United States Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

Risk Management Document

Importation of Fresh Pepper Fruit – Capsicum annuum L., 

Capsicum baccatum L., Capsicum chinense Jacq., Capsicum 

frutescens L., and Capsicum pubescens Ruiz & Pav. – from 

Peru into the Continental United States and Territories

July 10, 2012

Plant Health Programs (PHP)

Regulations, Permits and Manuals (RPM)

Contact Person: Meredith Jones
Introduction

This risk management document was prepared by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service (APHIS) to provide risk management strategies for the importation of peppers from Peru

following the development of a commodity-based, pathway-initiated risk analysis (PRA) that 

was conducted by APHIS (USDA, 2012). 

APHIS prepared a PRA to examine plant pest risks associated with the importation of fresh 

pepper (Capsicum spp., specifically the domesticated species Capsicum annuum L., C. baccatum

L., C. chinense Jacq., C. frutescens L., and C. pubescens Ruiz & Pav.) fruit without leaves or

stems in response to a request by the government of Peru (Barrenechea, 2009; USDA, 2012). 

The PRA considered the risk associated with the importation of several species of Capsicum (C. 

annuum, C. baccatum, C. chinense, C. frutescens, and C. pubescens) because of taxonomic 

uncertainty regarding the species status (Walsh & Hoot, 2001) and because wild populations of 

C. annuum merge with populations of C. frutescens and C. chinense (Eshbaugh, 1993). There is 

a wide overlap of common name usage among all domesticated Capsicum species (Bosland, 

1996) so two other cultivated species (C. baccatum and C. pubescens) were also included in the 

PRA (USDA, 2012). The PRA was prepared based on pest interception data, scientific literature, 

and information provided by the Government of Peru.

The PRA found four quarantine pests that may follow the pathway of fresh peppers fruit without 

leaves or stems from Peru into the United States (USDA, 2012). The pest list includes three 

insects and one fungus.

Arthropods

Anastrepha fraterculus (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Neoleucinodes elegantalis (Guenée) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae)

Fungi

Puccinia pampeana Speg. (Urediniomycetes: Uredinales)

The PRA rated three pests as High pest risk potential (the insects Anastrepha fraterculus and

Ceratitis capitata, and the fungus Puccinia pampeana). The PRA rated the Lepidoptera 

Neoleucinodes elegantalis with Medium pest risk potential. 

According to USDA guidelines for pathway initiated pest risk assessments (USDA, 2000), specific 

phytosanitary measures beyond port of entry inspection are strongly recommended for pests with 

High pest risk potentials, and phytosanitary measures may be necessary for pests with Medium 

pest risk potential. 

Risk Mitigation Measures

Fresh pepper (Capsicum spp.) fruits without leaves or stems may be imported into the 

continental United States and territories from Peru only under the following conditions:
(1) The peppers must be grown in approved production sites registered with the National Plant 

Protection Organization (NPPO) of Peru. Initial approval of the production sites will be 

completed jointly by the Peruvian NPPO and APHIS. The Peruvian NPPO will visit and inspect 

the production sites monthly, starting 2 months before harvest and continuing through until the 

end of the shipping season. APHIS may monitor the production sites at any time during this 

period. Peppers may be imported in commercial consignments only. All program records must 

be maintained by the NPPO for at least one year and made available for APHIS review if 

required. 

(2) Pepper production sites must consist of pest-exclusionary greenhouses, which must have 

double self-closing doors and have all other openings and vents covered with 1.6 mm (or less) 

screening.

(3) Registered sites must contain traps for the detection of Ceratitis capitata (Medfly) and 

Anastrepha fraterculus both within and around the production site.

(a) Traps with approved protein bait must be placed inside the greenhouses at a density of 

four traps per hectare, with a minimum of two traps per greenhouse. Traps must be 

serviced on a weekly basis.

(b) If a single Medfly or Anastrepha fraterculus is detected inside a registered production 

site or in a consignment, the registered production site will lose its ability to export 

peppers to the United States until APHIS and the Peruvian NPPO mutually determine 

that risk mitigation is achieved.

(c) Medfly traps with an approved lure must be placed inside a buffer area 500 meters 

wide around the registered production site, at a density of 1 trap per 10 hectares and a 

minimum of 10 traps. These traps must be checked at least every 7 days. At least one of 

these traps must be near the greenhouse. Traps must be set for at least 2 months before 

export and trapping must continue to the end of the harvest.

(d) Capture of 0.7 or more Medflies per trap per week will delay or suspend the harvest, 

depending on whether harvest has begun, for consignments of peppers from that 

production site until APHIS and the Peruvian NPPO can agree that the pest risk has been 

mitigated.

(4) The greenhouse must be inspected prior to harvest for Neoleucinodes elegantalis and the 

fungus Puccinia pampeana. If any of these pests or other quarantine pests is found to be 

generally infesting or infecting the greenhouse, export from that production site will be halted 

until the Peruvian NPPO determines that the pest risk has been mitigated.

(5) The Peruvian NPPO must maintain records of trap placement, checking of traps, and any fruit 

fly captures. The Peruvian NPPO must maintain an APHIS-approved quality control program to 

monitor or audit the trapping program. The trapping records must be maintained for at last one 

year and made available, if required, for APHIS' review.
(6) The peppers must be packed within 24 hours of harvest in a pest-exclusionary packinghouse. 

The peppers must be safeguarded by an insect-proof mesh screen or plastic tarpaulin while in 

transit to the packinghouse and while awaiting packing. Peppers must be packed in sealed 

containers or insect-proof cartons or covered with insect-proof mesh or plastic tarpaulin for 

transit to the United States. These safeguards must remain intact until arrival in the United 

States or the consignment will be denied entry into the United States.

(7) During the time the packinghouse is in use for exporting peppers to the United States, the 

packinghouse may accept peppers only from registered approved production sites.

(8) The Peruvian NPPO is responsible for export certification, inspection, and issuance of 

phytosanitary certificates. Each consignment of peppers must be accompanied by a 

phytosanitary certificate issued by the NPPO of Peru bearing the following additional 

declaration: “Peppers in this consignment were grown in a pest free place of production for 

Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata, and has been inspected and found free of 

quarantine pests.” The shipping box must be labeled with the identity of the production site.

Efficacy of Risk Mitigation Measures

Establishment of pest-free places of production obviates the need for post-harvest commodity

treatments to achieve phytosanitary security (IPPC 1996; 1999). Pest free places of production

have been used successfully to prevent infestation by Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly) and 

Anastrepha fraterculus for peppers of the species Capsicum annuum, Capsicum baccatum, 

Capsicum chinense, and Capsicum frutescens in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, 

and Nicaragua since 2005. No pests of quarantine significance have been intercepted by APHIS

on peppers imported from those countries using this systems approach (AQAS, 2011). 

Outbreaks of Lepidoptera pests in pest exclusionary structures can be readily detected, and are 

rare under good agricultural practices. Lepidoptera larvae (such as Neoleucinodes elegantalis)

leave visible signs when boring into the pepper fruit which makes detection upon inspection 

likely (Eiras & Blackmer, 2003; EPPO, 2011). 

Puccinia pampeana produces conspicuous symptoms and signs (Agrios, 2004; Hernández &

Hennen, 2003; Lindquist, 1982) that are easily recognizable on inspections in Peru as well as at 

U.S. ports of entry inspections. If the sites are found to be infected by quarantine diseases, the 

Peruvian NPPO may allow exports from the production site only after the determination that the 

risk mitigation has been achieved.

Peru peppers produced under this systems approach will also be subject to packing house 

inspection and inspection by the Department of Homeland Security Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) at the U.S. ports of entry. Infested or infected fruit will be rejected, and trace 

back will be accomplished by APHIS and the NPPO of Peru to identify and correct problems 

including removal of the packinghouse or area of production from the export program. A 

systems approach can provide an alternative to a single measure to meet the appropriate level of 
phytosanitary protection, or can be developed to provide phytosanitary protection in situations in 

which no single measure is available (IPPC, 2002). Fresh peppers from Costa Rica, El Salvador, 

Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua have been produced and exported to the United States 

under a systems approach for fruit flies for over four years with no interceptions of quarantine

pests (AQAS, 2011).

Pest-exclusionary greenhouses remove pests from production sites and culling removes damaged 

and infested/infected fruit at the packing house. As part of a systems approach these measures 

are effective at lowering pest populations. No fruit flies have been intercepted on produce 

coming from pest exclusionary structures in any of the programs for peppers or tomatoes.

Summary

There are several risk management measures available for the high and medium risk pests 

identified above that will permit the importation of pepper from Peru while satisfying the 

appropriate level of phytosanitary protection for the United States. A systems approach utilizing 

pest-exclusion greenhouse as described above, employing a combination of measures acting 

independently, also mitigates risk and provides an acceptable level of phytosanitary protection.

Pest-free places of production as well as packinghouse and port of entry inspections provide the 

level of phytosanitary security required by the United States.

Authors

Walter Gould, Senior Risk Manager

APHIS-PPQ

José R. Hernández, Senior Risk Manager

APHIS-PPQ
References

Agrios, G. N. 2004. Plant Pathology. Fifth Edition. Department of Plant Pathology University of 

Florida, Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego. 922 pp.

AQAS. 2011. Agricultural Quarantine Activity System Pest Interception Database. USDAAPHIS-PPQ. Last accessed July 2011.

Barrenechea, J. 2009. USDA Letter 04-11-2009. Pages 2 in. Servicio Nacional de Sanidad 

Agraria (SENASA). Dirección General de Sanidad Vegetal, Lima, Peru.

Bosland, P. W. 1996. Capsicums: Innovative uses of an ancient crop. Pages 479-487 in J. Janick, 

(ed.). Progress in new crops. ASHS Press, Arlington, VA. U.S.A.

Eiras, A.E. and J.L. Blackmer. 2003. Eclosion time and larval behavior of the tomato fruit 

borer, Neoleucinodes elegantalis (Guenée) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Scientia Agricola

60(1): 195-197.

EPPO. 2011. Spodoptera littoralis and Spodoptera litura. Data sheets on quarantine pests. 

European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. 

http://www.eppo.org/QUARANTINE/insects/Spodoptera_litura/PRODLI_ds.pdf 

accessed July 2011.

Eshbaugh, W. H. 1993. Peppers: History and exploitation of a serendipitous new crop discovery. 

Pages 132-139 in J. Janick and J. E. Simon, (eds.). New Crops. Wiley, New York, 

U.S.A.

Hernández, J.R. and Hennen J.F. 2003. Rust fungi causing galls, witch’s brooms, and other 

abnormal plant growths in Northwestern Argentina. Mycologia 95:728-755.

IPPC. 1996. Requirements for the establishment of pest free areas. International Standards for 

Phytosanitary Measures No. 4. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection 

Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 1999. Requirements for the establishment of pest free places of production and pest free 

production sites. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 10. Rome: 

Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and 

Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2002. The use of integrated measures in a systems approach for pest risk management. 

International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 14. Rome: Secretariat of the 

International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture 

Organization.
Lindquist J.C. 1982. Royas de la República Argentina y zonas limítrofes. Instituto Nacional de 

Tecnología Agropecuaria. Buenos Aires. 574 pp.

Natwick, E.T. and J.T. Trumble. 2009. UC IPM Pest Management Guidelines: Peppers

UC ANR Publication 3460 Insects and Mites. 

http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r604300711.html accessed July 2011.

USDA. 2000. Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02. USDA, 

APHIS, PPQ. 31pp.

USDA. 2012. Importation of Fresh Pepper Fruit – Capsicum annuum L., Capsicum baccatum L., 

Capsicum chinense Jacq., Capsicum frutescens L., and Capsicum pubescens Ruiz & Pav. 

– from Peru into the Continental United States and Territories. A Pathway-Initiated Risk 

Analysis. June 26, 2012. Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory, Center for 

Plant Health Science and Technology, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 85 pp.

Walsh, B. M., and S. B. Hoot. 2001. Phylogenetic relationships of Capsicum (Solanaceae) using 

DNA sequences from two noncoding regions: the chloroplast atpB-rbcL spacer region 

and nuclear waxy introns. International Journal of Plant Sciences 162:1409-1418.