Trade Issue  Resolution Management: Trade Issue Resolution Management Dr. Richard Dunkle Deputy Administrator Plant Protection and Quarantine


Regardless of whether it is an import issue or an export issue, a lot of things need to be considered….. : Regardless of whether it is an import issue or an export issue, a lot of things need to be considered…..


Some of the Considerations: : Some of the Considerations: Technical intricacy of the issue Value of the market Likelihood of success Political implications Willingness of the trading partner to negotiate Availability of negotiators


Add to that…..: Add to that….. The regulatory process in the U.S. or for the trading partner for resolving the issue(s) International standards and obligations Coordination with other agencies here and abroad


And you have a process: And you have a process For managing trade For preparing for international meetings For preparing for international or regional standards For coordinating efforts and strategies


However…..: However…..


Changes affecting the process:: Changes affecting the process: Reorganization of the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) Development of a strategic plan for trade in PPQ A new Congress Other intangibles


But…there are results:: But…there are results: Access to Chile for Oregon blueberries and California stone fruits and cherries Access and retention for chipping potatoes to Japan Access for U.S. walnuts to Korea Access for Alaskan seed potatoes to China Access for wheat to India


And expansion…..: And expansion….. Alaskan logs being fumigated in China Additional ports accepting U.S. pears in Brazil Almonds to India fumigated using phosphine U.S. Stonefruit to Mexico


And retention…..: And retention….. Chipping potatoes to Japan California citrus to Australia Potatoes to Canada Pulses to India California grapes to Indonesia


So, what next?: So, what next? PIM staff working on an integrated strategic plan Constant fine tuning of the process we use to resolve issues Includes coordinating with FAS, Industry, other interested stakeholders Recognition that change is a process, not an event, and trade is ever changing


7CFR319.73 (Q-37) Revision: 7CFR319.73 (Q-37) Revision Objective: Reducing the pest risk associated with the importation of plants for planting A comprehensive review and modification of the Q-37 regulatory policy will be accomplished in a multi-year project using a phased approach.


7CFR319.73 (Q-37) Revision: 7CFR319.73 (Q-37) Revision Focus Agency resources on mitigating the pest risk associated with plants with the highest risk ratings Move safeguarding activities off-shore Establish restricted category of plants for planting, Not Authorized Pending Pest Risk Assessment (NAPPRA)


7CFR319.73 (Q-37) Revision: 7CFR319.73 (Q-37) Revision Only plants for planting, currently not being imported that meet the established criteria will be included in the NAPPRA during phase one Implement Regional Sanitary Phytosanitary Measure no. 24, Plants for Planting Amend Departmental permit regulatory policy


Q-56 Revision (7 CFR 319.56): Q-56 Revision (7 CFR 319.56) Streamline Regulatory Process Notice-based process PRA available for 60 days via Federal Register notice All Comments considered, if non-substantive Federal Register Notice of permit to be issued


Q-56 Revision (7 CFR 319.56): Q-56 Revision (7 CFR 319.56) APHIS requested comments on 4 Designated Phytosanitary Measures: Approved Post-Harvest Treatment Certify origin from recognized pest free area Certify freedom from a specific pest or pests Port-of-entry inspection


Q-56 Revision (7 CFR 319.56): Q-56 Revision (7 CFR 319.56) Final Regulation has been developed based on comments received Currently in Departmental review OMB will also review Projected publication summer 2007 Q-56 Upgraded Website to support the rule in development Projected Website launch in winter 2007


Slide19: Pest Eradication Update – Asian Longhorned Beetle Survey, control, and regulatory activities ongoing in New Jersey and New York 10 detections in New York City this year Last detection in Illinois was in 2003; no areas currently regulated there Illinois is in its final year of survey before eradication is declared


Slide20: Pest Eradication Update – Citrus Canker Eradication no longer feasible in Florida; Statewide quarantined established Seeking to ease regulatory restrictions on the interstate movement of citrus fruit Established Citrus Health Response Program (CHRP) to safeguard all citrus-producing States for such citrus pests


Slide21: Pest Eradication Update – Emerald Ash Borer Over 175,000 square miles infested in the United States Quarantine over Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois; Michigan’s Lower Peninsula; and one Maryland county Spread attributed to the artificial movement of ash tree products (firewood, pallets, and nursery stock)


Slide22: Pest Eradication Update – Other Major Pests Citrus Greening - 14 Florida counties quarantined via Federal Order; eradication not feasible in Florida Phytopthera ramorum - 14 California counties and part of an Oregon county are quarantined; nurseries in California, Oregon and Washington are regulated; and efforts are ongoing to ensure the national nursery system is free of this disease


Slide23: Pest Eradication Update – Other Major Pests Plum Pox – detected and regulated in three Pennsylvania counties; Now also in Michigan and New York where it is a cross-border issue with Canada Potato Cyst Nematode – One regulated area in Idaho with seven positive potato fields; an Idaho eradication plan is being developed; and a national survey program planned