News that the administration of Hawai’i County would be seeking to build a fruit irradiation facility made the front page of The Honolulu Advertiser on December 30, 1996. In an article by the Advertiser Big Island correspondent, Hugh Clark, Mayor Steve Yamashiro was said to be planning to ask the County Council for $2 million to support a facility to irradiate tropical fruit for shipment to the mainland.
The county’s plans, which Yamashiro in sists are still not well formed at this stage, represent the third generation of planning for a fruit irradiation facility.
The first generation developed in the late 1980s, when the state proposed building an irradiator for treatment of papayas in Hilo. That plan, which never enjoyed popular sup port, ultimately collapsed in 1989 when the $5 million in funds that the state had obtained (including $4 million from the U.S. Depart ment of Energy) fell short of the $6 million estimated cost of construction.
The second generation of planning for an irradiation facility began in 1993 when the state Department of Agriculture’s Plant In dustry Division, under the leadership of Lyle Wong, began to discuss strategies for building a fruit irradiation facility at or near the Hono lulu airport. (Those plans were discussed in the July 1995 edition of Environment Hawai’i.)
Yamashiro’s effort comes even as Wong is still working for the Honolulu site. Wong told Environment Hawai`i that the timing of Yamashiro’s announcement was unexpected, but it could not have come as much of a surprise. As early as July 1995, Yamashiro had indicated his interest in developing an irradia tion facility on the Big Island. An article in the Hawai’i Tribune-Herald on July 2 of that year reported that Yamashiro, in a meeting with the Hawai’i Island Contractors Association, “predicted opposition to future projects be ing planned for the Big Island, including trying to lure the U.S Department of Agriculture to build an irradiation plant here.” A few days later, Yamashiro met in Hilo with officers of Isomedix, Inc., an irradiation firm on the mainland, the owner of a grocery that sells irradiated food in Chicago, and other proponents of irradiation.
Another foreshadowing of the mayor’s intent may be seen in a December 1996 draft of a high-tech “strategic plan” prepared by the Hawai’i Island Economic Development Board, a private group that receives substan tial public funding and which works closely with Yamashiro’s office. That draft report called for support of “expedited partnerships and timelines for a produce and product irradition [sic] facility.” The final document, dated January 2, 1997, contained identical language (down to the misspell).
For about four years after the initial proposal to develop a fruit irradiation facility met with defeat, the state did little to promote the idea further. In February 1993, however, Wong drafted a letter, signed by then-Department of Agriculture administrator Yukio Kitagawa, raising once more the prospect of irradiation as a means of increasing the value of Hawai’i’s agricultural exports. Responding to a request by state Representative Robert N. Herkes for an estimate of the value of crops Hawai’i could produce if fruit flies were eradicated, Kitagawa cited a figure of $300 million a year. (The figure was taken from a report prepared by The Nature Conservancy of Hawai’i on alien pest species; Kitagawa acknowledged that it “may be a dollar value subject to some debate.”)
“With the phase-down of sugar and pine apple in Hawai’i,” Kitagawa continued, “an unprecedented amount of prime agricultural land will become available in Hawai’i for diversified agriculture. The local market for new and exotic crops is limited. As a result, the full potential for diversified agriculture in Hawai’i will depend on the development of alternative post-harvest treatments or the successful eradication of fruit flies in Hawai`i, which would allow the untethered export of fruits and vegetables to mainland and foreign markets.”
While eradication is the “best long-term solution,” Kitagawa told Herkes, “for the near term, an alternative to eradication is a post-harvest treatment with broad applica tions to many crops. Irradiation is such a method.”
For years, treatment with the fumigant ethylene dibromide allowed for export of Hawaiian crops. When use of EDB was pro hibited, papaya growers, working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, developed alternative methods of treating their fruit with vapor heat or hot water.
In 1989, the USDA and the Food and Drug Administration approved a treatment proto col for papayas involving irradiation of the fruit. However, there was little incentive for Hawaiian papaya growers and shippers to pursue this treatment option. They had in vested more than $20 million in heat-treat ment systems here. Moreover, exports to Japan, which represent a substantial fraction (around 25 percent) of the papaya export market, cannot be irradiated.
After the letter to Herkes, Wong began to spend more time and effort developing irra diation as a means of increasing exports of Hawaiian crops. In September and October 1993, he convened several meetings with representatives of other state agencies, growers, and researchers, none of whom appears to have voiced any objections to Wong’s plan of action. That plan included conducting meetings with manufacturers of irradiation instruments, determining potential markets, coordinating efforts with federal and private sector agencies, exploring the “possibility of congressional appropriation,” and discussing the possibility of developing irradiation facilities jointly with the Hawai’i Sugar Planters’ Association (whose name has since been changed to the Hawai’i Agricultural Research Center).
In February 1994, Wong attended an irra diation workshop in Gainesville, Florida, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agri culture. Accompanying Wong were James Moy of the University of Hawai’i College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources and Harvey Chan of the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service in Hilo. In his summary of the workshop, Wong stated, “it was apparent to the Hawai’i delegation … that Hawai’i could play a pivotal role with regards to irradiation technology development in the U.S. discussions with USDA officials and industry representatives (Nordion, Vindica tor) regarding a possible joint venture effort on irradiation between the state of Hawai’i, USDA-ARS, and industry was well received and encouraged.”
All-Out Effort
In the next few months, Wong made contact with irradiation technology companies in the United States and began discussions with a Chicago-area retailer, Carrot Top, interested in carrying irradiated Hawaiian fruits. As early as March 1994, he had drafted a scenario for a possible joint venture for a commodity irradiator. Partners in the endeavor, estimated to cost $5 million, were the state Department of Agriculture, the USDA, associations of Hawai’i growers, a Canadian manufacturer of cobalt-60 source material, and a private company with experience in managing a food irradiation facility.
Under Wong’s hypothetical scenario, the state would pick up 49 percent of the cost, with the USDA providing 35 percent. The two companies would each contribute a 7 percent share, while the growers would contribute 1-2 percent.
Wong also approached the USDA about allowing untreated Hawaiian fruits to be shipped to the mainland for treatment at an irradiation facility there. Because of concerns about the spread of fruit flies into California and Florida, these states were ruled out as potential treatment sites even though both have irradiation facilities. Eventually, the USDA agreed to permit shipments of fruit to an Isomedix, Inc., irradiation facility in Morton Grove, Illinois, not far from Chicago’s O’Hare airport. By November 1994, Wong had invited Jim and Paula Corrigan, owners of Carrot Top, to Hawai’i “to meet with growers … and to help lay out a business plan” for the marketing of irradi ated fruit.
By establishing that a market existed for irradiated Hawaiian fruit on the mainland, Wong felt, the state would be in a better position to make the case for an irradiation facility to be built in Hawai’i.
Limited Entry
The shipments of untreated Hawaiian fruit to Chicago began on April 4, 1995. By the end of 1996, nearly two dozen shipments had been made. As explained by Wong, the fruit to be shipped is delivered to a Hono lulu food broker, Ham Produce & Seafood, Inc., which arranges for the produce to be sold to one or more distributors on the mainland. The broker pays the cost of shipping, while the distributors pay the cost of irradiating the fruit (about 25 cents a pound, Wong has said).
Under terms of the limited USDA per mit allowing the shipments, Wong told Environment Hawai`i, it is necessary for someone from Hawai’i to accompany the shipments to ensure that the strict require ments of the permit are carried out. Wong has made several trips, as have other state Department of Agriculture employees.
Other people accompanying the ship ments have included members of the state Exotic Pest Insect Committee. This com mittee, formerly called the Hawai’i State Fruit Fly Committee, was established to eradicate fruit flies, but has recently devoted most of its efforts and much of its budget to promoting irradiation. Among the committee’s members are several of the growers whose fruit is irradiated and mar keted under this program.
While Wong was overseeing shipments to Chicago, he was simultaneously attempting to lay the groundwork for construction of an irradiation facility in Hawai’i. Less than a month after the shipments began, George Dietz, senior vice president of Isomedix, seemed to believe construction of an irradiator in Hawai’i was a foregone conclusion. In a letter dated May 31, 1995, Dietz wrote Wong and Michael Strong: “At this point we can probably agree that:
“a. Radiation is the technically preferred quarantine treatment for tropical fruits.
“b. Radiation appears to be economically competitive with sufficient volume through-put.
“c. The lead-time for installation of an irradiator once all permits are issued is about 10-12 months.”
Dietz went on to suggest setting up a conference call with Wong and Strong to discuss the vagaries of marketing the irradi ated produce. “Obviously, there must be a market for the irradiated product before we forge ahead with an irradiator,” he concluded.
Within a couple of weeks, Wong and others had arranged a tour of the islands for Dietz, his boss, John Masefield, president of Isomedix, and Jim Corrigan of Carrot Top (along with their spouses). On July 6, in Hilo, they met with about 30 growers, packers, and government agency representatives (includ ing one USDA official from Beltsville, Mary land).
The following day, Wong had Masefield, Diez, and Corrigan meet in Honolulu with other parties interested in pursuing develop ment of such a facility. In addition to Masefield, Dietz, Corrigan, and Wong, at tending this “construction costs meeting” were representatives from the state Depart ment of Transportation (including its Air ports Division), the Bank of Hawai’i, and an engineering firm.
Finding a Site
Apart from the sign-in sheet, no official record appears to have been made of that meeting. Still, from later correspondence, it seems as though various people in attendance were to follow up with inquiries concerning possible sites and other questions relating to financing.
In a letter to Wong dated July 18, 1995, Masefield, the president of Isomedix, thanked Wong for arranging the meetings, which “were very helpful to our further understand ing of the Hawaiian agricultural economy, the status of the tropical flower industry, and the need and desire for a radiation facility for quarantine control…
“The several other issues we discussed which need further immediate attention were:
“a. How do we organize the growers to ensure that sufficient quantities of top quality papaya are sent for the radiation quarantine treatment on a consistent basis…
“b. How can we, or the state or the Airport Authority, solve the need for a refrigerated storage capacity?
“c. The Bishop ‘Gem’ property location and proposed equity position presented by Jon [Okudara, of the Exotic Pest Insect Com mittee] would appear, in principle, to be acceptable. Jon indicated that he would fol low up on his attempts to identify a potential investor who might be interested in funding the radiation shield.
“As indicated at the meeting, Isomedix would be prepared to provide the irradiator, source mechanism, and the Co-60 source.
By October 1995, Isomedix was still wait ing for a response. On October 20, Dietz wrote Wong, indicating he was still waiting for Okudara to send him land rental rate for a site in Kapalama. “Jon,” Dietz continued, “also said he submitted a proposal to the Bishop Estate trustees regarding their ‘Gem’ property location and possible interest in an equity position in the irradiator. No response yet from Jon.”
“There was a possible interest in participa tion by Hawaiian Electric,” Dietz went on to say. “Anything further?” (In fact, nothing further about possible participation by Bishop Estate or Hawaiian Electric appears in Wong’s files.)
Political Pull
In that same memo, Dietz went on to men tion that Okudara “was trying to setup a visit by several of your elected representatives, plus representatives of the Kapalama area.”
By early November, the trip involving elected officials had been arranged to accom pany the November 15 shipment. Both Donna Ikeda, then chairwoman of the state Senate Ways and Means Committee, and Donna Kim, the Honolulu councilwoman repre senting Kapalama, had agreed to participate, although Ikeda later bowed out. Kim ended up the only elected official going on the trip to Chicago, with her way paid by the state Exotic Pest Insect Committee. Others travel ing in party were Okudara and Wendy Sanemitsu, both with the Exotic Pest Insect Committee; Letitia Uyehara, deputy director of the state Department of Agriculture; Sam Hugh of Ham Produce, the Honolulu food broker; and Mike Strong, the grower from Kaua’i.
Kim’s trip, compliments of the state, was not the only effort to win political support for irradiation. As early as March 1994, Wong was talking with Chauncey Ching of the Washington staff of Senator Daniel Inouye. In a letter to Ching dated March 14, Wong promised to keep Ching “apprised of our ‘talks’ on irradiation… The most attractive plan appears to be a joint venture with USDA -ARS [Agricultural Research Service] for a pilot irradiator on O’ahu.” Wong closed by promising to stop by for a visit when he was in Washington the next week, “time permit ting.”
A year later, just before the second ship ment of fruit to Chicago was made, Wong, Strong, and Weinert met with staff of Repre sentative Patsy Mink in Washington. In a follow-up letter to James Nakatani, director of the state Department of Agriculture, Mink said she was “pleased with the results of this meeting” and the work of the “tropical fruit working group,” which, Mink noted, was “developing procedures to allow small ship ments of tropical fruit out of Hawai’i for irradiation treatment and marketing on the mainland. I believe that this bodes well for current and future diversification in Hawai’i’s agriculture industries.”
(Several boxes of papaya and lychee were sent to Mink’s office from that second ship ment. According to Wong, all of it “arrived cooked and in pretty bad condition.”)
In June, Wong drafted a letter sent out by Nakatani to Senators Inouye and Daniel Akaka. Nakatani informed the senators of plans for the June 14 shipment of papaya and lychee, which would be accompanied by two University of Hawai’i researchers, a USDA official from Hilo, Strong, Hugh, and Wong.
In response, Mark Fox, legislative assistant to Inouye, wrote Nakatani, mentioning that the senator’s office had “been staying in contact with Dr. Lyle Wong and Mr. Mike Strong, and the Senator was pleased to learn of the additional shipments… Please con tinue to keep Senator Inouye apprised of further developments, and do not hesitate to contact his office if we can be of any assis tance.”
From 1994 to the present, in fact, Fox and Ching, now a private consultant, appear to have been working closely with Wong on the irradiation facility issue. In September 1995, for example, Ching drafted a letter, for Inouye’s signature, to the administrator of the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspec tion Service (APHIS), urging APHIS to expe dite the rule-making process for a so-called ‘generic’ irradiation process for any and all fruits suspected of being host to the varieties of fruit flies found in Hawai’i. Two months later, Ching suggested that Wong attempt to obtain USDA matching funds for the market ing of irradiated fruit.
1996 was a year in which Wong redoubled his already considerable efforts to bring an irra diation plant to Hawai’i. Shipments of fruit to Chicago increased, as did the state’s efforts to find new distribution and retail outlets for the produce. But probably the most signifi cant development was the state’s signing an agreement with Gray-Star, Inc., developer of a new cesium-based irradiation technology, that gives the state the right of first refusal for purchase of the seventh Gray-Star irradiator to be built.
The agreement was signed by the state director of the Department of Agriculture, Nakatani, on November 15, 1996. The sign ing was the culmination of nearly a year’s worth of effort by Albert Marulli, a former USDA-APHIS employee who also is a con sultant to the produce industry and sales agent for Gray-Star.
After corresponding with Wong, Marulli visited Hawai’i in May 1996, where he met with growers and distributors. In a follow-up letter to Wong on May 30, Marulli men tioned that he was especially glad to have met with Peter Houle of Hawaiian Produce and Processing, on the Big Island, and Donald Lu of Palama Meat Co., Inc., on O’ahu.
“Peter Houle has already called our head quarters office in Mt. Arlington, New Jersey, and expressed an interest in reserving a Gray-Star unit for use on the Big Island,” Marulli wrote. “However, we are delaying any commitments to individual companies in Hawai`i until your state agency has had an opportunity to review the situation in terms of the overall development of diversified Hawaiian agriculture. As for Donald Lu, we will be sending him a questionnaire and will work with him in the development of an irradiation program for his products.”
In June 1996, Wong learned that Wash ington state had rejected a tentative proposal from Hawai’i to ship Hawaiian fruits to Hanford, Washington, for irradiation there. In a memo to Marulli of June 26, whose subject was “Why we need a Gray-Star,” Wong informed Marulli of this decision: “Bad news: Washington State won’t allow untreated Hawai’i papaya into the Hanford area fearing the fruit could be a source of medflies… Good news: Affirmative answer to question, does Hawai’i need an irradiator?”
Two days later, Wong provided Jon Okudara of the Exotic Pest Insect Committee a list of reasons for “reserving a unit” for Hawai`i. In a memo to Okudara dated June 28, Wong mentioned that Gray-Star “will waive the $10,000 deposit” it normally would require of anyone wanting to hold a spot in the line.
“Gray-Star has an agreement with a com pany in Cincinnati to fabricate the first unit and this will start in a few weeks after the completion of a drop test of a scale model,” Wong wrote. “Once completed and the find ings are a go for commercial production, getting a unit will likely be impossible for years to come as the Gray-Star offers a design that is more economical than a traditional cobalt unit or a machine source. Conse quently, if the design proves to be a winner, customers are sure to line up for units faster than we can get on the list in a traditional fashion… So it’s best that we take advantage of the Gray-Star offer and get on the list. Tar geted cost, less than $2 million (actually, about $1.3 million).”
In July, Marulli was holding out to Wong the prospect of having Hawaiian fruit be irradiated in a prototype Gray-Star facility. A research agreement that Gray-Star was negotiating with the USDA, Marulli wrote, “allows us to conduct, on a limited basis, the irradiation of research samples pro vided by potential industrial customers. I believe, but I can’t promise, that we may be able to set up a program for next year’s shipping season where the bulk of your shipments could be done in the prototype facility at no or minimal cost to the growers. We could also work with your group to find new outlets for irradiated Hawaiian prod ucts in the Pennsylvania/New Jersey/New York area. Two more potential reasons to get that Preliminary Purchase Agreement signed as soon as possible.”
Approval
On November 1, Wong sent a memo to Nakatani, recommending he sign that “pre liminary purchase agreement.” Nakatani was told that commercial units would not be available until all testing was completed, which would take at least two years. Still, Wong wrote, “Hawai’i has an option to reserve the seventh Gray-Star to go into production. Given Hawai’i’s need for a com modity treatment facility, Hawai’i should exercise this option.”
One week later, Wong forwarded to Nakatani three copies of the agreement for Nakatani’s signature. In a covering memo, Wong stated that Gray-Star is “one option for Hawai’i. Alternatives are being explored, including an X-ray unit recently tested by Isomedix in Florida, a superconducting lin ear accelerator under development in Texas, and cobalt-60. Hawai’i should be in a posi tion to decide on a suitable unit in approximately two years.”
In 1992, Senator Inouye placed in the federal Department of Defense appropriation for the 1993 fiscal year more than $900,000 that was to be spent in Hawai’i in support of efforts to rejuvenate Hawai’i’s flagging agri cultural industry, especially along the Big Island’s Hamakua Coast. Among the restrictions on use of funds is that they not be spent in support of experimental or research projects. Decisions on how to distribute the money were to be made by the board of a group called the Department of Defense Oversight Committee, whose members are selected by Inouye.
In later years, the appropriations increased, and for the last two years, they have been running around $5 million a year. Sometime around 1994, the name of the Oversight Committee was changed to Rural Economic Transition Assistance-Hawai’i, although its makeup and membership selection process stayed the same.
RETA-H has a contract with the private Hawai’i Island Economic Development Board to provide staff support. In this way, Paula Helfrich, who serves HIEDB as its executive director, also ends up serving as staff to RETA-H.
In August 1995, Wong approached RETA -H with the idea that some of its funds could be spent in support of irradiation. After receiving RETA-H funding guidelines, Wong forwarded it to University of Hawai’i researchers Jim Moy and Robert Paull, along with Okudara of the Exotic Pest Insect Com mittee. “The deal buster appears to be ‘non-research,”‘ Wong wrote in an accompanying memo, “but,” he added, “I’m sure we can get around this as little new information is needed to develop the technology for Hawai’i.”
No money was appropriated by RETA-H for irradiation, but the inquiry, as well as the meeting a month earlier in Hilo with representatives of Isomedix and Carrot Top, ap pears to have sparked a renewed interest in “radiation on the part of Hawai’i County and the HIEDB. Throughout 1996, HIEDB worked with four consultants in preparing a “Hawai’i Island High Tech Strategic Plan.” Language supportive of irradiation appears in both the draft plan, released in December 1996, and the final plan, released on January 2, 1997.
The Mayor’s Position
On January 7, 1997, Environment Hawai’i was told by Mayor Yamashiro that his deci sion to promote irradiation had nothing to do with the HIEDB. Rather, he said, “it came out as a result of a visit from the deputy secretary of Agriculture sometime before the 1996 election.” The official, whose name Yamashiro did not recall, encouraged him to take advantage of so-called generic rules about to be made final for irradiation of fruit flies, Yama shiro said. The rules will allow any produce that is thought to host fruit flies to be irradi ated at a minimum dose of 250 grays. Past rules have been commodity specific that is, they have set irradiation doses for individual types of fruit or food (e.g., papayas).
When asked about any economic feasibil ity analysis, Yamashiro said one had been done, but when Environment Hawai`i asked to see it, he said it was not complete. He was doing it himself, he said, along with staff from the Planning Department, Public Works Department, and the county Department of Research and Development.
According to Paula Heifrich, HIEDB is working closely with county Research and Development staff to come up with projec tions as to the volume of crop needed to make an irradiation facility economically feasible. Nothing was available for disclosure to Envi ronment Hawai`i by press time.
Late Developments
On January 16, HIEDB sponsored a commu nity forum on irradiation. In an announce ment of the event, HIEDB asked that those in attendance keep an “open mind,” without mentioning HIEDB’s earlier endorsement of irradiation. Nor was HIEDB’s position on irradiation made clear at the forum. Of the five invited panelists, just one – Kathy Dorn – was opposed to the idea.
That same day, Mayor Yamashiro met with officers of Isomedix in New Jersey. Outside the Isomedix facility, about 60 people endured bitter cold to carry signs protesting Hawai’i’s announced intention to build an irradiation facility.
Less than a week later, Governor Ben Cayetano delivered his state of the state ad dress to the legislature. In the list of activities he proposed under the heading, “Encourag ing economic diversification,” appears the following statement: “To help our farmers export their products to the mainland and foreign countries, the state and the county of Hawai’i will work together to build [an] irradiation facility in Hilo.”
On January 27 and 29, the House and Senate, respectively gave first hearing to bills calling for construction of a “safe” irradiation facility.
Volume 7, Number 9 February 1997