Review of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Response to Petitions to Reclassify the Light Brown Apple Moth as a Non-Actionable Pest

A Letter Report

Committee for the Review of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Response to Petitions to Reclassify the Light Brown Apple Moth as a Non-Actionable Pest

Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources

Division on Earth and Life Studies

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Review of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Response to Petitions to Reclassify the Light Brown Apple Moth as a Non-Actionable Pest A Letter Report     Committee for the Review of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Response to Petitions to Reclassify the Light Brown Apple Moth as a Non-Actionable Pest Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources Division on Earth and Life Studies            

OCR for page R1
    THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by a grant from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service under Grant No. 09-8100-1363-GR. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. The report is available online from the National Academies Press at http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2009 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
  The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.   www.national-academies.org  

OCR for page R1
   

OCR for page R1
  COMMITTEE FOR THE REVIEW OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE'S ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE RESPONSE TO PETITIONS TO RECLASSIFY THE LIGHT BROWN APPLE MOTH AS A NON-ACTIONABLE PEST MAY R. BERENBAUM (Chair), University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign THOMAS E. BUNDY, Office of General Counsel, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC (retired) SEAN B. CASH, University of Wisconsin, Madison; University of Alberta, Canada (on leave) RACHAEL E. GOODHUE, University of California, Davis VINCENT P. JONES, Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center, Washington State University, Wenatchee NICHOLAS J. MILLS, University of California, Berkeley L. JOE MOFFITT, University of Massachusetts, Amherst JERRY A. POWELL, University of California, Berkeley (emeritus) DANIEL S. SIMBERLOFF, University of Tennessee, Knoxville ROBERT C. VENETTE, U.S. Forest Service, St. Paul, Minnesota Staff ROBIN A. SCHOEN, Director KARA N. LANEY, Associate Program Officer KAMWETI MUTU, Research Associate KAREN L. IMHOF, Administrative Assistant NORMAN GROSSBLATT, Senior Editor v 

OCR for page R1
    BOARD ON AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES NORMAN R. SCOTT, Chair, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York PEGGY F. BARLETT, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia ROGER N. BEACHY, Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, St. Louis, Missouri HAROLD L. BERGMANN, University of Wyoming, Laramie RICHARD A. DIXON, Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation, Ardmore, Oklahoma DANIEL M. DOOLEY, University of California, Oakland JOAN H. EISEMANN, North Carolina State University, Raleigh GARY F. HARTNELL, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri GENE HUGOSON, Minnesota Department of Agriculture, St. Paul KIRK C. KLASING, University of California, Davis VICTOR L. LECHTENBERG, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana PHILIP E. NELSON, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana ROBERT PAARLBERG, Wellesley College, Watertown, Massachusetts KEITH PITTS, Marrone Bio Innovations, Davis, California CHARLES W. RICE, Kansas State University, Manhattan HAL SALWASSER, Oregon State University, Corvallis PEDRO A. SANCHEZ, The Earth Institute, Columbia University, Palisades, New York ROGER A. SEDJO, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC KATHLEEN SEGERSON, University of Connecticut, Storrs MERCEDES VAZQUEZ‐AÑON, Novus International, Inc., St. Charles, Missouri Staff ROBIN A. SCHOEN, Director KAREN L. IMHOF, Administrative Assistant AUSTIN J. LEWIS, Senior Program Officer EVONNE P.Y. TANG, Senior Program Officer PEGGY TSAI, Program Officer CAMILLA YANDOC ABLES, Associate Program Officer KARA N. LANEY, Associate Program Officer RUTH S. ARIETI, Research Associate JANET M. MULLIGAN, Research Associate KAMWETI MUTU, Research Associate ERIN P. MULCAHY, Senior Program Assistant vi 

OCR for page R1
      Acknowledgments       This report has been reviewed in draft form by persons chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council Report Review Committee. The purpose of the independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards of objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following for their review of the report: Greg Baker, South Australian Research and Development Institute, Adelaide Mark Hoddle, University of California, Riverside Frances Homans, University of Minnesota, St. Paul Russell Messing, University of Hawaii, Kapa'a Keith Pitts, Marrone Bio Innovations, Davis, California Wendell Roelofs, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York (emeritus) Lucía Varela, University of California, Santa Rosa Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of the report was overseen by Drs. Harley W. Moon, Iowa State University (emeritus) and Fred L. Gould, North Carolina State University. Appointed by the National Academy of Sciences, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of the report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of the report rests entirely with the author committee and the institution. vii

OCR for page R1
     

OCR for page R1
    BOARD ON AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Phone: 202 334 3062 Fax: 202 334 1978 E-mail: banr@nas.edu www.dels.nas.edu/banr August 31, 2009 Dr. David Kaplan Assistant Deputy Administrator Director, Emergency & Domestic Programs USDA/APHIS/PPQ 4700 River Road Riverdale, MD 20737 Dear Dr. Kaplan, In February 2009, representatives of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) approached the National Research Council’s Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources (BANR) to ask for an objective technical evaluation of the service’s response to two petitions to change the classification of the light brown apple moth (LBAM) from a quarantine-significant pest to a non-actionable/non-reportable pest. BANR assembled a committee of 10 members and charged it with evaluating the scientific basis of policy and regulatory decisions made by APHIS with respect to LBAM and the quality of evidence used by the agency in reaching its decisions. The committee was to determine whether APHIS satisfactorily addressed the specific arguments raised in the petitions for reclassification and whether its analysis of the arguments was balanced, thorough, and clearly articulated (see Appendix A for the committee’s statement of task). The members of the committee are pleased to provide this letter report containing their findings. The report represents the consensus of the committee (see Appendix B for committee member biographies). Material for review included the two petitions, the APHIS response (hereafter referred to as the Response), and ancillary Web-based materials. On July 9, 2009, the committee conferred by telephone and decided that additional information from APHIS was needed to permit evaluation of the Response; such information was provided by the agency on July 22, 2009. The committee met on the following 2 days in Washington, DC, at which time it put additional questions to APHIS. APHIS responded to further inquiries regarding the publication status of LBAM regulations in the Federal Register during the next week. The committee deliberated over the new information and the report in a conference call on July 30. The format of this report, a brief document prepared over a short time, is well suited to the task at hand in view of the urgency perceived by the agency in addressing the regulatory ix

OCR for page R1
    status of a pest species newly discovered in California that is of economic importance elsewhere in its range. First reported in 2006, the moth has been found in 17 California counties; APHIS classified LBAM as a high-risk pest of quarantine significance and in fall 2007 initiated an eradication program in cooperation with the California Department of Food and Agriculture. The two petitions were filed in accordance with Chapter 18 of the USDA Emergency Programs Manual (Floyd et al., 2002), which details criteria for termination of an emergency eradication program. In response to its statement of task, the committee found that APHIS did not “fully consider and address the specific arguments” and did not “conduct a thorough and balanced analysis” supporting the conclusions in its Response. Full consideration would have included a more detailed economic analysis and a more complete response to the argument against eradication. Overall, the committee found that the APHIS Response would greatly benefit from the use of more robust science to support its position. In responding to the petitions, APHIS would be well served by articulating the justification for its actions to the public clearly, and the Response should be revised accordingly. In addition, the LBAM regulations should be published for comment in the Federal Register. Sincerely, May Berenbaum, Chair Committee for the Review of U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Response to Petitions to Reclassify the Light Brown Apple Moth as a Non- Actionable Pest x