NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR PHYTO SANITARY MEASURES  
 
 
 
 
NSPM : 35 
 
 
 
 
 
System approach for  pest risk management of fruit flies 
(tephritidae)  
2013  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(This standard is approved by (the NPPO and) the Quarantine Committee of Nepal, chaired by the 
secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture Development on 1st December 2013 and, is submitted by National 
Plant Quarantine Program to the National Notification Authority to be notified to the WTO member states)   
Table of Contents  
Abbreviations  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  3 
1. Introduction  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4 
1.1 Scope  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  4 
1.2 References  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 4 
1.3 Definitions  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 4 
1.4 Outline of requirements  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  5 
2. Background  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 5 
3. Requirements  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................  7 
3.1Decision to implement an FF SA  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 7 
3.2Development of an FF SA  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  8 
Pre-planting  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 8 
Growing period  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................  8 
Harvest  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  9 
Post-harvest and handling  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  9 
Transportation and distribution  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 9 
Measures applied to several or all stages  ................................ ................................ ................  9 
4. Documentation and record -keeping  ................................ ................................ ..........................  9 
5. Verification  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10 
6. Tolerance Level  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  11 
7. Non-conformity and non -compliance  ................................ ................................ ......................  11 
Annex 1: FAO/I AEA guidelines for implementing systems approaches for pest risk 
management  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......  12 
Annex 2: Guidelines for the establishment, maintenance and verification of Fruit fly PFA  .... 14 
 
 Abbreviations  
APPPC    Asia Pacific Plant Protection Commission  
CODEX  Codex Alimentarius  
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization  
FF Fruit Fly  
GMO   Genetically Modified Organism  
IAEA  International Atomic Energy Commission  
IP Import Permit  
IPPC   International Plant Protection Convention  
ISPM  International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures  
NPPO   National Plant Protection Organization  
NPQP  National Plant Quarantine Programme  
PFA    Pest free area  
PRA     Pest Risk Analysis  
SA System Approach  
SIT    Sterile Insect Technique  
WTO   World trade organization  1. Introduction  
1.1 Scope  
This standard provides guidelines for the development , implementation and verification of 
integrated measures in a systems approach as an option for pest risk management of fruit 
flies (Tephritidae) of  economic importance  under Plant Protection Acts 2007 and the Plant 
Protection Regulation 2010 .  NSPM preparation based on  guidelines and recommendations 
developed within the framework of the IPPC. This standa rd also adopted the principles, 
recommendations and format of ISPM to achieve international harmonization of 
phytosanitary measures with the aim to facilitate trade.   
1.2 References  
IAEA2011. FAO/ IAEA Guidelines for implementing  system approach for pest risk 
management of Fruit flies (working Material). FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in 
FAO, Vienna, Austria, June 7 -11, 2010, Reproduce by the IAEA Vienna, Austria  
IPPC . International Plant Protection Convention . Rome, IPPC, FAO.  
ISPM 2.  2007. Fram ework for pest risk analysis . Rome, IPPC, FAO.  
ISPM 5 . Glossary of phytosanitary terms . Rome, IPPC, FAO.  
ISPM 11 . 2004. Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental 
risks and  living modified organisms . Rome, IPPC, FAO.  
ISPM 13.   2001. Guidelines for the notification  of non -compliance and emergency action.  
Rome, IPPC, FAO.  
ISPM 14 .  2002.  The use of integrated measures  in a systems approach for pest risk  
management . Rome, IPPC, FAO.  
ISPM 35 .  2012.  System approach for p est risk management of fruit flies (Tephritidae) . 
Rome, IPPC, FAO.  
ISPM 24.  2005 .  Guidelines for the determination and recognition of equivalence  of 
phytosanitary measures.  Rome, IPPC, FAO.  
ISPM 26 . 2006. Establishment of pest free areas for fruit flies  (Tephritidae) . Rome, IPPC, 
FAO.  
Plant Protection Act 2007. National Plant Quarantine Program,  Plant protection Directorate 
Ministry of  Agriculture, Government of Nepal  
RSPM 17.  Guidelines for the  establishment, maintenance  and verification  of Fruit  fly pest 
free area in North America NAPPO  
RSPM 4.  Guidelines for the confirmation of non -host status of fruit and vegetables to 
Tephritid Fruit fly    
The Plant Protection Regulation 2010.  National Plant Quarantine Program,  Plant 
protection Directorate Ministr y of Agriculture, Government of Nepal  
 
1.3 Definitions  
Definitions of phytosanitary terms used in the national standard can be found in ISPM 5 
(Glossary of phytosanitary terms ) Plant Protection Acts 2007 and the Plant Protection 
regulation 2010.  
 Systems a pproach(es): The integration of different risk management measures, at least two 
of which act independently, and which cumulatively achieve the appropriate level of 
protection against regulated pests  (ISPM 5)  
 
1.4 Outline of requirements  
For the developme nt of a systems  approach for fruit  flies (FF SA), the relationship between 
host, target fruit  fly species and  the area of production of the host fruits and vegetables 
(Fruits and Vegetables here after referred to as fruits) should  be considered. The option s for 
pest risk management measures should be determined by means of pest risk analysis 
(PRA).  
 
The NPPO Nepal shall establish a mechanism to develop workable measures. While 
developing a systems approach NPPO of Nepal requires the integration of differen t 
measures, at least  two of which act independent measures, which  may  be  applied  
throughout various  stages  of  the process, specifically  during the growing period and 
harvest; post -harvest and  transportation; and entry and distribution within the i mporting 
country. An FF SA may be developed in an area of low pest prevalence or temporary or 
localized pest absence  or geographic or biological barriers  of the target fruit fly species in 
combination with other measures (such as selection of less suscepti ble hosts, crop 
management  practices or post -harvest handling) to reduce pest risk to meet the 
phytosanitar y requirements of the importing country.  
 
For development, implementation and verification of an FF SA, operational procedures are 
necessary.  Confo rmity  with these  procedures  should  be  ensured  and  verified  by  the  
NPPO of  the exporting country.  Procedures should be monitored during the implementation 
and corrective actions should be taken in case of non -conformity.  
 
The development, implem entation and verification of an FF SA should be adequately 
documented and the documentation reviewed and updated when necessary by the NPPO of 
the exporting country.  
 
2. Background  
Under the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) of 
the World Trade Organization  (WTO), essentially all trading countries have agreed to allow 
free trade to continue as far as possible, whilst maintaining individual country sovereignty in 
efforts to prevent  the entry and spread of pests new to that  area, such as fruit flies. Many 
species of fruit flies of the family Tephritidae are among the most injurious pests of fruits and vegetables in the world. Presence of species of this family not only has a negative direct 
effect on the economy of many coun tries, but also has implication on international trade.  
Therefore,  to identify and manage the target fruit fly species risk, a PRA should be 
conducted  by  the  NPPO of  the  importing country  and phytosanitary  measures may be 
applied ( NSPM : Framework f or PRA , NSPM : PRA for quarantine pest including analysis of 
environmental risk and LMOs ). The Systems Approach (SA) facilitates the design of risk 
management that is proportional to the estimated pest risk. It provides a flexible method for 
achieving an im porting country’s appropriate level of protection (ALOP) against the pest risk, 
as estimated in the PRA.  
 
Systems approaches have been developed as pest risk management measures in situations 
where a single measure is not available or practicable,  or in ca ses where a systems 
approach is more cost -effective than the single measure available. The decision to 
implement a specific FF SA depends on the particular relationship between the host fruit, the 
target fruit fly species and the specified fruit production  area.  A systems approach requires 
a combination of at least two measures that are independent of each other, and  may  
include any  number of  measures that are dependent on each other ( NSPM : The use of 
integrated measures in a system approach for pest r isk management ). Treatments used in 
an FF SA are those not considered sufficiently efficacious to be applied as a single measure. 
The measures may be applied in different places at different times and may therefore involve 
a number of organizations and ind ividuals.  
 
Often, countries have used phytosanitary measures such as treatments or pest free areas 
for fruit flies (FF -PFAs) ( NSPM : Establishment of PFA for FF ) to support import or movement 
of host fruit. In other cases, prohibition has been applied. An FF SA may be an alternative to 
facilitate the export and movement of fruit fly hosts into endangered areas. NPPOs may 
recognize FF SAs as being equivalent to single measures.  
 
The exporting country may seek formal approval of equivalence of these measures  with the 
importing country. In cases where an effective FF SA has been implemented, components of 
those systems may be used by other importing and exporting countries to facilitate the 
movement of fruit from areas with similar conditions.  
 
An FF SA can b e applied in an area of fruit production as small as a production site or as 
large as a  country.  
 3. Requirements  
3.1Decision to implement an FF SA  
The importing country may establish  and communicate its technically justified phytosanitary 
import requirement s. Options that the importing country may  select as the basis for 
phytosanitary  import requirements ( NSPM : The use of integrated measures in a system 
approach for pest risk management )).  
 
The development of an FF SA is a combination of pest risk managemen t measures 
integrated into an FF SA is one  of the o ther responsibility of the NPPO of the exporting 
country. An FF SA may be developed and implemented in cases where:  
(1) The importing country, in its phytosanitary import requirements, specifies a systems  
approach  to be used in the exporting country.  
(2) The importing country  does not explicitly  require  a  systems approach, but the NPPO  
of the exporting country  deems  a systems approach to be  a suitable  and effective 
approach for achieving the impo rting country’s phytosanitary  import  requirements. 
The exporting country may need to negotiate formal approval of the equivalence of 
measures with the importing country (ISPM : Guidelines for the determination and 
recognition of equivalence of phytosanita ry measures ).  
 
An FF SA should have the appropriate combination  of measures to  achieve the appropriate  
level of protection. They should be scientifically sound and be selected to meet the 
phytosanitary import requirements.  Aspects of operational feasibil ity include cost -
effectiveness of the measures to be applied while seeking  to impose the least  restrictive 
measures necessary to  manage target  fruit fly species risks  for detail see Annex 1 .  
 
The fruit production area proposed for implementing an FF SA sh ould be defined and the 
participating producers should be approved by the NPPO of the exporting country.  
 
It advisable that NPPOs  involve other stakeholders in the development of an FF SA  
(NSPM : Frame work for PRA ).  
 
Basic information required for the d evelopment of an FF SA includes the following:  
 The host should be identified to the species level. In cases, where risk varies with the 
variety (e.g. because of varying tolerance to infestation), hosts should be identified to 
variety level.  
 The stage of m aturity of the fruit being examined is relevant (e.g. physiologically mature bananas are recognized as not being suitable hosts for fruit flies)  
 Data on the target fruit fly species associated with the host should be available (such as 
scientific name, pes t incidence and its fluctuation, and host preference).  
 The fruit production area defined for implementing an FF SA should be described and 
adequately documented with particular attention to host distribution in commercial areas 
as well as non -commercial a reas, if appropriate.  
In practice, FF SAs may be applied to one or more hosts or target fruit fly species in the 
same fruit  production area.  
 
3.2Development of an FF SA  
Measures may be applied at various stages from production of fruit within the exportin g 
country to distribution within the importing country. The NPPO of the importing country may 
also implement one or more measures on arrival of the consignment. Measures applied at the 
different stages to prevent fruit fly infestation may include:  
 
Pre-planting  
 selecting planting sites with low pest incidence of target fruit fly species (e.g. areas of low 
pest prevalence, areas unsuitable because of geographic location, altitude, climate)  
 selection of less susceptible fruit species or varieties  
 sanitatio n 
 managing hosts other than the crop  
 intercropping with non -fruit fly host plants  
 growing host fruit during specific periods when the pest incidence of target fruit fly 
species is low or temporally absent.  
 
Growing period   
 flowering control and timing fru it production  
 chemical control such as insecticide bait treatments, bait stations, male annihilation 
technique, and biological control such as natural enemies  
 physical protection mechanisms (e.g. bagging fruit, fruit fly protected structures)  
 sterile inse ct technique  
 campaigning mass trapping  
 management  of non -commercial  hosts within the  production area (e.g. elimination or 
replacement of other host plants by non -host plants where appropriate)  
 monitoring and survey of the target fruit fly species e.g . using traps or fruit sampling   sanitation (i.e. collection, removal and appropriate disposal of fallen fruit from the orchard 
or removal of mature fruit from the tree)  
 fruit stripping.  
  
Harvest  
 harvest at a specific stage of fruit development or time o f the year  
 safeguarding activities to prevent infestation at harvest  
 surveillance including fruit cutting   
 sanitation (e.g. safe removal and disposal of fallen fruit).  
 
Post -harvest and handling  
 safeguarding activities to prevent infestation, for example  chilling fruit, refrigerated 
transport,  processing in screen -protected packing rooms, warehouses and transit 
conveyances, using cold storage, wrapping of fruit  
 monitoring for target fruit fly species absence by trapping in and around packing houses  
 sanitation (e.g. removal of fruit with signs of infestation (culling) in packing houses)  
 sampling, inspection (e.g. by fruit cutting) or testing  
 treatments that are not considered sufficiently efficacious as a single measure  
 packing requirements (e.g. using  insect -proof packages)  
 ensuring traceability of lots.  
 
Transportation and distribution  
 safeguarding activities to prevent target fruit fly species infestation  
 treatments that are not considered sufficiently efficacious as a single measure (prior to, 
during or after transport)  
 distribution limited geographically or seasonally to areas where or periods when target 
fruit fly species cannot establish or where suitable hosts are not present.  
 
Measures applied to several or all stages  
 Community awareness pro grammes to generate support from the public  
 Movement  control of  host fruit and other pathways into the area ( e.g. requirements for 
production sites or islands).   
 
4. Documentation and record -keeping  
The development, implementation and verification of an FF S A should be properly documented by the NPPO of the exporting country. The roles and responsibilities of the 
NPPOs of the exporting and importing countries should be specified and documented. The 
documentation and records should be reviewed and updated regu larly, maintained for at 
least 24 months and made available to the NPPO of the importing country upon request.  
Documentation may include:  
 phytosanitary import requirements and, if available, a report of the pest risk analysis  
 identifying and describing the measures for reducing risk  
 description of the requirements for an FF SA’s operational procedures  
 description of the area intended for an FF SA  
 description of host fruit to be exported and target fruit fly species  
 details of the organizations invo lved and their roles and resp onsibilities and any  
linkages, including for example:  
 registration of organizations involved or stakeholders  
 agreement to cooperate in surveillance and control procedures  
 conformity with FF SA requirements (origin of fruit, mo vement from place of 
production, selection and packing of fruit, transportation and safeguarding of the fruit)  
 agreement to take appropriate corrective actions  
 keeping records and making them available  
 pest surveillance and control programme  
 survey resu lts  
 training programme for FF SA participants  
 traceability procedures  
 technical basis for specific procedures  
 survey, detection and diagnostic methodology  
 description of corrective actions and records of follow -up  
 reviews of the implementation of an FF SA  
 contingency plans.  
 
5. Verification  
The measures in an FF SA should be implemented in accordance with the standard  
procedures and should be monitored by the NPPO of the exporting country to ensure the 
system achieves its objectives.  
 
The NPPO of the e xporting country has the responsibility to monitor the implementation and 
the effectiveness of all stages of an FF SA. In cases where the operational procedures of an 
FF SA were properly implemented, but one or more of the components did not provide 
suffic ient pest risk management  to give the required effectiveness  of  all stages, a revision 
of  an FF SA should be conducted to ensure that phytosanitary import requirements are met. This revision may not necessarily involve the suspension of trade. Other co mponents of an 
FF SA may not need to be verified again. The frequency of verification should be influenced 
by the design of the FF SA.  
 
The NPPO of the importing country may audit an FF SA in agreement with the NPPO of the 
exporting country.  
  
6. Tolerance Level  
In many cases, the basis for developing an FF SA may be that the target fruit fly species 
incidence is kept at or below a tolerance level (in connection with fruit flies, the term 
“specified pest population  level” has sometimes been used instead of “ tolerance level”) 
specified by the NPPO of the importing  country in  the defined  area, for example an area  of 
low pest prevalence (ALPP). This may be as  a result of a naturally low target fruit fly species 
incidence or as a result of the implementation of c ontrol measures.  
 
Evidence to support that the target fruit fly species incidence is kept at or below the specified  
tolerance  level may be required  and, if so, should be obtained  as a result of trapping and  
fruit sampling . Surveillance of target fruit fly  species incidence may be conducted not only 
during the growing period  of the host fruit but also during non -growing periods.  
 
7. Non-conformity and non-compliance  
Non-conformity involves incorrect implementation or failure of an FF SA. In such cases, the 
NPPO of the exporting country may suspend the trade from the non -conforming component 
of the FF SA until corrective actions have been taken to address the non -conformity. Non -
conformity may occur in one or more stages of an FF SA. It is important to identify at which 
stage the non -conformity has occurred.  
 
The  NPPO of  the  exporting  country  should notify  the  NPPO of  the  importing country  of 
any  non -conformity that may have affected a shipment or phytosanitary certification.  
 
The  NPPO of  the  impo rting  country  should notify  the  NPPO of  the  exporting country  of 
any  non -compliances (see ISPM 13:2001).  Annex 1: FAO/IAEA guidelines for implementing systems approaches for 
pest risk management  
 
Working material  
FAO/IAEA Guidelines for Implement ing Systems  
Approaches for Pest Risk Management of Fruit Flies  
Report and recommendations of the consultants group meeting organized by the Joint  
FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture, Vienna, Austria,  
June 7 -11 2010  
Reproduced by  the IAEA  
Vienna, Austria 2011  
___________________________________________________  
Note 
The material in this document has been supplied by the authors and has not been edited by  
the IAEA. The views expressed remain the responsibility of the authors and do not 
necessarily reflect those of the government(s) or the designating Member State(s). In  
particular, neither the IAEA nor any other organization or body sponsoring this meeting  can 
be held responsible for any material reproduced in this document.  
http://www -naweb.iaea.org/nafa/ipc/public/ipc -systems -approach -2011.pdf  
1. Parts of a system  approach  
By defining types of phytosanitary measures associated with SA with useful t erms , we can 
better understand, develop, and modify SA. This will also allow  us to better understand the 
requirements regarding independent and  dependent measures within the SA.  
1.1 Independent measures  
We can define the large comprehensive phytosanitary m easures as major  components. 
These can be poor host status, areas of low pest prevalence,  pest exclusion structure, and 
less than probit -9 post -harvest commodity  treatment among others . These measures, by 
themselves, lower the risk of the  pest and are thus  independent measures for risk 
management. To be  classed as a SA there must be two or more independent 
measures/major  components working together in the pest risk  management plan.  
1.2 Dependent measures  
Several measures, that by themselves would not signif icantly lower the risk,  may be used in 
a combination to create an independent measure/major  component. For instance, the pest 
exclusion structure (which is an independent  measure) is made up of several dependent measures/elements,  like self-closing doors, screening, double doors, etc. Individually, these 
can be  classed as dependent measures or elements. Other dependent measures may be: 
producer registration, training, trapping, field controls, etc. and many other similar elements 
that help support the indep endent measure/major component for risk management.  
Other dependent measures/elements associated with SA are being employed  as safeguards 
(safeguard measures). They can be actions required either in  the exporting country such as 
containment of the shipment  to protect from reinfestation and to maintain the integrity of the 
shipment or in the importing  country to protect the importing country from an introduction of 
the pest when  further mitigation is taking place. Safeguard measures may also be required 
in a shipment transiting third countries.  
At least one of the dependent measures/elements is an action that verifies the  effectiveness 
and or compliance of the independent measure/major  component for risk management. 
These related elements include trapping by  the NPPO (dependent) in an area of low pest 
prevalence (independent ),regular inspections by the NPPO (dependent) of a pest exclusion 
structures  (independent), and monitoring of performance by the NPPO (dependent) of a  less 
than probit -9 post -harvest treatm ent (independent).  
Certain specific dependent measures/elements used by the grower to support  the 
independent measure/major component for risk management may not be  required by the 
importing NPPO, but are actions commonly used to ensure  compliance with a r equired 
component. An example of this is when a low level  of pest population is required in a SA; the 
specific field controls used by the  grower may be optional. This would be an outcome based 
requirement, as  opposed to a prescriptive based requirement.  
The dependent and independent measures that are integrated into a specific  SA are agreed 
by the importing and exporting countries, or regions. These  measures should be not only 
efficacious, but also technically and  economically feasible.  
Parts of a systems a pproach - an example  
Independent measure or major component  
Area of low pest prevalence  
Dependent measures or elements  
o  Quarantine controls     o  Trapping ( verification element)  
o  SIT          o  Sanitation          o  More, More, More  
  
Safeguard Me asures  
Transport in pest proof sealed containers and more 
   
Annex  2: Guidelines for the establishment, mainte nance and verification 
of Fruit fly PFA  
 
The following is a list of elements that should be considered in order to determine if a PFA 
meets the conditions of this standard:  
 
1. Geographic description of the proposed PFA  
a. maps  
b. places of production  
c. natural barriers  
d. buffer zone  
e. size  
f. location of regulatory control check points, as appropriate  
 
2. Survey protocols for establishment and  maintenance of PFA  
a. trap type  
b. bait or lure type  
c. target pest  
d. density of traps  
e. servicing intervals  
f. reporting of survey results  
 
3. Quality control protocols for surveillance  
a. verification of lure efficacy  
b. placement and recovery of mark ed target flies  
c. regular reviews of survey documentation  
d. audits of trap placement and servicing  
e. confirmation of identifier competency  
 
4. Movement controls  
a. sampling records  
b. identification of intercepted specimens  
c. verification of documents  
d. confirmation that required treatments occurred  
e. documentation of any other phytosanitary procedures  
 
5. Corrective action plan  
a. trigger for plan implementation  
b. delimiting survey  
c. mitigation measures