Importation of Hass 

Avocados from Peru 

into the Continental 

United States 

Environmental Assessment

August 2009

United States

Department of 

Agriculture

Marketing and 

Regulatory 

Programs

Animal and 

Plant Health 

Inspection 

Service
Importation of Hass Avocados 

from Peru into the Continental 

United States

Environmental Assessment

August 2009

Agency Contact:

Charisse Cleare

Regulatory Coordination and Compliance

Plant Protection and Quarantine

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

U.S. Department of Agriculture

4700 River Road, Unit 133 

Riverdale, MD 20737

____________________________________________________________

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its 

programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, 

age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not 

all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, 

audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’S TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 

(voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 

Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 

20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal 

opportunity provider and employer.

____________________________________________________________

Mention of companies or commercial products in this report does not imply 

recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture over 

others not mentioned. USDA neither guarantees nor warrants the standard of 

any product mentioned. Product names are mentioned solely to report factually 

on available data and to provide specific information.

____________________________________________________________

This publication reports research involving pesticides. All uses of pesticides must 

be registered by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies before they can be 

recommended. 

____________________________________________________________

CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, 

desirable plants, and fish or other wildlife—if they are not handled or applied 

properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow recommended

practices for the disposal of surplus pesticides and pesticide containers.
Table of Contents

I. Purpose and Need............................................................1

II. Alternatives ......................................................................2

A. No Action ....................................................................2

B. Proposed Action.........................................................2

III. Environmental Impacts....................................................7

A. No Action ....................................................................7

B. Proposed Action.........................................................7

C. Cumulative Impacts..................................................11

IV. Other Environmental Considerations...........................12

A. Endangered Species Act .........................................13

B. Other Considerations...............................................13

V. Listing of Agencies and Persons Consulted...............14

VI. References......................................................................15
1

I. Purpose and Need

International trade is important to the United States. However, as trade 

with foreign markets increases, the ability to introduce foreign plant pests 

into this country also increases. The United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

(APHIS), prohibits or restricts the importation of fruits and vegetables into 

the United States from certain parts of the world to prevent the 

introduction and dissemination of plant pests that are new to or not widely 

distributed within the United States to protect American agriculture from 

foreign pests (7 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 319.56). 

The government of Peru has requested that APHIS allow the importation 

of Hass avocados (Persea americana P. Mill.) into the continental 

United States. Because Peru is in the Southern Hemisphere, the harvest 

and production season is different than that of the United States. There is 

a high demand within the United States for a steady supply of avocados,

thus making the avocados imported during the United States’ off-season 

complementary to those grown and available during the United States’ 

avocado season. 

APHIS has prepared a qualitative, pathway-initiated risk assessment 

(USDA, APHIS, 2009a) and a risk management document (USDA, 

APHIS, 2009b) to determine which pests may pose a risk and which

mitigations will allow for the safe importation of avocados into the 

continental United States from Peru (USDA, APHIS, 2009a; USDA, 

APHIS, 2009b). 

The plant pest risk assessment identified five potential pests of concern—

two fruit flies, one moth, one scale, and one mealy bug (USDA, APHIS, 

2009a). The risk management document identified a systems approach 

that includes establishment of low-pest prevalence places of production or 

pest-free areas, or the use of quarantine treatments (cold treatment and/or 

methyl bromide treatment), other requirements for production and harvest, 

inspections, and certifications of compliance by the National Plant 

Protection Organization (NPPO) of Peru to ensure that the pests of 

concern are not introduced into the United States from the importation of 

Hass avocados from Peru (USDA, APHIS, 2009b).

This environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared consistent with 

APHIS’ National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) 

implementing procedures (7 CFR part 372), for the purpose of evaluating 

how the no action and proposed action alternatives may affect the quality 

of the human environment. 
2

II. Alternatives

This EA analyzes potential environmental consequences of a proposal to 

amend the fruits and vegetables regulations to authorize the importation of 

Hass avocados from Peru into the continental United States. Two 

alternatives are being considered in this EA: (1) no change to the existing 

regulations (no action alternative), and (2) amend the regulations to allow 

for the importation of Hass avocados from Peru into the continental 

United States under certain conditions (the proposed action).

A. No Action

The no action alternative would leave the fruits and vegetables regulations 

unchanged. Commercial shipments of avocados from Peru would 

continue to be prohibited from importation into the continental 

United States. Although this would ensure that foreign pests would not 

enter the continental United States through the importation of avocados

from Peru, this alternative would unnecessarily hinder trade because the 

plant pest risk assessment and risk management document have outlined 

effective mitigation measures for the safe importation of avocados from 

Peru.

B. Proposed Action

The proposed action would allow the importation of avocados from Peru 

into the continental United States under the following systems approach 

requirements that mitigate the risk of introduction of the five pests 

identified in the pest risk management document: Anastrepha fracterculus

(South American fruit fly), Ceratitis capitata (Med fly), Stenoma 

catenifer (avocado seed moth), Coccus viridis (green scale) and Ferrisia 

malvastra (malvastrum mealybug). The requirements are as follows:

• The NPPO of Peru must provide a workplan to APHIS that details the 

activities that the NPPO of Peru will, subject to APHIS’ approval of 

the workplan, 

• The avocados must be grown at places of production that are 

registered with the NPPO of Peru and that meet the requirements for 

grove sanitation, pest-free areas or trapping for A. fraterculus and 

Medfly, and surveys for the avocado seed moth that are described 

below.

• The avocados must be packed for export to the United States in 

packinghouses that are registered with the NPPO of Peru and that meet 

the packinghouse requirements for fruit origin; safeguarding; culling; 

treatment; and washing, brushing, and waxing.

• Avocados from Peru must be commercial consignments. 

Monitoring and Oversight
3

The systems approach includes monitoring and oversight requirements to 

ensure that the required phytosanitary measures are properly implemented 

throughout the process of growing and packing of avocados for export to 

the United States. 

• The NPPO of Peru must visit and inspect registered places of 

production monthly, starting at least 2 months before harvest and 

continuing until the end of the shipping season, to verify that the 

growers are complying with the requirements for grove sanitation and 

surveys for the avocado seed moth and follow pest control guidelines, 

when necessary, to reduce quarantine pest populations. 

• If trapping is conducted, the NPPO of Peru would also have to verify 

that the growers are complying with the trapping requirements and 

would have to certify that each place of production has effective fruit 

fly trapping programs.

• The NPPO of Peru would be required to monitor packinghouse 

operations to verify that the packinghouses are complying with the 

packinghouse requirements for fruit origin, pest exclusion, cleaning, 

safeguarding, and identification that are described later in this 

document. 

• If the NPPO of Peru finds that a place of production or a packinghouse 

is not complying with the requirements of the regulations, no fruit 

from the place of production or packinghouse would be eligible for 

export to the United States until APHIS and the NPPO of Peru conduct 

an investigation and appropriate remedial actions have been 

implemented. 

• Avocado fruit that has fallen from the trees would have to be removed 

from each place of production at least once every 7 days, starting 

2 months before harvest and continuing to the end of harvest. 

Grove Sanitation

• Fallen avocado fruit must not be included in field containers of fruit 

brought to the packinghouse to be packed for export.

There are two options for mitigating the risk associated with A. fraterculus

in avocados from Peru: Establishment of an area free of A. fraterculus or 

trapping to demonstrate that places of production have a low prevalence of 

A. fraterculus.

Requirements for A. fraterculus

• Determinations of pest-free areas must be made in accordance with 

International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No. 4, 

which sets out three main criteria for recognition of a pest-free area:

Establishment of Areas free of A. fraterculus 

• Systems to establish freedom;

• Phytosanitary measures to maintain freedom; and

• Checks to verify freedom has been maintained.
4

• APHIS must approve the survey protocol used to determine and 

maintain pest-free status, as well as protocols for actions to be taken 

upon detection of a pest. It also indicates that pest-free areas are 

subject to audit by APHIS to verify their status.

• If avocados were produced in an area designated by APHIS as free of 

A. fraterculus, no further mitigations for those fruit flies would be 

necessary for fruit produced in that area. However, the avocados must 

follow the traceability, phytosanitary certificate and safeguarding 

requirements.

• Beginning at least 1 year before harvest begins and continuing through 

the end of the harvest, trapping would have to be conducted in 

registered places of production with at least 1 trap per 0.2 square 

kilometers (km2) to monitor A. fraterculus populations. APHISapproved traps baited with APHIS-approved plugs would have to be 

used and serviced at least once every 2 weeks. 

Establishment of areas of low prevalence of A. fraterculus 

• During the trapping, when traps are serviced, if A. fraterculus and are 

trapped at a particular place of production at cumulative levels above 

0.1 flies per trap per day, pesticide bait treatments would have to be 

applied in the affected place of production in order for the place of 

production to remain eligible to export avocados to the United States. 

There are two options for mitigating the risk associated with Medfly in 

avocados from Peru: Establishment of an area free of Medfly or treatment

with methyl bromide and/or cold treatment.

Requirements for Medfly

• Determinations of pest-free areas must be made in accordance with 

International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No. 4, 

which sets out three main criteria for recognition of a pest-free area:

Establishment of areas free of Medfly

• Systems to establish freedom;

• Phytosanitary measures to maintain freedom; and

• Checks to verify freedom has been maintained.

• APHIS must approve the survey protocol used to determine and 

maintain pest-free status, as well as protocols for actions to be taken 

upon detection of a pest. It also indicates that pest-free areas are 

subject to audit by APHIS to verify their status.

• If avocados were produced in an area designated by APHIS as free of 

Medfly in accordance with § 319.56-5, no further mitigations for those 

fruit flies would be necessary for fruit produced in that area. 

However, the avocados must also follow the traceability, phytosanitary 

certificate and safeguarding requirements.
5

• If the avocados were not produced in an area free of Medfly, avocados 

from that place of production would only be allowed to be exported to 

the United States if they are treated with either cold treatment in 

accordance with T-107-a, methyl bromide treatment in accordance 

with T-101-c-1, or a combination treatment of cold treatment and 

methyl bromide in accordance with T-108-a-1, T-108-a-2, or T-108-a3.

Treatment for Medfly

• Surveys by the NPPO must demonstrate that registered places of 

production are free of the avocado seed moth at least once annually, no 

more than 2 months before harvest begins, and found to be free from 

infestation by the avocado seed moth. APHIS would have to approve 

the survey protocol used to determine and maintain pest-free status and 

the actions to be performed if the avocado seed moth is detected. 

Surveys would have to include representative areas from all parts of 

each registered place of production. The NPPO of Peru would have to 

cut and inspect a biometric sample of fruit at a rate determined by 

APHIS. Fruit sampled would have to be either from the upper half of 

the tree or from the ground. Sampled fruit would have to be cut and 

examined for the presence of eggs and larvae of the avocado seed 

moth in the pulp or seed and for the presence of eggs in the pedicel. 

Surveys for the Avocado Seed Moth

• If one or more avocado seed moths is detected in the annual survey or 

during any other monitoring or inspection activity, the affected place 

of production would be immediately suspended from the export 

program until appropriate measures to reestablish pest freedom, agreed 

upon by the NPPO of Peru and APHIS, have been taken. These 

measures could include further delimiting surveys, appropriate 

pesticide treatments, or removal of infested host material.

• Harvested avocados would have to be placed in field cartons or 

containers that are marked with the official registration number of the 

place of production. The place of production where the avocados were 

grown would have to remain identifiable when the fruit leaves the 

grove, at the packinghouse, and throughout the export process. 

Harvesting Requirements

• The fruit must be moved to a registered packinghouse within 3 hours 

of harvest or to be protected from fruit fly infestation until moved. The 

fruit would have to be safeguarded by an insect-proof screen or plastic 

tarpaulin while in transit to the packinghouse and while awaiting 

packing.
6

• Registered packinghouses can accept only avocados that are from 

registered places of production and that are produced in accordance 

with the requirements of the systems approach during the time they are 

in use for exporting avocados to the United States. 

Packinghouse Requirements

• Avocados must be packed within 24 hours of harvest in an insectexclusionary packinghouse. All openings to the outside of the 

packinghouse would have to be covered by screening with openings of 

not more than 1.6 mm or by some other barrier that prevents pests 

from entering. Screening with openings of not more than 1.6 mm 

excludes fruit flies. 

• The packinghouse must have double doors at the entrance to the 

facility and at the interior entrance to the area where the avocados are 

packed.

• All avocados must be cleaned of plant debris before packing. 

• Fruit must be packed in insect-proof packaging, or covered with 

insect-proof mesh or a plastic tarpaulin, for transport to the United 

States, to prevent fruit fly infestation after the fruit is packed. 

• Shipping documents must accompanying consignments of avocados 

from Peru that are exported to the United States to include the official 

registration number of the place of production at which the avocados 

were grown and must identify the packing shed or sheds in which the 

fruit was processed and packed. This identification would have to be 

maintained until the fruit is released for entry into the United States. 

• Inspectors from the NPPO of Peru must inspect a biometric sample 

from each place of production at a rate to be determined by APHIS. 

The inspectors would have to visually inspect fruit from each place of 

production for all the quarantine pests. The inspectors would also 

have to cut fruit to inspect for the avocado seed moth and to inspect for 

A. fraterculus, and Medfly if the avocados did not originate from an 

area free of those fruit flies.

Inspection by the NPPO of Peru 

• If any quarantine pests are detected in this inspection, the place of 

production where the infested avocados were grown would 

immediately be suspended from the export program until an 

investigation has been conducted by APHIS and the Argentine NPPO 

and appropriate mitigations have been implemented. 

• If Medfly is detected, avocados from the place of production where the 

infested avocados were produced would be allowed to be imported 

into the United States only if treated with an approved treatment for 

Medfly in accordance with 7 CFR part 305.

Each consignment of Hass avocados imported from Peru into the United 

States to be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued by the 

Phytosanitary Certificate
7

NPPO of Peru with an additional declaration stating that that the avocados 

in the consignment were grown, packed, and inspected and found to be 

free of pests in accordance with the requirements of proposed § 319.56-48. 

In addition:

• If the avocados were produced in an area free of A. fraterculus, the 

phytosanitary certificate would have to state that the avocados in 

the consignment were produced an area designated as free of 

A. fraterculus in accordance with 7 CFR 319.56-5. 

• If the avocados were produced in an area free of Medfly, the 

phytosanitary certificate would have to state that the avocados in 

the consignment were produced an area designated as free of 

Medfly in accordance with 7 CFR 319.56-5.

• If the avocados were treated for Medfly, the phytosanitary 

certificate would have to state that the avocados in the 

consignment were treated for Medfly in accordance with 

7 CFR part 305.

III. Environmental Impacts

A. No Action

Current regulations do not allow the importation of avocados from Peru 

into the continental United States. Under the no action alternative, 

avocados from Peru would continue to be prohibited. Although there 

would be no potential environmental consequences from prohibiting the 

importation of avocados from Peru, this alternative would unnecessarily 

hinder trade because mitigations can be implemented that will allow for 

the safe importation of avocados from Peru (USDA, APHIS, 2009b). 

B. Proposed Action

Under the proposed action alternative, APHIS would allow the 

importation of avocados from Peru into the continental United States 

following certain conditions.

The pest risk assessment identified five quarantine pests Anastrepha 

fraterculus (South American fruit fly), Ceratitis capitata (Mediterranean 

fruit fly), Stenoma catenifer (avocado seed moth), Coccus viridis (green 

scale), and Ferrisia malvastra (malvastrum mealybug). The pest 

management document outlined a systems approach method which

includes monitoring and oversight, production site requirements, harvest 

requirements, surveys, packinghouse requirements, traceability, and 

phytosanitary inspection and certification to ensure that the five pests are 

not introduced into the continental United States through the importation 

of avocados from Peru (USDA, APHIS, 2009b). 
8

Areas that are not established as pest free areas for Anastrepha fraterculus 

will require surveys to ensure that the area has a low prevalence for 

Anastrepha fraterculus. If any of these pests are detected at more than the 

level indicated in the requirements, the place of production will no longer 

be eligible to ship avocados to the continental United States until 

appropriate mitigations have been implemented. 

Avocados from areas that are not established as pest-free areas for Medfly

may still be shipped if they undergo treatment for Medfly: Cold treatment 

under T107–a, methyl bromide treatment according to T101–c, or cold 

treatment combined with methyl bromide treatment under T108–a-1, 

T108-a-2, or T108-a-3. 

The systems approach (which includes monitoring, grove requirements, 

surveys, harvest requirements, packinghouse requirements, inspection and 

certification) ensures that the commodity has limited pest presence prior to 

harvest, the commodity undergoes harvest and production processes which

will limit plant pest presence, and the commodity remains pest-free during 

transport and throughout the packinghouse processes. The labeling 

requirement ensures that the place of production and packinghouse facility 

are tied to each shipment. This is in place so that APHIS and the NPPO of 

Peru can identify the place of production and/or packinghouse at which 

the fruit was packed if inspectors find quarantine pests in the fruit either 

before export or at the port of entry. These mitigations were fully 

examined in the risk management document and were determined to be 

effective in providing protection against the introduction of quarantine 

pests from the importation of avocados from Peru into the continental 

United States (USDA, APHIS, 2009b). The concerns of the EA 

associated with these mitigations are discussed below.

The Plant Protection Act of 2000 (SEC. 401.7 U.S.C. 7701) defines 

“systems approach” as “...a defined set of phytosanitary procedures, at 

least two of which have an independent effect in mitigating pest risk 

associated with the movement of commodities.” Similarly, the Food and 

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’ (FAO) Standard for 

Integrated Measures for Pest Risk Management proposes that a systems 

approach be defined as, “The integration of different pest risk 

management measures, at least two of which act independently, and which 

cumulatively achieve the desired level of phytosanitary protection” (FAO, 

2002). Pest risk management is the decisionmaking process of reducing 

the risk of introduction of a quarantine pest. Systems approaches are 

employed by an importing country as an alternative to the use of a single 

measure that achieves an appropriate level of phytosanitary protection 

when a single phytosanitary measure is nonexistent, infeasible, or 

undesirable. 

1. Systems

 Approach 
9

Combining specific mitigation measures in a way which provides 

overlapping or sequential safeguards is distinctly different from applying 

single mitigation methodologies, such as fumigation or inspection. 

Specific measures may be selected from a range of preharvest and postharvest measures (e.g., surveys, inspections, sanitation, chemical 

treatments, etc.), and include mitigation measures to compensate for 

uncertainty. APHIS, Plant Protection and Quarantine uses systems 

approaches for the importation of many commodities, including Hass 

avocados from Mexico (7 CFR § 319.56–30), Unshu oranges from Japan 

(7 CFR § 319.28, 1997), tomatoes from Spain, France, Morocco, and 

Western Sahara (7 CFR § 319.56–28, 1997), and peppers from Israel (7 

CFR § 319.56–24, 1997). These programs have successfully prevented 

pests from reaching the continental United States for many years. 

As described in the risk management document, the effectiveness of the 

systems approach to eliminate live plant pests from avocados imported

from Peru into the continental United States is adequate to prevent pest 

introduction (USDA, APHIS, 2009b). As such, the systems approach for 

the importation of Hass avocados from Peru into the continental United 

States is not expected to have an effect on the human environment, 

including nontarget animals and humans. 

Cold treatments ensure that fruit is kept at a specific temperature for a 

minimum amount of days to ensure that the pest of concern does not 

survive. Cold treatment is initiated once the fruit is packed for shipment,

and generally occurs as the fruit is being transported to the continental 

United States. In this case, the treatment schedule is T–107–a as outlined

in 7 CFR part 305 which is as follows:

Temperature Exposure Period

34 °F or below 14 days

35 °F or below 16 days

36 °F or below 18 days

Cold treatments are conducted in contained facilities, thus limiting the 

exposure of nontarget animals, including humans and the environment. 

Additionally, based on the effectiveness of cold treatment to eliminate the 

presence of live plant pests, the importation of avocados from Peru into 

the continental United States is not expected to have an effect on nontarget 

animals or the environment. 

Methyl bromide fumigation would occur prior to exporting avocados from 

Peru or would be done at a designated fumigation center at the point of 

entry. The proposed rule requires that if the fruit must be fumigated it 

must meet the following conditions as outlined in treatment schedule 

T101–c–1.

3. Methyl 

Bromide 

2. Cold 

Treatment
10

Temperature Dosage Rate 

(lb/1000 cubic feet)

Exposure

Period

70 or above ( °F) 2 4 hours

Methyl bromide fumigation is conducted in contained facilities, thus 

limiting the potential exposure of other nontarget animals, including 

humans, and the environment. Occupational workers are most at risk of 

methyl bromide exposure; however, adherence to good practices and 

guidelines should ensure that there are no adverse effects on persons 

exposed occupationally. Additionally, based on the effectiveness of 

methyl bromide to eliminate the concern of live plant pests, the 

importation of avocados from Peru into the continental United States is 

not expected to have an effect on nontarget animals or the environment.

The primary concern with the use of methyl bromide fumigation is ozone 

depletion. Methyl bromide has been classified by the Environmental 

Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act as a Class I ozone-depleting 

chemical. The expected use of methyl bromide in fumigations of 

avocados from Peru is well below any levels which would contribute 

substantially to ozone depletion. The total number of avocados to be 

imported into the continental United States from Peru is approximately

19,000 metric tons. Of the shipments that may require treatment, some 

will be treated with cold treatment or a combination of methyl bromide 

and cold treatment. There is more environmental concern with the use of 

methyl bromide then with the use of cold treatment. However, even if all 

of the shipments were treated with methyl bromide the total amount of 

methyl bromide used would be roughly 1900 lbs.1

A thorough review of the potential effects of methyl bromide uses in 

fumigations on ozone depletion was originally presented in the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Importation of Solid Wood 

Packing Material (August, 2003); this document has recently been 

updated and is titled Importation of Solid Wood Packing Material, 

Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (USDA, APHIS, 

2007). This supplemental EIS (SEIS) determined that the cumulative 

impact of methyl bromide from routine commodity treatments on ozone 

depletion is not expected to be consequential. The methyl bromide 

treatment for use on avocados from Peru is consistent with the commodity 

 1 The amount of containers for 19,000 metric tons is roughly 950 containers (20 metric 

tons per container) and each container is just under 1,000 cubic feet. The methyl bromide 

does rate is 2lbs of MB per 1,000 cubic feet. 

950 (# of containers @ 1,000 cubic feet) x 2 = 1900 lbs of Methyl Bromide.
11

treatments evaluated in the SEIS (USDA, 2008c; pers. comm. with EPA, 

2008).

The risk management document stated that treatment schedule T108–a is 

effective against C. capitata. Under this treatment schedule, the 

commodity is exposed to methyl bromide followed by a cold treatment

according to treatment schedule T–108–a–1, T–108–a–2, or T–108–a–3. 

The table below shows the recommended dose and exposure times for 

both methyl bromide and cold treatment. 

Methyl Bromide 

Temperature 

Methyl Bromide

Dosage Rate 

(lb/1000 cubic feet)

Methyl 

Bromide 

Exposure

Period

Cold 

Treatment 

Temperature

Cold 

Treatment 

Exposure

Period

70 °F or above 2 2 hours 33–37°F 4 days

70 °F or above 2 2 hours 38–47°F 11 days

70 °F or above 2 2.5 hours 34–40°F 4 days

70 °F or above 2 2.5 hours 41–47°F 6 days

70 °F or above 2 2.5 hours 48–56°F 10 days

70 °F or above 2 3 hours 43–47°F 3 days

70 °F or above 2 3 hours 48–56°F 6 days

Methyl bromide combined with cold treatment is expected to have the 

same environmental effects as discussed above in the separate treatments

of methyl bromide and cold treatment. Due to the nature of how these 

treatments are conducted, there is limited impact to nontarget species and 

humans. As long as proper protocols are followed, the treatment is 

effective against the pest of concern. In addition, following proper label 

requirements and safety protocols will ensure no adverse impacts to 

occupational workers, the group at most risk for exposure.

C. Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative impacts are impacts on the environment which result from the 

incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions. The use of methyl bromide can lead 

to cumulative impacts when added to the uses of methyl bromide on other 

commodities. However, the limited quantities of methyl bromide needed 

to treat avocados from Peru are not substantial and are within the 

negligible treatments anticipated from the previous cumulative analysis 

(USDA, APHIS, 2007). 

4. Methyl 

Bromide 

with Cold 

Treatment
12

IV. Other Environmental Considerations

The APHIS NEPA implementing procedures require, to the fullest extent 

possible, the integration of Federal environmental laws and executive 

orders with the analysis of environmental impacts (7 CFR § 372.7). Of 

the numerous environmental review laws and executive orders, this EA 

looks at the few that have any possible association to plant, animal, or 

human health impacts from the proposed action.
13

A. Endangered Species Act 

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and its implementing regulations 

require Federal agencies to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(FWS) and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service to ensure the actions 

taken are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or 

endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. APHIS has considered the potential effects of the rule to 

allow importation of commercial shipments of Hass avocados from Peru 

into the continental United States. 

Cold treatments and methyl bromide fumigations are conducted in 

contained facilities; listed species and their habitats would not be exposed 

to these treatments. In addition, based on the ability of the requirements 

(methyl bromide fumigation, cold treatments, and a systems approach) to 

eliminate the presence of live plant pests, the program has determined that 

importation of avocados from Peru into the continental United States 

would have no effect on any threatened or endangered species or their 

critical habitats.

B. Other Considerations

Certain executive orders, such as Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks) and

Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice 

in Minority Populations and Low-income Populations), and departmental 

or agency directives call for special environmental reviews in certain 

circumstances. No circumstance that would trigger the need for special 

environmental reviews is involved in implementing the proposed action 

considered in this document. No disproportionate adverse effects are 

anticipated to any minority or low-income population, or particular subgroup of the U.S. population.
14

V. Listing of Agencies and Persons 

Consulted

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Policy and Program Development

Environmental Services

4700 River Road, Unit 149

Riverdale, MD 20737

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

Commodity Imports Analysis and Operations

4700 River Road, Unit 133

Riverdale, MD 20737

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

Phytosanitary Issues Management

4700 River Road, Unit 140

Riverdale, MD 20737

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

Planning, Analysis, and Regulatory Coordination

4700 River Road, Unit 156

Riverdale, MD 20737
15

VI. References

APHIS—See U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service

EPA—See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

FAO—See Food and Agricultural Organization

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2002. 

International standards for phytosanitary measures. Glossary of 

phytosanitary terms, Publication No. 5. UN–FAO–IPPC, Italy.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service, 2009a. Importation of ‘Hass’ avocado (Persea Americana) fruit 

from peru into the continental United States: a qualitative pathwayinitiated risk assessment. Center for Plant Health Science and 

Technology. November, 2008. Raleigh, North Carolina.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service, 2009b. Risk management document: importation of fresh 

commercial avocado (Persea Americana P. Mill) fruit from Peru into the 

continental United States. Commodity Imports Analysis and Operations.

November, 2008. Riverdale, Maryland. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service, 2007. Importation of solid wood packing material: supplement 

to the final environmental impact statement. October, 2007. Riverdale, 

Maryland.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service, 2003. Importation of solid wood packing material. Final 

environmental impact statement, August, 2003. Riverdale, Maryland.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Stratospheric Protection Division, 

2007 Pers. comm. between J. Arling (EPA) and P. Grove (USDA, 

APHIS) regarding changes to current methyl bromide treatment schedules 

or rates of usage. November 12, 2008.