historical Performance of Importing Irradiated Pineapple

Current regulations 7CFR 305.31 and 7CFR.319-56.2(k) allow the use of
irradiation to treat fruit for importation into the United States. No
country has taken advantage of the technology to import pineapple or any
other fruits into the United States with this treatment. Regulations
7CFR318.13-4f allow interstate movement of fifteen different fruit,
including pineapple, from Hawaii using a minimum absorbed dose of 150 Gy
to 400 Gy. (Pineapples of the smooth Cayenne variety are not hosts of
fruit flies and are moved interstate from Hawaii without treatment; the
irradiation treatment is approved for use on varieties of pineapples
other than smooth Cayenne.) There are four fruit flies associated with
pineapples other than smooth Cayenne from Hawaii: *Ceratitis capitata*
(Mediterranean fruit fly), *Bactrocera dorsalis* (oriental fruit fly),
*B. cucurbitae* (melon fruit fly), and *B. latifrons* (malasian fruit
fly). The 150 Gy dose is considered adequate to mitigate risk from all
these fruit flies (USDA 2006). Fruits and vegetables treated with
irradiation in Hawaii and moved to the mainland U.S. have had no live
pests of quarantine significance intercepted from irradiated fruits
(Uyeda 2005).

D. Evidence for the Effective Removal of Pests of Concern from the
Pathway

The following paragraph summarizes key mitigation measures for pineapple
fruit from Thailand and provides a general discussion of their efficacy.
The evidence APHIS uses to determine that these measures described above
in Section B effectively remove pests of concern from the pathway are
also discussed. The FAO (2002) defines "pathway" as "Any means that
allows the entry or spread of a pest."

\(i\) Insect Pests

Four pests likely to follow the pathway are all insect pests and not one
belongs to the order Lepidoptera. A minimum abosorbed dose of 400 Gy is
required by U.S. regulations 7CFR305.31 and has been determined by APHIS
to be adequate to neutralize or mitigate risks of all insect pests
excluding adults and pupae in the order Lepidoptera. Therefore, the
generic irradiation treatment is a valid treatment for all these insect
pests.

There has been no importation of irradiated pineapple from Thailand or
other countries, and hence there is no record of interception of any
quarantine pests from irradiated pineapples. Interstate movement of
irradiated pineapples from HI into the mainland U.S. has been allowed
since 2003. Fruits and vegetables treated with irradiation in Hawaii and
moved to the mainland U.S. have had no live pests of quarantine
significance intercepted from irradiated fruits (Uyeda 2005). Also,
there is no record of interception of any quarantine pests from fruits
or vegetables irradiated with 400 Gy dose, so it is safe to assume that
the dose is high enough for the insect pests associated with pineapple
from Thailand as well.

As part of the U.S. requirements (7CFR305.34) governing the use of
irradiation as a phytosanitary treatment, APHIS and the National Plant
Protection Organization (NPPO) of Thailand must jointly develop a
preclearance work plan. The work plan shall include details of
activities including inspection of articles that APHIS may perform
before or after the treatment. Inspection of the fruit for the presence
of pests not targeted by irradiation during preclearance activities will
further ensure that the pests of concern are removed from the pathway.

**VII. Rambutan:**

A. Introduction

The pest list completed by CPHST for rambutan from Thailand identified
ten potential quarantine pests that could follow the pathway on
*Nephelium lappaceum* (rambutan) fruit (USDA 2007, Table E4). All ten
are insect pests and are as follows:

*Bactrocera dorsalis* (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

*Bactrocera papayae* (Drew) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

> *Ceroplastes rubens* (Morrison) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Coccidae)

*Cataenococcus hispidus* (Morrison) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

*Dysmicoccus neobrevipes* (Beardsley) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

> *Maconellicoccus hirsutus* (Green) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
> Pseudococcidae)

*Paracoccus interceptus* Lit (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)

*Planococcus lilacinus* (Cockerell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera:
Pseudococcidae)

*Planococcus minor* (Maskell) (Hemiptera/Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)

*Conopomorpha cramerella* (Snellen) (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae)

The proposed importation of rambutan fruit from Thailand, if approved,
would be regulated by an amendment to the existing fruits and vegetables
regulations \[7 CFR § 319.56\]. This document outlines the phytosanitary
measures that APHIS will require if the proposed importation of rambutan
from Thailand is approved and documents the evidence used by APHIS to
conclude that these measures will effectively prevent the introduction
of quarantine pests.

B. Proposed Risk Mitigation Measures for Rambutan

We propose that, if approved, rambutan fruit from Thailand may be
imported into the United States only under the following conditions:

(a) Rambutan are grown in orchards registered with and monitored by the
    NPPO of Thailand to ensure that fruits are produced free of
    quarantine pests.

(b) The fruit for export must be treated by irradiation in Thailand at a
    minimum absorbed dose of 400 Gy and and monitored by APHIS in
    certified facilities.

(c) Each shipment must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate
    (PC) certifying that the fruit received the above irradiation
    treatment.

(d) The fruit is inspected. The regulations in § 319.56-6 provide that
    all imported fruits and vegetables shall be inspected, and shall be
    subject to such disinfection at the port of first arrival as may be
    required by an inspector. The pre-export inspection that will be
    conducted by APHIS personnel as part of preclearance activities in
    Thailand will serve to satisfy the inspection requirement. Section
    319.56-6 also provides that any shipment of fruits and vegetables
    may be refused entry if the shipment is so infested with plant pests
    that an inspector determines that it cannot be cleaned or treated.

C. Historical Performance of Importing Irradiated Rambutan

Current regulations 7CFR 305.31 and 7CFR.319-56.2(k) allow the use of
irradiation to treat fruit for importation into the United States. No
country has taken advantage of the technology to import rambutan or any
other fruits into the United States with this treatment. Regulations
7CFR318.13-4f allow interstate movement of fifteen different fruit,
including rambutan, from Hawaii using a minimum absorbed dose of 150 Gy
to 400 Gy. There are four fruit flies associated with the fruit from
Hawaii: *Ceratitis capitata* (Mediterranean fruit fly), *Bactrocera
dorsalis* (oriental fruit fly), *B. cucurbitae* (melon fruit fly), and
*B. latifrons* (malasian fruit fly). The 150 Gy dose is considered
adequate to mitigate risk from all these fruit flies (USDA 2006). Fruits
and vegetables treated with irradiation in Hawaii and moved to the
mainland U.S. have had no live pests of quarantine significance
intercepted from irradiated fruits (Uyeda 2005).

D. Evidence for the Effective Removal of Pests of Concern from the
Pathway

The following paragraph summarizes key mitigation measures for rambutan
fruit from Thailand and provides a general discussion of their efficacy.
The evidence APHIS uses to determine that these measures described above
in Section B effectively remove pests of concern from the pathway are
also discussed. The FAO (2002) defines "pathway" as "Any means that
allows the entry or spread of a pest."

\(i\) Insect Pests

Ten pests likely to follow the pathway are all insect pests out of which
only one belongs to the order Lepidoptera. A minimum abosorbed dose of
400 Gy is required by U.S. regulations 7CFR305.31 and has been
determined by APHIS to be adequate to neutralize or mitigate all insect
pests excluding adults and pupae in the order Lepidoptera. Of the ten
pests likely to follow pathway, one that belongs to the order
Lepidoptera is *Conopomorpha cramerella***.** However, the life stages
of concern associated with rambutan fruit for this Lepidopteron pest are
the eggs and larvae (USDA 2007). Therefore, the generic irradiation
treatment is a valid treatment for this and all other insect pests.

There is no record of importing irradiated rambutans from Thailand, but
records of interstate movement of irradiated rambutans from HI since
2000 show no interceptions of quarantine pests. (Uyeda 2005).

As part of the US requirements (7CFR305.34) governing the use of
irradiation as a phytosanitary treatment, APHIS and the National Plant
Protection Organization (NPPO) of Thailand must jointly develop a
preclearance work plan. The work plan shall include details of
activities including inspection of articles that APHIS may perform
before or after the treatment. Inspection of the fruit for the presence
of pests not targeted by irradiation during preclearance activities will
further ensure that the pests of concern are removed from the pathway.

**VIII. Conclusion**

The phytosanitary requirements described above include treatment in
Thailand of all fruit with irradiation using a minimum absorbed dose of
400 Gy and preclearance inspections for pests not targeted by the
irradiation treatment. The risk management document concludes that based
on the evaluation of effectiveness of these measures directed against
the pests of concern, APHIS finds that the safeguards of 7 CFR § 319.56
and the additional mitigations described here will result in the
effective removal of the pests of concern identified by the pest lists
for the importation of fresh litchi, longan, mango, mangosteen,
rambutan, and pineapple fruit from Thailand (USDA 2007).

**IX. References Cited:**

ARS. 2001. GRIN Online Database. USDA-ARS, National Genetic Resources
Program, Germplasm Resources Information Network. Washington, DC.
([http://ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/rare.pl]{.underline} \[Last
accessed July 2004\].)

CABI. 2003. Crop Protection Compendium 2003. CAB International,
Wallingford, UK.

Edwards, G. 2005. Personal Communication from G. Edwards of NZ
Department of Agriculture & Fishries to Karen Ackerman of US Department
of Agriculture, Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant
Protection & Quarantine, Riverdale, MD

FAO. 2002. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures:
Guidelines for Pest Risk Analysis. Publication No. 2. Rome: Secretariat
of the International Plant Protection Convention, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.

Johnson, G. I.; I. F. Muirhead; and L. M. Rappel. 1989. Mango
post-harvest disease control: A review of research in Australia,
Malaysia and Thailand. ASEAN Food Journal 4: 139-141.

Johnson, G., T. Cooke; A. J. Mead; G. I. Johnson; A. W. Cooke; and A. J.
Mead. 1993. Infection and quiescence of mango stem-end rot pathogens.
Acta Horticulturae: 329-336. \[Abstract\]

Kishun, R., and Chand, R. 1989. Mechanical transmission of *Xanthomonas
campestris* pv. *Mangiferae indica* through insects. Indian Journal of
Plant Pathology 7: 112-114.

PIN309. 2003. Port Information Network: quarantine status database. US
Department of Agriculture, Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service,
Plant Protection & Quarantine, Riverdale, MD.

Pruvost, O.; A. Couteau; and J. Luisetti. 1990. Development of bacterial
black spot of mangoes and epiphytic populations of the pathogen
(*Xanthomonas campestris* pv. *mangiferaeindicae*) under natural
condtions in Reunion Island. Fruits Paris 45:125-140. (Abstract0

Pruvost, O. and J. Luisetti. 1991. Effect of time of inoculation with
*Xanthomonas campestris* pv. *mangiferaeindicae* on mango fruits
susceptibility. Epiphytis survival of *X*. c. pv. *mangiferaeindicae* on
mango fruits in relation to disease development. Journal of
Phytopathology 133: 139-151.

USDA 2007. Pest lists for fresh *Litchi chinensis* (lychee or litchi),
*Dimocarpus longan* (longan), *Mangifera indica* (mango), *Garcinia
mangostana* L. (mangosteen), *Nephelium lappaceum* L. (rambutan), and
*Ananas comosus* (pineapple) fruit from Thailand, US Department of
Agriculture, Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection
& Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science & Technology, NC

USDA 2006. Treatment of fruits and vegetables. 71 (18): 4451-4464,
published January 27, 2006.

Uyeda E. 2005. Personal communication from E. Uyeda, Port Director, US
Department of Agriculture, Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service,
Plant Protection & Quarantine, Hilo, HI

Waite, G.K. 1999. New evidence further incrimates honey bees as vectors
of lychee erinose mite Aceria litchi (Acari: Eriophiidae). Experimental
and Applied Acarology 23(2): 145-147.

Waite, G.K. and J.S. Hwang. 2002. Pests of litchi and longan. In; Pena,
J.E., Sharp, J.L. and Wysoki, M. (eds). Tropical Fruit Pests and
Pollinators: Biology, Economic Importance, Natural Enemies and Control.
Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing, pp. 331-359.

[^1]: A pest is considered neutralized when it is killed, rendered
    sterile or its further development into becoming an adult is
    stopped.